Hong Sungchul introduces multimedia art as a narrative medium through which to address the essence of life and the origins of art. The moving images produced through such technological media differ from the expressive qualities of traditional media, in that they can function as products of the mind that externalize and solidify, as a kind of social phenomenon, the intimate and densely layered aspects of the artist’s mental state in relation to concrete events of life.

In this way, an artwork—as the specific product of an individual—begins to generate its own aesthetic channels, centered on diverse modes of communication with society. From this perspective, Hong Sungchul’s work may be regarded as a terminal point that produces the singular specificity of meaning. Furthermore, the reason his work can be discussed within the framework of multimedia art lies in the fact that what emerges as the content of his work seeks a dimension in which the artist’s artistic consciousness and the viewer’s act of perception can directly and interactively communicate through moving-image media.

However, his work, beyond the particular aesthetic specificity of the individual artist, expands as a phenomenon reflecting the social character of contemporary society—much like the tools of image production themselves—extending beyond purely artistic concerns to become a force that shapes the impressions of society at large.
 
The basis of artistic activity that artificially generates meaning is fundamentally related to human survival, and the impulse for creation operating on that foundation gains its legitimacy through the aesthetic orientation of individuals who seek the semantic richness of life. According to the German philosopher Kant, humans have refined the effort to create a natural order through artworks as a fundamental worldview of artistic creation. Within this context, images—now widely categorized under the general term “video” as a major current in contemporary art—are produced through various technological outcomes of modern science and function within society almost as independent ontological entities.

These images have already moved beyond the stage of defining their meaning and have begun to operate as part of our everyday lives. In such a situation, defining the essence and characteristics of particular human-made objects may no longer hold significant meaning. This is because, first, the structure or form of meaning is not the primary factor in images, and second, there exists far too much diversity to categorize and distinguish the ontological nature of the countless images that are continuously produced. This phenomenon began to generalize in the West after the 1960s, and in Korea more precisely after the late 1980s. Scholars have attempted to define this indeterminate, pluralistic characteristic of art and social phenomena through the framework of postmodernism.
 
Postmodernism, as an attempt to define the inherently indeterminate nature of artistic and social phenomena of this era, may appear as a contradictory attitude that seeks to define logic through seemingly illogical means. It can also be interpreted as an attempt to use traditional philosophical tools—based on reason, rationality, logic, and meaning—to interpret phenomena that appear meaningless; that is, as an effort to project the fragmented pieces of disintegrated meaning onto the events that commonly occur in this era.

However, within a contextual dimension, establishing a connection between the traditional aesthetic attempt of art—which seeks to incorporate forms resembling the universal aspects of human life into a world structured by its own spatial order—and the contemporary multimedia art attempt—which appropriates the formal order of representational images revealed through such frameworks as an analytical structure for interpreting the specific characteristics of images and video—may be a significant task in discussions surrounding the identity of multimedia art today.
 
Images do not produce meaning. In other words, traditional artworks—including painting and photography—have fundamentally been premised on the task of generating a third meaning through images. In contrast, images in multimedia art pursue the viewer’s mental and physical engagement not through meaning, but through the circulation of images—that is, through the atmosphere evoked by the flow or movement of images.

Here, meaning becomes possible not through the discrete stillness of individual images, but through actual connections of meaning grounded in the continuous physical movement of the work. The German philosopher Walter Benjamin argued that the invention of photography made the technical reproduction of artworks possible, thereby dismantling the aura inherent in them. His discussion of reproduction begins with the photographic replication of images from classical works, and he reframes this as a challenge to the domain of representation that painting had long occupied.

However, the attempt at representation can be traced either to the intention to fix and preserve the diverse phenomena of the world as images, or to its origins in the use of images by primitive humans as magical tools to fulfill their desires. As these methods of representation became established throughout human history, the dimension of aesthetic dynamism began to take on greater importance. At this point, the dimension of art shifts from a formal dimension to an aesthetic one.
 
The act of accurately depicting existing objects or phenomena witnessed in everyday life has moved beyond the level of determining factual truth, expanding instead into an exploration of unforeseen domains inherent to the work itself—that is, the meanings generated autonomously by the artwork. This process has constituted the history of art. It is because the formal devices used to depict the content of artworks inevitably give rise to spontaneous engagement with social contexts, surpassing the logical connections of their formal structures.

Such phenomena may be interpreted as connected to the totality of life, in the sense that everything exerts some degree of influence on everything else. However, if one were to take the intention of revealing truth as the primary task of aesthetic discourse, it would, in some respects, become quite nonsensical. Numerous social phenomena that suspend judgments of truth and falsehood exist throughout our lives, and artworks, accordingly, can only be discussed not in terms of truth and falsity, but in terms of possibility and openness.

