이태준과 김용준에 나타난 문학과 회화의 상호작용

박성창 한국비교문학회 2012 比較文學 Vol.0 No.56

The purpose of this study is to reveal the interactive relationship between literature and art during 1930's, especially focusing on the relation between two important artists of 1930's, Lee Tae-jun(李泰俊) and Kim Yong-jun(金瑢俊). In order to analyse the novels of Lee Tae-jun, his view of paintings and theory of literature, this study proposes to establish the comparison between Lee Tae-jun and Kim Yong-jun. Best friend and artistic partner, they shared artistic belief that the main factor of art is how to express the writer's emotions or subjective feelings. They made one team, Moon Jang Pa(文章派), in 1939. After that, they had pursued modernism and traditional values. Lee Tae-jun made an important role as critic of art as well as novelists. He tried to enter into a new relationship between literature and art theory. On the other hand, Kim Yong-jun, who played a crucial role in the emergence of Orientalist art, changed direction in the late 1930's to ink painting via orientalized oil painting. He recieved the oriental painting tradition by bringing 'literary' back to 'painting', reversing the existing trend of separating 'literary' from 'painting', and thus sought to achieve modern succession of literary painting by restoring the unification of poetry, calligraphy and painting. In order to reveal the relationship between literature and art during 1930's, this study propose to examine three things : activities of Kim Yonh-jun as book cover designer, intertextual relation between the famous essay of Lee Tae-jun, Museorok (無序錄) and the essay of Kim Yong-jun, Essay of Keun Won (近園隨筆). Finally this study examines how the short stories of Lee Tae-jun show specific characters of painting. His short novels are influenced by his theory of paintings and literature. He give a specific meaning to the 'description' in the short novels like Dal Bam. The purpose of this study is to reveal the interactive relationship between literature and art during 1930's, especially focusing on the relation between two important artists of 1930's, Lee Tae-jun(李泰俊) and Kim Yong-jun(金瑢俊). In order to analyse the novels of Lee Tae-jun, his view of paintings and theory of literature, this study proposes to establish the comparison between Lee Tae-jun and Kim Yong-jun. Best friend and artistic partner, they shared artistic belief that the main factor of art is how to express the writer's emotions or subjective feelings. They made one team, Moon Jang Pa(文章派), in 1939. After that, they had pursued modernism and traditional values. Lee Tae-jun made an important role as critic of art as well as novelists. He tried to enter into a new relationship between literature and art theory. On the other hand, Kim Yong-jun, who played a crucial role in the emergence of Orientalist art, changed direction in the late 1930's to ink painting via orientalized oil painting. He recieved the oriental painting tradition by bringing 'literary' back to 'painting', reversing the existing trend of separating 'literary' from 'painting', and thus sought to achieve modern succession of literary painting by restoring the unification of poetry, calligraphy and painting. In order to reveal the relationship between literature and art during 1930's, this study propose to examine three things : activities of Kim Yonh-jun as book cover designer, intertextual relation between the famous essay of Lee Tae-jun, Museorok (無序錄) and the essay of Kim Yong-jun, Essay of Keun Won (近園隨筆). Finally this study examines how the short stories of Lee Tae-jun show specific characters of painting. His short novels are influenced by his theory of paintings and literature. He give a specific meaning to the 'description' in the short novels like Dal Bam.

