의미론적 함의를 지닌 도자조형 작품의 표상성
Representativeness of ceramic works with semantic implication
- 주제(키워드) 도움말 의미론적 함의 , 표상성 , 프로토콜 , 프로토 타입 , 개인적 신념 , 형상인
- 발행기관 강릉원주대학교 일반대학원
- 지도교수 도움말 김 연화
- 발행년도 2024
- 학위수여년월 2024. 8
- 학위명 박사
- 학과 및 전공 도움말 일반대학원 조형예술디자인학과
- 세부분야 해당없음
- 실제URI http://www.dcollection.net/handler/kangnung/000000011946
- UCI I804:42001-000000011946
- 본문언어 한국어
초록/요약 도움말
국 문 초 록 근래에 이르러 조형 작품의 창의 가치성에 대한 객관적인 평가와 규범에 대한 학술적, 연구적, 미학적 입장에서의 심화된 논의가 이루어지고 있다. 평소, 우리의 자연주의 정신과 심상표현에 대한 관심은 도자작업으로의 조형적 표현의 지를 유발 시켰다. 그리하여 내면세계의 심상적 요소를 함의적 조형언어로 구현하였다. 선행연구에서 구축된 연구영역 및 접근 방향과 본 논문과의 차별성은 연구문제의 인 식, 이해 설정 및 실행에 있어서 비판과 판별, 해체와 해석에 대한 구조와 구성요소와 속 성, 변인들이 작품에 어떻게 내포되어 있는지에 대한 연구이다. 본 연구에서는 함의적 창의 가치성으로 명명하고 작품이 지닌 표상성(representativeness) 을 논의의 이슈(issue)를 한정화하였다. 그 이유는 의미론적 구성의 결과인 표상성이 새로 운 만듦의 세계를 개척하고 도전하는 실험이고 모험이며 아울러 표상이 지닌 형이하학 의 외연은 존재론적 미학의 입장에 대한 본성과 본물성의 존재에 대한 창의성을 가지고 있기 때문이다. 연구자의 작품에 함의하고 있는 의미의 스며듦은 사람의 본연지성이 자연스럽게 스며 들어 예술적 가치를 지니고 있음을 인식하게 되었다. 따라서 미지의 가치를 개척하는 주체성을 전제로 하는 본 연구는 연구 작품의 특성인 탈양식성, 비 형식성, 전위적 사고와 같은 논리 초월과 함께 경계의 넘나듬과 같은 표징 의 의미를 재해석하였다. 작품의 프로토타입으로 제시된 표상의 이념적 자아성은 환원적 표징의 의미이며 분석적, 해석적인 규범은 실체로 수행된 형상적 구조로 나타내었다. 또한 연구작품에 대한 분석과 해석의 신뢰도를 높이기 위하여 감성분석(SPSS 통계분 석)을 실행하였다. 실체에 체화된 사유적, 의미론적 차원의 본성과 본질 그리고 실체의 소구성(construction)은 요소 해석으로 분석하였다. - ii - 표상적 작품을 제시함과 동시에 연구결과 발견된 사실을 근거로 내린 결론은, 첫째, 의미론적 함의성은 작품 표상의 전제가 아닌 존재 그 자체 즉 존재인(因) (cause of form)이다. 둘째, 표상의 요소인 조형 문제의 해석 및 판별은 의미론적 함의성이 어떻게 점착되고 있는지의 필요조건이다. 셋째, 개인적 신념(personal identity)과 새로운 것에 대한 도전은 창의 가치체험의 존 재인(因)이며 표상인(因)(semantic implications)이다. 중심어: 의미론적 함의, 표상성, 프로토콜, 프로토타입, 개인적 신념, 존재인, 형상
more초록/요약 도움말
Abstract Representativeness of ceramic works with semantic implication kim, Soon- A Dissertation for a Doctorate Degree Major in ceramic Art Dept. of Art & Design Graduate School, Gangneung-Wonju National University, 2024 Advisor: Prof. Kim, youn-hwa Recently, there has been extensive discussion from academic, research, and aesthetic perspectives regarding the objective evaluation and standards of the creative value of ceramic works. Generally speaking, our commitment to naturalism and our interest in visual expression have driven our desire for formative expression through ceramic art. Consequently, the imagery elements of the inner world have been realized in implicit formative language. This thesis distinguishes itself from previous research in the scope of its research area and the direction of its approach. Specifically, it examines how the structure, components, properties, and variables for criticism, discrimination, deconstruction, and interpretation are integrated into the work, facilitating recognition, understanding, and implementation of the research problem. In this study, the value of implicit creativity is identified, and the scope of discussion is confined to the representativeness of the work. The reason lies in the justification that representation, as the outcome of semantic composition, constitutes - 135 - of creation; additionally, the extension of the metaphysics of representation possesses inherent creativity concerning the existence of nature and intrinsic materiality— viewed from the perspective of ontological aesthetics. The author of this thesis has come to recognize that the meaning embedded in the researcher's work naturally permeates an individual's innate intelligence and possesses artistic value. This san experimental and adventurous endeavor that explores and challenges new realms tudy then—grounded in the subjectivity of exploring unknown values—reinterprets the significance of symbols, including the intersection of worlds, alongside logical transcendence expressed through post modernity, informality, and avant-garde thinking. The ideological identity of the representation—presented as the prototype of the work—constitutes the meaning of a reductive sign, with the analytical and interpretive norms expressed as a figurative structure manifested as substance. The nature and essence of the rational and semantic dimensions—embodied in the entity, as well as the construction of the entity—were analyzed through elemental analysis. A representational work is presented based on the discovered facts, and conclusions are drawn based on these finding: Firstly, semantic implication is not a prerequisite for the representation of a work; rather the existence itself, serving as the cause of form. Secondly, the interpretation and discrimination of formative issues, which are elements of representation, are necessary conditions for the attachment of semantic implications. Thirdly, personal identity and challenges to new concepts are essential to the existence and semantic implications of creative value experiences
