Philosophical Implications of the YATOO Nature Art Movement: With the Focus on the Understanding of the Concept of 'Nature'
Lee Sang-don
Lecturer, Department of Philosophy
Seoul National University
Graduated from the Dept. of Philosophy, Seoul National Univ. and its Graduate School with a doctor’s degree (doctoral dissertation: ‘Theory of Zhu Xi’s Cultivation: With the Focus on the Moral Cultivation of the Unaroused State‘)
Currently a lecturer at the Dept. of Philosophy of Seoul National Univ.
and Kyung Hee Univ. and a translation fellow at The Taedong Center for Eastern Classics
Former lecturer at Seoul National Univ. of Science &Technology and Cheongju National Univ. of Education and a visiting scholar to the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS)
1. For a Better Understanding of the YATOO Nature Art Movement
In the summer of 1981, there were some people strolling on the white sand beach, as smooth as silk, of the Geum River. Even the scorching heat of the sun could not beat the passion of the young artists. Though quiet, what they did reverberated to the heart of people as if the water ripples around in a lake. The quiet movement turned into a big wave. The creations of these artists were called ‘nature art’ in a sharp differentiation from existing art forms. The nature art has exercised a great deal of influence, disseminating its significance, not just in the limited area of the art world but in Korea in general and, further, in the entire global village. We call the activities of creating nature artworks by YATOO artists, which began at the Geum River, ‘YATOO nature art movement.’
There are two questions that should be answered to understand the YATOO nature art movement: One is, what does the ‘nature art’ mean in the nature art movement? the other is, what makes the difference between the nature art in the nature art movement and art in the previous periods? In fact, the answer to this question depends on the answer to the first question. In other words, the overall question on the nature art movement is, despite all those various materials and methods it has taken, what the coherent flow of the nature art is which runs through its varieties. What are the subject matters and basic ideas that may lie in common behind all those various and complex activities and artworks? The subject matter and basic ideas may, of course, not be out there objectively to be found easily. They may be something that should be found through many dialogues, exchanges, thoughts, and experiences on our part.
This paper is an attempt to grasp what are the main subject matters and basic ideas of the YATOO nature art movement as I understand it through the understanding of the concept of ‘nature.’ It is not just natural to try to understand the nature art through the idea of nature, it is also a very urgent task. It is impossible to understand the nature art movement correctly without making a clear-cut definition of the concept of nature.
As a matter of fact, the birth of the YATOO nature art movement was itself closed related to the very meaning of nature. What was the early 1980s like? It should be given a deep thought that the works of nature artists started in this period. It was a period when the basis of people’s life was being undermined by industrialization in the institutional development of the Korean society; politically, the new military regime rose; and, in a narrower context of the art world, the established art community was harassed by extreme factionalism and conflicts. Under these circumstances, both socio-politically and in terms of the art circles, the general atmosphere felt across the Korean society was that of oppression and restraints—a situation which young artists found as fetters and shackles. For an understanding of the overall situation of the time when the Nature Art Movement was launched, see Lee Seong-won. As a response, they had stronger interest in studying the Eastern philosophy on the one hand and expressing the life of the contemporary people and the meaning of life in the form art by their artistic instinct on the other hand. What was at work there were the keen sensibility of the artists and the sharp intuition of their poetic sensibility.
The meaning of their efforts was not confined to the limited area of the art community centering on the subject of nature, but it led to a deep reflection on the problems of our life by its connection with society due to the deep implications of nature. In this light, this author defines the field of a series of new arts, which has found expression mostly in the Geumgang Nature Art Biennale and YATOO, as the nature art movement and intends to explore its artistic and philosophical meaning.
2. History and Milestones of the YATOO Nature ArtMovement
The YATOO Nature Art Movement began with Lim Dong-sik. According to Kim Jong-gil, Kim Jong-gil, ‘Korean Nature Art Group YATOO and its Aesthetics.’ he took interest in works outside the gallery as early as in the 1970s, which eventually led to the organization of an art festival at the Geum River. There must have been some reason for him, as an artist, to get out of the gallery to the open field. Now let us find out the reason.
A. From the Gallery to the Field
Nature art, Lim Dong-sik says, refers to "expressing one’s feelings as they are or unfiltered, pure aspects of the nature through artistic activities in many ways, and not just expressing, as in other art forms, the beauty of nature secondhand." Lim Dong-sik, Daejon Ilbo, p. 9. Feb. 16, 1991, reported by Lim Myung-hee. His idea is symbolically well captured in the title of Hong Myeong-seop’s presentation, "From the Represented World to the Field."That is, they wanted to get out of the represented world, which can be shown at a gallery, and go to the field. Their spirit and way of thinking is well represented in the name of the art festival: Outdoor Field Art."