1894년 갑오개혁 이후 주한 일본공사 이노우에의 개입과 대원군의 정치적 몰락— 이준용역모사건과 김학우암살사건을 중심으로 —

김영수 수선사학회 2022 史林 Vol.- No.81

At that time, diplomatic and personal records mainly focused on Dae-Won-Gun and Lee Jun-Yong, who were behind the assassination of Kim Hak-Woo in 1894. Most of the records of people who served as bureaucrats after the Gabo Reform(Kim Hong-Jib Cabinet) and diplomatic records of foreign missions in Korea were initially recorded as being the planners of Lee Jun-Yong and the masterminds of Dae-Won-Gun. However, as time passed, both the planners and the masterminds behind the Kim Hak-Woo assassination were identified as Dae-Won-Gun. In the end, Dae-Won-Gun planned the assassination of Deputy Minister of Justice Kim Hak-Woo in order to cover up Lee Jun-Yong's rebellion. In the course of a special court trial in April 1895, Minister of Justice Seo Gwang-Beom attempted to remove Lee Jun-Yong with extreme punishment. The Japanese minister in Seoul Inoue suspected the Ministry of Interior Park Young-Hyo and Queen Min. This means that Queen Min intervened behind her and instigated Lee Jun-Yong to be punished with extreme punishment. There is something peculiar about the judgment of the special court in April 1895. The first is the fact that no relationship can be found between Lee Jun-Yong and Dae-Won-Gun. The special court substantiated the charges against Lee Jun-Yong, but made no mention of any connection with Dae-Won-Gun. Second, Lee Jun-Yong did not intend to assassinate Queen Min. In the end, the special court deliberately concealed Lee Jun-Yong's assassination of Queen Min and Dae-Won-Gun's indirect intervention. Before and after the Gabo Reform, Dae-Won-Gun chose Lee Jun-Yong as the successor of King Gojong and tried to make his grandson the heir to the throne. The cases that prove this were the assassination of Kim Hak-Woo and the rebellion of Lee Jun-Yong. In this situation, King Gojong judged that Lee Jun-Yong was a threat to his throne and continued to check it. After that, Dae-Won-Gun planned Lee Jun-Yong's trip to Japan under the pretext of studying abroad. As a result, Lee Jun-Yong left Seoul on December 25, 1895 and fled to Japan. .

근원 김용준(1904-1967)의 기명절지화 연구

이인숙 고려대학교 민족문화연구원 2019 民族文化硏究 Vol.85 No.-

Keun-won Kim Yong-jun (1904-1967) was a painter, art theorist, writer, book designer, and educator, active from the 1920s to the 1960s, who defected to North Korea amid the chaos of colonization, liberation, and the Korean War. He was one of the leading Western painters and worked as an art critic. In 1939, however, Kim Yong-jun, at 36, changed direction to Oriental painting and expanded his scope as a theorist from art review to art history. The very first motivation to change his perception of Oriental painting came from the shock he had from the high painting quality of the ‘Gimyeong cheolji-hwa’ by O-won Jang Seung-eop (1843-1897). ‘Gimyeong cheolji-hwa’ is a big part of Kim Yong-jun’s work as an Oriental painter. I have divided his ‘Gimyeong cheolji-hwa’ into ink paintings, paintings on book designing, and portrait paintings with various subject matters. The ink painting has 13 cases, 22 pieces (including two published by the newspaper and two verified by the records), mostly with horizontal form. The works of the 1940s remain the most. The works are concisely composed of bronzeware, flowers, vegetables, fruits, books, and writing supplies, so they stick to the basics of ‘Gimyeong cheolji-hwa’ with the tastes of good auspicious signs and joy of learning. Among the book designing that utilized the ‘Gimyeong cheolji-hwa’ three cover page illustrations were from Kim Yong-jun for the monthly magazine Munjang and Hakpung in which he also participated as a member of writing staff, while three title page illustrations are related to Lee Tae-jun. Kim Yong-jun painted the portraits of Su-hwa Kim Hwan-ki, one of his favorite junior Western artist and Pyuk-cho Hong Myong-Hui, a novelist whom he respected, against the backdrop of the theme of ‘Gimyeong cheolji-hwa’. The ‘Gimyeong cheolji-hwa’ is significant in that it was an opportunity for Kim Yong-jun to recognize paintings from the Joseon Dynasty and change his path to an Oriental artist, and that Kim Yong-jun’s research broadened the scope of Korean art history from the biography of Jang Seung-eop to the painter theory of the Joseon Dynasty. 근원(近園) 김용준(1904-1967)은 화가이자 미술사학자이며 수필가이다. 1950년부터는 북한에서 활동했다. 동경미술학교에 유학한 서양화가, 미술평론가였던 김용준은1939년(36세) 동양화가, 미술사학자로 전향한 후 다수의 기명절지화를 그렸다. 서양화로 미술을 시작한 김용준의 전통회화에 대한 눈뜸은 1928년(25세)경 본 오원(吾園) 장승업의 기명절지화에서 시작되었다. 전향 배경에는 지필묵을 접하며 자랐던환경, ‘향토색’, ‘동양주의’ 등 미술계 담론과 ‘조선학’ 운동이라는 시대 상황, 모더니스트이면서 고미술품을 애완(愛翫)한 이태준(1904-?)의 영향 등이 있었다. 김용준의 「오원일사(吾園軼事)」는 그의 조선회화에 대한 인식 전환이 전통이나 민족 같은 이념이 아니라 장승업의 기명절지화에서 받은 미학적 충격에서 비롯되었으며, 여기에서 언급한‘기명절지’가 지금 통용되는 장르 명칭이 되었다는 점, 기명절지화가 나타난 배경 등을알려주는 중요한 글이다. 김용준의 기명절지화는 13건 22점이다. 길상과 문방정취의 뜻을 간소한 구성에 담았으며, 담채의 사의(寫意) 화풍에 적절한 화제로 문기(文氣)를 더한 점도 특징이다. 김용준은 기명절지화의 제재를 표지화, 속표지화, 삽화 등 책의 장정과 김환기, 홍명희등 인물화에 활용했다. 기명절지화는 김용준이 동양화가로 전향하는 시작이 되었으며, 그의 미술사 연구는 장승업 등 작가론에서 한국미술사 전반으로 심화되었다. 기명절지화를 그리면서, 그 화의(畵意)인 서재 생활의 정취를 향유함으로써 김용준이 동양화가, 미술사학자로서의 정체성을 확립하고 확장했다는 사실도 의미 깊다.

