Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea (대한건축학회논문집)

Architectural Institute of Korea (대한건축학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Controversies and Significance of the Gumi Export and Gumi Industrial Complex Monuments

구미 수출탑과 공단기념비를 둘러싼 논란과 의미

  • Lee, Seung-youp (School of Architecture, Kumoh National Institute of Technology)
  • 이승엽 (국립금오공과대학교 건축학부 )
  • Received : 2024.02.21
  • Accepted : 2024.08.05
  • Published : 2024.09.30
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This research explores the roles of monuments by examining two controversies: the Gumi Export Monument and the Monument of the 50th Anniversary of the Gumi National Industrial Complex. Since its erection in 1976, the Gumi Export Monument has served as a gateway to the complex but is often seen as an obstacle causing traffic accidents and congestion, sparking ongoing debates about its removal. The second controversy involves the omission of Park Chung Hee's name, the founder of the complex, from the anniversary monument. This raises questions about what should be commemorated. The polysemy of concrete, the material used in the Gumi Export Monument, plays a crucial role in evaluating its value. The second controversy also highlights a shift towards individualized commemoration, reflecting a broader social change toward accepting diverse opinions. These controversies underscore monuments' fundamental role as repositories of memory, continually reminding society of the past and prompting reevaluation.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

이 연구는 국립금오공과대학교 학술연구비로 지원되었음(2022년도)

References

  1. Arrhenius, T. (2013). The fragile monument: on Alois Riegl's modern cult of monuments. NA, 16(4), 51-55.
  2. Bald, S. (2011). Memories, ghosts, and scars: architecture and trauma in New York. Journal of Transnational American Studies, 3(1), 51-57.
  3. Casey, E. (2004). Public Memory in Place and Time, Framing Public Memory. 1st Ed., The University of Alabama Press, 32-33.
  4. Forgey, B. (2007). L'Enfant, Pierre-Charles: Grand avenues: The story of the French visionary who designed Washington DC. Biography, 30(3), 432-433.
  5. Forty A. (2012). Concrete and Culture: A Material History. Reaktion Books, 197-224.
  6. Jordan, J. (2006). Structures fo Memory: Understanding Urban Change in Berlin and Beyond. Stanford university Press, 11-19.
  7. Lee, S. Y., & Byun, N. Y. (2019). Spatial features and issues in the process of establishing and expanding the Milwaukee Art Museum. Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea Planning & Design, 35(1), 110-112.
  8. Lee. S. Y. (2023). Exploring symbolism of buildings on the KIT campus. Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea Planning & Design, 39(3), 109.
  9. Morgan, D. (2018). Soldier statues and empty pedestals: public memory in the wake of the confederacy. Material Religion, 14(1), 153-157.
  10. Olick, J. K., Vinitzky-Serioiussi, V., & Levy, D. (2011). The Collective Memory Reader. 1st ed., New York, Oxford Univeristy Press, 3.
  11. Piehler K. (1995). Remembering War the American Way. Washington, Smithsonian Books, 1-9.
  12. Quentin, S. and Sumartojo, S.(2019). Shaping Seoul's memories: the co-evolution of memorials, national identity, democracy and urban space in South Korea's capital city. Journal of Urban Design, 24(5), 762-767.
  13. Shanken A. (n.d.). How many pandemic memorials does it take to remember a pandemic.? PLATFORM(Retrieved August 29, 2022 from https://www.platformspace.net/home/how-many-pandemic-memorials-does-it-take-to-remember-a-pandemic.
  14. Upton D. (2013). Why do contemporary monuments talk so much?. Commemoration in America: Essays on Monuments, Memorialization, and Memory, University of Virginia Press, 12-35.
  15. Upton D. (n.d.). Monuments and crimes. Journal18, Retrieved August 10, 2024 from https://www.journal18.org/nq/monuments-and-crimes-by-dell-upton/