한국 신무용 개념 정위(定位) 과정에서의 논제
The Argument to establish definition of the Newly Arts Dance
0
조회
0
다운로드
4
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This research is a Argument about 'modernity' and 'context creative & tradition of arts' There are elements what will be to encounter during the process to established definition of the Newly Arts Dance. The aim of this research found the culture-historical meaning and necessary of preservation Newly Arts Dance in Korean dance history, as traditional cultural. As inquiring the modernity of Newly Arts Dance. Analysis that tradition is thought of as opposite to each other creative unnoticed modernity in traditional dance. Therefore they tried to regard the tradition as something passive and stagnant. The research divided the Korean dancing into different types. This was done to discuss what the standard in separating the Newly Arts Dance and traditional Korean dancing, and based on this separation, comparing the two and understanding the relationship between them, it tried to confirm the spiritual values in Newly Arts Dance history research. In art we inquired about, what is <evolution> or <development> is <progressive> or <unprogressive>, seeking for the periodic righteousness of the rise and the activities of the Newly Arts Dance and connecting with the theoretical inquiry in the creation of Art. Even if we don't think about the lessons and expectations of our forefathers through the studies of Korean Newly Arts Dance history, the character of it is more than a product of future directive ideal. It will provide an opportunity to clearly understand the true meaning of creation.
Abstract
This research is a Argument about 'modernity' and 'context creative & tradition of arts' There are elements what will be to encounter during the process to established definition of the Newly Arts Dance. The aim of this research found the culture-historical meaning and necessary of preservation Newly Arts Dance in Korean dance history, as traditional cultural. As inquiring the modernity of Newly Arts Dance. Analysis that tradition is thought of as opposite to each other creative unnoticed modernity in traditional dance. Therefore they tried to regard the tradition as something passive and stagnant. The research divided the Korean dancing into different types. This was done to discuss what the standard in separating the Newly Arts Dance and traditional Korean dancing, and based on this separation, comparing the two and understanding the relationship between them, it tried to confirm the spiritual values in Newly Arts Dance history research. In art we inquired about, what is <evolution> or <development> is <progressive> or <unprogressive>, seeking for the periodic righteousness of the rise and the activities of the Newly Arts Dance and connecting with the theoretical inquiry in the creation of Art. Even if we don't think about the lessons and expectations of our forefathers through the studies of Korean Newly Arts Dance history, the character of it is more than a product of future directive ideal. It will provide an opportunity to clearly understand the true meaning of creation.
참고문헌 (20)
- 구민희, "춤과담론제2호-학술세미나지상중계", 연낙재, ~ (2008)
- 김은영, "한국‘전통’음악의형성과근대성연구", 박사, pp.2009
- 김채현, "춤의 해 기념 한국무용사자료집:신무용의 역사와 현주소", 92춤의해 학술분과 편찬, ~ (1993)
- 박상익, "아침을열며:공옥진은무형문화재가아니다", 한국일보11.10일자, ~ (2009)
- 박종홍, "문화의전승.섭취.창조", 사상계, 63(10월) (1958)
- 안병주, "무용감상을위한이해" (1998), 신광문화사
- 안병헌, "사적 고찰을 통한 한국 전승무용의 전문화 배경 연구", 체육학논문집, 경희대학교, ~ (1998)
- 안병헌, "신무용사연구의필요성과논의방향에대한소고", 학술논문집, 10 (2003), (사)한국무용협회
- 안병헌, "신무용사 연구의 전제 : 접근태도의 논의", 예술논문집, 47, pp.229~259 (2008)
- 안제승, "재창조론고", pp.399~418 (1981), 미원 조영식박사 화갑기념논문집, 경희대학교
- 안제승, "한국신무용사" (1984), 승리문화사
- 안제승, "예의본명과원형승계의논리", 대한민국예술원논문집, 100~132 (1994)
- 이민호, "서양문화사" (2005), 도서출판느티나무
- 이태영, "전통을보는눈", 조선일보, 6.17일자, ~ (1981)
- 이혜정, "예술구술사인터뷰-문헌기록도결국사람의말", 문화예술지, (330) (2008)
- 장은주, "한국 근대성의 정당성 위기", 동양철학연구, (57), pp.7~45 (2009), 동양철학연구회
- 최상철, "무용사연구를위한접근방법", 한국무용교육학회10주년기념논문모음집, ~ (1999)
- 홍상희, "한국예술구술사의오늘", 문화예술지, (330) (2008)
- E.H.Carr, "역사란무엇인가" (2003), 청년사
- Gottschalk, "Understanding History", pp.45~ (1956), University of Chicago press
