바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

The Review of Korean Studies

Narrating Dissent in Joseon Literati Discourse

The Review of Korean Studies / The Review of Korean Studies, (P)1229-0076; (E)2773-9351
2019, v.22 no.2, pp.11-32
https://doi.org/10.25024/review.2019.22.2.002
Marion Eggert (Ruhr Universität Bochum)
  • Downloaded
  • Viewed

Abstract

Confucian tradition is often described as producing a “collectivist” mentality, as lacking the resources necessary for developing a sense of individual autonomy, and thus as averse to the voicing of dissent in defiance of political authority and independent of bonds of personal loyalty. Given that Joseon Korea defined itself as Confucian state, literati culture of that period should be expected to disdain expressions of dissent. The well-known history of intense intellectual debates among Joseon literati runs counter to this expectation. Two arguments can serve to resolve this seeming contradiction: either that these disputes should be seen as pure power struggle; or that they revolved around orthodoxy and thus in fact attest to the Confucian abhorrence of dissenting opinions. While acknowledging the explanatory power of both arguments, this paper sets out to test a third option that the above-mentioned assumptions about Confucian attitudes towards dissent are incomplete. Based on non-fictional texts most of which were part of a philosophical (or otherwise intellectual) controversy, it provides a sample of the ways in which Joseon literati talked about dissent, dispute, and discord. Attention is directed not to the points of contention themselves, but rather to the ways in which the fact of dissent is verbalized, narrated, and evaluated, with an emphasis on statements about the legitimacy of maintaining and defending personal convictions that run counter to group consensus. It is demonstrated that Joseon literati culture allowed for strong statements of moral and intellectual autonomy in disregard of status, power, and prestige.

keywords
Joseon intellectuals, dissent, debate, individual autonomy, Horak debate, Gimunpyeon, Jajeo silgi

Reference

1.

Baker, Don, and Franklin Rausch. 2017. Catholics and Anti-Catholicism in Chosŏn Korea. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

2.

Eggert, Marion. 2014. “Text and Orality in the Early Reception of Western Learning within the Namin Faction: The Example of Sin Hudam’s Kimunp’yŏn.” In Space and Location in the Circulation of Knowledge (1400-1800): Korea and Beyond, edited by Marion Eggert, Felix Siegmund, and Dennis Würthner, 141-59. Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang.

3.

Ganhaeng wiwonhoe, ed. 2006. Vol. 8 of Habin seonsaeng jeonjip 河濱先生全集[The Collected Works of Habin Sin Hudam]. 9 vols. Seoul: Asea munhwasa.

4.

Ha, Migyeong. 2012. Joeseon hugi Seon-Ri nonjaeng yeongu [Debates between Seon Buddhists and Neo-Confucianists during Late Joseon]. Seoul:Haejoeum.

5.

Hanguk cheolhak sasangsa yeonguhoe, ed. 1995. Nonjaeng euro boneun Hanguk cheolhak [Korean Philosophy Seen through Debates]. Seoul: Yemun seowon.

6.

Hwang, Junyeon et.al., comp. and trans. 2009. Yeokju Horak nonjaeng [Annotated Translation of the Horak Debate]. 2 vols. Seoul: Hakkobang.

7.

Ivanhoe, Philip J., and Youngsun Back. eds. 2017. Traditional Korean Philosophy:Problems and Debates. London: Rowman and Littlefield.

8.

Jeong, Ubong. 2014. “Sim Nosung ui jajeon munhak e natanan geulsseugi bangsik gwa ja-a hyeongsang” [Sim Nosung’s Writing Style and Self-Representation in his Autobiographical Literature]. Minjok munhwa yeongu 62: 89-118.

9.

No, Daehwan. 2007. Joseon ui aussaideo [Outsiders of the Joseon Dynasty]. Seoul: Yeoksaui achim.

10.

Roetz, Heiner. 2016. “‘Who is Engaged in the Complicity with Power?’:On the Difficulties Sinology has with Dissent and Transcendence.” In Transcendence, Immanence and Intercultural Philosophy, edited by Nahum Brown and Willam Franke, 283-317. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

11.

Roetz, Heiner. Forthcoming. “On Political Dissent in Warring States China.” In Criticising the Ruler in Pre-Modern Societies—Possibilities, Chances, and Methods, edited by Karina Kellermann, Alheydis Plassmann, and Christian Schwermann. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.

12.

Seo, Jongtae. 2001. “Yi Ik gwa Sin Hudam ui seohak nonjaeng” [The Debate between Yi Ik and Sin Hudam on Western Learning]. Gyohoesa yeongu 16:179-211.

13.

Sim, Gyeongho. 2009. Naemyeon gihaeng: seonindeul, seuseuro ui myobimyeong eul sseuda [Interior Journeys: Our ancestors’ Self-composed Epitaphs]. Seoul: Igaseo.

14.

Sim, Gyeongho. 2010. Na neun eotteon saram inga: seonindeul ui jaseojeon [What Kind of Person Am I?: Our Ancestors’ Autobiographies]. Seoul: Igaseo.

15.

Sim, Nosung 沈魯崇. 2014a. Jajeo silgi 自著實記 [True Record of and by Myself]. Vol. 12 of Hyojeon sango 孝田散稿 [The Collected Works of Sim Nosung]. Seoul: Hakjawon.

16.

Sim, Nosung 沈魯崇. 2014b. Jajeo silgi: geulsseugi byeong e geollin eoneu seonbi ui ilsang [True Record of and by Myself: The Daily Life of One Scholar Immersed in his Own Writings]. Edited and translated by Daehoe An et al. Seoul:Humanist.

17.

Sin, Hudam 愼後聃. 2006. Gimunpyeon 紀聞編 [Records of Things Heard]. Vol. 7 of Habin seonsaeng jeonjip 河濱先生全集 [The Collected Works of Habin Sin Hudam]. 9 vols. Seoul: Asea munhwasa.

18.

Sin, Sin 愼信. 2006. Habin seonsaeng yeonbo 河濱先生年譜 [The Choronological Record of Habin Sin Hudam]. Vol. 9 of Habin seonsaeng jeonjip 河濱先生全集 [The Collected Works of Habin Sin Hudam]. 9 vols. Seoul:Asea munhwasa.

19.

Yang, Seungmin. 2006. “Habin jeonjip haeje” 河濱先生解題 [Explanations of the Complete Works of Sin Hudam]. In vol. 7 of Habin seonsaeng jeonjip 河濱先生全集, edited by Ganhaeong wiwonhoe of Asea munhwasa, 7-33. Seoul: Asea munhwasa.

The Review of Korean Studies