과거를 통해 본 화가의 미래: 김용준의 조선시대 화가론

유재빈 미술사학연구회 2021 美術史學報 Vol.- No.56

Kim, Yong-jun(1904-1967) was full of aspirations and mission for "new Joseon painting" when he graduated Tokyo University of Arts in Western painting. He turned his attention to Joseon traditional paintings, in order to break through the rigid academism prevailed in both Western and Modern Oriental painting fields. This research examined Kim, Yong-jun’s studies on Joseon painters, Kim, Hong-do (1845-?), Jeong, Seon(1676-1759), Shim, Sa-jeong(1707-1769), Choi, Buk(1720-1786), and Jang, Seong-eob(1843-1897). Kim, Hong-do is an artist whom Kim, Yong-jun studied from the beginning to end, reflecting his ideal painter image changed over time. He rediscovered Kim Hong-do as a genre painter and established him as a ‘giant star (巨星)’ of the Joseon Dynasty, combining the Northern and Southern school (南北宗) and applying Western painting style. After defecting to North Korea, Kim Yong-jun placed Kim Hong-do in the position of a patriotic hero who best depicted ‘the image of people.’ For Kim Yong-jun, Jeong, Seon and Shim, Sa-jeong were painters who made a turning point in Joseon art by combining the he Northern and Southern school. He considered that they achieved their own independent status through the methods of "sketch from nature (寫生)" and "copy the old masters (模寫)" respectively. Choi, Buk and Jang Seung-eob were painters whose lives themselves were art. For Kim Yong-jun, their eccentricity was regarded as a pure passion for beauty and a driving force behind their creation. As such, Kim Yong-jun discovered his ideal goals, working methods, and artistic life style from Joseon artists. His studies on painters of the Joseon Dynasty influenced his career on art making and art education. 김용준(1904-1967)은 서양화 유학을 끝마칠 무렵 ‘새로운 조선화’에 대한 열망과 사명으로 가득 차 있었다. 그는 당시 아카데미즘에 경직된 서양화단이나 사숙관계로 계보를 잇는 동양화단 대신 200년 전의 조선시대 회화로 눈을 돌렸다. 본 논문은 김용준이 대상으로 삼은 화가 중에서 김홍도, 정선과 심사정, 최북과 장승업을 중심으로 살펴보았다. 김홍도는 그가 처음부터 마지막까지 천착했던 인물로서 시기에 따라 김용준 자신의 이상적인 화가상을 반영한다. 그는 풍속화가로서 김홍도를 재발굴하였고, 남북종을 융합하고 서양화를 응용한 조선시대 거성(巨星)으로 자리매김 하였다. 월북한 후 김용준은 김홍도를 인민의 모습을 가장 잘 그려낸 애국적 영웅의 자리에 올려놓았다. 김용준에게 정선과 심사정은 남북종을 융합하여 조선미술의 전환점을 이룬 화가였다. 김용준은 이들이 각각 ‘사생’과 고화의 ‘모사’라는 방식을 통해 자신만의 독자적인 경지를 이루었다고 파악하였다. 최북과 장승업은 삶 자체가 예술이었던 화가였다. 김용준에게 이들 화가의 기벽은 ‘미’에 대한 순수한 열정이자 창작의 원동력으로 여겨졌다. 이처럼 김용준은 조선시대 화가에게서 작가로서 그가 가졌던 이상적인 목표와 작업 방식, 그리고 예술가적인 삶을 발견하였다. 그의 조선시대 화가 연구는 간접적인 방식으로 그의 작품 활동과 미술 교육에 영향을 미쳤다. 그는 ‘사생’과 ‘모사’라는 훈련 방식을 그의 초반기 동양화 제작에 적극 활용하였다. 그의 작품이 1940년대에 19세기 화가들- 김정희, 허련, 장승업 등을 보수적으로 참고하는 모습을 보이는 것은 사실상 ‘모사’의 단계로 보여지며, 그의 작품 중에 즉흥적인 스케치에 가까운 그림들은 ‘묵희’의 정신을 동반한 ‘사생’의 결과라고 할 수 있다. ‘사생’과 ‘모사’를 통해 그 자신의 독자적인 화풍이 개발된 모습은 월북 이후의 작품, <춤> 등 에서 발견된다.

