고개지(顧愷之) 전신론(傳神論)과 소식(蘇軾) 전신론(傳神論)의 비교 고찰 = Comparison Consideration on Gu Kaizhi`s Chuanshen and Su Shi`s Chuanshen

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Ancient Chinese painting that was focused on instrumental role for edification from earlier ages was given independence as art works along with appearance of Neo-Taoism in Wei and Jin Dynasties. By adopting reasoning method that divides objects into shapes and spirits, discussion on reflecting shapeless spirits in art works was escalated, and This accumulation of reasons gave birth to the range of paintings of the premise of `Chuanshen 傳神`.
Chuanshen is to realize spirits innate in figures or objects on art works, which is represented by Gu Kaizhi(c.344∼406)`s and Su Shi(1037∼ 1101)`s opinions among interpretations on Chuanshen. Gu Kaizhi suggested Chuanshen for the first time and Su shi added concrete ideas from his experiences along with arousing Gu Kaizhi`s opinion on Chuanshen.
However, existing study of Chuanshen tends to have vague definition to a certain degree because it does not clearly categorize Gu Kaizhi`s and Su Shi`s opinions, but regards them as theories in the same category. Gu Kaizhi`s and Su Shi`s opinions have same fundamentals in that both of them pursued reflection of spiritual elements that the objects have along with depicting shapes, but in fact, perspectives on the process in realizing it largely contrasts into three points of view.
Firstly, the category of vehicles that are utilized in realization of Chuanshen. Gu Kaizhi utilized not only inner elements such as figures` pupils or beard(hair) but also outer elements such as backgrounds or situations as vehicles of Chuanshen. On the other hand, Su Shi tried to get realization of Chuanshen through the object itself, not outer elements, because he found the vehicles of Chuanshen from the point where the vehicles meet the essentials. Secondly, their opinions are contrasted in the range of allowing the transformation of the objects. Gu Kaizhi allowed transformation of vehicles that carries spirits of objects in order to glamorize objects or maximize dramatic effect. Su Shi, in contrast, suggested that vehicles should be expressed concretely and characteristically, although other elements except vehicles are allowed to be adjusted. Thirdly, the purpose to realize Chuanshen is contrastive. While Gu Kaizhi`s Chuanshen pursued dramatic beauty that is intended by the creator through securing `Marvelousness 妙`, Su Shi`s Chuanshen aimed to restore uniqueness through securing `Naturalness 天` and likeness that make objects look as itself.
By those perspectives, Gu Kaizhi`s and Su Shi`s Chuanshen need to be understood respectively in separated ways. Moreover, it can be much clearer to understand the definition of Chuanshen in Ancient Chinese Painting Esthetics and the method of its realization if it is possible to grasp both the discrimination between Gu Kaizhi and Su Shi and the specific causes of it.