도움말

단색조 회화운동 속의 경쟁구도

- 박서보와 이우환

The Rivalry in the Movement of Monochromatic Painting : Park Seo-bo and Lee U-fan
현대미술사연구 제32집, 2012.12, 251-284 (34 pages)
인용정보 복사
Quick View Quick View
구매하기 6,000원
인용하기
이용수 : 602건
피인용수 : 3건
분야내 활용도 : 4%
자세히 보기 >

· 이용수 : 2010년부터 집계한 원문다운로드수

· 피인용수 : DBpia 논문 가운데 해당 논문을 인용한 논문수

· 분야내 활용도 : 최근 24개월간 DBpia 이용수를 기준으로 산출 / 0%에 가까울 수록 활용도가 높고, 100%에 가까울 수록 활용도가 낮음

초록
Park Seobo and Lee U-fan are the two titans of the movement of Monochromatic Painting, and the artistic rivalry between them is manifested by the sharp contrast between their artistic paths in terms of both theory and career. The different artistic directions pursued by the two artists wrote the history of the Monochromatic Painting movement and formed the framework for the discourse of ‘Korean Modernism’. This article directs its attention not to the personal relationship between Park and Lee but to the art-historical significance of their rivalry.
To begin with, the rivalry between the two artists can be explained in terms of their theories of art, namely the meaning they conferred to art. Park shared the premise of ‘modernism’ by attaching emphasis to a certain spiritual world and based the spirituality on traditional views of nature, seeking for contemporary ‘Korean’ art. He inquired into what ‘Korean Modernism’ was and worked within the frame of such a discourse. On the contrary, Lee was concerned with the material world so as to deconstruct ‘modernism’. He cast light on the diasporic identity by positioning himself as an outsider while distancing himself from ‘Korean-ness’. Paradoxically, Lee contributed to the establishment of ‘Korean Modernism’ by presenting what was not ‘Korean Modernism’ outside the boundary of ‘Korean Modernism’.
Such a rivalry between them can also be detected in their artistic careers?hat is, their activities in the art world. Park pursued his artistic career in the way to establish and solidify his status as an artist in the Korean art scene, and his advance to the international art scene was carried out in the continuum of his activities in the domestic art scene. On the contrary, Lee started his career as an artist overseas. The development of his artistic career took place in the way to secure his status as an artist in the world art scene, and the establishment of Lee’s status in the domestic art scene resulted from his activities in the international art scene. When Park’s artistic career can be characterized by the centripetal movement to identify his own root and to strengthen it, Lee’s, which originated in his being de-rooted, can be described as centrifugal movement to deny his root and to explore his relationship to the outside world. The rivalry in terms of identity between ‘Korean-ness’ and ‘diaspora’ was reenacted in the artistic careers of the two artists.
It can be said that Park and Lee solidified the movement of Monochromatic Painting by constituting the movement respectively internally and externally. A bigger cultural geopolitical mapping can be done here through an examination of the social and historical conditions of the time when they lived and worked ?nationalist ideologies and the relations between Japan and Korea ?and the subsequent development of globalization.
A rivalry can be characterized by its dichotomous conception and is of goal orientation. The fulfillment of ‘Korean Modernism’ in which the goals of the self-existence and modernization of Korea were artistically embodied, was, therefore, facilitated greatly by the rivalry between Lee and Park. The rivalry against each other critically helped their dominance in the territory of contemporary art, and those that were not conformable to the goals must have been ignored and negated in the process. In this respect, a rivalry can be gendered as masculine.
The possibility of yet another history of the Monochromatic Painting movement depends chiefly on one’s realization of the prevalence of male-centrism and, if possible, on the reinstatement of women and the feminine that have been excluded and neglected owing to it. This paper looks into the movement from the perspective of the masculine logic of rivalry, namely the logic of ‘exclusion’, and its ultimate conclusion argues the need to employ this feminine principle of ‘inclusion’ in the reexamination of the movement of Monochromatic Painting

목차
Ⅰ. 여는 글
Ⅱ. 의미의 경쟁
Ⅲ. 경력의 경쟁
Ⅳ. 닫는 글
참고문헌
Abstract
인용된 논문 (3)

알림서비스 신청하고 '인용된 논문' 정보를 메일로 확인 하세요!

제 1 저자의 다른 논문 (15)

윤난지 식별저자 저자의 상세정보를 확인해 보세요.

  • 처음
  •  
  • 이전
  •  
  • 1
  •  
  • 2
  •  
  • 다음
  •  
  • 마지막
권호 내 다른 논문 (17)

현대미술사연구 제32집 의 상세정보를 확인해 보세요.

  • 처음
  •  
  • 이전
  •  
  • 1
  •  
  • 2
  •  
  • 다음
  •  
  • 마지막
추천 논문 (10)

DBpia 추천논문과 함께 다운받은 논문을 제공합니다. 논문 초록의 텍스트마이닝과 이용 및 인용 관계 분석을 통해 추천해 드리는 연관논문을 확인해보세요.

DBpia 추천논문

더 많은 추천논문을 확인해 보세요!

함께 다운받은 논문

지표

이용현황

· 이용수

· 이용순위 상위 Top3

자세히 보기 >
No 상위 이용이관 이용수
1 홍익대학교 113
2 서울대학교 69
3 이화여자대학교 69

활용도

· 활용지수

· 논문의 활용도 추이 (주제분야 기준)

자세히 보기 >

: %

2016-09
2016-10
2016-11
2016-12
0
20
40
60
80
100
  • 0%
  • 20%
  • 40%
  • 60%
  • 80%
  • 100%

피인용수

검색결과 미리보기
상세정보
저작권 정책

누리미디어에서 제공되는 모든 저작물의 저작권은 원저작자에게 있으며, 누리미디어는 각 저작물의 내용을 보증하거나 책임을 지지 않습니다. 단, 누리미디어에서 제공되는 서지정보는 저작권법에 의해 보호를 받는 저작물로, 사전 허락 없이 임의로 대량 수집하거나 프로그램에 의한 주기적 수집 이용, 무단 전재, 배포하는 것을 금하며, 이를 위반할 경우, 저작권법 및 관련법령에 따라 민, 형사상의 책임을 질 수 있습니다.

맨 위로 이동