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.