이 글에서는 조선후기의 진경산수화에 대하여 연구사를 정리하고, 眞景文化, 眞景時代論을 비판적으로 검토하였으며, 이후 진경산수화에 대한 필자의 소견을 개략적으로 제시하였다. 진경산수화의 연구사에 대한 정리부분에서는 먼저 진경산수화를 집중적으로 연구해온 학자들의 연구성과를 정리하였고, 그 다음으로는 그 가운데 현재 가장 많은 관심을 끌면서도 그 논의의 핵심을 파악하기가 쉽지 않은 진경문화와 여기에서 파생된 진경시대론을 살펴보았다. 결론적으로 말하자면 진경문화나 문화사적 개념으로 제시된 진경시대론의 이면에는 식민사관에 의하여 왜곡된 한국역사, 즉 정체성론에 의해 포장된 조선의 쇠퇴론을 극복하고자 하는 의지가 있었다. 최완수는 진경산수화의 대가인 鄭敾(1676~1759)을 깊이 연구하였고, 문사철을 넘나드는 종합적인 인식의 틀을 유지하면서 작가론을 완성하여 작가연구의 새로운 전범을 제시하였다. 그러나 朝鮮性理學, 朝鮮中華思想, 老論을 중심으로 한 기본구도로 인하여 중요한 한계가 드러났다. 그 한 가지는 정선과 관련된 많은 사실들이 이 구도 안에서 구성, 해석되었고 그 과정에서 정선이 회화작가로서의 예술적 역할보다 진경문화론을 증명하는 도구로서 활용된 것으로 보이는 점이다. 또한 정선을 중심으로 진경문화론을 진전시키다 보니 조선후기에 일어난 다양한 사회현상, 즉 선비계층의 분화, 사상적, 문화적 차별성, 서화계에서 일어난 주요한 경향들에 대한 해석이 제한된 틀 안에서 설명되는 문제점이 나타났다. 이를테면 風俗畵나 東國眞體처럼 남인계 및 소론계 인사들에 의하여 제기, 발전된 서화분야도 모두 서인 및 노론과 관련된 것으로 해석되었고, 조선후기의 시대 개념도 정선의 활동연간을 중심으로 숙종대에서 시작되어 영조연간, 18세기 전반에는 이미 전성기에 이르고, 18세기 후반 정조연간에는 쇠퇴기에 들어간 것으로 보았다. 조선후기를 숙종에서 정조연간으로 규정하고, 또 우리 문화의 황금기로 정의하였지만 그 쇠퇴기가 너무 빨리 와서 오히려 논지가 흐려졌다. 회화예술의 측면에서 정조연간은 화원제도의 정비와 국왕의 적극적인 후원에 힘입어 훌륭한 화원화가들이 나와 궁중회화가 번성하였고, 문인계층과 중서민계층이 진경산수화, 풍속화, 문인화, 민화를 제작, 후원, 수요하고 있었으며, 김홍도와 신윤복, 김득신 등 풍속화의 대가들이 활동하면서 조선후기 회화의 전성기를 형성하였다는 것이 통설이다. 여러 가지 요건 상 조선후기를 진경문화가 유행한 진경시대로 보는 것은 곧 이 시대를 조선성리학, 조선중화사상, 노론의 시대로 규정하는 것이 되고, 宋學 중심의 성리학에 대한 비판적 재고나 탈중화사상, 북학사상 등은 다 쇠퇴기에 나타났거나, 보조적인 현상으로 격하되는 구도가 된다. 비록 『진경시대』 안에 동국진체나 풍속화, 남종문인화에 대한 논의가 다 포함되어 있어서 이 다양한 경향들이 진경문화의 테두리 안에 포섭되고 있는 듯이 보이지만, 사실 이 세 가지 경향들은 진경문화의 전제조건 안에서 일어난 일이 아닌 것이 선행연구를 통하여 밝혀져 있다. 만일 진경문화, 진경시대론이 가진 전제와 해석을 받아들인다면 조선후기는 아주 편협한, 비생산적인 시대가 될 것이다. 그것은 오히려 식민사관의 정체성론을 인정하는 것은 아닌가 하는 의구심이 든다. 이러한 점에서 진경문화론과 진경시대론은 좀 더 포괄적인 조건을 수용할 수 있는지의 여부에 따라 그 유효성이 결정될 것이며, 그러지 않는다면 조선후기를 진경문화가 꽃핀 진경시대로 규정하기는 어려울 것이다.

