• 건축역사연구
• /
• 제24권1호
• /
• pp.29-40
• /
• 2015

This study is on historiography of Modern Architecture since its beginning to present. As a critical review of the history of the writing history of Modern Architecture, this study tends to be a meta-history and criticism of historical text. This study try to analyse historiographical project of Modern architecture at specific phase since the beginning of modern architecture. The historiography of Modern architecture shows that writing a history is making a discourse of Modern architecture as a imaginative representation to define and justify Modernism in architecture. The analysis of canonic text since early 20th century proves that the history of writing history of Modern architecture played a critical role not only to shape of our ideal but the practice of architecture with a ideology construction in retrospect. With a name of truth or morality they made myths about the modernity in architecture. So we can find deep 'Hagelean Unconscious' in writing history of Modern architecture not even the first generation of historians but the second generation who were influenced by earlier writer in spite of their intention of revision and overcoming, which is in itself the key concept of Hegel's philosophy of History. Under this kind of 'operative' discourse our view point of Modern architecture were confined and the historiography of Modern architecture itself was narrowly defined as a kind of melodrama that a few architect and work of art matters. The rise of critical history fundamentally has changed the way of seeing and writing the history of Modern architecture. but it has also a new kind of dilemma as regard to writing history and involving practice. This review of historiography traces the texts of historians as like Pevsner, Giedion, Banham, Rowe, Tafuri, Frampton, and Curtis relating to different discours making. When we consider Benjamin's famous concept of constellation, writing history necessarily is a kind of montage making in time and we always need to recognize the historicity of historiography.

• 건축역사연구
• /
• 제24권2호
• /
• pp.27-34
• /
• 2015

The tasks of writing history is to reconstruct the past in order to understand the present condition and to envision the future. Modern architectural histories in the west have assumed this role, from Winckelmann to Giedion. Likewise, history of Korean modern architecture has to serve this purpose. However, existing histories of Korean modern architecture simply list up stylistic changes from western eclectic architecture to modernism without any historical narratives explaining the transition from Korean traditional architecture to modern architecture. History of Korean modern architecture has simply been understood as a unilateral process of transplantation of western architecture into Korea. This paper points out two major problems underlying this kind of historiography of Korean modern architecture. The one is formalistic approach which sees history of modern architecture mainly as a process of formal and stylistic changes. The other is humanistic approach which sees modern architects as agents of history. This paper argues that this kind of history writings has limitations since modernity of Korean architecture is fundamentally different from that of the west. and that specific tasks that Korean modern architectural history has to address are then two folds;(re)connecting the past architectural tradition to the present and forming self-identity of Korean architecture.

• 건축역사연구
• /
• 제8권1호
• /
• pp.53-62
• /
• 1999

Modernism in architecture is a very complex and contradictory phenomena. So much so that it has been defined in various ways throughout the history, depending on one's position in the cultural and historical circumstances. It is thus necessary to map out the various concepts of modernism and their relationships in order to have a more comprehensive understanding of modern architecture. This paper attempts to define the various positions as functionalism, formalism and artistic avant-gardism, and to trace their history from the early twentieth century to the present. The change of the concept of modernism from functionalism to artistic avant-gardism seems a logical process in the history of western modem culture. The tendency of contemporary architecture to be more abstract and self referential artistic practice reflects the fragmentation of modern culture and the separation of art and technology. The validity of this position, of course, depends on how one evaluates the role of modern art in the situation of modern culture. It could be viewed either negatively or positively. However, this position is problematic in that it disregards the fundamental differences between architecture and other arts and distanced architecture farther from its material base. Given this historical perspective on the concept of modernism, modernism in Korea should not viewed simply identical to the western modernism, nor should western modernism be imported uncritically. The characteristics of her modernization and their differences from the west should be considered, along with the different status and role of architecture in korean modern society.

• 건축역사연구
• /
• 제2권2호
• /
• pp.107-118
• /
• 1993

For attempting to wright a history of Modern Architecture in Korea the first task might be to establish the beginning of the period and to search for the orign of Modernity in Korean Architecture. As a member of the third world Modernism and Modernity in Korean Modern architecture has to be different from that of the West. The main purpose of this study is to define Modernity and to find out the characteristics of Modernism in Korean architecture. Above all this study suggests to note the peculiarity and the differance in the history of Modern architecture within the large frame of modernization. Then maintains that the search for the new cultural identity and rationality instead of lost tradition and convention can be defined as a modernity in Korean architecture.

