한국현대미술에서 예술적 아방가르드는 물론 정치적 아방가르드의 시대로 1960년대를 주목한다. 그 시작점의 4․19 혁명은 한국 민주주의의 이정표와 같은 사건이었고, 청년 작가들이 정치적 목소리를 낼 수 있는 계기였다. 정치 주체로 성장했고 또한 좌절했던 청년세대가 사회적 억압의 탈출구로서 미술현장에서 폭발시킨 매체 다양성은 반예술 담론으로 확장 가능성을 갖는다. 하지만 ‘저항’의 시기에 모더니즘 비평은 미술과 사회를 분리하며 시대의 전위에서 사회적 의미를 축소시켰다. 1960년 《벽전》에서부터 1970년대를 문 연 AG에 이르기까지 일관되게 고수된 모더니즘적 주류 비평에 대한 문제의식에서 본 논의는 시작된다. 저항의 시기에 평론가 이일이 제시한 ‘참여’의 화두를 중심으로 현실 인식의 간극을 살펴 ‘전위’의 의미를 환기한다.

The purpose of this study is to reestablish the innovative and experimental designs of Rei Kawakubo by considering and analyzing the flow on the avant-garde nature of her design collection from 1981 to 2017. Design trends such as the art trend, silhouette, color, and expressive technique showcased in Rei Kawakubo’s collection from 1981 spring/summer to 2017 spring/summer were examined through precedent studies, books, internet materials, and the avant-garde expressive nature of her designs appearing in modern fashion. Additionally, this study considers the definition of avant- garde and analyzes the expressive nature of Rei Kawakubo’s 137 works from the Comme des Garcons collection, exhibited in New York’s Metropolitan Museum of Art. As a result of this examination, the avant-garde expressive nature seen in modern fashion was classified into the following themes: historicity, de-structure, exaggeration, intermixture, and surrealism. As a result of reclassifying these characteristics according to historical flow, the historicty, intermixture, and de-structure appeared in the 1980s, while intermixture, exaggeration, and de-structure appeared in the 1990s. More recently, historicity, intermixture, and de-structure appeared in the 2000s, and intermixture, de-structure, exaggeration, and surrealism appeared in the 2010s. The present study is significant in providing theoretical material for the more innovative and various design development in diverse domains while helping to define and understand the avant-garde expression through Rei Kawakubo’s collection.

본 논문은 1970년 아시아에서 최초로 개최된 일본만국박람회(日本万国博覽會)와 전위예 술에 대해 살펴보았다. 일본만국박람회를 국가 이미지를 표상하는 문화외교 정책을 위한 장으 로 파악하고 기존의 일본의 전후 미술사에서 잘 다뤄지지 않거나 지엽적으로 서술되는 데 그친 ‘환경(環境)’ 담론 및 테크놀로지를 강조한 환경예술의 예술가 협업 그리고 구타이미술협회의 후 기 활동에 해당하는 일본만국박람회 출품작에 대해 검토하였다. 여기서 테크놀로지를 이용한 전위예술 경향은 과학기술의 발전이라는 측면을 제시하였으며 이는 진보, 미래와 동일시되어 이를 강조하는 정부당국의 방향성과 합치되는 면이 있었던 것으로 보인다. 일본만국박람회에서 전위예술은 일본이 고미술 등의 전통 뿐 아니라 현대미술에 있어서도 문화대국으로서의 면모를 지니고 있음을 알리고자 했던 정부당국의 의도를 실현시키는 역할을 하였다고 볼 수 있다.

The purpose of this study is ultimately subjected to the Orientalism, even though this deals with some positive effects in the realm of art and architecture as the scope of study, because through which the relationship between two different cultures will be discussed. That is to say, this research focused not only on how the presentation of ‘avant-garde’ visual art, which is explained as formal ‘purity’ and ‘abstraction’ as the characteristics of modern arts, could be made in the transition to the 20th's World, but also on what is the role and meaning of Eastern thoughts, which is popular in that time, for the new philosophical background of the artistic revolution. As a result, this study found that a lot of ‘avant-garde’ architects such as F. L. Wright, M. Mahony in Prairie School and L. Sullivan, D. Burnham, J. Root in Chicago School, and Lauweriks, H. P. Berlage who introduced Wright's works into the Europe, had possessed the ‘Universal Philosophy’ including Unitarianism, Transcendentalism, Deism, and Theosophy which are all influenced by Oriental religions and thoughts through historic western philosophers, although it is generally well-known that W. Kandinsky and P. Mondrian were belong to that. Furthermore, they gave attention to the Oriental religions and thoughts in that time, eventually made a historical progressive process of unification of thoughts between East and West. In a word, the new universalism was the philosophical background that made the artist's idea and presentation on ‘from Being into Becoming’.

