탈냉전기 타이완의 ‘중국상상’과 민족주의 ― 개방담론과 귀속감을 중심으로 (‘Images of China’ and Taiwanese Nationalism in the Post-Cold War Period-The Opening of Cross-Strait Relations and the Impact on Sense of Belonging)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국중국현대문학학회
· 수록지 정보 : 중국현대문학 / 60호 / 159 ~ 190페이지
· 저자명 : 김미란

초록

This study examines attempts to overcome the Cold War order in Taiwanese society and the dynamics of the post-Cold War period after 1987. The focus is on nationalism and the correlation between awareness about the newly re-emerged ‘mainland China’ and the formation of nationalism and national identity. Specifically, this paper looks into how the waishengren(外省人), benshengren(本省人)and second generation of the Oesungin understand the opening of cross-strait relations. It also considers the changes to Taiwanese identity, focusing on Chinese nationalism and Taiwanese nationalism.
The crossing of the straits by the defeated Chinese nationalists in the 1940s resulted in the formation of a new nation-state and in this context nationalism is ‘justified’ as contributing to the completion of an incomplete nation. Chinese nationalism is embodied in the Taiwanese constitution, which regards mainland China as a territory of Taiwan and serves to complete the ‘incomplete nation-state’ by unifying the two countries. During the Cold War period, this was evident in the training of ‘Chinese’regardless of conflict of province origin(省籍). However, the opening of cross-strait relations triggered the collapse of this image of China as the mother culture and brought about a perception of the mainland as ‘a place to return’. At the same time, there was diversification or conversion to a ‘Taiwanese’ identity from a ‘Chinese’ one. The second generation of waishengren (外省人) is representative of this latter trend.
Taiwanese nationalists have criticized Chinese nationalism in two ways. Firstly, they have criticized waishengren(外省人) for trying to hold onto privileges gained in the Cold War period through the representation of the continent as limiting the territory within Taiwan where sovereignty can be reached. Furthermore, they have attempted to established the theory of ‘one China, one Taiwan’ by claiming the ‘right of self-determination’ based on one’s birthplace.
Secondly, they have criticized the ‘tributary’ (支流) theory, which is based on the idea that the majority of Taiwanese want to reunite with China, by emphasizing the differences in the anti-colonization /colonization experiences of mainland China and Taiwan.
The boundaries of the nation-state and the tensions between the existing camps i.e. the nationalist ‘returners’ versus those in favour of ‘self-determination’, have been deconstructed and reshaped by the emergence of China as ‘the other’ in Taiwanese society following the opening of cross-strait relations in 1987. It is noteworthy here that both China and Taiwan share the East Asian tendency towards coping with post-colonization through ‘nationalism’ rather than other forms of ideology or identity, although the goals of the two countries are opposed in the sense that overcoming the cross-strait separation ultimately spells the end for one or the other society.

영어초록

This study examines attempts to overcome the Cold War order in Taiwanese society and the dynamics of the post-Cold War period after 1987. The focus is on nationalism and the correlation between awareness about the newly re-emerged ‘mainland China’ and the formation of nationalism and national identity. Specifically, this paper looks into how the waishengren(外省人), benshengren(本省人)and second generation of the Oesungin understand the opening of cross-strait relations. It also considers the changes to Taiwanese identity, focusing on Chinese nationalism and Taiwanese nationalism.
The crossing of the straits by the defeated Chinese nationalists in the 1940s resulted in the formation of a new nation-state and in this context nationalism is ‘justified’ as contributing to the completion of an incomplete nation. Chinese nationalism is embodied in the Taiwanese constitution, which regards mainland China as a territory of Taiwan and serves to complete the ‘incomplete nation-state’ by unifying the two countries. During the Cold War period, this was evident in the training of ‘Chinese’regardless of conflict of province origin(省籍). However, the opening of cross-strait relations triggered the collapse of this image of China as the mother culture and brought about a perception of the mainland as ‘a place to return’. At the same time, there was diversification or conversion to a ‘Taiwanese’ identity from a ‘Chinese’ one. The second generation of waishengren (外省人) is representative of this latter trend.
Taiwanese nationalists have criticized Chinese nationalism in two ways. Firstly, they have criticized waishengren(外省人) for trying to hold onto privileges gained in the Cold War period through the representation of the continent as limiting the territory within Taiwan where sovereignty can be reached. Furthermore, they have attempted to established the theory of ‘one China, one Taiwan’ by claiming the ‘right of self-determination’ based on one’s birthplace.
Secondly, they have criticized the ‘tributary’ (支流) theory, which is based on the idea that the majority of Taiwanese want to reunite with China, by emphasizing the differences in the anti-colonization /colonization experiences of mainland China and Taiwan.
The boundaries of the nation-state and the tensions between the existing camps i.e. the nationalist ‘returners’ versus those in favour of ‘self-determination’, have been deconstructed and reshaped by the emergence of China as ‘the other’ in Taiwanese society following the opening of cross-strait relations in 1987. It is noteworthy here that both China and Taiwan share the East Asian tendency towards coping with post-colonization through ‘nationalism’ rather than other forms of ideology or identity, although the goals of the two countries are opposed in the sense that overcoming the cross-strait separation ultimately spells the end for one or the other society.

참고자료

· 없음