Korean | English

pISSN : 1229-0246

2020 KCI Impact Factor : 0.45
Home > Explore Content > All Issues > Article List

2008, Vol.27, No.

  • 1.

    Zum Entstehungsprinzip des modernen dissonanten Sch?nen (des H?ßlichen), gegr?ndet auf Hegels Begriff des ‘Kunstsch?nen’

    Kwon Jeong Im | 2008, 27() | pp.5~38 | number of Cited : 12
    Abstract
    In der Kunst des postmodernen Zeitalters, in dem der Begriff der Identität so wie der Schönheit verweigert wird, wird die dissonante Schönheit bzw. das Häßliche noch aktiver behandelt als die harmonische Schönheit. Außerdem gilt dabei das Häßliche neben dem Erhabenen als die hauptsächliche Kategorie der modernen Kunst. Es gab allerdings seit der alten Zeit die Gedanken über das Häßliche und dessen Bestimmungen, aber von den Hegelianern wurde das Häßliche erst zum Gegenstand der Diskussion im Bereich der Ästhetik. Die Diskussion um das Häßliche im 19. Jahrhundert wurde also von A. Ruge, K. Fischer, F. Th. Vischer anfänglich behandelt, von C. H. Weiße und K. Rosenkranz noch systematischer grundgelegt. Und dadurch wurde die Grundlage für die Bestimmung des Häßlichen wie dessen künstlerischen Bedeutung vorbereitet. Aber die meisten Hegelianer faßten das Häßliche bloß als den Gegensatz bzw. ein dialektisches Moment der Idee der Schönen auf, behandelten es als keine selbständige ästhetische Kategorie. Sie fanden nämlich das Häßliche als dasjenige, das ohne Voraussetzung des Schönen nicht bestehen kann, und verfolgten endgültig die Schönheit im klassischen * Professor an der Kangwon National Universität Sinne. Die Hegelianer selber glaubten, daß sich ihre Gedanken über die Kunst auf die Hegelsche Ästhetik gründen, und es wird im allgemeinen auch so verstanden. Aber in der Tat sind ihre Gedanken über das Häßliche auf die Vorlesungen über die Ästhetik, die Hotho seine eigenen Gedanken darin eingefügt herausgegeben hat, basiert. Daher sind sie von denen, die Hegel in der Ästhetikvorlesung entwickelten, ganz verschieden. Während die Diskussionen von den Hegelianern bei der von der Schönheit abhängigen Bestimmung des Häßlichen bleiben, findet sich die wahre ästhetische und künstlerische Bestimmung des Häßlichen als eines selbständigen ästhetischen Phänomens, das mit der Schönheit gleichwertig ist, bei Hegel. Wenn man die unmittelbaren Quellen von den Ästhetikvorlesungen, die Hegel in Berlin gehalten, nachprüft, ist der geistesphilosophische Standpunkt in der Betrachtung der Kunst deutlich. Und zwar zeigt sich, daß seine Gedanken über das Phänomen der nicht-mehr-schönen Kunst bzw. das Häßliche in den vier Ästhetikvorlesungen (1820/21, 1823, 1826, 1828/29) stäts modifiziert wurden, und daß er die Notwendigkeit so wie die eigentümliche Bedeutung des Auftretens des Häßlichen in der modernen Kunst vorgehend erwähnt. In diesem Zusammenhang liegt der zentrale Punkt der vorliegenden Arbeit darin, die Legitimität und die eigentümliche ästhetische Bedeutung des Häßlichen innerhalb der Hegelschen Ästhetik herauszuzeigen. Die Möglichkeit dieses Versuchs ist in Hegels Bestimmung des Kunstschönen enthalten. Dennoch wurd bisjezt die Forschung zu dem Grund und der Notwendigkeit des des Häßlichen durch Hegels Begriff des Kunstschönen unmöglich gegolten. Denn die Bestimmung des Hegelschen Kunstschönen so wie des darin grundliegenden Begriffs des Ideals in der von Hotho herausgegebenen Hegelschen Ästhetik wird mit der harmonischen Schönheit gleich gefaßt, damit verkannten die meisten Forscher, die diese Ästhetik als Grundlage genommen haben, die ursprüngliche Bedeutung dieses Begriffs. Aber wenn man die Nachschriften von den Berliner Ästhetikvorlesungen entwicklungsgeschichtlich analysiert, ist nicht nur Hegels ursprüngliche Bestimmung des Kunstschönen. sondern auch seine genaue Einsicht in die Entwicklungsrichtung der Kunst in der Moderne faßbar. Daher wird in der vorliegenden Arbeit die genaue Bedeutung des Kunstschönen durch die Analyse der Nachschriften erhellt und Hegels Bestimmung der Kunst mit betrachtet. Bei Hegel wird das Kunstschöne als der Schein nicht also bloß auf die harmonische Schönheit eingeschränkt, sondern enthält das nicht-mehr-Schöne. Und zwar zeigt sich es als dasjenige, das die Notwendigkeit hat, nicht mehr schön aufzutreten. Die Forschungen in dieser Richtung werden von A. Gethmann-Siefert und ihren Mitarbeitern stäts gemacht. Die vorliegende Arbeit gehört auch in die Reihe dieser Forschungen. Aber in der vorliegenden Arbeit geht es insbesondere darum, die Notwendigkeit und das Entstehungsprinzip des Häßlichen, das als ein Hauptphänomen der modernen Kunst seine Stelle genommen hat, in Hegels Begriff des Kunstschönen zu finden. Das daraus folgende Resultat hat die Bedeutung nicht nur dafür, zu erhellen, daß die mögliche Grundlage des Häßlichen eigentlich in Hegels Ästhetik enthälten ist, sondern auch dafür, zu zeigen, daß Hegels Gedanken über die Kunst in der Gegenwart noch aktuell sind.
  • 2.