more목차 도움말
목 차
국문초록 ······················································································································ⅰ
표 목차 ························································································································ⅴ
도 목차 ························································································································ⅷ
Ⅰ. 서론 ··································································································1
1. 연구배경 및 목적 ···························································································1
2. 연구방법 및 절차 ···························································································3
Ⅱ. 연구문제 인식(awareness)과 개념설정 ································6
1. 작품의 의미와 본성 ·······················································································6
2. 주요 메타포(metaphor) ·················································································7
3. 개념 설정 ·········································································································8
Ⅲ. 연구작품의 구성요소 해석 ······················································11
1. 연구문제의 비판, 해체, 판별 및 설정 ······················································11
2. 구성요소 재해석(concept close simulation) ···········································11
3. 재료의 가공 및 변환(transformation) ······················································13
3.1 도자유약의 재료 분석 ··········································································13
3.2 옻칠과 도자 유약의 다중시유 ····························································15
3.3 도태칠기의 색채 실험 ··········································································22
4. 의미반영의 프로토콜(protocol) ··································································30
5. 표상성의 구체적 사례분석 ·········································································31
5.1 김영원(1947~) ························································································31
5.2 신상호(1947~) ························································································33
5.3 한애규(1953~) ························································································36
- iv -
5.4 안토니 곰리(1950~) ··············································································38
6. 개념과 방법에 대한 분석 ···········································································43
Ⅳ. 연구작품의 표상성 ·····································································46
1. 연구작품의 존재론적 정당성 ·····································································46
2. 함의적 창의 가치성 ·····················································································47
3. 표상모형 제작콘텐츠 ···················································································50
4. 표상의 prototype ··························································································60
4.1 너와 나의 존재/ 본성 ··········································································60
4.2 자연으로의 포용과 회귀/삶의 기억 ·················································· 66
4.3 인체형상의 체험 ····················································································72
4.4 흙과 불의 본질 재해석 ········································································76
4.5 너, 나, 우리의 재회/희, 노, 애, 락 ····················································82
5. 소결 ·················································································································88
6. 감성 분석(SPSS 통계분석) ········································································90
Ⅴ. 결론 및 제언 ·············································································128
참고 문헌 ···························································································129
Abstract ····························································································134
부록1 박사학위 연구작품 전시 전경 ································································136
부록2. 조형표상 작품의 총괄표 (group A ~ group E) ································137
