• Trans-
• /
• v.3
• /
• pp.55-86
• /
• 2017

This study begins with the necessity of the concept of reincarnation of film media and the inclusion of specific tendencies of contemporary films as post - cinema comes. Variable movements around recent films Challenging and experimental films show aesthetics that are difficult to approach with the analysis of classical mise en scene and montage. In this way, I review the dispositif proposed by Martin in films that are puzzling to criticize with the classical conceptual framework. This is because the concept of dispositive is a conceptual pile that extends more than a mise en scene and a montage. Dispositif films tend to be non-reproducible and non-narrative, but not all non-narrativef tendencies are dispositif films. Only the dispositif film is included in the flow. Dispositif movement has increased dramatically in the modern environment on which digital technology is based, but it is not a tendency to be found in any particular age. The movement has been detected in classical films, and the dispositif tendency has continued to exist in avant-garde films in the 1920s and some modernist films. First, for clear conceptualization of cinematic dispositif, this study examines the sources of dispositif debates that are being introduced into film theory today. In this process, the theory of Jean Louis Baudry, Michel Foucault, Agamben, Flusser, and Deleuze will help. The concept of dispositif was discussed by several scholars, including Baudry and Foucault, and today the notion of dispositif is defined across all these definitions. However, these various discussions are distinctly different from the cinematic dispositif or dispositif films that Martin advocates. Martin's proposed concept reminds us of the fundamentals of cinematic aesthetics that have distinguished between the mise-en-scene and the montage. And it will be able to reconsider those concepts and make it possible to view a thing a new light or create new films. The basic implications of dispositif are apparatus as devices, disposition and arrangement, the combination of heterogeneity. Thus, if you define a dispositif film in a word, it is a new 'constraint' consisting of rearrangement and arrangement of the heterogeneous elements that make up the conditions of the classical film. In order for something to become a new design, changes must be made in the arrangement and arrangement of the elements, forces, and forces that make up it. Naturally, the elements encompass both internal and external factors. These dispositif films have a variety of possibilities, such as reflection on the archival possibilities and the role of supervision, the reestablishment of active and creative audience, the reason for the film medium, and the ideological reflection. films can also 'network' quickly and easily with other media faster than any medium and create a new 'devised' aesthetic style. And the dispositif film that makes use of this will be a key keyword in reading the films that present the new trend of modern film. Because dispositif are so comprehensive and have a broad implication, there are certainly areas that are difficult to sophisticate. However this will have a positive effect on the future activation of dispositif studies end for end. Dispositif is difficult to elaborate the concept clearly, so it can be accessed from a wide range of dimensions and has theoretically infinite extensibility. At the beginning and end of the 21st century film, the concept of cinematic dispositif will become a decisive factor to dismantle old film aesthetics.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.53 no.4
• /
• pp.234-249
• /
• 2020

The dispute involving the construction of the Tomb of Queen Sindeok (hereinafter "Jeongreung"), King Taejo's wife in Seoul, and the moving of that tomb, represents the most clearly demonstrated case for the collision of new and old ideologies between political powers in the early period of Joseon. Jeongreung, the tomb of Queen Sindeok from the Kang Clan, was built inside the capital fortress, but in 1409, King Taejong forced the tomb to be moved outside the capital, and the stone relics remaining at the original location were used to build the stone bridge, Gwangtong-gyo. In an unofficial story, King Taejong moved the tomb outside the capital and used the stone items there to make the Cheonggyecheon Gwang-gyo so that the people would step upon the area in order to curse Lady Kang. In the final year of King Taejo, Lady Kang and King Taejong were in a politically conflictual relationship, but they were close to being political partners until King Taejo became the king. Sillok records pertaining to the establishment of Jeongreung or Gwangtong-gyo in fact state things more plainly, indicating that the moving of Jeongreung was a result of following the sangeon (a written statement to the king) of Uijeongbu (the highest administrative agency in Joseon), which stated that having the tomb of a king or queen in the capital was inappropriate, and since it was close to the official quarter of envoys, it had to be moved. The assertion that it was aimed at degrading Jeongreung in order to repair Gwangtong-gyo thus does not reflect the factual relationship. This article presents the possibility that the use of stone items from Jeongreung to repair Gwangtong-gyo reflected an emerging need for efficient material procurement that accompanied a drastic increase in demand for materials required in civil works both in- and outside the capital. The cause for constructing Jeongreung within the capital and the cause of moving the tomb outside the capital would therefore be attributable to the heterogeneity of the ideological backgrounds of King Taejo and King Taejong. King Taejo was the ruler of the Confucius state, as he reigned through the Yeokseong Revolution, but he constructed the tomb and Hongcheon-sa, the temple in the capital for his wife Queen Sindeok. In this respect, it is considered that, with the power of Buddhism, there was an attempt to rally supporters and gather the force needed to establish the authority of Queen Sindeok. Yi Seong-gye, who was raised in the Dorugachi clan of Yuan, lived as a military man in the border area, and so he would not have had a high level of understanding in Confucian scholarship. Rather, he was a man of the old system with its 'Buddhist" tendency. On the other hand, King Taejong Yi Bang-won was an elite Confucian student who passed the national examination at the end of the Goryeo era, and he is also known to have held a profound understanding of Neo-Confucianism. To state it differently, it would be reasonable to say that the understanding of symbolic implications for the capital would be more profound in a Confucian state. Since the national system that was ruled by laws had been established following the Three-Kingdom era, the principle of burial outside of the capital that would have seen a grave constructed on the outskirts of the capital was not upheld, without exception. Jeongreung was built inside the capital due to the strong individual desire of King Taejo, but since he was a Confucian scholar prior to becoming king, it would not have been accepted as desirable. After taking the throne, King Taejong took the initiative to begin overhauling the capital in order to reflect his intent to clearly realize Confucian ideology emphasizing 'Yechi' ("ruling with good manners") with the scenic view of the Capital's Hanyang river. It would be reasonable to conclude accordingly that the moving of Jeongreung was undertaken in the context of such a historic background.