Journal of the Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture (한국조경학회지)

The Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture (한국조경학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Conflicts between the Conservation and Removal of the Modern Historic Landscapes - A Case of the Demolition Controversy of the Japanese General Government Building in Seoul -

근대 역사 경관의 보존과 철거 - 구 조선총독부 철거 논쟁을 사례로 -

  • Son, Eun-Shin (Interdisciplinary Program in Landscape Architecture, Graduate School, Seoul National University) ;
  • Pae, Jeong-Hann (Dept. of Landscape Architecture and Rural Systems Engineering, Seoul National University)
  • 손은신 (서울대학교 대학원 협동과정 조경학전공) ;
  • 배정한 (서울대학교 조경.지역시스템공학부)
  • Received : 2018.05.31
  • Accepted : 2018.07.30
  • Published : 2018.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In recent years, there has been a tendency to reuse 'landscapes of memory,' including industrial heritages, modern cultural heritages, and post-industrial parks, as public spaces in many cities. Among the various types of landscapes, 'modern historic landscapes', which were formed in the 19th and 20th centuries, are landscapes where the debate between conservation and removal is most frequent, according to the change of evaluation and recognition of modern history. This study examines conflicts between conservation and removal around modern historic landscapes and explores the value judgment criteria and the process of formation of those landscapes, as highlighted in the case of the demolition controversy of the old Japanese general government building in Seoul, which was dismantled in 1995. First, this study reviews newspaper articles, television news and debate programs from 1980-1999 and some articles related to the controversy of the Japanese general government building. Then it draws the following six factors as the main issues of the demolition controversy of the building: symbolic location, discoveries and responses of new historical facts, reaction and intervention of a related country, financial conditions, function and usage of the landscape, changes of urban, historical and architectural policies. Based on these issues, this study examines the conflicts between symbolic values that play an important role in the formation of modern historic landscapes and determines conservation or removal, and the utility of functional values that solve the problems and respond to criticisms that arise in the process of forming the modern historic landscape. Especially, it is noted that the most important factor that makes the decision is the symbolic values, although the determination of the conservation or removal of modern historic landscapes has changed according to changes in historical perceptions of modern history. Today, the modern historic landscape is an important site for urban design, and still has historical issues to be agreed upon and addressed. Thi study has contemporary significance from the point that it divides the many values of modern historic landscapes into symbolic values and functional values, evaluates these, and reviews the background social context.

최근 산업유산, 근대 문화 유산, 포스트 인더스트리얼 공원 등 기억의 경관들이 공공 공간으로 새롭게 활용되고 있다. 여러 유형의 기억의 경관 중 19~20세기에 주로 형성된 근대 역사 경관(modern historic landscape)은 근대사에 대한 평가 및 인식 변화에 따라 보존과 철거 간 논쟁이 가장 많이 발생하는 경관이다. 본 연구는 1995년 철거된 서울의 구조선총독부 철거 논쟁을 사례로 근대 역사 경관을 둘러싼 보존과 철거 사이의 쟁점을 검토하고, 보존 및 철거를 결정하는 가치 판단 기준과 근대 역사 경관의 형성 방식을 탐구한다. 먼저 1980~1999년 사이 조선총독부 철거 논쟁을 다룬 신문기사, 뉴스, 토론 프로그램 자료와 관련 문헌을 검토하고, 철거 논쟁의 주요 쟁점으로 다음의 여섯 가지 항목을 도출한다: 상징적 위치, 새로운 역사적 사실의 발견과 대응, 관련 국가의 반응과 개입, 재정적 여건, 경관의 기능과 이용 방식, 도시 역사 건축 정책 변화. 이를 기반으로 근대 역사 경관을 형성하고 보존 혹은 철거를 결정하는 중요한 가치로서 상징적 가치 간 대립 양상과, 근대 역사 경관이 형성되는 과정에서 발생하는 문제점을 보완하고 비판에 대응하는 기능적 가치의 역할을 고찰한다. 특히 본 연구는 근대사에 대한 인식이 시대에 따라 변화하면서 근대 역사 경관의 보존과 철거의 향방 또한 변화하지만, 오늘날에도 결정의 가장 중요한 요인은 여전히 상징적 가치라는 점에 주목했다. 근대 역사 경관은 오늘날 중요한 설계 대상지 중 하나로서 여전히 합의되고 해결되어야 할 역사적 쟁점을 갖는다. 본 연구는 근대 역사 경관의 가치를 상징적 가치와 기능적 가치로 나누어 평가하고, 그 배경에 자리한 사회적 맥락을 재검토했다는 점에서 동시대적 의의를 갖는다.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

