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
If one takes the available text for the survey course of art history, the lecture is evidently one or two generation behind the contemporary studies. Because it takes about 30 years for the new issue to be placed as an established theory. We, who accept to import it, encounter more difficult problems. if we write a survey text book, how should the contents be different from that written in western world?
The world wide best sellers, Story of Art (1955) by E.H.Gombrich and History of Art (1962) by H.W Janson give a good examples of survey text books. But their formalism are showing a limit in our age. Gombrich praised greek beauty of balance and harmony, but he disregards a compromised Roman style. H.W Janson set a standard for the Renaissance Painting as the solid style from Giotto to Masaccio and didn't admit a variety of others. Now we need a new survey text book with new point of view in which the works of a period should be estimated as phenomena of visual culture rather than superiority and inferiority of beauty.
The press world of English language is working hard to publish a new survey book to substitute the traditional text. It is interesting to see two different kinds of survey books: Art History (1995) by Marilyn Stokstad and The Oxford History of Western Art (2000) edited by Martin Kemp. Stokstad used the same timetable as Janson used. She reflected abundant new studies of the second half of 20th century and tried to narrate in very objective manner.
On the other hand, The Oxford History of Western Art strongly reflects a tendency of taking a serious view of a sociological function of Art history. In the contents they used "Church and State: The Establishing of European Visual Culture 410-1527" instead of the traditional manner of Romanesque, Gothic and Renaissance. They try to show an actual situation where a work was put and to represent a visual culture situation with not only the painting and sculpture but also with a scene of interior decoration and furnitures. It treats not only works of Spain but also the compromised and conflicting phenomena between the Spanish and local Art in South America Colony.
Now a legitimate, complete theory of Art history does not exist any more and a period of variety has come. The reader should choose, depending on his needs. I would like to design an alternative by suggesting a new mapping of Western Art History.
The history of art by Gombrich and Janson is based upon a progressive point of view on history and they make us look at the variety of region and time with one direction to contemporary western world. In general, the western art history begins from Greece, and is continued to Rome, France in Middle Ages, Italy in Renaissance, Italy, France, England in 17th-18th Centuries, almost France in 19th Century and America after World War Ⅱ, The line represents the Western Art History moving without any division of Latin, France, German and Anglo Saxon. Even America are looking for their root in Greek and Renaissance. So-called orthodox art history forces us to believe that the various kinds of art can be linked in one meaningful chain.
the problem of Middle East is more serious. The Middle East before Greek is treated as Mesopotamian Culture that nourished Greek and East Roman Empire as the end of Rome. And to explain Islam they indicate it as East. Even though Mesopotamia, Byzantium and Islam Art are all Art of contemporary Middle East, they are sometimes regarded as or hold its ground against Western art. It would be more resonable to make a proper noun and treat it independently rather than treat it under a name of Near East or Middle East, World.
The orthodox art history with theoretical consistency could not receive a contemporary interests. But a new survey asks us a narration with authors' points of view rather than one complete theory. If we, who are the users of Western Art History textbooks, attempt a new mapping of world art, we will become producers. And the alternative western art history written by us will contribute to a variety of western Art history.
The world wide best sellers, Story of Art (1955) by E.H.Gombrich and History of Art (1962) by H.W Janson give a good examples of survey text books. But their formalism are showing a limit in our age. Gombrich praised greek beauty of balance and harmony, but he disregards a compromised Roman style. H.W Janson set a standard for the Renaissance Painting as the solid style from Giotto to Masaccio and didn't admit a variety of others. Now we need a new survey text book with new point of view in which the works of a period should be estimated as phenomena of visual culture rather than superiority and inferiority of beauty.
The press world of English language is working hard to publish a new survey book to substitute the traditional text. It is interesting to see two different kinds of survey books: Art History (1995) by Marilyn Stokstad and The Oxford History of Western Art (2000) edited by Martin Kemp. Stokstad used the same timetable as Janson used. She reflected abundant new studies of the second half of 20th century and tried to narrate in very objective manner.
