潭陽瀟灑園과 蘇州滄浪亭의 조영사상과 경관구성요소에 관한 意味 비교연구 (A Semantic Comparative Study of Formative Idea and Landscape Elements Composition of Damyang ‘Soswaewon(潭陽瀟灑園)’ & Suzhou ‘Canglang Pavilion(蘇州滄浪亭)’)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국전통조경학회
· 수록지 정보 : 한국전통조경학회지 / 35권 / 1호 / 36 ~ 47페이지
· 저자명 : 위첨첨, 김재식, 김정문

초록

신흥유학 성리학을 바탕으로 조영된 조선시대 별서원림인 소쇄원과 중국 송대 성리학 생성기(生成期)에 조영된 창랑정을 비교고찰하여 원림문화의 조영사상과 구성요소의 의미론적 해석에 관한 결과를 요약하면 다음과 같다.
첫째, 소쇄원은 한국 별서원림 중에서도 성리학사상을 오롯이 구현하였으며, 중국 창랑정은 현재까지 잘 보존된 가장 연원이 깊은중국의 사가원림으로서, 조영 시기는 소쇄원보다 약 500년가량 앞서며 조영자인 소순흠 또한 송대의 사대부로서 창랑정 조영배경에는성리학이라는 뿌리 깊은 사상이 자리 잡고 있다.
둘째, 소쇄원과 창랑정 두 원림 모두 은일사상(隱逸思想)에 뿌리든 둔 자연친화(自然親和)성향이 두드러진다. 특히 소쇄원은 산림에입지한 형태로 은일(隱逸) 중에서도 ‘소은(小隱)’이며 창랑정은 도시에 입지한 ‘중은(中隱)’으로 해석할 수 있다.
셋째, 소쇄원과 창랑정의 명명(命名)에 상징의미가 배태된 원림요소들을 비교분석하면, 소쇄원은 자연합일(自然合一)된 원림으로서유불선(儒佛仙)의 다양한 사상들이 습합되어 발전된 중국 송대 성리학 사상이 원림조영에 깊숙이 내재되어 있으며, 현재 창랑정에서발견할 수 있는 다양한 상징요소들의 의미해석의 밑바탕으로 작용하고 있다.
넷째, 사상적인 변화는 반드시 원림의 형식적 양식이나 요소들에 체현(體現)됨으로 원림요소를 비교분석하였다. 이를 통해 소쇄원은최대한 자연을 활용함으로써 최소한의 인공을 가미하여 조영된 원림임을 알 수 있다. 즉 자연환경과 인문환경을 결합함으로써 공간의의미적인 특징을 표출하고자 하였다. 그 대표적인 예로 소쇄원의 대봉대는 조영자의 이상을 표현하는 장소이며, 창랑정은 높은 담장내에는 원내의 경치가 새롭게 창출되고 속세와의 단절감을 둔 채 재현된 자연을 구축함으로써, 창랑정은 가산 위에서 주변의 가경을관조하며 삶을 성찰하는 공간으로서의 장소성이 감지된다.
한국과 중국은 같은 문화적 뿌리를 가졌음에도 불구하고 원림의 양식이나 성격에서는 다양한 차이를 드러내고 있다. 이는 사회적, 문화적 배경이 각 민족의 특성과 결합하여 원림을 형성하였고, 상이한 결과를 나타나는 것으로 해석할 수 있다.

영어초록

In this research, sematic comparative study on formative idea and landscape elements composition was made between Soswaewon which was a remote villa garden in Joseon Dynasty and Canglang Pavilion which was built at a time when Neo-confucianism had been created in Song dynasty. From which the summary was resulted as below: Firstly, Soswaewon was fully devoted to Neo-confucianism among Korean remote villa gardens, Canglang-Pavilion was deeply affiliated with Neo-confucianism the deep-rooted thought. Adding a comment, as a richly historied Chinese private garden it was the best preserved even now and the farmost point from now and approximately 500 years advanced than Soswaewon, moreover Sosunheum the builder belonged to gentry society in Song dynasty.
Secondly, Both Soswaewon and Canglang-Pavilion were remarkable thank to nature friendly concept which was deeply rooted in the eremitic thought(隱逸思想). Most of all, it might be interpreted the location of Soswaewon lay down in a mountain, as to be swallow hidden(小隱) but that of Canglang-Pavilion lay down in a city, as to be middle hidden(中隱).
Thirdly, approaching with comparative study to gardens' factors implicated in symbolization when naming both Soswaewon and Canglang-Pavilion, neo-confucianism in Song dynasty in which diverse thoughts ranging Confucianism and Buddhism and Taoism had formed ensemble and developed was deeply built in Soswaewon, as to be in consistency to nature and to be a basis for comprehending diverse symbolization factors found in Canglang-Pavilion.
Fourthly, given that forms or factors of gardens was tangibly came up with thoughts' variation we surely underwent to comparative study. Through which we could know Soswaewon was made by maximizing use of nature but minimizing addition of artificial things. In other words, it was trial of expressing semantic feature of the site in a way blending natural circumstance and liberal one. One of the representatives, Daebongdae in Soswaewon was a site where the owner's idea came up with. Scenary was recreated and nature was represented in interspace of Canglang-Pavilion with the high wall around the border, for which it renounced the world. To the end, it was understood there was the location characteristic of Canglang-Pavilion which let us look down from mountain and take some time for introspection.
It might be said that the cultural root was in common between Korea and China, however it was found there were lots of differences in forms and features of gardens. We were able to interpret that social and cultural background were led to gardens' formation in which individual characteristic of two nations were blended, from which difference was resulted.

참고자료

· 없음