윌리엄 블레이크(William Blake)의 『아메리카:예언(America: A Prophecy)』(1793) 연구

정연심 미술사연구회 2000 미술사연구 Vol.- No.14

1920년대 晋州勞動共濟會의 조직과 농민운동의 발전

정연심 부산대사학회 1997 역사와 세계 Vol.- No.21

‘이동성’에 대한 1960년대의 건축적 상상력 -아키그램과 프랑수아 달르그레를 중심으로-

정연심 한양대학교 우리춤연구소 2019 우리춤과 과학기술 Vol.15 No.3

This paper explores the concepts of mobility and technological vision raised by the British architectural group Archigram in the 1960s as well as by François Dallegret whose architectural drawings are full of eccentric visions. This research stems from the historical and artistic references in conducting a multi-disciplinary project entitled ‘Smart Shelter’ which consists of engineers, architects, and philosophers. My paper first examines the issues of mobility, nomadic identities, the influence of pop art and the interaction with the Independent Group, in the analysis of the works of Archigram. The focus then turns to the case study of F. Dallegret in relation to his perspective on the prosthetic relationship of human and futuristic technology, invisible systems, and the body as interfaces. In conclusion, this article examines the architectural and artistic imagination, which deconstructs architectural practices and, instead, calls for alternative, transgressive ways to look at human bodies, urban cities and societies in general. 본 연구는 1960년대 아키그램과 프랑수아 달르그레의 건축적 드로잉이 가진 ‘이동성’과 기술적 비전을 연구하는 데 그 목적을 둔다. 이러한 연구의 배경에는 본 연구자를 비롯하여 건축, 공학, 철학 등 다학제간 연구자들로 이뤄진 ‘스마트 쉘터’ 프로젝트를 수행하는 데 있어 역사적 참조를 구축하기 위한 목표가 있다. 본 논문은 아키그램의 작품에서 볼 수 있는 이동성, 노마드적인 정체성을 논하고, 달르그레의 ‘아트 픽션’에 표현된 비가시적 시스템과 인터페이스, 기술과 인간의 상호 보철적 존재론 등을 분석한다. 이는 이 사례들을 단순히 이상주의자들의 비전적인 상상의 산물로 바라보는 것이 아니라, 인간과 테크놀로지, 사회와의 관계성을 통해 구축한 반건축적, 예술적 상상력에 주목하고 있다.

