INDEX
Note: Italicized numbers indicate a figure; n indicates an endnote
abjection: the notion of, 83– 84, 223– 24n8;
as the perpetual position of bilingual col-
onized writers and translators, 84– 90; as
the perpetual position of colonized Korea
itself, 140– 41, 158, 202; as the perpetual
position of imperial colonial literature, 71,
177; as portrayed by characters in “Into
the Light,” 71– 73, 222n9; as portrayed
by characters in “Pegasus,” 88– 98; as a
symbol of cultural purity to Korean post-
colonial nationalists, 177
Aczel, Richard, 137– 38
agency, 12, 155– 56, 199– 200, 201– 2
“Aika” (“Love?”), 1– 3, 5– 7, 21, 27, 195,
213– 14nn3– 6, 217n24
Akita Ujaku, 129, 145– 46, 231n45, 236n35
Akutagawa Literary Prize: the assessments
of nominees (1940), 49– 53; the awarding
of, 220n15, 221– 22n32, 239n17; and the
imperial Japanese sociopolitical agenda,
47– 49, 52, 53– 54, 57– 58, 76, 200; and the
Korea Boom, 81– 82; the nomination of
Kim Saryang for his “Into the Light,” 41,
50– 52, 53– 54, 81– 82, 88, 99; the nom-
ination of zainichi authors for, 25; the
significance of, 47
allegory, 58, 74, 232n62
assimilation: the Akutagawa Literary Prize
as a tool to promote colonial, 52, 53, 76;
censorship as a tool for forcing Korean
cultural, 35, 108, 122– 23, 162, 176, 217n30,
240n28; as a conundrum for Korean
cultural producers, 27– 28, 59– 60, 77, 105–
6, 114, 201– 2, 205; and differentiation as
complementary policies of empire, 8, 45,
46, 75– 76; the failure of allegedly success-
ful colonial, 103– 4, 113, 123, 128, 138– 39,
171; imperial Japanese policies of, 6, 17, 28,
108– 9, 156, 159, 162– 63, 215n1, 227n50; the
Korea Boom as a tool for colonial, 109, 131,
162– 63; Korean attempts to retain cultural
identity despite imperial, 37, 85, 105; the of
Korea exacerbated by Japanese expansion
into Manchuria, 7, 27, 138, 157– 59, 191, 199;
racism and loss of identity as byproducts
of imperial, 71, 75– 78; and the rhetoric of
Naisen ittai, 7– 8, 15, 76, 92– 93, 219n5
audience: and the challenge of promoting
transcolonial cultural understanding,
36– 37, 86, 101; the misrepresentation of
translated works to the metropolitan, 15,
53– 54, 148, 173, 189, 191; and the roundta-
ble format, 132, 134, 136, 137; satisfying as a
primary goal of imperial culture curators,
Previous Page Next Page