The circumstances suggest that the YATOO Nature Art Movement was born in the art of the outdoor field. What is interesting was that the outdoor field art was not directly perceived as the nature art. First of all, the artists of the YATOO nature art did not use the title 'nature art' from the beginning. What is clear and surprising is that there were discussions over the use of the term, nature art, among the YATOO artists.
Ko Seung-hyun recalls:
"In the early 1980s, YATOO members used the term outdoor field art. At the 6th regular YATOO seminar in January 1983, the term 'nature art' was first proposed by some members, including Ko Seung-hyun, Ko Hyun-hee, Shin Nam-chul, Ri Eung-woo, and JeonWon-gil. The proposal was made because the research and activities of the group was not just limited to the problems of the site of the outdoor field and its theoretical basis, but they took a basic interest in the pure nature which changes and breathes endlessly. However, the term 'nature art' was not adopted due to the objection of some members until 1986 when it was formally used. It was the first time in the world that the two words of Nature and Art were combined as a term, which was put gradually into wider use through the many nature art exhibitions that YATOO organized and active overseas exchange activities." Ko Seung-hyun, 'The Nature Art Movement in Korea and the Nature Art of the World at the End of the 20th Century.' Master’s thesis, Hannam Univ., p. 13.
His recollection suggests a lot to us when we attempt to understand the YATOO Nature Art Movement. At the heart of the issue was whether nature and art could be used side by side. The issue also posed the question that what the nature truly and substantially mean to us and what kind of concept of nature is most befitting to the aesthetic and theoretical orientation of YATOO artists. What, then, should be answered? Is it possible for nature and art to stand together?
An important point in this respect was an agreement on the definition of nature rather than on the concept of art, which is relatively easy to reach an agreement. Let us take a closer look at what nature could mean.
B. From the Field to the Nature
The concept of the nature is an important one both in the Western and Eastern philosophy but its implication varies according to different scholars and schools. In the ancient Greek philosophy, the source of the Western philosophy, the nature is 'physi'" in opposition with 'nomos' or the norms of the human society. Nature is a natural state as opposed to something done by human activities. In the East, nature was an important concept especially in Taoism. Particularly, the understanding of nature presented in Lao Tzu’s Tao Te Ching has been used as a basic concept of nature in the Eastern philosophy ever since.
Regarding the discussion on the meaning of the nature and art, Lee Seong-won present an interesting viewpoint:
Influenced by the Land Art but still clearly distinguished from it, a new, nature-friendly outdoor work has appeared. In 1971, German critic Walter Aue first described a series of these movements as 'Naturkunst' in the program guide to his PCA (Projecte Concepte & Actionen). The term was again used by Heinz Thiel when he contributed his article 'Naturkunst' to a featured section of Kunst Forum in 1982. However, the term, nature art, was rarely used for this type of works which were conducted in the nature at many places in Europe. This was probably because people found it difficult to accept the two words—seemingly conflicting ideas of nature and art—put together. Lee Seong-won, 'YATOO-A Study of Nature Art: With the Focus on the Four Season Research Society from 1981 to 1998.' Master’s thesis, Graduate School of Education, Gongju National Univ., p. 12.
In the West, nature and art are directly opposed ideas. Nature, as it is, refers to a natural state of things, while art, by definition, means transformation of nature by artistic intension of artists. Nature is antipodal to art in that art is something which is achieved by artists’creative works.
This understanding of nature and art as opposing ideas in the West is an important point also in understanding the YATOO Nature Art Movement. It also shows why the understanding of the concept of nature is critical in understanding the nature art movement.
The above quotation also contains an important question on how the 'land art' and 'nature art' can be distinguished. It is believed that YATOO’s emphasis on the field in its early days made it difficult to distinguish the nature art from the land art which had been popular in the United States of America. Probably that was why, as described in Ko Seung-hyun’s recollection, there were disagreements among the YATOO members. To sum up, with their work and the resulting artworks which were far different from the landart in its style and methods, YATOO members were themselves seriously considering how they would differentiate what they do from similar artistic activities which were done in the field of nature.
Under these circumstances, YATOO’s nature art began when they defined the nature of their artistic activities with more emphasis on 'nature' than on 'presence in the field.' It was first materialized when they changed the name of their organization to 'YATOO—Nature Art Research Society' as they published the catalog of YATOO in 1985. 'Geumgang modern art' now became 'Geumgang nature art.'
What does it mean that the YATOO artists defined their activities in terms of the nature rather than the presence in the field? Does it mean that their activities are not creative, do not belong to culture, and even did not apply any transformation to nature? The discussion gets complicated at this point. And this is where it is necessary to make a more precise philosophical examination on the meaning of nature.
