Introducing International Style, P. Johnson and H. R. Hitchcock gave three standards to be the Modern, volume and surface, regularity, and exclusion of applied decoration. In spite of the negation of stylistic, formal approach in the Modernist Manifestoes, one usually have understood Modernity in Architecture with its formal character, especially with no ornament and flat, abstract, white surface. Modernism as a new paradigm in architecture have emphasized that there is no representation of anything outside and only present architecture in itself. They said that Modernism only cared about the language of Architecture without figural reference. So apparently there is no way to prove to its Modernity with formal condition. Modernity is in Spirit and contents. But actually we understand well its existence by visual communication This study deals with this difficult situation how Modernity represents itself without visual media and asks the question how simultaneously it presents its thingness and materiality In order to analyse contradictory situation between representation and presentation in Modern Architecture we need to survey the historical process of changing position of ornaments and its meaning in time. With the crisis of representation the role of ornament have seriously changed and divided. It caused the two situation in pre-Modern Architecture. Firstly, Architecture tend to be a high art and formal expression became important much more. The Use of Ornament became a kind of fashion to show the power, class, money. Secondly, Ornament lost its cultural weight and the structure and material aspect became the central in architecture. Rational Structuralism would be the essential character in Modern Architecture. Here the theory of G. Semper and A. Loos on cladding(dressing) and Ornament can help its problems and limits. In the situation without conventional ornament Modernists need to present modernity with new media that only show the thing itself and by that it does not represent any thing else as like the value, idea outside buildings. They believed that only it concerned esthetics and morality in architecture. But in reality it referred to art and machines as like ships, aircraft, and cars. By excluding Ornament and showing the process of clearing, abstract, flat, white surface 'represent' Modernity by the indirect way referring the concept of transparency, reason, sanitation, tectonics, etc. An Ideology and myth intervened architectural discourse to make the doxa about the representation in Architecture. Surface must be a different kind of media and message that can communicate in different way with compared to conventional Ornament. Decorated Shed by R. Venturi and Post-Functionalism by P. Eisenman, that are the most famous post-modern discourse, shows well difficult and contradictory condition in contemporary architecture concerning representation and form, meaning and form.

두 명의 근대 사상가이자 비평가 작가였던 T. S. 엘리엇과 발터 벤야 민은 신화와 역사의 본질을 이해하는 데 많은 공통점을 가지고 있다. 엘리엇은 자유의지적인 선택으로 독실한 신앙인이 되었고, 유대인이었 던 벤야민의 사유에는 종교 내지 신학적인 문제들과 역사 구원과 같은 문제에 대한 관심이 매우 뿌리깊이 자리하고 있었다. 벤야민은 태생적 으로 유대인의 혈통을 물려받았다. 그런 면에서 종교적인 구원과 역사 의 문제는 두 사람에게 매우 중요한 주제였고, 그만큼 그들의 사상이 형성되는데 많은 영향을 주었다. 엘리엇은 그의 대표작 네 사중주를 통해 시간을 통한 구원의 인식과 역사의 문제를 매우 밀도 깊은 철학적 성찰로 다루었고, 벤야민 역시 역사철학 테제와 같은 역사철학에 관한 저술을 통해 자신이 가지고 있는 진보와 역사에 대한 개념을 서술하였다. 특히 현대사회가 가지고 있는 물신숭배적 종교성과 탈신화적 신화 성은 엘리엇과 벤야민이 함께 공명하는 매우 중요한 접점이라고 할 수 있으며, 이러한 관점에서 엘리엇의 작품을 이해하는 것은 모더니즘적 접근의 깊이를 한층 더 심화시켜 줄 것이다.

