Korean | English

pISSN : 1229-0246

http://journal.kci.go.kr/ksasa
Home > Explore Content > All Issues > Article List

2009, Vol.29, No.

  • 1.

    A Study on the Music of Twentieth Century

    Suh,In-Jung | 2009, 29() | pp.5~26 | number of Cited : 1
    Abstract
    The twentieth century has been the century of transition. In the beginning of the century A. Schönberg(1874-1951) opened the new era of modernism. He believed that the musical language of the new century could not be the traditional harmonic one. He replaced the harmonic system of tonal music with the mathematically rationalized nonharmonic system of twelve-tone music. By treating all twelve tones in an octave as being equal, the hierarchical and dynamic system of tonality, originated from the natural overtones, was destroyed. A. Webern, who studied with Schönberg, tried to rationalize other paradigms of music as well. The changes which have taken place in music since World War II have been quite unusally radical. Two diametrically opposed tendencies, total-serial music and indeterminate music, appeared. The young avant-gardists of the early 1950’s, particularly the multiple serialists of the Darmstadt School, serialized all paradigms of music by mathematical and intellectual methods. They regarded Webern, not Schönberg, as being really radical in the evolution of serial music. According to them, Schönberg used the twelve-tone technique just like a traditional thematic technique. and thus he could not fully realized the new world of serial music. The introduction of indeterminacy and chance into composition by J. Cage had far-reaching effects. Chance operations resulted in the total dissolution of the traditional musical form for two hundred years. The disintegration of the logic of musical form opened the new era of post-modernism after 1960’s. Post-modern composers argued that the meaning of musical works ultimately could not be determined. During the latter half of the twentieth century electro-acoustic music has played an especially important role. Electronic music as the new medium had been greatly enlarged by the introduction of purely electronic sound synthesis. The advances in the field included the development of electronic music synthesizers, the progressive refinement of computer techniques for handling sound, and the growth of live electronic music. Since 1970’s, contemporary music has concerned not so much with musical composition in the abstract as with the effect of music on the listener. The composition is not an object with a clear identity. An important part of the musical experience may thus be provided by the listener. Therefore, composers have been obliged to give attention to the reach of musical understanding. Today, plurality is the single distinctive feature. There have been a dissolution of the creative fellowship among composers, and it has become no longer possible to speak of a unified thrust of musical endeavour.
  • 2.

    Hegels Bestimmung der Musik und ihre Bedeutung für die Gegenwart

    Jeong-Im Kwon | 2009, 29() | pp.27~61 | number of Cited : 5
    Abstract
    In der vorliegenden Arbeit wird versucht, Hegels Betimmung der Musik durch die Subjektivität einerseits, durch den Ton und die Empfindung andererseits aufzuzeigen. Dieser Versuch zielt darauf ab, zu beweisen, dass Hegels Bestimmung der Musik nicht dem Klassizismus zugehört, vielmehr aktuelle Bedeutung für die Interpretation der gegenwärtigen Musik enthält. Im allgemeinen versteht man Hegel als denjenigen, der ein Laie in der Musik ist und zwar über das Interesse an der klassischen Musik nicht hinaus geht. Aber wenn man auf der Grundlage der neuen Quellen zu Hegels Berliner Ästhetikvorlesungen und der zeitgenössischen Berichte über ihn seine Bestimmung der Musik genau analisiert, zeigt sich wohl auf, dass Hegel seit jüngerer Zeit viele musikalische Erfahrungen gemacht und damit auch in der Musik viele Kenntnisse hat, und dass er nicht nur die damals berühmte Musik wie die von Mozart, sondern auch die neu interpretiert zu werden beginnende Musik von Rossini gelobt und die italienischen Gesänge neu eingeschätzt hat, ohne in zeitgenössischen Vorurteilen befangen zu sein. Diese Belobung und Einschätzung von Hegel läßt sich wissen, dass es sich Hegel in der Musik nicht um die musikalische Technik oder Fertigkeit, sondern um die in der Musik mögliche “Freiheit der subjektiven Innerlichkeit” handelt. Gerade diese Freiheit ist der Kern der Hegelschen Bestimmung der Musik. Freilich scheint Hegel, als ob er den klassischen Gesichtspunkt über die Musik habe, indem er von der ersten bis zur dritten Berliner Ästhetikvorlesung die Bedeutung des Textes sowie des Inhalts betont hat und der Ansicht war, die tiefe Melodie, die bis zur Dissonaz hinaufläuft, doch endlich wieder zur Harmonie zurückkommen muß. Dennoch sah Hegel das neue Phänomen, d.h. die Dissonanz in der modernen Musik und anerkannte die Notwendigkeit dieser Dissonanz und der Selbständigkeit der Musik, wie es in der letzten vierten Ästhetikvorlesung(1828/29) zu finden ist. So gesehen, kann man die Bedeutung der Hegelschen Bestimmung der Musik darin sehen, dass sie die theoretische Grundlage der Diskussion um die moderne Musik bietet, in der es gleichfalls sowohl um die ‘Subjektivität’, als auch um die ‘Selbständigkeit’ geht. Die Subjektivität und Selbständigkeit kann besonders in der Instrumentalmusik wohl realisiert werden. Hegel hat in den Vorlesungen bis 1826 diese Musik als uneigentlich dargestellt, in der letzten Vorlesung von 1828/29 aber als die freie Musik sehr positiv bewertet. Die Selbständigkeit bzw. Autonomität der Musik, die in Hegels Bestimmung der Musik die wichtige Rolle spielt, bildet in Adornos Musikästhetik, in der die soziale Kritik der Kunst durch die Autonomität betont wird, auch den Kernpunkt. Auf der anderen Seite gilt Hegels Bestimmung der Musik zugleich als der Grundstein für die Entwicklung der Musikästhetik sowie der Musiksoziologie in der Moderne und hat in diesem Sinne auch ihre Bedeutung für die Gegenwart, wenn man sich daran erinnert, dass der Ausgangspunkt der Hegelschen Philosophie der Kunst die geistesphilosophische Bestimmung als die geschichtliche Bedeutung und Rolle der Kunst war. Strikt gesagt, vertritt Hegels Gesichtpunkt die gegenwärtige Musik nicht im ganzen, dennoch kann man in seinen Überlegungen die wichtigen Ansätze für die Bestimmung der gegenwärtigen Musik finden. Und gerade daraus läßt sich die Bedeutung der Hegelschen Bestimmung der Musik für die Gegenwart herausnehmen, und dadurch ist seine Musikästhetik fort zu aktualisieren.
  • 3.