3. Meaning of Nature in the Taoist Philosophy
Literally, the word nature (自然) means 'self (自) so (然)' (or, so of itself) and was understood to mean 'naturally in the course of events (自然而然)' in the ancient times. In modern times, while it is used in the same way, as 'naturally' for example, nature is often used to refer to the 'natural world,' 'ecosystem,' or 'natural environment.' Although nature refers to the environment or ecology at the present day, originally it did not mean such things. The nature as meant by the modern people was expressed as 'heaven and earth' or 'everything' in the old times.
In sum, the meaning of nature includes, but not limited to, the natural world. Nature refers to a certain state of everything in the world, while the natural world indicates the natural environment and the ecological system, including such elements as the water, wind, trees, and mountains. In everyday usage, however, the difference between the two meanings is not always distinctively clear, hence the difficulties in our communication with the word 'nature.' From now on, nature and the natural world are to be used separately to mean different things. However, nature will be used as such in the expressions which have been used commonly in academic or idiomatic usage. For example, 'nature and humans' will not be necessarily stated as 'natural world and humans.' The same happens in understanding the meaning of the nature art movement.
Now, it is time that we explored a more detailed, philosophical meaning of nature. The nature as emphasized in Taoism has often been misunderstood to mean a state where a person severs all social relationships and goes into the natural world to live leisurely with the rivers and mountains. However, Lao Tzu, the originator of the concept of nature, did not use the word to mean the escape from the hustle and bustle of this world to a place where one can rest spiritually. The recent popular yearning for the eco-friendly life, along with the fad for the wellness lifestyle, has been an important cause for misunderstanding Lao Tzu’s idea of nature.
The misunderstanding stemmed from Lao Tzu’s harsh criticism of the tyranny of the power and the arbitrariness of rules, giving the impression that Taoism wanted to get completely out of any political and social contexts. However, Taoism cannot be viewed simply as something like one’s wish to live in the country to enjoy the pleasure of rural life after retirement.
The concept of nature in the Taoist philosophy can be understood by reflecting on what and how Taoism faced in the then situations of the time—i.e., the Spring and Autumn Period and the Age of the Warring States—and what assertions did it want to make when it was proposed. Lao Tzu criticized the corruption of people as well as the abuse of power of those in power and their hypocritical emphasis on moral standards amidst the disorder and chaos of the time. At the same time, he deeply thought about what political order and basic principles of society should be there in order to ensure people’s happiness and freedom. Ultimately, he pondered on what kind of human society should be built.
To Lao Tzu, nature had a broader and deeper meaning than its original meaning of 'self so.' In the Tao Te Ching, the nature is never presented as a natural environment or in the context that people are recommended to escape to the natural environment. Now let us take a direct look at Lao Tzu’s concept of nature. The word nature appears four times in the Tao Te Ching. We will examine them one by one, from the first to the last one:
In the best politics, people do not know if there is a ruler; in the next best,
they feel close to him and praise him; the next, they fear of him;
and the next, they despise him.
If you have no faith, people will have no faith in you.
There is composure of mind, so there are few laws.
When the work was done and their undertakings were successful,
the people say, "We did it on our own (自然)." Chapter 17, Tao Te Ching: 太上，不知有之；其次，親而譽之；其次，畏之；其次，侮之。
信不足焉，有不信焉。悠兮其貴言。功成事遂，百姓皆謂：「我自然」Here, '言' (literally, 'words') refers to laws and ordinances or the legal enforcement of a ruler. This interpretation is based on the annotations of Ren Ji Yu and Chen Gu Ying.
Abstaining from establishing laws, letting people do things on their own (自然). Chapter 17, Tao Te Ching: 希言自然。
Man follows the example of the Earth; the Earth follows the example of Heaven;
Heaven follows the example of the Tao; the Tao follows the example of its being what it is. Chapter 25, Tao Te Ching: 人法地，地法天，天法道，道法自然。
No ordination is given, but it is always done all by itself (自然). Chapter 51, Tao Te Ching: 夫莫之命而常自然。
As well described in the first quotation, it should be noted that Lao Tzu talked about 'nature' (自然) in the context of the relationship between the ruler and the ruled. He did not reject the ruling itself. Rather, he emphasized that the best ruling was when the ruled did not notice if any there was any ruling. This interpretation completely agrees with the last phrase in the first quotation, "We [The people] did it on our own." In other words, Lao Tzu defined as 'nature' the state where the ruler keeps away from oppressions and tyranny of the people and the society grows and develops naturally as a result of people’s autonomous efforts and practices.
What he says in Chapters 23 and 51 also completely coincides with this interpretation. The word '言' ('words') does not simply refer to speech and letters but a ruler’s words, meaning the law and order of the state. 'Words' also signifies giving orders. In the quotation, Lao Tzu did not say the orders should be abolished because he did not deny the ruling he just said that the orders should be considered valuable and thus be rarely given.
