The subject is connected with a structure named "The Symbolic" to Lacan, but he denied that the subject is explained simply as a fruit of language and "Other" From his point of view, passing through Subject, De-formation and Crack over it is designated as foundation of generation and creation rather than our destined defect. It should not be understood that subject of "The Real" is a concept of the subject free itself from restraint of "The Symbolic" However, this does not mean he asserts "Subject" is something incapable of being controlled by the unknown power. The problem is that this autonomous existence meets inside of it with something "More than one's own self" by "circulating around itself" like a permanent star. This is the indication of a "stranger in the middle of my privacy", or "extimite", a coined-word by Lacan. Perhaps "Subject" is nothing more than the name of distance of object which is "too hot" to come close, and of this circulating movement. It's because of this object that the real subject stands against generalization and the subject can't be restored to any place in symbolic order-even though it is empty. The part which is told from Lacan's structural theory, that is to say, an importance to Lacan is that his Subject theory is not suggested or denied as a manual structure. On the contrary, it is a study of the relationship between the settled symbol that included in "real subject which is a unconscious one" and the symbolic subject hold- that is a metaphysical subject in general meaning. In Lacan's enlarged concept of subject beyond symbolic reality, it is noticeable that it gives justifiability to the union of a medium of different nature in artistic expression. We can recognize that the unconscious world is a living space which enables it to be a "condition of human being" not something dark under the surface of water through Magritte's(Rene Magritte, 1898~1967) surrealistic works. In other words, Magritte's art secures a core dimension of human nature through a mysterious gap of conscious and settled space. Magritte's drawings often evokes strange and unsettling feelings in people who view his paintings. This is because routine objects are found in "unsuitable" places from which we usually find them in our everyday lives. "Reality" in Magritte's paintings makes it aware that it is a strained field of concealment and disclosure basically between truths, and we can learn that his behavior to overturn to paint in-visible things is finally an effort to restore the "real subject" to the viewer's reality. In other words, such reversion arouses a nostalgic desire for the objects existing in their original appearance as they are - natural condition that our gaze had not been distorted yet by anamorphic stains. - and the state when we are conscious of them normally. Such desire offers an opportunity for us to get out of mental depression rather than operates to us as an abnormal crack. It's successive process of effort to search for lost subject and Paradise Lost facing up to reality of subject human that is to be a subject of world and life are ousted from their place by structure and authority of culture.

Despite continuous efforts to redraw the boundaries between art and culture, the conventional concept of originality has persisted in approaches to the practice of contemporary art. In the discourse of originality, various forms of lesser arts that employ the method of replication have been referred to as kitsch, or “rear-guard,” the opposite of avant-garde. This categorization points to the contested issue regarding the oppositional relation between modernism and mass culture. With its easily accessible content and financial affordability, mass culture has become both an irresistible attraction and a most powerful threat to modernism. This threat has instigated a discursive system that has situated mass culture as a cultural other of modernism. Taking the marginalized category of kitsch as the area of contention, this paper examines a discursive repression of kitsch. It analyzes the conceptual framework that defends originality and autonomy in art and, conversely, degrades kitsch as an inferior and dangerous cultural category. Greenberg's concept of kitsch as a by-product of industrialization evolved into the criticism that advocates the autonomy of art. The Frankfurt School scholars, particularly Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer, practiced comparable cultural critiques. Focusing on mass culture such as film, radio, and television, instead of art works, they critically analyzed the system of mass culture and theorized the negative implications of the ubiquitous presence of kitsch. Some critics, on the other hand, perceived the growth of mass culture as opening possibilities in cultural development. Walter Benjamin and Harold Rosenberg asserted the socio-cultural dynamics of mass culture underlining the potential for continual transformation in reality and in the subject. They acknowledged that technological advances changed the condition of creation and enabled unmediated interactions between media. By scrutinizing conflicting views on kitsch, this paper intends to reassess arts that draw “the forces of the outside.”

