• Korean Institute of Interior Design Journal
• /
• no.29
• /
• pp.112-119
• /
• 2001

In general, the definition of criticism is making a constructive analysis between good & evil, right & wrong, and beauty & ugliness. Just as the literature, art, music, and architecture welcomes productive criticism in order for further advancement in each professional field, constructive criticism in the field of interior architecture must be activated stance it would be as useful as in other fields to upgrade the level of design quality If the constructive criticism were to be taken properly in the benefit of further advancement in particular design, then the criticism must hale a proper criteria in order to examine and review the design work objectively However, as the design symbolizes cultural interpretation and reaction towards better creativity, we expect design to be mutated in many different directions. As the limit of Interior architecture shares limitless possibilities in today's society, it seems that we need to set up a guidelines of design criticism in order to support the further development of the area of interior architecture.

• Proceedings of the Korea Society of Design Studies Conference
• /
• 2001.05a
• /
• pp.78-79
• /
• 2001

• Proceedings of the Korea Society of Design Studies Conference
• /
• 2003.11a
• /
• pp.22-23
• /
• 2003

• Journal of Science of Art and Design
• /
• v.2
• /
• pp.222-238
• /
• 2000

The attempts to explain the criterion of art criticism can be divided into three directions. The first is that there is a universal criterion of criticism. The second is that criticism is a subjective impression of each critic. Therefore, there is no universal criterion beyond a subjective impression. The third is that denies both claims. It tries to and the objective criterion which is neither universal nor subjective. In this paper, I will see how John Dewey criticizes the first two theories and holds the third theory. Dewey's denial of the first theory can be seen in his view of the judical criticism. The judical criticism claims that art criticism can be made on the universal criterion, as judical decision can be made on the general rule supposed to be applicable to all cases. But Dewey claims that the judical criticism cannot explain what makes the artist the 'masters'. Defining art as an experience, Dewey claims that art is a process of doing and undergoing, and that art is essentially an interactive activity between men and his environment As environment changes, the experience of the environment also changes. So art should accept the possibility of new experience. But, since the judical criticism advocates of the universal criterion which cannot allow the changeability, Dewey denies it. On the other hand, Dewey's denial of the second theory can be seen in his view of the impressionist criticism. The impressionist criticism claims that criticism is to clarify the impression which is consisted of feeling and imagery the art object evokes. To this claim, Dewey replies that to clarify an impression is to analyze it, and analysis can proceed only by going beyond the impression to the judgement. As we have seen so far, Dewey has denied the judical criticism that there is a universal criterion supposed to be applicable to all criticism. He has also denied the impressionist criticism that there are only subjective responses to the art object, and hence that there is no criterion of criticism at all. For Dewey, these two criticism are based on the same false assumption of the criterion, although their conclusions are different from each other. Both the judical and impressionist criticism failed to realize the difference between the meaning of the criterion as applied in measurement and as used in criticism. Criticizing of these two views of criticism, Dewey claims that there is an objective criterion which is neither universal nor subjective. Art criticism is objective in tv#o senses, i. e., in the first sense that it can be judged by the properties of the art object and in the second sense that it can be verified by the communities of the critics.

• Korean Institute of Interior Design Journal
• /
• v.22 no.5
• /
• pp.114-125
• /
• 2013

Kengo Kuma used to be very known well as a critic before being an architect. He usually mentioned quite unique type of comments for subjects whenever his criticism, also even his works results have been able to be targets of criticism materials by his method. His works are the achievements of challenges based on his continuous dynamic criticism. Hence, to have well understanding of his architectural thinking and works result, his complexes criticism structure must be needed to understand. And also, this study is using 'KJ Method' type to analyze his architectural thinking which is complicated making by a type of non-linear. Kengo Kuma's structures of architectural thinking and critiques perspective of modern architecture have been created by 'KJ Method'. Critiques types of keywords and consequences words collected from among the local dedicated professional architecture books to get this research result. First of all, Kengo Kuma desired even modern architecture problems to be melt as a specific architecture result such as modern type of power structure. To have result, Kengo Kuma had experienced sensible activity through materials which have specific characteristic. Also place of materiality created to get relationship between environments and architecture. Secondly, he wanted to recover troubled traditional Japanese architectural perspective which blocked relationship by dichotomy as a right way. In conclusion, this research reaches Kengo Kuma's type of architecture which strongly emphasizes harmony among related components such as human being, materials, substances based on accepted natural environments and lives' principle. Also, much more specific methods have been derived by related works results analyzing which have similar characteristic as Kengo Kuma's one.

