일반논문 : 추사 김정희 일가(一家)의 환로(宦路)와 서풍

김현권 ( Hyun Kwon Kim ) 한국실학학회 2013 한국실학연구 Vol.0 No.26

이 글은 金正喜가 한 시대를 움직인 서가로 성장할 수 있었던 기반을 분석하기 위함이다. 그러기에 본고는 크게 두 부분을 검토하였다. 우선 김정희 가문인 大橋金門 내에는 두 부류의 정치 계파가 발생하였는데, 金興慶의 아들 金漢藎이 1732년에 영조의 사위가 되었던 시점과 뒤를 이어 金漢祿의 사촌 동생인 金漢耉의 딸이 영조의 왕후가 된 때부터이다. 김정희의 직계 선조인 김한신계는 김한록계가 반탕평세력으로 활동하고 종국에는 피派의 중심세력이 되는 와중에도 이와 무관한 宦路를 걸었다. 그들은 부마 집안이 된 후 탕평세력이 되었으며, 특히 김정희의 친부 金魯敬은 1806년에 김한록계와는 정치적 선을 그으며 時派의 일원이 되었다. 이 같은 환로상의 정치색은 기존의 김정희 연구에서 명확하게 밝혀지지 않았던 부분으로, 향후 김정희의 생애, 학문, 서화 연구에 보탬이 될 수 있다. 다음으로 김정희 집안의 가풍과 그의 초기 서예 경향을 파악하였다. 부마 집안으로서 김한신계의 환로는 왕실 서풍을 받아들이게끔 하여 晉體의 선택과 墨守라는 상당히 보수적인 성향의 가풍을 형성시켰다. 그리고 김정희의 양부 金魯永과 친부인 金魯敬이 동일한 정파 내의 인물들과 교유한 사실은 기존의 가풍 외에도 당시 성행하였던 米비과 董其昌 서풍을 일부 수용하게끔 하였다. 그리고 김정희는 이를 자신의 초기 서예에 반영하는 가운데 여러 서체를 가미할 수 있었던 데는 박제가나 신위와 가진 교유 역시 한 몫을 하였다. 그리고 신위와 가진 교유는 그의 서예에서 趙孟부 서체의 사용을 가져왔다. 이러한 결과는 김정희의 서화가 오로지 청대 경향에 기반을 두었다는 견해가 수정되어야 함을 지적한 것이다. 그는 엄연히 조선의 서가였다. This paper was designed to identify how Kim JungHee(1786∼1856) became a calligrapher with political big power. To discuss this, the paper would focus on two points. Firstly, political positions of Kim`s family were studied: the positions were differed when Kim HanShin, a son of Kim HeungKeyung, became a son-in-law of King Youngjo of Chosun in 1732, while a daughter of Kim HanKu who was a cousin of Kim HanRoc was selected as one of wives of Youngjo. The family line of Kim HanShin, which was a direct ancestor of Kim JungHee, had a different political position from that of the Kim HanRoc line who actively worked against Tangpyeong policy and became the central figures of Beyeck-faction(?派, a group against the crown price killed by his father, Youngjo). Especially in 1806 Kim NohKeyong, the father of Kim JungHee, became one of members of Si-faction(時派, a group for Jungjo`s position, who was a grandson of Youngjo and the son of the dead crown prince) and kept the Kim HanRoc line at a distance. Such political positions have not been clearly identified in the existing research on Kim JungHee. Thus this paper might help facilitate further discussion on Kim`s life, scholarly works, paintings as well as his calligraphy. Secondly, Kim JungHee`s early style of calligraphy and his family tradition were studied. As a family of king`s son-in-law, the Kim HanShin line had adopted the royal family`s calligraphy style, selecting Wang Xizhi`s Jin-style and keeping its conservative family tradition. In the meanwhile, Kim NohYoung, the foster father of Kim JungHee and Kim NohKeyong, the biological father of him, kept company with people having the same political position. This could help adopt other calligraphy styles of Mi Fu and Dong Qichang, which were popular at that time. Kim JungHee was influenced by them at the early stage of his life. Thus, the idea that Kim JungHee followed the trends of Qing dynasty should be changed. Kim was a writer and a painter of Chosun.

