Abstract

In the meantime, if studies of art history have mainly focused on external factors such as style, form, and background of works, studies of recent art history persistently digest intrinsic problems, intrinsic intentions and political implications. The study of Korean art history in 2015 and 2016 can be summarized by the words ‘twisting’ and ‘looking for diversity.’ ‘Twisting’ is a re ‐ examination of what has been taken for granted from a different point of view. ‘Looking for diversity’ means that the outline of the research field has expanded, and communication and negotiation with other fields has been made. This view is not different from the trends of other humanities, and it may be the direction that art history should pursue in the future. However, if it is based on the humanistic methodology, it is necessary to have a balanced viewpoint in that the art works which are targeted at ‘works’ may fail if the works are omitted. In addition, the research method for each field is so different that the problem of what kind of research methodology is desirable at present is encountered. There are areas that deviate from the essence of art history by analyzing and classifying styles and forms by microscopic methodology and interpreting them by way of over ‐ interpretive methodology. Indeed, it is the time that the worries between art as work and art history as humanities are more serious than ever.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call