전쟁기의 증언과 반공주의의 규율 - 박완서 『목마른 계절』의 개작 양상 -

Abstract

이 논문은 박완서 문학의 원점에 해당하는 『목마른 계절』을 원작 『한발기』와 비교하면서 개작의 측면에서 그 특성을 살펴보았다. 『목마른 계절』은 널리 알려졌지만, 그것을 원작인 『한발기』와 연관지어 논한 경우는 없다. 『한발기』는 <여성동아>(1971)에 연재되었다가 1978년 수문서관에서 단행본으로 간행되면서 『목마른 계절』로 개제되었다. 이때 많은 부분이 삭제되고, 내용도 마지막에 한 장(章)이 추가되었다. 그것이 이후 두 개의 출판사에서 다시 간행되었으나 1978년판을 그대로 재간행한 형태여서 내용상의 변화는 없다. 『한발기』에는 적치하 ‘서울’의 풍경과 거기서 살아가는 사람들의 심경이 생생하게 포착되어 있다. 텅 빈집을 뒤지며 식량을 구하는 모습이나 피난을 떠나지 못한 어린이와 노인들만 남아 있는 산동네의 풍경, 무책임하게 선무방송을 흘리고 사라지는 국군의 모습, 인민군의 주둔지로 변해버린 S대학 교정의 풍경, 지하 창고에서 행해지는 인민군의 선무 공연 등은 적치하 서울의 모습을 생생하게 증언해준다. 개작 『목마른 계절』에서는 이런 증언들이 상당 부분 삭제되고 대신 작가의 좌익체험이 상대적으로 강화된다. 오빠는 인민군에 의해 국방군 낙오병으로 오인되어 처참하게 사살 되었다. 원작에는 없던 이 대목을 추가하면서 작가는 복수가 복수를 부르는 야만적 행위를 증언하고자 한다. 그런데, 여기서 드러나는 개인적 체험은 실제의 그 것과는 다른 형태로 굴절되어 제시된다. 『목마른 계절』이 전쟁기의 참상을 사실적으로 증언하고 있지만 그 한편에는 반공주의의 규율이 작용한 까닭이다. 이 시점까지 박완서는 “모든 죽음을 빨갱이가 반동이라고 해서 죽인 것”으로만 쓰는 “정직하지 못했던” 모습을 보였고, 그래서 개작 과정에서 오빠의 죽음을 황소좌의 광기에 의한 것으로 처리한 것이다. 『목마른 계절』은 증언적 서사라는 성과에도 불구하고 이데올로기 비판 소설이라는 혐의에서 자유롭지 못하다.

This paper examines the characteristics of the work in terms of the adaptation, comparing 『A Thirsty Season』, which corresponds to the starting point of Park Wan-seo literature, with the original 『Drought』. Although 『A Thirsty Season』 is widely known, there is no case of discussing it in relation to the original version of 『Drought』. 『Drought』 was first published in < Women Dong-A > from July 1971 to November 1972, but was published as a book in‘Sumunseohwan’in 1978 and was renamed as 『A Thirsty Season』. In the process, much of it was deleted or adjusted, and the contents were also showed change of an additional one chapter at the end. It had since been re-issued by two publishers, but since it was re-issued form of the 1978 edition as it is, there was little change in the contents. 『Drought』 vividly captures the scenery of “Seoul” under the enemy's rule and the feelings of people living there. The scene of searching empty houses for food, the scene of the mountain village leaving only children and the elderly who were unable to leave their homes, the scene of the Korean army fleeing after irresponsibly broadcasting pacification, the scene of the rich family house and S University that had been received by the People's Army and turned into a garrison and the propaganda performance of the People's Army at large underground warehouses vividly testify to the images of Seoul under the enemy's rule. It has social and historical significance in that it has been the streets of Seoul and the lifestyle of citizens since June 1950. In the adaptation of 『A Thirsty Season』, many of these testimonies are removed, and instead the author's left-wing experience is relatively noteworthy. Author’s brother was mistaken for a fallen soldier in the National Defense Army by the People's Army who were being glistening with entrancement, and was brutally shot dead. Adding this line, which was not included in the original book, the author intends to testify to the barbaric act of revenge. However, it can be seen that the personal experience shown here is refracted in a different form from that of the actual one. This is because anti-Communism rules plays a role in 『A Thirsty Season』, although it is realistic testament to the horrors of the war. Up until this point, Park Wan-seo has shown “unhonestable” by writing only “every death was killed by the Reds because it was a reaction,” so she treated her brother's death as a result of the bull's-eye madness in the process of the adaptation. Therefore, despite the achievements of 『A Thirsty Season』 as a testimony narratives, it is not free from the charge of an ideological critic novel.