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.

From the late 1920s to the 1930s, Korea’s fine art community focused on traditionalviewpoints as their main topic. The traditional viewpoints were discussed mainly byKorean students studying in Japan, especially oil painters. Such discussions on tradition canbe divided into two separate halves, namely the pre- and post-Sino-Japanese War (1937)periods. Before the war, the modernists among Korea’s fine art community tried to gain afuller understanding of contemporary Western modern art, namely, expressionism,futurism, surrealism, and so forth, on the basis of Orientalism, and borrow from theseschools’in order to create their own works. Furthermore, proponents of Joseon’s avant-garde fine arts and artists of the pro-fine art school triggered debate on the traditionalviewpoints. After the Sino-Japanese War, these artists continued to embrace Westernmodern art on the basis of Orientalism. However, since Western modern fine art wasregressing into Oriental fine art during this period, Korean artists did not need to researchWestern modern fine art, but sought to study Joseon’s classics and create Joseon’s ownavant-garde fine art in a movement led by the Munjang group. This research reviews thetraditional view espoused by the Munjang group, which represented the avant-garde fineart movement of the post-war period. Advocating Joseon’s own current of avant-garde fine art through the Munjang literarymagazine, Gil Jin-seop, Kim Yong-jun and others accepted the Japanese fine artcommunity’s methodology for the restoration of classicism, but refused Orientalism as anideology, and attempted to renew their perception of Joseon tradition. The advocation ofthe restoration of classicism by Gil Jin-seop and Kim Yong-jun appears to be similar to thatof the Yasuda Yojuro-style restoration of classicism. However, Gil Jin-seop and Kim Yong-jun did not seek their sources of classicism from the Three-Kingdoms and Unified Sillaperiods, which Japan had promoted as a symbol of unity among the Joseon people;instead they sought classicism from the Joseon fine art which the Japanese had criticized asa hotbed of decadence. It was the Joseon period that the Munjang group chose as classicism when Japanwas upholding Fascism as a contemporary extremism, and when Hangeul (Korean writing system) was banned from schools. The group highly evaluated literature written in the styleof women, especially women’s writings on the royal court, as represented by Hanjungnok(A Story of Sorrowful Days). In the area of fine art, the group renewed the evaluation of notonly literary paintings, but also of the authentic landscape paintings refused by, and thevalues of the Chusa school criticized as decadent by, the colonial bureaucratic artists,thereby making great progress in promoting the traditional viewpoint. Kim Yong-junembraced a painting philosophy based on the painting techniques of Sasaeng (sketching),because he paid keen attention to the tradition of literary paintings, authentic landscapepaintings and genre paintings. The literary painting theory of the 20th century, which washighly developed, could naturally shed both the colonial historical viewpoint whichregarded Joseon fine art as heteronomical, and the traditional viewpoint which regardedJoseon fine art as decadent. As such, the Munjang group was able to embrace the Joseon period as the source ofclassicism amid the prevalent colonial historical viewpoint, presumably as it hadaccumulated first-hand experience in appreciating curios of paintings and calligraphicworks, instead of taking a logical approach. Kim Yong-jun, in his fine art theory, definedartistic forms as the expression of mind, and noted that such an artistic mind could beattained by the appreciation of nature and life. This is because, for the Munjang group, theexperience of appreciating nature and life begins with the appreciation of curios ofpaintings and calligraphic works. Furthermore, for the members of the Munjang group, who were purists who valuedartistic style, the concept of individuality presumably was an engine that protected themfrom falling into the then totalitarian world view represented by the Nishita philosophy. Such a 20th century literary painting theory espoused by the Munjang groupconcurred with the contemporary traditional viewpoint spearheaded by Oh Se-chang in the1910s. This theory had a great influence on South and North Korea’s fine art theories andcircles through the Fine Art College of Seoul National University and Pyongyang Fine ArtSchool in the wake of Korea’s liberation. In this sense, the significance of the theoryshould be re-evaluated.