잉고 바움가르텐 (Ingo Baumgarten)
전시 기간: 2026. 04. 03 - 04. 30오프닝 리셉션: 2026. 04. 03(금) 저녁 6시 – 8시
장소: 갤러리 몬트레아 (서울 용산구 한남대로 57, 몬트레아한남 204호)
잉고 바움가르텐 (Ingo Baumgarten)
전시 기간: 2026. 04. 03 - 04. 30
On display through October 9, 2023, Not Paintings, Daegu Art Museum’s special exhibition, introduces 34 works of media and photography from the museum’s collection, which it has been collecting since before its opening. The exhibition explores how art forms have been transformed and expanded through encounters between art and technological media.
For a few years, the Daegu Museum of Art has been studying its collections to identify trends in contemporary art and presenting them through exhibitions.
Modern Life, held in 2021, was a project co-organized with the Fondation Marguerite et Aimé Maeght in France. It was a collaborative study of the collections of both institutions under the theme of modernism. Held in 2022, A Season of Meditation was an exhibition that explored people and humanity through 93 works from the Daegu Art Museum’s collection, including paintings, photographs, sculptures, and new media.
The exhibition Not Paintings, which opened on June 20 and runs through October 9, introduces 34 works of media and photography from the museum’s collection, which it has been collecting since before its opening in May 2011. The exhibition explores how art forms have been transformed and expanded through encounters between art and technological media.
These mediums, driven by technological advancements, are now being widely utilized as both a method and tool in the realm of artistic creations. “This exhibition aims not to merely showcase contemporary artworks that reflect the trends of the latest technology but to explore the changes and attributes that emerged from the intersection of art and technology,” said Park Bo-ram, the curator who organized the exhibition.
As art intersects with technological mediums, the paradigm of the act of “seeing” has undergone a profound transformation, along with the essential concept of art itself. Art has expanded from canvases to digital screens and from still images to moving videos.
A significant element that has emerged in these new art forms is “time.” Photography made us able to capture singular moments within a short period of time. Video-imaging technology enabled us to capture time in motion. And digital-based technology has allowed us to express non-linear timelines, enabling time to flow in reverse or be fragmented.
Furthermore, technology-based art has transcended the material properties of traditional mediums. Conventional paintings require paints and canvases, while sculptures require materials such as clay, plaster, or metal. However, with the advancement of digital technology, contemporary artists now have the freedom to choose from various modes of expression. Today, artists can explore a wide range of mediums, including photography, videography, graphic editing, scanning, compositing, 3D animation, virtual reality (VR), and multi-channel videos. This expansion of mediums has not only brought about changes in techniques and modes of expression but also in distribution methods.
Through the museum’s collection, the exhibition aims to show these changes in art.
This exhibition features works by artists from Daegu, such as Lee Kang-So, Park Hyunki, and Kim Kulim, who used video to conduct new media experiments, as well as works by the first generation of Korean media artists, including Nam June Paik, Kim Soun-Gui, and Kim Haemin, alongside works by contemporary artists who are currently actively engaged in their artistic practices.
Daegu was a center of the textile industry at the forefront of Korea’s industrialization and urbanization during the 1970s and ’80s. As capital flowed into Daegu, several galleries emerged, fostering the development of a unique and independent contemporary art scene distinct from Seoul. The Daegu Contemporary Art Festival played a significant role in this development.
Founded in 1974, the festival served as a focal point for artists nationwide, preceding its Seoul counterpart. In particular, during the fifth Daegu Contemporary Art Festival in 1979, artists like Lee Kang-So, Park Hyunki, Kim Youngjin, and Lee Hyunjae presented video works that contributed to the establishment of video art as a genre within the art world.
The exhibition is divided into three main themes.
The first section introduces a group of artists who expanded the boundaries of art, including Kim Kulim, Kim Soun-Gui, Kim Haemin, Park Hyunki, Nam June Paik, Lee Kang-So, and Chung Jae-kyoo. This section examines video installations and TV sculptures that emerged at a time when video art was first introduced and embraced in Korea, as well as formal explorations of frames, photography as a conceptual perception, and a general interest in mass media.
The second section features work by artists such as Kim Kulim, Kim Shinil, Oh Min, Moojin, Oh Junghyang, Lim Changmin, and Jeong Jeongju. This section explores the element of “time” that has emerged with the advent of new media art. Through the digital revolution and resulting medium experimentation, artworks now have the capability to express a new sense of “temporality.” This allows for the incorporation of new elements such as sound, interactivity, and multi-channel variations within the artwork. Here, the exhibition showcases works that capture moments of simultaneity and depict non-linear temporalities.