    On the Music in Lukács’ Theory of Mimesis

    Jun-Sik Won | 2009, 29() | pp.63~90 | number of Cited : 0
    Abstract
    Georg Lukács looks on art as a kind of the reflection-forms, on the epistemological premise that cognition is a reflection of the reality. That is, art is defined as ‘a mimesis or reflection of the objective reality’. Here mimesis does not mean a mechanical, photographic reproduction of what is extant, but a transformation of the phenomenal world for representing the essential moments through the phenomena. From this point of view, he envisages this aesthetic reflection as corresponding to the category mediating between the universal and the individual: ‘pariculaity (Besonderheit)’. According to him, particularity, the central category of the aesthetic reflection, sublates mere individuality and abstract universality, and unites the both organically. It is through the type(Typus) that the principle of particularity is realized in the works of art, and the universal moments of the objective reality finds expression in the typical characters and situations. In this sense, the type is ‘the most pronounced appearance form of particularity’. One of the objections to Lukács’ theory of mimesis is that it cannot be applied to the non-representational forms of art, such as music. Music, because of its high abstractness, raises more problems to the theory than other forms of art. ‘Is it reasonable to say that music imitates the objective reality?’ ‘How is the principle of particularity realized in the works of music?’ ‘What is the ‘type’ found in a musical work at all?’ To these problems he gives the answer that music is twofold mimesis, that is, music directly imitates feelings and emotions but such feelings and emotions are in themselves the reflections of the objective reality. Like this, music is characterized as ‘mimesis of mimesis’, and therefore shares with other forms of art the feature of reflecting the objective reality. According to Lukács, the feelings that music imitates or expresses are not those a composer feels while writing a piece of music, but feelings themselves being objectified socio-historically. Thus music cancels out the merely individual, in that it eradicates the purely personal circumstances of its origin; on the other hand, since it has no verbal character, it is incapable of grasping universality in conceptual terms. Consequently music is also governed by the category of particularity, which raises itself above the merely individual and extracts ‘typical traits from every particular phenomenon’. Music, as Lukács puts it, reproduces and evokes the problems of the moment of its personal and historical origin, from the perspective of its enduring significance in the development of humanity. In this way, Lukács is able to give an account of music that is in line with his theory of mimesis as a whole.
  • 4.