Thus, the nature as used by Lao Tzu in his Tao Te Chingmeans things unfold and develop on their own freely without enforcement and interference from the outside. In a word, it means things evolving naturally. What should be noted here is that this does not necessarily denote noninterference of any kind of outside actions. It does not mean that the nature is never influenced by any outside power or beings. That is because things always exist in connection with others and it is impossible for them to be severed from all outside influences. The concept of the nature defined this way would be a rudimentary one which does not deserve any serious academic discussions.
Together with the concept of the nature, it is the concept of '無爲' ('not-doing' or 'non-action') that should also be examined. Traditionally, the philosophical Taoism of Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu or Taoist philosophy is often defined as the thought of "what happens of itself without doing" (無爲自然). The concept of 'not-doing' (無爲) is as important as that of 'self so' (自然) in Taoism. Now we will investigate what 'not-doing' means and how 'self so' and 'not-doing' are connected. In fact, the concept of 'not-doing' has caused as much misunderstanding as that of 'self so.' Literally, '無爲' means 'doing (爲) nothing (無).' It is often misunderstood as "negation of everything that people do." 'Not-doing,' however, does not mean 'doing nothing.'
Now, we will check up the meaning of 'not-doing' in Tao Te Ching. The word appears 14 times in the book.
Therefore, the ruling of the sage is like this:
He keeps their hearts empty, makes their bellies full, discourages their ambitions, strengthens their bones;
So that the people may be innocent in their knowledge and desires,
and the wise shall not presume to act on them.
By action without deeds, there will be no non-governing. Chapter 3, Tao Te Ching: 是以聖人之治， 虛其心， 實其腹， 弱其志， 强其骨。 常使民無知無欲。 使夫智者不 敢爲也。 爲無爲， 則無不治。
The subject of this quotation is "the ruling of the sage." The conclusion of this sentence lies in '爲無爲.' In the phrase, '爲' ('doing') is the predicate and '無爲' ('not-doing') is the object, meaning 'doing not-doing.' Therefore, 'not-doing' does not directly refer to doing nothing. Rather, 'not-doing' is defined as an objective which should actively be pursued. In other words, "not-doing"is something that should be done in the ruling of the sage and the result, or its goal, is a state of 'no non-governing.' 'Not-doing'is, thus, an action which is pursued positively in the kind of ruling that Lao Tzu emphasizes.
Then, how do we do 'not-doing'? No, isn’t it '人爲' ('doing by humans') that doing anything at all, in that it is 'done' or 'human’s doing'? How can 'human actions' be 'not-doing'? Isn’t it contradictory?
Lao Tzu’s own comments would be helpful in understanding what context 'not-doing' was used in.
In learning, you increase knowledge day by day; in practicing Tao, you lose day by day.
Losing after losing, you reach not-doing. Chapter 48, Tao Te Ching: 爲學日益，爲道日損。損之又損，以至于無爲。
Show simplicity, maintain plainness, think less, and reduce desires. Chapter 19, Tao Te Ching: 見素抱朴，少思寡欲，
Empty yourself to the utmost; hold firm to the quietness. Chapter 16, Tao Te Ching: 致虛極，守靜篤。
'Not-doing' is defined as losing something. Losing means reducing one’s desires and attaining simplicity. In the last quotation, Lao Tzu explains what 'not-doing' is through the concepts of 'emptiness' and 'quietness.' Emptiness is the absence of the desires of one’s heart; quietness refers to the heart not being agitated by the desires. As such, the concepts of emptiness and quietness are interconnected.
The fact that the concepts of 'not-doing' and 'self so' are closely related each other can be found in the followings.
The Tao never does, yet through it everything is done.
If princes and kings were able to maintain it, all things develop of its own accord.
If this development became a contrived object of desire to me,
I would tranquilize the desire by the nameless simplicity.
By tranquilizing the desire, there would be no desires in the future.
If there is no desire, the quietness is achieved.