This paper comprises two stages. One presents the history and social context of the Jingyeong (literally meaning true, authentic natural scenery) landscape paintings made during the late Joseon period, conducting a critical review of Jingyeong culture, and the other outlines the author’s views on Jingyeong landscape paintings. Research into Jingyeong landscape paintings began mainly after the 1980s. This paper summarizes the research history of Jingyeong landscape paintings, and then presents a critical view of Jingyeong culture and the times of Jingyeong that draws the keenest attention and the core of whose argument is difficult to identify. If a conclusion is drawn, the Korean studies community’s problem awareness was behind the concept of Jingyeong culture and the times of Jingyeong which was presented based on the concept of cultural history. Likewise, the concept was formed on the assumption of the will to overcome the theory of Joseon’s recession that was packaged in Korea’s history distorted by colonial history views, namely, the theory of stagnation. Choi Wan su, valuing traditional methodologies based on the unity of literature, history and philosophy, conducted research into the artist Jeong Seon(1676~1759), presenting a fresh research methodology. However, he based his discussion on Joseon Seongnihak (Neo Confucianism), the theory of China-oriented thinking, and Noron (Elderly Political Faction), revealing his critical limitations. For one thing, many facts about Jeong Seon were composed and interpreted in this framework and, as a result, Jeog Seon was used not for his artistic role as a painter, but as a tool to prove the Jingyeong culture theory. Furthermore, as only Jeong Seon was highlighted, the theory of Jingyeong culture was studied, consequently making it impossible to make an objective interpretation of the diverse social phenomena occurring during the late Joseon period, including the segmentation of the class of scholars, thought and cultural differentiation. For instance, as with genre paintings and Donggukjinchae (literally meaning the authentic calligraphy of the east state), the western painting techniques, which was initiated and developed by members of the Namin and Soron political factions, was all interpreted as if they were related to Noron political factions. Also, the research included the view that “the concept of times” during the late Joseon period was initiated during the rule of King Sukjong, when Jeong Seon was active, peaked during the rule of King Yeongjo and the first half of the 18th century, and declined during the late period of the rule of King Jeongjo in the late 18th century. The late Joseon period was defined as the period between King Sukjong and King Jeongjo, and as the golden age of Korean culture, but its decline came too early. For reference, the commonly held view is that the reign of King Jeongjo was the peak time for paintings during the late Joseon period. For various reasons, the view that the late Joseon period is regarded as the Jingyeong era when the Jingyeong culture was in fashion is tantamount to defining this period as Joseon Seongnihak, the theory of Joseon’s worshiping China, and Noron. Likewise, the landscape would be that the period is defined as the period of the Noron political faction, and that the major trends of this period such as the critical reconsideration of Sung learning oriented Seongnihak (Neo-Confucianism), and the post theory of Joseon’s worshiping China appeared in the recession period or are demoted to a supplementary phenomenon. If the assumption and interpretation of the Jingyeong culture and the theory of the Jingyeong times are accepted, the late Joseon period would be regarded as a very narrow minded, unproductive period, thereby unfortunately leading to an acknowledgement of the colonial view of history. In this respect, depending on whether or not the view of Jingyeong culture and the theory of the Jingyeong times can accept more comprehensive conditions, their effect will be determined. Otherwise, it is difficult to define the late Joseon period as the Jingyeong times when the Jingyeong culture flourished. This paper presents a critical review of the research into Jingyeong landscape paintings and, as an alternative, the researcher’s position on and interpretation of Jingyeong landscape paintings are also presented. A compact discussion was made, making it difficult to present the summary. Readers interested in Jingyeong landscape paintings are advised to carefully read the references stipulated in the paper.