    Does Music Progress in the Age of Mass Media? : Adorno’s Response to Benjamin’s Theory of Popular Arts

    최유준 | 2009, 29() | pp.91~117 | number of Cited : 8
    Abstract PDF
    In his essay, “Das Kunstwerk im Zeitalter seiner technischen Reproduzierbarkeit”(1936), Walter Benjamin praised such reproductive art as films and photographs in that they opened a new way of common people’s reception of art by liquidating the ‘cult value’ or ‘aura’ of traditional artworks enjoyed by a limited number of high-class people. Theodor W. Adorno, however, put forward a counter-argument against him in an essay titled “Über den Fetischcharakter in der Musik und die Regression des Hörens”(1938). To Adorno the advent of popular art meant neither artistic innovation nor political emancipation, quite the opposite to what Benjamin expected. What is interesting about Adorno’s argument is totally based on his analysis on musical phenomena while Benjamin developed his theory by focusing on films. Unlike Benjamin who defended popular arts such as films for their innovative character freed from traditional artistic convention, Adorno points out that the intimacy and accessibility of popular music cannot be maintained without the essential elements of Western traditional music such as functional harmonic system and tonality. Furthermore he argues that change of people’s perception on art cannot lead to emancipation but to restriction in that the musical taste and enjoyment of the masses are incessantly reduced to ‘habitual responses’ by the power of ‘exchange value’ in the capitalist market system where ‘familiar things’ are deceptively provided as ‘new things’. Paying attention to these discrepancies, I try to draw the entire picture of Benjamin-Adorno debate and take a close look at their different points of view on the task of progressive arts in the age of mass media, respectively suggested in “Das Kunstwerk im Zeitalter seiner technischen Reproduzierbarkeit” and “Über den Fetischcharakter in der Musik und die Regression des Hörens”. Although this study aims at examining the oppositional moments of Benjamin-Adorno debate, it is also the critical attempt to shed light on the common ground of dialectical thinking shared by Benjamin and Adorno, both of whom were struggling to find the ways of artistic emancipation in the age of mechanical reproduction and mass media.
  • 5.

    Modern Music and the Problem of Image

    Yun Shin-Hyang | 2009, 29() | pp.119~145 | number of Cited : 3
    Abstract PDF
    This paper inquires into the problem of image in modern Music. The first two chapters show the theoretical background of this subject. The first chapter exposes the modern thought, which includes the consciousniss of the technology and the aesthetic of ‘difference’. Thereby the concept of ‘mimesis’ was derived from Th. W. Adorno and W. Benjamin. The next chapter discusses the problem of perceptional structure by listening to the modern music. The emanzipation of dissonance and the new expression indicators like sound-colour were caused this problem. This phenomenon implicates the boundary of the western traditional notation system in expression. The next chapter deals with the confrontation between sound and image of modern music. The elements indicating the confrontation are the ‘sound-colour melody’ of A. Schoenberg’s atonal music and the irregular rhythmic repitition of I. Stravinsky's dance music. The character of the ‘undeveloped crack’ by Stravinsky is significant, which can be compared with the technic of montage for the film production. The machine image of this technic crystallized into the spacial music concept of E. Varése. After 1950s it was possible, for the sound-colour to synthesize and to modulate by using electronic technics, therefore confrontation between sound and image increased. All these styles contribute to the ‘dissociation of time’. On the one hand, the traditional time structure transports to the spacial dimension by the serial spacial composition of K. H. Stockhausen, on the other hand it appears a destructive aspect by the aleatoric music of J. Cage. Specially in the sound-surface style of the 1960s from composers other then western-europe, the confrontation between sound and image is highlighted. The new media art film compresses the problem of image as the aesthetic dilemma of the modern music. The last chapter considers this matter under the aspect of the cinematic representation and the cultural syncretism. The technic of the electronic reproduction was the foundation for the new expression indicator like silence, noise, and the sound other then traditional western europe. Specially the syncronising technic between sound and image, from which the sound picture film was born, plays an important role. The audio-visual massmedia functionalizes as the cultural communication media, reflected by the sound-surface style of the 1960s. The concept of ‘mimesis’ could be regarded as an important keyword for the research into the problem of image and cultural syncretism.
  • 6.

    Modern Music, the Music Aesthetic of the Nazi-Fascism, and Carmina Burana of Carl Orff

    Kyungboon Lee | 2009, 29() | pp.147~171 | number of Cited : 0
    Abstract
    As Hitler’s National Socialists came to power in Germany, they oppressed the modern music harder than needed: it was almost dying because of it’s dissonance and isolation from the audience. The hidden Ideology of this act was derived from the anti-Jewish-thought of the Nazis on the one hand; because the most of the best musicians of the modern music were Jewish. On the other hands the modern music revealed the emotion of being the German community as lie. In contrary to boycott against the dissonant modern music like the atonal music of Schoenberg, the Nazis supported contemporary music and the young musicians like Gerhard Müller etc., should express the movements of the Nazis and German national ideology. But, <Carmina Burana> of Carl Orff(1895-1982), premiered 1937 in Frankfurt a. M., could be the most successful music work presented the Nazi-aesthetic; first of all the monumental sound with insistent rhythms, ostinato repetitions, a complete abnegation of contemporary chromatic and alternation of major/minor that make an antimodern impression and the same time an modern one, furthermore, laudation to the health and the rejection of the illness which Nazis put in the praxis on the social and political dimension like “comfortable murder”. So the whole impression of music with “stagnated structure” is “barbarous” and “counteracted” modernism, similar to the Nazis pursued technique, tempo and modernism, while also emphasizing nature, romantism, “Blut and Boden”.
  • 7.

