물질문화의 재인식과 문물로서 유무형 문화의 유기적 해석

임재해 국립민속박물관 2007 민속학연구 Vol.0 No.20

If a study of material culture was to overcome the current dullness of the field, we would have to study the relationship between material culture and intangible culture by means of the logic of “Culture and Civilization,” though organically. Material culture is the main text of interest, while intangible culture is a situational text. Moreover, material texts are created through a technique of intangible culture wisdom, which pursues intangible culture. The relationship of tangible culture and intangible culture is discovered in the relationship of the house to the home. Without recognizing this relationship we wouldn’t notice intangible culture such as “the home.” Rather, we would interpret the house to be merely architecture. We would be limited with regard to a holistic study of housing culture. Therefore if we were to interpret intangible culture like that of Sungjupuri, we could pioneer new paradigm of research in field of housing culture. When we complicate culture, if we don’t take notice of material texts as tangible culture, then we could be faced with a limited perspective on intangible culture interpretation. Examples are studies of Hahoe masks and funeral biers. We could be restored to the original state by means of Hahoe masks, and study the performance of Hahoe mask drama with consideration for the esthetic logic of the Hahoe mask. Also, if we studied funeral biers, we would have to consider Yeongyeo (a small bier that carries the soul of a dead person), so we could interpret funeral culture in order to find their viewpoint of death. Material text as tangible culture has a more decisive function than intangible material as historical material evidence when interpreting culture. But if we are buried under the importance of material evidence, it could obstruct a holistic interpretation. For example, the academic world of eating culture interprets the history of eating culture in a sequential order; rice gruel, rice cake, and boiled rice, according to excavated remains (grinding stones, earthenware steamers, and pots). This has been interpreted inordinately, because theorists have not considered general eating culture, for example they assume that an earthenware steamer must have functioned as a pot, and a rice gruel can boiler also must be a kind of pot. If we interpret excavation materials while considering the field situation of eating culture, we could correct these mistakes easily. Neither tangible material nor intangible material has an independent meaning or manifestation of its function inherent to itself. These meanings exist in an inter-relationship that takes on new meaning when viewed as an organic system. Its function is also understood by means of cultural context. Accordingly, the study of tangible material text has to be viewed as existing within the system and context of intangible culture as situational elements, while the study of intangible material texts needs to be accepted as a viable viewpoint that must be interpreted along with tangible artifacts as concrete evidence. Therefore cultural study must recognize tangible material text as well as intangibly procured text as the one holistic study of “Culture and Civilization.” At the same time, we have to look forward to contextual field studies that cross-interpret tangible with intangible material.

