[KS] cultural object circulation in the late Choson Dynasty query

[Frank Hoffmann]

Thanks, Javier! And thanks Andre for brining this topic to the list.
I think there are many here who are interested in this topic.

My own impression is that the "art market" has been a topic on  
jurnalistic art journals in Korea for decades, but always only the  
contemporary art market. Only over the past 10 or 15 years is the  
interest in research in the colonial and very late (late 19th century)  
art market growing -- this goes hand in hand with the developing but  
still very small field of art history in Korea, and the new academic  
programs for art history. By now we do have a considerable number of  
journal articles and some M.A. thesis dealing with the colonial period  
art market, colleting, the Japanese (in Korea) and collection, etc.  
But there seems still very little at all on the Chosŏn period "art  
market" (this might indeed better be used in quotation marks when  
discussing traditional Korea). Wonderful to hear that Shin Jiwon at  
Berkeley is working on a related book! Not an easy task for sure, not  
really much to "fall back on" in that area!

Javier Cha mentions the "Iunji 怡雲志" book (that's book #14) of Sŏ  
Yu-ga's 16-book (chapter) Imwŏn kyŏngjeji 林園經濟志, also known as Imwŏn  
simnyukchi 林園十六志. Sŏ's work is a typical sample for a work in the  
tradition of East Asian lexicological knowledge and all the strings  
attached to it (format, story-telling narrational strategies,  
selection of themes and contents, quotations, connections to the  
classics, historiographical approaches, etc.). On a side note, if you  
read through mainstream publications of the past 20 years in the area  
of Korean art, including modern art, you will still find lively traces  
of this narrative tradition. Sŏ did freely incorporate and quote at  
length the (famous) publications of his contemporaries or near  
contemporaries, scholars of the Silhak School--for example Pak  
Chi-wŏn's Yŏlha ilgi. The Imwŏn kyŏngjeji is therefore to be seen as a  
kind of lexicological compilation of the latest knowledge of the times  
(and that was at the time mostly the research produced by the Silhak  
scholars). Not any different from contemporary publications in Europe,  
this was global and all-inclusive lexical knowledge, anything from  
world geography over agriculture to aesthetics and crafts. Book 14,  
Iunji, deals with scholars' hobbies and culture, with flowers, birds,  
perfumes, book printing and binding. Within this context also with  
collecting, if you want to call it that. The entire work, the Imwŏn  
kyŏngjeji, is basically written with the countryside scholar in mind,  
educating him on what to do, what to get, etc. -- but also letting him  
know about the latest agricultural techniques and reforms, and so on.
However, you won't get too much out of this text when wanting to  
analyse teh art market, or better, as Andre Schmid put it in his mail,  
"the circulation of cultural objects." ... I doubt (I may be wrong)  
that there are particular texts that will allow rich insights in the  
Chosŏn period art market. But before this, let me point you to an  
article about the mentioned "Iunji" book:
TITLE: 『이운지』를 통해 본 조선 후기 사대부가의 생활 모습
BY: 신영주
IN: 漢文學報, 제13권 (2005), pp. 387-414
------
DOWNLOAD this as PDF:
http://www.woohan.or.kr/
- go to above URL
- click on "학회지 검색서비스"
- 한문학보 will already show in search pop-up window, just choose vol. 13, 2005
- click on "2" at bottom, for 2nd page
- click on PDF download link for the 신영주 article
------

Okay, here is what my hunch is--and maybe someone actually working on  
the Chosŏn period art market / collecting / circulation of cultural  
objects ... could jump in and say someting:
- First, it has been my impression that coming up with a meaningful  
analysis of this wider topic, this will require looking at a large  
variety of sources, including visual sources, trade records, diaries,  
etc. Nobody before the 20th century would have been interested to take  
on a topic such as "art market" or "collecting" in Korea--both terms  
had little to no meaning at the time. You would therefore hardly find  
any textual approach dealing with it. It would all be sources dealing  
with this 'indirectly.'
- Second, please question the question: Javiar Cha wrote (this is NOT  
meant as a criticism, just as a suggestion for a different approach):  
"The former would entail the collection of precious objects for their  
contemporary value (rare
books, paintings, treasures acquired domestically or imported from  
China) and the latter would have more to do with collecting for the  
sake of curiosity about the past (or the guwen notion of 'love of  
antiquity')." -- To my ears, this sounds too much like Italian  
Renaissance & Cosimo de Medici & patronate & collections & humanism.  
That concept will not get us much further when looking at traditional  
Korea, I think. The above approach seems misguided in that it does not  
place collection within the pattern of traditional Korean society.  
Maybe scholars dealing with the 19th and 18th centuries have a  
different opinion. But so far my two cents worth.

Best,
Frank