현대문학에 나타난 ‘추(醜)의 미학’ 탐구의 필요성과 연구의 난점들

Abstract

The aesthetics of ugliness is to be said to expose firmly what we conflict with or want to deny. Because the ‘ugliness’ involves a considerable amount of human truth to be undeniable. The artists who practice the aesthetics of ugliness are those who devote themselves to the ugliness just as we devote ourselves in everyday to the beauty. But it is actually not easy to evaluate this aesthetics of ugliness as an art. The necessity and aporias to study this aesthetics is discussed thus in this paper. The motive and necessity to study this aesthetics are summed up as follows. First, the Korean literature from 1980th to 2000th revealed a strong tendency of this aesthetics. Second, if the ‘aesthetics of beauty’ was emphasized by the aesthetic history in the same period, it could meant to thrust the ugliness out of the world of art. In other words, it is to be inferred that the authors of classic aesthetics indeed made the ugliness their most warning object. To read prudently Aristotle’s or Horace’s Poetics is to see how acutely they sensed the aesthetics of ugliness. This intention of classic aesthetics as an another motive suggests indirectly the necessity to study the aesthetic of ugliness. The aporias to study the aesthetics of ugliness are classified as follows. (1) The ubiquity of ugliness hinders this aesthetics from systematizing. If this aesthetics becomes an object of systemic study as a discipline, the typification of ugliness must be done primarily, but it is difficult to classify the ugliness. This requests to grasp delicately the fused modes of ugliness in its context. (2) The aesthetics of ugliness has a tendency to comprehend diversely the empirical ugliness and the ugliness as human nature. While the empirical ugliness comes from the ill society, the ugliness as human nature is an indefinable aproia of philosophy because its origin is humanity itself. Though this aporia is a difficulty that must reserve continually its firm definition, it is important due to be a momentous point to draw a reflection on humanity. (3) The relativity of the aesthetics of ugliness is also an aporia due to signify that the persons may react differently to their enjoyment of this aesthetics. (4) The relativity of the aesthetics of ugliness also makes the measure of evaluation of this aesthetic a difficulty. This is the problem that requests the most careful attitude to study this aesthetics. (5) The aesthetics of ugliness is the most notable tendency of modern arts, but its influences on our emotions and passions must be considered seriously. Though this aesthetics is ultimately a paradoxical for the more significant human world, the disharmony and unbalance that its serious observer accumulates in himself are aporias that must be considered seriously. We may become nearly the followers of ugliness unless we always remind that all the ugliness in arts has not always its value as the aesthetics of ugliness. This requests thus necessarily to establish a colder perspective than the attitude to the aesthetics of beauty.