This paper intends to examine the significance of the “Minjoong Misool(People's art)” of the 1980s emerged in Korea in its social, cultural, and art historical context. This paper also aims to provide an analysis of the meaning and form of the individual artist's works, which have been overlooked under the dominant discourse that has emphasized their political role as a collective group. In particular, this paper scrutinizes the work of “Critical Realists” by examining the way in which they perceived Korean society in the early 1980s and visualized their experiences of the period. The figurative art newly emerged in the early 1980s challenged the formalist Modernism, which was adopted into Korea and translated into monochrome paintings and the work of the conversative academicism of the 1970s. The figurative art encouraged a social communication and moreover it intended to criticize the conflicts in the political, economical, and social domains in Korea. The targets of its critique include the unavoidable results of the unprecedented development of economy, various social phenomena of the post-industrial society, and the growth of the commercialized kitsch culture. Along with Shin, Hak-chul's work that incorporates collage technique since the 1980s, the work of some members of “Reality and Utterance” and “Im- sul-nyun” exemplify their critical interests in disclosing the false dream of wealth and happiness by both referring to and drawing on the utopian fantasy manipulated and distributed by mass media and commercial advertisements. This paper pays particular attention to Nouvelle Figuration emerged in France and Europe during the 1960s, which is comparable to the new figurative art emerged in Korea during the 1980s. Nouvelle Figuration criticized the autonomy in art isolated itself from political and social reality after WWII, in particular the indifference of Informel and abstract art as well as American abstract art. Moreover it became rather politicized around May of 1968. Given that French Nouvelle Figuration was introduced in Korea in 1982 and made a significant contribution to the formation of figurative art in Korea, it should be noted that the new figurative art emerged in the 1980s in Korea cannot be categorized merely in relation to People's Art. This paper intends to critically redress the notion that People's art was formed in the particular political, economical, and cultural context of Korea independent of the contemporary artistic practices outside Korea. It will provide a critical examination and analysis of the content and form of the new figurative art, from which People's Art was germinated, in the global context.

The theories of Korean Public Art originated by the artists who were against dictatorship and they associated with democratic politicians. They criticized the Fine art that were supported by the dictatorship and gave their efforts for restoration of ‘resistance paintings(against dictatorship)’, ‘proletarian painting’, ‘realism painting’. In addition, they participated new social ideology(democracy) movement and demonstrated for their rights in arts. These became the main kernel the public art theory was initiated. The public artists splitted into several different parts and participated in the democratic social movement as well as the art movement for freedom. They opened various art exhibitions within different genre, diverse space for various art section such as an exhibition hall, a factories, a university, or a congregation square. Furthermore, the public art theorists published their divergent views through newspaper/broadcasting or unauthorized printed materials. Most of the public artist and the theorists kept their relationship strongly until 1985, the time when ‘ National Arts Association’ started. In 1983 and 1984, they were clearly separated into two parts; artists(move only in art museums) and activists(move in public spaces like school, convention square etc). Their ideological separation also took out national problems. The division; professional artists and armatures, became the social issue as a social stratification matter. And in creating method, there are also other conflicts; critical realism, and public realism as well as western painting and traditional one. These kinds of separation and conflicts made different Public artists associations, under divergent names; ‘Reality and Speak’(R&S), ‘KwangJu Art Association’, ‘Durung’, ‘Dang(Land)’, and ‘Local Youth Students Association’. In addition, their ideology and pursuit toward art movements were very difference. However, the differences and conflicts weakened When the oppression of democratic education from new dictatorship(Pres. Jun, Doo Hwan) came out. In August. 