공미술로서의 지역 만들기와 예술촌의 역할

Abstract

How has been used the concept of ‘publicness’ in the domestic public art? This concept of ‘publicness’ can be divided into three categories in the social science. The first one is the value of the public, the second one is the territory, and finally the subject performing its role. The meaning of the territory has something in common with public space. When the arts came out of the exhibition hall and was placed on the public space, it was affected by the mass and place. When the initial types of the arts were displayed, it brought about disputes with various points of publicness. It caused the necessity to pay attention on the concept “in-between” of Hannah Arendt. Not confronting between personal and public territory, you need to pay attention to the various communication opportunities maintaining the relationship while they are crossing their borders each other. Variability of view points has been formed and progressed since the formation of New Genre Public Art as social movements. However, it still have been causing confusion as the public art is explained as site-specific-art and community-oriented-art. Recently, the public art can be divided into three types: public arts, village regeneration, artist village. Each type has its own advantages and disadvantages and this study investigated the ‘Seoul Art Space Sin-dang’ as the third one. This one also is in need of artists' labor by the explanation through community-oriented-art's viewpoints. Therefore, it is necessary to differentiate in separate areas of the public arts.