본 연구는 국립미술관이 지향하는 공공성의 실체를 파악하는 과정에서 그 운영방침의 전제가 되는 미술정책과 공공성의 역학 관계를 과연 어떤 관점에서 조명해야 하는가를 질문한다. 만약 정책을 ‘공익의 실현’이라는 목표에 이상적으로 부합할 수 있는 실질적이면서 합리적인 수단이라고 전제한다면, 박정희 정권의 조국 근대화 프로젝트 중 하나였던 국현 경복궁관 개관, 공공 미술관으로서의 대중성과 전문성을 확보하고자 했던 과천관의 설립과 전개, 그리고 민간 경영의 개념 도입 이후 정부와 미술계의 논쟁으로부터 비롯된 특수법인화 추진까지의 정책사는 공공성 에 대한 복합적인 정치적 이해관계가 얽혀있음을 전제해야 한다.

This study is about the cultural policy related to fine art under the U. S. Military Government in Korea(USAMGIK), from September 8, 1945, to August 15, 1948. Drawing on the previous studies of Korean art history in the ‘Liberation Period’, this study especially concentrates on intention, attitude and activities of the USAMGIK. Particularly the historical documents, stored at the National Archives at the College Park, Maryland, U.S.A., were valuable to do research on the cultural policy of USAMGIK. The cultural policy was subordinated to the political objectives of occupation that can be summarized to building a stronghold of anti-communism in South Korea. Under the U.S. Military government control, cultural matters were assigned to the Cultural Section, the Bureau of Education, which later turns into the Bureau of Culutre, the Department of Education. The Bureau of Culture dealt with matters of the ancient Korean art treasures and of the Korean contemporary art. USAMGIK reopened the Korean National Museum which had been closed by the Japanese since the World War Ⅱ period. After that, U.S. Department of State sent arts & monuments specialists to South Korea for investigating ancient Korean art and culture. Although some of the destructed art treasures were restored during the occupation, there were many negative cases including intentional destruction of historic sites or loot of art treasures by U.S. army. In contrast to their interest in the Korean antiquities, USAMGIK payed little attention to promoting the Korean contemporary artists and their arts. USAMGIK distrusted and suppressed the artists of leftism, while they kept good relations with the pro-American artists and the right-wing artists. In conclusion, the visual-cultural policy of USAMGK was mainly planned and carried out in order to preserve the national interest of the United States. This period produced long-term effects on the fine art and visual culture of South Korea, in terms of institution, policy, and reorganization of art community based on anti-cummunism.

The aim of this thesis is to evaluate visual art policy during Kookmin government period(1998-2002). In the beginning, many artists had expected president Kim Dae Jung to enlarge arts support But the evaluation of them was very negative vecause the government was only interested in the development of cultural industry. First, I analysed the government expenditure in the visual arts. Department of Culture and Tourism took the responsiblity of visual arts policy. The budget of art and culture increased to 1% of total government expenditure in this period. But the main factor was the increasement of cultural industry and tourism expenditure. The budget of visual arts in 2002 was only 6,600million won. Second, I analysed visual arts support programs. (1) The government introduced studio programs for the first time. For 5 years, 2 mational studios and 23 public studios were established. (2) The number of art museum was increased to 62. (3) It introduced alternative space supported 200million won annually. (4) percent for art scheme reduced from 1% to 0.7% of total construction cost, but still 27 public sculpture gardens were built. (5) Business support for visual arts reduced because of IMF. (6) Also arts marker froze and many commercial galleries were closed. (7) In order to revitalize region through arts and to promote international exchange of culture, Gwangju Biennale was created. Third, I analysed Arts Plan 2002. It had a radical Limitaion because it was established in the last year of Kookmin government period. Also it showed special favors to some arts organizations. In general, I think that positive outcomes are the introductions of the studio program and the alternative space support program. Especially alternative space support program enforced the diversity of visual arts, and encouraged creative young artists. But policy of art market failed because of IMF and visual artists had to go through rough times.