물질문화연구와 동양미술

조인수 미술사와 시각문화학회 2008 미술사와 시각문화 Vol.7 No.-

In understanding art works, sometimes their function is more important than their aesthetic value. In such a case, we may focus on the material aspects ofart works and pay attention to a new trend of material culture studies. The present study purposed to examine the current state of material culture studiesand their applicability to Asian art history. In "material culture," "material" means more artificially produced or transformed things than naturalobjects or substance. Material culture studies believe that we can enhance our understanding of culture through examining things which embody culturalmeanings. Furthermore, researchers analyze the point that things define relations among people and mediate among various social groups. Thus, materialculture studies explore interrelations between humans and materials by paying attention to the cultural attributes of things. The term "material culture"began to be used from the mid 19th century in Europe when studying artifacts as means of understanding the past and present society in archaeology andanthropology. However, social anthropology in the early 20th century was focused on social structure rather than objects and, as a result, scholars losttheir interest in material culture. Later material culture studies revived in the 1980s based on interdisciplinary approaches. Because material culturestudies are not relied on established theories, methodologies or specific disciplines, it is not easy to sum up them. While in the United Kingdom the fieldof material culture studies is often included in anthropology and archaeology, in the United States they flourish in ethnography and American art history.Particularly with increasing importance of objects in late capitalism where the consumption of goods occupies an important part of daily life, many scholarsof material culture analyze mass production and consumerism critically. Among them, Daniel Miller, who draws our attention with his productive academicinquiries, criticizes the modern Western notion of art and insists that the unequal dualism of mind and material should be overcome. As material culturebecame an important research subject, it has been also studied in Asian art history. Craig Clunas is one of the art historians who paid attention to thissubject. His analysis was concentrated on material culture particularly in the Ming Dynasty. He applied the fact that consumption society rose in 1500~1800, which is equivalent to early modern in Europe, to China and specifically to Suzhou. He proved that the Chinese case can enrich material culture studiesfurther. Recently Jonathan Hay is studying Chinese paintings by deepening material culture studies in a theoretical dimension. He divides the functions ofChinese paintings into instrumental function, semiotic function, and embodying function. Hay does not limit the functions of paintings to aesthetics butunderstand them as complexes in various social contexts. He analyzes the material aspects and formats of paintings and suggests new socio-cultural meaningsof landscape paintings. In Korean art history, interests in material culture studies seldom appear. While studying portraits in the Joseon Dynasty, I took note of their ritual functions and attempted to reinterpret them from the viewpoint of visual culture and material culture. In addition, as portraits wereexamined in connection to funerals and ancestor worship, tombs as an artistic objects were also investigated together. However, what were valued most inConfucian ancestor rites were neither portraits nor tombs. Rather, they held a name tablet, which was merely a piece of wood, most valuable. Originally,name tablets regarded as sacred in this way were not objects of people's aesthetic interest. We cannot understand the rich and multi-layered meaning andfunction of portraits, tombs and name tablets through the methodologies of traditional art history alone. As the three objects embody the social relationbetween the living and the dead through different material forms and media, they need to be considered in connection to one another. As Asian art history has long been formulated from the viewpoint of Western art history, it has not been studied in its own cultural context, and many objects have been excludedfrom the category of art. Accordingly, material culture studies are expected to adjust the distorted Asian art history and contribute to the reconstructing of the world art history.

