메인메뉴 바로가기본문으로 바로가기
네이버 공유 카카오 공유 트위터 공유 페이스북 공유

Tradition, Modernity, and Identity:<br> Modern and Contemporary Art in Korea

Professor Kim Young-na's "Tradition, Modernity, and Identity: Modern and Contemporary Art in Korea," due for publication, is the first fruit of a series of books in English to be published by the Korea Foundation, based on plans developed in 2001 to make Korean culture better known to the world. In this sense, I find the publication of this book highly encouraging, and I appreciate the efforts of Professor Kim and the Foundation.

When I visit the bookstores of major museums or universities abroad, I always feel that there is a considerably larger number of books in English on the arts of Japan and China, or even Southeast Asia, but far fewer books on Korean art. When the absolute number of cultural properties existing today is considered, Korea may come after China and Japan. However, cultural achievement cannot be measured by the quantity of cultural artifacts. Considering the fact that knowledge about Korean culture is indispensable in understanding the development of Northeast Asian art, more books about Korean art need to be published as soon as possible in the languages of today's world citizens.

Recently, some people have come to refer to English, other than British English, as "Globalish." They have even formed a kind of community and welcome English users, other than Britishers, to join. English has definitely emerged as the common language of the people of the world. Therefore, the Korea Foundation's plans to publish a series of books in English on Korean culture and art, although somewhat belated, is still timely and appropriate.

In the book, Professor Kim describes modern and contemporary Korean art based on the following chapters/sections:


1. Introduction
2. Colonial Modernity Contested
3. The Spread of International Modernism
4. Identity and Tradition Reconsidered
5. Contemporary Korean Art Now
6. The Other Half: Art in North Korea
Epilogue


As outlined above, the book covers Korean art from the 19th century to the present in a considerably broader and more systematic manner as compared to the handful of other books on modern and contemporary Korean art published thus far. Especially, the book includes Korean artists working in the United States, Europe and other countries, thereby providing an opportunity to understand how Korean diaspora has been reflected in art. The inclusion of Minjung Misul (people's art), which is now recognized as one of the contemporary art genres, is also timely and proper. The book also examines North Korean art, although briefly, and offers the readers an opportunity to compare North and South Korean art, which has shown striking differences during the past half century.

Authors of other books usually categorize modern and contemporary artists depending on the kinds of materials or techniques they used - traditional Korean-style paper, brush, and ink, or Western-style oil painting, watercolor, and prints. Professor Kim, however, does not apply such a dichotomous standard but instead examines how the artists expressed themselves and regards their works as s of art of various forms in the overall flow of art history. I think such an approach is worthy of note.

Another strength of the book is that the author examines modern and contemporary art from a context of the art history of East Asian and the world at that time, while attempting to have individual painters understood within such context. Such an approach would not have been possible without Professor Kim Young-na's extensive knowledge about the modern and contemporary history of the West. Moreover, since the book is targeted for English-speaking readers, such an approach should be quite effective.

There are a few critical points that I would like to offer. First, in my opinion, the use of "Now," in the title of Chapter 5, "Contemporary Korean Art Now," does not seem necessary. If the author sought to emphasize the present time, an alternative title, “Today's Contemporary Art,” might have been better. In noting that there is much controversy over the criteria of modern and contemporary periods among the academic art history circles at present, the author indirectly indicates in the "Introduction" that she adopts the concept of "modernity" used in Western history. That is, she mentions the two major events: the Industrial Revolution and revolution of the political sector, especially in regard to the spread of democracy. I think it would have been better if the author reminded the readers that such events had emerged in the late 18th century in the West, as compared to the late 19th century or the early 20th century in Korea, and provided at least a little more explanation about cultural background. There is also an error found in an oversimplification of summarizing Korea's history and cultural history in the brief "Introduction," in which the author says that Korean art centered on Chinese culture before the Japanese colonial rule. ("From ancient times, Korean art centered on Chinese culture, then during the colonial years Japan's influence became foremost, and then after the Korean War, the influence of the West expanded." pp. 3-4) In this case, she seems to overlook true-view landscape painting, in a departure from the Chinese style, or the emergence of genre paintings in the late Joseon period.

It seems somewhat unfortunate that the author fails to offer a simple explanation about the Buddhist term “art informel,” which non-contemporary art majors would likely find unfamiliar, and thus not understand her discussion of this subject. It would also be helpful for the author to explain more about how such formless art is different from non-figurative or abstract art.

I imagine that these minor points can be addressed in the future. As such, I am pleased to see the publication of Tradition, Modernity, and Identity: Modern and Contemporary Art in Korea, which marks the start of the Korea Foundation's series on Korean art history.

SEARCH

통합검색

통합검색버튼
통합검색닫기

전체메뉴

전체메뉴 닫기