김방한의 소쉬르 연구

김현권(Hyun-Kwon Kim) 사단법인 한국언어학회 2012 언어학 Vol.0 No.62

This article tries to analyse Prof. Kim’s interpretations of some important of some important linguistic principles of F. de Saussure from his major works on Saussure. His interest and studies on Saussure. His interest and studies on Saussure have commenced with his early academic life and continued just up to his death. The whole story is fascinatingly described in his own autobiography, Memories of a Linguist. As a general historical linguist, he worked in various domains. Strictly speaking, he is not a Saussurean, but he had recognized his importance in the general linguistics. He published many articles on Saussure and a monograph in 1988, the title of which is Saussure: Ancestre of Modern Linguistics. The book focused on the analysis of Saussure’s Cours de Linguistique Generale with some detail, and added the translation of Saussure’s second lecture on general linguistics in the appendix. He explained, commented, and interpreted main issues in Saussurean linguistics without any mention on the subjects of the historical linguistics of Saussure’s work.

‘송백(松柏)’과 ‘세한(歲寒)’ 도상 출현과 의미의 변화 - 김정희 <세한도(歲寒圖)> 연구 I

김현권 ( Kim Hyun-kwon ) 경희대학교 인문학연구원 2021 인문학연구 Vol.- No.47

<세한도(歲寒圖)>는 김정희(金正喜, 1786-1856)가 제주유배 시절에 제자인 역관 이상적(李尙迪, 1804-1865)에게 그려 준 회화이다. 그는 이 작품에 『논어(論語)』의 「자한(子罕)」편을 조형화시켰으며 송(松)과 백(柏)을 제재로 사용하였다. 공자가 활동한 춘추시대에 송백(松柏)은 유학과 도가, 그리고 민간에서 여러 상징으로 이해되었으며 이 중에는 성현이나 곧은 성품을 칭송하는 경우가 많았다. 이 송백이 회화로 등장한 시기는 4세기 후반경이다. 특히 두 나무는 산수의 소재로 이용되므로 산수화 역사와 밀접하게 관련되기도 한다. 동아시아에서 산수화의 발생에는 불교 신자인 종병(宗炳, 375-443)에 의해 시작될 정도로 도가의 매카니즘을 이용하고 수용하면서 실재론의 성향을 띠는 동아시아 불교의 역할이 컸다. 8-9세기에 이르면 김정희의 <세한도>와 관련된 송백(松柏), 세한(歲寒), 쌍송(雙松)을 포함한 쌍수(雙樹), 그리고 언송(偃松) 요소가 산수화 속에 빈번하게 등장하였으며, 이후 오대 및 북송 초에는 위의 요소가 표현되는 것은 물론이고 화제로 사용되는 예가 상당히 증가한다. 그래서 이 시기 산수화에 보이는 나무의 도상은 김정희의 <세한도> 속 송백의 원형으로 거론되는 편이다. 그러나 오대 및 북송 초 산수화는 전경성이 강한 대관산수 화인 반면에 김정희의 <세한도>는 제재가 부각된 소경산수화이면서도 경물이 절제되어 있다. 더구나 전자에 표현된 개개 사물은 대자연의 일부 요소일 뿐으로, 유학, 도가, 불교라는 동아시아 사상의 상호 침투 현상 속에서 도가가 융합된 동아시아 불교와 연관된다면, 후자의 두 나무는 작가의 심리가 투영된 사물로, 도가와 불교의 자극과 영향 속에 발생한 신유학의 발생과 관련된다. 즉 김정희의 <세한도> 구성 형식의 일부는 소식과 주변의 화가들이 보여준, 자연과 사물의 모습을 심미적이고 주관적으로 파악하면서 상징성을 부여하고 그 의미를 강조하는 고목죽석도와 연관된다. < Sehan-do(Wintry days, 세한도, 歲寒圖) > is a painting drawn by Kim Junghee(김정희, 1786-1856) to give to his disciple Yi Sangjeok(이상적, 1804-1865) during his exile in Jeju. Kim Junghee used ‘Pine and Cypress(松柏)’ as sanctions to express the Lunyu(Analects of Confucius, 論語)-chapter Zihan(子罕). From the Spring and Autumn(春秋) Period when Confucius was active to the 4th Century, ‘Pine and Cypress’ was understood as a symbol of various things in Confucianism, Daoism, and the private sector, Likewise, there were a lot of cases praising saints among them. Later, ‘Pine and Cypress’ began to appear in paintings. In particular, the two trees are also used as subject matter for landscape paintings, Thus the flow of this material is closely related to the history of landscape painting. Just as landscape painting was initiated by a Buddhist believer Zong Bing(宗炳, 375-443), East Asian Buddhism which adopted Taoism and took on Naive Realism, played a crucial role in the creation of landscape painting. In the 8th and 9th centuries, ‘Pine and Cypress’, ‘Sehan’, ‘Twin Tree(雙樹)’ including ‘Twin Pine(雙松)’, and ‘Lying Pine Tree(偃松)’ began to appear frequently in landscape paintings. Afterward, in the Five Dynasties(五代) and the early Northern Song(北宋) Dynasty, these elements not only expressed in paintings but also used as titles of paintings increased considerably. Therefore, the icon of a tree in landscape paintings during this period is often discussed as the archetype of ‘Pine and Cypress’ in Kim Junghee’s < Sehan-do >. However, the landscape paintings of the Five dynasties(五代) and the early Northern Song(北宋) Dynasty are ‘Monumental-view landscape painting(大觀山水畵)’ with a strong panoramic propensity, whereas Kim Junghee’s < Saehan-do > is ‘Intimate-scene landscape painting(小景山水畵)’ with emphasis on sanctions. Moreover, the individual objects expressed in the former are only a part of nature and are directly related to East Asian Buddhism which combines Daoism. On the other hand, later two trees and house objects are projected into the artist’s psychology. Therefore, this is also related to Neo-Confucianism arising from the stimulation, influenced by Taoism and Buddhism. Comparatively, Some of Kim Junghee’s < Sehan-do > composition forms are related to the form of ‘Gomokjukseok-do(Dry tree-Bamboo-Stone Painting, 枯木竹石圖)’, painted by Sushi(蘇軾, 1036-1101) and his surrounding artists. This is because Kim Jeong-hee and sushi have a common point of understanding nature and objects aesthetically and subjectively, and giving them symbolism. It is vague to directly compare works such as Sushi and Kim Junghee’s < Sehan-do >, since there are development and change in East Asian painting between these two works.

청(淸) 등석여(鄧石如) 서풍의 조선 유입과 이해, 그리고 근대 서단

김현권(Kim, Hyun-kwon) 한국근현대미술사학회 2012 한국근현대미술사학 Vol.23 No.-

The Korea-China exchange in calligraphic activities in the 19th century has frequently issued Seal Script and Clerical Script styles of Deng shiru(鄧石如, 1743-1805) and his followers. This paper examines how this Beipai(碑派) calligraphic style from Ching dynasty came to be introduced and understood in Korea, and in which process the introduced style came to be accepted to local calligraphic circles. For working on the above missions, this paper thoroughly goes through the below three points: Firstly, Beipai calligraphic circle was led by Deng shiru and his followers. Secondly, Joseon calligraphic circles came to widely favoured Clerical Script as Kim Jeonghee preferred it. Lastly, as for the understanding exchange networks between Korea-China calligraphic activities, almost all Ching calligraphers who associated Joseon calligraphers, were from Jiangzhe( Jiangsu江蘇 and Zhejiang浙江). This paper develops discourses based on the above points. Calligraphers who initiated the style of Deng shiru and his followers, are mainly Lee Sangjeok, Oh Gyeongseok, and Kim Seokjun under the Kim Jeonghee"s supervision and Park Gyusu and Min Yeongik followed them. These calligraphers associated various Ching calligraphers. Among them, there are Zhang Yaosun(張曜孫), his companions including one of his diciples, Fang Shuo(方朔), and Zhao Zhiqian(趙之謙), Wu Dacheng(吳大?), Wu Changshuo(吳昌碩) from Shanghai circle who followed Deng shiru style. They introduced a number of calligraphic works by exchanging various calligraphers from Ching dynasty. Meanwhile, its introducing aspects show that Palbun(八分) was predominant in the late 19th century, while Seal Script with consideration of the previous flows, was so in the early 20th century. The significance of introducing and accepting Beipai calligraphic style from Ching dynasty can be summarized in two points: first of all, it contributed to connecting the 19th century calligraphic circles with modern circles. Kim Taeseok succeeded the trend of Kim Jeonghee"s style in the amid of modern calligraphic development which Kim Jeonghee style was predominant. Secondly, it facilitated development of various styles. The early 20th century witnessed various styles in visual aspects, and tried formative interpretation. In other words, a new possibility to the calligraphic circles of the time, in which Joseon calligraphic tradition mixed with styles from Ching and Japan.