현용준의 물질문화 연구 -제주도 무속을 중심으로-

최진아 한국무속학회 2018 한국무속학 Vol.0 No.37

This study aims to examine the trends and achievements of the material culture research by Hyun Yong-jun, putting focus on the shamanism of Jeju Island, and to analyze the characteristics and significance of the research. At the time when Hyun Yong-jun was active in research activities, the material culture of shamanism was not the subject of attention. As a result, very few basic data related to the material culture have been accumulated. On the contrary, Hyun Yong-jun has identified the material culture of Jeju shamanism as a subject of individual study since the 1960s and made an attempt to study it. In that respect, he is a researcher who made it possible to discuss the shamanistic research of Jeju island from various views. Among the research achievements made by Hyun Yong-jun, the study related to the shaman material culture hold significance in many aspects. First, after the shamanism of Joseon had been studied by Japanese researchers, Murayama Jizen 村山智順) and Akiwa Takashi (秋葉隆), Hyun Yong-jun contributed to the accumulation of research results related to the material culture of shamanism, which had been neglected for a while. Second, Hyun’s work focused on materials, shapes and compositions, which lay the foundation for the research on material culture, and thereby allowed discussions to be made. Third, Hyun’s research provided empirical archive of basic data for discussions to be made on the history of material culture of Jeju shamanism and offered figures for a more precise understanding of the material through diagrams. Forth, Hyun’s work summarized in details various ritual symbols of the material. For instance, when it comes to Sinkal and Sanpan which are the ritual tools used by Shimbang, a ritual presider of Jeju shamanism to show the intention of God during the ceremony, Hyun’s research presented a variety of cases as pictures, described and analyzed the meaning, which varies depending on the circumstances or types of the ritual. Fifth, Hyun Yong-jun analyzed the origins of Sindang (a ritual space for shamanism), sacrifice, Mengdu and Singan in Bonpuri (epic ritual music), which is the most remarkable element in Jejudo shamanism. He saw sacrifice as the least changing element among cultural elements, revealed the food that God favors or does not like in Bonpuri, and analyzed the divine hierarchy in it. Although Hyun Yong-jun’s work has the significance described above, it has several pitfalls. Hyun Yong-jun’s research on the material culture has not progressively analyzed the intermediary tendency that Kime and Mengdu holds in order to compare Shimbang and shaman; analyzed the meaning of sacrifice in Bonpuri in a fragments; and neglected discussions on the influence with other religions. Although it has shortfalls, Hyun Yong-jun’s research made a great contribution to the research not only on Jeju shamanism but also on the material culture: It recognized the material culture of shamanism as a necessary subject to understand Jeju shamanism and allowed to approach research on Jeju shamanism from various angles. 본 연구는 제주도 무속을 중심으로 현용준의 물질문화 연구의 경향과 성과를 살펴보고, 그 연구의 특징과 연구가 갖는 의의를 분석하는 데에 그 목적이 있다. 현용준이 활발하게 활동하던 당시 무속의 물질문화는 주목받는 대상이 아니었다. 그로 인해, 물질문화와 관련된 많은 기초자료 또한 축적되지 못하였다고 볼 수 있다. 이와 달리, 현용준은 1960년대부터 제주 무속의 물질문화를 개별적인 연구대상으로 파악하여 이에 대한 연구를 시도하였다는 점에서, 제주도 무속연구를 다양한 관점에서 논의가 가능하게 한 연구자라 할 수 있다. 현용준의 연구 성과 중 무속의 물질문화와 관련된 연구는 여러 면에서 의의를 지닌다. 첫째, 일제강점기에 조선의 무속을 연구하였던 일본인 연구자들인 무라야마 지준(村山智順)과 아끼바 다까시(秋葉隆) 이후 한동안 간과되어 왔던 무속의 물질문화에 관심을 갖고 그와 관련된 연구 성과를 축적했다는 점을 들 수 있다. 둘째, 현용준의 연구는 물질문화 연구에 가장 기초가 되는 재료 및 형태와 구성요소에도 주목하여 그에 대한 논의가 이루어졌다는 점이다. 셋째, 제주 무속의 물질문화 연구사를 논의하기 위한 실증적인 아카이브 기초자료를 제공하고 있다는 점과, 도식화 자료를 통해 물질에 대한 보다 정확한 이해를 할 수 있게끔 하였다는 점이다. 넷째, 물질이 갖는 다양한 의례적 표상을 상세하게 정리했다는 점에 있다. 예를 들어, 제주 무속의 의례주재자인 심방이 의례 과정에서 신의 의사를 알려주는 신칼과 산판의 경우 여러 다양한 경우의 수를 그림 자료로 제시하여 이를 설명하고, 의례의 상황에 따라 혹은 의례의 종류에 따라 달라지는 의미를 분석하였다. 다섯째, 현용준은 제주도 무속에서 가장 주목할 만한 요소라 할 수 있는 서사무가인 본풀이 속에서 제의공간인 무속의 신당과 제물 그리고 멩두와 신간의 기원과 유래를 분석하였다. 제물의 경우, 문화요소 중에서 가장 변화가 더딘 요소로 보고, 본풀이 속에서 신이 즐기는 음식과 그렇지 않은 음식을 밝혀내고 그 속에서 신의 위계 관계를 분석해 내기도 하였다. 위와 같은 의의를 지니지만, 현용준의 연구에서 몇 가지 아쉬운 점도 존재한다. 현용준의 물질문화 연구 중 심방과 샤먼의 비교를 위해 기메와 멩두가 지니는 매개적 성향에 대한 분석이 발전적으로 이루어지지 못했다는 점과 본풀이를 중심으로 제물에 대한 의미 분석이 단편적으로 이루어졌을 뿐 아니라 타종교와의 영향 관계 속에서의 논의는 간과했다는 점 등이다. 그럼에도 불구하고, 현용준의 연구는 무속의 상징물을 제주무속을 이해하기 위해 놓쳐서는 안 될 대상으로 인식해 제주 무속 연구를 다각도로 접근할 수 있게 하였다는 점에서, 그의 연구는 제주 무속 뿐 아니라 물질문화 연구에 있어서도 기여하는 바가 크다고 할 수 있다.

