1

J ournal ofE a s tA s i a nS t u d i e sVol.12 No.2 OCT. 2012

S ungkyun

ISSN 1598-2661

Academy of East Asian StudiesSungkyunkwan University

SUNGKYUNKWAN UNIVERSITY

ABSTRACT

Sungkyun Journal of East Asian Studies Vol.12 No.2© 2012 Academy of East Asian Studies. 165-185

email of the author: dennis.wuerthner@rub.de 165

Introduction This article rose out of an observation while reading Ch’oe Namsŏn’s (1890-1957) article Kŭmo sinhwa haeje (An explanatory introduction to the Kŭmo sinhwa), which was published in the journal Kyemyŏng (Dawn; vol. 19) in 1927. In this article, Ch’oe, himself being one of the leading and most influential intellectual figures of early twentieth century Korea, first introduced the Kŭmo sinhwa (New Tales of the Golden Turtle), a collection of novellas written by Maewŏltang Kim Sisŭp (1435-1493) in the 1460’s at Mount Kŭmo in Kyŏngju, to a modern Korean readership. The Kŭmo sinhwa had vanished from Korea, presumably in the wake of the Hideyoshi Invasions in the late sixteenth century, appearing to have been unknown during the latter half of the Chosŏn dynasty, and was reprinted in Japan only. For his article, Ch’oe Namsŏn probably used the last Japanese woodblock-print from 1884, an edition of the Kŭmo sinhwa which Ch’oe might have acquired during his brief stay in Tokyo as a student, or through Japanese channels during the second decade of Japanese colonial rule over Korea.

Bearing in mind that the Kŭmo sinhwa, next to the Kuunmong (The Cloud

The Kŭmo sinhwa by Kim Sisŭp is today regarded as one of the major cornerstones of Korean

literature. However, leading intellectuals of Korean colonial modernity like Ch’oe Namsŏn and

Kim T’aejun criticized the work for its close resemblance to the Jiandeng xinhua by Qu You.

Claiming that the Kŭmo sinhwa was an ill-written copy of its Chinese predecessor, they merely

acknowledged its alleged Korean national spirit and local Korean color. In this article it is argued

that through the diffusion and circulation of knowledge between Ming China and Chosŏn Korea

the Chinese work’s critical content as well as the biography of its author were well known in 15th

century Korea. It is hypothesized that Kim Sisŭp did not simply imitate the Jiandeng xinhua due

to a lack of literary ability, but that he rather consciously selected the Jiandeng xinhua in order

to utilize it as a foundation for his own personal thoughts on certain contemporary individuals

and political issues. It is suggested that Kim Sisŭp’s decisions to model his Kŭmo sinhwa after the

Jiandeng xinhua and to set his novellas in a specifically Korean context had a profound influence on

the way the collection was received and understood by a contemporary Korean readership.

Keywords: knowledge diffusion, Kŭmo sinhwa, Jiandeng xinhua, Ch’oe Namsŏn, modern nationalism,

literature critical of contemporary issues

Dennis WUERTHNER Ruhr-Universität Bochum

The Kŭmo sinhwa – Product of a Cross-Border Diffusion of Knowledge between Ming China and Chosŏn Korea

during the Fifteenth Century1

Dennis WUERTHNER

166

Dream of the Nine) by Kim Manjung (1637-1692), is today regarded as one of the major pillars of Korean prose literature, Ch’oe Namsŏn’s perception and assessment of the Kŭmo sinhwa’s literary value and originality appeared somewhat surprising at first glance:

Merely judging from the extant [five novellas] one cannot speak of the Kŭmo sinhwa as an

outstanding masterpiece, but, in accordance with what preceding Confucian scholars have

pointed out, rather as one single [collection of] chuanqi (Korean chŏn’gi) which imitates the

Jiandeng xinhua by Qu You of the Early Ming; also one may note that it not only used the

Jiandeng xinhua as a model concerning form and diction, but even concerning the given titles

and assigned meaning as well as the chosen motifs and characters. (Ch’oe 1927, 4)

In this paragraph, Ch’oe Namsŏn criticizes the Kŭmo sinhwa, describing the work as being little more than a blatant imitation of the Jiandeng xinhua (New Tales while Trimming the Wick) by Qu You (1347-1428), asserting that the Kŭmo sinhwa is in some respects an uninspired piece of trivial literature which lacks creativity, while implying that Kim Sisŭp’s personal literary contribution was marginal at best. However, Ch’oe Namsŏn’s view of the Kŭmo sinhwa was by no means a primarily negative one. In the Kŭmo sinhwa haeje, he stresses that Kim Sisŭp succeeded in writing a genuinely Korean work of fiction and, from a nationalistic point of view, favorably acknowledges that Kim Sisŭp strived to incorporate some “local color” (hyangt’osaek), that is, something genuinely Korean, in his novellas:

But, if one takes a closer look, the motifs of the old bachelor in Manboksa chŏp’ogi who

complains in front of the Buddha and encounters a beautiful companion, or the scholar in

Yi-saeng kyujangjŏn who enters into a strange relationship by throwing furtive looks while

walking up on the road, are all stories frequently found in our people’s literary heritage;

covered underneath the layers of skin of the [Jian]deng [xin]hua lie the bones and sinews of

our national narratives … In this respect the text at hand strives to grasp the brightest local

color. (Ch’oe 1927, 4)

Both aspects, the lack of literary creativity as well as the emphasis laid on the alleged inherent Korean spirit which is claimed to make the work important and unique, are interesting and will be discussed in the course of this article.

Ch’oe Namsŏn’s Kŭmo sinhwa haeje marked a watershed in the history of Korean literary studies as it reintroduced Kim Sisŭp’s Kŭmo sinhwa into Korea after hundreds of years and laid the groundwork for all following studies. In Korea, Kim Sisŭp’s collection of novellas has, since the middle of the twentieth century, become one of the most widely and intensively studied fictional works of the premodern era and much research has already been accomplished. Of course, one has to note that the amount of fictional works from the premodern period is comparatively small, so that the range from which modern scholars of literature can actually choose is

1 This work was generously supported by the Academy of Korean Studies of the Republic of Korea (AKS-2009-MA-1001).

The Kŭmo sinhwa – Product of a Cross-Border Diffusion of Knowledge between Ming China and Chosŏn Korea during the Fifteenth Century

167

fairly limited. Much in contrast to the research situation in Korea, the Kŭmo sinhwa has thus far only drawn little attention from scholars in the Western world. The work is of course mentioned in historiographies (see Kim 1976; Hoyt 2000; Lee 2003) but only few scholars have thus far studied it in detail (see Huwe 1990; Evon 2004; Nam 2005). Also, there exists no complete translation of the Kŭmo sinhwa in any Western language as yet (second novella translated in Lee 1981).

After the initial spark lit by Ch’oe Namsŏn, other scholars of the early modern age also took notice of Kim Sisŭp’s collection. In the early 1930’s, Kim T’aejun (1905-1949) dedicated several sections of his groundbreaking historiography of Korean narrative literature Chosŏn sosŏlsa (A History of Korean narrative literature) to the Kŭmo sinhwa and its author. Evidently influenced by Ch’oe Namsŏn’s 1927 article, Kim T’aejun writes:

I say that the Kŭmo sinhwa imitates the Jiandeng xinhua because of the incredible resemblance

of form and content [of the two works]. For, if one inserted one of the novellas of the

Kŭmo sinhwa into the Jiandeng xinhua, it would not be possible to quickly tell them apart.