秋史 金正喜의 繪畵觀 형성과 변화 - 詩論과의 관계와 淸代 畵論의 수용을 중심으로

김현권(Kim Hyun-kwon) 대동한문학회 2006 大東漢文學 Vol.25 No.-

  秋史 金正喜(1786~1856)는 19세기의 사상과 학문, 그리고 문학과 서화계에 새로운 지표를 제시했던 문인이다. 그는 1809년의 燕行을 시점으로 1856년의 서거까지 자신의 예술론을 살펴볼 수 있는 기록을 남겼다. 그 기록을 시기별로 구분한다면 김정희의 예술론이 형성되어 가는 과정을 알 수 있다. 필자는 김정희의 시론을 비롯해 화론과 서론 등, 제 예술론이 담겨 있는 기록의 편년을 설정하고자 하였으며, 이를 김정희의 행적 및 교류관계와 현전하는 그의 묵적과 비교하였다. 이렇게 설정된 편년을 근거로 김정희의 시론을 검토해 본 결과, 性靈, 格調, 神韻 등이 서로 조합되어 어느 정도 시기별로 나타나고 있었다. 구체적인 내용은 다음과 같다.<BR>  김정희는 연행을 계기로 翁方綱의 영향을 강하게 받아 조선에 蘇軾像의 제작과 崇蘇 열풍을 일으켰으며, 회화 경향 역시 당시 燕京의 문인들이 애용하였던 소슬한 小景圖류를 선호하였다.<BR>  김정희의 제주 유배시기와 江上(서울) 시기는 이전 시기의 영향이 지속되는 가운데, 翁方綱의 시론에 기초하면서도 王士禎의 神韻說에 대한 효용성을 인정하였다. 그 결과 朱彛尊의 詩法을 위주로 하고 王士禎의 詩法을 참작한다는 논리를 보여주었는데, 이는 翁方綱의 詩論과 차이를 보이는 측면이다. 이 시론은 김정희의 畵論에서 黃公望을 위주로 하고 倪瓚의 神韻을 참작한다는 산수화론과 연결된다. 그리고 김정희는 淸代 화론을 수용하여 四王畵派에서 黃公望에 이르는 學畵 계보를 성립하였다. 이 같은 화론은 정확하지는 않으나 작품에 적용되었다. 다만 黃公望과 倪瓚의 작품을 열람한다는 것이 현실적으로 불가능하였기에 김정희는 董其昌을 기본으로 하고 四王畵派의 筆墨法을 가미하는 방식을 현실적 대안으로 택하였다. 이때의 필묵법은 神韻의 표현과 연결된다. 그리고 김정희의 필묵이론 역시 화풍에서와 마찬가지로 淸代의 이론에 영향을 받았다.<BR>  북청 유배와 과천 은거시기에는 性靈·格調구비론이 성립된다. 김정희는 성령과 격조의 조화를 주장하면서도, 특히 성령이 격조로 제정되지 않았을 때를 심히 우려하였다. 이후 과천시기를 중심으로 王士禎의 신운설이 김정희 시론의 전면에 등장하게 되는데, 이는 그의 禪家的 삶 속에서 택한 예술론이기 때문이다. 이 시론 역시 화론에 적용된다. 김정희는 禪境의 회화 세계를 설정하고 있으며, 이때 나타나는 필력을 金剛杵에 비유하였는데, 기존의 법에 구애받지 않는 順筆이다. 그리고 四王에서 黃公望에 이르는 계보와 병립되는 부류로, 王維와 巨然, 그리고 貫休라는 화가부류를 새롭게 상정하였다. 이러한 화론을 설명할 수 있는 작품으로 <不二禪蘭>을 꼽을 만하다. 그러나 실제의 조형적 특징은 신운설에서 말하는 平淡과는 거리가 멀며 오히려 禪宗畵에서나 볼 수 있는 禪美에 닿아 있다.<BR>  김정희는 이처럼 시론과 淸代 화론을 기초로 화론을 정립하는 태도를 보여주었다. 그리고 이론들은 서로 충돌되지 않고 있다. 이 여러 이론을 시간 개념에 구애받지 않고 언급한다는 것은 무리가 따르나, 다음과 같이 정리할 수 있다. 김정희는 개인마다 다른 性靈을 인정하였으며, 이를 예술 창작의 동기이자 일차적 단계로 보았다. 그리고 실제 창작시에는 성령을 격조로서 제정을 해야 하는데, 그 格調는 한 순간에 이루어지는 것이 아니라 學畵의 계보를 차츰 차츰 밟아 올라가야 하며, 그러기 위해서는 끊임없는 학습이 요구된다. 이렇게 해서 나타난 결과는 구천구백구십구분에 해당된다. 나머지 일분마저 이루게 되면 바로 神韻이 구현되는데, 왕사정의 신운과 자신의 禪家적 삶이 어우러진 것이다. 이는 추사 김정희 회화관의 窮極이다.   Chusa Kim Jeong-hee(1786~1856) is a scholar who suggested new directions in philosophy, science, literature, painting and calligraphy in the 19th century. He left records showing his art theories from his trip to Beijing as an envoy in 1809 to his death in 1856. By examining the records by period, we can see how Kim Jeong-hee"s art theories had been formed. The present author attempted to set the chronicle of his records containing Kim Jeong-hee"s art theories including theories on poetry, on paintings, and on calligraphy, and compared it with Kim Jeong-hee" doings through his life, his exchanges with others, and his works extant. When Kim Jeong-hee"s theories of poetry were examined based on the set chronicle, Emotional sensibility, Figuration and Transcendental elegance appeared intermingled by period. The details are as follows.