라우센버그와 게임하기-<리버스> 다시읽기 (Playing with Rauschenberg: Re-reading Rebus)
-
- 미술이론과 현장
- /
- 제2호
- /
- pp.27-48
- /
- 2004
Robert Rauschenberg's artistic career has often been regarded as having reached its culmination when the artist won the first prize at the 1964 Venice Biennale. With this victory, Rauschenberg triumphantly entered the pantheon of all-American artists and firmly secured his position in the history of American art. On the other hand, despite the artist's ongoing new experiments in his art, the seemingly precocious ripeness in his career has led the critical discourses on Rauschenberg's art to the artist's early works, most of which were done in the mid-1950s and the 1960s. The crux of Rauschenberg criticism lies not only in focusing on the artist's 50's and 60's works, but also in its large dismissal of the significance of the imagery that the artist employed in his works. As art historians Roger Cranshaw and Adrian Lewis point out, the critical discourse of Rauschenberg either focuses on the formalist concerns on the picture plane, or relies on the "culturalist" interpretation of Rauschenberg's imagery which emphasizes the artist's "Americanness." Recently, a group of art historians centered around October has applied Charles Sanders Peirce's semiotics as art historical methodology and illuminated the indexical aspects of Rauschenberg's work. The semantic inquiry into Rauschenberg's imagery has also been launched by some art historians who seek the clues in the artist's personal context. The first half of this essay will examine the previous criticism on Rauschenberg's art and the other half will discuss the artist's 1955 work Rebus, which I think intersects various critical concerns of Rauschenberg's work, and yet defies the closure of discourses in one direction. The categories of signs in the semiotics of Charles Sanders Peirce and the discourse of Jean-Francois Lyotard will be used in discussing the meanings of Rebus, not to search for the semantic readings of the work, hut to make an analogy in terms of the paradoxical structures of both the work and the theory. The definitions of rebus is as follows: Rebus 1. a representation or words or syllables by pictures of object or by symbols whose names resemble the intended words or syllables in sound; also: a riddle made up wholly or in part of such pictures or symbols. 2. a badge that suggests the name of the person to whom it belongs. Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language Unabridged. Since its creation in 1955, Robert Rauschenberg's Rebus has been one of the most intriguing works in the artist's oeuvre. This monumental 'combine' painting(
이 논문은 중국에서 중국어로 집필된 한국문학사 가운데 조선족 학자인 이암(李岩)(외)의 "조선문학통사"(2010)와 한족 학자인 위욱승(韋旭昇)의 "조선문학사"(1988, 2008)의 서술시각을 남북한문학사와 비교하여 그 특징을 밝히고자 하였다. 주요 검토 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 조동일의 "한국문학통사"와 북한 15권본에서는 시대구분 방식, 장르의 개념, 개별 작품에 대해 논의를 세밀하게 전개하면서 이를 문학사 서술에서 적극 활용한 바 있다. 그러나 위욱승(韋旭昇)과 이암(李岩)의 한국문학사에서는 남북한의 이러한 이론적 논의 과정에 거의 주목하지 않았다. 이암(李岩)의 "조선문학통사"는 2010년에 출간되었고, 위욱승(韋旭昇)의 "조선문학사"는 1986년 초판을, 2000년과 2008년에 개정판을 출간했다. 두 문학사의 출간 시점으로 보면, 한국쪽에서 이루어진 여러 논의들을 참조하는 것이 당연한 일일 터인데 그렇지 못하다. 자국문학사의 서술 전통에 더 많은 영향을 받았기 때문이라 생각된다. 둘째, 두 텍스트는 정치 사회 경제 문화 등 문학 외부적 요인을 중시하며 각 시대마다 '개술'에서 이를 따로 언급하고 있고, 본문에서도 인민성 현실성 민족성 등 '정치 표준'에 의거한 평가가 중시된다. 이는 사회주의 체제에서의 문학사 서술에서 자주 쓰이는 방식이며, 북한 15권본도 비슷한 형식을 보인다. 셋째, 두 문학사는 중국학자가 쓴 한국문학사이기 때문에 중국문학과 한국문학의 연관성에 주목하는 부분이 많다. 하지만 소품(小品) 낙부(樂府) 우언(寓言) 설창(說唱) 사전(史傳) 등 장르 용어는 중국문학 용어를 많이 활용하였다. 그러나 중국에서 사용되는 이러한 장르 용어로 한국문학을 설명할 때, 본래의 의미와 변화된 의미 사이의 차이를 세밀하게 검토하지 않은 경우가 많았다. 향후 작업에서 반드시 고려되어야 할 점이라 생각한다.
1. The 'Kao Zheng Pai(考證派) comes from the 'Zhe Zhong Pai' and is a school that is influenced by the confucianism of the Qing dynasty. In Japan Inoue Kinga(井上金娥), Yoshida Koton(吉田篁墩) became central members, and the rise of the methodology of historical research(考證學) influenced the members of the 'Zhe Zhong Pai', and the trend of historical research changed from confucianism to medicine, making a school of medicine based on the study of texts and proving that the classics were right. 2. Based on the function of 'Nei Qu Li '(內驅力) the 'Kao Zheng Pai', in the spirit of 'use confucianism as the base', researched letters, meanings and historical origins. Because they were influenced by the methodology of historical research(考證學) of the Qing era, they valued the evidential research of classic texts, and there was even one branch that did only historical research, the 'Rue Xue Kao Zheng Pai'(儒學考證派). Also, the 'Yi Xue Kao Zheng Pai'(醫學考證派) appeared by the influence of Yoshida Kouton and Kariya Ekisai(狩谷掖齋). 3. In the 'Kao Zheng Pai(考證派)'s theories and views the 'Yi Xue Kao Zheng Pai' did not look at medical scriptures like the "Huang Di Nei Jing"("黃帝內經") and did not do research on 'medical' related areas like acupuncture, the meridian and medicinal herbs. Since they were doctors that used medicine, they naturally were based on 'formulas'(方劑) and since their thoughts were based on the historical ideologies, they valued the "Shang Han Ja Bing Lun" which was revered as the 'ancestor of all formulas'(衆方之祖). 4. The lives of the important doctors of the 'Kao Zheng Pai' Meguro Dotaku(目黑道琢) Yamada Seichin(山田正珍), Yamada Kyoko(山田業廣), Mori Ritsi(森立之) Kitamura Naohara(喜多村直寬) are as follows. 1) Meguro Dotaku(目黑道琢 1739
1.The 'Kao Zheng Pai'(考證派) comes from the 'Zhe Zhong Pai(折衷派)' and is a school that is influenced by the confucianism of the Qing dynasty. In Japan Inoue Kinga(井上金峨), Yoshida Koton(古田篁墩