• Archives of design research
• /
• v.11
• /
• pp.130-139
• /
• 1995

The dictionary defines the word 'Design' as planning and designing. Though this is a meaning confined to decorative function, the conception of modern design in this capitalist society of mass production and mass consumption can be said to have reached a new stage of the meeting of industry and the arts. This means the two sides of design' the side of beauty and usefulness The side of beauty should be understood in view of the sense of beauty, and usefulness should also be considered from the viewpoint of consumer's taste and preference This is thought to be the natural problems of design The origin of design can be understood from the background of capitalism. But the capitalism can be said to be the mode of Western thought and action developed based on Western thinking. The capitalism is an economic system derived from the society of industrial capitalism through commercial capitalism. but this economic thinking has been resulted from a mature social system of democracy and civic society. The civic society and democracy are derived from polis of ancient Greece and Rome. and the ancient Greek and Roman society was a society developed from the social system of the nobility and slaves. Polis continued to develop based on the positive territorial expansionism centering around the Mediterranean on the basis of Hellenism. and European countries achieved the intergration of religion. society and politics based on this. thus accomplishing the spirit of capitalism Our design is believed to have been derived from the direct import of Western capitalism. Accordingly. as the original form of Western capitalism has become our economic system. so our design copied that of th West. And our traditional culture and sensitivity which are different in the original form and root of racial disposition seem to breed discord between them. It is. therefore. very important and meaningful for us to exert all possible efforts to seek the root of our disposition and tradition and grope for the appropriate thought and style of design.

• The Korean Journal of Archival Studies
• /
• no.34
• /
• pp.221-250
• /
• 2012

This paper introduces the characteristics of the records and archives management of Korea from Joseon dynasty to now. This paper also explains historical background of making the records and archives management in Joseon dynasty. This paper introduces the process of establishment of modern records management system by adopting records management system and public administration of USA after liberation in 1945. The Joseon bureaucrats established systematic methodologies for managing and arranging the records. Jeseon dynasty managed its records systematically since it was a bureaucratic regime. It is also noticeable that the famous Joseonwangjosilrok(Annals of Joseon dynasty) came out of the power struggles for the control of the national affairs between the king and the nobility during the time of establishment of the dynasty. Another noticeable feature of the records tradition in Joseon dynasty was that the nobility recorded their experience and allowed future generations use and refer their experiences and examples when they performed similar business. The records of Joseon period are the historical records which recorded contemporary incidents and the compilers expected the future historians evaluate the incidents they recorded. In 1894, the reformation policy of Gaboh governments changed society into modernity. The policy of Gaboh governments prescribed archive management process through 'Regulation(命令頒布式)'. They revised the form of official documents entirely. They changed a name of an era from Chinese to unique style of Korean, and changed original Chinese into Korean or Korean-Chinese together. Also, instead of a blank sheet of paper they used printed paper to print the name of each office. Korea was liberated from Japanese Imperialism in 1945 and the government of Republic of Korea was established in 1948. In 1950s Republic of Korea used the records management system of the Government-General of Joseon without any alteration. In the late of 1950's Republic of Korea constructed the new records management system by adopting records management system and public administration of USA. However, understanding of records management was scarce, so records and archives management was not accomplished. Consequently, many important records like presidential archives were deserted or destroyed. A period that made the biggest difference on National Records Management System was from 1999 when was enacted. Especially, it was the period of President Roh's five-year tenure called Participation Government (2003-2008). The first distinctive characteristic of Participation Government's records management is that it implemented governance actively. Another remarkable feature is a nomination of records management specialists at public institutions. The Participation Government also legislated (completely revised) . It led to a beginning of developing records management in Republic of Korea.

• (The) Research of the performance art and culture
• /
• no.22
• /
• pp.223-252
• /
• 2011

If we remember that modern world history has built systems of meaning through the concepts "difference," "different," and "other-ness" and has constructed new identity based on opposing hierarchy, music anthropology which tried to build "difference" between the west and the non-west was thoroughly west -centered, in the sense that it has perceived the heterogeneous symbolic systems among nations, as well as the barrier between the two cultures. On the other hand, world music, which has emerged as the most attractive field in culture industry and concert-art-market by crossing over global capitals, markets, and barriers, can be considered the most post-modernist and glocal. However, it is interesting to note that world music, which has been described as post-modern and glocal, has "difference" and "different" in its basis, just like the precepts for modern music anthropology (Meintjes 1990; Guilbault 1993; Taylor 1997; Frith 2000; Feld 1988). Furthermore, one can understand that the "different" and "difference," generally termed as being "non-western," are fundamentally based on ethnic or national imagination. In this sense it is interesting and important to examine such ethnic imagination in the "non-western ethnic musics" in music anthropology and in world music. Notwithstanding the attention paid and research made by music anthropologists, they have failed to elevate the "non-western ethnic musics" to become universally communicative, and these ethnic musics were reborn as "global" and "world music," through the process of "acculturation," "derivation," and "hybridization," with the west as major site for production and consumption. Meanwhile, the audience for world music, which did not exist before the birth of world music as a term, was now born as world music emerged. They are global populace who consume the musical "difference" and "imagined ethnicity," who through their consumption are constructing new social meanings including ethnicity, race, nation, and class identity. This study, by examining current discourse, performance, and process for the world music through media and field studies and scholarly debates, attempts to understand the production and consumption of "imagined ethnicity." This will also shed light on how "ethnicity" is created and consumed, and how this is involved in the process of world music.