국내 서양미술사, 서양미술이론 연구 장에 관한 연구

서지정보

ㆍ발행기관 : 한국미술이론학회 ㆍ수록지정보 : 미술이론과 현장 / 2권
ㆍ저자명 : 심상용

목차

서론: 서울에서의 서양미술사
1. 에고-히스토리(ego-history)
2. 서양미술사로부터의 두 가지 질문
미술의 역사인가, 미술사의 실현인가?
미술사가, 미술이론가는 누구인가?
3. 국내의 서양미술사.미술이론에 관한 연구
국내 서양미술사 및 서양미술연구에 잠재하는 오리엔탈리즘
거리의 문제, 증언의 허술함과 텍스트적 소통의 딜레마
범주의 정치학, 혹 범주의 체계: "서양미술사는 서양미술만을 다룬다?"
4. 비평적이고 다양한 열린 해석
관습화된 순응주의적 해석?
서양미술사, 미술이론의 '한국미술' 평가
결론: "머리를 다시 몸통에 붙여야 한다"
참고문헌
Abstract
국문요약

영어 초록

Studies on western art in Korea has been caught in a dilemma that they could deal with only those things which had been arranged according to their ‘historical generalization’ in their contexts because of the bounds of time and space. It is not trivial that such conditions affect art studies in Korea. Access to the original texts and to their contexts of production is so restricted that the studies on them are prone to be superficial. And it is not independent on the politics of Korean art scene. Such factors are on the background of Korean art’s excessive ‘assimilation or accordance’ with western art. The domestic studies on western art history and art theory have failed to notice the differences in context and Korean art has simply mediated or reproduced the restricted information by those studies. Also the studies on western art in Korea have been made use of as a justifying method of one’s own academic domains. In such situations we should lead the studies on western art history and western art theory to a more reflective direction and confirm that the studies should not have any privileges of the realities. And we should try to reform a scholarship which participates in our life and existence. The field of domestic studies on western art history and western art theory should free itself from the invention of objectivity or the neutrality of mechanical reading and turn its eyes to the realities of life where events happens. Constantly suggesting which way Korean art and world art should go has to be the field’s new coordinates.

참고 자료

없음