<BR>  With his trip to Beijing as an envoy, Kim Jeong-hee was strongly influenced by We?ng Fa?ng?ga?ng and initiated the trend of drawing the image of Su??shi? and adoring him, and the trend of paintings in those days also preferred the bleak style of Hwanghansogyeongdo, which was popular among literary men in Beijing at that time.<BR>  During the period of exile to Jeju and the period in Gangsang (Seoul), under the continuous influence of the previous periods, Kim Jeong-hee acknowledged the usefulness of Wa?ng Shi??zhe?n theory of Transcendental elegance based on We?ng Fa?ng-ga?ng"s theory of poetry. As a result, he presented the theory that adopted Zhu? Y?-?zu?n"s poetic method as the base and referred to Wa?ng Shi?-zhe?n"s poetic method, which showed the difference from We?ng Fa?ng?ga?ng"s poetic theory. The theory on poetry is linked to his theory on landscape paintings that adopted Hua?ng Go?ng-wa?ng"s style as the base and referred to Ni? Za?n"s Transcendental elegance. In addition, Kim Jeong-hee followed the painting theories of the Qing Dynasty, learning first from the School of Four Wangs and ultimately from Hua?ng Go?ng-wa?ng. The painting theory was not definite but was applied to his works. However, because it was impossible to view the works of Hua?ng Go?ng-wa?ng and Ni? Za?n, Kim Jeong-hee chose a practical alternative, adopting Do?ng Qi??cha?ng as the base and adding the technique of brush-and-ink works from the School of Four Wangs. The (Indian ink paintings) brush-and-ink work technique was connected to the expression of Transcendental elegance. In addition, Kim Jeong-hee"s theory on brush-and-ink works was affected also by that of the Four Wangs.<BR>  During the period of exile to Bukcheong and the period of retirement in Gwacheon, Kim Jeong-hee"s theory on Emotional sensibility and Figuration was established. Kim Jeong-hee insisted on harmony between Emotional sensibility and Figuration but he was very concerned about cases that Emotional sensibility was not controlled by Figuration. Mainly during the period in Gwacheon, Wa?ng Shi?-zhe?n"s theory on Transcendental elegance came to the fore of Kim Jeonghee"s theory on poetry. It was because the theory was adopted in his Zen-style life. The theory on poetry was also applied to the theory on paintings. Kim Jeonghee formulated the world of paintings of an enchanted land, and his style of stroke at that time was compared with Vajra staff. It was a fluent style free from any existing technique. In addition, though not as definite as the theory on poetry, he introduced a new group of painters including Wa?ng We?i, Ju? Ra?n and Gua?n Xiu? who stood together with the line from Four Wangs to Hua?ng Go?ng-wa?ng. A work that explains the theory on painting is Bulyiseonran. However, the actual formative characteristics are far from comments in the Transcendental elegance theory and, rather, are linked to the beauty of lines observed in Zen-style paintings.<BR>  In this way, Kim Jeong-hee showed the attitude of est

