근대일본의 선종화 창출과 그 사적 위상 ―남북종론을 중심으로―

Abstract

This article examines the modern period where Zen Painting created by Tenshin conflicts with traditional painting theory based on Literati painting and focuses on the development of Northern Southern school theory in Chinese painting theory. Such conflicts in modern Japan, particularly Japan’s recent particular situation where Southern School theory or Literati painters claiming to adopt newly introduced paintings from China used the schematic understanding as a premise ‘Muromachi period : Song/Yuan Painting=Northern School of Painting=Court Painting’, ‘mid-late Edo: Ming/Qing Painting=Southern School of Painting= Literati Painting’ from prestigious Chinese painting theory to build stronger presence. Due to this schematic understanding, Zen Priests and their works which were active in the Muromachi period were defined as “Northern School Theory” and were denigrated. However, Okakura Tenshin, who values the painting style of the Muromachi period and the Kano faction affected by it, adopted a paradigm shift to scrap Northern Southern Theory and establish a new “Zen Painting” in order to not accept this modern schematic understanding which highly appreciates Chinese culture after all. On the other hand, Taki Seiichi reconsidered the Northern Southern School theory and included “Zen Painting” in Literati painting. This seem to be something that Taki took seriously the issue of the Depicting Thoughts(寫意) which became an exclusive property of the Zen Painting or Northern School of Painting by the Tenshin. Therefore, the question of representativeness was raised, whether Zen Painting or Literati painting represents the Oriental painting. Two rivals competed around the painting of the Zen priest by Taki, one was Literati painting and Southern School theory which had been disparaged since Fenollosa and Tenshin and the other was Zen Painting and Northern School theory which held superior position.