본 연구의 목적은 1920년대 중반부터 한국과 중국 미술비평에 있어서 중추적 역할을 한 김용준, 서비홍이 1950년대 이전까지 각자의 미술론을 형성·발전시킨 과정을 비교·분석하고 상이점을 고찰하는 데 있다. 김용준과 서비홍은 현실·실용주의자이면서도 민족주의적 성향을 나타낸다. 그들은 서구의 미술을 자신만의 미술론으로 미술비평과 미술교육 등에 도입하여 당시의 미술과 융화·발전시켜갔다. 이들의 미술론은 공통적으로 그 무렵의 미술이나 문화에 많은 영향을 주었을 뿐만 아니라, 낙후된 자국의 미술 발전에 크게 기여하였고, 현대 미술이 태동하는 데 일정 역할을 하였다. 그러나 김용준과 서비홍의 예술가적인 위상이나 작품 등을 오늘날의 관점에서 견주어 보면, 특히 이들이 본격적으로 활동하였던 1950년대 이전까지는 국적과 활동 배경 등이 다르지만 비교될만한 요소들이 적지 않다. 서비홍은, 과학은 예술과 함께 할 수 없다는 김용준의 비평관과 반대적 입장을 지녔고, 예술가는 혁명가이어야 한다는 김용준의 관점과도 정반대되었다. 또한 서비홍은 김용준과는 달리, 프롤레타리아적인 미술이 인민들에게 실질적인 도움이 된다는 점을 강조했으며, 서구미술의 장점만을 선별하여 중국미술에 끌어들이자고 하였다. 당시 서울대학교 교수를 역임했던 김용준과 북경대의 교수를 지냈던 서비홍의 미술 이론적 관점은 이처럼 상이한 점들이 적지 않다. 따라서 본 연구에서 이들의 미술론의 상이점, 지향점 등을 고찰하는 일은 한국과 중국의 근대 미술의 과거와 현재를 이해하고 향후 양국의 미술 문화의 협력 관계를 형성하는 데도 미약하나마 기여하게 될 것이다.
The objective of this study is to comparatively analyze a process of forming and developing art criticism by foreign study group to Japan like Kim, Yong-Joon and Xu, Bei-Hong who played a pivotal role in art criticism of Korea and China that were beginning to be modernized in early 1900s until 1950s and consider, systemize its academic difference. Two artists like Kim, Yong-Joon and Xu, Bei-Hong were prominently different in various aspects including artistic position or art work in a perspective of world art. But they were comparatively in an equal position before 1950s when they were engaged in their activity. Therefore, in this study, based on a time before 1950s when Kim, Yong-Joon defected to North Korea, Xu, Bei-Hong who is now acknowledged as world best painter and Kim, Yong-Joon who was regarded as commentator and intellectual in Korean art circle at that time and is by no means inferior to Korea''s first art critic were intended to be comparatively researched. Due to this reason, theses comparatively researching on modern, contemporary Korean, Chinese painters or artists were seldom available in reality. Overcoming this difficult situation, this study could clarify a process relatively in detail that Kim, Yong-Joon and Xu, Bei-Hong harmoniously developed art at that time by introducing western art situation at an early stage into art theory and education based on their own art criticism. In this study, based on art theory at that time developed by Kim, Yong-Joon and Xu, Bei-Hong, art activity and criticism being derived therefrom were extensively analyzed academically and objectively through various data. Therefore, through this study, it could be realized that perspective in terms of art criticism of Kim, Yong-Joon who served a professor of Seoul National University and Xu, Bei-Hong who served a professor of Beijing University and Joongang University seriously affected the society and art at that time and based on this, it was clarified that monumental events in which progressive and reflective consideration such as identity, nationalistic aspect, traditional art and art school education was unfolded were progressed. In addition, through this study, in view of methodological, philosophical, cognitive dimension, context of art criticism and oriental identity of Kim, Yong-Joon and Xu, Bei-Hong was clarified to be contradictory because environment and historical root of each country is different. Significance of this study is that a base of practical research direction for progressing diversified researches on artistic, cultural identity and art criticism of Korea and China in the future could be established.