“동아시아사”의 공간적 맥락-교과서 서술과 관련하여- (A Study on Spatial Context of "East Asian History "- Related to Textbook Description -)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국중국학회
· 수록지 정보 : 중국학보 / 67호 / 183 ~ 213페이지
· 저자명 : 김승욱

초록

It is useful for neighboring countries to review the past history of the region together and share a historical awareness in order to resolve mutual conflicts and pursue. In this respect, it can be said that it is desirable for historians of South Korea, China and Japan to play a central role in publishing common history textbooks at the East Asian level. For the present, establishing “East Asian History” as a high school history curriculum in Korea can be evaluated positively. However, in order for “East Asian History” to achieve the desired results, it can be said that some more considerations are required so that it has universality as a method of historical description. It is difficult to say that it was fully discussed in advance while the curriculum was established and textbook were published in a short period. Accordingly, it seems that the historians take on more responsibility. Thus, the author roughly summarized which description method was desirable when constructing “East Asian History” with a focus on the spatial context in this article.
This study focused on the spatial context because it recognizes the two following perspectives: One is that it is necessary to develop strategies of space description of perspective that the spaces should be understood overall so that it will not be exclusive to the history of one nation because “East Asian History” is based on transnational space East Asia. The other is that the regional space called East Asia tends to be thought associated with the integrated identity as an East Asia or East Asian related to the problem of ensuring consistency and systematicity of “East Asian History” description. Especially in the latter case, it seemed necessary to consider more carefully in order for “East Asian History” to ensure the universality of historical description. Thus, the author aimed to search for other strategies for spatial description at another level including this regional space overall without clinging the integrated identity.
As described above, the spatial issues in the description of “East Asian History” are fundamentally connected to historiographical concerns that the universality of historical description should be in harmony with particularity. After World War II, this region's historiographical community including South Korea has shown greater interest in East Asian history with the motivation to overcome Eurocentrism. However, the historical description divided according to the regional category East Asia was not ultimately desirable from the perspective of the universality of historical description. In short, it runs the risk of dividing world history (history) into specific territory. In general, therefore, cautious attitude has been maintained to regard this as a historical unit in spite of the continuous interest in East Asia for a substantial period of time. On the other hand, it can be said that the ongoing “East Asian History” has a tendency to emphasize “integrated description” and “integrated regional world” slightly more before. There is a gap between the reality (past) and prospect (future) of East Asia as a regional category.
Although “East Asian History” cannot avoid playing a power game among various Nations/states, it is necessary to be more interested in the transnational spaces beyond it. It is important to capture the transnational spaces developed in this region so that it will not be exclusive to the history of one nation.
In such a case, it is necessary to construct it in detail at the regional level before connecting at the global level. “East Asian History” will be very useful to maintain a balance between universality and particularity as a method of historical description.
Thus, the author proposed the construction of “non-territorial” space formed from opposite directions when taking an interest in the transnational space appearing in East Asia region in this article. One is the space formed by the non-territorial governance device and the other is the space independently formed by non-territorial actors. The author decided that the logical development in the controversy surrounding imperialism and transnationalism help recognize these spaces. In addition, they were named “centripetal space” and “centrifugal space”. It is expected to construct consistent and systematic “East Asian History” centered on these spaces appearing this regional world without trying to integrate an ambiguous space category “East Asia” when describing “East Asian History”.
The epilogue of The History that Opens the Future, which is the first result of the publication of common history textbook by Korea, China and Japan, begins with a description of blue and beautiful Mother Earth from space. It is not possible to fixedly draw the category of East Asia when describing East Asia region with the passage of time through a lens to observe the earth from space. If we saw it in detail, we could see the governance devices to regulate human life and humans' independent actions to respond to them in this region. It is possible to construct these appearances to various spaces. It does not necessarily have to verify the identity of East Asia or East Asian or converge with them because it is called “East Asian History”. Qualifications as a “human”, “cosmopolitan” or “earthling” enough are enough, aren't they?

영어초록

It is useful for neighboring countries to review the past history of the region together and share a historical awareness in order to resolve mutual conflicts and pursue. In this respect, it can be said that it is desirable for historians of South Korea, China and Japan to play a central role in publishing common history textbooks at the East Asian level. For the present, establishing “East Asian History” as a high school history curriculum in Korea can be evaluated positively. However, in order for “East Asian History” to achieve the desired results, it can be said that some more considerations are required so that it has universality as a method of historical description. It is difficult to say that it was fully discussed in advance while the curriculum was established and textbook were published in a short period. Accordingly, it seems that the historians take on more responsibility. Thus, the author roughly summarized which description method was desirable when constructing “East Asian History” with a focus on the spatial context in this article.
This study focused on the spatial context because it recognizes the two following perspectives: One is that it is necessary to develop strategies of space description of perspective that the spaces should be understood overall so that it will not be exclusive to the history of one nation because “East Asian History” is based on transnational space East Asia. The other is that the regional space called East Asia tends to be thought associated with the integrated identity as an East Asia or East Asian related to the problem of ensuring consistency and systematicity of “East Asian History” description. Especially in the latter case, it seemed necessary to consider more carefully in order for “East Asian History” to ensure the universality of historical description. Thus, the author aimed to search for other strategies for spatial description at another level including this regional space overall without clinging the integrated identity.
As described above, the spatial issues in the description of “East Asian History” are fundamentally connected to historiographical concerns that the universality of historical description should be in harmony with particularity. After World War II, this region's historiographical community including South Korea has shown greater interest in East Asian history with the motivation to overcome Eurocentrism. However, the historical description divided according to the regional category East Asia was not ultimately desirable from the perspective of the universality of historical description. In short, it runs the risk of dividing world history (history) into specific territory. In general, therefore, cautious attitude has been maintained to regard this as a historical unit in spite of the continuous interest in East Asia for a substantial period of time. On the other hand, it can be said that the ongoing “East Asian History” has a tendency to emphasize “integrated description” and “integrated regional world” slightly more before. There is a gap between the reality (past) and prospect (future) of East Asia as a regional category.
Although “East Asian History” cannot avoid playing a power game among various Nations/states, it is necessary to be more interested in the transnational spaces beyond it. It is important to capture the transnational spaces developed in this region so that it will not be exclusive to the history of one nation.
In such a case, it is necessary to construct it in detail at the regional level before connecting at the global level. “East Asian History” will be very useful to maintain a balance between universality and particularity as a method of historical description.
Thus, the author proposed the construction of “non-territorial” space formed from opposite directions when taking an interest in the transnational space appearing in East Asia region in this article. One is the space formed by the non-territorial governance device and the other is the space independently formed by non-territorial actors. The author decided that the logical development in the controversy surrounding imperialism and transnationalism help recognize these spaces. In addition, they were named “centripetal space” and “centrifugal space”. It is expected to construct consistent and systematic “East Asian History” centered on these spaces appearing this regional world without trying to integrate an ambiguous space category “East Asia” when describing “East Asian History”.
The epilogue of The History that Opens the Future, which is the first result of the publication of common history textbook by Korea, China and Japan, begins with a description of blue and beautiful Mother Earth from space. It is not possible to fixedly draw the category of East Asia when describing East Asia region with the passage of time through a lens to observe the earth from space. If we saw it in detail, we could see the governance devices to regulate human life and humans' independent actions to respond to them in this region. It is possible to construct these appearances to various spaces. It does not necessarily have to verify the identity of East Asia or East Asian or converge with them because it is called “East Asian History”. Qualifications as a “human”, “cosmopolitan” or “earthling” enough are enough, aren't they?

참고자료

· 없음