Furthermore, it seems as if the extant five stories [of the Kŭmo sinhwa] are from the same vein

as eight stories of the Jiandeng xinhua. (Kim 1933, 40)

In the course of the subchapter “Kŭmo sinhwa-ŭi kogŏ” (“A historical inquiry into the Kŭmo sinhwa”) the Kŭmo sinhwa is likewise altogether treated in a rather positive and favorable fashion with regards to its role as the first genuine Korean work of narrative fiction, for Kim T’aejun praises the fact that, although the work was completely written in Chinese, the Kŭmo sinhwa’s novellas are entirely set in Korea, that Kim Sisŭp made use of genuinely Korean characters, and that he placed his stories within the context of a Korean historic narrative. Citing passages from the aforementioned article by Ch’oe Namsŏn, Kim T’aejun writes:

Then, like Yuktang said, the one thing which put an end to the primeval chaos of [early]

Korean literature, constituting the prime of [Korean] chuanqi-style literature, and which, in

the early phase of the Chosŏn dynasty, showed purity and luster to literary circles that had

almost passed into a state of blank desolation- if it was not the Kŭmo sinhwa, what else could

it have been? (Kim 1933, 42)

However, Kim T’aejun also follows in Ch’oe Namsŏn’s footsteps by critically addressing the resemblance between the collections by Kim Sisŭp and Qu You, while implying that this resemblance somehow diminishes the Korean work’s literary value. Written in 1927 and 1933 respectively, these articles fall into a period in which Korean intellectuals were keen on praising the high standard of native premodern Korean literature. This, of course, has to be interpreted as a nationalist reaction to Japanese efforts of imperial domination as well as Western influences. As in the case of Ch’oe Namsŏn and Kim T’aejun, nationalist Korean scholars of literature in the early and middle parts of the twentieth century also aimed at constructing a genuinely Korean tradition of narrative fiction, the supreme discipline of literature in Western eyes, which was meant to reach back in time

Dennis WUERTHNER

168

as far as possible. The Kŭmo sinhwa, written during the early years of the Chosŏn dynasty, thus served as an ideal object for research. However, the kind of literature primarily advocated by the new intellectual elite was diversified, innovative, beautiful belles lettres that could measure up to the standards of Western and Chinese masterworks. In comparison to Chinese and Western literature, Ch’oe Namsŏn believed that “In whichever sense one may speak, one cannot but state that Chosŏn novels have for a long time been- no, even until today, are extremely artless and plain” (Kim 1973, 122). An exception constituted a “novel” like the Kuunmong, which seemed fit to serve as a prime example for this new, nationalistically charged view of an indigenous literature tradition (Eggert 1999, 67). The Kŭmo sinhwa on the other hand was too short, too obviously modeled after a Chinese work to be of any importance in this respect. Only its time of creation as well as its “Koreanness” were apt to be utilized during the foundation phase of the creation of an indigenous, glorious Korean tradition of narrative literature. The Kŭmo sinhwa’s status and image as a work of meager literary finesse, but as an important example of Korean fiction within the framework of a “national literature,” was thus fixed in the early 20th century. This evaluation of the Kŭmo sinhwa partly persists until today, for the views brought forth by Ch’oe Namsŏn and Kim T’aejun can likewise be observed in many recent studies. Some claim that “Though a rather straightforward adaption of its Chinese model, with some changes in settings, persons and place names, the work is of undeniable value in Korean literary history, for it was the first recognized attempt by a Korean to write a novel” (Ch’oe-Wall 1994, 123), or state that “Though the story was practically an imitation of the Chinese story, and the book was written in classical Chinese, showing the influence of Chinese literature, it was here framed in a Korean background” (Zŏng 1989, 175).

However, it is imperative to raise the question why Kim Sisŭp actually chose to model his own work on a collection of novelettes from the early Ming period that, while admittedly very popular and widely read in Korea, belonged to a genre that was not admired as the epitome of high art and was rather looked down upon by the large majority of literati as unsophisticated, “pulp-fiction” designed for lower-rank officials to pass the time. Especially, in the light of the premodern biographies on Kim Sisŭp, which formed his reputation as one of the brightest minds of his time, it is vital to raise the question of why he specifically selected to emulate the Jiandeng xinhua and its chuanqi format and style, marked by the strange and otherworldly, for his collection. Here, it is important to maintain distance from the work’s modern, purpose-oriented assessments made by the representatives of Korean colonial modernity, in order to shift the focus towards a reflection on Kim Sisŭp’s own possible motivations for writing a work of chuanqi-fiction. For, if one was to assume that at the beginning of his literary endeavor Kim Sisŭp did not actually solely intend to write a fictional work of high literary value, but that he really meant to utilize the reputation of the Jiandeng xinhua and the overall form of chuanqi-narrative fiction as means to transmit his personal thoughts on certain contemporary issues and individuals and to take a stance on the political and social conditions in early Chosŏn Korea, the question why he chose the Jiandeng xinhua as a model acquires a new meaning.

The Kŭmo sinhwa – Product of a Cross-Border Diffusion of Knowledge between Ming China and Chosŏn Korea during the Fifteenth Century

169

As shown above, Ch’oe Namsŏn devalued the Kŭmo sinhwa on a literary level due to its close resemblance to the Jiandeng xinhua. However, in another article entitled “How Did Narrative Fiction of Chosŏn Develop?” Ch’oe Namsŏn mentions a decisive aspect of its historical context. From the mindset of a modern intellectual, to whom the Chosŏn dynasty synonymously stood for an era which lacked progressive development, he marvels at the incredible speed of the diffusion of knowledge and culture in premodern times:

Taking the lead was Kim Sisŭp’s (Maewŏltang) Kŭmo sinhwa, but this was clearly a collection

of novelettes which abundantly imitated the Jiandeng xinhua by Qu You of Ming. [However],

the fact that the distance between the two texts’ publication was no more than a few decades

really leaves one amazed at the speed of cultural exchange [between China and Korea in the

fifteenth century]! (Kim 1973, 123)

Taking up this line of thought, it is this article’s aim to suggest that one of the Jiandeng xinhua’s notable features, its criticism towards the elites and its disclosure of the state of the empire, constituted a reason why Kim Sisŭp consciously selected this specific work as a model for his own collection of novellas. It is my hypothesis that the Jiandeng xinhua’s critical tenor was known in Korea, and that Kim Sisŭp presupposed that this shared knowledge about the Chinese work would consequently influence the way in which his own collection would be received and understood by a contemporary Korean readership. This leads to the assertion that, for Kim Sisŭp, the Jiandeng xinhua was not primarily interesting in a literary sense, but rather vital as the foundation onto which he could build his literary exposure of social and political evils in Chosŏn during the 1450’s and 1460’s, the reign of King Sejo (born 1417; r. 1455-1468), as well as a means to incorporate his work into an East Asian tradition of narrative literature critical of contemporary issues. The fact that there are hardly any sources suggesting that the Kŭmo sinhwa was actually read as such a critical work in Korea inevitably leads to the focus being laid on a text-immanent interpretive approach. However, this text-based reading approach can be supported by an important Korean source from later times. Within this context, a discussion of the contemporary assessment of the Jiandeng xinhua as well as a text-immanent interpretation of different parts of the Chinese collection is also indispensable in order to show how a critique of state and society might have been received in China and Korea.

The Jiandeng xinhua by Qu You – A Disappointed Author’s Banned WorkWithin this framework, it is imperative to briefly consider some aspects of Qu You’s biography as well as of the history of the work itself, in order to gain an understanding of which kind of a writer’s fictional work Kim Sisŭp chose as a foundation for his Kŭmo sinhwa and how that might have affected the contemporary readers’ perception of the Korean work. Many Western studies on the given subject have already dealt with Qu You’s literature and his personal downfall (Franke 1958; Harmon 2002; Nam 2005), but another short discussion here is nevertheless vital to comprehend the relationship between the Kŭmo sinhwa and the Jiandeng xinhua.

