이 논문은 베트남전쟁기 게릴라 화가들의 활동을 추적하기 위해 먼저 베트남 근대미술 의 형성과 베트남전쟁기 저항미술이 나타난 경위를 고찰한다. 전쟁에서 경험할 수 있는 폭력적인 참상에도 불구하고 게릴라 화가들은 적에 대한 적개심보다 근거지에서의 평범 한 일상을 표현하는데 주력했다. 게릴라이자 화가였으므로 옻칠회화나 유화보다 연필이 나 펜으로 그린 스케치와 수채화가 대부분을 차지하고 있기 때문에 이 드로잉들은 거의 일기와도 같은 것이었다. 전쟁의 현실을 직접적으로 그려낸 이 드로잉을 통해 게릴라화 가들이 파악하던 베트남전쟁의 성격을 이해하는 데는 소중한 참고가 될 것이다. 또한 자신들이 겪고 있는 현실을 미화하거나 과장하지 않고 표현했다는 점도 중요하다. 이 논문의 의의는 베트남 근대미술과 저항미술의 형성과정을 고찰하고 이를 바탕으로 한국 에는 잘 알려지지 않은 베트남전쟁기 게릴라 화가들의 활동과 작품을 고찰한 것에서 찾 을 수 있을 것이다.

The purpose of this essay is to examine the responses of artists on nuclear experiences through an analysis of the nuclear images represented in contemporary Japanese art. Japan has previously as twice experienced nuclear disaster in 20th century. The first atomic bombs were dropped in 1945 as well as the 5th Fukuryumaru, Japanese pelagic fishing boat, exposed by hydrogen bomb test operated by the US in 1954 nearby Bikini atoll. Due to Tsunami taken place by the great earthquake that caused the meltdown of Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant in March 2010, Japan is being experienced a nuclear disaster again. Despite practical experiences, comtemporary Japanese art has avoided the subject of nuclear disasters since the end of the Asia-Pacific War for a variety of reasons. Firstly, GHQ prohibited to record or depict the terrible effect of atomic bomb until 1946. Secondly, Japanese government has tried to sweep the affair under the carpet quite a while a fact of nuclear damage to their people. Because Japan has produced numerous war record paintings during the Second World War, in the aftermath of the defeated war, most of Japanese artists thought that dealing with politics, economics, and social subject was irrelevant to art as well as style of amateur in order to erase their melancholic memory on it. In addition, silence that was intended to inhibit victims of nuclear disasters from being provoked psychologically has continued the oblivion on nuclear disasters. For these reasons, to speak on nuclear bombs has been a kind of taboo in Japan. However, shortly after the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima, the artist couple Iri and Toshi Maruki visited to ruin site as a volunteer for Victim Relief. They portrayed the horrible scenes of the legacy of nuclear bomb since 1950 based on their observation. Under the condition of rapid economical growth in 1960s and 1970s, Japanese subculture such as comics, TV animations, plastic model, and games produced a variety of post apocalyptic images recalling the war between the USA and Japanese militarism, and battle simulation based on nuclear energy. While having grown up watching subculture emerged as Japan Neo-Pop in 1990s, New generation appreciate atomic images such as mushroom cloud which symbolizes atomic bomb of Hiroshima. Takashi Murakami and other Neo-Pop artists appropriate mushroom cloud image in their work. Murakami curated three exhibitions including <Little Boy: the Art of Japan's Exploding Subculture> and persists in superflat and infantilism as an evidence in order to analyze contemporary Japanese society. However, his concept, which is based on atomic bomb radiation exposure experience only claimed on damage and sacrifice, does not reflect Japan as the harmer. Japan has been constructing nuclear power plants since 1954 in the same year when the 5th Fukuryumaru has exposed until the meltdown of Fukushima Nuclear Plant although took place of nuclear radiation exposures of Three Mile and Chernobyl. Due to the exploding of Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant, Japan reconsiders the danger of nuclear disaster. In conclusion, the purpose of this paper may be found that the sense of victim which flowed in contemporary art is able to inquire into the response of artist on the subject of nuclear as well as the relationship between society, politics, culture, and modern history of Japan and international political situation.

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.

