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
Distinctions between art and craft have been treated as an important issue in the art world since the Renaissance. Indeed, the entire discipline of art history is based upon a qualitative analysis which would elevate particular classes of objects and make light of others. However, they appear a fiction when we examine art history before the Renaissance. Why have certain art objects been selected to be part of art history while others were not? Were they selected to represent an aesthetic significance or were they a mere matter of convenience? The purpose of this paper is to examine the historical process in which an art object has been placed in either a craft category or a fine art category and explore how the dividing line between art and craft has been bolstered by social, ideological, and institutional system.
Greek and Latin writers did not distinguish between fine arts and craft, using the word ‘art’ to refer to a skilled craft or science rather than to a creative activity. However, two complementary groups of arts were distinguished: the liberal versus the mechanical. The intellectual labor of the liberal arts was placed above the physical labor of the mechanical. The liberal arts encompassed intellectual activities and skills, such as grammar, rhetoric, astronomy, as well as music and poetry. The mechanical arts, on the other hand, included manual activities, ranging from weaving, wood carving, agriculture, pottery, and navigation to armament, in which subgroup were also found painting, sculpture, and architecture. During the medieval period, ongoing contempt for manual labor was mitigated by the moral value of work and self-sufficiency within the monastic way of life.
Italian Renaissance artists and humanists claimed tor the visual arts the same intellectual status as that of poetry and music, and leaving behind among the mechanical arts what would become known as craft. Renaissance theorists reinforced the intellectual and artistic claims of the visual arts by establishing academies devoted exclusively to painting, sculpture, and architecture, the three “arti del disegno.” With the help of these academies, the visual arts acquired an identity distinct from that of the mechanical arts, one that paved the way for the later notion of the fine arts.
Although Renaissance theorists furthered the conceptual claims of visual arts, they did not link these claims to a concept of beauty in art. A theory of fine arts emerged clearly only in the eighteenth century, when such thinkers as Burke, Baumgarten, and Kant developed new philosophical principles for judging artistic beauty. Kant himself reinforced the notion of the division of mental and manual labor by presenting it as a transcendental necessity. This transformation introduced a theoretical border between the fine arts and all other arts. Although this distinction may have helped to clarify the nature of those activities now considered the fine arts, it left behind an ill-assorted group of activities under the medieval term mechanical arts. This type of discourse is also found in R.G. Collingwood’s Principles of Art in which he argues, it is necessary to disentangle the notion of craft from that of art proper in order to take the first step towards a sound aesthetic. Thus it is quite possible to say that the history of craft has been shaped by its exclusion from art history. The exclusion of craft is socially created and constantly reaffirmed by the gatekeepers of classical art history and aesthetics.
The legacy of the hierarchical preoccupation with ‘lower’ and ‘higher’ forms of art has become so embedded in Western thought that it persists even today. Thus the deconstruction of the distinction between art and craft helps in dismantling the hegemonic framework for the triumph of modernism. In fact post-modernists and feminist art historians are deconstructing many of the most cherished assumptions of art history and aesthetics, especially the hierarchical system of arts, in order to achieve a more balanced view.
Greek and Latin writers did not distinguish between fine arts and craft, using the word ‘art’ to refer to a skilled craft or science rather than to a creative activity. However, two complementary groups of arts were distinguished: the liberal versus the mechanical. The intellectual labor of the liberal arts was placed above the physical labor of the mechanical. The liberal arts encompassed intellectual activities and skills, such as grammar, rhetoric, astronomy, as well as music and poetry. The mechanical arts, on the other hand, included manual activities, ranging from weaving, wood carving, agriculture, pottery, and navigation to armament, in which subgroup were also found painting, sculpture, and architecture. During the medieval period, ongoing contempt for manual labor was mitigated by the moral value of work and self-sufficiency within the monastic way of life.