무속 기록의 엄정함과 총합성

홍태한 한국무속학회 2018 한국무속학 Vol.0 No.37

이 글은 제주도 무속을 연구한 현용준 선생의 기념비적 저작물인 <제주도 무속 자료 사전>의 성과를 살핀 글이다. 글쓴이는 이 글에서 제주도 무속을 연구하며 활동한 몇 사람을 키워드로 삼아 글을 전개하였다. 그들은 현용준, 안사인, 진성기, 문무병, 김헌선, 강정식, 강소전, 허남춘이다. 이들을 중심에 두고 <제주도 무속 자료 사전>의 가치를 살폈다. 먼저 이 책의 기본적인 성격을 사전(辭典dictionary), 사전(事典cyclopedia)의 개념으로 살핀 후 이 책은 사전(私典wikipedia)을 지향한다고 했다. 즉 끊임없이 보충되어야 할 제주도 무속 연구의 길잡이 구실을 한다. 현용준 선생이 주 제보자로 잡은 이는 안산인 심방이다. 안사인 심방이 연행한 대부분의 자료를 책에 수록하였지만, 다른 무속 자료에 대한 보완은 필요하다. 그런 점에서 이 책은 앞으로 다른 제주도 무속 성과를 계속 축적하라는 가르침의 지표가 된다. 그런 점에서 현용준 선생과 함께 제주도 무속을 연구한 진성기, 문무병 두 학자의 성과들도 진지하게 검토하여 소중하게 받아들여야 한다. 현용준 선생의 성과는 김헌선과 강정식에 이어지는데 이 두 사람은 현용준 선생의 성과를 심화시켜 소중한 저작물 <제주도 조상본풀이 연구>, <제주굿 이해의 길잡이>를 낳았다. 허남춘은 제주 무속 자료 정리를 사명으로 삼아 제주도에서 지금도 활동하는 여러 심방들이 본풀이를 채록 정리하여 현용준 선생의 사전을 보충했다. 강소전은 ‘멩두’ 하나로 제주 무속을 심화시켜 현용준 선생이 집성한 사전의 깊이를 더 했다. 이처럼, 현용준 선생의 자료를 바탕으로 새로운 자료집을 더한 연구, 현용준 선생의 자료집에 대한 해설 연구, 새로운 자료를 발굴하여 <제주도 무속 자료 사전>의 자료와 비교할 수 있는 자료의 보충 연구, 하나의 소재를 깊이 있게 탐색하는 연구 등 다양하다. 이는 각각 사전의 보완, 사전의 해설, 사전의 보충, 사전의 심화로 정리될 수 있다. 보완, 해설, 보충, 심화는 지역 무속학 정립을 위해서 반드시 있어야 할 연구 방법들이다. 제주도 무속 연구에 이러한 경향의 연구 성과가 계속 쌓이고 있으니 ‘사전’이라는 명칭을 책에 붙여 놓은 현용준 선생의 의도가 마침내 꽃을 피우게 되었다. The purpose of this study is to examine the fruition of <The Dictionary of Materials for Shamanism in Jeju>, a monumental work written by Sir Hyeon Yong-jun who devoted his life to studying shamanism in Jeju. In the book, the author developed his writing having some persons engaged in studying shamanism in Jeju as keywords. They are Hyeon Yong-jun, An Sa-in, Jin Seong-gi, Mun Mu-byeong, Kim Heon-seon, Gang Jeong-sik, Gang So-jeon, and Heo Nam-chun. Putting these persons in the center, this researcher has appreciated the value of <The Dictionary of Materials for Shamanism in Jeju>. This author has examined the basic characteristics of this book as a dictionary (辭典) or cyclopedia (事典) first and then decided that it pursues wikipedia (私典). In other words, it works as a guide for research on shamanism in Jeju which has to be complemented constantly. The major informer for Sir Hyeon Yong-jun is a simbang named An Sa-in. Although the book contains most of the materials about what simbang An Sa-in performed, it still has to add other materials about shamanism. In this sense, the book forms an index for teachings to accumulate the fruition of shamanism in Jeju continuously afterwards. Therefore, along with the fruition of Sir Hyeon Yong-jun, that of two other scholars, Jin Seong-gi and Mun Mu-byeong who also studied shamanism in Jeju, should be examined seriously and accepted valuably, too. Sir Hyeon Yong-jun’s fruition led to Kim Heon-seon and Gang Jeong-sik’s, and these two persons deepened the result of Sir Hyeon Yong-jun and produced precious works, <Research on the Bonpuri of Ancestors in Jeju> and <A Guide for Understanding Jeju-gut>. Having the task of organizing materials about shamanism in Jeju as his own mission, Heo Nam-chun has noted down and arranged data about the bonpuri of several simbangs still working in Jeju and complemented