    The Aesthetics of Ugliness in the work of Karl Rosenkranz

    San Choon Kim | 2008, 27() | pp.39~60 | number of Cited : 11
    Abstract
    According to Karl Rosenkranz, ugliness and beauty are inseparably related to each other; as good and evil, health and illness, justice and injustice, grace and sin are inseparably related to each other. Rosenkranz placed ugliness between beauty and the comic. He presented the universe of ugliness through formlessness, incorrectness and disfiguration. He also presented the category of ugliness in terms of vulgarity, disgust and caricature. For Rosenkranz, therefore, beauty became the starting point, and the comic became the terminal. But he did not explain in detail what he understood by the comic. He only followed the process carefully leading to the comic from ugliness. Rosenkranz demonstrated this process in an empirical fashion with many illustrations from varying works of art and from various periods and culture. Why does art produce ugliness? Rosenkranz answered that simple beauty is the mere superficial exposition of the Idea. He thought that if we want to express the phenomenon of the Idea in totality, we have to express not only the positive aspect but also the negative aspect of the phenomenon. Art is the intuition of the Ideas. If art wants to express the * Professor of Sogang University dramatic depth of the Idea, it cannot avoid ugliness. For Rosenkranz, the ultimate ground of beauty is freedom. Beauty not only consists of form and correctness but also spontaneity and ensoulment, therefore lack of freedom is the mother of ugliness, lack of freedom ultimately becomes the caricature of beauty. Finally, Rosenkranz believed that apart from satire which has offensive movement, this caricature can return to beauty by way of humor by which he meant generosity and affection. Modern western aesthetics inquired into art-beauty, but contemporary western aesthetics seems to pursue art-ugliness. So now aesthetics became anti-aesthetics, art became anti-art. I think that Rosenkranz’s The Aesthetics of Ugliness(1853) was the most important pioneering book for contemporary aesthetics, because he thought that the remedy for art-ugliness is humor.
  • 3.

