Chusa Jeong-Hee Kim_his life and art


작성자 moam(admin) 시간 2017-12-06 08:37:44 조회수 1575
첨부파일 :

표제: 흰눈집주인 이 영 재(1930~)

Major Fallacies in the study of Jeong-Hee Kim (Chu-Sa 秋史, 1786-1856)

混沌 (CHAOS)and 選択(CHOICES)

われわれがている絶対的真実だとえるか?だったら、動物えた世界はどうか?たしかに、人間とはなるとわれます。また、われわれのこっているが、えない現状などはどう説明できますか?そのさまざまな錯視現状などまでえると、われわれは、幻影(Illusion)混沌 (Chaos)んでいるとえます。

Can you say that what we're seeing is absolutely truthful?" Then, other creatures such as dogs, cats, any kind of insects, and so forth, what about the world other living things in nature see through their eyes? The world they see might be very different from the world we see now. Also, how can you explain what is going on in front of us, but not in sight, etc.? In addition, considering the various illusionary situations of the world, we could say that we might live in Illusions and Chaos.


- 李 庸 銖

Do you think absolutely obvious and clear things in the world could and would exist? I think, in fact, ​the absolutely obvious and clear things of the world can not and will not exist. I could say that each person just objectively examines all the situations in this chaotic environment (the middle course, the beauty of the middle course), and only strives for the best choices in every moment. And then we can say that our lives lie on the continuity of choices that we should make in every moment. This kind of choices could arise from the opposite direction(s) as well. The choices in both ways can also be called a series of  'mutual choices'. And I think this kind of choices occur among artists and audiences of the art world.

- Yong-Su Lee​  



Wan-Yeum-Hap-Byuk(阮髥合璧), 모암문고茅岩文庫 The Moam Collection

추사 김정희와 그의 예술에 관한 일단의 마무리를 준비하며... 

본래 학문學問​이라는 것은 새로운 이론과 실제의 발전에 따른 이전 성과에 대한 고찰考察​과 수정修正​이 동반된다. 물론 새로운 학술적인 성과나 그 학문적 근거가 빈약한 비평은 학술적·학문적이라 말할 수 없고, 따라서 언급할 일고의 가치가 없을 것이다. 하지만, 이에 관한 평가는 글쓴이 자신이 할 수 없다. 이는 온전히 독자분들의 몫이다.

- 이용수 Yong-Su Lee  

               Major Fallacies in the study of Jeong-Hee Kim (Chu-Sa 秋史, 1786-1856)

          Yong-Su Lee

          The Moam Collection


The achievements of Jeong-Hee Kim, a well-known scholar based artist, have been recognized by many Koreans and Kim still has strong influence on people in Korea and Korean art society. Resulting from this, Jeong-Hee Kim has become one of the most popular and favorite artists in Korea. On the contrary to this, however, considerable drawbacks lie in the study of Jeong-Hee Kim.    


Up until now, a variety of exhibitions of Jeong-Hee Kim's collection have been organized by various institutions, such as a series of exhibitions with several publications including Chu-sa Jib (Hyunamsa, 2014), Ink Rubbings of Chu-Sa (Chu-Sa Tak Bon Jeon), Wan-dang and his wind in company with the publication Biography of Wan-Dang (Wan-dang Pyoung Jeon, Hakgojae, 2002), and so forth. As a result of these exhibitions with publications, many Koreans have become keenly interested in Jeong-Hee Kims works.


Although large numbers of shortcomings were in the publications above, interestingly enough, Wan-dang Pyoung Jeon has received much interest. " Wan-dang Pyoung Jeon and Chusajib" are significant as the first in-depth and overall research about Jeong-Hee Kim and his works. Those books present Chu-sa's personal life and the whole range of his works by period and works of art. These books are regarded as required texts for studying Chu-sa and his works by scholars and students.


However, in spite of two Korean scholars' significant contributions, numerous misrepresentations exist in their books and in the exhibitions mentioned above. Even though I do understand we need a very careful and deliberate approaches, treatments and I totally recognize it might be an inappropriate approach to study art history at some points, I would like to point out that a major problem is many inauthentic works are (still) in those books as well  as in  the exhibitions. Besides, those authors misunderstood the works of Jeong-Hee Kims students, such as Don-In Kweon, Hwi-Yong Cho, Jeong-Hyun Yun, and Ha-Ung Lee, for the works of Jeong-Hee Kim. In addition, some misunderstandings and fallacies in translation and anecdotes of Jeong-Hee Kim have frequently appeared in other primary book resources. In my point of view, this is problematic now that it could make people all around the world including Korea confused. And scholars, students, and general public might regard the inauthentic works as the genuine ones, and they might study Jeong-Hee Kim and his works based on these incorrect materials and resources.


In this section of my thesis or dissertation(publication) I would like to focus much more on the source of confusion between Jeong-Hee Kims works and that of his students, especially Don-In Kweon. For this I will demonstrate that the pen names, Yeum(), Yeum-Na(髥那), Na-Ga(那伽), Na-Ga-San-in(那伽山人), Guo-Sa(居士), Byung-Guo-Sa(病居士) formerly accepted to be that of Jeong-Hee Kim are in fact not the case. Rather these pen names are Don-In Kweons by the study of Wan-Yeum-Hap-Byuk(阮髥合璧) which is the album made mostly by Jeong-Hee Kim and Don-In Kweon. To do this I will select Jeong-Hee Kims works from Wan-dang Pyoung Jeon & Chusajib and explain why these works are not Chu-Sas. 



ⓒ 모암문고 茅岩文庫 The Moam Collection

무단전재 및 도용 재배포금지 | 저작권문의