• Journal of architectural history
• /
• v.12 no.2 s.34
• /
• pp.61-69
• /
• 2003

Manfredo Tafuri's Ideological criticism in architecture has opened a new horizon to interpreting architecture in modern capitalist architecture for it views architecture not just as a style or formal invention, but in terms of socio-economical process. It offered a comprehensive understanding of a chaotic situation of contemporary architecture and historical meaning modern architectural movements in relation with capitalistic development. However, it has been criticized as architectural pessimism which does not allow any possibility for progressive architectural practice. It was also criticized of epistemological problem of how one could be outside ideology without assuming true consciousness against false consciousness of ideology. Tafuri solves this problem by assuming Althusserian activist concept of knowledge and suggest the concept of labor of writing history of critical historians, instead of a design for utopian society, as a possible critical architectural practice. However, I argue that ultimately ideological criticism does not deny architectural practice itself, nor researches on formal characteristics of architecture. The problem lies rather in the architectural Intellectuals' attachment to the traditional concept of architect as a form giver to the society. By rejecting this myth and broadening the concept of architectural practice from design to production, we can find that Ideological problem is not architectural pessimism, but rather it opens up a new way of approaching to the problem of architectural practice in modern capitalist society.

• Proceedings of the Korea Fashion and Costume Design Association Conference
• /
• 2005.06a
• /
• pp.29-30
• /
• 2005

• Journal of the Korean housing association
• /
• v.26 no.6
• /
• pp.61-69
• /
• 2015

Current criticism regarding the "uniformity" of Korean apartments has shown not only tendencies of emotional and unscholarly criticism, but also lack of academic discourse. They tend to stay at the common-sense level and be quite subjective without supporting facts. This research began with questioning the phenomenon of seeing Korean apartments as an object of negative criticism. The research questions for this study are: 1. Of the living space of so-called apartment houses, what elements should be called uniform?; 2. How should the implications of the findings be interpreted? In this context, this study aims to reinterpret criticisms on the uniformity of apartments from a new point of view. First, literature review is done to examine characteristics of Korean apartments in the social-cultural, economic, and physical contexts. Next, existing non-academic, abstract criticisms are classified into three trends, to show that the way of understanding architectural spaces by those criticisms are limited and weighted towards visual perceptions focused only on the shape of architectural structures. Finally, it is argued that the viewpoints of space and residents' experience should be treated as important for the reinterpretation of criticisms on the uniformity. This is validated through presenting relevant cases such as changes of space uses, diversified lifestyles being accepted, and the expansion of living space.

• Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea Planning & Design
• /
• v.36 no.5
• /
• pp.11-22
• /
• 2020

It is the juristocracy in architecture to judge the architectural plagiarism by copyright law. The architectural plagiarism should judge by architectural criticism. From the point of the criticism to discuss architectural plagiarism, the study on artistic imitation should be preceding. The current discussion on architectural plagiarism doesn't consider artistic imitation. Therefore, the result of the discussion only focused on whether the building is plagiarizing or not. From the point of architectural criticism, there should be three considerations, which are creation, imitation, and plagiarism. In the study of Aesthetics, it theorized artistic imitation as the appropriation. With the understanding of the appropriation, contemporary art is developing the discourse on plagiarism beyond the boundary of plagiarism fundamentalism. The purpose of this study is to apply the appropriation to the discussion of architectural plagiarism. The study introduces the discourse on architectural plagiarism rather than judging it with copyright law. There so the study categorized the aesthetics standard of appropriation art, then apply it to the architecture cases. The architecture cases subjects of analysis are the glasshouse by Philip Johnson, National Museum of Australia by Howard Raggatt, and the Meiquan 22nd Century in China. At the point of the appropriation theory, the glasshouse is the only architectural appropriation, and others need to apply the evaluation criteria of plagiarism.

• Proceedings of the Korea Society of Design Studies Conference
• /
• 2000.11a
• /
• pp.132-133
• /
• 2000

오늘날 메타(mee)라는 용어는 '메타언어', '메타과학', '메타비평' 등의 합성어를 통해 자신의 존재를 이 사회에서 확인 받고 있다. 특히 메타언어는 메타라는 용어를 가장 적극적으로 사용하는 경우라고 할 수 있다. 왜냐하면 메타언어는 언어를 연구대상으로 하는 학문영역에서 언어의 한 특성, 흑은 자체의 구조를 설명하는 보다 일반화된 개념으로 소통되고 있기 때문이다. (중략)