    The Conceptual Implication of Beauty/Uglinessin the East and the West

    Joosik Min | 2008, 27() | pp.61~87 | number of Cited : 7
    Abstract
    The parallel words of ‘mi(beauty)’ and ‘chu(ugliness)’ are frequently used in our daily life and in technical terms. We need to investigate when these words began to be used and what were the meaning at that time. The words ‘mihak(aesthetics)’ and ‘misul(fine art)’ were modern translated words which did not exist before the Japanese Meiji era. The method of academic study needs new innovation and perspective in the rapid change of human society and environment. We should investigate the process which has formulated the genre concepts concerning learning and art in the modern westernizing period. This task is a very complicated thing, but it was overlooked for a while. It is worth to notice the ideological or cultural meaning of the concept of beauty which has played a role in the process of modernization. The beauty as an abstract idea did not exist in Korea and Japan until confronting westernization. And the inclusive value system covering truth, goodness, and beauty also did not exist. It was borrowed from neo-Kantian philosophy. Though the meaning of beauty used in present times in Korean society includes the traditional aesthetic concept to a certain degree, it basically expresses the Western concept of beauty. In * Professor of Yeungnam University this sense, it is significant for us to discuss ‘mi(beauty)’ and ‘chu(ugliness)’ in aesthetics. But such discussion is not effective to understand fully how the aesthetic value was acknowledged in Eastern cultures. Accordingly, this paper aims to notice the concepts of ‘a(雅, elegance)’ and ‘sok(俗, vulgarity)’ which were managed with gravity in the East, instead of the western translated words, beauty and ugliness. As a result, we could know the relational aspect of aesthetic value concepts in the East and the West and the difference of their role in the development of aesthetic consciousness. Some distinctive traits are indicated as following. Beauty and ugliness in the West were the concepts focused on the formative phase of aesthetic value. The two are oppositionary and show contrastive relation. But a or elegance and sok or vulgarity were the concepts focused on the human inner consciousness. The two strive to maintain a convertible relation or an associated relation.
  • 4.

    The sublime and the ugliness in Lacan: focusing on the seminar VII

    조선령 | 2008, 27() | pp.89~124 | number of Cited : 0
    Abstract
    In the aesthetic traditions, the ugliness has often been either ignored as the category without the aesthetic quality or undervalued as the negative one, that is, as the absence of beauty. But, in this paper, I tried to find a clue to reappraise the ugliness through the theory of Jacques Lacan. By infering the category of the ugliness from Lacan’s theory, I suggest that the ugliness implies a new aesthetics, which has an ethical attitude without repression of the sensible and the material. Topologically, the ugliness is located in the same place as ‘the end of analysis’. At the end of analysis, ‘identification with the symptom’ can be analogous to the ugliness because it is an experience of the reduction to an object, which is both nothingness and the sensible, that is ‘object a’. As long as the end of analysis means to surmount the neurosis, we should study what the neurosis is. In the same manner, we can put the prior step to the ugliness in the logical sense. It is the sublime. Thus, I presented a comparative study between the sublime and the ugliness. Actually, Lacan, especially in his seminar VII and VIII, alluded to this comparison by his comments to two tragic plays, “Antigene” by Sophocles and The Hostage by Paul Claudel. The sublime and the ugliness have a * Ph. D. candidate and lecturer of Hongik University common characters in that they cause negative sentiment unlike the beauty. But the latter has a different function from the former. While the sublime is apt to sacrifice the sensible (the pathological objects, in Kant’s terminology) in order to reveal the transcendental quality of the desire, then to run into a danger to keep the fantastic faith to the existence of Other, the ugliness is to relatively free from such a danger for it has a ‘indifferent’ attitude to the objects without sacrificing them. Lacan’s concept of ‘sublimation’ contains both the sublime and ugliness. Though it can be overlapped with the sublime in many aspects, it also leaves another character which remains out of the sublime. It is the satisfaction of drive (pulsion). The aim of the drive is not to reach its object in the material aspect, but to maintain its turning movement itself. It makes a kind of indifferent relationship with the sensible objects. In effect, while the sublime is to express the transcendency of desire, the ugliness is to express the ‘reality’ of drive. In addition to two plays mentioned above, Lacan makes some comments and criticisms on several texts, such as Kant’s The Critic of the Practical Reason, Sade’s novels, and James Joyce’s novels. He warns a potential danger that Kant’s morality turns into Sade’s perversion. Lacan sees it in Kant's will to sacrifice all ‘pathological’ objects in the field of morality, to avoid to sensual ‘jouissance’, the other side of the law, and to eschew the encounter with the Real. Then, Lacan sees an image of the sublime in Antigone, the heroine of “Antigone”, and the one of the ugliness in Sygne, the heroine of The Hostage. Unlike Antigone, whose sublime death protects her own desire in its invisibility, Sygne reveals the impossibility of the satisfaction of desire, and turns into the image of ugliness with her convulsion of the face. She turns into the object a. Sygne’s image shows us an example of ugliness; Joyce’s novels show us a new way of creation with ugliness. Lacan names Joyce’s writing ‘sinthome’. Mixture of the fantasy and the symptom, sinthome indicates how the category of ugliness makes the artistic creation possible.
  • 5.

