네트워크와 원시성 - 1970년 인간환경계획연구소의 ‘한국 2000년 국토공간구상’

신정훈(Shin Chunghoon) 한국예술종합학교 한국예술연구소 2021 한국예술연구 Vol.- No.33

이 글의 목표는 1970년 EXPO ’70 한국관 미래전시실 전시를 위해 인간환경계획 연구소가 수행한 2000년 한국의 미래상과 국토이용 구상을 살펴보는 것이다. 기존 EXPO ’70 한국관에 대한 논의에서 다루어진 바 없는 사례로서, 그 구상은 김수근을 비롯한 연구소의 건축가들이 1969년 말에 진행한 해외의 미래학과 한국의 미래상에 관한 발표와 토의에 근거를 두었다. 본 논문은 이 ‘미래학 세미나’와 전시설계 과정이 ‘공간적 도시주의’, ‘도카이도 메갈로폴리스’, ‘엑키스틱스’ 등 테크놀로지 지향의 건축과 도시에 관한 해외의 논의가 수용되고 동시에 그것들이 당대 한국의 맥락으로 굴절되는 장이 되었음을 주장한다. 특유의 ‘원시’에 대한 열망을 확인하고 이를 선진국의 미래주의적 낙관론과 구분지으면서 동시에 반문화적 태도와 전자문명시대의 재부족화(retribalization)를 주창하는 마셜 매크루헌의 영향과 관련지어 이해한다. 그리고 이 영향이 1971년 하와이 범태평양 건축상 수상 강연을 필두로 ‘제3의 공간’, ‘궁극공간’, ‘모태공간’, ‘네가티비즘’ 등의 개념들로 발화되는 김수근 특유의 건축론으로 전개됨을 시사하고자 한다. This paper explores the futuristic urban visions in the the Future Exhibition Hall of the Expo ’70 Korean Pavilion. Largely neglected by previous literature, these were the technological and forward-looking visions of architecture and urbanism derived from a series of invited talks and interdisciplinary discussions, hosted by the Human Environmental Development Institute (HEDI), which architect Kim Swoo-Geun built as his own architectural office in Fall 1969. The ‘futurology seminar’ provided Korean architects of Kim Swoo-geun’s team with a significant arena, in which Western and Japanese technologically oriented urban and architectural discourses were introduced, discussed, and inflected into a Korean context, creating various futuristic sketches, drawings, and maquettes. This paper argues that these design processes for the Korean Pavilion took on an important role for Kim Swoo-geun’s architectural maturity, as represented by his promulgation of ‘the third space,’ ‘ultimate space,’ ‘womb space,’ ‘negativism,’ and others in the 1970-80s.

김영나, 『1945년 이후 한국 현대미술』 (미진사, 2020)

申政勳(Shin Chunghoon) 미술사연구회 2020 미술사연구 Vol.- No.38

1970년 오사카 만국박람회 한국관

신정훈(Chunghoon Shin) 현대미술사학회 2015 현대미술사연구 Vol.0 No.38

Largely ignored in the existing historical literature and occasionally discussed only as an embryonic stage for Kim Swoo-geun’s architectural maturation in the 1970s and 1980s, Korea Pavilion at Expo ’70 has received little scholarly attention. This paper aims to provide a better understanding of the Pavilion as an architectural event generated under the particular historical moment of the late 1960s. Restoring the original visions of young architects Yoon Seung-joong and Kim Won, who made a substantial contribution to the Korea Pavilion project (1968-1970) under the Kim Swoo-geun’s guidance, this paper explores what was at stake in the design process and what geopolitical, historical, and socio-technological forces shaped a realm of constraint and possibility for the project. Inspired by Expo ’67’s spatial extravaganza and recent developments in interdisciplinary future studies, the Korean designers took the opportunity to experiment with advanced architectural and aesthetic concepts. A lot of ambitious plans, but little came to fruition under unfavorable conditions such as public antipathy, bureaucratic compromise, technical limitations, as well as limited budget. Rather than celebrate the unrealized visions, however, this paper argues that the Korea Pavilion should be viewed to speak to the ever-widening gap between growing expectations and grim reality in the growth-oriented milieu of the late 1960s.

