The term “The Conditions of the Post-Contemporary” is not intended to declare the arrival of a new era. Rather, it functions as an analytical concept designed to bring the operative principles that contemporary art has established for itself back into the realm of critical reflection.

This text is not written to introduce or defend Korean contemporary art. Nor is it intended to declare a new movement or to predict future artistic forms. The point of departure for this series is a more fundamental question: Under what conditions has contemporary art operated, and are those conditions still valid today?

If modernism grounded art in formal innovation and historical progress, and postmodernism dismantled that narrative by foregrounding difference and the relativization of meaning, contemporary art today no longer functions as a framework capable of articulating new aesthetic principles or a coherent historical direction.

Today’s art market operates on a vast speculative structure camouflaged by the language of “investment.” Artworks are no longer read as products of emotion or thought; instead, they are interpreted as indicators of price volatility.

Today’s contemporary art scene has been rewritten in the language of capital. Artworks have become units of transaction rather than outcomes of thought, and the artist’s creative act is adjusted somewhere between private desire and market demand. The spiritual value of art—the inner form where human perception meets reflection—is gradually losing its ground.

In the previous essay, “The Age of Role Reversal,” we examined how essence is obscured by the non-essential. This chapter turns to the loss of value—a deeper layer of that same inversion. Here, “value” does not refer to market price. It signifies the belief in authenticity, autonomy, and inner necessity that once made art possible as art—a shared yet invisible agreement that sustained the meaning of artistic creation.