    An Aesthetic Understanding of the Abject Art: focused on the later works of Cindy Sherman

    Chung Sukyung | 2008, 27() | pp.125~158 | number of Cited : 5
    Abstract
    The abject art is a kind of art which is not beautiful, but ugly and disgusting. But the abject art is regarded as the most important avant-garde art of the 1980s. Analyzing Cindy Sherman’s photo works in terms of Jacques Lacan’s psychoanalysis will explain why and how that happened. Her early works, <Untitled Film Still>s were partially welcomed by the Feminist theorists for their potentials to break the stereo-types of women prevalent in the patriarchic society. They were expected to disturb the representational schema by revealing the gaze and upsetting the status of the male subject. But in fact, <Untitled Film Still>s remained as the mere collection of the imaginary identifications of Cindy Sherman rather than the arena of subject building. But her later works, the abject arts evidently handle the matter of subject building in a radical way. They show us traumatic scenes of damaged bodies, especially women bodies and scenes of disgusting secretions and rotten materials smelling death. But they not only make us unpleasant but also lure us in an unexplainable way. Jacques Lacan explains it with the notion of the object a and the lamella. According to * Ph. D. candidate and lecturer of Seoul National University Lacan, the female body, esp. mother’s body represents the original fullness of existence, and the secretions represents the remnants of the symbolic castration which forbids the unification with the mother in the name of the father. So both indicate the unachievable state of wholeness. In the longing to achieve it, the subject cannot but to stick to the sex and the abject. And the lacked subject takes the jouissance, the pleasure in pain in the sex and the abject. Sherman’s abject arts make use of this point. They show the sex and the abject, but in an uncanny and grotesque way that the subjects cannot make any imaginary unified identification. Through this, Sherman tried to break through the fantasies imposed to the women. Sheman’s later works thus can be called the sublimation of the abject. Lacan asserted that the sublimation is to elevate an ordinary thing to the status of the real, the Thing. It depends on the switch of the status and meaning of an object. When the symbolic cannot catch the wholeness of an object, the lack and the object a as the real reveal and the object changes into the Thing. Thus sublimation happens where the symbolic and the visual codes work badly as in the later works of Cindy Sherman.
  • 6.