‘포스트-민중’시대의 미술

신정훈(Chunghoon Shin) 한국근현대미술사학회 2009 한국근현대미술사학 Vol.20 No.-

This paper explores a particular set of artistic practices engaged with the rehabilitation of the social role of art in what can be called post-Minjung era. This era was marked by the enervation of Minjung art, a politically engaged art movement that vigorously resisted the oppressive military regime of the 1980s but fell into lethargy in the ostensibly democratized 1990s. The late 1990s witnessed the emergence of collective attempts to resume the discussion of the social role of art, which had been interrupted since the early 1990s when Minjung art lost its political and aesthetic efficacy. The resumed discussion was led by some members of artist collective Forum A which was founded in October 1997. They regard- ed it as an imperative to make what can be called as “activist”, “socially-engaged,” or “critical” art enter the 90’s Korean art scene. The discussion on this topic took place in variable venues provided by Forum A, such as exhibitions, seminars, workshops and the tabloid-format journal Forum A. In order to formulate new aesthetic strategies for responding to the changing social and political circumstances, the members of Forum A examined the legacy of Minjung art, recognizing its accomplishments as well as limitations, and they turned to the Western avant-garde practices such as the conceptual art and institutional critique of the 1960s-70s and the Situationist International of the 1950s-60s. By focusing on Seongnam project (1998) and Cheonggyecheon project (2003-), this paper examines how these projects developed their aesthetic strategies of interventionist practices in dialogue with Minjung art as well as the Western precedents of North American Conceptualism and French Situationism. Employing a variety of artistic forms, including photo-text documentations, films and videos, installation, and diagrams, the urban practices adopted an anthropological model of project art based on fieldwork, challenging dominant socio-spatial orders operating in the specific urban sites, mostly marginalized areas. And yet, at the same time they sought to explore how the users of the sites appropriated their own physical or socio-economic spaces that have been imposed on them. By looking at these urban practices, this paper claims that they were engaged critically in the discussion of the term “public,” contesting its supposed equality and neutrality by exposing that the discourses of public art, public space, and publicness can only be effected though exclusions. And yet, this paper also put in a sharp relief a significant change lying in the development trajectory between Seongnam Project and Cheonggyecheon project, which was prompted by the latter’s attempt to go beyond a nostalgic impulse embedded in the former’s representation of the marginalized urban areas.

1960년대 말 한국미술의 ‘도시문명에의 참여’

신정훈(Shin, Chunghoon) 한국미술사교육학회 2014 美術史學 Vol.- No.28

1960년대 말 한국미술의 담론 속에는 “현대문명”, “도시문명”, “산업문명”, “일상생활”, “기계문명”, “도시세계”, “소비문명” 등과 같은 새로운 용어들이 통용되기 시작했다. 이 다양한 어휘들의 등장은 그것들이 지칭하고자하는 한국사회의 새로운 성격이 충분히 파악되지 않았음을 의미한다. 그러나 동시에 한국사회가 변모하고 있다는, 최소한 변모를 앞두고 있다는 감각내지 기대가 형성되고 있었음을 시사한다. 본 논문의 목표는 이와 같이 새로운 사회의 도래에 대한 기대 섞인 전망이 1960년대 말 특정 시기 한국미술 생산에 주요한 역할을 했음을 밝히는 것이다. 본 논문은 그 전망을 일상적인 수준에서 가장 구체적이고 가시적으로 구현하고 있던 도시화와 일상환경의 변모에 당시 일군의 오브제, 환경, 해프닝, 기하학적 추상 작업이 반응하고 있음에 주목한다. 따라서 탈-캔버스 작업으로 나아갔던 포스트-앵포르멜 세대의 젊은 미술가뿐만 아니라 기하학적 패턴을 채택하여 자신의 회화를 일신하려했던 30-40대의 기성미술가들을 포함한 1960년대 말 선진적인 한국의 미술가들 사이에서, 일종의 도시적인 것으로의 전환이 일어났음을 확인하고 그 전환에 놓인 기대감을 강조한다. 비록 이 전환이 기존 미술사 서술에서 별 주목을 받지 못했지만, 그것은 1960년대 후반 비평가 이일에 의해 지속적으로 새로운 ‘전위’의 태도로 강조된 바 있었다. 그의 표현에 따라 ‘도시문명에의 참여’라 부를 수 있는 그 태도는 저항이나 반항을 존재이유로 하던 기존 앵포르멜 미술가의 실존주의적 태도와 결별하고 도래하는 새로운 사회에 대한 적극적인 호응(‘참여’)내지, 최소한 중립적인 대응(‘확인’)을 특징으로 했다. 본 논문은 ‘도시문명에의 참여’가 당시 미술가들 사이에서 중요하게 고려해야할 태도나 관념으로 부상했음을 지적한다. 그리고 이를 앵포르멜 이후 새로운 미술의 등장을 바라는 당시 미술계의 강렬한 요구, 역동적으로 전개되는 당대 해외미술에 대한 직간접적 정보의 증가, 그리고 서울의 급격한 도시화와 그에 수반된 낙관주의적, 미래주의적 도시담론의 확산과 같은, 미술적이고 사회-공간적인 여러 요인들의 복합적인 상호작용의 결과로 파악한다. The late 1960s witnessed the emergence of new terms such as “modern civilization,” “urban civilization,” “industrial civilization,” “everyday life,” “machine civilization,” “urban world,” and “consumer civilization” in the discourse of Korean art. While a plethora of new terms indicates a dearth of a shared definition of the new society to which they sought to refer, it reveals a new awareness that Korean society was on the verge of, if not in the midst of, totally new formations. The aim of this paper is to elucidate the significant role of that awareness in the production of Korean art in the late 1960. To this end, this paper focuses on a particular set of advanced practices such as ‘environmental work’, ‘Happenings’, and ‘geometrical abstraction,’ of which advent in the Korean art scene should be understood as inseparable from the urbanization and transformation of everyday surroundings that made optimistic visions of a new society much more tangible than any other forces. This paper argues that the late 1960s saw what might be called a urban turn in Korean art, which was widely performed not only by the new generation of post-Informel artists (‘environmental work’ and ‘Happenings’) but also by established ones in their 30s and 40s (‘geometrical abstraction’). Although the turn has received little attention in the existing literature, it occupied a central position in the work of art critic Yi Il (1932-1997) in the late 1960s. For him, who was highly informed during his sojourn in Paris by a noticeable surge in attention to the artistic use of everyday objects and the fusion of art and architecture, a radical immersion into the urban environment defined the characteristic of new ‘avant-garde.’ Calling for ‘participation in urban civilization,’ the critic urged Korean artists to depart from artistic existentialism embodied by Korean Informel in favour of the enthusiastic incorporation of elements from a new urban society. Pointing out that the ‘participation in urban civilization’ attitude arose among the Korean artists for serious consideration, this paper deals with largely ignored issues and works regarding the late ‘60s urban turn as a result of a complex interplay among various artistic and socio-spatial forces.