물질문화의 개념 수정과 연구 전망

배영동(Bae Young-Dong) 한국민속학회 2007 韓國民俗學 Vol.46 No.-

민속학에서 물질문화 분야의 연구는 미미할 뿐만 아니라, 관심을 가진 연구자도 소수다. 게다가 민속학뿐만 아니라 여러 학문에서 널리 쓰이는 물질문화란 용어는 명확히 합의가 이루어지지 않은 채 ‘문화의 산물로서 인공물(artifact)’이라는 뜻으로 사용되어 왔다. 그러나 물질문화를 그렇게 규정할 경우 오히려 인공물을 통한 문화연구는 차단되어 버릴 소지가 크다. 이 문제를 해결하기 위해서는 ‘인공물과 문화의 결합체’를 물질문화라고 규정해야 한다. 종래의 물질문화 개념을 이렇게 수정하면, 물질문화라는 용어가 성립될 수 없다는 주장도 성립되지 않는다. 또한 인공물과 문화의 결합체를 물질문화라고 하면 물질문화도 문화연구의 중요한 분야가 되게 마련이다. 그 대신 종래 물질문화로 여겨지던 인공물에 대해서는 ‘물질문화자료’로 명명하는 것이 적절하다. 물질문화자료에 대해서는 자연환경과 관련지어 분석하는 연구와 사회문화와 관련지어 분석하는 것이 연구의 출발점이 된다. 왜냐하면 물질문화자료는 모두 자연자원을 변형하여 인간생활에 유익하게 만든 것이며, 그것을 만들고 사용하는 과정에서는 사회문화적 방식이 개입되고 반영되기 때문이다. 따라서 물질문화자료를 통해서 문화를 이해하기 위해서는 문화연구의 일반적 관점을 적용할 수 있다. 나아가 물질문화자료의 생산(제작)과 소비(사용)의 과정은 의미의 교환이므로, 물질문화자료의 생산과 소비에 대해서 기술적·정치적·경제적·이념적 과정으로 접근하여 분석할 필요가 있다. The research of material culture is not sufficient in folklore. The term of material culture has always meant “artifacts as the products of culture.” However, if material culture is defined like this, the research of culture through artifacts could be excluded. To solve this matter, material culture needs to defined as a ‘combination of artifacts and culture.’ If material culture is a ‘combination of artifacts and culture,’ material culture will occupy the most important place in the study of culture. Instead, artifacts, which have been considered as material culture thus far, will be appropriately designated as ‘material objects’ means tangible objects of material culture. To implement the right study, ‘material objects’ should be analyzed as a division of natural environment-related study and society and culture-related study. Because social and cultural methods are necessarily added and reflected in the process of making and using ‘material objects’ ; they have been made so by the transformation of natural resources for the benefits of human life. Accordingly, to understand culture through ‘material objects,’ the general perspectives of cultural research should be applied. Furthermore, as the process of producing and consuming(using) ‘material objects’ is the exchanges of meanings, their products and consumption must be approached and analyzed as technological, political, economic and ideological processes. Nevertheless, the researchers in folklore should pursue the understanding of folk culture by studying ‘material objects’ which are used broadly in folk life.