    The Origin of Ugliness(Non-the Aesthetic) in the Psychoanalysis and Modern Art : focusing on Freud and Lacan

    InnSuk Nam | 2008, 27() | pp.159~194 | number of Cited : 2
    Abstract
    In this work ‘Ugliness’ broadly refer to non-the aesthetic which there is no place in traditional aesthetics. But it means a kind of the aesthetic concerning modern and contemporary arts. Because they have provoked crucial question transgressing the traditional criterion of art. ‘The origin[of ugliness(Non-the Aesthetic]’ does not result from diachronic approach but synchronical in this paper. That is to say, ‘the origin of Ugliness(Non-the aesthetic)’ lies on a structure which setoff the psychic life in the psychoanalysis. This paper leads to reveal iso-structure between the structure and the origin of the Ugliness(non-the aesthetic) in the psychoanalysis. And then it could be a theoretical support for modern and contemporary arts. Commonly it is believed that traditionally western aesthetics has thought of the beauty as ideal form in the field of aesthetic and the pleasure as subjective response regarding as the beauty since Plato. Symmetry, proportion and decorum etc. are the objective criterion of the ideal form. So the Ugliness or non-the aesthetic has undervalued with * Ph. D. candidate and lecturer of Hongik University This work was supported by 2006 Hong-Ik University research fund. unpleasure, asymmetry, night(there is no light), ugliness(there is nothing the beauty) so on. But nowadays there are many hundreds of arts which consist in materials, forms as variable as possible. It is impossible to categorize them several ways because of appearance that are scattered, fragmented, non-articulated, shocked and culminated at random. Actually we faced to the problem that explains comtemporary art at any ways. Psychoanalysis lights on the problem that will research an explanation about modern and comtemporary arts. To approach the problem, above all, I analyze that ‘Spaltung and Méconnaissance’ are the structural origin and ‘Angst and Trieb’ are the affective origin of psychic life in the psychoanalysis focusing on Freud and Lacan. And then, showing how an artwork is related with ‘Méconnaissance and Spaltung’, ‘Angst and Trieb’, the structure as ‘the origin’ is the cause to symbolize something that Lacanian term is ‘the real’ at the same time the origin is the result to make up an artwork that symbolizes something. Hence in psychoanalysis, an artwork as a cause-object is necessary related the structure of the origin in the psychic life or [unconscious] psychoanalytic subject. To reveal the relation between the psychoanalytic origin and the artwork, I analyze the artwork, <Le Bar aux Folies-Bergère>. In short, through the analysis, to conclude: the Angst is the fundamental affekt which is the subject symbolizing something and the Méconnaissance is the fundamental structure in the imaginary which the subject aggressively longing on the other as imago. These fundamental instance roles the cause-object in the modern and contemporary arts. So with psychoanalysis we can prospect to explain something like that scattered, shocked and fragmented body, consistently floating or disappearing image[Ding or le réel].
  • 7.

