시나노에서, 히가시야마 치조의 명작 「녹음 울린다」를 즐긴다. - 씨를 뿌리다

시나노에서, 히가시야마 치조의 명작 「녹음 울린다」를 즐긴다. - 씨를 뿌리다

일본 박물관의 소장품에서 오늘 한 장

시나노에서, 히가시야마 치조의 명작 「녹음 울린다」를 즐긴다.

2021-10-09

히가시야마 魁夷『녹색 울림』(1982) 나가노현 시나노 미술관 히가시야마 魁夷館

나가노 시내에 있는 나가노현 시나노 미술관의 히가시야마 츠쿠이관에는, 쇼와에서 헤세이에 걸쳐 활약한 일본화의 거장, 히가시야마 츠쿠이의 유명한 '녹색 울림'이 소장되어 있다. 이 그림은 한때 샤프한 평면 액정 TV AQUOS의 CM에서 사용된 것으로 일약 유명해졌다. 기억하는 사람도 있을지도 모른다. 한 마리의 흰 말이 숲의 호반을 걷는 모습을 그린 것이다. 이 정감 넘치는 환상적인 풍경화는, 나가노현에 실제로 있는 풍경이 기초가 되고 있다.

이 '녹색 울림'에서 우선 눈에 띄는 것은 화면 오른쪽 안쪽에 작게 그려진 해변을 걷는 하얀 말. 화면 앞에서 하얀 말이 있는 먼 해변까지 녹색 호수가 펼쳐진다. 그 호반 건너편에는 나무들이 늘어선 깊은 숲이 있다.

이 그림의 구도적인 매력은 하얀 말이 있는 숲의 풍경이 그림의 중앙을 가로지르는 해안선을 경계로 반전하고,투투키통하는 호면에 거울처럼 비추어져 있는 곳일 것이다. 이 반전에 의해, 녹색의 숲의 나무들이 그림 전체를 채우고, 그 안에서 호반을 걷는 하얀 말의 모습이 돋보인다.

히가시야마 魁夷 「녹음 울린다」

初めて伺います。調べてみました。

---

https://www.tane-wo-maku.com/kaii-echoes-of-green/

---

画家は長野県の蓼科高原にある御射鹿池（みしゃかいけ）の風景からインスピレーションを得てこの絵を描いた。

長野県信濃美術館の東山魁夷館所蔵の日本画家、東山魁夷による『緑響く』のもとになった蓼科高原にある御射鹿池の風景

『緑響く』の湖畔にいる白い馬は実際に存在したわけではなく、画家の心の中に浮かんだものだったという。そして画家が描いた森の湖畔の景色は、白い馬が画家に見せた馬自身の心の風景（心象風景）だったという。多少難解な部分もあるが、白い馬が現れた風景について画家は次のように語っている。　

「ある時、一頭の白い馬が私の風景の中に、ためらいながら小さく姿を見せた。…しかしいつも、ひそやかに遠くの方に見える場合が多く、決して前面に大きく現れることはない。」「風景は全て背景としての役目であって、白い馬の象徴する世界を、風景が反映しているのである。」

---

화가는 나가노 현과과고원에 있는미사카 연못(미샤카이케)의 풍경에서 영감을 얻어 이 그림을 그렸다.

나가노현 시나노 미술관의 히가시야마 치조관 소장의 일본 화가, 히가시야마 치조에 의한 '녹색 울림'의 기초가 된 요테이 고원에 있는 미사카 연못의 풍경

'녹색 울림'의 호반에 있는 하쿠마는 실제로 존재한 것은 아니고, 화가의 마음 속에 떠오른 것이었다고 한다. 그리고 화가가 그린 숲의 호반의 경치는 하얀 말이 화가에게 보여준 말 자신의 마음의 풍경(심상 풍경)이었다고 한다. 다소 난해한 부분도 있지만, 하얀 말이 나타난 풍경에 대해 화가는 다음과 같이 말하고 있다.　

“어쩌면 한 마리의 하얀 말이 내 풍경 속에 망설이면서 작게 모습을 보였다. ""풍경은 모든 배경로서의 역할이며, 백마의 상징 세계를 풍경을 반영하고있는 것이다. "

"녹색 울리는 "은 백마 꾸는 꿈을 화가가 꿈 같은 , 몽상적인 풍경화가 되고 있다.

---

화가는 나가노 현과과고원에 있는미사카 연못(미샤카이케)의 풍경에서 영감을 얻어 이 그림을 그렸다.