Then, the world would become correct of its own accord in the future. Chapter 37, Tao Te Ching: 道常無爲而無不爲。 侯王若能守之， 萬物將自化。 化而欲作， 吾將鎭之以無名之朴。 鎭之以無名之朴， 夫將不欲。 不欲以靜， 天下將自正。
The sage says, "I do nothing and the people develop of themselves;
I love quietness and the people become correct of themselves;
I have no business to deal with and the people become rich of themselves;
I have no desires and the people become simple of themselves. Chapter 57, Tao Te Ching: 聖人云 我無爲， 而民自化； 我好靜， 而民自正； 我無事， 而民自富； 我無欲， 而民自朴。
This quotation indicates that not-doing corresponds with the absence of desires, which, in the end, makes possible the self-development and self-correction—that is, the realization of self-so. According to Lao Tzu, the Tao and the sage (or the ruler who has acquired the Tao) all do not-doing and the natural order is completely realized. Then, not-doing is a prerequisite of realizing self-so. The key to doing so is reducing and losing desires until there is none. This means abandoning 'artificiality' In this context, 'artificiality' (人爲) has a negative connotation as often used in the modern usage of the word. and 'contrivedness.' In other words, not-doing means not overly involving one’s subjective desires artificially so that things and events can develop in their natural course. The thought of "what happens of itself without doing" (無爲自然), then, can be understood as achieving the state of self-so (自然) by not-doing (無爲).
As discussed above, the essential meaning of nature as emphasized by Lao Tzu lies in the people being free from the ruler’s violent oppressions and forced interference. Lao Tzu has often been misunderstood to have set nature and culture at odds because he criticized the ills and adverse effects of the Confucianism-based culture of his times. However, Lao Tzu did not deny all cultural orders. He never denied the natural development of things; rather, he was deeply interested in the ideal organization and operational principles of the human society.
As seen above, the nature as discussed in the East, especially in Taoism, never refers to the natural world. Neither are all human actions denied. Nature can be defined as the maintenance of the natural development and evolvement of things and the denial of all external coercions and violent interventions.
4. Why Nature Art?
We have now seen that the nature does not mean the natural world and the concept does not deny all cultural developments. It is time that we discussed how nature is understood in the nature art movement.
First of all, why does the nature art movement conduct creative activities with the nature as its material in nature? In short, why does it take nature as a material for their creations? If nature is something that denies interventions and coercions, there seems no reason why it should take nature as a place for their work.
The meaning of nature needs to be reconsidered here. The nature art movement works in the natural world. Then, the relationship between the natural world and the nature should be identified. Nature is literally "self so, or so of itself." However, the natural world is where the aspects of the nature make appearance most clearly. Left alone, the natural world evolves according to its own laws of operation without any interference. It exists and changes on its own without any external enforcements and interventions. Therefore, the natural world is the best place to learn about and feel the nature. Though humans sometimes involve their will and twist and distort its natural development and evolvement, the natural world exists and changes naturally in itself, without any artificiality and contrivedness.
For example, flowers blossom when the spring has come. Flowers do so when the right time comes. They are not anxious if they blossom late; nor are they proud if they do early. They just let the blossoming take place in itself as the nature allows it. The mountains do not get angry and the valleys are not happy when there is a heavy rain. The nature let everything flow on its own. This character of the nature can be best witnessed in the natural world.
Another question that may be raised here is that why the nature art movement applies unnatural transformation to the natural world and alters the nature when they use it as a material for their works. As pointed out in the above when we discussed the concept of the nature, the nature does not necessarily mean a state where nothing is changed or everything is preserved as such. Rather, the nature is something that does not disturb the natural flow and evolvement of things. In fact, if the transformation of the nature itself is made an issue, no creative works and cultural orders can take place. Even a pastoral life in the nature cannot coincide with this view. Isn’t hunting and collecting still a transformation of the nature?
In the old days, Wang Shou Ren (a.k.a. Wang Yang Ming who is famous for his doctrines) in the Ming Dynasty China, once discussed with his student the issue of mowing grass. He told him that he could cut the grass if need be. What he said implies that you go ahead and cut the grass if necessary and do not cut if not necessary. It suggests the relationship between humans and the natural world. The natural world can be made subject to the human use if they find it necessary. As it is indispensible to us, we talk about 'nature conservation' and 'protection of the environment.' If the natural world is useless to us, why should we make an effort to conserve and preserve it and argue about it?
In the discussion about the nature, the question of its transformation and use itself cannot be an issue. The problem is how naturally the transformation and use can be done according to the natural flow and evolvement of things. That is, the point at issue is how proper and appropriate the use of the natural world is. The true nature of the discussion is mainly how much the natural world is destroyed and damaged by political and personal avarice and how inevitable and necessary the transformation is.
Therefore, the question that why the nature art movement transforms the natural world and is it truly an art form that puts emphasis on the nature is directly connected with the definition of the nature. In the East, the nature has not been used to mean no transformation to the natural world. After all, in the natural art movement, the nature and the art are compatible and can coexist in harmony.