Dennis WUERTHNER

170

As Franke and Harmon have pointed out, the Jiandeng xinhua’s author Qu You lived in a time marked by turmoil and hardships that followed the overthrow of the Yuan Dynasty by the Ming, a period which was characterized by moral and ethical confusion brought about by battles and rebellions to overthrow the Mongol rule of China. Although his authorship was frequently questioned in premodern China and Korea (see Yi Ok 2001, 147; Yi Kyugyŏng), the Jiandeng xinhua was generally considered to have been written by Qu You roughly during this time of political and social upheaval. Although Qu You held petty offices for a short period of time, his life was nevertheless mainly shaped by failure, disappointment and continuous futile struggles with the authorities. During his entire life he was never called to any high, prestigious office and had to content himself with the rather meager career of an ambitious and talented, but eventually unsuccessful and poor intellectual, with nothing to show for himself but having served as a private tutor, a personal administrator, and a teacher at local schools. Furthermore, Qu You was banished to the outskirts of the empire in his old age, most likely because of his having written government-critical literature (Franke 1958, 341-43).

It might have been a combination of Qu You’s sense of frustration and disappointment with the social conditions of his time on the one hand, and a deep-felt anger over his dissatisfying personal situation on the other which made him compose narrative literature in order to disclose the, in his mind, social evils of his day and address the unworthy treatment he received. This criticism is reflected in his most famous and influential literary achievement, the collection of novellas completed in 1378, the Jiandeng xinhua. But how is this criticism revealed within the text itself? At this point it is important to quickly focus on some parts of the Chinese collection which are vital for my argument, for they textually underpin the assumption that the Jiandeng xinhua could very well have been read as a work critical of contemporary issues. In the novella Linghusheng mingmeng lu (Record of Scholar Linghu’s Dream of the Underworld) the following is stated:

When Zhuan heard this, he could no longer contain his anger and exclaimed: “At the

beginning I stated that only in the mundane world corrupt officials could gather riches and

bend the law, that the wealthy could hand out bribes and get everything [they desire], and

that the poor have no possessions and [therefore] have to endure punishment. But how could

I have guessed that it is even worse in the underworld? (Ch’oe 2005 (sang), 121)

Certainly alluding to his own day and age, Qu You in this passage clearly addresses the high scholar-officials’ inclination towards corruptibility as well as the fact that as a man of wealth one can buy almost anything and even bend the laws of this world and the one to come. The poor on the other hand have to endure hardships and cope with punishment only because they do not possess the necessary financial means to bribe the ones in charge and pay for a life of bliss. Among many other examples of criticism of powerful officials and rich landlords contained in the Jiandeng xinhua, the novella Fugui fajisi ji (The Office for the Distribution of Riches and Honors, for German translation see Bauer and Franke 1988) can be mentioned. It is quite understandable that stories like these, which not only disclose social

The Kŭmo sinhwa – Product of a Cross-Border Diffusion of Knowledge between Ming China and Chosŏn Korea during the Fifteenth Century

171

evils, but also hint at the perpetrators, were not greatly appreciated by the ruling elites who certainly saw their reflections in this literary mirror.

Next to the exposure of corrupt officials and bribing landlords, with some of the love stories contained in the Jiandeng xinhua, Qu You attacked the social order and conditions of his time, marked by a rigid hierarchy of status groups. In this context, the novella Aiqing zhuan (The Biography of Lady Ai) can serve as a fitting example. In this novella, the description of a marriage between a wealthy, educated man of noble heritage and a courtesan, however beautiful and talented she might be, must have been considered a violation of social norms. Also, a novella like Lianfang lou ji (The Tower of Twofold Fragrance), in which two dauntless daughters succeed in tricking their watchful parents and luring a young man into their bedchamber in order to seduce him, must have been considered particularly immoral in a society in which, at least theoretically, women were to be sealed off from the world of men.

Furthermore, in the first novella of his collection, Shuigong qinghui lu (Records of a Celebration Party in the Water Palace), Qu You addresses his dissatisfying personal situation in a novelistic way. In this novella, an unsuccessful but gifted young scholar receives an invitation from the Dragon King and travels to his underwater palace, where, after having delivered a presentation of his literary excellence, his brilliant performance is praised and honored by the Gods. This could be interpreted as the expression of Qu You’s wish that the high and mighty should appreciate and make use of the knowledge and skills of intellectuals like him. Something similar can be observed in the novella Xiuwen sheren zhuan (An Officer of the Institute for the Cultivation of Literature), as this novella not only addresses the abuse of authority and the corruption within the bureaucratic sphere, but also criticizes the fact that honorable and highly competent scholars remain without office simply for being upright and honest. In the Xiuwen sheren zhuan, the selection criteria concerning the appointment to office in the netherworld, that is, the selection of civil servants according to their ability and performance, are exactly the way they should be, but are not, in the real world. Next to the repeated exposition of bribery and corruption, Qu You here hints at his own poor fate, lamenting that as a well-educated man of letters he deserved better than to work in a school in the countryside.

Several parts of the Jiandeng xinhua can therefore be read as attacks against the existing order and the ruling elites, although one certainly has to state that this criticism is of a rather general nature and that it is fairly difficult to pinpoint exact targets, for instance, specific individuals or policies, at which the above mentioned passages were directed. In the case of the Jiandeng xinhua extant sources show that in the early to mid fifteenth century the collection was considered a misleading, perhaps even dangerous piece of literature, for in 1442 the Libator of the Imperial College Li Shimian (1374-1450) wrote a memorial to the throne in which he addressed the, in his mind, vulgar, misleading and despicable works of trivial literature like the Jiandeng xinhua, specifically calling for Qu You’s collection to be added to the index of banned books (an English translation and discussion of the memorial can be found for example in Nienhauser 1980). His request for

Dennis WUERTHNER

172

proscription of the Jiandeng xinhua was granted the same year, leading to Qu You’s work being banned for several decades. In his memorial to the throne Li is particularly keen on pointing out that the reading of fictional works distracts the future scholar-officials from studying the Classics. However, one could surmise that the given reasons on which he grounds his call for a banishment of the Jiandeng xinhua to some extent might merely have served as a pretext, behind which other motivations were hidden. In fact, the author of this article believes it to be possible that its critical core was another (unuttered, but grave) reason why Li considered the Jiandeng xinhua as unfit reading-material for future high-ranking officials. Perhaps, by calling for an indexation of the Jiandeng xinhua on the basis of the collection’s potential for distraction, Li Shimian aimed at obscuring his true intention of, on the one hand, preventing young scholars from reading a kind of literature in which official misconduct is, at times rather openly, described and, on the other hand, ultimately from absorbing and taking a liking to the critical ideas contained within the Jiandeng xinhua. Li even states that these ideas might throw the hearts of the people into a state of utter confusion (Nam 2005, 70), that is, corrupt the minds of the people. Seen from this angle, it is quite striking that Li specifically only mentions the collection by Qu You. This fact might suggest that the Jiandeng xinhua was considered a prime example for the sort of narrative literature which was capable of opening people’s ideas to official misconduct. Hence, it would have been generally inacceptable for the ruling elites.