Supported by : 한국연구재단

References

  1. Braae, E.(2015) Beauty Redeemed: Recycling Post-industrial Landscapes, Basel: Birkhauser.
  2. Chang, H.(1996) Architectural tradition and modern Korean architecture. Review of Architecture and Building Science 40(7): 49-52.
  3. Chae, H. and S. Park(2015) Exploring 'Historic Urban Landscape' as a new approach to heritage conservation. Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea Planning & Design 31(2): 253-260. https://doi.org/10.5659/JAIK_PD.2015.31.2.253
  4. City History Compilation Committee of Seoul(2002) Seoul under Japanese Invasion: 1910-1945. Seoul: Seoul.
  5. Ha, S.(2011) Politics of Agenda-building: Analysis of the process of ex-choson governmental general’s building destruction. Journal of Contemporary Politics 4(1): 153-178.
  6. Han, J.(2011) Inner city regeneration utilizing for historic landscapes: A case study of old settlements in Shanghai. Journal of the Korean Geographical Society 46(5): 626-647.
  7. Jeon, J.(1995) No Architecture?: Remarks on Architectural and Art Experts against the Demolition of the Old Building of Governor-general of Korea. Seoul: Ganhyang Media Lab.
  8. Jeong, W.(1995) A Tour of the Japanese Heritage Sites in Seoul. Seoul: Hanwool.
  9. Ju, N.(1991) The old governor-general building must be demolished. Review of Architecture and Building Science 35(3): 74-75.
  10. Kim, B.(2007) Modification of symbolic spaces and invention of collective memories: How the national places in Seoul were reconstructed through the colonial experiences? Space and Society 28: 188-221.
  11. Korea Cultural Policy Institute(2001) A Study on the Mid-to Longterm Development of the National Museum of Korea. Policy Report.
  12. Lee, H.(1990) The Japanese General Government building must be demolished. Monthly Korea Forum 13(1): 104-111.
  13. Lee, S.(1991) The issues of restoring the Kyongbok Palace and Kyonghi Palace, And removing the old governor-general building. Review of Architecture and Building Science 35(2): 52-56.
  14. Lee, S.(1993a) The Recklessness of Cultural Policy of Planning to Relocate the National Museum of Korea within 2 Years. No Architecture?: Remarks on Architectural and Art Experts against the Demolition of the Old Building of Governor-general of Korea. 71-74.
  15. Lee, S.(1993b) Will It Make the History of Half a Milion Years Black and Blue. No Architecture?: Remarks on Architectural and Art Experts against the Demolition of the Old Building of Governorgeneral of Korea. 75-77.
  16. Lee, S.(1993c) Inducing One-sided Demolition Theory. No Architecture?: Remarks on Architectural and Art Experts against the Demolition of the Old Building of Governor-general of Korea. 78-81.
  17. Lee, S.(1995) Is the Surprise Show a Cultural Policy? No Architecture?: Remarks on Architectural and Art Experts against the Demolition of the Old Building of Governor-general of Korea. 198-200.
  18. Lee, S.(2017) Conservation Ethics. Seoul: Graphic Korea.
