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
This paper addresses several critical concepts in regard to such Olafur Eliasson’s installations of works of art as 360 °Room for All Colors, Your Black Horizon of 2005, Seeing Yourself Seeing of 2001, The Mediated Motion of 2001, Double Sunset of 1999, Moss Wall of 1994, and Green River of 1998-2001; the interactive aspects of immersion, conceptually and effectively, are embodied in a number of indoor and outdoor pieces.
I should first like to turn my attention to the viewer’s perception of“immersion” as well as the“sublime”in Eliasson’s work, which is theatrical and artificial insofar as his use of materials as well as display. The Lego-park-like artificial nature or so-called pseudo-nature amplifies the intervention of the viewer by“putting the viewer first”to a greater extent than any other works of contemporary artists. By looking at the psychological and physical operation of“immersion, sublime, theatricality, and artificiality.”I intend to differentiate Eliasson’s rhetoric of visual operation and the involvement of viewers, bearing in mind James Turrell and Robert Erwin on one hand, and Gordon Matta-Clark and Marcel Broodthaers on the other. The former group used light and sensory objects to increase the subjectivity of viewers, whereas the latter criticized institutionalized space. Although Eliasson’s critical terms stem from these aforementioned artists, he has attempted to move beyond the two aspects in order to ascribe to the following stage of involvement and detachment of his works with viewers.
Once you are familiar with the very interactivity of Eliasson’s work, it is possible to experience his work phenomenologically, and realize the entire setting is actually artificial and mechanical. Your perception, a propos your senses, has been blocked and negotiated at the sight of the automatic technology of his installation: mechanically produced fog, machine-oriented movements of waterfalls, or lights, etc. My analysis brings to mind Bertolt Brecht’s“Verfremdung,”which distanced the immersion and Einfuhlung (empathy), favored by Aristotle in his discussion of drama. By oscillating the theatrical absorption or immersion with the Brechtian“Verfremdung,”distancing or alienation, Eliasson’s works place the viewer in a completely different situation as a subliminal figure. His art also fluctuates between reality, and the modes of representation and simulacra. Eliasson’s Double Sunset project, which installed his artificial sunlight in juxtaposition with real sunlight in Utrecht, in the Netherlands, offers a striking example of the real and the simulacra, confusing the real with the facsimile.
Additionally, following Eliasson’s claim, I also explore his works as a production of“contexts”or“situations.”In this light, his works of art blur the traditional dichotomy of subject-object, inside-outside, user-used, and so on. Rather, they generate new aspects of real and hyper-real existence as well.
Finally, my paper discusses the act of sharing in his Utopian projects, which are exhibited at the Venice Biennale. This spirit is conceptually Utopian as the communal sharing itself is never possible in his pavilion projects. However, like other Utopian communal projects, Eliasson’s work recalls Jean-Luc Nancy’s Etre singulier pluriel /Being Singular Plural, published in 1996. The community in his project remains singular and plural at the same time. Despite the limited success of his attempts for this communal sharing, his projects intersect at a juncture of complex idioms in architecture, fine art and design.
I should first like to turn my attention to the viewer’s perception of“immersion” as well as the“sublime”in Eliasson’s work, which is theatrical and artificial insofar as his use of materials as well as display. The Lego-park-like artificial nature or so-called pseudo-nature amplifies the intervention of the viewer by“putting the viewer first”to a greater extent than any other works of contemporary artists. By looking at the psychological and physical operation of“immersion, sublime, theatricality, and artificiality.”I intend to differentiate Eliasson’s rhetoric of visual operation and the involvement of viewers, bearing in mind James Turrell and Robert Erwin on one hand, and Gordon Matta-Clark and Marcel Broodthaers on the other. The former group used light and sensory objects to increase the subjectivity of viewers, whereas the latter criticized institutionalized space. Although Eliasson’s critical terms stem from these aforementioned artists, he has attempted to move beyond the two aspects in order to ascribe to the following stage of involvement and detachment of his works with viewers.
Once you are familiar with the very interactivity of Eliasson’s work, it is possible to experience his work phenomenologically, and realize the entire setting is actually artificial and mechanical. Your perception, a propos your senses, has been blocked and negotiated at the sight of the automatic technology of his installation: mechanically produced fog, machine-oriented movements of waterfalls, or lights, etc. My analysis brings to mind Bertolt Brecht’s“Verfremdung,”which distanced the immersion and Einfuhlung (empathy), favored by Aristotle in his discussion of drama. By oscillating the theatrical absorption or immersion with the Brechtian“Verfremdung,”distancing or alienation, Eliasson’s works place the viewer in a completely different situation as a subliminal figure. His art also fluctuates between reality, and the modes of representation and simulacra. Eliasson’s Double Sunset project, which installed his artificial sunlight in juxtaposition with real sunlight in Utrecht, in the Netherlands, offers a striking example of the real and the simulacra, confusing the real with the facsimile.
Additionally, following Eliasson’s claim, I also explore his works as a production of“contexts”or“situations.”In this light, his works of art blur the traditional dichotomy of subject-object, inside-outside, user-used, and so on. Rather, they generate new aspects of real and hyper-real existence as well.
Finally, my paper discusses the act of sharing in his Utopian projects, which are exhibited at the Venice Biennale. This spirit is conceptually Utopian as the communal sharing itself is never possible in his pavilion projects. However, like other Utopian communal projects, Eliasson’s work recalls Jean-Luc Nancy’s Etre singulier pluriel /Being Singular Plural, published in 1996. The community in his project remains singular and plural at the same time. Despite the limited success of his attempts for this communal sharing, his projects intersect at a juncture of complex idioms in architecture, fine art and design.