Li’s memorial to the throne undoubtedly proves that the work was regarded as being misguiding, frivolous and without moral content. Moreover, it underlines the assumption that the Jiandeng xinhua had a considerably large readership and that it rightly can be considered as one of the most popular works of fiction of the Ming period. The extant version (four volumes containing twenty-one novellas) was first printed during the Yongle-reign (1403-1424), probably in the year 1421. A reprint, the first after the collection’s banning, can be dated back to the year 1466. Another, later printing, can be traced back to the Wanli-reign (1572-1620). Furthermore, some of the novellas from the Jiandeng xinhua were incorporated into several other collections (Harmon 2002, 127-28). Its continued popularity can also be proven by the publishing of a number of adaptations and imitations, like the Jiandeng yuhua (Additional Tales while Trimming the Wick) by Li Zhen (1376-1452) or the Mideng yinhua (Tales while Searching for the Lamp) by Shao Jingzhan (ca. 1600). These follow-up works are also able to provide insights into the way the criticism contained in the Jiandeng xinhua was, if at all, recognized and if so, how it was received. If social and administrative wrongs were not exposed within these adaptations, it would be natural to assume that the Jiandeng xinhua’s inherent criticism was either not acknowledged or considered unimportant, or that it was perhaps too hazardous to take Qu You’s work as a literary model in this respect. However, such criticism can clearly be detected in the Jiandeng yuhua, one example being the collection’s fourth novella He Siming you Fengdu lu (Records of how He Siming sojourned in Fengdu), in which the protagonist is given a “guided-tour” through the different dungeons of hell, the most gruesome one being the dungeon of those who betrayed the people while in office:

The Kŭmo sinhwa – Product of a Cross-Border Diffusion of Knowledge between Ming China and Chosŏn Korea during the Fifteenth Century

173

Again there were a metal snake and a copper dog who feasted on human blood and bone

marrow, and screams of agony shook the earth. All of the [inmates] had held high, important

offices in the human world, but had wielded their powers taking bribes. They had deceived

the world and stolen names. Some of them, while at their posts, had behaved with integrity on

the outside and had taken gifts and bribes on the inside. Others, while in their home villages,

had believed in their official powers and had handled public matters as they pleased. Those

who had cheated the people and merely acted in their own interest were all detained inside.

Also, there were one or two of them whom I knew personally. (Ch’oe 2005 (ha), 124-25)

That the critical stance of Li Zhen could, if taken seriously, help to improve the social and political conditions of the time is mentioned in a foreword to the collection by Liu Jing, in which he meaningfully raises the question of whether it might have been a wise decision to call Li Zhen to the imperial court in order for him to assist the emperor, discuss the Way with him and lead the empire to a brighter, more righteous future (Ch’oe 2005 (ha), 36). Although Liu Jing does not specifically say so, he obviously hints at the contemporary officials’ inclination towards corruptibility. According to Liu, Li Zhen’s attitude towards bribery and the deception of the people which finds its literary expression in the Jiandeng yuhua, qualify him as someone well suited to advise the emperor. Similar to the forewords in the Jiandeng xinhua, those appearing in the Jiandeng yuhua accentuate righteous, “good” behavior and denounce antisocial, “bad” behavior. These similarities hint at the fact that the Jiandeng xinhua’s critical content concerning contemporary issues must have been widely known for a considerably long period of time not only in China, but, as will be discussed, in Chosŏn Korea as well.

Reception and Assessment of the Jiandeng xinhua in Chosŏn KoreaAt which exact point in time the Jiandeng xinhua entered Korea in the fifteenth century and which editions were actually available remains unknown. The work was first officially imported into Korea during the last years of the reign of King Yŏnsan’gun (r. 1476-1506, see Chosŏn wangjo sillok). An early Korean critique however was left by no other than Kim Sisŭp himself. One of Kim Sisŭp’s still extant poems is the Che Chŏndŭng sinhwa-hu (Written after [reading] the Chŏndŭng sinhwa), which proves that Kim Sisŭp read the Jiandeng xinhua and that it had a tremendous impact on him:

The nobleman from Shanyang played with the weaving loom

With his hand he trimmed the wick, lit the flame in the oil lamp and recorded strange tales

There can be found within them prose, poems in the style of the [Li] sao (by Qu Yuan) and

records of events

[Amidst] pleasurable enjoyment and amusing entertainment is sequence and order

Beautiful like the spring flowers, changing like the clouds

The tales about the refined life, all grasped and held in one

At first it is as if there was nothing to lean on, but later there is taste

Excellent work, almost like eating sugarcane

Dragons fight, ghosts on war chariots and the crowing of pheasants

Dennis WUERTHNER

174

The Confucians had good reason not to abridge it

When the tales are connected to the education of the world, they may be odd, but not

harmful

When the events [described] are concerned with the affection of the people, they may be

deceitful, but can bring joy

Once I saw in the Hejian [zhuan] (by Liu Zongyuan) an account of lascivious behavior

Later I saw in the Mao Ying [zhuan] (by Han Yu) records of those who lack sincerity

A big gourd, cooked and fallen, that is the minor official from Qiyuan

Odd and sly are the questions of the emperor to the master of the Three Lu

To read these tales again is [like] following previous footsteps

Spirits of the forests and ghosts of the waters leap up high, fish and dragon are dancing

Qu [Yuan] und Zhuang [Zhou] ride on high, Han [Yu] and Liu [Zongyuan] [appear] leisurely

Clouds and rain rise above the twelve peaks of Mount Wu

By the wall of the Tao-[Clan] flies a weaving-shuttle, Wen Jiao burns a rhinoceros horn

The old man who [planted] the tangerine-tree has for the first time tasted the dried meat of

the dragon

Bundle up liver and gall, stockpile creation

Underneath the moving brush, smoke [rose like] swarms of bees

In front of Jin Cui’s grave the creeks and mountains are beautiful

Inside the residence of Luo and Zhao moss and grass are thin

Outside of Jujing Garden the lotus’ fragrances are odoriferous

The bank by the Tower of Autumn Fragrances is bathed in the white light of the moon

Facing this as a human, the heart grows far and remote

Fantasy and foam, strange traces as if they were inside my eyes

Alone I lie in the Mountain Hall and wake from a springtime dream

Flying petals, innumerous dots, above my bed and forehead

To read one novella is sufficient for me to [laughingly] open my teeth

And swept away are the heaps of sorrow of my entire life

The detailed references to specific novellas (like Cuicui zhuan (The Biography of Cui Cui), Aiqing zhuan or Teng Mu zuiyou Jujingyuan ji (The Drunken Teng Mu’s Sojourn in Jujing Garden)) imply that Kim Sisŭp was very familiar with the collection’s content and the opening lines of the poem show that he highly valued its literary versatility and quality. Moreover, the closing lines of the poem suggest that the reading of the Jiandeng xinhua lifted Kim Sisŭp’s spirit, that it made him feel better during his years of wandering around in the periphery, far away and isolated from the dynasty’s center of power. It can be assumed that this laughter might have risen from the realization that he would be able to utilize the Jiandeng xinhua as a model for a narrative work of his own, by means of which he himself would be capable of challenging the leaders of his own time and dynasty.

Kim Sisŭp’s lyrical critique serves as an early and important indicator concerning the Jiandeng xinhua’s reception in Korea, but other sources have to be mentioned in this context as well. In 1549, a Korean woodblock-print of the work appeared, a highly sophisticated, annotated version entitled Chŏndŭng sinhwa kuhae (Annotated Version of the Chŏndŭng sinhwa) which was compiled by Yun Ch’unnyŏn

The Kŭmo sinhwa – Product of a Cross-Border Diffusion of Knowledge between Ming China and Chosŏn Korea during the Fifteenth Century

175

(1514-1567) and Im Ki. Im has often been falsely identified as a Chinese scholar (see for example Nam 2005), but was proven clearly by Yi Kyugyŏng to have been Korean, although, admittedly, he states that a lot of people in Yi’s own time also believed him to have been Chinese. Both commentators left epilogues in their Chŏndŭng sinhwa kuhae, which are interesting with regard to the assessment of Qu You and his collection in Korea. In his epilogue, Im Ki points out that Qu You was an erudite and refined scholar who, retreated from the world and, never minding the consequences, wrote what was on his mind. Furthermore, Im Ki underlines the fact that, in his novelettes, Qu You recommends the good and chastises the evil. Additionally, Im Ki emphasizes that, since in Chosŏn there is hardly a scholar left who deeply grasps the Way through reading the Classics, the Jiandeng xinhua is apt to serve as a helpful device for understanding the Way of the Confucian sages. Thus, it appears as if the Jiandeng xinhua’s critical tenor was acknowledged in sixteenth century Korea (Ch’oe 2005 (sang), 367-68).

