• Journal of the Korean Institute of Traditional Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.38 no.3
• /
• pp.1-10
• /
• 2020

The purpose of this study is to identify whether the cranes had been bred in the palace of the Joseon Dynasty period and to consider the related cases. The temporal range of this study is in the Joseon Dynasty period, and the spatial range is throughout the entire palace, including the naejeon(內殿) and oijeon(外殿), and government offices inside(闕內各司) and government offices outside(闕外各司). The reference materials for this study were partly extracted and translated from the original documents to consider, and a Korean version of documents was used in the database of the Institute for the Translation of Korean Classics. The results of this study are summarized as follows. First, the cranes were bred from the early Joseon Dynasty Era in Uijeongbu, the highest government office in the Joseon Dynasty period. After the Japanese Invasion of Korea in 1592, crane breeding in Uijeongbu(議政府) seems to have been suspended due to the damage to the government building and the change in the status of the government office. Second, crane breeding in Hongmungwan(弘文館), which was responsible for the classics colloquium(經筵) and public opinions and assisted the king by the side, continued from the early Joseon Dynasty period(Jungjong's Era) to the late Joseon Dynasty period(Jeongjo's Era) after the Japanese Invasion of Korea in 1592. Third, in the Jeongjo's Era, the cranes were also bred in Gyujanggak(奎章閣), which was newly established as the central institution of learning to strengthen the royal authority. At that time, it seems that several cranes were bred in Gyujanggak. Fourth, it is judged that 'Crane breeding' in the core government offices of Joseon, such as Uijeongbu, Hongmungwan, and Gyujanggak, was meaningful as a symbol of identities, such as the status and character of the institution. Fifth, it seems that the cranes bred in the palace, including Hongmungwan, were conventionally brought by the Baecheon County of Hwanghae-do. This convention caused minor conflicts between the central and local government offices during the Yeongjo's Era, but it seems to have continued throughout the Jeongjo's Era. In this study, there is a limit that most of the studies were conducted based on local data. If further data discovery and translation outcomes are accumulated in the future, more abundant cases will be identified. The deepened follow-up studies are also needed, other than the cases of rearing cranes in the local government offices and temples.

• Journal of Korean Classical Literature and Education
• /
• no.34
• /
• pp.115-147
• /
• 2017

This paper compared and reviewed the poetic theories and Chinese poems of the Korean author Kim Chang Heup and his Japanese counterpart, Kan Chazan. Kim Chang Heup and Kan Chazan shared largely the same opinions on poetry, and both rejected archaism. First, they did not just copy High Tang poetry. Instead, they focused on the (sometimes trivial) scenery right in front of them, and described the calm feelings evoked by what they had seen. They also adopted a sincere tone, instead of an exaggerated one, because both believed that poetry should be realistic. However the differences between the two poets are also noteworthy. Kim Chang Heup claimed that feelings and scenery meet each other within a literary work through Natural Law, and the linguistic expressions that mediate the two are philosophical in nature. However, Kan Chazan did not use Natural Law as a medium between feelings and scenery. Instead the Japanese writer said the ideal poetical composition comes from a close observation and detailed description of scenery. In sum, while Kim Chang Heup continued to express reason through scenery, Kan Chazan did not go further than depicting the scenery itself. In addition, Kim Chang Heup believed poetry was not only a representation of Natural Law, but also a high-level linguistic activity that conveys a poetic concern about national politics. As a sadaebu (scholar-gentry), he held literature in high esteem because he thought that literature could achieve important outcomes. On the other hand, Kan Chazan regarded it as a form of entertainment, thereby insisting literature had its own territory that is separate from that of philosophy or politics. In other words, whereas Kim Chang Heup considered literature as something close to a form of learning, Kan Chazan viewed it as art. One might wonder whether the poetics of Kim Chang Heup and Kan Chazan reflect their individual accomplishments, or if the characteristics of Chinese poetry that Korean and Japanese poets had long sought after had finally surfaced in these two writers. This paper argued that the two authors' poetics represent characteristics of Chinese poetry in Korea and Japan, or general characteristics of Korean and Japanese literatures in a wider sense. Their request to depict actual scenery in a unique way, free from the ideal model of literature, must have facilitated an outward materialization of Korean and Japanese literary characteristics that had developed over a long time.

• Asia Marketing Journal
• /
• v.7 no.3
• /
• pp.53-76
• /
• 2005

With rapid technological and market change, new product development (NPD) complexity is a significant issue that organizations continually face in their development projects. There are numerous factors, which cause development projects to become increasingly costly & complex. A product is more likely to be successfully developed and marketed when the complexity inherent in NPD projects is clearly understood and carefully managed. Based upon the previous studies, this study examines the nature and importance of complexity in developing new products and then identifies several issues in managing complexity. Issues considered include: definition of complexity : consequences of complexity; and methods for managing complexity in NPD projects. To achieve high performance in managing complexity in development projects, these issues need to be addressed, for example: A. Complexity inherent in NPD projects is multi-faceted and multidimensional. What factors need to be considered in defining and/or measuring complexity in a development project? For example, is it sufficient if complexity is defined only from a technological perspective, or is it more desirable to consider the entire array of complexity sources which NPD teams with different functions (e.g., marketing, R&D, manufacturing, etc.) face in the development process? Moreover, is it sufficient if complexity is measured only once during a development project, or is it more effective and useful to trace complexity changes over the entire development life cycle? B. Complexity inherent in a project can have negative as well as positive influences on NPD performance. Thus, which complexity impacts are usually considered negative and which are positive? Project complexity also can affect the entire organization. Any complexity could be better assessed in broader and longer perspective. What are some ways in which the long-term impact of complexity on an organization can be assessed and managed? C. Based upon previous studies, several approaches for managing complexity are derived. What are the weaknesses & strengths of each approach? Is there a desirable hierarchy or order among these approaches when more than one approach is used? Are there differences in the outcomes according to industry and product types (incremental or radical)? Answers to these and other questions can help organizations effectively manage the complexity inherent in most development projects. Complexity is worthy of additional attention from researchers and practitioners alike. Large-scale empirical investigations, jointly conducted by researchers and practitioners, will help gain useful insights into understanding and managing complexity. Those organizations that can accurately identify, assess, and manage the complexity inherent in projects are likely to gain important competitive advantages.