지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Coming to 1980's, the research environment of the Buddhist Art was better than before in various respects. But most research papers have not developed in comparison with the former ones in that they have been kept the same format as well as methology. The reason why the research papers have not been changed is the idle attidtude that depends on the plate instead of field work.
The reason why the research is unsatisfactory is caused by the use of the improper terminology. Each terminology has a specific and objective meaning that can not be interpreted arbitrarily. Nevertheless some terminologies have been misused. Style and Taenghwa (幀畵) are the typical examples.
1. Style
The idiom is the main object of Buddhsit art. By recognizing the idiom we can understand the essence of work. The idiom of work is the objective fact including structure, form, color, and so on. Also what is the idiom, to compose the essence of work, is the historical fact that was formed by the various cultural background.
Style is the artistic expression which the formative arts contain or is to make the formal standardization made by a person, a period, a people and a state. After grasping the idiom, style is able to be understood.
The terminology ‘style’ is used frquently in Buddhist art. As the study on Buddhist art became vivid, the meaning of style seems to be used extendedly. The elegance style (端雅樣式) is the example used extendedly. The elegangce style is mentioned frquently as the characteristic of Buddha image in Koryo period. However, the elegance is only the subjective aesthetic view, it is shy of the objectivity. So the elegance style is not proper terminology as the concept of style. Besides clothes style (着衣樣式), Buddhist Robe style (法衣樣式), and composition style (構成樣式) is close to form or feature.
2. Taenghwa (幀畵)
The terminology is used correctly to communicate with each other. In research papers the understanding of the correct meaning about term is the most important thing. Nevertheless, the research papers on Buddhist painting have been misused. The representative example is the term 'Taenghwa(幀畵)'.
Nowadays 'Taenghwa' has been used as a general term substituted Buddhist painting. That is very special phenomenon that happen in Korea, because China and Japan called Buddhist Cultural Zone have not used this term. But whoever can not explain how it called, or when does use this term.
The earliest example used the term 'taeng' is the Amitabha Paingting of Neze Museum(根津美術館). It was 1306 that this painting was made in Koryo period. There is a paingting record: newly paint Amitabha Painting one taeng. In this record 'taeng' means the auxiliary numeral not painting. Besides in stele and record taeng was used as a auxiliary numeral. Also in name of Buddhist painting Hoi(繪) and Do(圖) were used. So 'taeng' seem to have nothing to do with Buddhist painting.
In most of the Buddhsit paintings painted in the 16th century ‘taeng' is next to figure, so it was used as a term to mean painting for hanging. In addition there were instances that 'taeng' was next to 'Do(圖)', so it appears to have no relation with Buddhist painting.
The term ‘taeng' was showed frequently in Buddhist painting made in the 18th, 19th centrury. That seems to be the main reason that Buddhist painting was called as Taenghwa. But most tides of works ended up taeng, 'taenghwa' was used in the limited works. So at that time 'taeng' in meaning was changed, however, it was still used as a painting for hanging.
Through the examples of Koryo and Joseon period, 'taeng' is seem to indicate the unit for counting painting or painting for hanging. So the use of the term 'Taenghwa' substituted Buddhist painting seem to be improper.
The reason why the research is unsatisfactory is caused by the use of the improper terminology. Each terminology has a specific and objective meaning that can not be interpreted arbitrarily. Nevertheless some terminologies have been misused. Style and Taenghwa (幀畵) are the typical examples.
1. Style
The idiom is the main object of Buddhsit art. By recognizing the idiom we can understand the essence of work. The idiom of work is the objective fact including structure, form, color, and so on. Also what is the idiom, to compose the essence of work, is the historical fact that was formed by the various cultural background.
Style is the artistic expression which the formative arts contain or is to make the formal standardization made by a person, a period, a people and a state. After grasping the idiom, style is able to be understood.
The terminology ‘style’ is used frquently in Buddhist art. As the study on Buddhist art became vivid, the meaning of style seems to be used extendedly. The elegance style (端雅樣式) is the example used extendedly. The elegangce style is mentioned frquently as the characteristic of Buddha image in Koryo period. However, the elegance is only the subjective aesthetic view, it is shy of the objectivity. So the elegance style is not proper terminology as the concept of style. Besides clothes style (着衣樣式), Buddhist Robe style (法衣樣式), and composition style (構成樣式) is close to form or feature.