This paper comprises two stages. One presents the history and social context of the Jingyeong (literally meaning true, authentic natural scenery) landscape paintings made during the late Joseon period, conducting a critical review of Jingyeong culture, and the other outlines the author’s views on Jingyeong landscape paintings. Research into Jingyeong landscape paintings began mainly after the 1980s. This paper summarizes the research history of Jingyeong landscape paintings, and then presents a critical view of Jingyeong culture and the times of Jingyeong that draws the keenest attention and the core of whose argument is difficult to identify. If a conclusion is drawn, the Korean studies community’s problem awareness was behind the concept of Jingyeong culture and the times of Jingyeong which was presented based on the concept of cultural history. Likewise, the concept was formed on the assumption of the will to overcome the theory of Joseon’s recession that was packaged in Korea’s history distorted by colonial history views, namely, the theory of stagnation. Choi Wan su, valuing traditional methodologies based on the unity of literature, history and philosophy, conducted research into the artist Jeong Seon(1676~1759), presenting a fresh research methodology. However, he based his discussion on Joseon Seongnihak (Neo Confucianism), the theory of China-oriented thinking, and Noron (Elderly Political Faction), revealing his critical limitations. For one thing, many facts about Jeong Seon were composed and interpreted in this framework and, as a result, Jeog Seon was used not for his artistic role as a painter, but as a tool to prove the Jingyeong culture theory. Furthermore, as only Jeong Seon was highlighted, the theory of Jingyeong culture was studied, consequently making it impossible to make an objective interpretation of the diverse social phenomena occurring during the late Joseon period, including the segmentation of the class of scholars, thought and cultural differentiation. For instance, as with genre paintings and Donggukjinchae (literally meaning the authentic calligraphy of the east state), the western painting techniques, which was initiated and developed by members of the Namin and Soron political factions, was all interpreted as if they were related to Noron political factions. Also, the research included the view that “the concept of times” during the late Joseon period was initiated during the rule of King Sukjong, when Jeong Seon was active, peaked during the rule of King Yeongjo and the first half of the 18th century, and declined during the late period of the rule of King Jeongjo in the late 18th century. The late Joseon period was defined as the period between King Sukjong and King Jeongjo, and as the golden age of Korean culture, but its decline came too early. For reference, the commonly held view is that the reign of King Jeongjo was the peak time for paintings during the late Joseon period. For various reasons, the view that the late Joseon period is regarded as the Jingyeong era when the Jingyeong culture was in fashion is tantamount to defining this period as Joseon Seongnihak, the theory of Joseon’s worshiping China, and Noron. Likewise, the landscape would be that the period is defined as the period of the Noron political faction, and that the major trends of this period such as the critical reconsideration of Sung learning oriented Seongnihak (Neo-Confucianism), and the post theory of Joseon’s worshiping China appeared in the recession period or are demoted to a supplementary phenomenon. If the assumption and interpretation of the Jingyeong culture and the theory of the Jingyeong times are accepted, the late Joseon period would be regarded as a very narrow minded, unproductive period, thereby unfortunately leading to an acknowledgement of the colonial view of history. In this respect, depending on whether or not the view of Jingyeong culture and the theory of the Jingyeong times can accept more comprehensive conditions, their effect will be determined. Otherwise, it is difficult to define the late Joseon period as the Jingyeong times when the Jingyeong culture flourished. This paper presents a critical review of the research into Jingyeong landscape paintings and, as an alternative, the researcher’s position on and interpretation of Jingyeong landscape paintings are also presented. A compact discussion was made, making it difficult to present the summary. Readers interested in Jingyeong landscape paintings are advised to carefully read the references stipulated in the paper.

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

late Joseon period, true-view landscape painting, realism, Neo-Confucianism, China-oriented thinking, Jeong Seon, Kang Se-whang, Kim Hong-do, theory of heavenly mechanism, western painting