Sir Hyeon Yong-jun’s dictionary. Gang So-jeon deepened shamanism in Jeju as ‘mengdu (the sinpyo of a shaman)’ and made the dictionary compiled by Sir Hyeon Yong-jun more profound. Like these cases, there are many kinds of research, for example, research to add new materials grounded on Sir Hyeon Yong-jun’s sourcebook, research to explain Sir Hyeon Yong-jun’s sourcebook, research to discover new materials and complement <The Dictionary of Materials for Shamanism in Jeju> with comparable data, or research to explore a single subject matter profoundly. These cases can be categorized as the supplementation of the dictionary, explanation of the dictionary, complementation of the dictionary, and deepening of the dictionary. Supplementation, explanation, complementation, and deepening are all must-have study methods to establish the studies of regional shamanism. As the results of research on shamanism in Jeju with these trends are accumulated continuously, Sir Hyeon Yong-jun’s intention to put ‘dictionary’ to the title of his book has finally bloomed.

이태준과 김용준에 나타난 문학과 회화의 상호작용

박성창 ( Sung Chang Park ) 한국비교문학회 2012 比較文學 Vol.56 No.-

The purpose of this study is to reveal the interactive relationship between literature and art during 1930`s, especially focusing on the relation between two important artists of 1930`s, Lee Tae-jun(李泰俊) and Kim Yong-jun(金瑢俊). In order to analyse the novels of Lee Tae-jun, his view of paintings and theory of literature, this study proposes to establish the comparison between Lee Tae-jun and Kim Yong-jun. Best friend and artistic partner, they shared artistic belief that the main factor of art is how to express the writer`s emotions or subjective feelings. They made one team, Moon Jang Pa(文章派), in 1939. After that, they had pursued modernism and traditional values. Lee Tae-jun made an important role as critic of art as well as novelists. He tried to enter into a new relationship between literature and art theory. On the other hand, Kim Yong-jun, who played a crucial role in the emergence of Orientalist art, changed direction in the late 1930`s to ink painting via orientalized oil painting. He recieved the oriental painting tradition by bringing "literary" back to "painting", reversing the existing trend of separating "literary" from "painting", and thus sought to achieve modern succession of literary painting by restoring the unification of poetry, calligraphy and painting. In order to reveal the relationship between literature and art during 1930`s, this study propose to examine three things: activities of Kim Yonh-jun as book cover designer, intertextual relation between the famous essay of Lee Tae-jun, Museorok (無序錄) and the essay of Kim Yong-jun, Essay of Keun Won (近園隨筆). Finally this study examines how the short stories of Lee Tae-jun show specific characters of painting. His short novels are influenced by his theory of paintings and literature, He give a specific meaning to the "description" in the short novels like Dal Bam.

