Jung-Ah Woo and Kyunghee Pyun, the editors of Interpreting Modernism in Korean Art: Fluidity and Fragmentation, explain how three Korean terms, geundae (modern), hyeondae (contemporary), and dongsidae (contemporaneity) all refer to the present, yet are used in art history to designate three distinct periods of the twentieth century. 'Why did Koreans feel the need to divide this relatively short time period into smaller units?' They ask. The answer is found in socio-political ruptures experienced by the nation and its people. The short-lived Korean Empire (1897-1910) came under Japanese colonial rule from 1910 until 1945 and soon after Korea's independence in 1945 the nation found itself in the midst of the Korean War (1950-1953). As a result, the Korean peninsula remains divided, signalling the enduring effects of its geo-political and ideological conflicts.

Instead of privileging a singular narrative, the anthology thus brings together a rich collection of essays that highlight fragmented and fluid interpretations of the past. The chapters are organized into five parts, and are roughly chronological in order, spanning the 1890s until the 2000s. Interpreting Modernism in Korean Art introduces complex issues and concrete examples related to Korea's modernism and modernity by highlighting their competing definitions. Its discussions are not necessarily limited to such traditional art as ink painting and oil painting. For example, Soohyun Mok explores the making of modernism through symbols found in textbooks and propaganda materials; while Yuri Seo examines magazine covers to consider the relationship between cultural consumption and modernism. Hyunjung Cho unpacks the changing subjectivity of Korean architects between 1945 and 1990 whereas Youngjung Oh traces the history of the Nangang Parlour Coffeehouse in the 1930s to examine how creative expressions and collaborations amongst the key modern artists occurred at this venue.

Some topics are particularly pertinent, considering the growing attention on avant-garde artistic practices in postwar South Korea. Here I am thinking of Sooran Choi's in-depth analysis of the Fourth Group, one of the most radical art collectives of the early 1970s, and Chunghoon Shin's mediation on necessity and imitation through what he describes as the 'necessity trials'. According to Shin, the prevalent logic of centre and periphery between the West and non-Western 'latecomers' prompted art movements arising in countries like Korea to demonstrate and validate its emergence. The examples they introduce offer new insights into the experimental art practices of the 1960s and 1970s, a period of polyvocal artistic movements. Travelling exhibitions currently on show, including Only the Young: Experimental Art in Korea, 1960s-1970s (Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art, Seoul; Guggenheim Museum, New York; Hammer Museum, Los Angeles) draw overdue critical attention to such artist-led initiatives.

It should be noted that while the anthology's overarching interdisciplinary approach to art and culture challenges the established art historical canon, its discussions remain fixated on Korea. The anthology could have benefited from asking how Korea sought to define modernism in comparison to other neighbouring postcolonial countries in Asia. Translating and defining the 'modern' is not only regarded as complex and problematic in Korea, but it is a condition that the majority of non-Western cultures share. The publication's limited geographical focus also results in redundancy. Similar socio-political and cultural contexts reappear across several essays, such as the impact of Japan's Cultural Rule in 1919. To avoid such repetition, a short chapter introduction that establishes important contexts could have been helpful. In many instances, theories by European thinkers, including Benedict Anderson (1936-2015), Gilles Deleuze (1925-1995) and Ernest Gellner (1925-1995), are referenced to evaluate the formation and unfolding of modernism in the nascent Korean art world. One cannot help but feel that these theories are used as toolboxes, applied to frame examples specific to a country. Such attempts are certainly valuable, but contributions that challenge or question the imposition of a Western-centered account of modernism might have offered compelling counter-narratives to the conventional understanding of the term.

One of the reasons art historians favour narratives punctuated with ruptures and disconnections is because they offer a definitive break for bracketing ideas and movements. A similar approach is readily found in this volume: Periods repeatedly serve as important markers for defining geundae, hyeondae, and dongsidae. In her concluding essay on the 'Contemporaneity of Korean Contemporary Art', Jung-Ah Woo categorises the first half of the twentieth century as modernism, the second half as contemporary, and the period from the 1990s onwards as the era of contemporaneity. In many instances, however, the essays implicitly reveal that the past cannot be so neatly organized as we would like to imagine it. Although the edited volume essentially reiterates the established linear account of modernism, its diverse and rich case studies serve as a valuable introduction to students and specialists interested in competing art historical readings of twentieth-century Korean art and culture.

Sooyoung Leam