함부르크의 두 가지 공공미술 사례와 생활세계의 식민화 테제의 양상

• 영문명: Two examples of public art in Hamburg and aspects of the colonial thesis of the living world
• 발행기관: 한국독일사학회
• 저자명: 김동규(Kim, Dong Gyu)
• 간행물 정보: 『독일연구』Vol.33, 121~152쪽, 전체 32쪽
• 주제분류: 인문학 > 역사학
• 파일형태: PDF
• 발행일자: 2016.11.30

영문 초록

This esssy tries to explain the case of Gängeviertel and Park Fition in Hamburg by means of the concept of colonizing thesis, the colonization of lifeworld by system. Some theorists estimate that the thesis is so defensive. But it is so narrow interpretation, because lifeworld is often offensive in justifying the system. In this way, lifeworld has the regulating function to system. But there is insufficiency in Habermas’ theory. Recently, the tendency of ecapturing lifeworld from system takes place. For example, squatting the house and bilding in public art. But Habermas’ theory is not dealing with this tendency appropriately. Concretely to say, communicative rationality cannot be dealing with the practice of public art in public sphere. So this essay selects the theory of recognition. It is Axel Honneth’ theory. It can justify the publicness of public art in holding the publicness of communicative rationality. Generally speaking, public art is usually using the strategy of communication and struggle. The intersubject recognition works in communicative action and the struggle to recognition works in struggling situation. The intersubject recognition and the struggle to recognition is all publicness. Thus I will set up the idea of common sphere that includes the communicative recognition and struggle to recognition. There is communicative common sphere in the one side. There is noncommunicative common sphere in the other side. My strategy is trying to justify the practice of public art that recapture public space in lifeworld stolen by system.

목차

Ⅰ. 서론

Ⅱ. 하버마스의 생활세계이론에 대한 재해석

Ⅲ. 공론장과 공공미술의 문제

Ⅳ. 공공미술과 함부르크의 사례

Ⅴ. 문화적 공론장에서 문화적 공통영역으로

키워드

Hamburg public art Habermas living world common area colonization thesis aspect