Another question that may arise is that if the nature in the nature art movement has nothing to do with the Taoist philosophy or the philosophical Taoism of Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu because the concept of the nature in Taoism does not focus on the relationship between the humans and the natural world. The nature in Taoism, of course, does not refer to the natural world. But by the nature, it still discusses the basic problem of operating and maintaining the human society. Nature is something that does not distort the order of things by human desires and emotions. This said, the use of the nature must be an issue in that the human society is formed on the basis of the natural world. For example, many people live on fish, but it has always been criticized all times and places when the fishing is monopolized and the catching is made even for the fry. Therefore, although Lao Tzu’s nature has nothing to do with the natural world, upon a closer look at, the problem of the natural world has necessarily to be discussed in relation with the nature.
Now, to the question that why the natural art movement is conducted with the natural world as a material in the natural world, an answered can be given like this: Human beings live in the natural world and take after the nature shown in the natural world, or the naturalness of the evolvement of things. Although the concept of the natural world is different from that of the nature, the natural world is where the meaning of the nature is best displayed. For this reason, the YATOO artists presumably called by the term 'nature art' by themselves their artistic activities, which are done in the natural world—the place which takes after the nature most.
5. Nature: From a Material to an Object of Assimilation
This is, however, is where another question arises: If the nature art movement is defined as an art movement with the natural world as a material, then how can it be differentiated from other similar art forms? The question seems to be in line with the effort to define the nature art itself more precisely and strictly. It is understood that the question is part of the efforts of the artists participating in the nature art movement to reflectively examine their own activities and works and find a way to integrate various perspectives and theories on their activities into one.
With regard to this, Jeon Won-gil asks to himself:
1. Is the nature art nature art when it uses natural materials and not nature art when it use artificial materials?
2. Can the nature art be nature art only by pointing to the nature itself?
3. Is the nature art possible only in the nature?
4. Does the nature art have different aesthetic standards from those of other art forms? Jeon Won-gil, 'Toward the Possibility of the Natural Art as an Art that Come Alive,' indoor exhibition titled 'Where is the Nature?' 2010 Geumgang Nature Art Biennale.
These are fundamental questions about the identity of the nature art and the orientation of its movement. This question even seems to contain the problem, what is art? As I am not a professional artist, answering to this question is out of my ability. However, the meaning of these questions may be discussed here because they, after all, boil down to the problem, is it the nature art if only art works are done in nature?
At this point, Jeon Won-gil’s comment deserves our attention:
The nature exists without any excess or deficiency even though it does not work with any will; with any part of it taken for examination, it exists in completion. The nature, therefore, remains independent from the aesthetic judgments. When we look at any part of the forest where trees make rich changes and depth, we do not feel any awkwardness and lack because a generative principle, which is different from contrived attempts by humans, is at work in the nature.
Sometimes, the sense of the independent perfection can be felt with the results of people’s creative activities as with the natural state of things. Artists often have the experience that an art work takes the lead of the work by itself until it is completed as an independent work which denies even the involvement of the artist himself/herself. The kind of works completed this way inspires similar feelings in us as with the nature which works of its own accord. Jeon Won-gil, 'Toward a New Communication with the Nature'
This quotation provides a fine explanation of the characteristics of the nature. The nature used by Jeon here refers to the natural world in my terms. In contrast with the contrivedness of humans, the self-sufficiency of the nature is well pointed out. More importantly, from this of understanding of the nature, the surprising observation was made that humans’creative activities complete their job by themselves. This observation clearly shows that the works of artistic creation of the nature art cannot simply be defined with its characteristics of taking the natural world as an object or materials and taking place in the natural field.
From this comment made by Jeon Won-gil, it can be noticed that the nature art is progressing toward a state where the boundaries between the nature and human beings are coming to naught and it is the kernel of the nature art movement.
Now, we need to turn to what Ri, Eung-woo has to say about this issue:
As an act of (the intrinsic human nature-based aesthetic) expression of the beauty or the aesthetic senses of which everyone can sympathize, [The nature art movement is] an art which is "done in the nature, with the nature, and directed toward the nature" and which expresses the artist’s feelings, thoughts, and will (of his/her own which have been acquired through elements of the nature) via purely natural materials in the stage of the nature, a source of the human existence. Ri Eung-woo, 'Art and Wongol Village,' Geulsaem, 1993. Quoted from Kim Ki-hyun’s 'A Study of the Formation of an Indigenous Nature Art: With the Focus on the Birth of the Nature Art in Korea.'
In this paragraph, Ri made the expressions of 'with the nature' and 'toward the nature' apart from 'in the nature.' I found in 'with the nature' and 'toward the nature' the meaning of the concept of the nature as used in the East. The expressions 'with the nature' and 'toward the nature' are read to mean the evolvement and development of all natural things taking place in the nature. The nature art is not simply a work which takes the nature as its material but it joins in the natural flow of the natural world and goes toward its natural order.