T. S. 엘리엇의 게론티온 은 ‘왜소한 늙은이’라는 의미를 지닌 게론티온의 눈으로 바라본 종교, 문화, 도덕, 인간관계의 영역에서의 근대성의 위기를 문제화하고 있다. 게론티온은 기본적으로 알레고리적인 인물로서 그의 이름은 늙은 유럽에 대한 하나의 알레고리적인 기호이며, 유대인이 소유하고 있는 그의 퇴락한 집은 세계대전이후의 유럽의 위태로운 사회·경제적 상황에 대한 하나의 생생한 삽화에 해당된다. 자신의 시대의 위기에 충격 받은 게론티온은 기독교의 성육신교리의 문제까지 추적하여 그 기원을 찾는다. ‘역사의 미로’에 갇힌 게론티온은 이 시에서 실베로씨, 하카가와, 드 토른키스트 부인, 쿨프 양을 서구의 문화적, 정신적 타락을 영속화하는 대표적인 타자들로 기재한다. 게론티온 에서 서구 문명의 위기와 뗄 수없이 결합된 것은 주체의 위기이다. 게론티온의 인간과 사회에 대한 관점은 본질적으로 니체―들뢰즈가 비판하는 반응적 허무주의와 친근성이 있다. 이 시의 마지막 대목에서 거미줄이라는 미세한 공간에서부터 큰곰자리와 같은 우주적 공간에서 게론티온이 바라다본 것은 존재들의 ‘무의 춤’이다.

The main aim of this paper is double-folded: it aims to examine the significance of Eliot’s re/reading of Baudelaire’s urban poetry in the formation of his modernist poetics and, thereby, to uncover the lasting presence of allegory in the modernist poetry of Eliot. Important texts for the exploration of Baudelaire’s impact on Eliot are his own later essays on the French poet. The poet of The Flower of Evil, according to Eliot, revolutionizes modern poetry not just by selecting the metropolitan life as the main subject matter of poetry but by penetrating into its shocking reality deeply and accurately. Eliot highlights the fusion of reality and fantasy as the essence of Baudelaire’s urban poetics and, at the same time, as the most important factor that he has learned from the French poet. However, Eliot’s later essays on Baudelaire are not fully helpful in explicating the French poet’s influence on his own urban poems in that Eliot’s critical writings on Baudelaire, mostly written after his 1927 conversion, are not so much concerned with the urban aesthetics of his poetry as with the ethical and religious agendas. Eliot’s early poems reveal that he develops his modernist sensibilities under the strong influence of Laforgue and Baudelaire. Viewed in the context of the poetic discourse of the French poets, Eliot’s early poems gradually move from Laforguian ironic voice and his detached attitude to Baudelairean aesthetics of allegory and shock. At the center of the impact of Baudelaire on Eliot lies the French poet’s deployment of the souvenir as an allegorical sign of the barrenness and the self-alienation of modern experience. In Eliot’s urban poetry, the souvenir is transfigured into debris and there exists a certain “genealogy” of debris. This genealogy begins with “Second Caprice in North Cambridge,” in which “the debris of a city” is a realistic sign of its ruined cityscape, and makes a radical turn in “Goldfish,” where “the debris of the year” is internalized as allegory of the inner death of modern experience. “Rhapsody on a Windy Night” unifies these opposing sides of debris in that “A crowd of twisted things” are mobilized to describe both the external urban space and the protagonist’s memory or “inner-scape.” Eliot’s deployment of debris as allegory of modern experience reach a peak in The Waste Land. As the title bespeaks, the poem is about the land of waste or debris. In this allegorical city of modernity, ghosts of the ancient period return as modernity’s others and their return transfigures the desert-like city into a ghostly land. In the secular Hell of The Waste Land, ruins/debris of cities, an allegorical sign of modern experience, become fused with ghosts, an allegorical sign of modernity’s others.

According to Martin Heidegger’s argument that human emotions and feelings play an important role in defining modernism, the elements of melancholy must have been a crucial element in characterizing modernism. In this respect, T. S. Eliot’s “The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock” and The Waste Land that are regarded as reflecting modernistic phases have been analyzed to show how the elements of melancholy appear in them and to what degree they present modernity. The keen awareness of fragmentation and the impossibility of totality in modernism as part of modernity has been shown to have a lot to do with melancholy. The concept of melancholy is not a brand new term which was born in modernism, rather it was a “reinvented” and “reassessed” concept that already has quite a long history. On the threshold to the contemporary era, a number of critics and writers came to be deeply interested in and did a lot of research about melancholy. Remarkably, modern critics are doing insightful studies that can illuminate the deceitful desires that are produced by capitalist society that leave people in discontentment permanently, which acts like a sense of loss. Their analyses about the mechanism of melancholy are expected to help analyze the relation between melancholy and capitalist society. In that aspect, even though melancholy appeared in modernism era, still the concept of melancholy seems to be a great issue that can be very helpful to understand the cultural aspect of contemporary era.

