지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Seth Siegelaub has drawn a lot of academic concern from art-historians recently, as the key person of conceptual art in the 1960s. When he opened 〈The Seth Siegelaub Gallery〉 in mid town, Manhattan, he was only 23. With many young conceptual artists, for instance, Robert Barry, Joseph Kosuth, and Lawrence Weiner, he organized a number of controversial shows. He suggests a catalogue of exhibition is more important and direct than real art pieces. Catalogues are faster and easier at distributing the idea of the artist, and he placed the reproduced images and the artists' statement of the art work as the major information instead of real art objects. With this procedure, the physical existence of art works and its material quality were replaced by language and letters. Due to his avant-garde attitude, he was considered the leading person responsible for the development of conceptual art in the United States.
He worked as a dealer, gallery owner, critic, and curator. However, against Siegelaub's own assertion, saying, "conceptual art is the most precious pure art movement working for the non-material, non-commercialized, anti-capitalist revolution," Benjamin Buchloh raised a question on the evaluation of conceptual art. The well-known art-historian believes that conceptual art only attempts to reverse the institutional convention of art making and circulation. Due to the fact that conceptual art is limited to the ideology of art, it was unstable and soon overtaken by traditional paintings and sculptures.
Siegelaub's idea blossomed in the 《January Show》 of 1969. In the exhibition, Kosuth, Barry, Hubler, and Weiner displayed two pieces each and six in verbal explanation. The catalogue is the major source and the art works have radical forms, such as letters in newspaper, photos, and even invisible sound waves.
Various critics remarked on the shows, yet it was controversial. But the most important thing is whether the difference of the existence of the works really change the art world or not. In spite of Siegelaub and his friends being bold in theory and eager to change the form of exhibition, conceptual art has not undone the business system of circulating art works and art being a commodity. Rather, it eagerly utilized the power of mass media and commercialized galleries and dealers. Siegelaub eventually contributed the strong bond of dealer, curator and exhibition organizer to the promotion of specific art and it visibly flourished in conceptual art.
He worked as a dealer, gallery owner, critic, and curator. However, against Siegelaub's own assertion, saying, "conceptual art is the most precious pure art movement working for the non-material, non-commercialized, anti-capitalist revolution," Benjamin Buchloh raised a question on the evaluation of conceptual art. The well-known art-historian believes that conceptual art only attempts to reverse the institutional convention of art making and circulation. Due to the fact that conceptual art is limited to the ideology of art, it was unstable and soon overtaken by traditional paintings and sculptures.
Siegelaub's idea blossomed in the 《January Show》 of 1969. In the exhibition, Kosuth, Barry, Hubler, and Weiner displayed two pieces each and six in verbal explanation. The catalogue is the major source and the art works have radical forms, such as letters in newspaper, photos, and even invisible sound waves.
Various critics remarked on the shows, yet it was controversial. But the most important thing is whether the difference of the existence of the works really change the art world or not. In spite of Siegelaub and his friends being bold in theory and eager to change the form of exhibition, conceptual art has not undone the business system of circulating art works and art being a commodity. Rather, it eagerly utilized the power of mass media and commercialized galleries and dealers. Siegelaub eventually contributed the strong bond of dealer, curator and exhibition organizer to the promotion of specific art and it visibly flourished in conceptual art.
목차
Ⅰ. 개념미술에의 대립적 평가
Ⅱ. 뉴욕화단과 미술의 상업성
Ⅲ. 《1월전》
Ⅳ. 《1월전》에 대한 평가와 동시대인들의 반응
Ⅴ. 상업적 본질과 자본주의의 문제
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
개념미술에서 의상의 역할
한국의류학회지
2011 .01
-
1950년대의 한국미술(1), 제1공화국 미술의 태동과 진통
미술사논단
2015 .06
-
‘움직이는 조각’과 공연예술
서양미술사학회논문집
1990 .12
-
현대미술과 시장 : 예술의 자율성과 자본의 힘 사이에서
현대미술학 논문집
2009 .12
-
무용과 과학기술을 융합한 그룹 E.A.T.에 관한 연구
무용예술학연구
2019 .01
-
모두를 위한 엘리트주의 : 공동체적 가치의 담론 장場으로서 미술비평
현대미술학 논문집
2009 .12
-
기야 이방운의 《정미년(丁未年) 사계산수도첩(四季山水圖帖)》 연구
미술사와 문화유산
2016 .02
-
지역 미술과 권력
미술이론과 현장
2005 .01
-
미술과 공예 : 그 경계와 위상
미술사학
2007 .08
-
Glocalization 시대의 현대미술
현대미술학 논문집
2006 .12
-
미술의 공공성을 둘러싼 경합의 위상학 : 일본에서의 미술가·비평가 탄생에 대한 재해석
한국근현대미술사학
2009 .12
-
노마디즘 공간적 특성을 적용한 미술대학 공간계획에 관한 연구
한국실내디자인학회 학술대회논문집
2019 .11
-
전통과 현대의 다리를 놓다 : 석남 이경성의 미술사 인식
한국근현대미술사학
2011 .12
-
현대미술 감상 및 표현수업 지도방안 연구 - 실험적 관점에 의한 7가지 방법론을 중심으로 -
조형교육
2009 .01
-
미술비평의 효용성에 대해 다시 묻는다 : 아서 단토의 ‘미술종말론’에 대한 비평적 독서
현대미술학 논문집
2006 .12
-
현대 미술비평의 난점과 그 대안
현대미술사연구
2001 .05
-
1960년대 이후 한국 현대미술에 관한 사회학적 논의 : 브르디외(Pierre Bourdieu)의 ‘자본’ 개념을 활용한 사회구조적 분석
미술사연구
2009 .12
-
美術後援硏究의 方法論에 대한 小考
서양미술사학회논문집
1994 .12
-
미술가와 역사-미술사 교육의 한계와 전망
미술이론과 현장
2004 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-650-017298256