여름 미사카 연못의 풍경.

'녹색 울림'의 호반에 있는 하쿠마는 실제로 존재한 것은 아니고, 화가의 마음 속에 떠오른 것이었다고 한다. 그리고 화가가 그린 숲의 호반의 경치는 하얀 말이 화가에게 보여준 말 자신의 마음의 풍경(심상 풍경)이었다고 한다. 다소 난해한 부분도 있지만, 하얀 말이 나타난 풍경에 대해 화가는 다음과 같이 말하고 있다.　
“어쩌면 한 마리의 하얀 말이 내 풍경 속에 망설이면서 작게 모습을 보였다. ""풍경은 모든 배경로서의 역할이며, 백마의 상징 세계를 풍경을 반영하고있는 것이다. "
"녹색 울리는 "은 백마 꾸는 꿈을 화가가 꿈 같은 , 몽상적인 풍경화가 되고 있다.

「녹음의 일부」

히가시야마 추이관이 유명한 "녹음쿠』 외에도, 화가의 어린 시절의 작품을 포함해 다수 소장되어 있다. 신슈는 화가에게 '작품을 키워준 고향'이라고 부를 정도로 그림 제작에 영감을 주는 곳이었다. 화가가 사랑하지 못한 신슈의 무성한 풍경에 둘러싸인 이 미술관에서,히가시야마 魁夷의 세계에 차분히침수하고 싶다.

나가노현 시나노 미술관 히가시야마 치조관

나가노 현 시나노 미술관 동산魁夷館
〒380-0801 나가노시箱清水1-4-4
(젠 코지 동린)
https://nagano.art.museum/higashiyama_kaii_gallery
· 히가시야마魁夷館는 화가가 생전에 집에서 보존하고 있던 작품을 나가노현에 기부한 것을 계기로 지어진 것. 화가의 돌출의 어린 시절부터 만년까지의 폭넓은 작품을 소장한다. 이 호텔은 시내의 유명한 관광 명소인 젠코지 부지에서 도로를 사이에 두고 바로 옆에 위치해 있습니다. 미술관은 건축가인 타니구치 요시오(東谷魁夷)의 회화의 「액자」가 되도록 설계되었다고 한다. 확실히 그 작품을 돋보이게 하는 간결한 모습이 되고 있다.

참고 : 「히가시야마 치조」일본 경제 신문 출판사 1991

✎저/ 씨를

Modern capitalist society - Wikipedia

Modern capitalist society - Wikipedia

Modern capitalist society

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigationJump to search

hideThis article has multiple issues. Please help to improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages) The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's general notability guideline. (May 2020) This article is written like a personal reflection, personal essay, or argumentative essay that states a Wikipedia editor's personal feelings or presents an original argument about a topic. (May 2020)

Modern capitalist society is a term used to describe a type of capitalist society in which a capitalist class of "new elites" and "old elites" concerned with maximizing their wealth secures a political system that serves and protects their interests, leading to the development of a wage-earning class.^[1] The term is commonly used by historians to refer to a transition from a premodern feudal society to a modern capitalist society, with consensus being that England emerged as the first modern capitalist society through the English Civil War (1642-51) and the Glorious Revolution (1688-89).^[2][3] Historians identify that the transition into modern capitalist society is often defined by a bourgeois revolution in which rising elites secure a system of representative democracy, rather than direct democracy, that serves their interests over the interests of the previously ruling royal aristocracy, such as in the American Revolution.^[1][2][4]

Modern capitalist societies rely on calculated and systematic production, different from the merchant capitalism of the Italian city-states, and are defined by the existence of a wage-earning class that functions as the counterpart to a capitalist class.^[2] They are described as highly competitive and individualistic, focusing on private interests over public welfare, through prioritizing commodity production and profit maximization.^[5][6] Defending private property, preserving law and order, maintaining the economic exploitation and political impotence of the wage-earning class, training the wage-earning class in the tasks that modern capitalist society requires to function, educating the wage-earning class to internalize the principles of capitalist-democracy, often through forms of propaganda in the mass media, and conditioning the wage-earning class to believe that they are autonomous and live in a society ruled by the citizenry, have all been identified by scholars as forces which maintain modern capitalist societies.^[7][8][9]

