이 논문은 포스트모더니즘에 대한 책들을 간결하게 검토하는데, 이 작 업은 예이츠와 그의 포스트모던한 작품의 면모를 읽는데 도움이 될 수 있을 것이다 . 그런데, 모더니즘 혹은 포스모더니즘은 무엇인가? 한마디로 정의할 수 있는가? 아마도 어렵지 않을까? 나에게 이 질문을 던지면 나 역시 쉽게 답하지 못할 같다. 그래서 이 문제를 안고 책 몇권을 뒤적인다. 그래서 결국 이와 관련하여 제안을 하고 싶은데, 낭 만주의, 모던니즘, 포스모더니즘 등 -주의, 혹은 -이즘 대신에 문학사적으로 운동을 시 기(시대)구분 하는 것은 어떨까?

The history of art during the first half of the last decade was founded the discussion with highly impressive and confident. The art might establish its unique area based on self recognition at that era. The self-confidence of modern art may be possible on enlightenment, which is the firm relationship for knowledge and reality. However the faith of modernism which shows rational tendency, objective, and the existence of universal knowledge has been drastically doubted and criticized thereafter. A internal ideological system which had leaded the modern art was exhausted. Postmodernism revolved to the dramatic openness leaning against the deoedipalizational confession. According to the dissipation of the vitality of modern art postmodern art has been evolved and then various phenomena which follow the trends has been emerged. The avant-garde and resisteive attribute of modern art was diluted fast due to the influx of popular culture. As time goes it can be attracted by spectacle taste than metaphysical peculiarity. It has to inevitably justified the drift of light and quick themes, contents, and images. Such as these phenomena realistically shows fact that postmodern art had been failed to open a new chapter of consilience which intermediates beauty and usual communication to overcome the solipsism of modernism. A trial to pursuit the opened esthetics conceived more ‘heroic’ ‘Star-Subject’ than before by dismantling the modern ‘Hero-Subject’. Postmodernism has been recorded as a regression of art, which is the technology of profound spirit that mitigates antagonism and confrontation and mediates mutual encountering of human being. Prevailing of postmodern freedom had been accompanied by popularity, osetentation consumption, marketing, gambling level exitement, mixtures of desires with price fluctuations. We witness ‘self-confinement’ and ‘lasting absence of exit’ phenomena in postmodernism ideology and practice. We have to deal postmodernism as an ‘ideology which closes the discussion for the future’ in the context of ‘absence of way’ at this point. We are going to investigate how postmodern ideology and practice takes part in the prospection beyond thereafter through discussion. We also pay attention to the ‘absence of prospection’ as a internal problem in itself nevertheless mention the three merge points such as tradition or memory, earthy thought, the self who confrontation others as the clue of prospecting thought which is allowing coming over postmodern absence.

Cross-Over as an aesthetic phenomenon is closely associated with postmodernism. So we have to return once again to the relation between modernism and postmodernism. Postmodemism especially relating to cross-over is defined as anti-modernism. Postmodernism as antimodemism considers modernism as too intelligent, difficult, elitisic art. Moreover modernism is no longer an actual artistic theory but just a past theory. Elitism of modernism is replaced by populism of postmodemism. Especially after 1980's, Crossover, characteristic of postmodernism as being oriented towards popular culture has been seen in every apect of life. For example, crossover between high culture and popular culture, between history and fiction, even between image and reality. Postmodemism is a principal logic in society where every hierarchy is demolished and an aesthetic version of democracy, pluralism and relativism. In this essay, Postmodernsim relating to crossover is regarde and interpreted as an American cultural theory. So it is a very serious problem that Postmodemism as a national and local theory is accepted as if it is a global cultural theory. The call for modernism in the middle of 19th century was in connection with the question of the status of art in the capitalism. In the capitalist society where every human action and meaning was reduced to money, modernism chose to isolate itself from contemporary society and dedicated itself to art. It limited its main question to the artistic experiment. The Art Cult of Modernism was a resistent activity of modem artists against their society. In that process, art inevitably became esoteric, ambiguous and difficult. Because of its difficulty, thus, Modernism is accessible only to a few spectators. In that situation, numerous constructions of museums and concert halls for industrial and financial aim made Modernism much expensive commodity. The others of Modernism, for example, female artists, homosexual artists and artists of colored races criticized occidental, white, male centrality of Modernism. They argued Modernism is not a universal but only a local aesthetic theory. Postmodemism as one of the others of Modernism appears in criticizing those negative aspects of Modernism. It is argued that Postmodemism is not only a new cultural and aesthetic logic but also a new historical theory. But the reason why this essay interprets postmodernism as an American theory or a kind of americanism lies in the fact that the program of postmodernism itself is solely American. In America as multicultural nation, there can be various heterogeneous cultures, and even they can coexist peacefully. America has no dominant high culture handed down fiom old times. American culture is represented as popular culture. So Postmodernism as affirming lightness, joke, style and appearance instead of heaviness, reality and meaning can be propagated in America. It is natural that Postmodemism is an American theory. But it is not a local theory. Postmodemism as Americanism or cultural imperialism wants to homogenize cultures of entire world and at last dominate that world mentally. Postmodernism is cultural logic of political dominance of all the world by America. In conclusion, we must call crossover in question instead of treating it solely as an aesthetic phenomenon.

이 연구는 앤서니 브라운 첫 작품 『거울 속으로』에 등장하는 포스트모더니즘적 철학의 의미를 분석하고 있다. 『거울 속으로』는 아이들과 학부모에게 다소 낯선 회화적 요소뿐만 아니라 스토리의 구성이 기존의 그림책과는 다르게 표현되어 있다. 앤서니 브라운 『거울 속으로』에서는 기존의 그림책이 시도하지 않았던 회화적 표현 기법을 사용하였으며 그림책의 내용으로 아이들과 공감할 수 있는 세계로 이끈다. 이 그림책은 상상력의 오브제(obget)와 시뮬라크르 제시를 통하여 아이들에게 창조의 기쁨을 일으킨다. 그림책 속에는 푸코가 제시하는 팝옵티콘(panopticon)의 시선이 미치지 않는 자유와 즐거움 그리고 행복의 ‘헤테로토피아’적 공간에 대한 철학도 담겨있다. 이 그림 책의 색채는 전반적으로 초록과 빨강, 노랑이 반복적으로 표현되고 이러한 반복적 색깔의 변화는 작가의 의도성이 담겨져 있다. 『거울 속으로』에서 초록, 빨강, 노랑은 작가의 메시지를 담고 있다. 앤서니 브라운 『거울 속으로』는 공동체 생활에서 다소 소외 받을 수 있는 아이들에게 자유와 꿈과 희망을 주며, 보편화되고 획일화된 미래 세상을 뛰어 넘어 개별자의 특수성이 인정되고 모두가 배려되고 존중받는 진정한 아동중심 사상을 제시해 주는 포스터모더니즘의 어린이 철학 교재이다.