1920년대 普州勞動共濟會의 조직과 농민운동의 발전 : 1920년대 진주노동공제회의 조직과 농민운동의 발전

정연심 부산대학교 사학회 1997 釜大史學 Vol.21 No.-

페르낭 크노프(Fernand Khnopff)의 작품에 나타난 벨기에 상징주의와 내셔널리즘

정연심 한국미술이론학회 2010 미술이론과 현장 Vol.9 No.-

This paper examines Fernand Khnopff’s Symbolism, focusing on the I Lock My Door upon Myself as a manifesto of his artistic credo in style and theme. Its title was originally in English, originating from the poem “Who Shall Deliver Me?” by Dante Gabriel Rossetti’s sister Christina Rossetti. I use the term “Social Symbolism” which combines a nationalist perspective with traditional French Symbolism, in order to explain how the image of Bruges is represented in his oeuvre. Symbolism calls for psychological introspection evoking death, love, silence, and solitude and recluse from realty in pursuit of the Unknown and the Ideal. Although Khnopff shared this idea, he departed from symbolist tradition by incorporating a political milieu in his paintings. First, I discuss Khnopff’s early stage in the formation of his artistic concept, including his family background as well as his early opportunity to visit the Exposition Universelle in Paris where he formed his early interests in aesthetics, philosophy, literature, mythology and Egyptian art. His early works, La Painture, la Musique, la Poesie(1880-1881), Le Crise(1881), and En ecoutant Schuman(1883) reveal his favorite subjects which were quite prevalent in the symbolist traditions of both Belgium and France. By looking at Khnopff’s paintings, I endeavor to situate his Symbolism in the context of the development of Belgian modernity and cultural nationalism. Second, my analysis of Khnopff creates a new overview of Symbolism in Europe, especially in Belgium. In the absence of socio-political integration, the Symbolist painter adds nostalgic meaning to the landscape of Bruges. The scene of Bruges illuminates the social atmosphere in Belgium at that time. Since Belgium became an independent country, it tried to differentiate its own cultural and national identity from France. There was a powerful social movement for Belgium to claim its own identity, language, and culture. Bruges was, for Symbolists, the epitome of Belgium’s past glory. This encouraged the formation of Belgian nationalism centering on Brussels, as I demonstrate in Khnopff’s Bruges-la-Morte(1892). The relationship between Symbolist artist and writers is crucial for understanding this development. Khnopff, for instance, illustrated or provided frontispieces for many Symbolist writers such as Rodenbach, Peladan, Spencer and Le Roy. Khnopff did not objectify the exact meaning, but rather provided his own subjective interpretation. In this respect, I Lock My Door, inspired by Rossetti, started from the same motif, but Khnopff seeked escape into silence and death while Rossetti searched for Christian salvation. Finally my paper deals with the social context in which Khnopff worked. He was a founding member of Les XX in 1883 and later La Libre Esthethetique he also participated in the exhibition of le Salon de la Rose + Croix. Les XX was not a particular school of art and did not have a uniform manifesto, but its exhibitions focused on decorative arts by encompassing art for all people via common, everyday objects. The Periodical, L’art moderne was founded to support this ideal by Edmond Picard and Maux. Les XX declared art as independent art, detached from all official connections. Khnopff designed the 1890 catalogue cover of Les XX and the 1891 cover. These designs show decorative element of Art Nouveau in an early example of “modern poster.” Les XX pursued all art including graphic arts, prints, placard, posters and book illustrations and design. These forms of art were l’art social and this movement was formed by the social atmosphere in Belgium in terms of social reforms and strikes by working class. Khnopff designed the book cover for la Maison du Peuple. The artist, however, did not share the ideal egalitarianism of the working class to a certain degree, while he was working in his villa he designed under the ideal motto, “on n’a pas que,” he expressed the nihilistic emotions toward society by the theme of interiority such as solitude, silence, narcissism, introspection, and introversion. In the middle of his Symbolism, we find the “cultural nostalgia” or longing that the artist develops in the I Lock My Door upon Myself. Khnopff’s longing toward the lost city of “Bruges” form the crux of his “Social Symbolism.”

강국진의 초기(1964-1974) 작업에 나타난 전위성 연구

정연심 현대미술사학회 2018 현대미술사연구 Vol.0 No.44

This essay explores Kang Kukjin’s early experiments with both sculptures and installation art. Although there have been numerous critical studies of the artist, only a few monographs have been published since his death. To reevaluate his early works, this paper examines the artistic formation of “Nonggol” in which six young and emerging artists of the 1960s participated. Although their works still represented the spirits of Informel abstract idioms, their manifestos and critical writings nevertheless are noteworthy. The next chapter looks at Kang’s participation in the “New Exhibition Group” and the formation of “the Union Exhibition of Korean Young Artists” in December of 1967. The last chapter examines the very indeterminacy of the sculptural language of his works in his first exhibition which took place at the Myungdong Gallery in 1973. Analyzing contemporary primary sources and material culture, this paper discusses Kang’s short-lived experiments in early sculptures and the formation of collective artistic groups. 본 논문은 1964년 강국진이 『논꼴아트』를 형성하는 시기부터 1974년까지 그의 초기 작업을 중심으로 탈물질적 일시적 예술을 살펴본다. 이 글은 강국진의 논꼴 시기부터‘ 신전’ 동인 형성까지의 작업 과정, 1967년 《한국청년작가연립전》에 출품한 구체적 작품, 그리고 1973년 명동화랑 개인전에 전시한 조각을 설명한다. 이 글은 강국진의 일시적 예술 작업에 나타난 실험적이고 전위적 시도를 동시대의 물질문화, 재료, 매체의 변화 내에서 다룬다