Modern capitalist societies are positioned in Western culture as a phase of human progression that is superior or "more advanced" than "premodern" forms of society.^[10] This perspective was most evidently portrayed through colonial logics which asserted that Indigenous peoples belonged to more "primitive" cultures and therefore should assimilate into more "civilized" societies or face genocide (e.g., "Kill the Indian, Save the Man").^[11][12][13] For Marxists, anarchists, and others, modern capitalist society is a phase which will eventually lead to the emergence of a qualitatively different form of society. In opposition, liberals and others are opposed to the structural transformation of modern capitalist society.^[14]

Contents

• 1Ideological origins
  • 1.1Weber
• 2Historical lineage
• 3References

Ideological origins[edit]

Modern capitalist societies center the concept of means-end rationality, also referred to as instrumental rationality and formal rationality,^[15] and its inherent association with domination over nature, so as to manipulate it to suit material needs, and human beings, so as to organize and discipline them in their control over nature. Means-end rationality has held importance in Western culture for longer than modern capitalist societies have existed and historians have identified that this concept may have origins as early as Homer.^[16][17]

Weber[edit]

According to sociologist Max Weber, modern capitalist society "arose out of the moral calling of Calvinists; more specifically, the doctrine of predestination which resulted in new tensions between the individual and society and encouraged the believer to rationalize the objectivity of his belief (his or her productive contribution to the accumulation of capital)."^[18] As Weber theorized:

The objectivization of one's beliefs was predicated on the distinction between instrumental reality (the actual enactment and application of the prevailing norms and rules of society) and value rationality (how moral beliefs and values define the meaning and scope of these rules and laws). The growth of modern society, in this sense, referred to the creation of large bureaucracies, police forces, and legislative bodies: all autonomous rational structures of the state and modern capitalist society embodying the effects and ends of instrumental rationality. The legitimacy of these institutions thus reflected the dominant function assumed by these institutions in maintaining and administering societal order. [...] The result of this evolving orientation was that citizens learned to obey societal laws which, in turn, served as the basis of dominant and legitimate types of authority in society.^[18]

Weber perceived bureaucratization as an efficient institutional representation of rationality in modern capitalist society, yet also recognized how this could be "potentially dehumanizing, even malevolent, in its impersonality and possible elevation of economic efficiency and profit-maximization over human values and social justice. Weber was genuinely alarmed by the prospect that an institutionalized, morally vacuous or pernicious instrumental, and especially, formal, rationality might be used to justify morally questionable ends. Such rationality could potentially strip individuals of their freedom and dignity, placing them, metaphorically, in an 'iron cage' of despair."^[19]

Historical lineage[edit]

The first modern capitalist society has its origins in England with the English Civil War (1642-51) and the Glorious Revolution (1688-89), which has been identified by historians as a bourgeois revolution that resulted in the transition from a traditional feudal society to a modern capitalist society.^[1][2][3] These historical events in England were described by scholars as being fueled by the historically inaccurate yet profoundly influential reference to Magna Carta (1215), which was heavily cited in the 17th century by rising elites such as Jurist Edward Coke and others to rally support against the British monarchy through the promotion of individualism.^[20][21] Early colonial charters, such as the Virginia Charter (1606) and the Massachusetts Body of Liberties (1641), as well as support for the American Revolution were influenced from this reference to Magna Carta. Many American colonists fought against Britain to preserve liberties and rights that they believed to be enshrined in Magna Carta. In the late 18th century, the United States Constitution became the supreme law of the land, recalling the manner in Magna Carta had come to be regarded as fundamental law.^[22][23]

As described by political scientist Kenneth Good, "the rewriting of history 'forged a new pedigree for the concept of democracy' traceable from Magna Carta, through the Glorious Revolution of 1688, and the Founding Fathers of the American constitution–all largely aristocratic and elitist events with an absent or passive people–taking precedence over [the alternative canon of] Athens, the Levellers and Diggers, and the Chartists and many others of the 1830s and 1840s." According to Good, "in this heritage, political rights in modern capitalist society no longer had the meaning and potency of citizenship in Athens. There was no clear division between state and civil society, no distinct and autonomous economy. With perhaps an especial contribution from American experience, modern capitalist democracy would be confined to a formally separate sphere while the market economy followed rules of its own, and socio-economic inequalities would coexist with civic freedom and formal political equality. Though new urban working classes struggled for self-determination through nineteenth-century Britain, democracy moved away from active citizenship to 'the passive enjoyment of constitutional rights and safeguards'; checks and balances, the division of powers, the rule of law." For Good, this idea of democracy was most identifiable through British and American liberalism.^[4]

