이 연구는 해방 이후 문학 정전(正典)의 양상을 교과서, 교육과정, 독서제도를 통해 다각적으로 살펴보는 데 그 목적이 있다. 연구대상은 1955년부터 1973 년까지 발간된 1,2차 교육과정 『국어』 교과서이며, 연구방법은 교육과정, 교과서, 독서문화 등의 문화사적 맥락을 살펴보는 것이다. 1,2차 ``교육과정``에서 문학 교육의 비중은 높지 않으나 문학작품을 활용한 교육은 중요하게 다루어져 있다. 그러나 같은 시기에 ``교과서``에 실제 반영된 것을 살펴보면 사정이 달라진다. 원칙적으로는 교과서가 교과과정을 반영해야 하나, 국가정책에 따라 교과서가개정되면서 내용이 재편되기 때문이다. 이를테면 한일국교 정상화나 새마을운동등을 계기로 교과서가 개정되는 사례가 그러한데 이 과정에서 특정 단원이 삭제, 보충되며 교육과정이 지닌 추상적 지향은 작동하지 않게 된다. 또 문학작품선별에 있어 특정 작가군이 선호되고 있으며 ``한국현대문학사``의 배타적 지식이영향을 미치고 있다. 또한, 교육과정이나 교과서 못지않게 학생들의 독서문화 또한 정전의 확대재생산에 영향을 미치고 있었는데 그 대표적 사례가 ``필독서``로강제된 텍스트이다. 필독서로 선별된 한국문학작품은 입시제도와 연동하며 ``교과서``를 보충, 확대한다. 요컨대, 해방이후 문학정전은 국민교양의 대의를 추상적차원에서 제시하고 있는 교육과정과 국정교과서라는 독점적 구조, 그리고 이 제도를 보충적으로 확대 재생산하는 독서문화가 결합하며 문학정전의 계보와 목록을 구성해 낸다.

The purpose of this study is to examine the aspects of literary canons found through screening and representation after the emancipation with ``textbooks``. In particular, mainly with textbooks published in the first and second curricula from 1955 until 1973, this author has analyzed the curricula, textbooks, and reading culture, and so on multilaterally. First of all, in the basic objectives of those curricula, ``literary education`` is weakened, but instead, literature is used mainly as ``reading materials`` or ``educational materials``. Rather than aesthetic understanding of ``literary works``, it is often utilized as the materials of linguistic activities, so the criteria of ``literary aspects`` are postcured. In other words, in the aspects of those curricula, the detailed evaluation or criteria of literary works are not highlighted importantly. However, things are different in the stratum of editing ``textbooks``. In the same curricula, textbooks were revised, but it was subtly linked with the fact that national policy was urgently announced. For example, diplomatic normalization between South Korea and Japan or Saemaeul Movement can be included in those cases. This either made the unit itself deleted or changed or new text included, and national policy was reflected even up to the level of vocabulary. Also, screened writers repeatedly appeared in a certain range. Comparing the textbooks with government designated textbooks including authorized textbooks, we can see that particular groups of writers were selected repeatedly. The critical variable influencing this repeated screening was history of modern literature in Korea, and we can see that not just ``textbooks`` themselves but ideolized knowledge exerted influence independently. Also, in the reading culture, students read world literature as must-read, and this alsocan be understood as the process that ``textbooks`` were complemented and extended in connection to the school entrance system. For example, after the emancipation, within the relations among dynamic powers including the education system, textbooks, or reading culture, literary canons` genealogy and list were formed, and within that, ``canons`` were used as a medium to represent the range and genealogy rather than the list selected itself.