PASKYULA was formed in September, 1923 through the union of artists involved in two art groups: Kim Ki-Jin, Kim Bok-Jin, Yeon Hak-Nyeon who had previously participated in the ToWolHoi, and Park Young-Hi, Lee Sang-Hwa, An Seok-Ju, former members of the BaeckJo. After its founding, the PASKYULA artists had been searching for the social function of art to reform the harsh reality of Minjung and the nation with criticism toward society as well as art world. Their art theory for MinJung could grow relatively ease in relation to changing social and political conditions in the early 1920s. In August, 1925, PASKYULA organized the Korea Artista Proletaria Federatio with the YeomGunSa, and laid the groundwork for Proletariat art movement which was regularized in the late 1920s. From PASKYULA up to the early state of KAPF, the theory of art advocated by Kim Bok-Jin and An Seok-Ju could be summarized as "art for MinJung". At that time, widely ranging discourses on MinJung, however, was spawned in art theory, because many intellectuals`─`including artists and writers`─`begun to pay more attention to MinJung, who emerged as one of the social forces after the Samil Independent Movement. Sometimes, MinJung was construed as the target of enlightenment from a negative viewpoint. On the other hand, several intellectuals under the influence of individualism asserted that the discussion itself on MinJung exerted an evil influence on art. In contrast of these cases, the PASKYULA artists including Kim Bok-Jin, An Seok-Ju perceived that MinJung had the potential to change society, and regarded them as "a creator of genuine civilization and art". In the PASKYULA artist's writings, the concept of MinJung was often overlapped with the meaning of the Choson nation suffering under colony. Although their concept of MinJung was transformed gradually into the proletariat as they were under the strong influence of socialism, it did not change that they grasped the realities of the whole Choson Peninsula through the proletarian consciousness. In the early state of PASKYULA, the methodology for social function of art was presented in a twofold manner. First of all, Kim Bok-Jin emphasized on the necessity of education to improve MinJung's way of life through art, and it was embodied by the organization of ToWol Art Workshop and public lecture. Also, he championed "the popularization of art", which was one of methods to distribute art to MinJung. According to the PASKYULA artists, art should be not art for art's sake but art for MinJung. That was why they advocated the convergence of art and MinJung's life. Especially Kim Bok-Jin affirmed a link between art and industry because he considered industry the field inextricably linked with MinJung's life. In this context, his idea could be read as the generalization and equalization within the framework of possession. Kim Bok-Jin thought that the social ramifications of capitalism deprived MinJung of their right to enjoy art, and emphasized the artist's social role to return the right to them. That is, the even distribution of art was mainly discussed than the contents of art in the half of 1920s. By 1925, the contents of art itself became an issue in the PASKYULA art theory, and it was based in realism. Kim Bok-Jin and An Seok-Ju insisted that art should be reflection of real life. At that time, realism acquired the representation of MinJung and the nation's realities not realistic style. In fact, the various Western art styles including Futurism, Constructivism, Cubism etc. were exploited in the PASKYULA's visual images. Western art, target of criticism on theory, was selectively adopted in the works which were produced by Kim Bok-Jin and An Seok-Ju. Kim Bok-Jin's MoonYeUnDong cover design was conceived of as the example in which Western art was adopted with it's ideology under the influence of MAVO, while Western art shown in An Seok-Ju's illustrations served as a decorative function in many cases. Especially, An Seok-Ju attempted the various styles of Western art simultaneously, which may be seen as representing that PASKYULA did not have a firm ideology for their style. Also, it can be read as showing his hasty zeal to overcome Western art rapidly. The wish to establish "art for MinJung" as soon as possible was accompanied with the will to jump over the all steps of Western art though it was superficial. This aspiration of PASKYULA was expressed through the mass media, which had the potential for communicating to MinJung. At this point, there was a significant disparity between PASKYULA and another art groups in the first half of 1920s. However, the PASKYULA's method on the basis of the mass media could not but have a certain limitation because of the medium's properties. Nevertheless, PASKYULA?attempts may be considered to be valuable in sense that they expended the boundaries of Korean modern art into the commercial art questioning the matter of the distribution for art.

The continuous struggle to establish virtual reality on the stage during the history of Western Theater has been centered upon the development of scenographic setting and devices. It began with the Classical Greek drama where the place of performance became separated from the place of the audience. These two places were united as the orchestra - the place of the Dionysiac festival in the earliest stage of the Greek theater. And the skene, once a storage building outside the theatrical area, became an essential factor of the scenic space to provide illusion of the other world where the actors dwell. As a natural consequence it followed the structural change of Roman theater where the stage became a high and wide platform and the skene converted into the permanent stone scaenae frons. Such a tradition of the Classical theater was revived in Italian Renaissance and Baroque theater, which succeeded Vitruvius' concept of scaenographia as well as the vestiges of Imperial Roman theater. The cases of Serlio, Palladio, and Andrea Pozzo reveal the way how Western theater conjured the fictional space by traditional representational scenery, including architectural background setting and painted devices. It resulted in the physical and emotional division of actors?space and audience's space. The rejection of representational scenery upon the stage by avant garde artists like Edward Gordon Craig in the early years of the twentieth century should be interpreted as an attempt to recover an emotional attachment of actors and the audience, which was the case of Greek antiquity. This new scenogrpahic endeavor in modern theater is to challenge the main purpose of traditional scaenae frons to establish the boundary of the illusional 'scene' of performance where the audience should remain as passive spectators, and instead, to try to unite the action of actors and the audience upon the stage as a 'place'.

