국민의 정부 시기 미술진흥정책의 성과와 한계

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국미술이론학회
· 수록지 정보 : 미술이론과 현장 / 1권
· 저자명 : 양현미

목차

1. 서론
2. 미술진흥정책 관련 행정조직 및 예산
1) 행정조직
2) 예산 및 기금
3. 미술진흥을 위한 정책사업의 유형별 고찰
1) 창작스튜디오 조성
2) 미술관 확충 및 운영 활성화
3) 대안공간 및 비영리 갤러리 지원
4) 건축물 미술장식 제도, 조각공원 조성사업 등을 통한 문화 환경 개선
5) 기업의 미술지원
6) 미술품 유통구조 개선 및 해외 미술시장 개척
7) 국제미술교류 지원
4. <순수예술진흥종합계획>(2002)의 미술 관련 계획
5. 결론: 국민의 정부 미술진흥정책에 대한 평가
참고문헌
요약(영문)

영어초록

The aim of this thesis is to evaluate visual art policy during Kookmin government period(1998-2002). In the beginning, many artists had expected president Kim Dae Jung to enlarge arts support But the evaluation of them was very negative vecause the government was only interested in the development of cultural industry. First, I analysed the government expenditure in the visual arts. Department of Culture and Tourism took the responsiblity of visual arts policy. The budget of art and culture increased to 1% of total government expenditure in this period. But the main factor was the increasement of cultural industry and tourism expenditure. The budget of visual arts in 2002 was only 6,600million won. Second, I analysed visual arts support programs. (1) The government introduced studio programs for the first time. For 5 years, 2 mational studios and 23 public studios were established. (2) The number of art museum was increased to 62. (3) It introduced alternative space supported 200million won annually. (4) percent for art scheme reduced from 1% to 0.7% of total construction cost, but still 27 public sculpture gardens were built. (5) Business support for visual arts reduced because of IMF. (6) Also arts marker froze and many commercial galleries were closed. (7) In order to revitalize region through arts and to promote international exchange of culture, Gwangju Biennale was created. Third, I analysed Arts Plan 2002. It had a radical Limitaion because it was established in the last year of Kookmin government period. Also it showed special favors to some arts organizations. In general, I think that positive outcomes are the introductions of the studio program and the alternative space support program. Especially alternative space support program enforced the diversity of visual arts, and encouraged creative young artists. But policy of art market failed because of IMF and visual artists had to go through rough times.

참고자료

· 없음