미국 민속학에서 물질문화에 대한 인식과 연구

배영동(Bae, Young-Dong) 비교민속학회 2014 비교민속학 Vol.0 No.55

여러 나라 민속학 연구에서 물질문화(material culture)는 후발 주자로 성립된 분야이다. 이 글은 20세기 후반 미국 민속학에서 물질문화가 과연 어떻게 인식되었고 어떻게 연구되었는지를 살핀 것이다. 다만 설화를 연구하여 공식적으로 미국 최초의 민속학박사가 되었지만, 물질문화 연구로 주전공을 재설정한 워렌 E.로버츠(Warren E. Roberts, 1924~1999)의 연구에 한정하여 그 경향성과 의의에 대해 검토하고자 하였다. 로버츠는 설화연구자로 유명한 스티스 탐슨(Stith Thompson)의 제자였으나 고국 노르웨이에서 민속학을 연구한 경험을 계기로 물질문화 연구자로 전향하였다. 그 후 인디애나대학 민속학과 교수로 물질문화 분야를 담당하였다. 그의 물질문화 연구는 민중생활(folklife)이라는 테두리 속에서 혹은 민중생활과 관련하여 예술품(art), 공예품(craft), 건축물, 그리고 제작 도구를 대상으로 하여 이루어졌다. 로버츠가 말하는 물질문화는 이와 같이 사물(물건, 물질문화자료)로 구체화된 것이었다. 그의 이러한 물질문화에 대한 인식은 물질문화 연구를 지속적으로 활성화시키는 데 걸림돌이 된다. 그럼에도 전통적 공예품을 만드는 장인들을 주목한 것은 소비자보다 생산자를 훨씬 중시했기 때문이며, 사람 본위로 물질문화를 연구하는 길을 연 것이다. 또한 농민들의 생존활동 가운데 상당 부분을 수공기술의 관점에서 이해하려 한 점, 농부들의 삶과 활동을 생계형 수공기술(subsistence crafts)의 개념으로 연구한 점이 주목된다. 그의 물질문화에 대한 기본적인 시선은 산업화와 더불어 사라지는 민중들의 전통적 물질문화를 조사·연구·보전하는 것이었다. 물질문화에 대한 접근방법은 물질문화라는 대상을 중심에 놓고 관련되는 문화요소를 최대한 풍부하게 조사하여 연구하는 것이었다. 로버츠는 역사지리학적 방법, 연대기적 방법, 기능주의적 방법, 맥락주의적 방법으로 물질문화를 연구하였다. 그의 물질문화 연구는 미국 민속학 발전 초기에 수행되었으며, 야외박물관 설립 노력과 병행되었고, 민중생활의 맥락 속에서 풍부한 현지조사를 통하여 물질문화의 변천을 설명하고 분포지도를 작성하고, 기능적 고려와 적합성을 조사하여 서술하는 형태였다. 그는 장인들의 활동에 주목하였지만, 물질문화를 ‘행위의 체계’ 속에서 연구하는 학문적 전통을 분명하게 확립하지 못한 아쉬움이 있다. Material culture in the folkloristics of many countries is a field that began to be studied relatively late. This paper has examined how material culture was perceived and studied for American folkloristics in the late 20th century. It focused on studies by Warren E. Roberts (1924~1999) and investigated their tendency and meaning. Warren E. Roberts committed himself to studying folktales and became the first titlist of Ph.D. in folklore in USA. Later he changed his major field to the study of material culture. Roberts was taught by Stith Thompson, the famous researcher of folktales. However, he changed his research field to material culture after he studied folklore in Norway, his native country. Afterwards he became a professor in charge of material culture in department of folklore at Indiana University. He studied material culture within the frame of folklife, focusing on art, craft, architecture and manufacturing tools which were related to folklife. What he referred to as material culture was what was concrete in objects (things and physical matters). His perception of material culture is an obstacle to that continuously activates the material culture studies. Nevertheless, he paid attention to artisans/craftsmen who made traditional craftworks because he valued producers much more than consumers. Such an attitude led to the research of material culture which valued human beings. It is notable that he examined farmers’ subsistence activities in terms of crafts and that he studied farmers’ lives and activities from the viewpoint of subsistence crafts. His basic job for material culture was to survey, research and preserve traditional material culture of folk which was disappearing on account of industralization. His approach was to investigate and research as many cultural elements as possible related, placing the objects of material culture at the center. Roberts used a historical-geographical method, a chronological method, functionalism and a contextual approach to study material culture. His study of material culture was characterized by the following facts: his material culture study is made early in the American folkloristics; it was made along with efforts to establish an outdoor museum; and his study investigated and narrated changes of times, distribution-map drawing, and functional consideration and propriety through a lot of field studies in the context of folklife. Regrettably, though it paid attention to artisans’ activities, this study has not firmly established an academic tradition whereby material culture can be studied in behavioral systems.