1985 the government opened to the public so called, 'The draft of School stabilization law'(Hankwon Anjung Bup) to control the teachers' rights and that initiated bigger street demonstration and conflicts between police and educators. In November.1985, assembly meeting of National Arts Association in democracy opened as ‘ONE’ combined organization. In this presentation, I'd like to summarize the stream of art movement until 1984, and clarify the main art theories that lead the Public Art Movements in 1980s. The main theories in 1980s are crucial because they become the origin of public art theories. This presentation started with O,youn's ｢Hyunsil Dong In the first declaration｣ and explained the absent of practice in 1970s. In addition, Won, Dong Suk 's theory was mentioned as all over struggles in theories before 1980s. GA and R&S 's founding declarations in 1970s were the start of public art theorists' activities and this article reported the activities after the declarations. First, realism base on the consciousness of reality. Second, practice art democratization based on the ideology. Third, the subject of public art movement based on understanding people's social stratification structure. Fourth, the matters of national forms and creative ways in arts based on showing reality. Fifth, the strong points in arts that the practitioners accepted. About the public art theories around 1984, I discussed the dividing point of public art theories that were shown in ‘generation theory’, ‘organization theory’, and ‘popularization theory’ by the practitioners. The public realism theory that subjects the contradiction of reality and point out the limits of critical realism not only showing the new creative ways but also giving the feeling of solidarity to the public art activist groups. After that, public art movements expressed ‘Dismentlement of Capitalism’ and ‘Public revolution’. In addition, the direction of public art movements were established strongly. There were various opinions and views during the start and formation of the public art theories. The foundation of theorists activities derived from the practitioners who had the concept based on stratification and nationalism. The strong trend of group division spreaded out by practitioners who opened art work together in factories, universities, squares and rural areas. Now many lively active practitioners are gone to the other field not related with arts, and others join into professional art field not public art one with unknown reason. The theorists have the same situation with the practitioners. It means to me that theory always have to be based on the practice.

本文以中国改革开放之后的乡土美术为研究对象，主要讨论了乡土美术发展的三个阶段及其代表性的艺术家和艺术作品；对支持和影响不同阶段的乡土美术的观念进行了阐释。改革开放之后乡土美术的出现和发展，就其本身而言经历了三个大的发展阶段。即七十年代末到八十年代的乡土写实主义美术；八十年代中期兴起的以西北为题材的乡土美术；九十年代市场经济兴起之后，以进城打工的农民工为表达对象的乡土美术。乡土写实主义的美术就是改革开放之初，卽伤痕美术。改革开放之后，人们普遍认为文革美术是假大空的虚伪现实主义艺术，原因之一就是它用理想化的农村和农民形象，遮蔽了生活在艰难困苦之中的乡村和农民。从观念上说就是用毛时代一直受到批判的人道主义和人性论，来反对毛时代，特别是文革中流行的阶级斗争观念。在上世纪八十年中期，中国的知识分子感受到西方强势文化的压力，不约而同地把眼光投向了西北。借西北的乡村和农民形象，神圣化汉唐的历史和文化来神圣化中国文化。这作为回应西方文化冲击的一种特殊方式，标志着乡土美术的转向，那就是从关注对文革的否定和反思上转向对整个中国文化的反思。进入九十年代之后，一个重要的艺术现象是新生代的出现。从中国视觉艺术史的角度看，新生代的艺术标志着从表达乡村到描绘都市的转向，同时也预示了另一种新型农民形象-----农民 工形象---的出现。过去以地理空间为界限的城乡对立，在改革开放之后也进入城市空间之中，形成一种新的社会结构。上世纪九十年代开始的市场经济改革，加大了中国社会贫富之间的差距，由此导致知识界的新左派和自由主义者对中国社会问题的争论，其中社会公正、公平和经济效率成为两派争论的焦点。事实上，农民被置入社会底层，成为市场经济改革中受益最少的人群，正是改革者为了追求经济效率最大化的制度设计产生的结果。此时表达农民工形象的乡土美术，在一定程度上反映了新左派的思想影响，也体现了历史上早有的民粹主义关注弱势人群的传统。本文认为改革开放之后的乡土美术，虽然是以中国乡村和农民为表达对象的，但这个对象在作品并不是主体，而是沉默、无语和匿名的。原因在于中国乡村和农民的边缘化进程，与中国社会的变迁几乎是同步的，由此证明了从一开始，乡土美术并没有真正成为农民的代言人，而是另有政治和艺术的诉求。

The Philippines was colonized by Spain for about centuries, from 1521 to 1898, and ruled by America for around four decades, from 1899 to 1946. After recovering from the Second World War, the government started to harness human labor as export itself. In the present time the overseas Filipinos keep the economy afloat with their steady transfer of money to relatives and dependents. Through the art works, the issue which Filipinos were exploited and exported by its government has been reflected as the various allegories. As Filipinos traditionally follow and keep Catholic belief, themes of Christ's sacrifice has allegorically been represented as salvation, struggle, suppression, and emancipation of people. Through the allegory, we can interpret both the intrinsic and superficial texts. Also we can identity