'한국회화사' 재구축의 과제 = 근대적 학문의 틀을 넘어서

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The present paper purposes to discuss tasks in reestablishing Korean painting history through the issue of 'meta art history' from the viewpoint of science history and theory history. Currently research and perception on Korean painting history is being developed focused on the subject and the object or nation and anti-nation based on the theory of internal development as the anti-colonial view of history.
Taking typical landscape paintings and real landscape paintings as examples, the two were understood as opposite to each other in a way that former was non-subjective. imitative, ideological and foreign while the latter was national independent. original, realistic and modernistic, produced from the native color of Chosun. However, such a perception is hardly explainable considering that Jeong Seon, Kim Hong-do and other literary and professional artists in the late Chosun Dynasty created works of both tendencies without conflict. Like real landscape paintings, genre paintings and folk paintings developed as pan-East Asian genres and perception on them must also be reconstructed in the context of the circulation of East Asian practice and culture not in the view of modernism or nationalism. In modern paintings as well, Choi Woo-seok's <portrait of Admiral Lee> and other historical portraits are in fact military divines for the construction of the Great East Asia that borrowed the image of Toyotomi Hedeyoshi,and the fact that it was a symbol of 'Japan-Chosun Integration' combined with Shinto arts, which was the national polity of 'Empire' is a good example showing that it is urgent to overcome the existing frame of perception, which has been established as a discourse of resistance through reconstructing the frame of perception.
To reconstruct Korean painting history. which has been defined and represented in Western modern ideologies and languages, in a form coincident with the realities, it is essential to reconsider the paradigm of art culture in the world system of East Asia, in which national boundaries have been drawn unilaterally and the others were excluded or reduced. Therefore, it is urgent above all to reconstruct Korean painting history in the structure of the paradigm of East Asian art culture and historical context, comprehending all similarities and differences between Chinese and Japanese painting histories and going beyond unilateralistic self-sufficiency and closeness or the narrowness of nationalism based on unilateralism.
An East Asian standpoint to examine the reality of Korean painting history is to look the whole picture of East Asian art culture including elements jointly promoted through mutual relationship under the objective conditions of geography and system and others and to identify similarities and differences among the countries. Similarities and differences among the countries must be identified not by the relationship of universality and peculiarity established from the existing dichotomic view of the center and the surroundings but by structural elements that form the paradigm of East Asia art culture.
To establish a diachronic system as 'Korean painting history' as well as synchronic perception as East Asian art history. it is required to reconstruct Korea art history as a continuing serial, breaking off the discontinuing or separated systems before and after the modern ages. Current texts of art history survey, which stop its description at the end of the Chosun Dynasty, are limited to traditional art history or ancient art history, so they are characteristically 'Korean Ancient Art History' or 'Korean Traditional Painting History.' In addition, although it is a part of Korean art history, Korean modern & contemporary art history is studied separately with little structural understanding of connection and evolution in the whole context. Such a research trend also caused dichotomic perception and discontinuity of traditional arts and creative arts, making it difficult to

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 머리말
• Ⅱ. '한국회화사' 인식틀의 형성
• Ⅲ. '한국회화사' 인식의 問題群과 재구축의 과제
• Ⅳ. 맺음말
• ABSTRACT