丁若鏞의 실학적 서화미학에 관한 연구
A Study of Jung Yak Yong's Shilhak based Aesthetics of Calligraphy and Painting Works
0
조회
0
다운로드
4
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
茶山 丁若鏞(1762-1836)은 柳馨遠, 李瀷의 經世致用과 北學의 利用厚生 및 西學⋅佛敎⋅陽明學⋅考證學 등을 비판적으로 수용하여 實學을 집대성한 인물이다. 그는 실학뿐만 아니라 題畵詩와 書畵에 관한 題跋도 많이 남기고 있어 詩⋅書⋅畵 방면에도 수준이 매우 높았던 것으로 보인다. 특히 그의 실학은 문예전반과 연계되어 서화미학⋅서화비평 등의 기저가 되고 있다. 다산의 투철한 시대인식과 현실파악에서 비롯된 실학관은 문예전반에서 ‘실제성’과 ‘진실성’이라는 두 축으로 연계된다. 회화에서는 實寫에 입각하여 寫實의 중요성을 인식함으로써 寫實이 되지 못한 상태에서 粗率하고 기괴하게 표현하는 관념적 寫意畵風을 반대한다. 서예에서는 당대의 글씨가 字態의 美麗함에만 경도되어 서예본질의 실제성⋅진실성이 결여되었고 眞氣가 사라졌다고 비판한다. 이는 예술이 지나치게 관념적 풍조로 치달은 것을 자각하여 예술의 진정성과 實心을 구하려는 입장이다. 특히 다산이 양명학자이자 서예가였던 李匡師를 당대 최고의 서예가로 평가한 것은 주목할 만하다. 여기에는 여러 이유가 있겠지만, 그의 실학에 내재된 陽明心學的 사유와 밀접한 관련이 있다고 하겠다. 즉, 주자학 중심이었던 시대상황 속에서 陸象山, 王陽明의 학문체계를 자신의 학문에 응용한 점은 陽明學의 실천윤리학적 학문성향을 긍정한 결과였다. 그는 이광사의 心學的 예술정신에 대한 간접적 체현을 통하여 脫주자학적 실학정신을 표출한다. 주체적이고 실천적인 학문사상을 이광사에 대한 예술비평을 통하여 간접적으로 발현했던 것이다. 그러므로 정약용의 서화미학사상은 脫朱子學的 실학정신과 陽明心學의 비판적 수용에 의해 형성된 것이라 하겠다.
Abstract
Dasan Jung Yak Yong (1762-1836) compiled Shilhak (實學: Realist School of Confucianism), critically accepting Yoo Hyung Won and Yi Ik's idea of Kyongsehchiyong (經世致用: A Confucian idea insisting that studies should be practically contributed to the society), Bukhak (北學: A school established by Shilhak scholars in Joseon Dynasty)'s idea of Yiyonghusaeng (利用厚生: An idea pursued by Shilhak scholars of the Bukhak School meaning prosperous economy and satisfied living status including clothing, food, and housing), and studies of Calligraphic, Buddhism, studies of Yang Myong, and of Kojeung. He must also have had a significantly high level of poetry, writing, and painting for many of his works on Jehbal (題跋: A name of Chinese-styled sentences) in regard to pictured poems, and Calligraphy and painting besides Shilhak still remain. Especially his Shilhak, linked to the overall field of literature, sometimes works as a basis for the aesthetics and criticism of Calligraphy and painting. His practical and progressive view of Shilhak moves toward a point in which the adhesion of the old is no more pursued and the practicality of the present is more focused on. He criticizes the blind classicism under which it insists that the older is always the better and things now are not as worthy as those back then and pursues technical improvement. This does not mean that he completely rejects the ancient thought but refuses to uncritically accept the introduction of the advanced outcomes of civilization. In calligraphy, he criticizes the classicism-oriented and passive aesthetic consciousness of Joseon Dynasty in which Wang Hi Zi and the artistic system of renowned figures is absolutely regarded as best. Accordingly, he rather sticks to the open and practical idea of positively accepting the techniques of Song and Ming Dynasty