    On the Basis of Georg Simmel’s Philosophy of Art

    Joosik Min | 2009, 29() | pp.175~201 | number of Cited : 1
    Abstract
    The task of this paper is firstly to examine the formation of Simmel’s philosophy of art, secondly to inquire his critical thinking on the contemporary art circumstances, and thirdly to consider the outcome of his art philosophical study connected with modernity or modern life. Georg Simmel has been known to Korean academic world mainly as a sociologist. His broad scope of philosophical thinking was hardly noticed. However, in present Europe and America, the study on Simmel’s philosophy of art is especially extending. The influence and the significance of Simmel’s philosophy is very important in these days. His philosophy relieved from German conceptualism and hold abundant artistic sensibility. His writings on Goethe and Rembrandt was evaluated as useful devices for German Gymnasium education. Although his period has become a distant past, the critical mind on the modern way of life could be sympathized with us. He is belong to the school of Lebensphilosophie together with Nietzsche, Bergson and Ortega y Gasset. He opposed to rationalism, intellectualism and Kantianism. Some peculiarities of his philosophy can be enumerated as following. Firstly, the noble and refined liveliness with urban atmosphere. Secondly, the uncomparable uniqueness and subtlety of his viewpoint. Thirdly, the moving power of increasing curiosity. His concern on artistic culture was broadly crossing on various genre of art such as music, painting, sculpture and literature. There is a linkage between his artistic acquirement and Lebensphilosophie. And also there is a sociological viewpoint. Simmel has aspired to study various problems of artistic world from early days to his later. He was inclined to psychological and ethnological researches at the beginning, and afterward moved to philosophical one. And he aimed to accomplish his own philosophy of art at his later years. Unfortunately, he cannot succeed on the accomplishment owing to the outbreak of the Second World War. As we can know from his continuing writings, he retained a wide-ranging artistic knowledge comprising not only Western art but also Chinese and Japanese arts. His plan to write his Philosophy of Art must be a magnificent scale including the exceptional problems which could not be accepted by his contemporary European aesthetics. And we should not fail to notice his sociological viewpoint to manage the individual and the society in his philosophy of art.
  • 8.