지속 가능한 프로젝트와 동시대성

정연심 예술경영지원센터 2013 예술경영 Vol.- No.6

포스트-미디엄과 포스트프로덕션 : 포스트모더니즘 이후 현대미술의 ‘동시대성(contemporaneity)’

정연심 한국미술이론학회 2012 미술이론과 현장 Vol.14 No.-

In recent studies of art historical methodology, such as Critical Terms for Art History and The Art of Art History, subjectivity, identity, abjection, and other terms have been placed safely in the genealogy of contemporary art history. This paper questions the contemporaneity in the story of contemporary art in our time in relation to two other critical terms that have been regularly cited by contemporary critics, not only in Euro-American fields but also in Korea. The terms are post-medium and postproduction, respectively, as used by Rosalind Krauss and Nicolas Bourriaud. This paper stems from the critical condition in which art criticism and theory have their power in the rise of neo-liberalism. But this paper does not deal with the contemporary as a chronological term for art history but rather examines the three critical terms—contemporaneity, post-medium, and postproduction—that have garnered scholarly attention. I would like to put aside postmodernism for the moment; I don’t disregard the postmodern condition although the death of postmodern critical terms has resulted in the loss of its polemical power in art worlds such as in exhibitions, etc. To look at “the postproduction in the age of post-medium age after postmodernism,” I first explore Krauss’s notion of post-medium because, unlike media artists like Lev Manovich and Peter Weibel, Krauss’s post-medium condition is different and insists on medium specificity. In this sense, Krauss has turned out to be another Greenberg in disguise. For her, photography and video are expanded mediums after Greenberg, because Krauss has spent her life explicating those mediums. Under the Cup, her recent publication, came out in 2011, and discusses her desire to defend medium-specificity against the intermedia of installation art found ubiquitously in international exhibitions and biennales. Her usage of post-medium has been taken up by Weibel as postmedia in a broader sense. But whether the post-medium condition or the postmedia age, we nonetheless enter the new age of the contemporary. Consequently, this paper questions what constitutes contemporaneity in our times. It is said that there is nothing new on earth, yet I find original artistic strategies among the younger generation in the postmedia age. The contemporary justifies its place in art fields and criticism by keeping its distance from postmodernism although we still find the remnants of postmodern artistic practices and theoretical foundations. By looking at materials written by Terry Smith, I would like to examine contemporaneity as a rhetoric where artists, critics, and curators endeavor to set up a new spirit of criticism, distant from the past of modernism and postmodernism. In discussions, modernism and postmodernism act as catalysts interacting with each other while justifying their own place. In conclusion, my paper reaches to delineate where the contemporary finds its place among artists’responses and working methods. It explores the postproduction of the Internet and the World Wide Web generations, where images become data rather than representation (of modernism) and appropriation (of postmodernism). This paper analyzes Bourriaud’s text, as well as relevant artists like Pierre Huyghe, Liam Gillick, and others. By examining the aforementioned critical terms, I would like to reconsider our own contemporary art in Korea, especially among young artists influenced by digital media and the World Wide Web in the 1990s.