The last section explores the blurring of the boundaries between the virtual and the real in art through works by artists such as Yoo Hyunmi, Lim Taek, Lim Changmin, Wang Qingsong, Jeong Yeondoo, Ryu Hyunmin, Jade Sujin Lee, Debbie Han, Jo Seub, and Jun Sojung. Particularly when exploring such boundaries, digital photography and video allow for editing and compositing, making them popular tools of expression for many artists. Through works that traverse between the virtual and the real, artists freely express playfulness, reflections on reality, and questions and predictions about the future.
Andrew RussethFeatures4 September 2023ArtReview Asia
From portraits without pictures to predatory prey, the South Korean artist’s idionsyncratic work delights in upending established orders and power dynamics
It is a vanishingly rare event, but it does happen: an artist makes a work that is so effective, so potently charismatic – too charismatic, you could even say – that it takes on a life of its own. This is a fraught experience, at once a gift and a curse. The piece may win its creator new fans, but as it circulates, various odd, and sometimes ill-informed, interpretations have been known to accrue.
The South Korean artist Kim Beom, who is fifty-nine, has made such an artwork: a spellbinding 2012 video titled Yellow Scream, in which an actor, Choi Kyong-Ho, demonstrates how to make an abstract painting in 30 minutes. Staring straight at the camera, the man counsels his viewers: “You may find it hard to think about something or make decisions” when painting. His advice: “Don’t think; just choose your colours and move your brush as you feel.” And so he proceeds to do just that. As he makes careful horizontal strokes in shades of yellow, he leans towards the canvas and screams. This artist has range. He paints what he terms “some screams of unbearable confusion” and “a short scream expressing a flashing pain”. Each mark, each scream, is a bit different.
A quick internet search can yield stories about it on clickbait-y sites with headlines like ‘Try Not to Laugh as This Man Calmly Paints Yellow Lines While Screaming’ and ‘Meet the Anti-Bob Ross of Korea’. That latter characterisation seems particularly misjudged – the actor actually comes across as decidedly pro-Ross, exuding the same earnestness and equanimity as the beloved TV painting-instructor. He is sincere and patient, and he wants you to learn. The issue is just that this painter’s artistic goals (and Kim’s) are a bit more antic than Ross’s.
Kim may not be satirising Ross, but he has other targets. Yellow Scream comes across as a sendup of both a certain type of rarefied abstraction and the outrageous claims that are made about its ability to transmit emotions, narratives and ideas. It recalls Tom Wolfe’s indictment in 1975, in his book The Painted Word, that art was no longer about ‘“seeing is believing,” you ninny, but “believing is seeing” for Modern Art has become completely literary: the paintings and other works exist only to illustrate the text’. (The emphasis is Wolfe’s.)
That is not to say that Kim is some archconservative, lobbying for a return to theory-free visual pleasure. He is no anti-intellectual. A piquant scepticism and a zest for invention (frequently camouflaged as nonchalance) define his idiosyncratic practice. Across various mediums, in diverse tones, his artworks prod viewers to consider what they are willing to believe, and what they are willing to accept – aesthetically and politically.
A 2010 installation, Objects Being Taught They Are Nothing But Tools, enacts an indoctrination session. It places cheap household products – a table fan, a kettle, a nightlight – in tiny chairs in front of a chalkboard and a television, on which a man delivers a tedious lecture. “Some of you use electricity,” he says. “Others use batteries.” You may find yourself feeling sorry for them. Reminding myself that they were only objects, I just felt sorry generally, thinking of all the systems of control we construct and endure.
Kim delights in highlighting and upending power dynamics with light touches and deadpan humour. In a 2010 video, Spectacle, he reverses the action of nature documentaries and has a cheetah fleeing a superfast antelope. In other video installations from that year, we encounter A Ship That Was Taught There Is No Sea and A Rock That Was Taught It Was a Bird. A 2008 canvas called Denial presents a kind of challenge to its viewers, plainly stating in black letters, ‘THIS IS NEITHER A CANVAS NOR A PAINTING’ and ‘THERE IS NO SUCH THING HERE’. As the old saying goes: who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?
All works of art ask us to suspend our disbelief – or, at least, to believe in them. (‘Ceci n’est pas une pipe’, another trickster, René Magritte, informed his viewers.) Kim makes this moment of decision, this choice, the fulcrum of his art. He ‘emphasizes the internalized action of the viewer to believe or not believe’, as the curator Paola Morsiani has written about Kim’s (sometimes-sinister) pedagogical installations. In 1994 Kim used a pencil to draw a small circle on a piece of paper and wrote, ‘believe this circle is alive’, ‘believe this circle can think’ and a couple other bold imperatives. Are you buying it?