Italian Renaissance artists and humanists claimed tor the visual arts the same intellectual status as that of poetry and music, and leaving behind among the mechanical arts what would become known as craft. Renaissance theorists reinforced the intellectual and artistic claims of the visual arts by establishing academies devoted exclusively to painting, sculpture, and architecture, the three “arti del disegno.” With the help of these academies, the visual arts acquired an identity distinct from that of the mechanical arts, one that paved the way for the later notion of the fine arts.
Although Renaissance theorists furthered the conceptual claims of visual arts, they did not link these claims to a concept of beauty in art. A theory of fine arts emerged clearly only in the eighteenth century, when such thinkers as Burke, Baumgarten, and Kant developed new philosophical principles for judging artistic beauty. Kant himself reinforced the notion of the division of mental and manual labor by presenting it as a transcendental necessity. This transformation introduced a theoretical border between the fine arts and all other arts. Although this distinction may have helped to clarify the nature of those activities now considered the fine arts, it left behind an ill-assorted group of activities under the medieval term mechanical arts. This type of discourse is also found in R.G. Collingwood’s Principles of Art in which he argues, it is necessary to disentangle the notion of craft from that of art proper in order to take the first step towards a sound aesthetic. Thus it is quite possible to say that the history of craft has been shaped by its exclusion from art history. The exclusion of craft is socially created and constantly reaffirmed by the gatekeepers of classical art history and aesthetics.
The legacy of the hierarchical preoccupation with ‘lower’ and ‘higher’ forms of art has become so embedded in Western thought that it persists even today. Thus the deconstruction of the distinction between art and craft helps in dismantling the hegemonic framework for the triumph of modernism. In fact post-modernists and feminist art historians are deconstructing many of the most cherished assumptions of art history and aesthetics, especially the hierarchical system of arts, in order to achieve a more balanced view.
목차
Ⅰ. 들어가는 말
Ⅱ. 정신과 육체: 고대에서 중세
Ⅲ. 자유학예와 기예: 르네상스에서 18세기
Ⅳ. 순수와 기능: 19-20세기
Ⅴ. 나가는 말
참고문헌
Abstract
「미술과 공예: 그 경제와 위상」에 대한 질의
김정락 선생님의 질의에 대한 답변
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
‘움직이는 조각’과 공연예술
서양미술사학회논문집
1990 .12
-
무용과 과학기술을 융합한 그룹 E.A.T.에 관한 연구
무용예술학연구
2019 .01
-
전통과 현대의 다리를 놓다 : 석남 이경성의 미술사 인식
한국근현대미술사학
2011 .12
-
기야 이방운의 《정미년(丁未年) 사계산수도첩(四季山水圖帖)》 연구
미술사와 문화유산
2016 .02
-
1950년대의 한국미술(1), 제1공화국 미술의 태동과 진통
미술사논단
2015 .06
-
미술가와 역사-미술사 교육의 한계와 전망
미술이론과 현장
2004 .01
-
스베트라나 앨퍼스에 대한 비평적 조망
현대미술사연구
2011 .12
-
지역 미술과 권력
미술이론과 현장
2005 .01
-
현대미술과 시장 : 예술의 자율성과 자본의 힘 사이에서
현대미술학 논문집
2009 .12
-
모두를 위한 엘리트주의 : 공동체적 가치의 담론 장場으로서 미술비평
현대미술학 논문집
2009 .12
-
현대미술 감상 및 표현수업 지도방안 연구 - 실험적 관점에 의한 7가지 방법론을 중심으로 -
조형교육
2009 .01
-
미술사 교육의 전통과 담론들 : 미술관, 미술사, 그리고 교육
미술사학
2004 .08
-
美術後援硏究의 方法論에 대한 小考
서양미술사학회논문집
1994 .12
-
1960년대 이후 한국 현대미술에 관한 사회학적 논의 : 브르디외(Pierre Bourdieu)의 ‘자본’ 개념을 활용한 사회구조적 분석
미술사연구
2009 .12
-
공예란 무엇인가?
한국디자인문화학회지
2005 .06
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-650-017048278