전후 일본의 관동대지진 조선인학살의 기억과 문학 담론

Memories of the Genocide of Koreans and literary discourse after the Great Kanto Earthquake in Postwar Japan: A narrative of responsibility in September of Blood

敗戦直後、関東大震災時の朝鮮人虐殺に対する日本民衆の責任は、同 時代の言説において、ほぼ取り上げられることはなかった。なお、在日朝鮮人 運動史においても、極めて限定的かつ部分的に取り上げられるに過ぎなかっ た。当時、関東大震災時の朝鮮人虐殺問題に対する責任は、ほとんど軍閥と 警察、または官僚と資本家の階級だけに集中的に追及されていた。そのため日 本民衆の責任に対する叙事は、ほとんど排除されるか、あるいは部分的に扱わ れる程度であった。そのようななか、江馬修の長編小説『血の九月』は、日本 民衆の朝鮮人虐殺問題に対する責任の叙事において、同時代の他の言説と は異なる様相を見せている。また当時の朝鮮人運動史における、日本民衆に 対する責任追及の仕方とも異質的な方向を提示している点は注目に値する。特 に、敗戦直後、まだ日本民衆に対する責任追及問題が争点化する以前に出 版された作品であり、しかも実際に作品が脱稿されていた1930年代から日本民 衆による朝鮮人虐殺への加担と責任の問題を取り上げていたことは、あらためて 再評価されるべきである。 しかし『血の九月』が一般読者はもちろん研究者からも充分な評価を得ていないこと は、戦後日本の植民地支配責任に対する意識の欠如を垣間見る事例といえよう。

Immediately after the defeat, the responsibility of the Japanese people for the Genocide of Koreans during the Great Kanto Earthquake was hardly taken up in the discourse of the same period. Even in the history of the Korean movement in Japan, it was only partially and partially taken up. At that time, the responsibility for the Genocide of Koreans during the Great Kanto Earthquake was mostly focused on the ranks of warlords and police, or bureaucrats and capitalists. Therefore, the narrative of the responsibility of the Japanese people was almost excluded or partially treated. Under such circumstances, Shu Ema’s novel September of Blood appears to be different from other discourses of the same period in the discourses of the responsibility of the Japanese people for the Genocide of Koreans. It is also noteworthy that it presents a different direction from the way of pursuing responsibility for the Japanese people in the history of the Korean movement at that time. In particular, it is a work published immediately after the defeat and before the issue of pursuing responsibility for the Japanese people became an issue. Moreover, it should be re-evaluated that the issue of participation and responsibility for the Genocide of Koreans. by the Japanese people has been taken up since the 1930s when the work was actually drafted. However, the fact that September of Blood has not been sufficiently evaluated not only by general readers but also by researchers can be said to be a glimpse of the lack of awareness of postwar Japan’s responsibility for colonial rule.