On the other hand, The Oxford History of Western Art strongly reflects a tendency of taking a serious view of a sociological function of Art history. In the contents they used "Church and State: The Establishing of European Visual Culture 410-1527" instead of the traditional manner of Romanesque, Gothic and Renaissance. They try to show an actual situation where a work was put and to represent a visual culture situation with not only the painting and sculpture but also with a scene of interior decoration and furnitures. It treats not only works of Spain but also the compromised and conflicting phenomena between the Spanish and local Art in South America Colony.
Now a legitimate, complete theory of Art history does not exist any more and a period of variety has come. The reader should choose, depending on his needs. I would like to design an alternative by suggesting a new mapping of Western Art History.
The history of art by Gombrich and Janson is based upon a progressive point of view on history and they make us look at the variety of region and time with one direction to contemporary western world. In general, the western art history begins from Greece, and is continued to Rome, France in Middle Ages, Italy in Renaissance, Italy, France, England in 17th-18th Centuries, almost France in 19th Century and America after World War Ⅱ, The line represents the Western Art History moving without any division of Latin, France, German and Anglo Saxon. Even America are looking for their root in Greek and Renaissance. So-called orthodox art history forces us to believe that the various kinds of art can be linked in one meaningful chain.
the problem of Middle East is more serious. The Middle East before Greek is treated as Mesopotamian Culture that nourished Greek and East Roman Empire as the end of Rome. And to explain Islam they indicate it as East. Even though Mesopotamia, Byzantium and Islam Art are all Art of contemporary Middle East, they are sometimes regarded as or hold its ground against Western art. It would be more resonable to make a proper noun and treat it independently rather than treat it under a name of Near East or Middle East, World.
The orthodox art history with theoretical consistency could not receive a contemporary interests. But a new survey asks us a narration with authors' points of view rather than one complete theory. If we, who are the users of Western Art History textbooks, attempt a new mapping of world art, we will become producers. And the alternative western art history written by us will contribute to a variety of western Art history.
목차
Ⅰ. 문제제기
Ⅱ. 곰브리치와 잰슨의 서양미술사와 한계
Ⅲ. 다양한 대안들
Ⅳ. 새로운 지도 그리기
Ⅴ. 나가는 글
참고문헌
Abstract
「우리의 서양미술사 개론서 어떻게 가능한가」에 대한 질의
송혜영 선생님의 질의에 대한 답변
부록 설문지와 답변
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
포스트콜로니얼리즘!? : 지금 이곳에서 서양미술사 하기와 관련하여
서양미술사학회논문집
1999 .06
-
현대미술사 교재의 다양화를 위한 대안적 모색
미술사학
2005 .08
-
미술가와 역사-미술사 교육의 한계와 전망
미술이론과 현장
2004 .01
-
스베트라나 앨퍼스에 대한 비평적 조망
현대미술사연구
2011 .12
-
한국현대미술사와 한국의 미술사학 교육
미술사학
2005 .08
-
전통과 현대의 다리를 놓다 : 석남 이경성의 미술사 인식
한국근현대미술사학
2011 .12
-
미술과 공예 : 그 경계와 위상
미술사학
2007 .08
-
'한국회화사' 재구축의 과제 : 근대적 학문의 틀을 넘어서
미술사학연구(구 고고미술)
2004 .03
-
미술사의 추억
서양미술사학회논문집
2004 .12
-
한국 현대미술사에서 페미니즘 연구사
미술사논단
2020 .06
-
미술사 교육의 전통과 담론들 : 미술관, 미술사, 그리고 교육
미술사학
2004 .08
-
[특집 03] 중국 ‘정치 팝 아트(政治波普藝術)’의 형성과 전개
한국근현대미술사학
2012 .06
-
한국의 지방 미술대학에서 실기교육에 대한 미술사 교육의 입지와 역할
미술사학
2004 .08
-
일본미술사의 반성적 지평들 : 전쟁의 기억 이후, 미술사비평 또는 메타미술사의 가능성
미술사논단
2012 .12
-
한국미술사연구의 과제와 방법론
미술사학연구(구 고고미술)
2004 .03
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-650-017320713