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.
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
American art criticism in the mid-twentieth century was dominated by formalist Modernism, which claimed Abstract Expressionism as the “triumph” of American painting. The apparent consensus within the Modernist discourse concealed a conflict in ideas about what modern art should be. The purpose of my study is to redress the supposed “triumph” by redeeming the achievement of Harold Rosenberg(1906-1978) in a contested discursive field of criticism. Negating the formalist emphasis on the art object as the central focus of progress in art history, Rosenberg defined art as “action.”
Employing the term “action,” Rosenberg intended to provide the new American art with philosophical meaning and to restore the revolutionary spirit of the avant-garde. His emphasis on the artist, the agent of creation, expands beyond a critique of the Modernist aesthetic. His negation of Modern tradition ties in with his critique of the Enlightenment, in which reason is the instrument to control or liberate the human condition.
Denouncing self-sufficient, objective, and unchanging principles of Modernism, he sought a legacy for the avant-garde by proclaiming sensations, feeling, and experience as the impetus of the creative act. His focus on the artist’s creative act challenged the absolute value of the aesthetic, which generated cultural hierarchies with art at the pinnacle. He discarded traditional aesthetic references as irrelevant to the artist’s creative act. Rather, he sought new possibilities by expanding the boundaries of art into culture. For Rosenberg, art as action meant a constant process of the artist’s transaction with an environment, and moreover, the unending process of self-creation of both the artist and the critic.
In the course of probing the structure of Rosenberg’s criticism, I argue that he strove to restore the revolutionary spirit of the avant-garde, which was deflected or distorted in the reign of formalist Modernism. Rosenberg refuted any kind of system, including history, reason, and ideology, which would endanger the artist’s creativity. Thus, for him, the artist’s act was a gesture of liberation from all values given by society.
By attempting to unmask the inability of monolithic Modernist criticism to deal with ever-changing present reality, Rosenberg redeemed artists’subjectivity in breaking down old barriers between artists and society, product and process, thought and action. It seems to me that his concept of action also indicates the character of his criticism, which was a constant transaction, modifying itself through the encounter with the artist. His criticism is a critique of the limits where normative foundations reach exhaustion and where problems can lead to other possibilities.
Employing the term “action,” Rosenberg intended to provide the new American art with philosophical meaning and to restore the revolutionary spirit of the avant-garde. His emphasis on the artist, the agent of creation, expands beyond a critique of the Modernist aesthetic. His negation of Modern tradition ties in with his critique of the Enlightenment, in which reason is the instrument to control or liberate the human condition.
Denouncing self-sufficient, objective, and unchanging principles of Modernism, he sought a legacy for the avant-garde by proclaiming sensations, feeling, and experience as the impetus of the creative act. His focus on the artist’s creative act challenged the absolute value of the aesthetic, which generated cultural hierarchies with art at the pinnacle. He discarded traditional aesthetic references as irrelevant to the artist’s creative act. Rather, he sought new possibilities by expanding the boundaries of art into culture. For Rosenberg, art as action meant a constant process of the artist’s transaction with an environment, and moreover, the unending process of self-creation of both the artist and the critic.
In the course of probing the structure of Rosenberg’s criticism, I argue that he strove to restore the revolutionary spirit of the avant-garde, which was deflected or distorted in the reign of formalist Modernism. Rosenberg refuted any kind of system, including history, reason, and ideology, which would endanger the artist’s creativity. Thus, for him, the artist’s act was a gesture of liberation from all values given by society.
By attempting to unmask the inability of monolithic Modernist criticism to deal with ever-changing present reality, Rosenberg redeemed artists’subjectivity in breaking down old barriers between artists and society, product and process, thought and action. It seems to me that his concept of action also indicates the character of his criticism, which was a constant transaction, modifying itself through the encounter with the artist. His criticism is a critique of the limits where normative foundations reach exhaustion and where problems can lead to other possibilities.
목차
Ⅰ. 서문
Ⅱ. 로젠버그 비평의 형성 과정과 역사적, 인식론적인 배경
Ⅲ. 로젠버그가 제시하는“행동”과 아방가르드의 개념에 관한 고찰
Ⅳ. 맺음말
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
A Study of an Artist's Self-Development
예술과 미디어
2008 .01
-
아방가르드 개념에 관한 재고 : 해롤드 로젠버그의 비평을 중심으로
인물미술사학
2009 .12
-
한국미술의 아방가르드 시론
한국근현대미술사학
2010 .12
-
러시아 전위미술의 여전사들
현대미술사연구
2009 .06
-
미국 네오아방가르드 미술의 몸의 정치학
현대미술사연구
2010 .06
-
21세기 서양미학의 동향과 전망을 위한 시론 2-아방가르드 이론의 재검토 : 부클로 및 포스터의 뷔르거 비판과 뷔르거의 응답을 중심으로
현대미술사연구
2015 .06
-
1960년대에서 1970년대로, 전환의 미술 - 그룹 ‘AG’를 중심으로
미술사논단
2015 .06
-
아방가르드, 네오-아방가르드, 새로움의 정치학 : 아방가르드 미술론의 역사와 전망
현대미술사연구
2013 .12
-
북 아트(Book Arts)의 발전 및 형성에 관한 연구 : 아방가르드(Avant-garde)를 중심으로
한국디자인학회 국제학술대회 논문집
2005 .05
-
예술가 신체의 물질/비물질성
서양미술사학회논문집
2011 .02
-
유럽 모더니즘의 수용과 변질 : 클레멘트 그린버그의 미술론
서양미술사학회논문집
2003 .06
-
1990년대 중국 아방가르드 미술의 전개와 특징 : ‘후89 미술’을 중심으로
현대미술사연구
2013 .12
-
역사적 아방가르드의 미학과 정치학의 갈등 : 구축주의와 초현실주의를 중심으로
현대미술사연구
2013 .12
-
20C초 섬유 산업에 기여한 예술가들에 대한 연구 -1900년에서 1925년을 중심으로-
한국의류학회지
1997 .01
-
‘개인’의 위치 : 2010년대 미술가/개인의 존재 방식과 사회적 발언
한국근현대미술사학
2018 .12
-
북한의 예술가 명예칭호 제도에 관한 연구 -음악·무용분야를 중심으로
대한무용학회논문집
2019 .01
-
6·25전쟁기 미술인 조직에 대한 연구
한국근현대미술사학
2010 .12
-
전위의식과 한국의 미술운동 : 1920~30년대를 중심으로
한국근현대미술사학
2007 .12
-
19세기 상해의 화가들
인물미술사학
2007 .12
-
Modernism and Politics of Avant-garde : Has it Changed the Image of Woman?
한국디자인학회 국제초대전도록
2018 .06
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-609-016512198