This way of thinking seems to go beyond the perspective of seeing the natural art movement as personal artistic activities in its narrow meaning. The fact that the movement intends to transcend the simple state where it is conducted in the nature and pursue a natural order is understood as containing the nature art movement’s message to the society. It is also indicated in Ri’s following comment:
In addition, the art has a meaning as an art of 'life' which opposes the environmental pollutions, an adverse effect of the 20th century civilization. Ri Eung-woo, Ibid.
The end point of the art moving 'with the nature' 'toward the nature' is the recovery of the natural order of the human society. The natural order refers the aspects of the nature flows and developments observed in the natural world. The recovery of the natural order in the human society seems to be a logical conclusion of the nature art movement. It is because the movement is thought to be not simply an art in the nature but an art which goes with the nature and oriented toward the nature, namely, a pursuit of the human mind and body to be completely assimilated with the nature. This is the most fundamental and essential element which makes the nature art movement different from the other movements. Here the concept of the nature in the East which the nature art movement has pursued has been realized completely.
In this very respect, the YATOO nature art movement is believed to take root as a very meaningful movement in a society where the nature has been seriously damaged due to indiscriminate developments to satisfy human avarice and desires. A civilization is necessary but, since the beginning of the industrialization, the natural world has long been faced with excessive and indiscriminate destruction and damage as people have used all its resources as a tool to maximize their interest.
The nature art movement has developed from the emphasis on the presence in the field via the art in the nature to the logical conclusion of the assimilation with the nature. What is surprising is that the proposed assimilation with the nature of the YATOO nature art movement has not stopped simply at the logical and theoretical levels but been realized through practice. Again, the nature art movement is there beyond the ordinary, common sense level of an art which is practiced with the nature as a material or in the nature. It has now reached the level of the assimilation and unification with the nature.
The assimilation and unification with the nature has been realized in many ways. For one thing, it has been realized on the level of artists themselves. The assimilation with the natural order has been practiced and witnessed in their life in the nature. They have lived in a small country village called Wongol in Gongju together with the local residents there and engaged in creative activities. This attests to the fact that, in a departure from other art forms which use the nature simply as a material, such as the Land Art, the advocates of the nature art have pursued a life assimilated with the nature in that they have lived in the nature. In other words, the YATOO Nature Art Movement is not simply an activity carried out in the nature but a pursuit of the assimilation with the nature, which has been materialized in the form of the life of the artists who moved and settled in Wongol.
For another, the pursuit of the assimilation with the nature is also witnessed in the permanent reversion of the artworks to the nature, as exhibited in the Yeonmi Mountain International Nature Art Festival. They went on and returned their creations of the nature art to the nature. Now the works of the nature arts, which started as a natural material, are returned to and thus belong to the nature again via the creative hand of humans. It is truly a surprising way of thinking that follows the ecological cycle where the artworks are born in the nature and returned to the nature through humans. The works of artificial creation and the materials of the nature are not distinguished here. The works are assimilated with the nature in it, breathing and growing with it to completely and naturally become part of the nature.
The works, once out of the natural flow of the nature, are included in the natural order again and reverted to the life of the nature permanently. Here, the works of the nature art achieve lasting naturality and the distinctions between the nature and humans, the art and the nature, and the civilization and the nature disappear.
As examined in the above, the YATOO Nature Art Movement has assimilated and merged with the nature on the two levels of the life of the YATOO artists and the created works of the nature art. These two characteristics are what make the YATOO Nature Art Movement different from any other artistic trends which use materials in the nature and are conducted in the nature. Regarding this, it is worth noting that George Dickie, one of the most renowned aestheticians in the United States of America, proposed a new theory, termed institutional theory of art, by exploring the institutional nature of art. George Dickie, Art and the Aesthetic. trans. by Oh Byung-nam, Hyeondae Mihak—Yesulgwa Mijeok Daesangui Bunseok (Modern Aesthetics: An Analysis of Art and Aesthetic Objects), Seoul: Seogwangsa, 1982. In order to overcome the limitation of the traditional theories of art, he maintained that the value of artworks is determined by the context of its cultural relationships.
An important viewpoint in modern aesthetics, this suggest a great deal in the classification and distinction of the artistic works which are often overlapped or similar in various artistic activities. The nature art is not an exception in that it has many art works of similar nature. It is not always easy to make a sharp distinction between those belonging to the nature art and those not. George Dickie’sinstitutional theory of art comes in handy at this point. Anyone can claim that their works belong to the nature art. However, one thing clear is that an organization of the nature art called YATOO has been formed, continued for some 30 years, and developed and disseminated the nature art worldwide during the period. What should also be remembered is that the artists of the YATOO Nature Art Movement have thought and worked harder than anybody else on the nature art and lived a life which coincides with the concept of nature in the evolvement and development of their artistic consciousness. The aura that the organization and those belonging to it emit how is hardly matched or imitated by other organizations and individuals.
