RISS 검색 - 국내학술지논문 상세보기

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

In the traditional scholarship of art history, the period of Renaissance has been perceived as the culmination of resuscitated Humanist ideal and mimetic visual techniques such as linear perspective and chiaroscuro. This recurring eulogy of Renaissance is, to a large extent, ascribed to the fact that the discipline of art history itself has been initiated by German-speaking scholars fascinated by southern, Mediterranean art of Classical Greece and Renaissance Italy. In other words, this stereotypical understanding of the Renaissance originates in the nationalistic awareness of the self and the other between the European nations north and south of the Alps.
In 1995, Claire Fargao rightly pointed out the element of Nationalism in the shaping of Renaissance scholarship and brought to light its resultant extension: viewing non-European others such as Africans, Amerindians, and Asians from the perspective of the Italian or European Renaissance. In order to overcome or “reframe” this traditional boundary of the Renaissance, she insisted to incorporate the post-Colombian American art and to redefine the period as the full launching of global contact and global art. In 1999, Gauvin A. Bailey further explored this issue of global exchange of visual culture by focusing on the mission activities of Jesuits in four realms of the world: Mughal India, China, Japan, and the Americas. Farago suggested the term of hybridization to refer to this new genus of Renaissance art; Bailey, after critically reviewing the terms such as acculturation, transculturation, and inculturation, eventually came up with the tentative term “partnership.”
As a specialist of Renaissance Christian art, and as Korean national with Buddhist and Confucianist legacies, I would like to deal afresh with this acculturation issue in the Jesuit art introduced and reproduced in East Asia, by discussing them not as cultural objects but as religious objects. Even though the issue of acculturation in visual form has been thoroughly studied, one of the most interesting case being James Cahill’s work in 1982, I suggest here to turn our attention to the conflation or interaction of the ideas such as Buddhism and Catholicism, rather than their visual outcomes.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 장진성, "董其昌(1555-1636)과 서양기하학" 한국미술사학회 256 (256): 137-160, 2007

2 Shin, Junhyoung Michael, "The Reception of Evangelicae Historiae Imagines in Late Ming China: Visualizing Holy Topography in Jesuit Spirituality and Pure Land Buddhism" XL (XL): 2009

3 Cahill, James, "The Compelling Image: Nature and Style in Seventeenth-Century Chinese Painting, Cambridge" Harvard University Press 1982

4 Farago, Claire, "Reframing the Renaissance: Visual Culture in Europe and Latin America 1450-1650" Yale University Press 1995

5 Belting, Hans, "Likeness and Presence: a History of the Image before the Era of Art" University of Chicago Press 1994

6 Beurdeley, Cecile, "Giuseppe Castiglione: a Jesuit Painter at the Court of the Chinese Emperors" Rutland 1971

7 Hsiang, Ta, "European Influences on Chinese Art in the Later Ming and Early Ch’ing Period. : in The Translation of Art: Essayson Chinese Painting and Poetry" 1976

8 Bailey, Gauvin, "Art on the Jesuit Missions in Asia and Latin America 1542-1773" University of Toronto Press 1999