Abstract
In archival science, where ‘archives’ is translated as ‘records for preservation’, the typologization of archival preservation records is one of the most crucial issues. Operating under the premise that each record possesses its own unique content and structural context, archival science has classified archives at various levels of content structure context. Discussions in archival science surrounding the definition of records have focused on aspects of evidence, information, and memory. Within the interrelationships of various concepts such as evidence, memory, and identity information, archival science has managed archives, and the typology of archives has been an essential task. The situation is similar in what is known as archive art, which incorporates archives as methods and strategies of artistic practice. Much of the critical discourse on contemporary archive art has focused on the typologization of archive art. This study observes and examines the logic, strategies, and issues of typologizing contemporary Korean archive art, referencing discussions on archival types in archival science. How has the critical discourse in Korea typologized archive art? How does this typologization compare and contrast with those in other regions or countries, for example, Hal Foster’s categorizations? Are there unique types of contemporary Korean archive art? These are the key issues this paper addresses.
Details
Presentation Type
Paper Presentation in a Themed Session
Theme
2024 Special Focus—-Art for Sustenance
KEYWORDS
Archives, Contemporary Korean Art, Korean archive art