Kim started out as a painter, and in his formative works from the 1990s you can see him questioning artistic customs, toying with how a painting should behave, how it should look and how it should address its audience. He cut into a canvas, folding the flaps and attaching buttons to make shirt pockets for Self-Portrait (1994). He sewed together rectangular slices of canvas to render Brick Wall #1 (1994). And he affixed cotton swatches to a canvas and used a black marker to draw arrows and lay down some rules: ‘DON’T LOOK AT THIS PART’ (too late) or ‘TOUCH THIS PART’. An untitled 1995 piece bears a rolled-up paper and a note: ‘TAKE THIS POEM WITH YOU’. At Kim’s current retrospective at the Leeum Museum of Art in Seoul, a gallery attendant at the entrance informs visitors that touching the works is, in fact, verboten, which makes his pictures both funnier and sad – cut off, alienated.


Is Kim a rock? In some sense. He has eschewed a signature style but charted a singular course, wielded the language of sundry art movements for his own incisive ends: the canonical text-based conceptualism of Robert Barry and Yoko Ono, the research-based installation art of so many biennials past, and more. From one vantage point, he is a kind of court jester of contemporary art, poking at its pretensions, stripping it down to its basics and turning it into something else (a painting as a shirt, an instructional video as a comedy act). In a pivotal early effort, he made a painting of chicken and sold it for $11.95, the price of a chicken dish he wanted to buy – a painting as actual currency, pure use value. At the 2012 Gwangju Biennale, he sold paper-clay sculptures of whole chickens and used the profits to buy 2,840 vouchers for underprivileged children to buy chicken. (These are only a few of his chicken-related pieces.)
Taken together, these disparate actions suggest an artist who is endlessly inquisitive about art’s efficacy. Kim has serious doubts about the art enterprise, but he is not a cynic, and he is sceptical only because he seems to want more from art than our present world provides. He is also restless. Each new series he starts leaps across the aesthetic map. One problem of writing about his art is that it has taken so many forms that it is impossible to summarise it all. (Another problem is that many of his artworks are very funny, and it is horrible to explain a joke.)


This is a plainspoken art, and an art that is aware of the cruelties of the world: where lies are told, where people are repressed and where a ship might be taught that there is no sea. Since 2002, Kim has been creating renderings for fantastical, occasionally menacing buildings, like A Draft of a Safe House for a Tyrant (Perspective) (2009), and in 2008 he began a series called Intimate Suffering, which offers dense mazes on canvas, each a hard-edge, Op-art abstraction as an exhausting game. One from 2014 is nearly five metres tall, and while I have tried to complete it, gliding my eyes along its passages, I always give up way before the end. Kim rarely consents to interviews, but he has said of those puzzles, ‘Life comes with its share of problems, and solving problems and finding the right way is hard, but it seems to be human instinct and nature to do so.’
And so we might ask: amid tough times, is it worth trying to ‘keep your original posture’, like a rock? Sure, that has value in a world that demands conformity. But it is at least as important to keep trying new things. Like Kim’s puzzles, with their long alleys and distressing dead ends, one message of Kim’s whole practice is that the essential thing is to keep looking for solutions, to keep going.
Kim Beom’s solo exhibition How to become a rock is on view at Leeum Museum of Art, Seoul
https://artreview.com/kim-beom-do-not-think-at-all/
2013. 12.31 PM7
https://www.instagram.com/p/DSlh001k4YaIYaXNHneH_uPT9shQvFyYNnxYYI0/?img_index=5
2026. 3. 21.- 7. 19
부산현대미술관
몸은 말보다 먼저 반응하고 언어보다 오래 기억합니다. 언어는 때로 사건을 매끄럽게 요약하지만 몸이 기억하는 미세한 떨림은 가공할 수 없는 정직한 신호로 남기 때문입니다. 그렇게 남은 신호가 다시금 살아있는 목소리가 되는 순간 몸은 단순한 경험의 산물이 아니라 과거를 현재로 불러내는 증언의 매개가 됩니다. 이번 전시는 숨길 수 없는 몸의 반응들이 다시금 살아있는 목소리가 되는 지점에 주목하며 이를 몸의 증언이라 명명하고자 합니다.
우리가 삶의 순간을 정의하고 결론을 내리는 동안에도 몸에는 기록이 포착하기 어려운 긴장과 흔적이 잔류합니다. 이러한 미세한 감각은 삶의 과정이 완전히 종료되지 않았음을 알리는 신호이며 몸이 내뱉는 가장 정직한 발화이기도 합니다. 증언은 단순히 과거를 되풀이하는 행위라기보다 기록이 놓친 감각을 빌려 지나간 시간을 현재의 체감으로 변화해 나가는 과정입니다. 사실이 과거를 고정된 장면으로 박제한다면 증언은 몸을 매개로 그날의 실재를 오늘로 되돌려 놓습니다.
《몸의 증언》은 부산현대미술관 수장고 내부에 머물던 세 개의 몸을 선택하여 현재의 지평 위로 소환합니다.
