-
8. Nation, Class, and Region in the Study of the Hong Kyŏngnae Rebellion
- University of Washington Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
168 8 Nation, Class, and Region in the Study of the Hong KyQngnae Rebellion D ivergent perspectives on the 1812 rebellion, and its leader Hong KyQngnae, have surfaced ever since the rebellion was put down, showing the immense impact that this event has had on Korean history and culture. Whether in the popular imagination or in scholarly analysis, the rebellion has been remembered and presented in ways that reveal historical and cultural conditions in Korea since 1812. The colonization , division, and democratization of Korea in the twentieth century cast a certain shadow on the scholarly interpretation as well as popular consumption of this episode—a shadow that has generally obscured the regional origin of the rebellion. In the years immediately following the rebellion, rumors that Hong KyQngnae had not died—or that he was still living on an island, as historical heroes and mystics were pictured in popular imagery of the late ChosQn period—were widespread and inspired subsequent antidynastic conspiracies, such as the one by Yi Inha and others that was aborted in 1817.1 In contrast to popular deification of Hong, two kasa (a long vernacular verse form), composed immediately after the rebellion by someone who participated in the counterrebel campaign, viewed the rebellion as treason and emphasized its traumas.2 And Cho Susam (1762–1849), a commoner poet who happened to witness the rebellion because he was in the area on his way back from China, wrote a series of poems about the rebellion in classical Chinese. His poems convey a mixed assessment. Though he saw the event as an unacceptable subversion, he was also critical of official corruption and arbitrary Nation, Class, and Region 169 taxation and, more penetratingly, of regional discrimination.3 The 1861 publication of Sinmirok (A Story of the Sinmi Year), a vernacular Korean fiction based on the rebellion, by a private publisher in Seoul, reveals the high profile this event occupied in people’s minds, although it lacks structure and a coherent story line. Created for popular consumption, it simply highlights the main characters’ bravery.4 the indigenous progressive revolutionary tradition versus dynastic decline A strikingly different perspective on Hong KyQngnae and the rebellion, which further separated the issue of regional discrimination from the incident, began to emerge in the twentieth century under colonial rule (1910–45). The first of these, the Hong KyQngnae silgi (A Tale of Hong KyQngnae), appeared in 1917 as a Korean publication. Its author, Nam’ak-chuin (Ch’oe NamsQn? 1890–1957), regards the rebellion as a missed opportunity to destroy the corrupt dynasty, spread the “great principle” (tae]i), and bring “public goods” (kongni) to the world, depicting Hong KyQngnae as an unusually endowed person although much of the narrative is devoted to describing battles from the government perspective.5 Examples of Hong framed as a revolutionary leader became abundant in the 1920s and 1930s. A nationalist intellectual discourse to seek the cause of ChosQn’s decline and colonization, as well as to find “national” inspiration for resistance against colonial rule, must have motivated intellectuals to highlight a historical figure like Hong. One of the earliest cases is an article that appeared in the monthly journal KaebyQk (Creation) in 1920. Defining ChosQn as an autocratic state, the author Yi Tonhwa (Paektu-sanin, 1884–?) argues that the rebellion was caused by regional discrimination in terms of official employment—a “political slavery” (chQngch’ijQk noye saenghwal). He states that he wants to introduce Hong to people because he admires Hong’s heroic qualities and the “historical energy” (yQksajQk hwalgi) emanating from his movement.6 This article was followed by a book by An Hwak (1886–1946), who proclaims that the rebellion was a revolutionary movement that advocated people’s rights.7 In a similar fashion, Mun Ilp’yQng (1888–1936) declares that the rebellion was the herald of a people’s revolution (minjung hyQngmyQng ]i sQn’gu) and that Hong KyQngnae took up armed struggle to demolish yangban society, root and branch.8 Meanwhile, HyQn Sangyun’s novel Hong KyQngnae chQn (Story of Hong KyQngnae), serialized in the Tonga ilbo (Tonga Daily) in 1931, also adopts this line of nationalist dis- [3.144.124.232] Project MUSE (2024-04-17 04:27 GMT) 170 Nation, Class, and Region course, narrates the whole event from the side of the rebels, and concludes that the rebellion was an antidynastic social movement.9 This attempt to write “a truly national history, the story of the origins and struggle for survival of...