근대 일본의 바우하우스 디자인교육의 수용과 특징 (Looking at the Features about the Reception of Bauhaus Preliminary Education in Japan)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국근현대미술사학회(구 한국근대미술사학회)
· 수록지 정보 : 한국근현대미술사학(구 한국근대미술사학) / 25호 / 167 ~ 191페이지
· 저자명 : 서희정

초록

This study thinks of Japanese imperialistic perspective toward Asia while examining the reception of Bauhaus education in Japan. In 1920s, Japan allied with Germany politically since World war 1, and received actively from german modern system to build up Japan as modern nation. German design magazines were introduced in Japan, and a lot of Japanese students, who studied at Bauhaus in Germany returned Japan, tried to build up modern design education while receiving Bauhaus system which motto was ‘Unification both Art and Technique’. They reorganized Bauhaus system to match with Japanese society, and named it by ‘Kousei eduation’. ‘Kousei’ is translated by Mijutani Takehiko who studied at Bauhaus, which means 'Gestaltung' in german.
This study look at Japanese imperialistic perspective toward Asia while considering the introduction and the development of Japanese 'Kousei education'. To come true the goal, this study mainly analyzed two important historical books, Kousei Kyouiku Taikei(1934), Kousaku Gizyutu Taikei(1940).
Before starting ‘Kousei education’ by Kawakita Rensichiro, old Japanese design education suggested students to imitate the world and things. Therefore, Kawakita’s ‘Kousei education’ was the epoch-making education which tried to do Bauhaus education system as modern design education. Kawakita opened ‘New Architecture-Craft school(Shin Kenchiku kougei gakuin)’ at Tokyo in 1932 and organized its educational curriculum using Bauhaus preliminary course. It had run until 193t, and Kawakita’s ‘New Architecture-Craft school’ can be valued as the root of Japanese ‘Kousei education’. Kawakita’s conept of ‘Kousei education’ was not same with Bauhaus preliminary course, His concept of ‘Kousei education’ was divided by two area, one was ‘Abstract Kousei’ and the other was ‘Production Kousei’. ‘Abstract Kousei’ was the same one with Bauhaus preliminary course which trained the basic sense for the materials to deal with, however, ‘Production Kousei’ was the unique concept in Japanese Bauhaus education which was not in german Bauhaus education. ‘Producation Kousei’ had the practical goal, such as architecture, craft, theater, textile and so on, and even it dealt with natural condition and social condition. ‘Production Kousei’ had 3 steps: first step was Kousei=Labor, second was the study about nature, third was the study of society. Thus, it can say that Japanese ‘Kousei education’ was deeply relating to the society which that design would use in practice. Therefore, this study could find that the final target of Japanese ‘Kousei education’ was Fashion design and Chair design, compared with Architecture as the final target of German Bauhaus. It means that Japanese ‘Kousei education’ focused on starting the modern life style in Tokyo: people started working at the modern company while sitting at the chair instead of sitting on the floor like Tatami, and wearing the western style cloth during daytime at the company instead of wearing Kimono at night at home when they came back from the workplace. It shows clearly that Japanese ‘Kousei education’ was relating to the society in practice on the basis of Kawakita’s educational concept of ‘Production Kousei’.
Continually, around 1940 when Greater East Asia War, ‘Kousei education’ was upgrade toward ‘Kousaku education’ which dealt with technology together with preliminary course. ‘Kousaku education’ tried to upbring the people who can work with technology and science toward production for national defense in order to build up the developed asian area by Japan. Around Greater East Asia War, Japanese ‘Kousei education’ reflected Japanese imperialistic perspective toward Asia which was basis on the concept of Kawakita’s ‘Production Kousei’ to do in practice in relation with social condition. In result, this study can suggest the new academic viewpoint for the modern east asian design history in the historical context of Japanese imperialism that might be relating to another asian colonial cultural policy.

영어초록

This study thinks of Japanese imperialistic perspective toward Asia while examining the reception of Bauhaus education in Japan. In 1920s, Japan allied with Germany politically since World war 1, and received actively from german modern system to build up Japan as modern nation. German design magazines were introduced in Japan, and a lot of Japanese students, who studied at Bauhaus in Germany returned Japan, tried to build up modern design education while receiving Bauhaus system which motto was ‘Unification both Art and Technique’. They reorganized Bauhaus system to match with Japanese society, and named it by ‘Kousei eduation’. ‘Kousei’ is translated by Mijutani Takehiko who studied at Bauhaus, which means 'Gestaltung' in german.
This study look at Japanese imperialistic perspective toward Asia while considering the introduction and the development of Japanese 'Kousei education'. To come true the goal, this study mainly analyzed two important historical books, Kousei Kyouiku Taikei(1934), Kousaku Gizyutu Taikei(1940).
Before starting ‘Kousei education’ by Kawakita Rensichiro, old Japanese design education suggested students to imitate the world and things. Therefore, Kawakita’s ‘Kousei education’ was the epoch-making education which tried to do Bauhaus education system as modern design education. Kawakita opened ‘New Architecture-Craft school(Shin Kenchiku kougei gakuin)’ at Tokyo in 1932 and organized its educational curriculum using Bauhaus preliminary course. It had run until 193t, and Kawakita’s ‘New Architecture-Craft school’ can be valued as the root of Japanese ‘Kousei education’. Kawakita’s conept of ‘Kousei education’ was not same with Bauhaus preliminary course, His concept of ‘Kousei education’ was divided by two area, one was ‘Abstract Kousei’ and the other was ‘Production Kousei’. ‘Abstract Kousei’ was the same one with Bauhaus preliminary course which trained the basic sense for the materials to deal with, however, ‘Production Kousei’ was the unique concept in Japanese Bauhaus education which was not in german Bauhaus education. ‘Producation Kousei’ had the practical goal, such as architecture, craft, theater, textile and so on, and even it dealt with natural condition and social condition. ‘Production Kousei’ had 3 steps: first step was Kousei=Labor, second was the study about nature, third was the study of society. Thus, it can say that Japanese ‘Kousei education’ was deeply relating to the society which that design would use in practice. Therefore, this study could find that the final target of Japanese ‘Kousei education’ was Fashion design and Chair design, compared with Architecture as the final target of German Bauhaus. It means that Japanese ‘Kousei education’ focused on starting the modern life style in Tokyo: people started working at the modern company while sitting at the chair instead of sitting on the floor like Tatami, and wearing the western style cloth during daytime at the company instead of wearing Kimono at night at home when they came back from the workplace. It shows clearly that Japanese ‘Kousei education’ was relating to the society in practice on the basis of Kawakita’s educational concept of ‘Production Kousei’.
Continually, around 1940 when Greater East Asia War, ‘Kousei education’ was upgrade toward ‘Kousaku education’ which dealt with technology together with preliminary course. ‘Kousaku education’ tried to upbring the people who can work with technology and science toward production for national defense in order to build up the developed asian area by Japan. Around Greater East Asia War, Japanese ‘Kousei education’ reflected Japanese imperialistic perspective toward Asia which was basis on the concept of Kawakita’s ‘Production Kousei’ to do in practice in relation with social condition. In result, this study can suggest the new academic viewpoint for the modern east asian design history in the historical context of Japanese imperialism that might be relating to another asian colonial cultural policy.

참고자료

· 없음