언어사전 정의의 구성과 유형에 대하여

김현권(Hyun-Kwon Kim) 사단법인 한국언어학회 1989 언어학 Vol.0 No.11

동사 항목과 의미 기술 : 논항 설정, 다의 구분, 상관 항목 기술

김현권(Kim Hyun-Kwon),김미영(Kim Mi-Young) 한국사전학회 2003 한국사전학 Vol.- No.2

The aim of this paper is to discuss the lexicographic description of semantic informations of a verb entry in a electronic dictionary(including a printed dictionary). In order to fully describe the semantics of a verb, it is necessary to distinguish clearly various senses of homonymic and/or polysemous verbs. We have chosen a Korean verb sseuda to demonstrate this analysis. In relation to sseuda, it is divided into three homonyms, such as sseuda 1, sseuda 2, sseuda 3, and sseuda 1 is a polysemous word(the other two sseuda are not being considered here). Verbs have the property of taking arguments and this property can be represented in terms of argument structure. This property is the most useful criterion for the distinction of verb senses. The several important ways to establish argument structures of a verb and to specify the senses are presented. The fact that it is essential to establish as many arguments as possible for the sense distinction is pointed. On the other hand, it is also very important to describe a verb semantics together with semantically related or correlative verbs which reflect the morphological, syntactic and semantic or conceptual relations. For the semantic description of polysemous verb sseuda 1, correlative verbs which are related morphologically, syntactically, semantically and lexically have to be analysed together. The semantic informations for a verb entry in a dictionary(for exemple, argument structure, selectional restriction, thematic role, definition and example) are presented such a way that correlative relations must show systematic correspondences between the semantically related verbs.

에밀 벵베니스트의 언어, 담화, 사회 관계 연구

김현권 ( Hyun Kwon Kim ) 한국불어불문학회 2014 불어불문학연구 Vol.0 No.98

La presente etude se fixe pour objectif de dessiner quelques elements theoriques essentiels des travaux d``E. Benveniste qui revele la relation subtile entre la langue, le discours et la societe en illustrant cette relation de quelques exemples indo-europeens. Benveniste presente un concept tres original de l``enonciation qui place le discours entre la notion saussurienne de langue et la societe. Son enonciation, qui differe quelque peu de l``acte de parole d``Austin, contient certaines references a la realite extralinguistique fondee sur un signe linguistique specifique. Le discours ainsi elabore revet deux caracteristiques differentes par nature, l’une est semiologique, l``autre sociologique. Ce cadre theorique mene a l``analyse semantique du lexique institutionnel de la societe indo-europeenne, dont la structure tripartite est debattue ici comme une etude de cas.