Interestingly, some of the aspects mentioned in the epilogues of the Chŏndŭng sinhwa kuhae reappear in another Korean source: the epilogue of the 1884 Japanese woodprint edition of the Kŭmo sinhwa entitled Kŭmo sinhwa-bal (Epilogue to the Kŭmo sinhwa) by Yi Sujŏng (1842-1886). This source is especially notable when discussing the Jiandeng xinhua’s reception in Korea and the work’s relationship to the Kŭmo sinhwa. Here, the critical core of the Jiandeng xinhua is openly addressed:

I believe that our native land’s scholars are afraid of the Qing officials’ assessment … During

the Ming Dynasty it was also just like this. Hence, convicted for writing the Jiandeng xinhua,

Qu You in the end had to face banishment. If in later times there were those who wanted to

create imitations of his work, how could they have ever dared to write [chuanqi tales modeled

after the Jiandeng xinhua] and intend to suffer again the calamities [that Qu You had to

suffer]? (Ch’oe 2006, 520)

Though admittedly written at a fairly late point in time, several centuries after the first introduction of the Jiandeng xinhua into Korea, this passage by Yi Sujŏng suggests that the collection’s background of creation as well as Qu You’s and the work’s fate were well known there. Yi Sujŏng clearly states that because of the criticism towards the officials contained in the Jiandeng xinhua, Qu You was convicted and sent into exile. The fact that Yi Sujŏng included this unusually frank remark concerning Qu You’s critical stance in an afterword to the Kŭmo sinhwa can serve as an indicator as to the way in which Yi read the Korean work in the 19th century. Moreover, Yi Sujŏng explicitly connects the writing-background of the Jiandeng xinhua with the emergence and creation of the Kŭmo sinhwa, for he continues:

Only Maewŏltang and Kim Ch’unt’aek were both extraordinarily virtuous, upright scholars

who stood outside of worldly affairs. For this reason they could use their brushes at will to

write about boudoirs, about the sweet smelling and the beautiful, about holy immortals and

ghosts or about the strange and the fantastic in order to transmit their thoughts… (Ch’oe

Dennis WUERTHNER

176

2006, 521)

Yi Sujŏng remarks that only scholars like Kim Sisŭp and Kim Ch’unt’aek (1670–1717), to whom Sa-ssi Namjŏnggi (Records of Lady Sa’s journey to the South), a fictional work that was viewed as highly politicized with regard to the factional struggles during the seventeenth century, was attributed, could have dared to risk modeling their own works on the Jiandeng xinhua. As a reaction to the coup d’état led by King Sejo, who in the early 50’s of the fifteenth century had usurped the throne, had illegitimately claimed kingship and had killed his own kin, the hitherto reigning King Tanjong (1441-1457, r. 1452-1455), Kim Sisŭp had refused to serve under the new king and had (from a Confucian point of view) chosen a life of exile as a wandering Buddhist monk prior to writing the Kŭmo sinhwa. Yi Sujŏng describes Kim Sisŭp and Kim Ch’unt’aek as social outcasts. It was exactly this “outlaw status” that put them in the position where they could actually write literature imitating the style and meaning of the Jiandeng xinhua. Here, clear parallels to the words written by Im Ki regarding the social role of Qu You and the circumstances of the creation of the Jiandeng xinhua can be drawn.

Criticism in the Kŭmo sinhwaThus, a number of sources support the hypothesis that the Jiandeng xinhua was known in Chosŏn Korea as a work critical of contemporary issues. If in the late nineteenth century Yi Sujŏng was (albeit in Japan) aware of Qu You’s and the Jiandeng xinhua’s fate, it appears reasonable to assume that Kim Sisŭp and his contemporaries also knew about the Jiandeng xinhua’s content and critical core. In the light of this, the resemblance between the Kŭmo sinhwa and the Jiandeng xinhua, criticized by modern readers of the Korean work, acquires a new meaning. Assuming that Kim Sisŭp was aware of the Chinese collection’s content and message, it might have been this particular aspect which made him utilize the Jiandeng xinhua from the genre of chuanqi-fiction as a model for his own collection of novellas, because he might have foreseen that it was exactly this resemblance that would embed his Kŭmo sinhwa into a broad tradition of literature critical of state and society and guide the work’s potential readership.

However, it has to be stressed that Kim Sisŭp introduced significant innovations to the model set by the Jiandeng xinhua. As was said earlier, the Chinese work’s criticism is rather general and it is fairly difficult to identify exact individuals or policies which Qu You meant to attack by means of his Jiandeng xinhua. This is one way in which it differs from the Kŭmo sinhwa. While building on the Jiandeng xinhua’s reputation and using it as a guideline for his readers, Kim Sisŭp went a step further and took his criticism to another level by creatively attacking the reigning king and his recent usurpation of the throne. However, it is clear that, although he was a social outcast, Kim Sisŭp was not in a position to bluntly mention King Sejo or the violent death of Tanjong in an undisguised fashion, for this would certainly have resulted in him becoming a political threat, a danger to the throne, who the officials in charge would have dealt with in a severe manner. Hence, Kim Sisŭp artistically camouflaged his disapproval of the government and the ruler by

The Kŭmo sinhwa – Product of a Cross-Border Diffusion of Knowledge between Ming China and Chosŏn Korea during the Fifteenth Century

177

writing his novellas in the Jiandeng xinhua’s chuanqi style, by telling about human characters’ relations with ghosts of brutally murdered innocent women, virtuous and just rulers of hell, or grand and venerable creatures of the spiritual realm. The theory that the novellas’ main male characters are direct embodiments of Kim Sisŭp, while especially the deceased supporting female characters stand in for the murdered King Tanjong, and the murderers, for example, the Red Turban warriors or the Japanese marauders, to represent King Sejo, is generally accepted in the scholarship of Korean literature studies (see for example So 1989, 193). But in what way is this criticism of King Sejo and his, in Kim Sisŭp’s view, illegitimate rule over Chosŏn Korea actually reflected in the Kŭmo sinhwa? A prime example should be mentioned in the first place.

In the collection’s third novella Ch’wiyu pubyŏkchŏnggi (Account of Drunken Sojourning at Pubyŏk-Pavilion) the female protagonist, daughter of King Chun (Chun wang), the last king of Old Chosŏn (Ko Chosŏn), who herself is no less than a direct descendant of Kija (Chinese: Ji zi) and, at the time of narration, a Taoist immortal, tells the male protagonist Scholar Hong the story of her life and death and the fall of her own dynasty.

I am a descendant of the kings of Yin, a daughter of the Clan of Ki. My remote ancestor (Kija)

was indeed granted [this land] … The beauty and brilliance of our cultural achievements

lingered on for more than a thousand years. One morning however, by Heaven’s behest,

fate turned against us. Infernal blazes and great calamities suddenly came over us and my

deceased father suffered defeat at the hand of P’ilbu (Wiman). Eventually we lost our land.