What a concept of theatricality in modern art became more controversial is through a review 'art and object-hood' on Michael Fried's minimal art, as having been already known broadly. As he had been concerned, the art following the minimalism is accepting as the very important elements such as the introduction of temporality, the stage in the exhibition space, and the audience's positive participation, enough to be no exaggeration to say that it was involved in almost all the theatricality. Particularly even in the installation art and the environment art, which have substantially positioned since the 1970s, the space is staged, and the audience's participation is greatly highlighted due to the temporal character and the site-specific in works. In such way, the theatricality in art work is today regarded as one of the most important elements. In this context, it is thought to have significance to examine theatricality, which is shown in the works of Arte Povera artists, who had been active energetically between 1967~1971. That is because the name of this group itself is what was borrowed from “Poor Theatre” in Jerzy Grotowski, who is a play director and theorist coming from Poland, and because of having many common points in the aspect of content and form. It reveals that the art called Arte Povera is sharing many critical minds in the face of commanding the field called a play and other media. Grotowski's theatre theory is very close to the theory and substance in Arte Povera in a sense that liberates a play, which was locked in literature, above all, renews the relationship between stage and seat and between actor and audience, and pursues a human being's change in consciousness through this. That is because Arte Povera also emphasizes the communication with the audience through appealing to a human being's perception and through the direct and living method, not the objective art concept of centering on the work. In addition, the poor play or poor art all has tendency that denies a system, which relies upon economic and cultural system, and seeks for what is anti-cultural, elemental, and fundamental. It is very similar even in a sense that focuses on the exploration process itself rather than the result, excludes the transcendental concept, and attaches importance to empiricism. However, Arte Povera accepts contradictoriness and complexity, and suggests eclecticism and tolerance, thereby being basically the nomadic art and the art difficult to be captured constitutively. On the other hand, there is difference in a sense that the poor play is characterized by purity, asceticism, seriousness, and solemnity. If so, which significance does this theatricality, which was introduced to art, ultimately have? As all the arts desire to be revealed with invisible things beyond the visual thing, theatricality comes to play a very important role at this time. If all the artists and audiences today came to acquire actual or virtual freedom much more, that can be said to be a point attributable to that art relied upon diverse conditions in a play.

日本近代美術史上での大正期新興美術運動の意義のひとつは, 術家が?滑の美術の領域を超えて演劇, ダンス, 建築, 文芸といったさまざまな分野に果敢に進出し, 美術と他分野を合一した特異な美術表現を行ない, 美術の領域を大幅に擴大したという点に求められる. 美術と舞台の領域をまたぐ「人形座」もまた, この運動と密接なかかわりを持った. 人形座は伊藤熹朔(1899~1964)とその妻智子, 熹朔の弟の千田是也（本名·伊藤挑夫, 1904~1994）らを中心に, 1920年代の東京で活動した新興人形劇のグル─プである. これまで注目されることがなかったが, 新興美術運動にかかわる美術家が積極的に參加したことで, 日本に新興人形劇を勃興させたことや, この運動とさまざまな接点を持っていた点で, 美術史の視点から考察することに意義が認められる. 本發表では, 最初に, 活動の要となった1923年10月の試演會, 1926年9月の第一回公演會, 1927年7月の臨時公演會`─`以上の公演會の槪要とそのとき上演された作品`─`順にメ─テルリンク作「アグラヴェ─ヌとセリセット」, K.A.ウィットフォ─ゲル作「誰が一番馬鹿だ?」, 小山內?作「三つの願ひ」と「人形」のあらましを確認する. つづいて上演作品の內容が象침主義からプロレタリア, さらに一般大衆化へという揀化を見せたことに注目し, 上演툭時の社뀜的, 文化的環境を踏まえながら人形座が公演會ごとに目指した人形劇について浮き彫りにする. そして最後に人形座同人だった美術家の人形座以外での美術活動に注目しつつ 人形座と大正期新興美術運動とのつながりを明らかにし, さらに「美術の領域としての舞台」という視点を導入することによって, 人形座がこの美術運動におけるひとつの活動袴式であったことを浮き上がらせる.