秋史 金正喜의 산수화

김현권(Kim Hyun-kwon) 한국미술사학회 2003 美術史學硏究 Vol.- No.240

Kim Jeong-hee (金正喜) was a leading painter of the nineteenth century, during the Chosun Dynasty (朝鮮). His unique calligraphy and ink orchid paintings are considered inventive even in view of its Chinese (Qing Dynasty: 淸) sources. Although his landscape painting is not as renowned as his calligraphy and orchid painting, it also served as a standard model for other painters to follow. We can understand the characteristics of his landscape painting through the investigation of his Essay on Painting (畵論). His research into the treatises of the Qing scholars Weng Fanggang (翁方綱) and Ruan Yuan (阮元), in the Qing Bibliographical Study (考證學), influenced his concepts of representation. In this academic attitude, he expressed the theory by creating a concrete work. His artistic views are the unifying theme as well of his Essay on Poetry (詩論) and Essay on Calligraphy-Painting (書畵論). He judges that poetry is derived from 'emotional sensibility (性靈)', but he believes that excessive exaltation of sensitivity and emotions will result in 'strangeness and deviation from universality (奇怪)', thus, advocates 'figuration (格調)' to guard against it. He applied this to his painting theory, as is exhibited in his 'orthodox style (古法)'. It is a literati painting style of Yuan (元), Ming (明), and early Qing (淸) Dynasty. The influence-the desolate but noble atmosphere of Huang Gongwang (黃公望) and Ni Zan (倪瓚), and the linearity of the Four Wangs (四王) and Dong Qichang (董其昌) as followers of them-are evident in his work which apply both 'dry brushstroke-light ink (渴筆淡墨)' and 'accumulated ink (積墨)'. In 1809 in Beijing (北京) he met painters such as Weng Fanggang and viewed many fine Chinese paintings. Particularly through his exchanges with Zhu Henian (朱鶴年) did he gamer knowledge of Beijing painting trends. It is after 1825 and <Reading gentlemen in cottage (書屋圖)> type of painting that he began exchanging works with Qing painters including Zhang Shen (張深). That served as a basis for his master piece <A Cottage Under Evergreen Tree (Sae Han Do, 歲寒圖)> during his period of exile to Cheju Island (濟州道). About the late period of exile, he borrowed the styles of Zhang Geng (張庚) to attain the painting styles of Huang Gongwang, and Ni Zan. In Seoul, after his release from exile, during a period of positive critical assessment of painting work, he perfected his theory on painting. During this period he consulted the works of Dong Qichang, Wang Yuanqi (王原祁), and Shitao (石濤), and executed paintings in 'dry brushstroke-light ink' and 'accumulated ink' techniques, developing his own style through this process. In 1851 he was exiled to Buk Chuang (北靑), and was released the next year. Following this, he developed a devotion to Buddhism, and the concepts of phenomenon and mind as explored in that religion began to inform his landscape paintings in a conflation of Painting and Zen, that is to say hua-son ilchi (畵禪一致)'. In conclusion, his paintings fall into the school of Huang Gongwang and Ni Zan, particularly in terms of their dry, desolate, but noble air. Ultimately, he developed his own and unique painting style as can be seen in the work <Sae Han Do> and attained the 'hua-son ilchi'. His style of painting was succeeded to the Chusa school (秋史派) of Chosun dynasty painters.