Hong Sungchul introduces multimedia art as a narrative medium that articulates the essence of life and the foundation of art. The moving images produced through such technological media differ from the expressive qualities of traditional media, in that they are capable of externalizing and materializing the most intimate and dense aspects of the artist’s mental condition as a kind of social phenomenon, in relation to concrete events of life.

In doing so, an artwork—though a specific product of an individual—begins to generate its own aesthetic channel through various modes of communication with society. In this respect, Hong Sungchul’s work can be understood as the final unit that produces the particularity of meaning, and the basis for discussing his practice within the realm of multimedia art lies in the fact that what emerges as the content of his work seeks a dimension in which the artist’s artistic consciousness and the viewer’s act of perception can directly interact through the medium of moving images.

However, beyond the aesthetic specificity of an individual artist, his work also expands as a phenomenon reflecting the social nature of contemporary image-production tools, which, like many such tools in modern society, extend beyond the realm of art to become forces that shape the impressions of society at large.
 
The foundation of artistic acts that artificially generate meaning is essentially tied to human survival, and the creative impulse that operates on this basis gains its legitimacy through the aesthetic orientation of individuals who seek semantic richness in life. According to the German philosopher Kant, human beings have refined the effort to create a natural order through artworks as a fundamental worldview of artistic creation.

Within this context, images—commonly referred to under the universal title of “video” and produced through the technological outcomes of modern science—have become established as a major current in contemporary art. These images, functioning almost as independent ontological entities within society, have already moved beyond the stage of defining their meaning and have begun to operate as part of human life itself. In such a situation, defining the essence and character of certain human-made products may no longer hold significant meaning.

This is, first, because the structure or form of meaning is not a crucial factor in images, and second, because the vast diversity of endlessly produced images makes it nearly impossible to categorize their ontological nature. Such phenomena began to generalize in the West after the 1960s and, more precisely, in Korea after the late 1980s. Scholars have attempted to define these indeterminate and pluralistic characteristics of art and social phenomena through the framework of postmodernism.
 
As an attempt to define the inherently indeterminate characteristics of artistic and social phenomena in this era, postmodernism may appear, at first glance, as a contradictory attitude that seeks to define logic in an illogical manner. It can also be interpreted as an attempt to analyze phenomena that seem meaningless using traditional philosophical tools based on reason, rationality, logic, and meaning—namely, an attempt to project the universally occurring phenomena of this era through fragmented meanings.

However, establishing a contextual linkage between the traditional aesthetic attempt of fine art—where forms resembling the universal aspects of human life are incorporated into a world with its own spatial order—and the contemporary attempt of multimedia art—where the formal order of representational images is appropriated as a framework for analyzing the specific characteristics of images and video—may become an important task in discussions on the identity of multimedia art today.
 
Images do not produce meaning. In other words, traditional artworks—including painting and photography—have fundamentally set as their task the production of a third meaning through images. However, the images of multimedia art do not aim at meaning but rather pursue the viewer’s mental and physical participation through the circulation of images—that is, through the atmosphere evoked by the flow and movement of images.

Here, meaning becomes possible not through each discrete still image but through actual connections formed in the dimension of continuous physical movement. The German philosopher Walter Benjamin argued that with the invention of photography and the resulting possibility of mechanical reproduction, the aura of the artwork was dismantled. His discussion of reproduction began with the photographic duplication of classical images, and he reframed this issue as a challenge to the domain of representation that painting had long occupied.

Yet, the attempt at representation originates either from the intention to fix and preserve various phenomena of the world as images, or from the use of images as magical tools by primitive humans to realize their desires. As these methods of representation became established throughout human history, the dimension of aesthetic dynamism began to gain increasing importance. At this point, art shifts from a formal dimension to an aesthetic dimension.
 
Accurately depicting existing objects or phenomena observed in human life has expanded beyond the question of factual truth to the exploration of unforeseen realms generated by the artwork itself—that is, the meanings that the work autonomously produces. This expansion has formed the history of art. It inevitably leads to a spontaneous engagement with social context that transcends the logical connections of formal devices within the artwork.

Such phenomena can be understood as reflecting the totality of life, where everything influences everything else to some degree. However, if the intention to reveal truth is taken as the central task of aesthetic discourse, it may, in some sense, become nonsensical. Numerous social phenomena that suspend judgments of truth and falsehood exist throughout our lives, and artworks cannot be discussed in terms of truth or falsity but must instead be approached in terms of possibility and openness.

References

• [비평] 이미지로 드러나는 삶, 그 이미지를 바라보는 정체성
  [Critique] Life Revealed Through Images, The Identity That Gazes Upon Them