    日本の美学確立期における東西交渉史 : 東洋的芸術をめぐる岡倉天心․和辻哲郎․大西克礼

    小田部 胤久 | 2008, 27() | pp.197~265 | number of Cited : 4
    Abstract
    미학예술학회의 2008년 봄 학술심포지엄의 주제인 ‘추’를 K. 로젠크란츠는 미적인 제 개념의 관계 속에서 논의하고자 했다. 미적인 제 개념의 상호관계를 묻는 이론은 ‘미적 범주론’으로 불리는데, 본 연구에서는 20세기 전반을 대표하는 세 명의 일본의 미학자가 시도한-일본을 중심으로 한-동양의 미의식과 예술에 대한 미적 범주론들을 살펴보고 그 의미를 규명해 본다. ‘미적 범주론’을 미의식 내지 예술적 특질에 관계하는 유형론이라는 넓은 의미에서 이해할 때, 미적 범주론은 근대 일본 미학이론의 중심적 주제 중의 하나로 지속되어왔으며 일본 미학자들에게 연구된 미적 범주론은 동서의 만남이 낳은 간문화적(intercultural) 소산으로 볼 수 있다. 즉 이들은 서구의 미적 개념들을 수용하되, 동시에 이 개념들과 치열한 논쟁을 거쳐 동양(아시아)의 미 현상에 타당한 새로운 미적 범주론을 독자적으로 제시하고 있는 것이다. 본 연구는 무엇보다 지금까지 주목되지 않은, 그들의 미적 범주론에 내재되어 있는 간문화적 측면을 명확하게 드러내는 데에 중점을 둔다. 먼저 오카쿠라 가쿠조오 <텐신>(岡倉覚三 <天心>, 1862-1913)은 인도, 중국, 일본 삼국의 예술이 상호작용에서 다양성과 통일성을 가지는 것으로 보며, W. 뤼브케와 헤겔의 영향 아래서 일본미술사의 발전 단계를 세(상징적, 고전적, 낭만적) 단계로 나누지만 이들이 유럽중심주의 사상을 기초로 하는 것과는 달리 아시아 예술 속에서 서양 예술에 필적하는 역사적 발전을 찾아내어 인정한다. 그는 ‘소승불교’가 지배했던 나라 시대의 예술은 ‘인간계와 정토가 가깝지 않다’는 이념을 바탕으로 하기 때문에 이 시대의 불상은 ‘인간의 고상한 이상’을 표현한 것으로 보며, ‘밀교’가 발전했던 헤이안 시대는 ‘사람과 부처 사이는 멀지 않다’는 사유를 토대로 함으로 불상이 ‘인간의 정’을 담은 모습으로 제작되었다고 본다. 또한 ‘선종’이 번창했던 아시카가 시대에는 ‘자각’이 중시됨으로써 예술 역시 ‘속세를 초탈’하게 되었다고 파악한다. 이 세 시대에 해당되는 미적 범주는 ‘장려(숭고함)’, ‘우미(인간적 감정이 풍부)’, ‘고담(현세를 초월하여 자족한 상태)’으로 분류된다. 이렇듯 오카쿠라는 헤겔 방식에 기초하나 새로운 역사관으로 일본의 미적 범주를 파악한다. 다음으로 와츠지 테츠로(和辻哲郎, 1889-1980)는 H. 뵐플린과 보링거의 예술학적 이론 연구에 입각하고 있는데, 고대 일본과 고대 그리스의 공통성을 강조하는 동시에 고대 동양과 고대 그리스의 근본적인 차이도 지적하면서 코스모폴리타니즘과 풍토성에 기초하여 양 예술의 특성을 논한다. 예술과 풍토의 관계에서도 일본과 그리스의 풍토적 공통성을 언급하지만 일본의 고유한 풍토성에 의한 ‘존재 방식’과 미적 특성을 ‘고요한 격정’과 ‘모노노 아와레(物の哀れ)’로 규정한다. 와츠지는 또한 K. 글라저가 ‘서양의 미학적 근본 개념을 동양미술에 적용해 실험해보는 것이 진정한 일반예술학의 과제’라고 제기한 바를 자신의 연구과제로 삼았다. 특히 그는 뵐플린과 보링거의 예술학 연구의 핵심 개념인 ‘형식’ 문제를 자신의 동양미술 연구의 근본 개념으로 사용하되, 시각작용보다 더 근본적인 것인 ‘인격적 작용’을 중시하며 독자적으로 발전시킨 ‘형식의지(Formwille)’라는 개념에 의거한 새로운 정신사적 양식사를 시도하여 중국과 일본의 미술양식을 연구했다. 이는 동서의 공통성과 차이성을 고려한 새로운 양식론이라고 할 수 있다. 그러나 1934년 이후 와츠지는 일본문화의 특성을 ‘다양한 계기의 중층성’으로 파악하고, 예술 역시 다양한 예술형식이 이전의 ‘양식을 변화시키지 않고’ 병존한다는 입장을 갖는다. 따라서 그는 ‘양식사적 관점’으로는 일본 예술을 온전히 파악할 수 없다고 주장하며 유럽식의 ‘-주의(-ism)의 역사’를 재고할 것을 촉구하고, 양식을 다원적으로 파악하는 다원주의적 관점을 열었다. 마지막으로 오오니시 요시노리(大西克礼, 1888-1960)는 ‘민족적 특수성의 한계를 초월하여 보편적 이론을 생명으로 하는 체계적 미학을 구성하는 것’을 목표로 하면서 와츠지가 정초한 ‘정신사’적 방법은 보편적 학문으로서의 ‘미학’을 충족할 수 없음을 비판하고, ‘일본적’ ‘미적 개념’과 특수한 ‘체험’의 본질을 보편적 이론체계로서의 ‘미학’에 구성해 넣는 것을 연구과제로 삼았다. 이를 위해 그는 ‘기본적 미적 범주’와 ‘파생적 미적 범주’를 구분하고 후자를 전자에 기초하여 논리적으로 구성하는 것이 미학의 학문적 체계성을 보증하는 것이라고 보았다. 이러한 관점에서 그는 ‘미’, ‘숭고’, ‘유머’ 이 세 가지를 기본적 미적 범주로 파악하고 서양에서는 ‘완미’, ‘비장’, ‘골계’가 이로부터 나온 파생적 미적 범주이며, 동양에서는 ‘아와레’, ‘유우겡’, ‘사비’가 이로부터 나온 파생적 미적 범주라고 규정한다. 이러한 오오니시의 이론이 추상성을 벗어나지 못하는 면도 있지만 일본의 미학적 제 개념을 서양 미학과의 대결을 통해 보편적인 체계로 편성하려한 점은 그 자체로 가치가 있으며, 오늘날 미학적 개념의 글로벌 스탠더드 형성에 있어 동서양 이론체계의 역동적인 상호작용이 필수적이라는 면에서는 서양의 미학 개념들을 상대화하여 동양 및 일본의 미적 특수성을 고찰하고자 한 오쿠카라와 와츠지의 시도들도 큰 의미가 있다. 이들의 시도에 이어 근대 일본 미학의 작업을 문화촉변(文化触変)의 과정으로 전환하여 동서의 만남이 초래한 공동 작업으로서 파악하는 것이 오늘날에도 여전히 요구된다.
  • 8.