반구대 천전리암각화발견 40주년 기념 특집 : 천전리 암각화에 대한 신라인의 이해와 행렬도 제작

김현권 ( Hyun Kwon Kim ) 한국불교미술사학회(한국미술사연구소) 2011 강좌미술사 Vol.36 No.-

川前里刻石에는 암각화와 명문들이 새겨져 있는데 내용과 제작시기에 따라 상단과 하단으로 구분할 수 있다. 상단에는 기하문양이 주를 이루면서 동물문양이 포함된 선사시대의 암각화가 있다. 이는 암각화의 주된 구성을 이루는 부분이다. 그리고 하단에는 상단의 암각화를 피해 신라인이 5세기부터 9세기에 걸쳐 새긴 선각화가 명문과 함께 새겨져 있다. 이렇게 시기가 다른 그림과 글씨가 새겨져 있는 천전리각석은 시간을 넘나들 수 있는 공간과 같았다. 이같은 공간에 대해 여러 가설과 판단을 내릴 수 있는데, 그중에 신라인이 선각화와 명문을 새길 때, 당연히 이전부터 있었던 선사시대의 암각화를 보고 어떠한 반응을 하였을 것이라는 판단은 어렵지 않게 할 수 있다. 이 논문은 상기의 판단에 기초하여 <原銘>의 재해석, 여러 명문의 형식과 서예사적인 검토, 그리고 <行列圖>의 회화사 및 조각사적인 검토를 하였다. 이를 통해 다음의 사항을 확인하였다. 신라인들이 남긴 명문 중에 ``古谷``, ``善石``은 선사암각화에 대한 이해를 반영한다. 즉, 그들은 선사암각화를 기호문자나 고대 문자의 일종으로, 보았을 여지가 크다. 이러한 인식은 신라사회에서 광범위하게 알려졌고, 점차 이곳은 신라의 대표적인 유람처가 되었다. 특히 6~7세기에 신라의 중심세력이었던 沙喙部를 비롯하여 喙部 세력과 이 두 부가 관할하는 지역인들이 주로 유람하였다. 이러한 유람은 <행렬도>의 제작으로 이어졌다. 이 선각화는 구성과 내용으로 보건데, 상당한 규모의 행렬이었다. 그러기에 그 행렬은 선각화에 표현된 배를 이용하여 천전리각석 근처에 왔으며, 다시 말을 이용하여 각석으로 향해 갔다. 이 점은 <행렬도>에 재현되어 있다. 즉, 이 선각화는 사훼부 등이 천전리각석으로 유람가는 과정을 재현한 작품이다. <행렬도>는 신라 회화와 조각을 살필 수 있는 중요한 작품이다. 회화사적으로는 신라 최초의 행렬도이자 인물화이다. 이 선각화에서는 異時同圖法과 주인공을 크게 부각시키는 기법 등의 고대인물화법이 사용되었다. 또한 기법에서는 형태의 생략과 이목구비의 표현이 <신라토우>의 방식과 닿아 있다. 그러므로 <행렬도>는 6세기 작품이다. On a prehistoric rock in Cheonjeon-ri were carved paintings and epitaphs, which can be divided into upper and lower sections depending on the contents and the time. The upper carvings show geometrical patterns engraved with drawings from prehistoric era including animal prints, which composes of main part of the carved paintings. On the lower section, the Shilla people during the 5th century and the 6th century carved paintings and letters Drawings and epitaphs from those two different times made the rock a unique place that could transcend the time. Several hypothesis can be established regarding this place. It is easily assumed, however, that the Shilla people spotted prehistoric carvings on the rock and responded to them with their own paintings and petrographs. Based on this assumption, this paper reinterprets an ``original inscription(原銘)``, reviewing different epitaphs in a way of calligraphy history and ``painting of a procession(行列圖)`` in a way of painting and sculptural history. This could confirm following statements. Shilla people carved inscriptions such as ``古谷(old valley)`` and ``善石(nice stone)`` on Cheonjeon-ri petrographs, which proves they perceived carved paintings from prehistoric age as kind of letters. After King Galmun had been on an excursion to Cheonjeon-ri, the public employed this comprehension of the place that became one of popular sightseeing spots during the Shilla era. Most of visitors were Hwebu(喙部) or Sahwebu(沙喙部), main districts of the Shilla dynasty during the 6th and 7th centuries, and local people from both districts. The excursion led to produce paintings of a procession. Composition and contents of carved paintings indicated that Hwebu group including Sahwebu went on an excursion near Cheonjeon-ri by ship.