김용준과 차이위안페이의 예술론 연구: 김용준의 미술론과 차이위안페이의 미육사상을 중심으로

오윤형 한국동양예술학회 2024 동양예술 Vol.64 No.-

본 연구는 김용준의 미술론을 차이위안페이의 미육사상과 비교 분석하는데 목적이 있다. 김용준과 차이위안페이는 각자의 나라에서 격변의 근대를 맞이했으며 교육자로서 활약했던 인물이다. 이들은 밀려오는 서양 사조를 흡수하고 자국의 전통과 융합하여 새로운 시대의 도약을 꾀했다. 또한 예술의 본질을 파악하고 있었고, 궁극적인 지향점으로 인간의 성장과 자아실현, 참된 인간성의 회복, 사회 변혁을 이뤄 나가는 데 있다고 보았다. 김용준과 차이위안페이는 미와 도덕의 관계를 중시했으며, 과학만능주의에 대한 비판적 입장을 견지했다는 점에서 유사성이 있다. 또한 종교와 미술에 관한 관심을 두었던 것도 일치한다. 그러나 김용준은 차이위안페이와 다른 견해를 피력했다. 차이위안페이는 미육이 종교를 대신할 수 있다고 주장했지만, 김용준은 종교와 예술은 각자 고유한 영역과 가치가 있다고 보았다. 그는 예술이 종교를 대체할 수는 없으며 두 영역은 각자의 고유한 특성과 역할을 가지고 있다고 생각했다. 이들은 예술을 단순한 미적 대상이 아닌 인간과 사회에 실질적인 영향을 미치는 중요한 영역으로 인식했으며 이러한 관점에서 그들의 사상은 예술과 삶, 윤리의 관계에 대한 깊이 있는 통찰을 제공한다고 할 수 있겠다. 한국의 김용준과 중국의 차이위안페이를 비교·분석하는 것은 동아시아 근대 미술론의 특성을 이해하고, 사회적 역할을 고찰하며, 한·중 간 문화교류와 상호 이해 증진에 이바지할 수 있으리라 생각한다. 또한 이를 기반으로 더욱 풍부한 예술교육 연구와 실천의 기반을 마련할 수 있으리라 생각한다. This study aims to compare and analyze Kim Yong-jun's art theory with Tsai Yuan-pei's aesthetics and philosophy. Kim Yong-jun and Tsai Yuan-pei were figures who faced the turbulent modern times in their respective countries and were active as educators. They absorbed the incoming Western trends and merged them with their own traditions to seek a leap forward in a new era. They also understood the essence of art and believed that its ultimate goal was to achieve human growth, self-realization, restoration of true humanity, and social transformation. Kim Yong-jun and Tsai Yuan-pei had similarities in that they valued the relationship between beauty and morality and maintained a critical stance toward scientific supremacy. They also shared an interest in religion and art. However, Kim Yong-jun expressed a different view from Tsai Yuan-pei. Tsai Yuan-pei argued that aesthetics and philosophy could replace religion, but Kim Yong-jun believed that religion and art each had their own unique domains and values. He believed that art could not replace religion and that the two domains had their own unique characteristics and roles. They recognized art as an important area that has a real impact on humans and society, not just as a simple aesthetic object, and from this perspective, their thoughts can be said to provide deep insight into the relationship between art, life, and ethics. I believe that comparing and analyzing Korea's Kim Yong-jun and China's Tsai Yuanpei can help us understand the characteristics of East Asian modern art theory, examine their social roles, and contribute to cultural exchange and mutual understanding between Korea and China. I also believe that this can serve as a foundation for richer art education research and practice.

