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
The formalist art criticism of Clive Bell and Roger Fry has been recognised as 'traditional modernism'. They valued modern artists whose works were unified in solid forms and structural compositions, which is equivalent to what looks to be universal and classic. An representative artist who proved to be an ideal example for their aesthetics was Paul Cezanne, whose work was highlighted in the two crucial exhibitions for Post-Impressionism in London held by Fry. One cannot undermine the British formalism's achievement contributing to the formation of modernism whose essential incentive seeks for independence of Art-'Art for Art's sake'.
The process of negation was the way suggested for attaining to the modernist goal, which was thought to remove inessential elements in art practice such as descriptive expression of literary themes or psychological state, and representation itself. Therefore what remains to us is form confirming its priority in the visual. Such form is suggested being constructed by relationships between pictorial elements in a painting, separated from explaining contents and literary associations. As a result, the formalist criticism has often been understood as a kind of aestheticism regardless of empirical experiences in human life. Against this rather simplistic apprehension of the formalists-Fry in particular, this paper attempts to take a balance by shedding light on the other side of their aesthetics: its involvement with social context and its relation to everyday life without losing its proclaimed name of 'Art'.
This is approved in the Bloomsbury group and the Omega workshop, the two major artists' groups, which Fry made in order to realise his formalist criticism in the painting (the former) and everyday objects (the latter). What is concerned in this research is, in fact, the way in which he tries to relate his theoretical formulation and art making where he himself took part in. It is due to the fact that the main purpose of this paper aims to reconsider the formalist aesthetics centering on Fry's from a standpoint of the postmodern era. Under its argument lies a sort of skepticism over a binary opposition between modernism and postmodernism, of which clear-cut division seems implausible at least in the very formation of formalist critique in Britain and the art practices drawing on it.
This project has been actually motivated by the two exhibitions on the art of Bloomsbury group and Roger Fry's artistic vision, recently held in London, which gave us a chance to look back how British formalist criticism was related to the art of Bloomsbury, bridging theory and art production. One could not expect that the modernist works of Bloomsbury and Omega workshop were good enough to realise the formalist aesthetics of Fry and Bell. Obviously, there are holes and gaps remained in the texture made of the interrelating structure of their conceptual idea and the concrete practices based on it. Nonetheless, the initial formation of formalist criticism in Britain was not so 'Modern' of which sense is rigidly contrasted to Postmodern. Rather, one could say that Fry and the formalist discourse that he ardently championed was rather open, more flexible and more related to everyday life than we habitually assume it to be under the category of Modernism.
The process of negation was the way suggested for attaining to the modernist goal, which was thought to remove inessential elements in art practice such as descriptive expression of literary themes or psychological state, and representation itself. Therefore what remains to us is form confirming its priority in the visual. Such form is suggested being constructed by relationships between pictorial elements in a painting, separated from explaining contents and literary associations. As a result, the formalist criticism has often been understood as a kind of aestheticism regardless of empirical experiences in human life. Against this rather simplistic apprehension of the formalists-Fry in particular, this paper attempts to take a balance by shedding light on the other side of their aesthetics: its involvement with social context and its relation to everyday life without losing its proclaimed name of 'Art'.
This is approved in the Bloomsbury group and the Omega workshop, the two major artists' groups, which Fry made in order to realise his formalist criticism in the painting (the former) and everyday objects (the latter). What is concerned in this research is, in fact, the way in which he tries to relate his theoretical formulation and art making where he himself took part in. It is due to the fact that the main purpose of this paper aims to reconsider the formalist aesthetics centering on Fry's from a standpoint of the postmodern era. Under its argument lies a sort of skepticism over a binary opposition between modernism and postmodernism, of which clear-cut division seems implausible at least in the very formation of formalist critique in Britain and the art practices drawing on it.
This project has been actually motivated by the two exhibitions on the art of Bloomsbury group and Roger Fry's artistic vision, recently held in London, which gave us a chance to look back how British formalist criticism was related to the art of Bloomsbury, bridging theory and art production. One could not expect that the modernist works of Bloomsbury and Omega workshop were good enough to realise the formalist aesthetics of Fry and Bell. Obviously, there are holes and gaps remained in the texture made of the interrelating structure of their conceptual idea and the concrete practices based on it. Nonetheless, the initial formation of formalist criticism in Britain was not so 'Modern' of which sense is rigidly contrasted to Postmodern. Rather, one could say that Fry and the formalist discourse that he ardently championed was rather open, more flexible and more related to everyday life than we habitually assume it to be under the category of Modernism.
목차
서론: 블룸즈버리에 대한 재조명
Ⅰ. ‘블룸즈버리(Bloomsbury)’ 그룹
Ⅱ. 블룸즈버리의 예술
Ⅲ. 형식주의 비평: 벨과 프라이의 미학관
Ⅳ. 영국 화단의 맥락과 블룸즈버리: 블룸즈버리 그룹의 분열과 형식주의에 대한 비판
결론: ‘Modern Art에 내재한 Postmodernism인가?’
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
형식주의와 모더니즘
현대미술사연구
2004 .12
-
현대 미술비평의 난점과 그 대안
현대미술사연구
2001 .05
-
클레멘트 그린버그의 미술이론과 비평
서양미술사학회논문집
1996 .12
-
모두를 위한 엘리트주의 : 공동체적 가치의 담론 장場으로서 미술비평
현대미술학 논문집
2009 .12
-
비평의 재구성 : 한국 미술비평의 과제 설정을 위한 제안
한국예술연구
2010 .06
-
미술비평의 효용성에 대해 다시 묻는다 : 아서 단토의 ‘미술종말론’에 대한 비평적 독서
현대미술학 논문집
2006 .12
-
1950년대의 한국미술(1), 제1공화국 미술의 태동과 진통
미술사논단
2015 .06
-
근대 유럽의 공공전시와 미술비평의 등장 : 18세기 프랑스와 영국의 사례
미술사학
2015 .08
-
한국미술에 있어서 ‘모더니즘’의 의미와 특징
한국근현대미술사학
2011 .12
-
미술비평가 나혜석
미술사논단
2012 .12
-
유럽 모더니즘의 수용과 변질 : 클레멘트 그린버그의 미술론
서양미술사학회논문집
2003 .06
-
미학의 시대에서 비평의 시대로 : 아서 단토에 있어서 거대 내러티브의 종말과 그 이후의 미술
현대미술학 논문집
2006 .12
-
공동체 형성에 있어서 뉴미디어아트의 사회적 역할에 대한 고찰
미술이론과 현장
2012 .01
-
애그니스 마틴의 여성적 추상미술
현대미술사연구
2001 .12
-
현대미술과 시장 : 예술의 자율성과 자본의 힘 사이에서
현대미술학 논문집
2009 .12
-
영국의 도시 공간과 현대미술 : 제2차 세계대전 이후의 런던
서양미술사학회논문집
2004 .06
-
미술과 공예 : 그 경계와 위상
미술사학
2007 .08
-
1960년대 이후 한국 현대미술에 관한 사회학적 논의 : 브르디외(Pierre Bourdieu)의 ‘자본’ 개념을 활용한 사회구조적 분석
미술사연구
2009 .12
-
무용과 과학기술을 융합한 그룹 E.A.T.에 관한 연구
무용예술학연구
2019 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-650-017298438