추상표현주의와 정치 : 수정주의 관점 다시 읽기 = Abstract Expressionism and Politics: Rereading Revisionist Views

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

During the last three decades, there have been controversies about the relationship between art and politics, in particular, the use of Abstract Expressionism as a weapon of the Cold War. According to some revisionist historians of postwar American art, the success of Abstract Expressionism was closely related to the American government’s desire to promote an image of America as a land of freedom and individualism. Recently scholars have successfully refuted the claims of these revisionist historians by presenting specific cases where Abstract Expressionist painting was not predominant. This study is an attempt to examine the validity of revisionist views through the investigation of two exhibitions of the 1950s.
The International Sculpture Competition, “The Unknown Political Prisoner” was proposed to the ICA by Anthony Kloman, a former U.S. cultural attache in Stockholm. As the largest international sculpture competition, it drew a huge response of 3,500 entries. The organizers emphasized that the theme should be regarded as of universal significance. In a period of Cold War tension, however, the theme was widely regarded as directed at the communist bloc. By examining confidential correspondence exchanged between the chief organizers of the competition, in fact, Robert Burstow revealed that the competition theme was a rhetorical device to naturalize the idea of Communism as the threat to liberal democracy.
The underlying political intentions became more certain in the decision to give a runner-up prize to Kim, Chong-yang, a Korean figurative sculptor. Although the organizers of the competition claimed judicial impartiality towards artistic style in the prospectus, the jury unmistakably showed a bias toward modernist art. Almost all the winning works were in an abstract style. Naturally judicial prejudice provoked protests from artists and critics. Thus, it is possible that the decision to give a Korean sculptor a prize might have been partly based on a political consideration rather than aesthetic one.
The exhibition “Eight American Artists” was held in April 9-21, 1957 at the National Museum in Seoul. It was sponsored by the USIA and organized by the Seattle Art Museum. Two editions were prepared for Europe and Asia, and the Asian edition consisted of 30
paintings and 10 sculptures. Although Korea was never mentioned in the itinerary for the Asian edition in the preparatory stage, she became the first country to host the exhibition. The sudden inclusion of Korea seems to have caused a serious problem in terms of publicity. It explains why the exhibition catalogue came out in the form of the July 1957 issue of the magazine Sinmisul. It also explains why the exhibition did not get the attention of the Korean press on the opening day.
In the face of tepid reaction to the exhibition, USIS officials, who had not enough time to provide publicity material in Korean, seem to have hastily made out reference material for Korean critics based on John Baur’s Revolution and Tradition in Modern American Art. Three reviews’ simultaneous appearance and reference to Baur’s book seem to have something to do with the USIS’s publicity activities. After all, the exhibition gave the Korean art community not only the opportunity to see some examples of contemporary American art but also the framework through which to understand them.
In his recently published book Abstract Expressionism as Cultural Critique, David Craven showed us a quite different picture of Abstract Expressionism from that of revisionist historians by examining the FBI files on some Abstract Expressionists and their avowed intentions. My examination of the two exhibitions also reveals that agencies of the American government did not particularly exploit Abstract Expressionism for political gain. During the 1950s and 1960s, many Americans affiliated with the arts believed that the increased

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 1. 서언
• 2. 수정주의 논쟁
• 3. 사례분석
• 4. 결언
• 참고문헌
• Abstract
• 「추상표현주의와 정치: 수정주의 관점 다시 읽기」에 대한 질의(김현화)
• 김현화 선생님의 질의에 대한 답변(정무정)