Wiman seized this opportunity, stole [my father’s] precious throne and the reign of Chosŏn

collapsed. I stumbled about and was in grave danger, but I wanted to protect my innocence

and do no more but await death. All of the sudden there was a godlike person who soothed

me and spoke: “I am the original ruler of this land. After I had taken charge of and ruled the

land, I retired to an island in the sea in order to become a holy immortal. This was already

more than a thousand years ago. You can follow me to the Purple Mansion in the Mysterious

Metropolis and how would you like to roam around at your own pleasure and enjoy

yourself?” I answered: “So be it.” Thus he took me by the hand and pulled me along until we

arrived at where he lived. [He] built an annex [for me] where I could receive him and gave me

the Medicine of Immortality from Xuanzhou. (Ch’oe 2006, 59-60)

Her own personal fall thus corresponds with the fall of the ruling family and the destruction of the dynasty’s capital P’yŏngyang. What seems to be of special importance is the fact that the usurpation of the throne by Wiman (Chinese: Wei-man) is portrayed as an act of utter immorality and injustice. Aside from the implied judgment, her account is roughly based on historical events. Wiman, who during the war between Old Chosŏn and the Chinese State of Yen, his own native country, had initially been ordered by King Chun to fortify and defend Old Chosŏn’s northwestern borderlines, solidified power over a great mass of Yen-refugees and led them back towards P’yŏngyang, where he waged war against his own lord and ultimately usurped the throne, claiming kingship sometime between 198 and 180 BC. Told from the perspective of the daughter of the overthrown

Dennis WUERTHNER

178

King Chun, Wiman is depicted as a traitor avid for power who never questioned the rightfulness of his behavior. Not only did his actions cause utter destruction and devastation, they also led to the female protagonist having to fear the loss of her innocence. However, she is saved from evil by no one else but the most legitimate ruler of all, namely Tan’gun wanggŏm, the mythical founding-father of the first Korean dynasty, whose description in the foundation myth complies with that of the godlike-person who appears in the above quoted passage. It surely is no coincidence that Kim Sisŭp chose the original ruler of the country to act as her savior, as the appearance and role of Tan’gun in the story certainly serve the purpose of underlining the legitimacy of the female protagonist’s father’s, or King Tanjong’s, rule and, vice-versa, the illegitimacy of the usurpation of the throne by Wiman, or King Sejo. It seems safe to say that this episode can be read as an allegory for Kim Sisŭp’s own day and age. By making a clear distinction between right and wrong, legitimate and illegitimate, Kim Sisŭp hints at the state of the present dynasty and makes a statement about the current king’s obvious lack of legitimacy. The hideousness of Wiman’s usurpation of the throne can be easily transferred to the way Prince Suyang, the later King Sejo, overthrew and killed his own kin, King Tanjong. Thus, Kim Sisŭp at first glance seems to write about some partly legendary events of antiquity, but it is hard to imagine that the implied message, the harsh critique directed against King Sejo which oozes through the lines, could have been overlooked by any educated contemporary reader.

Interestingly enough, it is exactly this passage which is praised by Ch’oe Namsŏn and Kim T’aejun as the prime example of the Kŭmo sinhwa’s alleged Korean national spirit. Ch’oe Namsŏn writes:

Moreover, in the Ch’wiyu pubyŏkchŏnggi “P’yŏngyang is the Capital of Old Chosŏn” is used as

the opening line, the daughter of the [clan] of Kija of Yin is likewise rescued by Tongmyŏng

“sin’in” (Tan’gun) and kept safe in the immortal’s palace—in a scene like this you can catch a

glimpse of the author’s spirit. (Ch’oe 1927)

Kim T’aejun even goes a bit further, exclaiming:

Like in the case of Ch’wiyu pubyŏngnugi (Ch’wiyu pubyŏkchŏnggi), in which the opening line is

“P’yŏngyang is the Capital of Old Chosŏn,” in which the daughter of the clan of Ki is likewise

saved by Tongmyŏng sin’in and kept safe in the immortal’s palace—if the novel which

revealed the brightest local [Korean] color and showed the most [Korean] independent spirit

was not the Kŭmo sinhwa, which one could it have been? (Kim 1933, 42)

Ch’oe Namsŏn’s and Kim T’aejun’s interpretive approach of viewing the Ch’wiyu pubyŏkchŏnggi’s passage from a nationalistic standpoint, highlighting its alleged “Koreanness” and independent Korean spirit within a modern mindset, is understandable regarding the time and circumstances in which they were writing. The passage served the purpose of its modern advocates, who by means of the Kŭmo sinhwa tried to prove the independence and uniqueness of Korea’s cultural heritage when faced with annihilation in the course of colonial aggression.

The Kŭmo sinhwa – Product of a Cross-Border Diffusion of Knowledge between Ming China and Chosŏn Korea during the Fifteenth Century

179

The appearance of Tan’gun, who in the 1920’s was particularly argued by Ch’oe Namsŏn to be, not a mythical, but a historical figure who bore witness to the chosen-ness of Korea, turned this passage from a work of the fifteenth century into a suitable corner-stone for modern nationalist propaganda. However, it is necessary to distance ourselves from these modern evaluations made during colonial times, for an interpretation of this kind is difficult to maintain when taking the social and political conditions of fifteenth century Chosŏn Korea as well as Kim Sisŭp’s personal situation, which served as a background of the work’s creation, into consideration. The speech held by the daughter of the Ki clan is certainly a prime example—not in a modern nationalistic sense, but concerning its criticism towards a specific political situation in fifteenth century Korea. It is unlikely that Kim Sisŭp (who lived in a Sino-centric world as a Confucian scholar and Buddhist monk and certainly had little notion of an independent “Korean nation”) chose to set his novellas on the Korean peninsula and literarily utilize Korean history, mythology and traditional motifs in order to nationalistically highlight some Korean uniqueness. Instead it is more probable that the novellas’ Korean settings were a vital component of the criticism he directed specifically at the political rulers’ lack of legitimacy during his own day and age.

A feeling of bitterness appears to have haunted Kim Sisŭp for the better part of his life. After his refusal to serve under the illegitimate King Sejo and his subsequent escape to the periphery, Kim Sisŭp seems to have despised the high-ranking officials for their incompetence and moral inferiority, which stood in sharp contrast to his own abilities and behavior. This also finds its expression in the Kŭmo sinhwa. Just as was shown in the case of the Jiandeng xinhua, in which Qu You, mirroring his own personal situation, also incorporated figures who possessed the necessary ability and talent to move up the ranks and obtain prestigious posts, but who nevertheless had to eke out a fairly miserable existence due to outside factors, some of the male protagonists in the Kŭmo sinhwa are modeled in a similar fashion. This is especially true for the male protagonists of the fourth and fifth novella, Scholar Pak from Namyŏmbujuji (Tale of the Southern Isle Yŏmbu) and Scholar Han from the novella Yonggung puyŏnnok (Records of an Invitation to a Feast in the Dragon’s Palace). At the beginning of the respective novellas it becomes obvious that the protagonists possess all the necessary means for a great career as high-ranking officials, except the one trait of character which appears to be indispensable for climbing up the social ladder: they are not willing to behave in an immoral, reprehensible way to achieve their goals. Both of them are subsequently enveloped by a feeling of despair due to the current state of the mundane world, where true virtue and talent do not count for much, but where hideous tactics, influential benefactors and the willingness to violate the basic rules of virtuous behavior are the decisive factors for a successful official career. Thus, very much like their creator Kim Sisŭp, Scholar Pak and Scholar Han have to scrape together a living as social outcasts while much more undeserving candidates gather honors and riches. In contrast to the mundane world however, they are praised and honored for their righteousness and scholarly/literary abilities in the world beyond, such as in the netherworld of the hell ruled by King Yama or the underwater world

Dennis WUERTHNER

180

of the Dragon King’s palace. The two main characters in the last novellas of the Kŭmo sinhwa receive treatment worthy of their nature only in the world beyond, so that, after eventually having returned to the world of the living, they refuse to take further part in the never ending struggle for worldly success, ultimately choosing death (and subsequent reincarnation as the new King Yama) in the case of Scholar Pak, and the secluded life of a hermit in the case of Scholar Han.

