한국화, 추상 담론의 가능성 탐색
To understand The Possibility of Discourse on Abstraction in Korean Painting
0
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Korean painting lies within a strangely distorted landscape within modern and contemporary history. This is mainly because the concept of Korean painting came into being amid general historical contradictions, so all activities under this concept are distorted. But if we practice in the name of Korean painting itself, this practice is an attempt to face and solve present pending issues. In Korean-style painting, abstraction is one of such problems. The vague concept and distorted understanding of ‘Korean painting’ today is associated with the problem of modernity. There is much confusion about abstraction, sustaining two confronting attitudes: one avoids abstraction in Korean painting altogether. Those who maintain this position say discourse on abstraction derives from our misunderstanding of the concept and evolvement of modern abstraction. “It is obvious abstract painting offers experience different to the world of modern Korean painting. -- Abstraction in Korean painting refers to embracing an external element, and is a problem of Korean painting as a result of this embracement. Therefore, abstraction is insubstantial in Korean painting.” The second attitude is understanding the tradition of ‘xieyi(寫意)’ - emphasizing meaning of a painting, and expressing the spirit of the painter, rather than accurate representation of form - in Oriental painting, in connection with abstraction. This attitude accepts ‘xieyi’ as stemming from literati painting as the departure point for modernity in art. The first attitude erases all possibility of Korean painting as contemporary art, while the second presents an advanced art style, aligned with Western art, and underlines its own superiority. One embraces the history of clashes among civilization, but the other show an attitude to address historical, structural problems as the matter of analogy. The problem of abstraction in Korean painting is thus complex and subtle. This essay will address possibilities of a new discourse on ‘Korean painting’ and ‘abstraction’ that has been so far discussed in an abnormal manner.
Abstract
Korean painting lies within a strangely distorted landscape within modern and contemporary history. This is mainly because the concept of Korean painting came into being amid general historical contradictions, so all activities under this concept are distorted. But if we practice in the name of Korean painting itself, this practice is an attempt to face and solve present pending issues. In Korean-style painting, abstraction is one of such problems. The vague concept and distorted understanding of ‘Korean painting’ today is associated with the problem of modernity. There is much confusion about abstraction, sustaining two confronting attitudes: one avoids abstraction in Korean painting altogether. Those who maintain this position say discourse on abstraction derives from our misunderstanding of the concept and evolvement of modern abstraction. “It is obvious abstract painting offers experience different to the world of modern Korean painting. -- Abstraction in Korean painting refers to embracing an external element, and is a problem of Korean painting as a result of this embracement. Therefore, abstraction is insubstantial in Korean painting.” The second attitude is understanding the tradition of ‘xieyi(寫意)’ - emphasizing meaning of a painting, and expressing the spirit of the painter, rather than accurate representation of form - in Oriental painting, in connection with abstraction. This attitude accepts ‘xieyi’ as stemming from literati painting as the departure point for modernity in art. The first attitude erases all possibility of Korean painting as contemporary art, while the second presents an advanced art style, aligned with Western art, and underlines its own superiority. One embraces the history of clashes among civilization, but the other show an attitude to address historical, structural problems as the matter of analogy. The problem of abstraction in Korean painting is thus complex and subtle. This essay will address possibilities of a new discourse on ‘Korean painting’ and ‘abstraction’ that has been so far discussed in an abnormal manner.
참고문헌 (12)
- 들뢰즈, "감각의 논리" (1995), 민음사
- 들뢰즈, "차이와 반복" (2004), 민음사
- 들뢰즈, "천의 고원" (2001), 새물결
- 김백균, "동양인의 심미의식과 예술론" (2008), 중앙대학교 출판부
- 劉劍華, "中國畵論類編" (1974), 華正書局
- 蘇 軾, "蘇東坡全集" (1997), 中國書店
- 오광수, "한국추상미술 40년" (1997), 재원
- 김영희, "들뢰즈의 예술론에 관한 연구", 동서철학연구, (36), pp.159~174 (2005), 한국동서철학회
- 민주식, "추상미술의 미학적 원리: 개념과 장르적 특성을 중심으로", 미술사학보, (34), pp.5~38 (2010), 미술사학연구회
- 윤희경, "본원적 실재에 관한 인식화(認識畵)로서의 말레비치의 추상화", 미술사학보, (34), pp.331~368 (2010), 미술사학연구회
- Daniel W. Smith, "Deleuze’s theory of senstion: Overcoming the Kantian Duality, in Deleuze: Critical Reader" (1996), Blackwell Publishers
- Arthur C. Danto, "After the End of Art: Contemporary Art and the Pale of History" (1997), Princeton University Press