  19. Ministry of Culture and Sports(1993) A Plan to Demolish the Old Japanese General Government Building. Presidential Archives. Report.
  20. Ministry of Culture and Sports and National Museum of Korea(1997) Report on Surveying and Demolition of the Old Japanese General Government Building(the 1st volumes). Seoul: Ministry of Culture and Sports and National Museum of Korea.
  21. Park, H. and H. Kim(2010) A study on the change of consciousness in Korean architectural circles through the demolition matter of Chosun government general building. Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea Planning & Design 26(1): 217-224.
  22. Rico, T.(2008) "Negative heritage: The place of conflict in world heritage," Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites 10(4): 344-352. https://doi.org/10.1179/135050308X12513845914507
  23. Song, M.(1991) A Proposal for Relocation of the Old Governorgeneral Building. Review of Architecture and Building Science 35(3): 72-73.
  24. Yang, S.(1998) Preservation & restoration: Old general governor building in Korea. Review of Jeju Halla University 22: 381-390.
  25. Yim, C.(1992) Core area development and understanding the townscape aspects of cultural heritage. Review of Architecture and Building Science 36(1): 32-34.
  26. Chosun Ilbo. 1991. 1. 22; 1993. 8. 11; 1993. 8. 23; 1993. 11. 6; 1995. 3. 2; 1995. 7. 22; 1995. 8. 1; 1995. 8. 15; 1995. 8. 16; 1997. 5. 15; 1997. 11. 27.
  27. Dong-A Ilbo. 1982. 3. 17; 1982. 3. 19; 1982. 4. 13; 1982. 7. 7; 1984. 9. 19; 1986. 10. 18; 1987. 12. 7; 1988. 8. 13; 1990. 10. 27; 1990. 12. 4; 1990. 12. 6; 1991. 1. 28; 1991. 6. 3; 1991. 6. 4; 1991. 6. 16; 1991. 9. 4; 1992. 12. 4; 1992. 12. 30; 1993. 8. 10; 1993. 9. 4; 1994. 1. 5; 1995. 1. 1; 1995. 8. 4; 1995. 8. 16a; 1995. 8. 16b; 1996. 12. 3; 2001. 9. 6; 2017. 9. 26.
  28. Hankyoreh. 1988. 9. 20; 1990. 10. 25; 1990. 11. 6; 1991. 6. 4; 1991. 6. 15; 1991. 6. 21; 1992. 12. 29; 1993. 8. 11; 1993. 11. 6; 1995. 8. 16; 1996. 10. 2; 2015. 5. 11.
  29. KBS. 1991. 3. 1.
  30. Korean Economic Daily. 2005. 12. 25.
  31. Kukmin Ilbo. 2013. 12. 10.
  32. Kyunghyang Shinmun. 1982. 3. 16; 1990. 9. 5; 1991. 1. 23; 1991. 6. 14; 1992. 10. 29; 1993. 4. 9; 1993. 5. 21; 1994. 1. 27; 1995. 1. 1; 1995. 8. 16; 1996. 11. 10; 1999. 6. 3; 2015. 4. 9.
  33. Maeil Business. 1991. 6. 14; 2005. 10. 20.
  34. MBC. 1991. 3. 3; 1991. 8. 24; 1995. 8. 15.
  35. Cultural Heritage Administration, The Portal Site of National Cultural Heritage. www.heritage.go.kr
  36. Cultural Properties Protection Law, No. 15065-2. Implementation in 27, Nov. 2017. http://www.law.go.kr
  37. Korean National Commission for UNESCO, UNESCO and Heritage. www.heritage.unesco.or.kr
  38. National Archives of Korea, Cheong Wa Dae Walks with the Presidential Security Service. 17pss.pa.go.kr/walk/tour/tour.jsp
  39. National Archives of Korea. http://theme.archives.go.kr
  40. National Museum of Korea. www.museum.go.kr
  41. Seoul History Archives. museum.seoul.kr/archive
  42. Seoul Map Museum, , Street Map of Seoul. gis.seoul.go.kr
  43. archist.kr/171.
  44. http://db.kdemocracy.or.kr