기계, 우주, 전자: 1960년대 말 한국미술과 과학기술

신정훈 ( Shin Chunghoon ) 미술사와 시각문화학회 2021 미술사와 시각문화 Vol.28 No.-

In the late 1960s Korean artists became invested in science and technology, incorporating machine aesthetics, industrial products and materials, mechanical devises for their art making and discussing the artistic ramifications of technological change in their writings. The importance of science and technology in the late 1960s’ artistic imagination, however, remains largely ignored in the existing literature, in which unconventional approaches of art fall under the neutral, overarching concept of ‘experimental art.’ This paper explores what can be called a ‘science-technological turn’ among Korean artists in the late 1960s, when an ever-growing public attention to science and technology was fueled by international news on the Apollo missions to the moon and the electronic environment of networks and computation as well as the anticipation of urbanization, industrialization, and modernization. This paper provides three discursive points of reference―‘machine,’ ‘space,’ and ‘electronics’―around which Korean artists’ investment in science and technology came into play, seeking to understand the ‘science-technological turn’ within a long history of Korean art’s relationship to science and technology.

모방과 필연: 1950-60년대 한국 미술비평의 쟁점

신정훈 ( Chunghoon Shin ) 미술사와 시각문화학회 2017 미술사와 시각문화 Vol.19 No.-

The accusation of “imitation” was the most severe form of criticism within modernist aesthetics that uphold the principle of “creation”, “invention”, and “originality.” In the 20th century Korean art, there were no exceptions to this tendency. Positioning themselves as a non-Western latecomer to modernism, however, Korean artists and critics did not adopt a uniform attitude towards imitation. Indeed, although largely denigrated, imitation was deemed particularly in the 1950s and 1960s as the effective way for Korean art as a (late-) latecomer to initially learn and finally catch up the West. And yet behind the mimetic endeavor actually lay a self-critical questioning of which foreign models were likely to be rooted in the Korean context and which were just imitative. In tackling the question, the idea of “necessity” (pilyeon or pilyeonseong in Korean) served as a yardstick for the evaluation of imitation as a path to creativity. According to the idea, the selection, transposition, and incorporation of foreign models should be motivated directly by the demands of “our” reality. Examining works by Korean art critics, including Lee Kyungsung, Kim Young-ju, Bang Geun-taek, and Lee Yil, this essay offers a more nuanced approach to the vexing issue of imitation in Korean art, with a special focus on the idea of “necessity,” one that has been largely ignored in the literature but still works in the artists` mind-set in the Korean art field.