certain modes of the visuality of allegory in selected works from Philippine art history that in their complex mediations materialize the people and dignity of their predicament and their prevailing. Philippine art can be divided as three different features: passion, vagrancy, and mass formation. The passion stage was depicted as deep structure of Christian thought and devotional feeling, harsh capitalist system. In the pictures of vagrancy, under the regime of Ferdinand Marcos, the themes of drift, deprivation, and homelessness are reckoned through the images of pictures. The stories represented with allegory have been played an important role to bring local issues up as national ones. Those stages take us to the processes of mass formation or the depiction of the people as a moment in the totality of force. The allegorical sign refers to another sign that precedes it, but with which it will never able to coincide reach back to a previous stage and in this constant attempt at return incorporates a structural distance from its origin. The true people's art is one that radically generates transformative technologies and techniques so that it irrevocably breaks the plane of “art”. In the painting, the truth is represented by functioning as foundation of a rhetoric of the image. And at this axis, the passional, the vagrant, and the mass formation tend to come together because they render the form of contingency that must be suffered and hopefully surpassed, a Filipino subjectivity that must be stitched in time.

The artworks of Socialist Realism of the former Soviet Union, with the beginning of the 21st century, are gaining a new attention from art collectors. One reason for this might consist in the fact that relevant art pieces exemplify the ways in which they visualize ideas on the basis of their high-profile art tradition and also in which they integrate their utopian ideals with mysticism. These aspects of the Soviet art goes far beyond the wide-spread assumption that their art, as a means of propaganda, principally represents a political allegiance to the system. With Stalin coming into power in the 1930s, the artistic trend of Socialist Realism obtained a nationwide sympathy and support from people, giving birth to a new art which essentially corresponded to the demands of the political power. An official art current of the USSR over the period from the 1930s to 1950s, Socialist Realism was in tandem with the Communist commitment to the party and popularity, symbolizing a loyalty to the cause. It was thus characterized by plainness and lucidity so that ordinary people could gain easy access to art. Its salient feature, over an entire range of art, was an optimistic pursuit of a utopian dream. Therefore, it tallied with the popular sentiment for a Communist paradise, giving form to their beliefs in human agency working at the materialist world and also to such abstract concepts as force, fitness, and beauty by adding even mythical ideals. Its main subject matter includes harvest feasts of collective farms, imaginary socialist cities, grand marches of heroic laborers and in this way it served as a propaganda for a sacred utopia of socialist totalitarianism. On the other end of the spectrum, however, rose the second camp of art, which put an emphasis on bona-fide artistic activities of plastic art and on an artist's personal expression and freedom, as opposed to the surface optimism of Socialist Realism. Central to the Russian Avant Garde art, which prized the above-mentioned values, were Malevich's Geometric Abstraction and A. Rodchenko's Constructivism. Furthermore, in the transitional era of the late 20th century and the 21st century it was recognized that film art or electronic media art, rather than traditional genre of paintings, would function as a more efficient way of propaganda. These new genres were made possible by ridiculing the stereotypes of the Russian lifestyle and also by ignoring ethical or professional dimensions of artworks. That is, they reinvented themselves into a sort of field art, seemingly degrading the quality of artworks and transforming them into artifacts or simulacres in the very sense of post-modernism. The advent of the new era brought about the formation and occupation of pop culture of the younger generations, calling into question the idea of art as the class-determined. It also increased the attention to field art, which extensively found way to modern art centers, galleries, and exhibition projects. It can be stated that this was a natural outcome of human nature.

