바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

대중서사연구

  • P-ISSN1738-3188
  • E-ISSN27139964

2010년대에 ‘학생운동’ 말하기—1990년대와 2010년대의 학생운동 경험 구술과 ‘우리’의 구성

Speaking Student Activism in the 2010s—Experience of Student Activism in the 1990s and 2010s and the Composition of ‘We’

대중서사연구, (P)1738-3188; (E)27139964
2020, v.26 no.1, pp.135-174
https://doi.org/10.18856/jpn.2020.26.1.005
김시연 (연세대학교)
  • 다운로드 수
  • 조회수

Abstract

The article focuses on the student activism experience of the 1990s and 2010s and on the accumulation of everyday experiences created by the conditions of the 2010s against the backdrop of differences in how the composition of ‘we’ is portrayed in oral narrative. What stands out in the 90s oral narratives on student activism experiences, which were compiled in the 2010s, is the distancing of the culture of student activism at that time. In the words of speakers who experienced university life in the 1990s, the culture of student activism at the university was created through private relationships, and was, needless to say, considered ‘natural’. At the same time, however, the ‘natural’ is said to be ‘abnormal’ or ‘strange’ in the context of the 2010s in which it is being talked about, and is meant to be an experience with a certain distance from the present speakers. This aspect is associated with the conditions under which the experience of the 90s is being described in the 2010s. The present, which explains past experiences to speakers, was explained after the 2016 candlelight protest and Gangnam Station femicide protest, and is described as a world that is qualitatively different from before, and is located as an opportunity to create a critical distance from past experiences. This qualitative change, which raises suspicions about the homogenous “we”, is based on a newly acquired sense of gender sensitivity, living since the mid-2010s, when gentler issues were the biggest topic in Korean society, among others. In the 2010s, the composition of ‘we’ is no longer understood as a community of people who share any commonality, but as individuals who unite despite numerous differences. This reveals the experiences of those who have already embodied this in their everyday senses in the 2010s. The ‘we’ they formed should have nothing to do with private relationships, nor was homogeneity considered the most prominent group, so it was nothing that could explain the ‘me’ at the time of the demonstration and outside of the venue. It was in that context that the relevant experience was described in a cautious manner throughout. This, in turn, raises the need to ask and understand a new sense of student activism and, moreover, social movements and the sense of unity as ‘we’. It should also be asked who is the main body of the movement and what is the use of asking it. Soon, the need and meaning of defining the fixed identity of ‘we’ in the movement should be questioned. Therefore, it should be asked what fixed positions or coordinates can really represent someone’s position.

keywords
university student university student activism social movement oral narrative square gender generation 1990s 2010s community 대학생 대학교 학생운동 사회운동 구술 광장 젠더 세대 1990년대 2010년대 공동체

대중서사연구