    Cindy Sherman’s Untitled Film Stills: An Alternative Perspective

    Phil Lee | 2009, 29() | pp.203~232 | number of Cited : 0
    Abstract
    본 논문은 1970년대 말 이래로 많은 학자들의 주목을 받아온 신디 셔만의 <무제 필름 스틸>(1977-1981) 흑백사진 연작을 사진이라는 미디움에 중심을 둔 대안적인 시각에서 해석하고 있다. 신디 셔만의 흑백사진 무제 연작은 80년대 초에 당시 포스트모던 논의를 이끌던 몇몇 이론가들에 의해 일련의 젊은 작가들의 작품과 함께 논의되면서 포스트 모더니즘 미술을 대표하는 작품으로 부각되기 시작했다. 그 이후로 셔만은 현대미술이라는 포괄적인 관점에서 대표적인 현대미술 작가중 한 사람으로 인식되어왔고, 그녀의 작품 또한 대부분 이와 같은 맥락에서 논의되어 왔다. 본 논문은 이처럼 70년대 말 이래로 지배적인 현상이 되어온 포스트포던적 관점에 기초한 해석 경향과는 달리, 사진사와 사진이론의 관점에서 셔만의 사진을 연구한다. 이러한 저자의 접근은 한편으로는 셔만 작품에 대한 기존의 지배적인 논의에 문제를 제기하고 대안적인 읽기를 제시함으로 작품의 해석의 가능성을 열뿐만 아니라, 포스트 모던이론에 의해 기술된 사진이론과 사진사를 근본적으로 재고할 필요가 있음을 주장하는 것이다. 셔만의 사진을 사진이라는 미디움의 관점에서 볼 필요가 있다고 주장하는 것은 셔만을 사진가로 보아야한다고 주장하는 것은 아니다. 저자는 셔만을 사진가라기보다는 현대미술가로 보는 관점에 동의한다. 그러나 최근의 일련의 필름 제작을 제외하고는 셔만이 작품을 만들기 위해 지속적으로 사진이라는 미디움만을 사용해왔다는 점은 주목할 만 하다. 저자는 사진사와 사진 이론의 관점에서 셔만의 사진을 볼 필요가 있음에도 불구하고 학계에서 이 점이 간과되어 온 점을 지적하고 대안적인 해석을 제시함으로써 셔만의 사진 연구에 기여하고자 한다. 서론에서는 1970년대와 80년대 사진과 관련된 미국 미술계의 전반적인 상황을 스케치하면서 사진에 관한 모더니즘적 입장과 포스트모더니즘적 입장이 어떻게 상충하고 있었는지 독자들에게 소개한다. 저자는 포스트모더니스트들이 모더니스트들의 입장을 공격하기 위하여 수단으로서 사진이라는 미디움을 정치적인 수단으로 이용하였으며, 불가피하게 사진이라는 미디움의 본질적인 특성을 무시하고 자신들의 논리전개에 유용한 미디움의 외형적인 특성들만을 강조하게 된 모순적인 상황을 만들었다고 주장한다. 저자는 이와 같은 주장을 당시의 대표적인 포스트모던 사진이론의 틀거리인 “전유”와 “인덱스”를 신디 셔만의 사진에 적용했을 경우, 그 논리들이 어떻게 타당하지 않는지 분석함으로써 증명한다. 이러한 목적을 위하여 저자가 본론에서 분석하는 포스트 모더니스트들의 사진에 관한 주 텍스트는 더글라스 크림프의「픽쳐스」(“Pictures”, 1979)와「전유를 전유하기」(“Appropriating Appropriation”, 1981), 로잘린드 크라우스의「인덱스에 관한 노트」(“Notes on the Index: Part I & II”, 1976)이다. 셔만의 사진이 대표적인 포스트모던 작품으로 거론되기 시작한 것은 1979년 크림프의 에세이「픽쳐스」가 발표된 이후이다. 이글은 당시 젊은 작가들의 작품에서 보이는 새로운 형식의 미술의 도래를 반기고, 그들 작품의 공통적인 경향을 연구하는 외형을 띄고 있다. 이 글은 마이클 프리드의「미술과 사물성」(1967)에 대한 크림프의 포스트모더니스트로서의 항변으로서 크림프의 정치적인 의도는 클레멘트 그린버그와 프리드의 모더니즘 미술비평의 핵심인 미디움의 순수성에 대한 주장을 공격하는데 있다. 크림프는 이들 젊은 작가들의 작품에 나타난 미디움의 혼재현상을 지적하고, 작품 스스로가 의미를 발화한다는 그린버그와 프리드의 주장과 반대로, 작품을 경험하는 관객의 존재가 이들 젊은 작가들의 작품을 완성하는데 중요한 역할을 하며 작품의 의미를 형성해 낸다는 점을 역설한다.「전유를 전유하기」에서 크림프는 셔만의 사진을 포스트모던적 “전유”라는 틀거리에서 읽어내며 셰리 레빈, 리차드 프린스, 로버트 메이플쏘프의 사진작품과 함께 논의한다. 한편 크라우스는 크림프보다 앞서 동시대 미술에 사진이라는 미디움의 사용이 만연함을 지적하는 글 “인덱스에 관한 노트”를 두 편에 나누어 발표하면서, 앞서 저자가 문제 삼고 있는 포스트모더니스트들의 사진에 대한 기본적인 입장—미디움의 본질을 간과한—을 피력하였다. 이후로 80년대 초기에 발표된「사진의 일률적이지 않은 공간들」(“Photography’s Discursive Spaces”)등 사진에 대한 글들을 통해서 크림프의 시각을 옹호하고 있다. 저자는 본 논문에서 이 두 학자의 텍스트를 분석하고 그들과는 다른 시각에서 신디 셔만의 사진을 읽음으로서 셔만의 사진을 제한된 해석의 틀거리에서 풀어놓고자 한다. 이는 크림프와 크라우스의 논리를 완전히 파기하려는 것이 아니라 셔만의 사진이 다른 각도에서 보다 복합적으로 읽혀질 수 있음을 증명하고자 함이다. 보다 광범위한 맥락에서 본 논문은 포스트 모더니즘 미술비평이 어떻게 사진을 이론화하고 (비)역사화 했는지, 그들의 논리를 비판적으로 검증하고 그들과는 다른 지난 40년간의 사진의 역사를 쓰고자하는 저자의 연구 과제의 일부를 실행하고 있다.