• The Journal of Art Theory & Practice
• /
• 제7호
• /
• pp.37-64
• /
• 2009

The theories of Korean Public Art originated by the artists who were against dictatorship and they associated with democratic politicians. They criticized the Fine art that were supported by the dictatorship and gave their efforts for restoration of 'resistance paintings(against dictatorship)', 'proletarian painting', 'realism painting'. In addition, they participated new social ideology(democracy) movement and demonstrated for their rights in arts. These became the main kernel the public art theory was initiated. The public artists splitted into several different parts and participated in the democratic social movement as well as the art movement for freedom. They opened various art exhibitions within different genre, diverse space for various art section such as an exhibition hall, a factories, a university, or a congregation square. Furthermore, the public art theorists published their divergent views through newspaper/broadcasting or unauthorized printed materials. Most of the public artist and the theorists kept their relationship strongly until 1985, the time when 'National Arts Association' started. In 1983 and 1984, they were clearly separated into two parts; artists(move only in art museums) and activists(move in public spaces like school, convention square etc). Their ideological separation also took out national problems. The division; professional artists and armatures, became the social issue as a social stratification matter. And in creating method, there are also other conflicts; critical realism, and public realism as well as western painting and traditional one. These kinds of separation and conflicts made different Public artists associations, under divergent names; 'Reality and Speak'(R&S), 'KwangJu Art Association', 'Durung', 'Dang(Land)', and 'Local Youth Students Association'. In addition, their ideology and pursuit toward art movements were very difference. However, the differences and conflicts weakened When the oppression of democratic education from new dictatorship(Pres. Jun, Doo Hwan) came out. In August. 1985 the government opened to the public so called, 'The draft of School stabilization law'(Hankwon Anjung Bup) to control the teachers' rights and that initiated bigger street demonstration and conflicts between police and educators. In November.1985, assembly meeting of National Arts Association in democracy opened as 'ONE' combined organization. In this presentation, I'd like to summarize the stream of art movement until 1984, and clarify the main art theories that lead the Public Art Movements in 1980s. The main theories in 1980s are crucial because they become the origin of public art theories. This presentation started with O,youn's "Hyunsil Dong In the first declaration" and explained the absent of practice in 1970s. In addition, Won, Dong Suk 's theory was mentioned as all over struggles in theories before 1980s. GA and R&S 's founding declarations in 1970s were the start of public art theorists' activities and this article reported the activities after the declarations. First, realism base on the consciousness of reality. Second, practice art democratization based on the ideology. Third, the subject of public art movement based on understanding people's social stratification structure. Fourth, the matters of national forms and creative ways in arts based on showing reality. Fifth, the strong points in arts that the practitioners accepted. About the public art theories around 1984, I discussed the dividing point of public art theories that were shown in 'generation theory', 'organization theory', and 'popularization theory' by the practitioners. The public realism theory that subjects the contradiction of reality and point out the limits of critical realism not only showing the new creative ways but also giving the feeling of solidarity to the public art activist groups. After that, public art movements expressed 'Dismentlement of Capitalism' and 'Public revolution'. In addition, the direction of public art movements were established strongly. There were various opinions and views during the start and formation of the public art theories. The foundation of theorists activities derived from the practitioners who had the concept based on stratification and nationalism. The strong trend of group division spreaded out by practitioners who opened art work together in factories, universities, squares and rural areas. Now many lively active practitioners are gone to the other field not related with arts, and others join into professional art field not public art one with unknown reason. The theorists have the same situation with the practitioners. It means to me that theory always have to be based on the practice.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• 제26권1호
• /
• pp.3-30
• /
• 2011

According to the Article 86 of the United Nations on the Law of the Sea(UNCLOS) the provisions of high seas apply to all parts of the sea that are not included in the exclusive economic zone, in the territorial sea or in the internal waters of a State, or in the archipelagic waters of an archipelagic State. Article 87 also stipulates the freedom of the high seas. International laws on the flight over the high seas are found as follows; Firstly, as far as the nationality of the aircraft is concerned, its legal status is quite different from the ship where the flags of convenience can be applied practically. There is no flags of convenience of the aircraft. Secondly, according to the Article 95 of UNCLOS warships on the high seas have complete immunity from the jurisdiction of any State other than the flag State. We can suppose that the military(or state) aircraft over the high seas have also complete immunity from the jurisdiction of any State other than the flag State. Thirdly, according to the Article 101 of UNCLOS piracy consists of any act of voluntary participation in the operation of a ship or of an aircraft with knowledge of facts making it a pirate ship or aircraft. We can conclude that piracy can de done by a pirate aircraft as well as a pirate ship. Fourthly, according to the Article 111 (5) of UNCLOS the right of hot pursuit may be exercised only by warships or military aircraft, or other ships or aircraft clearly marked and identifiable as being on government service and authorized to that effect. We can conclude that the right of hot pursuit may be exercised only military aircraft, or aircraft clearly marked and identifiable as being on government service and authorized to that effect. Fifthly, according to the Article 110 of UNCLOS a warship which encounters on the high seas a foreign ship, is not justified in boarding it unless there is reasonable ground for suspecting that: (a) the ship is engaged in piracy, (b) the ship is engaged in the slave trade, (c) the ship is engaged in an authorized broadcasting and the flag State of the warship has jurisdiction under article 109, (d) the ship is without nationality, or (e) though flying a foreign flag or refusing to show its flag, the ship is, in reality, of the same nationality as the warship. These provisions apply mutatis mutandis to military aircraft. Sixthly, according to the Article 1 (5)(dumping), 212(pollution from or through the atmosphere), 222(enforcement with respect to pollution from or through the atmosphere) of UNCLOS aircraft as well as ship is very much related to marine pollution. Seventhly, as far as the crime on board aircraft over the high seas is concerned 1963 Convention on the Offences and Certain Other Acts Committed on Board Aircraft(Tokyo Convention) will be applied, and as for the hijacking over the high seas 1970 Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft(Hague Convention) and as for the sabotage over the high seas 1971 Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Civil Aviation(Montreal Convention) will be applied respectively. These three conventions recognize the flag state jurisdiction over the crimes on board aircraft over the high seas. Eightly, as far as reconnaissance by foreign aircraft in the high seas toward the coastal States is concerned it is not illegal in terms of international law because its act is done in the high seas. Ninthly as for Air Defence Identification Zone(ADIZ) there are no articles dealing with it in the 1944 Chicago Convention. The legal status of the foreign aircraft over this sea zone might be restricted to the regulations of the coastal states whether this zone is legitimate or illegal. Lastly, the Arctic Sea is the frozen ocean. So the flight over that ocean is the same over the high seas. Because of the climate change the Arctic Sea is getting melted. If the coastal states of the Arctic Sea will proclaim the Exclusive Economic Zone(EEZ) as the ocean is getting melted, the freedom of flight over that ocean will also be restricted to the regulations of the coastal states.