오랜 기간 보관되어 온 소장품을 다시 꺼내어 배열하는 행위는 과거를 전시하는 차원을 넘어 그 안에 축적된 생명력을 오늘날의 질문으로 다시 불러내는 실천입니다. 수장고의 어둠 속에 잠들어 있던 이 세 개의 몸은 이제 전시장 조명 아래에서 감상자에게 말을 건네기 시작합니다. 그 전언 속에는 몸을 매개로 오늘을 살아내야 하는 우리에게 스스로의 실존적 근거를 마주하며 사유의 경로를 개척할 가능성이 담겨 있습니다.
출품작;
〈바카레스 호수〉, 1985, 프로젝터 1대에 2채널 비디오, 컬러, 사운드, 6분 20초, ed. 3/7.
〈준비된 피아노〉, 1985, 프로젝터 1대에 2채널 비디오, 컬러, 사운드, 5분 56초, ed. 3/7.
나란한 몸들: 세 가지 양태
《몸의 증언》은 크리스 버든과 김순기 그리고 아나 멘디에타의 작품을 병치한다.
병치는 종합이 아니며 서로 다른 요소가 차이를 유지하며 나란히 놓이는 배열이다. 종합이 이질적 요소를 하나의 상위 개념으로 통합하는 작업이라면 병치는 개별 특성이 보존되는 배치에 가깝다. 이 세 작가의 작업은 하나의 메시지로 수렴하지 않는다. 이들 작업은 서로를 설명하지 않으며 서로를 해석하거나 정당화하지 않는다. 그래서 한 작가의 작업에서 얻은 감각은 다음 작가의 작업 앞에서 온전히 유지될 수 없다. 감상자는 작품에서 작품으로 이동하며 이전 감각을 수정하고 새로운 지각을 형성하는 순환에 놓인다. 전시는 이 순환을 상처와 호흡 그리고 흔적이라는 세 구성으로 병치한다.
처음 구성인 상처는 크리스 버든의 〈발사〉(1971)와 〈침대 조각〉(1972)을 포함한다. 감상자는 전시 입구에서 곧바로 총격과 정지라는 극단 장면과 마주하며 관람의 안정된 출발을 허용하지 않는다. 육체의 피동적 훼손과 의지적 침묵이 교차하는 이 공간은 목격의 책무를 환기하며 타자의 고통을 감각의 전면으로 소환한다. 〈발사〉가 신체에 가해진 물리적 충격의 흔적을 남긴다면 〈침대 조각〉은 시간의 무게를 육체에 새겨 존재의 한계를 드러낸다.
두 번째 구성인 호흡은 김순기의 〈바카레스 호수〉(1985)와 〈준비된 피아노〉(1985)로 이루어진다. 상처의 긴장을 통과한 감상자는 느린 리듬과 자연 시간 앞에 놓이며 앞선 구성이 남긴 경직이 몸 어디에 어떠한 형태로 남아 존재함을 감지한다. 앞선 인위적 타격을 넘어 본연의 율동으로 회귀하는 호흡은 파열된 지각을 정제하며 내면의 파동을 응시하도록 유도한다. 진동하는 선율과 고요한 물결의 흐름은 외부 압력에 저항하는 신체의 유연한 기제로 작용하며 감각의 이완을 이끌어 낸다.
세 번째인 흔적은 아나 멘디에타의 〈무제: 실루에타 연작〉(1978-1979) 두 점을 배치한다. 감상자는 화면에서 신체를 직접 볼 수 없지만 신체가 떠난 뒤 남겨진 자국과 그 자국이 자연에 의해 소거되는 과정을 따라간다. 부재가 남긴 공백은 다시 존재의 흔적을 투사하며 소멸과 생성이 교차하는 대지 위로 존재를 확장한다. 육체가 사라진 자리에서 피어나는 대지의 박동은 유한한 생명이 영원한 자연의 순환으로 편입되는 숭고한 이행을 목격하게 한다.
몸을 다루는 이 전시는 결국 감상자 몸을 통해 완성된다. 크리스 버든의 상처 앞에서 경직된 자세와 김순기 호흡 앞에서 느려진 맥박 그리고 아나 멘디에타 부재 앞에서 긴장한 시선은 전시장을 나선 이후에도 즉각 원래대로 돌아가지 않는다. 몸은 경험을 기억하며 그 기억은 물음의 형태로 지속된다. 내 몸은 어떠한 상태인가. 내 감상은 어떠한 책임을 수반하는가. 그리고 나는 이 경험을 어떠한 이후로 이행해야 하는가. 우리는 타자의 과거를 대면함을 넘어 우리 역시 미래의 타자에게 도달할 과거 몸이 될 운명을 공유한다. 이 순환은 확정된 결론에 도달하기를 거부하며 현재의 경계 너머 미래까지 포섭하는 부단한 증언의 도정으로 남는다.
최상호 부산현대미술관 학예연구사