    Psychological Approach on Art: Problem of Visual Perception

    Moyoung Lee | 2008, 27() | pp.269~298 | number of Cited : 3
    Abstract
    This thesis discusses on what are needed to revitalize the psychological approach on art which is currently in stagnation, by focusing on the problem of visual perception. To achieve this aim, it first looks at the Fechner’s experimental aesthetical approach and the gestaltpsychological approach to examine how the psychological approach on art was started and what kinds of study have been done on this subject from the 19th century to the early 20th century. Subsequently, it attempts to search out the possibility of a new development of the psychological approach on art by critically considering the limits and possibilities of these two approaches. According to the experimental aesthetics approach and the gestaltpsychological approach, perception plays a vital role in understanding art. Perception as the significant field of study in psychology has mainly been explored from the epistemological perspective in tradition. The empirical and scientific methodology of study has been employed to analyze the ways in which behavior of perception,such as perceiving shapes and objects and reasoning the positions of that objects, occurs. The theory of perception based on such concepts of perception demonstrates * Professor of Sunmoon University limits in explaining the fundamental aspects of art like dynamic interactions between elements constituting a painting and the unspeakable feeling of being deeply moved when seeing a picture. Therefore, it requires more comprehensive sense of perceptual psychology study which is appropriate for understanding the complex phenomena of art. A study of perception as sensuous cognition has been proposed as an alternative to this kind of study. In fact, that Baumgarten’s aesthetics was originally a study of sensuous cognition implies a very important point. Furthermore, the gestaltpsychological approach suggests a great possibility in studying sensuous cognition through a systematic study on the perceptual process like the principle of perceptual organization. Arnheim’s visual thinking develops it further to provide a theoretical foundation for perception as sensuous cognition. The detailed study on perception as sensuous cognition is expected to make a great contribution to extending the comprehension of the complex phenomena in art.