It was not easy to escape from ignorance on Gisaeng(妓生, 藝妓). It was mid 1990s that I have gained my knowledge on gisaeng for the first time. It was because ‘The History of Gisaeng(朝鮮解語花史)’by Yi Neung-hwa(李能和, 1869-1943) was translated into Korean. The book was first published in Hannamseorim in 1927, republished in 1968 and publicized from Dongmunsun in 1992. The book offered a chance to look at the realities of the history. However, the perspective on gisaeng, based on after the studying feminism simply was not the solution. The years passed, and from one day, I was able to see and observe the actual calligraphies of Ham Juk-seo and Oh Gui-sook but also that of Min Woon-cho, Won Geum-hong and Gang Ja-sook. Most of them are the ones who devoted their livesas gisaeng in Korea under Japanese rule, but still their lives are hardly known so that it is impossible to leave any specific comments on the artists and the work.
Here, the research was held based on the previous studies as well as the works, literatures and records were also included but I have limited the period just for1910s, so that this can become the base of the studies later.
The fact that gisaeng as an artist and an artist as a gisaeng is the history that cannot be denied and still there are some works that continued their lives, but the history of gisaeng artist was excluded in art history. After three gisaeng artists- Jukhyang, Jinhong, Somi were introduced in the Geunyeokseohwajing by Oh Se-chang in the line of art history, a few gisaeng artist started to be revealed their presence but still,it is very difficult to find works that come down through the generations, above all, gisaeng artist still do not have their position in among any professional researchers.
So far, the giseang was regarded just as aliens who always exist as the object of the outside. In the past, they have gained attention but only as "models" of the paintings and of the photographs, and this remains the same today. The works of gisaeng artists here, of course, cannot be literati paintings, nor the creations of the royal painters: solely they were standardized as just simple amusementfull of techniques, the result of followings of imitations, so the formativeness, creativity and individuality were inevitable to be rejected. Even more, during whole time under Japanese rule, the culture of gisaeng was corrupted and the decorativeness of works of gisaeng artist was denied- which led their works to be considered as the ones that have no artistic and historic values. As aresult, they were excluded from acquisitions of collections at the institutions including art museums, as well as the main subject that needs to be explored, in history of art and culture: even, in general, they gained no interest at all, and were dismissed as pieces doodle with no value.
However, gisaeng and giseang artists are the truth of history which had unique tradtion and identity in human culture and art community. The negative impression still remains, in contemporary society, where no social status and class, solemn sexual discrimination are broken, this of course, must be overwhelmed. This is reinstatement of gisaeng artist in history but in the opposite, this is also the process of breaking the notion of social class discrimination that still continued in art history today. For this, in the process of eliminating ideas of social class, status and sexual discrimination, respect towards gisaeng as the creator, and the inner values of the works of gisaeng must be explored.