농악문화유산으로서 물질·비물질 자료의 활용가능성 타진: 발굴·기록·보존·전시·교육을 중심으로

박혜영 실천민속학회 2017 실천민속학연구 Vol.29 No.-

If Nongak as a cultural expression is an artistic activity of transmission community that has communicated emotions and thoughts and evoked empathy, the process in which Nongak has been excavated and recorded and also recreated to satisfy five senses is another creative behavior producing an aesthetic value in a certain social condition. Today, artistic techniques of Nongak are more elaborated and the material foundation of it, which makes it possible to conduct the performance, is also repeatedly changed based on technology. A series of processes in which not only artistic forms but also experiences of transmitters have been communicated or the tradition has been represented and recreated involve many kinds of technology. Such a fact is also reflected by excavation, recording, preservation, exhibition and education of Nongak. The spectrum and cultural foundations of Nongak may be commonly called the Nongak culture. This paper dealt with Nongak continuously recreated by the community and the whole of culture around it as the ‘Nongak culture’, a comprehensive concept. In this paper, the author focused on activities of the performance and material elements that allow it, by extending them to the entire material culture constituting Nongak. This paper investigated the cultural heritance of Nongak by dividing it into material/immaterial culture data, discussed excavation research, recording and exhibition, suggested some specific cases and sought educational availability of transmissions of skills and performing arts. It emphasized collection and necessity of material culture data, reproduction, preservation and exhibition of immaterial culture data previously excavated and examined, and connectivity between use of the cultural heritage of Nongak and education of it. The performance of Nongak is a manifestation of the communal character of the transmission group. Therefore, a lot of kinds of material culture data used by persons who engaged in Nongak are public artifacts and resources rather than consumables. Cultural inheritance and identity which have been passed by the transmission group through successive generations and cultural knowledge flourished by the accumulation of experiences are embedded in them. They are nothing but a rediscovery of future heritage that connects the past, the present and the future. Such an exploration of a new transmission channel crossing temporal and spatial boundaries by using digital media beyond spheres of local tradition or transmission between generations is also a strategy for Nongak to take root in daily life of ordinary people again. 농악이 문화적 표현물로서 감정이나 사유를 전달하고 공감을 이끌어내는 전승공동체의 예술행위라면, 농악을 발굴하고 기록하며, 오감을 만족시키도록 재가공하는 과정 또한 사회적 여건 속에서 미적가치를 생산해내는 창조적 행위이다. 오늘날 농악의 예술적 테크닉이 수려해지는 것은 물론, 연행을 가능케하는 물적 기반도 기술력을 바탕으로 변화를 거듭하고 있다. 예술적 형식 뿐 아니라 전승자의 경험을 전달하거나 전통을 재현하고 재창조하는 일련의 과정에 온갖 첨단의 기술력이 동원된다. 농악의 발굴․기록․보존․전시․교육에 있어서도 이러한 현실이 반영되어 있다. 농악을 둘러싼 문화적 스펙트럼과 이를 배태한 문화적 기반들을 통칭하여 농악문화라고 할 수 있다. 본고에서 공동체에 의해 끊임없이 재생산되는 농악과 농악을 둘러싼 총체적인 문화 전반을 아울러 ‘농악문화’라는 포괄적인 개념으로 다루었다. 농악의 행위 그 자체와 더불어 이 연행을 가능하게 하는 물질적 구성요소들을 농악을 이루는 물질문화로서 주목하였다. 농악문화유산을 물질․비물질 자료로 구분하여 살피고, 발굴조사와 기록 및 전시 사례를 제시하며, 기․예능의 전승활동에 있어 교육적 활용가능성을 모색하였다. 물질 자료의 수집과 그 필요성, 기존에 발굴․조사된 비물질자료의 재생산과 보존 및 전시, 농악문화유산의 활용과 교육과의 연계성에 중점을 두었다. 농악의 연행은 전승집단이 지닌 공동체성의 발현이다. 그러기에 농악인들이 사용하던 각종 물질자료들은 소모품이기 이전에 공적 유물이자 자원이다. 여기에는 전승집단이 누대로 이어온 문화적 고유성과 그리고 경험의 축적으로 꽃피워온 문화적 지식이 배어있다. 농악문화유산의 생명력을 살리는 작업은 과거와 현재, 미래를 잇는 미래유산의 재발견에 다름 아니다. 세대 간 전승이나 지역적 전승권역을 뛰어넘어, 디지털 매체들을 활용하여 시공간적 경계를 초월하는 새로운 전승활로를 모색하는 것은 농악을 서민대중의 일상생활 속으로 다시금 뿌리 내리게 하는 전략이기도 하다.

초등학교 5, 6학년 영어 교과서의 읽기 자료에 나타난 문화 연계 실태 및 문화 내용 분석

정은숙(Jeong, Eunsook),정다빈(Jung, Dabin) 한국초등영어교육학회 2020 초등영어교육 Vol.26 No.4

This study aims to explore the connections between reading materials and culture, and the cultural contents in the 5th and 6th grade English textbooks. For this, 150 pieces of reading material in 10 English textbooks were analyzed based on three aspects: 1) whether the reading materials are connected with culture, 2) if so, how strongly the reading materials are tied to culture, 3) what cultural contents (topics, types, backgrounds) are suggested in the reading materials. The content analysis of the reading materials found that 66% (99 out of 150) of the reading materials were tied to culture with different degrees (weak, medium, strong). Specifically, 47.4% of the 99 reading materials turned out to have a weak connection with culture, whereas 23.2% had a medium connection and 29.2% had a strong connection. In addition, in terms of cultural contents suggested in the reading materials, topics about the daily lives of people from diverse cultural backgrounds were commonly dealt with in 78.1% of the reading material. For cultural types, material culture accounted for 45.8% of the reading materials, followed by spiritual and behavioral culture. Lastly, for cultural backgrounds, English culture was presented the most, followed by non-English and Korean culture. Based on the findings, some pedagogical implications were discussed.