In the development of linear perspective, Brook Taylor's theory has achieved a special position. With his method described in Linear Perspective(1715) and New Principles of Linear Perspective(1719), the subject of linear perspective became a generalized and abstract theory rather than a practical method for painters. He is known to be the first who used the term ‘vanishing point’. Although a similar concept has been used form the early stage of Renaissance linear perspective, he developed a new method of British perspective technique of measure points based on the concept of ‘vanishing points’. In the 15th and 16th century linear perspective, pictorial space is considered as independent space detached from the outer world. Albertian method of linear perspective is to construct a pavement on the picture in accordance with the centric point where the centric ray of the visual pyramid strikes the picture plane. Comparison to this traditional method, Taylor established the concent of a vanishing point (and a vanishing line), namely, the point (and the line) where a line (and a plane) through the eye point parallel to the considered line (and the plane) meets the picture plane. In the traditional situation like in Albertian method, the picture plane was assumed to be vertical and the center of the picture usually corresponded with the vanishing point. On the other hand, Taylor emphasized the role of vanishing points, and as a result, his method entered the domain of projective geometry rather than Euclidean geometry. For Taylor's theory was highly abstract and difficult to apply for the practitioners, there appeared many perspective treatises based on his theory in England since 1740s. Joshua Kirby's Dr. Brook Taylor's Method of Perspective Made Easy, Both in Theory and Practice(1754) was one of the most popular treatises among these posterior writings. As a well-known painter of the 18th century English society and perspective professor of the St. Martin's Lane Academy, Kirby tried to bridge the gap between the practice of the artists and the mathematical theory of Taylor. Trying to ease the common readers into Taylor's method, Kirby somehow abbreviated and even omitted several crucial parts of Taylor's ideas, especially concerning to the inverse problems of perspective projection. Taylor's theory and Kirby's handbook reveal us that the development of linear perspective in European society entered a transitional phase in the 18th century. In the European tradition, linear perspective means a representational