고려대학교

초록/요약

The controversy over the notion of 'taiwan literature' that broke out in Taiwan in the early 1980s and kept its galvanizing force well into the 1990s generated much passion and anxiety and given rise to much intellectual provocation and reflection. The controversy over the nature of Taiwan literature may yield no less far-reaching an impact than the calls for a literary revolution that, announcing the arrival of the May Fourth enlightenment in the late 1910s, formally ushered in a New Literature that would help establish the paradigm of modern Chinese literature. The objective of this article is to trace the development of the idea of Taiwan literature since the early 1980s and to reconstruct and appreciate the complexity of the discourse. In addition to conscientiously fostering studies of the native literary tradition, the journal Literary Taiwan also promoted a clearly delineated Taiwan Literature. The two guiding principles that the journal endorsed were 'originality' and 'nativization'. This originality distinguishes Taiwan literature from the literature produced across the Taiwan Strait, but it does not deny that Taiwan literature is part of the larger Chinese literature. The conceptual ambiguity of 'originality' acquired an active life of its own and was enabled by totalizing view of continuity that accords Taiwan literature its historical significance. It would reemerge with full vengeance in the discourse of Taiwan literature, the political thrust of which was no longer aimed at Western cultural imperialism or economic colonialism. Taiwan literature which, just like the history of Taiwan, is admittedly a complex record of breaks, shifts, and upheavals. Articles to endorse Taiwan literature as a symbol of cultural self-sufficiency and independence proposed a 'screening criterion' by which to examine and define what constitutes Taiwan literature proper and addressed a relevance to the Taiwan independence movement through 'issues concerning the navivization of Taiwan literature at the present stage'. Between the unificationists and the nativists, there is no consensus achieved on how to resolve the conflict.