메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색
질문

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
저널정보
미술사연구회 미술사연구 미술사연구 제20호
발행연도
2006.12
수록면
7 - 28 (22page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색
질문

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
Portraiture is the representation of a specific individual through drawing, painting or photography. Portraiture is a genre that has a longer tradition than any other genres in the history of art. However, the efforts to define portraiture have proved to be difficult because of the genre’s several inherent contradictions. Firstly, although a portrait represents a mere moment in a person’s life, it is perceived to encapsulate his or her essential being, which cannot be grasped by pure physical resemblance. Thus, a portrait also addresses one’s personality, occupation, psychology, social status, etc.; in short, it contains all that would constitute an individual’s identity. Secondly, the focus of a portrait lies on the sitter, the one who is portrayed. However, emphasis can also lie on the artist who is looking at the sitter. As Walter Benjamin said, “the portraiture, if they last, do so only as testimony to the art of the painter.” For Benjamin, traditional portraits are first and foremost a document of the artist’s hand and eye. This argument greatly diverges from the definition offered by the Oxford English Dictionary: “A representation or delineation of a person, esp. of the face, made from life, by drawing, painting, photography, engraving, etc.; a likeness.”
Another difficulty in answering what a portrait is the way portraiture is practiced in modern and contemporary art. In the 20th century, portraits no longer obsessively adhere to the principle of ‘likeness’ on account of the advent of movements such as abstract art as well as a shift in the art world where portraits are rarely produced to meet the demands of a certain patron. This makes it all the more difficult to designate portraiture. On the other hand, there is photography, which occupies that empty place of ‘likeness’ with a supposed guarantee of physical resemblance. Does this mean that when discussing the technical reproduction of portrait photography, we have to change the perspective from which portraits have traditionally been discussed?
In this article, I propose the following categories for understanding portraiture in art history: state portrait, individual and group portrait, self-portrait, contemporary portrait. This enables us to recognize that the portrait occupies a sphere where its very definition as well as reception cannot but be unstable, fluid and flexible.

목차

Ⅰ. 초상화의 기능
Ⅱ. 닮음의 문제
Ⅲ. 개인과 그룹 초상화
Ⅳ. 화가의 자화상
Ⅴ. 현대미술의 초상화
Ⅵ. 맺음말
참고문헌
〈Abstract〉

참고문헌 (0)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0

UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-650-017668501