한국의 초기 퍼포먼스와 (타자화 된) 예술가의 몸

정연심 한국미술이론학회 2016 한국미술이론학회 학술대회 Vol.2017 No.05

한국 미술에서 동시대 미술(컨템포러리 아트)이란 무엇인가: 비평적 담론에 대한 논고

정연심 한국근현대미술사학회(구 한국근대미술사학회) 2023 한국근현대미술사학 Vol.46 No.-

2015년 안팎을 기점으로 한국 미술에서는 ‘동시대(컨템포러리, contemporary)’라는 용어가 빈번하게 등장했다. 학계와 현장에서는 지금의 미술을 지칭하기 위해 현대 미술이라는 용어보다는 동시대 미술을 사용하여 ‘지금, 여기’를 더욱 면밀하게 다루는 동향들이 나타나기 시작했다. 이에 본 논문은 첫째, ‘동시대’라는 용어가 시간을 의미하는 정의로 한국 미술에서 비평적으로 나타나기 시작한 시점을 살펴보며, 언제부터 한국 미술의 ‘동시대’가 출발했는지 비평가들의 텍스트를 분석하고 이에 대해 비평한다. 동시대 미술이 모던 아트와 어떤 관계성 속에서 지속되고 또 단절되었는지, 동시대 미술의 태동을 시간 개념으로 접근하는 것이다. 둘째, 한국 비평가들의 시각과 글을 통해 우리는 동시대라는 용어가 시간성의 개념에 머물지 않고 점차 공간 개념으로 새로운 관계를 맺으며 확장하는 것을 살펴본다. 동시대 미술의 기원을 알려주는 전지구적, 아시아적 문맥과 전지구화, 비엔날레의 확산 등으로 인한 포스트콜로니얼 담론의 확장, 네트워크의 변화, 무엇보다도 한국에 들어선 새로운 제도적 장치와 다양한 전시 담론의 대두를 동시대적 변화의 조건으로 생각해볼 수 있다. 이러한 분석을 통해, 동시대는 시대착오적이며, 비선형적이고 비역사적인 혼종적 공간이자 관계적 네트워크를 형성한다는 점을 알 수 있다. 셋째, 현장과 뮤지엄, 큐레토리얼 실천에서 한국 컨템포러리 아트는 사전적 의미를 넘어 비평적 담론으로 자리를 잡아가는데, 동시대성이 글로벌 아트의 대두와 연관되어 있다는 점을 고려한다. 본 논문은 한국 컨템포러리 아트는 이제 세계 미술사를 재구조화할 수 있는 담론적 위치에서 새로운 의의를 찾아야 할 필요성이 있음을 제기한다. Commencing in the approximate year of 2015, the term “contemporary” embarked on a notable ascent in the realm of Korean art. Within academic, professional discourse, and critical examination, the expression “here and now” progressively emerged as a means to delineate art relevant to the contemporary era, in contrast to the established terminology of “modern art.” This shift in nomenclature signifies an emerging tendency towards a more intricate consideration of temporal dimensions in the realm of art. Consequently, this paper initiates an inquiry into the precise juncture in history when the term “contemporary” assumed a pivotal role in the context of Korean art, principally connoting a temporal concept. The analysis entails a comprehensive exploration of critical texts authored by esteemed experts in the field, aiming to pinpoint the moment at which the term “contemporary” garnered significance within the twenty-first-century Korean art landscape. The primary aim of this investigation is to expound upon the genesis of contemporary art within the Korean art milieu and scrutinize its evolving interplay with modern art, discerning instances of continuity, disjunction, and negation. Furthermore, by looking into the perspectives and writings of critics, we can assess whether the concept of “contemporary” transcends its temporal confines and gradually extends to forge novel associations with the concept of space. This expansion is influenced by the global and Asian context that underpins the genesis of contemporary art. Factors such as globalization, the proliferation of postcolonial discourse through the propagation of biennales, shifts in networks, and, most notably, the emergence of diverse exhibition discourses all contribute to this transformative terrain. Through this analysis, it becomes evident that the contemporary manifest as anachronistic, non-linear, and non-historical hybrid spaces, establishing intricate relational networks. Moreover, in the realms of museums and curatorial practice, Korean contemporary art surpasses the constraints of its dictionary definition and assumes a position of critical discourse. This recognition acknowledges that contemporaneity is intricately intertwined with the ascent of global art. Consequently, this paper underscores the necessity for Korean contemporary art to unearth fresh significance within a discursive framework capable of reshaping the landscape of world art history.