Large parts of the novella Namyŏmbujuji are apt to serve as examples for Kim Sisŭp’s criticism towards the reign of King Sejo and the way in which he seized power. In one passage, King Yama tells Scholar Pak about the way he actually became one of the Kings of Hell. Here it says:

When I lived on earth, I served my king with utmost loyalty, was brave and unrelentingly

fought devious insurrectionists. And I swore to myself thus: ‘If I should die, I shall become

a vengeful spirit, so that even [after death] I can kill the insurrectionists. And since [in the

wake of my demise] this wish had not ceased and my loyalty and commitment remained

inexhaustible, I was transferred into this Land of Evil and became its ruler. Now I live on this

earth and those who fear me are altogether those who in the previous world have killed their

fathers and mothers or even the king, the ruthless, hideous ones. (Ch’oe 2006, 81)

Apart from the fact that King Yama, originally a Buddhist king of hell (Teiser 1994), is portrayed as a thorough Confucian at the core who only ascended the throne due to his infinite loyalty to his king, it is interesting to see that he punishes the souls of those who killed their parents or the king. The imaginary figure Scholar Pak is portrayed as the exact opposite to King Sejo, and so is the way he eventually ascends the throne. In an allusion to the reigning king of Chosŏn, King Yama clearly states that “Those with virtue shall not use force to ascend the throne.” (Ch’oe 2006, 83) Thus, in contrast to King Sejo, Scholar Pak does not use brute force to take power, but rather ascends the highest throne by invitation and in accordance with the etiquette as the legitimate successor to the throne of hell. (Ch’oe 2006, 84-85) At the end of the novella it becomes clear that it will not be the current King Yama who will punish the soul of the regicide, but Scholar Pak himself, once he becomes heir to the throne of the underworld. Since the novella is set in the mid to late 60’s of the fifteenth century (i.e. the supposed time of creation of the Kŭmo sinhwa), Scholar Pak will be the reigning king of the fifth hell by the time King Sejo passes on. Again following the assumption that all main protagonists in the Kŭmo sinhwa stand for the author Kim Sisŭp himself, one cannot help but wonder if the social outcast Kim Sisŭp hereby wanted to suggest that, in the long run, he himself would triumph over King Sejo.

ConclusionIt can be argued that Kim Sisŭp specifically chose the Jiandeng xinhua as a model for his own magnum opus exactly because of its reputation as a work critical of contemporary issues. As Ch’oe Namsŏn also stated, the speed and magnitude of the diffusion of knowledge and literary works during the early phase of the Chosŏn dynasty must have been enormous. Thus, we can assume that Kim Sisŭp expected

The Kŭmo sinhwa – Product of a Cross-Border Diffusion of Knowledge between Ming China and Chosŏn Korea during the Fifteenth Century

181

the contemporary readers of the Kŭmo sinhwa, who due to the wide diffusion and circulation of knowledge were aware of the generally critical content and reputation of the Jiandeng xinhua and the fate of its author, to immediately recognize the Kŭmo sinhwa as part of a Sino-Korean tradition of literature critical of contemporary issues. One can thus claim that the Kŭmo sinhwa is a product of a cross-border diffusion of knowledge and literature between Ming China and Chosŏn Korea.

The modeling of the Kŭmo sinhwa after the Jiandeng xinhua provided Kim Sisŭp with the possibility to camouflage his own criticism under the guise of a piece of fictional literature belonging to a genre marked by the strange, the incredible, and the otherworldly. By modeling his collection after the Jiandeng xinhua, Kim Sisŭp thus also grasped the opportunity to express his harsh critique in a way which would eventually spare him from running the risk of facing merciless punishment. This certainly was a necessary strategy, because of the Kŭmo sinhwa’s new quality of criticism—a criticism directed at particular living persons, a criticism which challenges the entire legitimacy of the current court and king. Frankly speaking, in comparison to the Jiandeng xinhua, the Kŭmo sinhwa is a much more daring literary project, because it is not merely a work marked by a general criticism of corruption and iniquities brought forth by a disappointed, disregarded scholar, but rather a work which accuses the Chosŏn dynasty’s leading figures of illegitimate usurpation and brutal regicide.

Yet, although the criticism is disguised behind a façade of stories about the strange, it is literarily designed in a way which should have made it easy enough to be recognized by those it was meant for, that is a like-minded Chosŏn Korean literati readership. For example, the above cited passage from Ch’wiyu pubyŏkchŏnggi could only have been understood as an allusion to King Sejo’s illegitimate accession to the throne by an educated Korean who was well versed in the foundation myths of the early dynasties on the Korean peninsula and who consequently could draw a connection between the historical events surrounding the fall of Old Chosŏn and the contemporary events surrounding King Sejo’s rise to power. Kim Sisŭp’s educated Korean contemporaries were bound to immediately recognize the criticism and apply it to the present state of the dynasty they lived in.

Hence, Kim Sisŭp’s decision to closely model his work on the Jiandeng xinhua must necessarily not be regarded as a flaw, but rather as a masterful literary move made by one of the most broad-minded intellectuals of the Chosŏn era: the deliberate placement of the Kŭmo sinhwa within an East Asian tradition of critical literature which geared the readers’ overall reading-approach on the one hand, and the emphasized shift of focus towards specific Korean individuals and recent political situations on the other, is nothing short of brilliant.

The evaluations and interpretations of the Kŭmo sinhwa taken by critics in the early years of the modern age which were marked by the fear of the loss of a national identity certainly had their purpose and raison d’être. It is by no means the author of this article’s intention to disparage the achievements made by leading intellectual figures of Korean modernity like Ch’oe Namsŏn or Kim T’aejun, who laid the essential groundwork for future scholarship in various fields on Korea. However, it is counterproductive if one clings too strongly to their purpose-

Dennis WUERTHNER

182

oriented assessments and the national agenda they promoted. This is especially true in the specific case of the Kŭmo sinhwa, for the pejorative aspect of their interpretations hinder a deeper interpretation and appreciation of this marvelous work. The interpretive approach offered here could lead to further insights not only concerning the meaning and significance of Kim Sisŭp’s collection of novellas, but also concerning the diffusion and transformation of knowledge and literature during the premodern era within a broad, “international” East Asian sphere. Certainly, much research still needs to be conducted—especially with respect to the specific networks and actors within the framework of a circulation of knowledge and culture as well as concerning the exact ways in which these processes of diffusion and transformation were actually carried out.

GLOSSARY

Aiqing zhuan 愛卿傳 Kŭmo sinhwa 金鰲新話Che Chŏndŭng sinhwa -hu Kŭmo sinhwa haeje 金鰲新話解題

題剪燈新話後 Kŭmo sinhwa-bal 金鰲新話跋Ch’oe Namsŏn 崔南善 Kŭmo sinhwa-ŭi kogŏ Chosŏn sosŏlsa 朝鮮小說史 金鰲新話의 考據Chŏndŭng sinhwa kuhae 剪燈新話句解 Kuunmong 九雲夢Chun wang 準王 Kyemyŏng 啓明Cuicui zhuan 翠翠傳 Li sao 離騷Ch’wiyu pubyŏkchŏnggi 醉遊浮碧亭記 Li Shimian 李時勉Ch’wiyu pubyŏngnugi 醉遊浮碧樓記 Li Zhen 李禎Fugui fajisi ji 富貴發跡司記 Linghusheng mingameng lu Han Yu 韓愈 令狐生冥夢錄He Siming you Fengdu lu 何思明遊酆都錄 Liu Jing 劉敬Hejian zhuan 河間傳 Liu Zongyuan 柳宗元hyangt’osaek 鄕土色 Maewŏltang Kim Sisŭp Im Ki 林芑 梅月堂 金時習Jiandeng yuhua 剪燈餘話 Manboksa chŏp’ogi 萬福寺摴蒲記Jiandeng xinhua 剪燈新話 Mao Ying zhuan 毛穎傳Kija 箕子 Mideng yinhua 覓燈因話Kim Ch’unt’aek 金春澤 Namyŏmbujuji 南炎浮州志Kim Manjung 金萬重 Qu You 瞿佑Kim T’aejun 金台俊 Qu Yuan 屈原Ko Chosŏn 古朝鮮 Sa-ssi Namjŏnggi 謝氏南征記

The Kŭmo sinhwa – Product of a Cross-Border Diffusion of Knowledge between Ming China and Chosŏn Korea during the Fifteenth Century

183

Sejo 世祖 Xiuwen sheren zhuan 修文舍人傳Shao Jingzhan 邵景詹 Xuanzhou 玄洲Shuigong qinghui lu 水宮慶會錄 Yi I 李珥Tan’gun wanggŏm 檀君王儉 Yi Sujŏng 李樹廷Tanjong 端宗 Yi-saeng kyujangjŏn 李生窺牆傳Teng Mu zuiyou Jujingyuan ji Yonggung puyŏnnok 龍宮赴宴錄

騰穆醉遊聚景園記 Yŏnsan’gun 燕山君Tongmyŏng ‘sin’in’ 東明神人 Yun Ch’unnyŏn 尹春年Wen Jiao 溫嶠 Zhuang Zhou 莊周Wiman 衛滿

REFERENCES

Bauer, Wolfgang and Herbert Franke. 1988. Die Goldene Truhe. Chinesische Novellen aus zwei Jahrtausenden. München: Carl Hanser verlag.