which had developed in the history of calligraphy since Wang Hi Zi. His view of Shilhak, generated from his thorough awareness of the era and understanding of the reality, is linked to the two axes of 'practicality' and 'truth' in the overall literature field. In painting, he opposes the idea of ideal painting in regard to mentality which expresses carelessly and bizarrely in the state of not being practical and pursues the awareness of the importance of being practical based on real objects. In calligraphy, he sees that the letter of the day only focuses on the beauty of its appearance and lacks the practicality and truth and its original essence is gone. For this matter, he is standing in a position in which he criticizes the fact that art had way too much leaned toward ideal trend and he seeks to realize the truth and purity of art. It should be notable that he evaluated Yi Kwang Sa, a scholar of studies of Yang Myong and calligrapher, as the best calligrapher of the day. Of many possible reasons, it seemingly has something to do with the thought of Studies of Mentality of Yang Myong absorbed in his Shilhak. That is, despite the atmosphere of the time when Confucianism was prevailing, he applied the academic system of Yook Sang San, and Wang Yang Myong to his own studies and this shows that he positively accepted the academic tendency of practical ethics of studies of Yang Myong. Through his indirect realization of Yi Kwang Sa's artistic spirit of mentality studies, he expresses practical thought which is apart from Confucianism. He intended to reveal his active and practical academic thought indirectly through art criticism regarding Yi Kwang Sa. Thus, it can be said that Jung Yak Yong's aesthetic thought on Calligraphy and painting was formed by the practical thought which was apart from Confucianism and the critical acceptance of Studies of Mentality of Yang Myong.
참고문헌 (25)
- "大學", ~
- "與猶堂全書", ~
- "息山續集", ~
- "星湖全集", ~
- "東溪集(이상 문집총간)", ~
- 李匡師, "圓嶠書訣", 서울大學校 奎章閣 所藏, 寫本, ~, 刊年未詳, M[DOI]
- 琴章泰, "朝鮮 後期의 儒學思想" (1988), 서울대학교출판부
- 金光郁, "韓國書藝詩硏究" (2006), 계명대학교출판부
- 金文植, "북학론의 사상적 특징, in: 韓國儒學思想大系Ⅲ - 哲學思想編" (2005), 한국국학진흥원
- 金相肅, "筆訣", 서예비평 (2002), 한국서예협회
- 金相洪, "茶山의 書藝觀에 對하여", 書藝學, (창간) (2000), 한국서예학회
- 裵奎河, "中國書法藝術史 下" (2000), 梨花文化出版社
- 徐坰遙, "한국유교지성론" (2003), 성균관대학교출판부
- 徐承禮, "조선후기 米芾,董基昌 行草書風의 유행", 書藝學硏究, (6) (2005), 한국서예학회
- 宋載邵, "茶山의 리얼리즘", 茶山學報, (1) (1978), 다산학연구원
- 沈慶昊, "다산 정약용의 학문연구 태도에 대하여", 한국학대학원논문집, (7) (1992), 한국정신문화연구원
- 유봉학, "조선후기 학계와 지식인" (1998), 신구문화사
- 尹絲淳, "茶山의 人間觀, in: 丁茶山硏究의 現況" (1985), 민음사
- 李奎象, "幷世才彦錄⋅書家錄, in: 18세기 조선인물지" (1997), 창작과비평사
- 李原珩, "茶山 丁若鏞의 書畵 硏究", 석사, pp.2002
- 李乙浩, "茶山實學의 洙泗學的 構造", 아세아연구, 8(2) (1965), 고려대학교
- 茶山學硏究院, "李乙浩全書 4", 예문서원
- 張法, "中國美學史" (2000), 中國上海人民出版社
- 張志熏, "朝鮮朝後期 書藝美學思想 硏究", 박사, pp.2007
- 池斗煥, "조선 후기의 문화-양명학", 한국사, 35 (1998), 국사편찬위원회