김용준 著 『단원 김홍도』 해제 : 고독한 천재의 눈에 비친 사실주의 화가 김홍도

김미정(Kim, Mi jeong) 근대서지학회 2020 근대서지 Vol.- No.22

이 글의 목적은 김용준(金瑢俊, 1904~1967)의 『단원 김홍도』를 해제하고 김용준의 김홍도 연구가 지닌 미술사적 의의를 찾고자 함이다. 2018년 학계에 처음으로 소개된 『단원 김홍도』는 1955년에 북한에서 출판된 단행본이다. 이 책은 조선회화사 연구서를 통틀어 고전 화가를 개별 작가론으로 서술한 가장 이른 사례의 단행본으로 확인된다. 전체 분량은 51쪽으로, 앞표지는 김홍도의 인장과 신선도(神仙圖)로 꾸며졌다. 15점의 작품 이미지와 함께 수록된 작품해설에는 김용준의 빼어난 문장력과 더불어, 그림에 대한 자신의 감성을 충실하게 묘사하는 수필체 미술사 서술의 진면목이 드러난다. 1955년은 북한 미술사학계에서 비정(比定)한 김홍도의 생년에 따라 김홍도 탄생 195주년이 되는 해였다. 이 무렵 미술사 관련 출판물의 수가 늘어났고 각지에서 수집·발굴된 고서화와 문화유산을 소개하는 전람회도 개최되었다. 북한 미술계는 1955년을 전후해 민족 미술에 관한 인식의 변화와 함께 조선화에 적용할 내용과 형식의 변화를 모색했다. 이에 따라 『단원 김홍도』는 민족문화에 대한 관심이 촉발된 시기에 맞춰, 위인의 업적을 기려 대내외에 홍보하려는 목적에서 출판되었던 것이다. 월북 이후 김용준은 김홍도를 단일주제로 여러 편의 글을 저술했다. 일련의 글에서 그는 김홍도를 애국주의 화가이자, 18세기 사실주의 미술 발전의 핵심적 역할을 담당했던 화가로 평가했다. 또 김홍도의 신선도와 인물, 풍속 그림들의 필법에 주목했다. 김홍도의 인물화에서 인물형상의 조형적 특징을 찾으려고 했던 김용준은 전통 회화기법을 조선화 창작에 직접 적용했다. 그는 유려한 선조(線條)와 담백한 색채로 조선화를 창작해 여러 전람회에 출품하면서 조선화가 전근대적 산물이라고 보았던 1950년대 중·후반 북한 미술계의 인식을 개선하고자 몸소 실천했다. 조선회화에서의 독창성과 사실성 탐구에 집중했던 김용준의 미술사 연구는 1950년대 후반 북한미술이 조선화를 바탕으로 민족 형식의 전형을 확립해나가는데 밑거름이 되었다. The purpose of this article is to briefly describe ‘Danwon Kim Hong-do’ written by Kim Yong-jun (金瑢俊 1904~1967) and to understand the art historical implications of Kim Yong-jun’s studies on Kim Hong-do. ‘Danwon Kim Hong-do’ first introduced to academia in 2018 is a book of Korean art history published in North Korea in 1955 and is confirmed to be the earliest book that describes one of the most renowned classical painters based on an individual writer’s theory among all research papers as to the painting history during the Joseon Dynasty period. The year 1955 marks the 195th anniversary of Kim’s birth based on his birth year presumed by the North Korean art history academia. In this light, the publication of ‘Danwon Kim Hong-do’ apparently aimed to commemorate the great achievements of one of the most noteworthy painters in Korean art history at home and abroad at a time of soaring interest in national culture. Following his defection to North Korea, Kim Yong-joon wrote a number of articles dedicated to Kim Hong-do. In a series of his writings, he appraised Kim Hong-do as a patriotic painter who played a key role in developing the realism in the 18th century. He also noted Kim Hong-do’s brush stroke in his famous paintings, including Immortals, portraits, and customs paintings. Kim Yong-jun, who sought to identify the figurative characteristics of the figures in Kim Hong-do’s portraits, applied the traditional painting technique directly to creating the Joseon paintings. He made sincere effort to improve the awareness of the North Korean art academy in the mid- and late 1950s who found the Joseon paintings outdated as he created some Joseon paintings with elegant brush and plain colors and presented them to several exhibitions. Kim Yong-jun’s art history studies, which focused on seeking the originality and realism in Joseon paintings, served as a foundation for the North Korean art world to establish an exemplary model of national formality in the late 1950s based on the Joseon paintings.