Chosŏn wangjo sillok 朝鮮王朝實錄 [veritable Records of the Chosŏn Dynasty]. Yŏnsan vol. 62, 12th year (1506) 4th month 13th day, 4th article.

Ch’oe, Namsŏn. 1927. Kŭmo sinhwa haeje 金鰲新話解題 (An explanatory introduction to the Kŭmo sinhwa). Kyemyŏng 啓明, 19. viewable in: National Assembly Library 국회도서관 (www.u-lib.nanet.go.kr).

Ch’oe-Wall, Yang Hi. 1994. “The Impact of Taoism on the Literature of Mid-Chosŏn, 1568-1724”. In Korean Studies: New Pacific Currents, edited by Dae-Sook Suh, 113-26. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Ch’oe, Yongch’ŏl, ed. 2005. Chŏndŭng samjong (sang+ha) 剪燈三種 (上+下) [Three Books of Cutting Candle Romance (First and second Volume)]. Seoul: Somyŏng Ch’ulp’an 소명출판.

_________, ed. 2006. Kŭmo sinhwa-ŭi p’anbon 금오신화의 판본 [Editions of the Kŭmo sinhwa]. Seoul: Kukhak charyowŏn 국학자료원.

Eggert, Marion. 1999. ‘Balancing Words: The Sŏp’o manp’il on Language and Literature’. In Language and Literature: Japanese and the Other Altaic Languages, Studies in Honour of Roy Andrew Miller on His 75th Birthday, edited by Karl H. Menges and Nelly Naumann, 67-90. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.

Evon, Gregory Nicholas. 2004. Kim Sisŭp (1435-1493): The Perils of Memory in an Imperfect Present. KAREC Discussion Paper vol. 5, no. 2. Sydney: Korea-Australasia Research Centre (KAREC), The University of New South Wales.

Franke, Herbert. 1958. “Eine Novellensammlung der frühen Ming-Zeit: Das Chien-teng hsin-hua des Ch’ü yu”. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft (ZDMG).

Harmon, Coy L. 2002. ‘Trimming the Lamp: The Literary Tales of Ch’ü Yu’. In: Excursions in Chinese Culture. Festschrift in Honor of William R. Schultz, edited by

Dennis WUERTHNER

184

Marie Chan, 125-48. Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press. Hoyt, James. 2000. Soaring Phoenixes and Prancing Dragons: A Historical Survey of

Korean Classical Literature. Seoul: Jimoondang International.Huwe, Albrecht. 1990. Zu den Geister- und Jenseitsvorstellungen bei Maewŏltang Kim

Sisŭp (1435-1493) – Unterbesonderer Berücksichtigung der Erzählsammlung Neue Geschichten vom Berg Kŭmo (Kŭmo sinhwa). In Bochumer Jahrbuch zur Ostasienforschung, 14, 117-38.

Kim, Chunyŏp (Ed.). 1973. Yuktang Ch’oe Namsŏn chŏnjip, vol. 3 六堂崔南善全集 3 [Collected Writings of Yuktang Ch’oe Namsŏn, vol. 3]. Seoul: Hyŏn’amsa 玄岩社.

Kim Sisŭp. Che Jiandeng xinhua-hu 題剪燈新話後 [Written after [reading] the Jiandeng xinhua]. viewable in The Institute for the Translation of Korean Classics 한국고전번역원 (db.itkc.or.kr).

Kim, Tai-jin. 1976. A Bibliographical Guide to Traditional Korean Sources. Seoul: Asiatic Research Center of Korea University.

Kim, T’aejun 金台俊. 1933. Chosŏn sosŏl-sa 朝鮮小說史 [A History of Korean narrative literature] Kyŏngsŏng 京城, Ch’ŏngjin Sŏgwan 淸進書館. viewable in Sogang University Loyola Library 서강대학교 로욜라 도서관 (www.library.sogang.ac.kr).

Lee, Peter, H. 1981. “Student Yi Peers over The Wall.” In Anthology of Korean Literature. From Early Times to the Nineteenth Century. Honolulu: The University of Hawaii Press, 79-91.

__________. 2003. A History of Korean Literature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Nam, Nguyen. 2005. Writing as Response and as Translation: Jiandeng xinhua and the Evolution of Chuanqi Genre in East Asia, Particularly in Vietnam. PhD. Diss., Harvard University.

Nienhauser, William H., Jr. 1980. “Aspects of a Socio-Cultural Appraisal of Ming Short Fiction - the Chien-teng-hsin-hua and Its Sequels as Example”. Tamkang Review 10 (3-4).

So, Chaeyŏng 蘇在英. 1989. “Kŭmo sinhwa-ŭi munhak-chŏk kach’i 금오신화의 문학적 가치 [The literary value of the Kŭmo sinhwa]”. Maewŏltang – kŭ munhak-kwa sasang 매월당 – 그 문학과 사상 [Maewŏltang – His literature and thought]. published by Kangwŏn Taehakkyo Inmun’gwahak Yŏn’guso 강원대학교 인문과학연구소, 179-207. Kangwŏn: Kangwŏn Ch’ulp’anbu.

Teiser, Stephen F. 1994. The Scripture on the Ten Kings and the Making of Purgatory in Medieval Chinese Buddhism. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Yi I 李珥. “Kim Sisŭp-chŏn 金時習傳 [Biography of Kim Sisŭp]”. Maewŏltang-jip – chŏn 梅月堂集 – 傳 [Collected works of Maewŏltang – Biographies]. viewable in The Institute for the Translation of Korean Classics 한국고전번역원 (db.itkc.or.kr).

Yi Kyugyŏng 李圭景. “Jiandeng xinhua pyŏnjŭngsŏl 剪燈新話 辨證說 [Dialectic Words on the Jiandeng xinhua].” In Oju yŏnmun changjŏn san’go 五洲衍文長箋散稿 [Oju’s Commentaries on Prose-Writings]. viewable in The Institute for the Translation of Korean Classics 한국고전번역원 (db.itkc.or.kr).

Yi Ok 李鈺. 2001. Yi Ok chŏnjip 李鈺全集 3 [The Complete Works of Yi Ok 3]. Seoul: Somyŏng Ch’ulp’an 소명출판.

The Kŭmo sinhwa – Product of a Cross-Border Diffusion of Knowledge between Ming China and Chosŏn Korea during the Fifteenth Century

185

Yi, Pyŏnghyŏk. 2002. Jiandeng xinhua - Yi Pyŏnghyŏk yŏkju [Jiandeng xinhua –Translated and annotated by Yi Pyŏnghyŏk]. Seoul: T’aehaksa 태학사.

Yun, Ch’unnyŏn 尹春年. “Maewŏltang sŏnsaeng-jŏn” 梅月堂先生傳 [“Biography of Master Maewŏltang”]. In Maewŏltang-jip Maewŏltang-jŏn 梅月堂集 梅月堂傳 [Collected works of Maewŏltangs – Biographies]. viewable in The Institute for the Translation of Korean Classics 한국고전번역원 (db.itkc.or.kr).

Zŏng, In-sŏb. 1989. A Guide to Korean Literature. New Jersey: Hollym.