목차
Ⅰ. 들어가는 글
Ⅱ. 스펙터클로서의 작품: 숭고와 인위적 자연 세계
Ⅲ. 상황(Context/situation)을 설정하는 연극성과 거리두기
Ⅳ. 시간성의 지속과 유토피아적 커뮤니티
Ⅴ. 나가는 글
참고문헌
〈Abstract〉
참고문헌 (38)
참고문헌 신청
1. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 이지은 / 2009 / 올라푸 엘리아슨(Olafur Eliasson)의 작품을 통해 보는 미술의 집단적 체험과 공동체적 소통의 가능성 / 서양미술사학회 논문집 31 (31) : 121 ~ 141
3. [학술지(정기간행물)] - Allen, Jane Ingram / 2001 / Putting the Viewer First: Olafur Eliasson / Sculpture 20 (8) : 28 ~ 33
4. [단행본] - Bal, Mieke / / Light Politics in Madeleine Grynsztejn et al / Take Your Time: Olafur Eliasson, San
5. [단행본] - / 2007 / Francisco: San Francisco Museum of Modern Art; New York / Thames & Hudson
6. [학술지(정기간행물)] - Birnbaum / 2006 / Air Portikus / Domus 893 : 76 ~ 81
3. [학술지(정기간행물)] - Allen, Jane Ingram / 2001 / Putting the Viewer First: Olafur Eliasson / Sculpture 20 (8) : 28 ~ 33
4. [단행본] - Bal, Mieke / / Light Politics in Madeleine Grynsztejn et al / Take Your Time: Olafur Eliasson, San
5. [단행본] - / 2007 / Francisco: San Francisco Museum of Modern Art; New York / Thames & Hudson
6. [학술지(정기간행물)] - Birnbaum / 2006 / Air Portikus / Domus 893 : 76 ~ 81
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
올라퍼 엘리아슨의 설치 작품에 나타난 공간 경험 및 디자인 방법 : 인간, 환경 사의의 관계성을 중심으로
한국실내디자인학회 논문집
2014 .10
-
올라푸 엘리아슨(Olafur Eliasson)의 작품을 통해 보는 미술의 집단적 체험과 공동체적 소통의 가능성
서양미술사학회논문집
2009 .08
-
올라퍼 엘리아슨의 유사자연 표현특성을 반영한 공간의 상호작용성에 관한 연구
한국공간디자인학회 논문집
2013 .01
-
뵈메의 감성학을 통한 올라퍼 엘리아슨 공간의 지각적 분위기 체험 연구
한국실내디자인학회 논문집
2018 .06
-
올라퍼 엘리아슨의 작품에 나타난 블러 색채 특성 연구
한국실내디자인학회 논문집
2012 .06
-
공간 설치예술에서 컨셉 구현에 관한 연구 : 울라퍼 엘리아슨, 서도호, 도쿠진 요시오카를 중심으로
한국실내디자인학회 학술대회논문집
2010 .10
-
몰입의 담론적 계보와 잠재적 유토피아: 제임스 터렐, 올라퍼 엘리아슨, 팀랩의 작업을 중심으로
서양미술사학회논문집
2020 .08
-
물리적 공간으로부터 감각적 공간으로의 전이- Anish Kapoor와 Olafur Eliasson의 작품을 중심으로-
예술과 미디어
2015 .01
-
크로노토프 개념에서 본 매체성에 대하여 - 올라퍼 엘리아슨, 아니쉬 카푸어, 히로시 스기모토 작품에 있어서 지각과 기억을 중심으로 -
한국실내디자인학회 논문집
2019 .10
-
전시공간 속 현상학적 연출이 반영된 설치작품의 공간지각요소 특성에 관한 연구 : 올라퍼 엘리아슨, 제임스 터렐, 도쿠진 요시오카 작품 중심으로
한국실내디자인학회 학술대회논문집
2018 .05
-
Case Study of Community Art Project as Public Art : Focused on Community Approach
한국디자인학회 국제학술대회 논문집
2010 .10
-
Transforming the Four Major River Restoration Project into a Design Project
Archives of Design Research
2010 .05
-
연극적 설치미술– 라이브 아트 전시회 <14개의 방>을 중심으로
한국연극학
2015 .01
-
설치미술에서의 공간과 설치유형에 관한 연구
한국디자인문화학회지
2003 .09
-
지하루와 그래험 웨이크필드의‘ 인공자연’ 시리즈를 통해 본 인공생명미술의 특징
현대미술사연구
2020 .06
-
The relationship between interactive installation art and traditional art
TECHART: Journal of Arts and Imaging Science
2019 .05
-
공간과 관찰의 변증법 : 설치 미술(Installation Art)의 범주설정과 문제의식
예술과 미디어
2016 .01
-
호텔 직영레스토랑의 서비스스케이프가 고객만족, 호텔 이용의도에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구 : P호텔 직영레스토랑을 중심으로
관광레저연구
2016 .02
-
돌잔치전문점 이용객의 소비가치유형에 따른 선택속성에 관한 연구
관광레저연구
2018 .02
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
올라푸 엘리아슨(Olafur Eliasson)의 작품을 통해 보는 미술의 집단적 체험과 공동체적 소통의 가능성
이지은
서양미술사학회논문집
2009
.08
올라퍼 엘리아슨의 설치 작품에 나타난 공간 경험 및 디자인 방법 : 인간, 환경 사의의 관계성을 중심으로
이송학
,
김종진
한국실내디자인학회 논문집
2014
.10
올라퍼 엘리아슨의 작품에 나타난 블러 색채 특성 연구
김선영
한국실내디자인학회 논문집
2012
.06
올라퍼 엘리아슨
조현진
마루
2009
.10
[France] 미술관으로 들어온 우주, 올라퍼 엘리아슨의 `접촉`
서동희
더원미술세계
2015
.02
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2012-650-004014774