본고는 서양의 시대정신인 모더니티라는 자아이상을 추구하는 과정에 새롭게 그들의 인식에 등장한 동아시아풍의 건축이 그들의 당대 건축문화 형성에 미친 영향을 연구해 보고자 한다. 시기는 모더니티에 대한 고민이 한창인 18세기 중엽부터 20세기 초반으로 설정한다. 동아시아로 한정하여, 근대 서양 건축문화 형성 과정에 동아시아의 어떠한 점이 어떻게 개입되어 궁극적으로 그들의 20세기 모더니즘 건축에 일조 했는지 시기별로 구분하여 살펴볼 것이다.

진주 출신의 작곡가 이상근(1922~2000)의 음악이 최근 음악학계의 주목을 받는 가운데, 본 연구 는 그의 초기 합창음악 양식에 초점을 맞추었다. 1946년부터 1951년 사이 쓰여진 그의 12작품(개별 16곡) 중 출판된 11작품이 ‘전통과 현대성’이라는 관점에서 분석되었다. 이상근은 그의 논문에서 전 통적인 것과 현대적인 것에 대한 생각들을 펼치고 있다. 그는 전통 음악적 소재와 민족적 정서를 중 요시 하였고 이를 그가 영향받은 인상주의 음악과 결합하여 새로운 음악적 정체성을 확립하려고 노 력하였다. 그의 시도는 5음음계나 새야화현이 현대적 리듬과 화성진행과 결합한 형태로 음악화되었 다. 이상근의 초기 합창음악은 한국창작음악의 미학적 관점에서 볼 때 민족성이나 현대성 외에 합 창의 대중적 속성을 반영하는 ‘친근성’을 내포하고 있다는 특성을 가진다.

The main aim of this article is twofold: first, to uncover the theoretical significance of Walter Benjamin’s critical revaluation of Bergson, Proust, and Freud, who shed new light on the understanding of memory, and secondly, to re-read Eliot’s poetry in the context of Benjamin’s ideas of modernity and memory. In “On Some Motifs of Baudelaire,” Benjamin highly values Bergson’s Matière et mémoire as a ground-breaking work in understanding how perception and memory co-operate. In À la recherche du temps perdu, Proust reworks Bergson’s pure memory by illuminating that memory is in essence involuntary. However, both of them, Benjamin argues, fail to address the historical and social characters of memory. By channelling Bergson’s pure memory and Proust’s involuntary memory into Freud’s insightful idea that consciousness and memory are mutually exclusive, Benjamin finally locates a historical/social schema of memory. Conscious remembering or the voluntary memory is devoid of the creative and redemptive force of the involuntary memory, and becomes the main form of memory in the age of high capitalism when Erlebnis (everyday lived experience), not Erfahrung (genuine experience), is overwhelmingly dominant. What Benjamin calls Erlebnis and its memory are problematized in Eliot’s early works, including some of his unpublished poems as well as “Boston Evening Transcript,” “Rhapsody on a Windy Night,” and other published ones. In “Goldfish,” the traces of a young man’s past experiences are deployed as allegorical signs that visualize the meaningless daily routine and its “dead” memory. For Eliot, as for Benjamin, a symptom of modernity is that people increasingly tend to experience the world indirectly through newspapers and other news sources. Distancing themselves from their communities, urban people are, as presented in “Boston Evening Transcript,” controlled and, even, enslaved by newspapers, and real, felt, embodied experiences sharply decline in modern cities full of sensational and shocking news. “Rhapsody on a Windy Night,” on the other hand, presents a young man’s longing for genuine experiences that may transgress the logic of rationality, calculation, and discipline. However, imprisoned in the modern world, where his memory as well as his body functions as an automatic machine and even the moon is transfigured into a prostitute whose re/usable body, like a factory worker’s, is sold in the market, he fails to carve out a space/time of difference or redemption.