Sculpture also became the target of criticism as a part of art in 1920s, when Kim, Bok-jin had returned to Korea from Japan after majoring in sculpture. Mentioning the artist and the existence of criticism became the hub of the study, unlike the prior positions of the masons or craftsmen in palaces, or the buddhistic artists who served the Buddhist rituals. The fact that rapidity on the progress of research could only arise when there are studies on coeval works or artists, was confirmed by the relations of the traditional engraver and Kim, Bok-jin, the sculptor. The fact that there are unknown artists in many artworks, such as mason and Buddha statues, demonstrates the differences of the modern period sculptors from calligraphic painters. Unlike painting, sculpture occupies the space and therefore it exposes the social character.
The social character of sculpture has taken place as a tool of spotting the political and economical phenomena of the society, which engraver’s studies has been created as not only the artist’s, work’s argument, or mode but also further to the fundamental data and work about various social conditions. Studies regarding commemorative sculpture or statue are based on the deployment of these characters. However, eventually, the interest on the external conditions of a sculpture had limited the amplification of the researchers’ interest of the internal mode or the artist. In terms of describing Korean modern and contemporary sculpture history, the absence of arguments between researchers about the works’ style or tendency, or the expansion of discussions, explains these circumstances.
The studies of Korean modern and contemporary sculpture history are not only small in quantity, but also still lack the discovery of fundamental data and the research on the artist’s lifetime and on the work itself. In this respect, sculpture has a lot of opportunity in allowing the creation of raisonne once the sculpture work is identified, unlike having the difficulties of reverting to the painting artists that were actively engaged in dealings. Also, inversely, this respect allows the possibility of studying Korean modern and contemporary sculpture history with precise data.
The object of studies in Korean modern and contemporary sculpture history depends on continuous production and discovery. The various exhibitions and the writings that are published there are mostly professional theses. Nevertheless, as this study had only considered published writings, catalogs and statements, and master’s theses have been ruled out from consideration. In order to supplement the study later, the results of the major studies will be reflected in the Korean modern and contemporary sculpture history statement.