This study is to investigate how the youth perspective has been formed and changed through a discourse analysis in accordance with each political and economic background as well as social and cultural background of the period from the early modern whe... This study is to investigate how the youth perspective has been formed and changed through a discourse analysis in accordance with each political and economic background as well as social and cultural background of the period from the early modern when the youth hierarchy began to be differentiated until now. This study employed Foucault's discourse theory for the theoretical background as well as Fairclough's critical discourse analysis for the methodological framework, and then analyzed the major newss from 1920 to 2014. From 1920 when the youth discourse began in earnest until now, this study divided the age into four periods based on historical events and the characteristics of the contemporary regime to discuss the main youth discourse. The first period (1920∼1940's) interpreted social contexts from salvation and alternation perspectives with a focus on Japanese occupation and modernization. In this period, the youth group was considered as a keyword of liberation of the fatherland and modernization and it received a historical call as getting over occupation and modernizing its country. The youth group achieved modernization by breaking down the feudal order and it was viewed as an object to achieve independence for its country under Japanese occupation. The second period (1950∼1970's) interpreted social contexts from chaos and reconstruction perspectives with an emphasis on the Korean War and economic development. After the Korean war, Korean peoples' livelihoods were at stake and the Korean society condition was chaos because the Korean society suffered a human and material loss. In this period, the youth group was considered as an icon of the overwhelming chaos and development of its country. In addition, it became the cornerstone of reconstruction and economic recovery, which is the most urgent national challenge after the war. The third period (1980∼1990's) interpreted social contexts from oppression and resistance perspectives with a focus on the youth protection policy and declaration of the Charter of Youth. In this period when the youth perspective became permanent, the youth group was named as 'Problem Adult Mini Me'. It was suggested that youth problems came from the problematic society and adults. Also, youth protection came into system adaptation, and thus, the youth protection policy was enforced. However, this problematic youth perspective represented a possible change to the anti-orientation of Mini Me in the social context of declaration of the Charter of Youth. The fourth period (2000s∼ ) interpreted social contexts from participating in candlelight rallies with an emphasis on the advent of various youth hierarchies. The youth group had been considered as a marginal man by being excluded from the main group before this period. During this period, however, the youth group was viewed as an entity of peaceful protest through participating in candlelight rallies. Also, the youth group, which had been excluded from the process of forming youth identity in the past, expanded the youth category through involving in the area of discourse. Thus, the Korean society represented marginally the change of recognition of youth for being. As discussed above, even though the youth discourse did indicate divided aspects by period, they represented several common characteristics that transcended time. First, editorial of each news carried the same tone regarding youth issues. Second, there was a dichotomy between 'leading' and 'self-examination' in the speech manner. Third, the youth identity was considered as the other by the older generation. Fourth, youth discourse included social convention of youth. The youth perspectives, such as recognition and regulation of youth, were the most important in the process of forming youth discourse. The common premise youth discourse had was that the youth group faced troubles and had problems to be solved. This youth perspective solidified the immature logic on development of youth and produced negative stereotypes. The youth discourse created the effect that it needed to be controlled in the name of leading and protection by the older generation. As a result, the Korean society have kept forging certain types of youth image, and it leads to a result of restricting the youth group under certain rules. The youth group has been maladjusted to the mainstream culture from the older generation, and it has been categorized into the psychologically anxious entity with negative self-consciousness. The youth perspective is not the existence of youth, but just one insight. Nevertheless, the socially formed youth perspective is working through the way of characterizing youth's own understanding. Thus, the youth perspective, which was considered as the social component in the past, is important because it is substantiated through each of youths who has self-control in mind. Today, the dominant youth perspective has been handed down by history for a long time. We should not accept youth perspective as immutable truth formed by societies, but understanding its implications in accordance with historical and social contexts. Key words : Youth Discourse, Youth Perspective, Critical Discourse Analysis, Ideology, Social Convention
|