2. Taenghwa (幀畵)
The terminology is used correctly to communicate with each other. In research papers the understanding of the correct meaning about term is the most important thing. Nevertheless, the research papers on Buddhist painting have been misused. The representative example is the term 'Taenghwa(幀畵)'.
Nowadays 'Taenghwa' has been used as a general term substituted Buddhist painting. That is very special phenomenon that happen in Korea, because China and Japan called Buddhist Cultural Zone have not used this term. But whoever can not explain how it called, or when does use this term.
The earliest example used the term 'taeng' is the Amitabha Paingting of Neze Museum(根津美術館). It was 1306 that this painting was made in Koryo period. There is a paingting record: newly paint Amitabha Painting one taeng. In this record 'taeng' means the auxiliary numeral not painting. Besides in stele and record taeng was used as a auxiliary numeral. Also in name of Buddhist painting Hoi(繪) and Do(圖) were used. So 'taeng' seem to have nothing to do with Buddhist painting.
In most of the Buddhsit paintings painted in the 16th century ‘taeng' is next to figure, so it was used as a term to mean painting for hanging. In addition there were instances that 'taeng' was next to 'Do(圖)', so it appears to have no relation with Buddhist painting.
The term ‘taeng' was showed frequently in Buddhist painting made in the 18th, 19th centrury. That seems to be the main reason that Buddhist painting was called as Taenghwa. But most tides of works ended up taeng, 'taenghwa' was used in the limited works. So at that time 'taeng' in meaning was changed, however, it was still used as a painting for hanging.
Through the examples of Koryo and Joseon period, 'taeng' is seem to indicate the unit for counting painting or painting for hanging. So the use of the term 'Taenghwa' substituted Buddhist painting seem to be improper.
목차
머리말
1. 양식
2. 탱화(幀畵)가 불화(佛畵)인가
맺음말
참고문헌
Abstract
「佛敎美術 서술의 用語 문제」에 대한 질의
박은경 선생님의 질의에 대한 답변
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
道岬寺 觀世音菩薩三十二應幀의 圖像 硏究
미술사학연구(구 고고미술)
2003 .12
-
1628年 七長寺 〈五佛會掛佛圖〉硏究
미술사논단
2006 .12
-
朝鮮前期 金線描阿彌陀三尊圖一例
미술사연구
2008 .12
-
불화 속 여인들의 머리형태에 관한 고찰- 서사적 내용 속의 여인들을 중심으로 -
한국인체미용예술학회지
2014 .01
-
고려 초기 회화의 조명
미술사논단
2019 .06
-
조선 전기 불화의 서사적 표현, 佛敎說話圖
미술사논단
2005 .12
-
죽화(竹畵)의 유형과 분류체제의 정립을 위한 시론
미술사논단
2018 .12
-
大興寺 法身中圍會三十七尊圖考 : 朝鮮時代 密敎系 佛畵의 硏究(1)
미술사학연구(구 고고미술)
2003 .09
-
회화의 위기, 회화의 대안
미술이론과 현장
2004 .01
-
고려 중기의 북송과의 회화 교류
미술사논단
2019 .12
-
개화기 화단의 신경향과 잡화병
미술사논단
2008 .12
-
근대기 지방화단 연구 : 서울화단과의 영향관계를 중심으로
한국근현대미술사학
2009 .12
-
高麗佛畵의 변죽 : 本地, 畵幅, 奉安에 대한 問題
미술사논단
2012 .06
-
화문과 화제의 분류체제
미술사논단
2018 .06
-
19세기 「朝鮮書畵傳」을 통해 본 韓日 繪書交流
미술사학연구(구 고고미술)
2012 .03
-
조선 후기 남종화풍 문인산수화의 모방과 창작 : 화보의 분류 체계와 그 수용
미술사논단
2016 .06
-
藹春 申命衍의 繪畵
미술사연구
2007 .12
-
이용우(李用雨, 1902-1952)의 ‘묵로’시대 회화 연구 : 인물화와 화조화를 중심으로
한국근현대미술사학
2018 .12
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-650-017298387