이 연구는 한국전쟁 직후에 식민지 세대 화가ㆍ평론가들이 제기한 추상 담론이 한국근현대 미술사에서 어떤 의미와 위상을 차지하고 있는지를 재검토하는 작업의 일부이다. 추상 담론은 식민지 유산인 《대한민국미술전람회》를 중심으로 미술계가 재편된 가운데 제기되었다. 그들은 한국전쟁 후 폐허 같은 상황에서 이른바 세계화ㆍ현대화라는 시대적 과제를 설정하고, 서구의 전후 추상 물결을 현대성으로 인식하는 한편, 실존주의 사상과 문학에 공감하는 가운데 추상 담론을 전개했다. 그들은 주로 1930년대 초부터 1940년대 전반기의 동양주의 추상 담론을 재인식하는 가운데 추상을 통하여 동양적/한국적 정체성을 확보하고자 했다. 하지만 그들과 뒤이은 전후 세대가 냉전공간에 현대성을 지시하는 기호로서 추상을 신화화하는 동안, 식민지 근대성을 해체하는 또 다른 시대적 과제는 묻히게 되었다.

In the late decade of 1930, under the Japanese Imperialism, the Korean abstract art which was formed with affection by Japan and Europe. They say the early Korean abstract art is colonized, from a point that it derives from exterior impact. And they say also it is colonized not to be related to the representation of their own life world. On the other hand, the early Korean abstract art in 1930s is told as the prehistory of ‘Korean Modernism in Art’, which flourished in 1970s followed ‘Informal Art Movement’ in the late 1950s. Because the status of abstract art in 1930s was not more than a germ of ‘Korean Modernism in Art’, while they understand until 1950s as a period dominated by representational art based on Chosun Exhibition or Korean National Exhibition, the period until 1970s as a period ruled by abstract art which was accepted as ‘Korean Modernism in Art’, and the period after 1980s as a period by Min-jung Art and Post-Modernism Art. However, the historical value of Korean Abstract Art in 1930s cannot be passed over, if not trying to understand the development of ‘Korean Modernism in Art’ especially focusing on not their own history but the impact of Western and Japanese art. In the late colonial period, the Korean early abstract art was the strongest utterance of the time paradoxically, even if not related much to optical representation of the Korean subjectivity. Therefore the existing viewpoints about the early Korean abstract art should be changed.