References[edit]

1. ^ Jump up to:^a b c Cust, Richard; Hughes, Ann (2014). Conflict in Early Stuart England: Studies in Religion and Politics 1603-1642. Taylor & Francis. pp. 2–3. ISBN 9781317885023.
2. ^ Jump up to:^a b c d Lundskow, George (2008). The Sociology of Religion: A Substantive and Transdisciplinary Approach. SAGE Publications. p. 97. ISBN 9781412937214.
3. ^ Jump up to:^a b Burnham, Michelle (2008). "Textual Investments: Economics and Colonial American Literatures". In Castillo, Susan; Schweitzer, Ivy (eds.). A Companion to the Literatures of Colonial America. Wiley. p. 68. ISBN 9781405152082.
4. ^ Jump up to:^a b Good, Kenneth (2014). Trust in the Capacities of the People, Distrust in Elites. Lexington Books. p. 16. ISBN 9781498502443.
5. ^ Wood, Ellen Meiksins (1991). The Pristine Culture of Capitalism: A Historical Essay on Old Regimes and Modern States. Verso. pp. 146.
6. ^ Dutt, Sagarika (2006). India in a Globalized World. Manchester University Press. p. 98. ISBN 9781847792143.
7. ^ White, Leslie A. (2016). Modern Capitalist Culture, Abridged Edition. Taylor & Francis. p. 66. ISBN 9781315424408.
8. ^ Williams, Raymond (2000). "Advertising: The Magic System". In Marris, Paul; Thornham, Sue (eds.). Media Studies: A Reader - 2nd Edition. NYU Press. pp. 704–705. ISBN 9780814756478.
9. ^ Garner, Roberta; Hancock, Black Hawk (2014). Social Theory, Volume II: From Modern to Contemporary Theory, Third Edition. University of Toronto Press. pp. 573–578. ISBN 9781442607408.
10. ^ Kawamura, Nozomu (2013). Sociology and Society of Japan. Taylor & Francis. pp. 95–96. ISBN 9781317793199.
11. ^ Furniss, Elizabeth (1999). The Burden of History: Colonialism and the Frontier Myth in a Rural Canadian Community. UBC Press. pp. 146. ISBN 9780774807111.
12. ^ Brown, Enora R. (2009). Handbook of Social Justice in Education. Taylor & Francis. pp. 81–82. ISBN 9781135596149.
13. ^ Bruchac, Margaret M. (2018). Savage Kin: Indigenous Informants and American Anthropologists. University of Arizona Press. p. 68. ISBN 9780816538300.
14. ^ Comninel, George C. (2003). Delanty, Gerard; Isin, Engin F. (eds.). Handbook of Historical Sociology. SAGE Publications. pp. 87. ISBN 0761971734.
15. ^ Pauer-Studer, Herlinde (2007). Peter, Fabienne; Schmid, Hans Bernhard (eds.). Rationality and Commitment. OUP Oxford. p. 80. ISBN 9780199287260.
16. ^ Sharrock, Wes W.; John A., Hughes; Peter J., Martin (2003). Understanding Modern Sociology. SAGE Publications. pp. 78. ISBN 0761957065.
17. ^ Thornhill, Chris (2013). "Max Weber". Political Theory in Modern Germany: An Introduction. Wiley. ISBN 9780745668789.
18. ^ Jump up to:^a b Roach, Steven (2006). Politicizing the International Criminal Court: The Convergence of Politics, Ethics, and Law. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. p. 91. ISBN 9780742541047.
19. ^ TenHouten, Warren D. (2014). Emotion and Reason: Mind, Brain, and the Social Domains of Work and Love. Taylor & Francis. p. 99. ISBN 9781317580614.
20. ^ Danzinger, Danny; Gillingham, John (2004). 1215: The Year of Magna Carta. Hodder Paperbacks. p. 280. ISBN 978-0340824757.
21. ^ Breay, Claire (2010). Magna Carta: Manuscripts and Myths. The British Library. p. 46. ISBN 978-0-7123-5833-0.
22. ^ "Magna Carta and Its American Legacy". National Archives and Records Administration. Retrieved 19 May2020.
23. ^ "The Magna Carta". National Archives and Records Administration. Retrieved 19 May 2020.

Categories: 

• Modernity
• Capitalism
• Society