system to indicated the three-dimensional nature of space and the image of objects on the two-dimensional surface, using the central projection method. However, Taylor and following scholars converted linear perspective as a complete mathematical and abstract theory. Such a development was also due to concern and interest of contemporary artists toward new visions of infinite space and kaleidoscopic phenomena of visual perception.

이 논문은 근대사실주의를 표방하는 소설과 미술전반에 나타난 파놉티콘적 재현의 특성을 고찰하고 있다. 파놉티콘적 재현을 정의하기 위해 논문은 우선 알베르티의 중앙투시도법 이론(1435)으로부터 비롯된 근대적 재현의 탈신체적, 관념적 시각성의 특징을 살피고 이것이 18세기 말 제레미 벤쌈의 파놉티콘 개량감옥이 구축하는 감시적, 통제적 시각성에 이론적 근거를 부여했음을 고찰하고 있다. 이와 같은 경향은 근대소설과 미술의 인물구성에 나타나는 다양한 고립적 상태⎯독방감금, 고립, 자아 몰입⎯에 적용된다고 주장할 수 있다. 즉, 중앙적 시각이나 전지적 화자의 시점에 의해 재현되는 고립된 주체에는 그의 주체구성요건에 벗어날 수 없는 항시적 감시와 통제가 작용하고 있다고 볼 수 있는 여지를 제공한다. 이는 근대적 시각성의 이데올로기적 특성을 드러내는 것으로서 이를 밝히기 위해 벤쌈이외에도 마이클 프리드, 존 벤더와 같은 이론가들의 시각성에 대한 주장을 살피고 있다. 그러나 더욱 중요한 본 논문의 고찰 대상은 실제 파놉티콘적 재현의 감시의 대상으로 등장하고 있는 고립된 자아가 특이한 재현방식을 통하여 재현의 중앙 권력적 시각으로부터 이탈하고 있다는 점이다. 이와 같은 주장은 우선 탈 신체적, 관념적 시각성을 통해 구축된다고 여겨지는 중앙 권력적 작용에 대한 탈 권력적 인식의 틀을 통해 뒷받침될 수 있다. 파놉티콘적 권력은 단일한 시각의 균일성을 통해 대상의 통일성과 투명성을 마련하고자 하는데 이때 수반되는 문제는 대상에 대한 축소적 해석이다. 즉, 시각의 대상은 다양한 시각적, 신체적 특성이 교차하는 타자의 범주임에도 불구하고 권력의 시점은 언제나 이를 단순화시켜 바라봄으로써 클리셰나 스테레오 타입과 같은 반복적이고 낯익은 전형성의 범주로 이해하려고 하는 것이다. 이와 같은 파놉티콘적 재현의 인식적 맹점은 근대미술이나 소설에 나타나고 있는 시각이나 서술의 주변부에 잘 드러나 있다. 이 인식의 변두리는 사실주의적 기법에 의하여 짐짓 흐리거나 대략적으로 나타나 권력중심적 인식의 틀이 멀리 놓여있는 대상에 대해서도 일정한 시각의 균일성을 보여주고 있음을 드러내고 있다. 하지만 또 한편으로는 이 변두리 지역이야말로 권력적 시각의 취약성이 드러나고 있는 곳이기도 하다. 즉, 이곳은 클리셰나 스테레오 타입에 대한 권력적 시각의 의존성이 가장 높기 때문에 권력주체와 타자, 인식과 실제, 시각과 경험등 사이의 간극을 통해 탈 권력적 표현전략이 궁리되어질 수 있는 지점인 것이다. 예를 들어, 미술사학자 노만 브라이슨의 주장대로 그림이나 서술은 사실적 표현을 위해 대상을 중심 시선에 고정시키고 묘사하는 것 이외에도 또한, 중앙에서 벗어난 시각의 주변부에 분산되고 이탈적인 타자의 범주를 반영하는데 힘을 기울이고 있다고 볼 수 있다. 결국 이는 사실성의 인지가 대상에 대한 집중과 분산, 관찰과 이탈, 동종성과 이질성과 같은 요소들이 서로 상호작용하여 이루어내는 것이라는 것이다. 이와 같은 인식적 근거를 통해 볼 때, 파놉티콘적 재현은 시각의 주변부에 나타나는 여러 상이한 대상의 움직임을 축소시키고자하는 권력적 인식의 작용이라 하겠다. 그러나 앞서 밝힌대로 이와 같은 축소적 재현은 타자를 단조롭고 반복적인 진부한 표현대상으로 삼는 문제를 야기하고 만다. 이는 중앙 권력적 시각의 맹점으로, 타자를 관찰하는데 하나의 중요한 인식적 간극을 제공하는 것이다. 즉, 단순한 표현으로 나타난 타자의 반복적 모습은 실은 위장적인 것이며, 그 이면에 있는 진정한 타자의 모습은 무엇인가에 대한 궁금증을 야기하는 것이다. 위와 같은 방법론적 태도는 18세기에서부터 마련되기 시작한 사실주의적 미술작품과 소설은 물론 개량감옥 보고서나 에세이등에 나타난 인물의 감시적 고립상태를 주도하는 파놉티콘적 시각성을 그 연구대상으로 간주한다. 즉, 이와 같은 시각성이 드러내는 시각과 서술의 불균형, 갈등, 전복등의 여러 모순적 상황들을 중요한 고찰의 대상으로 삼는 것이다. 또한 이와 같은 갈등을 드러내고 있는 여러 수사학적, 표현적 특성과 그 특성이 표방하고 있는 인식론적 의미도 고찰대상에 포함된다. 이와 같은 작업의 한 시작으로서 본 연구의 마지막 장에서는 19세기 영국의 개량감옥에 대한 에세이로 유명한 헨리 메이휴의 <런던의 여러 형무소의 생활상>(1868)을 다루고 있다.