Conclusion: Meaning of the YATOO Nature Art Movement
When the mainstream order exercises tyranny and dogmatism, a natural reaction would be an attempt to escape from the oppressions and enforcement and return to the natural state of things which most resembles the natural world. The philosophical Taoism of Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu at the age of chaos and wars of the Spring and Autumn Period and the Age of the Warring States explored a way to liberate people from the false consciousness of the formalities. The key words that they proposed were "what happens of itself without doing" (無爲自然).
YATOO(野投)’s nature art movement is interpreted to have an intention of getting out of the existing order from its title, meaning 'throwing from the field' (野投). The meaning deepens when it corresponds with the nature. Their movement was organized into activities which have influenced the society over a long period of time. The movement, in this light, is an attempt to retrieve the meaning of the nature through the works of artistic creation by those artists who follow the natural flow of the natural world out of the established social order. Then, the name YATOO already encompasses the nature art movement in general.
In short, the YATOO Nature Art Movement has made a great shift from the separation of the subject from the object in the creative activities of art in the represented world to the their unity in the assimilation with the nature. The shift is equipped with a coherent logic and theory, which the YATOO members have been completely materialized in creative activities of art in practice.
The discussion above can be summed up as a following table:
| Early Nature Art | Early Nature Art | Matured Nature Art | |
| Characteristic of the Creative Activities |
Imitation | Field | Life |
| Relationship with the Natural World |
Object | Coexistence | Assimilation |
| Relationship with the Object of Works | Representation | Directness | Unity |
The nature art pursued by YATOO has transcended the stage where it uses the nature as a material and is conducted in the nature and assimilated with the natural order. In the 30 year history of the YATOO Nature Art Movement, this characteristic has left an indelible mark in its trail.
So far, the YATOO Nature Art Movement has increasingly made its artistic and philosophical significance meaningful. Now it is expected that the YATOO Nature Art Movement can play an important part in putting to end the aimless wandering of the poor souls who have fallen victims of unbridled desires in this capitalist society where one’s selfishness is pursued without limits; that anyone can experience the natural evolvement and development through the nature art in nature and learn how to control and refrain from the excessive desires; and that the life where people can assimilate with the nature can lead to the recovery of humanistic values and the reestablishment of the right relationship between and among the people, helping pave a way to the peaceful and harmonious coexistence of all people.
Bibliography
Kim Jong-gil, 'Korean Nature Art Group YATOO and its Aesthetics.'
Jeon Won-gil, 'Toward the Possibility of the Natural Art as an Art that Come Alive,' indoor exhibition titled 'Where is the Nature?' 2010 Geumgang Nature Art Biennale.
Ri Eung-woo, 'Art and Wongol Village,' Geulsaem, 1993. In Kim Ki-hyun’s A Study of the Formation of an Indigenous Nature Art: With the Focus on the Birth of the Nature Art in Korea.
Lim Dong-sik, Daejon Ilbo, p. 9. Feb. 16, 1991, reported by Lim Myung-hee.
George Dickie, Art and the Aesthetic. trans. Oh Byung-nam, Hyeondae Mihak—Yesulgwa Mijeok Daesangui Bunseok (Modern Aesthetics: An Analysis of Art and Aesthetic Objects), Seoul: Seogwangsa, 1982.
Oh Byung-nam, Mihak Gangui (Lectures on Aesthetics), Seoul: Seoul National University Press, 2003.
Song Young-bae, Jejabaekgaui Sasang (Thoughts of the Hundred Schools of Thought), Seoul: Hyunumsa, 1994.
Feng Yu Lan, History of Chinese Philosophy. trans. Park Sung-gyu, Jungguk Cheolhaksa (History of Chinese Philosophy), Seoul: Kkachi Publishing Co., 1999.
Mou Zong San, 中國哲學十九講..trans. Chong In-jae & Chong Byung-sok, Jungguk Cheokhak Teukkang (Special Lectures on the Chinese Philosophy), Seoul: Hyungseul Publishing Co., 1985.
Lee Sang-don, 'Juhuiui Suyangnon: Mibal Hamyang Gongbureul Jungsimeuro' ('Theory of Zhu Xi’s Cultivation: With the Focus on the Moral Cultivation of the Unaroused State'), Doctoral dissertation in philosophy, Seoul National University, 2010.
Lou Yu Lie, 老子道德經注校釋 (Collated and Annotated Tao Te Ching by Lao Tzu),Beijing: Chung Hwa Book Co., 2009
Zhu Xiao Shi, 老子今註今譯 (Lao Tzu: Modern Commentary and Translation), Taipei: The Commercial Press, Ltd., 1991