Yangbanxi("model plays") symbolize the Cultural Revolution(1966~1976) in China. The Eight Model Revolutionary Works include five Chinese Modern Peking Operas, namely, Taking Tiger Mountain by Strategy(智取威虎山), Harbor City(海港), Shaijabang(沙家浜), The Red Lantern(紅燈記), and Raid on the White Tiger Regiment; (奇襲白虎團), ballets such as The Red Detachment of Women(紅色娘子軍) and The White-Haired Girl(白毛女); and a symphony: Shajiabang(沙家浜). On April 24, 1967, Chinese leaders, including Mao Zedong, saw a performance of The White-Haired Girl. Yanbanxi was performed in Beijing between May 24 and June 15 the same year. The Red Lantern was designated as a work for the proletarian classes by Jiang Qing(Mao Zedong's third wife and the most influential woman in China) and spread nationwide. It was also made into a film to be enjoyed by many people. The modern Chinese operas went a long way in their creation of visual images of revolutionary heroes. The Red Lantern, in particular, came to be regarded as the most representative revolutionary opera. In the course of such a process, Jiang Qing used Yangbanxi as a political tool for compelling the people to worship and pledge their allegiance to Mao in an effort to turn the Cultural Revolution into a class struggle on behalf of her husband. During the Cultural Revolution period, artists were made to associate with workers, farmers and soldiers based on the idea of advocating revolutionary arts for the proletarian classes. The characters in The Rend Lantern were portrayed as heroes from the proletarian classes according to the demands of the era. Chinese leaders set forth the principles of artistic expression, stressing three important factors: politics, heroes, and heroic acts, which were to be applied to all the visual arts, including Yangbanxi. This paper attempts to present a new view of fine arts during the Cultural Revolution in China by focusing on the productive significance of a leading style of a specific era in the past. To that end, this paper sheds light on products made in conformance with political instructions, stressing the importance of revolutionary heroes in The Red Lantern.

Many historical research and facet about modern art in Indonesia which formulating background of contemporary Indonesian Art. Indonesian art critic Sanento Yuliman states that Modern art has been rapidly developing in Indonesia since the Indonesian Independence in 1945. Modern Art is a part of the super culture of the Indonesian metropolitan and is closely related to the contact between the Indonesian and Western Cultures. Its birth was part of the nationalism project, when the Indonesian people consists of various ethnics were determined to become a new nation, the Indonesian nation, and they wished for a new culture, and therefore, a new art . The period 1960s, which was the beginning of the creation and development of the painters and the painters associations, was the first stage of the development of modern art in Indonesia. The second stage showed the important role of the higher education institutes for art. These institutes have developed since the 1950s and in the 1970s they were the main education institutes for painters and other artists. The artists awareness of the medium, forms or the organization of shapes were encouraged more intensely and these encouraged the exploring and experimental attitudes. Meanwhile, the information about the world's modern art, particularly Western Art; was widely and rapidly spread. The 1960s and 1970s were marked by the development of various abstractions and abstract art and the great number of explorations in various new media, like the experiment with collage, assemblage, mixed media. The works of the Neo Art Movement-group in the second half of the 1970s and in the 1980s shows environmental art and installations, influenced by the elements of popular art, from the commercial world and mass media, as well as the involvement of art in the social and environmental affairs. The issues about the environment, frequently launched by the intellectuals in the period of economic development starting in the 1970s, echoed among the artists, and they were widened in the social, art and cultural circles. The Indonesian economic development following the important change in the 1970s has caused a change in the life of the middle and upper class society, as has the change in various aspects of a big city, particularly Jakarta. The new genre emerged in 1975 which indicates contemporary art in Indonesia, when a group of young artists organized a movement, which was widely known as the Indonesian New Art Movement. This movement criticized international style, universalism and the long standing debate on an east-west-dichotomy. As far as the actual practice of the arts was concerned the movement criticized the domination of the art of painting and saw this as a sign of stagnation in Indonesian art development. Based on this criticism ‘the movement’ introduced ready-mades and installations (Jim Supangkat) . Takes almost two decades that the New Art Movement activists were establishing Indonesian Installation art genre as contemporary paradigm and influenced the 1980's generation like, FX Harsono, Dadang Christanto, Arahmaiani, Tisna Sanjaya, Diyanto, Andarmanik, entering the 1990's decade as “rebellion period”; reject towards established aesthetic mainstream i.e. painting, sculpture, graphic art which are insufficient to express “new language” and artistic needs especially to mediate social politic and cultural situation. Installation Art which contains open possibilities of creation become a vehicle for aesthetic establishment rejection and social politics stagnant expression in 1990s. Installation art accommodates two major field; first, the rejection of aesthetic establishment has a consequences an artists quest for medium; deconstruction models and cross disciplines into multi and intermedia i.e. performance, music, video etc. Second aspect is artists' social politic intention for changes, both conclude as characteristics of Indonesian Installation Art and establishing the freedom of expression in contemporary Indonesian Art until today.