Korean and European Perspectives on 19th Century Chosŏn Material Culture : Kyŏngdo Chapchi Versus Ethnographic Collecting

Katharina Süberkrüb 인하대학교 다문화융합연구소 2023 다문화와 교육 Vol.8 No.3

After the opening of the Chosŏn Dynasty to foreign powers in 1876, European interest in the Korean peninsula included the collection of objects of material culture, art and science. Ethnographic museums began to collect strategically by commissioning Europeans living in Korea to acquire Korean material culture. The image of Korean culture in Europe was shaped by Korean and European intermediaries. Research therefore requires a transcultural approach that includes Korean and European perspectives. This article focuses on the perspectives of the Korean Sirhak scholar and historian Yu Tŭkkong (柳得恭, 1748 - 1807) and the German physician, anthropologist and ethnologist Georg Thilenius (1868 - 1937) on late Chosŏn Dynasty culture. Yu Tŭkkong is the author of the Kyŏngdo chapchi (Capital Miscellany, 京都雜志), a Korean primary source from the late 18th or early 19th century that lists and explains the material culture of the upper class of late dynastic Korean society and describes holidays, festivals and customs. In his position as director of the Hamburg Museum of Ethnology, nowadays Museum am Rothenbaum – Kulturen und Kunste der Welt (MARKK), Georg Thilenius wrote a multi-page wish list to a collector in Korea of objects he wanted to add to the museum's collection in the early twentieth century. By filtering out the categories and subcategories of Korean material culture mentioned by the authors, corresponding ontologies can be created. This helps to understand the different views of Korean material culture: Yu's indigenous view on culture and Thilenius' Eurocentric view. For this article, headgear and artworks have been selected as exemplary objects to demonstrate the results and the influence on the image of late Chosŏn dynasty culture from the Korean and European perspectives.

물질문화의 고고학적 이해와 미술사

김종일 미술사와 시각문화학회 2008 미술사와 시각문화 Vol.7 No.-

This article attempts to examine various archaeological approaches hitherto developed for a better interpretation of material culture with reviewing the main paradigm shifts in archaeology, for example, Antiqurianism, Culture-Historical approach, Processual approach, Post-Processual approach. In particular, it is discussed that material culture could be understood as playing an active role in diverse social change rather than a mere record to reflect the past human behaviour, which has been suggested in recent post-processual approaches. Concomitantly, it is explored to how archaeology could suggest a new perspective on the research of the past and the present material culture, based upon a close investigation on various theoretical views with their limits. For example, Marxism and its influence enable us to understand any social change in reference to ideology, power, and hegemony. It is, however, suspicious that there is any essential reality masked by ideology in material culture. It is also stressed that structuralism provides us with a platform to grasp the meaning of material culture and related social action. In spite of its huge impact on archaeological interpretation, it is unlikely that some of the main methodological premise such as binary opposition and arbitrariness should be adopted into the interpretation very carefully. As a result, it is emphasized that archaeology could contribute to a new and better understanding of material culture by way of frequent interchange with other disciplines such as philosophy, sociology and art history as well as systemisation and sophistication of the existing approaches. In addition, classification system of material culture including typology and style is critically reviewed, focusing on how it could be grasped in life world of the period. It is also argued that as an alternative, material culture needs to be comprehended in terms of category and categorisation.