In Korea, nation and nationalism are undeniable justice, absolute virtue andmoreover system of desire. From the late Chosun Dynasty when the Korean Peninsula hadto survive from the critical situation of being the arena of competition, and through thecolonial period under Japanese imperialism, nationalism became stronger as a logic ofsurvival. The policy of seclusion under closed and exclusive nationalism that didn’trecognize the world situation well enough, eventually gave more pain to the nation.Nationalism in colonial Korea which was as reformed nationalism and on the other hand,as intransigent, resisting nationalism. Since the purpose of this writing is not for clarifyingthe argument raised on Korean nationalism, there is no use mentioning how it went withthe change of time. But we have to focus on the fact that the word‘nation’whichappeared under the influence of popular revolution and capitalism meaning‘a group ofpeople’, was translated and understood as a racial concept for strengthening the unity of‘single-race nation with five thousand years’history. First of all, there is nationalism used to fortify the system. ‘The Charter of NationalEducation’and‘The Pledge of Allegiance’were ornaments to intensify the ruling ideologyand dictatorship to militarize entire South Korea for‘settling Korean democracy’professednationalism. Also, another ruling ideology armed with‘self-reliance’put North Korea intothe state of hypnosis called nationalism. Nationalism, claiming‘nation’outwardly, but inreality, being an illuminating, instructing ideology isolating each other was indeed a bodywith two faces. This made‘nation’in Korea mysterious and objective through work suchas. The statue commemorating patriotic forefathers’and picture of national records’inSouth Korea art. Nationalism used to strengthening the system encountered the magical‘single-race’and made‘ghost’being an extreme exclusion to other nations. We can findpedigreed pureness not allowing any mixed breeds from the attitude accepting western art-via Japan or directly- and making it vague by using the word Korean and Asia. There’s nationalism as a resistant ideology to solidify the system on the other side. Itcame out as a way of survival among the Great Power and grew with the task of nationalliberation to became as a powerful force facing against the dictatorship dominating SouthKorea after the liberation. This discussion of nationalism as a resistance ideology was activein 1980s. In 1980, democracy movement against the dictatorship of 5th Republic originatedfrom military power which came out suppressing the democratic movement in Gwangju,spread out from the intellects and the students to the labors, farmers and the civilians. It is well known that the‘Nation-People(Minjoong)’s Art Movement could come out under thissocial condition. Our attitude toward nationalism is still dual in this opening part of 21st century. Onone hand, they are opposing to the ultra-nationalism but are not able to separate it fromnationalism, and on the other, they have much confusion using it. In fact, in a single-racenation like Korea, the situation of being nationalism and jus sanguinis together can causedual nationalism. Though nationalism is included in the globalization order, it is evidence that it’seffective in Korea where there are still modern fetters like division and separation. Inparticular, in the world where Japan makes East Asia Coalition but exposed in front ofnationalism, and China not being free from Sinocentrism, and American nationalism takingthe world order, and Russia fortifying nationalism suppressing the minority race after thedissolution of socialism, Korean nationalism is at the point to find an alternative plansuperior to the ruling and resisting ideology.

As biennale exhibitions has been expanded into all of the world since 1990s, these trends of blockbuster exhibitions have caused several problems. For instance, some major curators monopolized most global size exhibitions despite of a variety of cultural and historical backgrounds. Besides, due to a strong connection between these curators and their own artists, the young emerging artists’ opportunities tend to be reduced as a result of the power game. In addition, major curators’ power have influence on the exhibition style as well as on the theme itself. Some artists who did not involved that kind of huge scale exhibitions dispute that the direction of the exhibition is concentrating on the curator’s interest instead of artists or viewers. Although these dissatisfactions could not portray correctly the process of organizing and managing system of a biennale exhibition, those biennale exhibitions held in recent have shown tautologic discourses without any passion and positive attitude direct to the exploitation of our society as a vanguard. In the process of comparing several kinds of biennale exhibitions, I could find that some artists who participated several biennale exhibitions at the same time did not present their creative vision, although the triumph of an exhibition was typically measured by the amount of visitors. Thus, the aim of this article is to prove that the biennale can show us new cultural discourse as well as progressive method of understanding our times. Is biennale producing the real ‘global standard’? If biennale has done it, could this global standard present up-to-date paradigm for the unique exhibition system? Is biennale providing an useful opportunity for the understanding and communicating of contemporary art through the re-contextualization which is pronounced by the publicity of curator and organizing committee? How can we find the distinctive strategy from each biennale exhibition including Venice Biennale? Biennale, as a blockbuster exhibition, always requires a degree of hype, otherwise it would not be a special event and would not attract a big enough audience. It is the actual reason why major biennale exhibitions seem to be similar artistic events. Unfortunately, it seems that the excess of biennale exhibitions might bring about the lack of contents. In this case, the biennale syndrome would being a kind of the center of poverty, in spite of the visual splendor. After all, following the global standard may not be a matter of great importance now. What really matters is how each biennale exhibition which started under the different conditions can search their own identity.