근원 김용준의 수필 연구 -김용준의 예술관과 ‘문인화식 글쓰기’를 중심으로-

강정화 조선대학교 인문학연구원 2020 인문학연구 Vol.0 No.60

This study explores the artistic consciousness of Kim Yong-jun who was a painter and writer based on his essays. Kim Yong-joon actively performed in literary history during the modernization period, but no independent research has been conducted on his essays. Essays directly reveal the author's consciousness. In this sense, Kim Yong-joon's essay reveals his artistic consciousness as a painter and artist. From his art-based attitude of treating art as an art, to the upright attitude that an artist should have, to the art of orientalism that our artist should pursue, we can see his worldview encompassing the world of art. Therefore, taking a look at Kim Yong-joon's essay provides a glimpse into the artistic consciousness of Kim Yong-joon, as well as into the concerns of artists during the modernization period, which has been marked by concerns about the identity of our art. We look forward to expanding the appearance of our literary artist Kim Yong-joon as a writer. 본 연구는 화가이자 문인이었던 김용준의 수필을 중심으로 그의 예술세계를 가로지르는 의식을 살펴보는 것을 목적으로 수행되었다. 김용준은 근대화가 이루어지던 시기 문예사의 한 페이지를 장식하며 활발한 활동을 펼쳤지만, 그의 수필에 관한 단독의 연구는 이루어지지 않고 있다. 수필은 작가의 의식이 직접적으로 드러난다. 그런 의미에서 김용준의 수필에서는 화가이자 미술이론가였던 김용준의 예술 의식을 확인할 수 있다. 예술을 예술로써 대하고자 했던 예술 지상주의적 태도와 예술가가 지녀야 할 강직한 태도, 그리고 우리 화가가 지향해야 할 동양주의의 예술까지, 그의 예술세계를 아우르는 세계관을 확인할 수 있다. 따라서 그의 수필을 살펴보는 것은 김용준의 예술 의식을 살펴볼 수 있는 것과 동시에 우리 예술의 정체성에 대한 고민으로 점철되었던 근대화 시기 예술인들의 고민을 들여다볼 수 있는 일이 된다. 미술인이었던 김용준의 문인으로서의 면모를 살핌으로써 우리 문예사의 외연이 확장되기를 기대해본다.

「훈민정음 해례본」의 유출 과정 연구 : 학계에서 바라본 '발견'에 대한 반론의 입장에서

박종덕 한국어학회 2006 한국어학 Vol.31 No.-

I have studied the leakage of 「Hunminjeongeum Heryebon」(National Treasure No. 70; preserved at Gansong art Museum) for the last several years. In result, the following information was found. First, the origin of 「Hunminjeongeum Heryebon」is Geunggudang in Gaya-ri Hwaryong-myeon, Andong, Gyeongsangbuk-do. Second, 「Hunminjeongeum Heryebon」was succeeded through the following process. ◁표 삽입▷Origin Geunggudang: The Kim Family of Andong (Kim, Chi-sang ~ Kim, Eung-su) ◁표 삽입▷Last purchased by: Jeon, Hyeong-pil (Pen Name: Gansong) ◁표 삽입▷Helpers Hwang, Ui-don (?), Kim, Tae-jun ◁표 삽입▷Leaker Lee, Yong-jun (Kim, Eung-su's Son-in-Law) Third, the firsthand possessor of 「Hunminjeongeum Heryebon」is Kim, Chi-sang, a 6th-generation descendant of Kim, Eon-gi. This study is based on Lee, Yong-jun's letter to Kim, Eung-su, his father-in-law, and Madam Song of Yeosan, his mother-in-law, and Kim, Chi-sang's signature at the back of a record of family inheritance that he gave to his son, Kim, In-tak