농악문화유산으로서 물질 · 비물질 자료의 활용가능성 타진

박혜영(Park, Hey-Yeong) 실천민속학회 2017 실천민속학연구 Vol.29 No.-

농악이 문화적 표현물로서 감정이나 사유를 전달하고 공감을 이끌어내는 전승공동체의 예술행위라면, 농악을 발굴하고 기록하며, 오감을 만족시키도록 재가공하는 과정 또한 사회적 여건 속에서 미적가치를 생산해내는 창조적 행위이다. 오늘날 농악의 예술적 테크닉이 수려해지는 것은 물론, 연행을 가능케하는 물적 기반도 기술력을 바탕으로 변화를 거듭하고 있다. 예술적 형식 뿐 아니라 전승자의 경험을 전달하거나 전통을 재현하고 재창조하는 일련의 과정에 온갖 첨단의 기술력이 동원된다. 농악의 발굴 · 기록 · 보존 · 전시 · 교육에 있어서도 이러한 현실이 반영되어 있다. 농악을 둘러싼 문화적 스펙트럼과 이를 배태한 문화적 기반들을 통칭하여 농악문화라고 할 수 있다. 본고에서 공동체에 의해 끊임없이 재생산되는 농악과 농악을 둘러싼 총체적인 문화 전반을 아울러 ‘농악문화’라는 포괄적인 개념으로 다루었다. 농악의 행위 그 자체와 더불어 이 연행을 가능하게 하는 물질적 구성요소들을 농악을 이루는 물질문화로서 주목하였다. 농악문화유산을 물질 · 비물질 자료로 구분하여 살피고, 발굴조사와 기록 및 전시 사례를 제시하며, 기 · 예능의 전승활동에 있어 교육적 활용가능성을 모색하였다. 물질 자료의 수집과 그 필요성, 기존에 발굴 · 조사된 비물질자료의 재생산과 보존 및 전시, 농악문화유산의 활용과 교육과의 연계성에 중점을 두었다. 농악의 연행은 전승집단이 지닌 공동체성의 발현이다. 그러기에 농악인들이 사용하던 각종 물질자료들은 소모품이기 이전에 공적 유물이자 자원이다. 여기에는 전승집단이 누대로 이어온 문화적 고유성과 그리고 경험의 축적으로 꽃피워온 문화적 지식이 배어있다. 농악문화유산의 생명력을 살리는 작업은 과거와 현재, 미래를 잇는 미래유산의 재발견에 다름 아니다. 세대 간 전승이나 지역적 전승권역을 뛰어넘어, 디지털 매체들을 활용하여 시공간적 경계를 초월하는 새로운 전승활로를 모색하는 것은 농악을 서민대중의 일상생활 속으로 다시금 뿌리 내리게 하는 전략이기도 하다. If Nongak as a cultural expression is an artistic activity of transmission community that has communicated emotions and thoughts and evoked empathy, the process in which Nongak has been excavated and recorded and also recreated to satisfy five senses is another creative behavior producing an aesthetic value in a certain social condition. Today, artistic techniques of Nongak are more elaborated and the material foundation of it, which makes it possible to conduct the performance, is also repeatedly changed based on technology. A series of processes in which not only artistic forms but also experiences of transmitters have been communicated or the tradition has been represented and recreated involve many kinds of technology. Such a fact is also reflected by excavation, recording, preservation, exhibition and education of Nongak. The spectrum and cultural foundations of Nongak may be commonly called the Nongak culture. This paper dealt with Nongak continuously recreated by the community and the whole of culture around it as the ‘Nongak culture’, a comprehensive concept. In this paper, the author focused on activities of the performance and material elements that allow it, by extending them to the entire material culture constituting Nongak. This paper investigated the cultural heritance of Nongak by dividing it into material/immaterial culture data, discussed excavation research, recording and exhibition, suggested some specific cases and sought educational availability of transmissions of skills and performing arts. It emphasized collection and necessity of material culture data, reproduction, preservation and exhibition of immaterial culture data previously excavated and examined, and connectivity between use of the cultural heritage of Nongak and education of it. The performance of Nongak is a manifestation of the communal character of the transmission group. Therefore, a lot of kinds of material culture data used by persons who engaged in Nongak are public artifacts and resources rather than consumables. Cultural inheritance and identity which have been passed by the transmission group through successive generations and cultural knowledge flourished by the accumulation of experiences are embedded in them. They are nothing but a rediscovery of future heritage that connects the past, the present and the future. Such an exploration of a new transmission channel crossing temporal and spatial boundaries by using digital media beyond spheres of local tradition or transmission between generations is also a strategy for Nongak to take root in daily life of ordinary people again.