• 한국실내디자인학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국실내디자인학회 2007년도 춘계학술대회 논문집
• /
• pp.264-269
• /
• 2007

Modern architecture does a role in terms of connecting traditional and current architecture. In the same time, Which is important part of korean architecture history because of introduction of western architecture. Accordingly, At this meaninglessly going out and leaving of modern architecture, the purpose of this study is systematic researching of the modern Government Office interior. I progressed this study to research into the period context at construction of the modern Government Office and tendency of architecture and interior at that time. And then understand interior space organization of it. The early modern Government Office adopted Neo-Baroque style from tendency of that time. Also, showed composite order which is mixed in the Greek temple, the Renaissance and the classic style representing the power. But, after late 1920 It adopted Modern Style. This characteristic is different from current composit order, which is comprehended by our. In order to understand aesthetic value of current straight interior space, It have to be interacted the present and past. But It's averted because it was made in the period of Japanese imperialism. Therefore, We should explore history of interior design that is endowed with sociality and historicity between modern and future interior space as well as current.

• 한국실내디자인학회논문집
• /
• 제16권5호
• /
• pp.3-12
• /
• 2007

Modern architecture is very Important part of korean architecture history. Because It's a role in terms of connecting traditional and current architecture and introduction of western architecture. Accordingly, At this meaninglessly going out and leaving of modern architecture, the purpose of this study is systematic researching of the modern Government Office interior. This study to research into the period context at construction of the modern Government Office and tendency of architecture and interior at that time. And understand interior space organization of it. The modern Government Office adopted Neo-Baroque style from tendency of that time. Also, showed composite order which is mixed In the Creek temple, the Renaissance and the classic style representing the power. But, after late 1920 It adopted Modern Style. This characteristic is different from current composit order, which is comprehended by our. In order to understand aesthetic value of current straight interior space, It have to be Interacted the present and past. But It's averted because it was made In the period of Japanese imperialism. Therefore, We should explore history of interior design that is endowed with sociality and historicity between modern and future interior space as well as current.

• 건축역사연구
• /
• 제13권4호
• /
• pp.75-88
• /
• 2004

The German Werkbund, which was founded in 1907, played an important role in the history of modern architecture. Its exhibition 1914 in Cologne is estimated as a meaningful event in the development of modern architecture. Especially two examples, among which were built at that time, are worthy of notice. The one is the 'Modelfactory' by Walter Gropius and the other 'Glashaus' by Bruno Taut. Generally in the Textbook on the history of modern architecture, the Taut's Glashaus is rarely mentioned or described as a early example of some expressionistic architecture, while the Modelfactory by Gropius is regarded as an essential workpiece in the early stage of modern movement. the time of searching alternative not only from rationalistic modernism but also postmodernism and today in the time of plurality, Taut's Glashaus could bring us more interesting and meaningful aspects in architectural design. Through investigating the background in the planning stage and analysing the composition of space, construction, circulation etc. it is to try to understand the building as really as what it was. Furthermore, historical meanings of the building in the modern architecture is reinterpreted in the following aspects; what should be reflected in architecture and how could 'Zeitgeist' be architecturally adopted?

• 대한건축학회논문집:계획계
• /
• 제35권6호
• /
• pp.69-80
• /
• 2019

This research focuses on 10 modern museums built in Europe near important cultural assets of UNESCO World Heritage level. This study aims to reveal the coexistence of European laminated history and contemporary architecture by considering various aspects of respecting the existing and maintaining their identity as modern buildings, using these cultural assets as a basic concept of planning while minimizing conflicts with the past. The four measures of respecting existing cultural heritage are arranged by showing respect by lowering oneself, sympathizing with others, preparing for harmony with modernity, and communicating by looking at. The measures that reveal the identity of modern buildings are confirmed by classifying them as modern and post-modern approaches, each with several options. Through this study, we have been able to extract useful lessons for us, as well, while the past and present coexist successfully, by taking history as a reliable guide to take a fresh leap from it, rather than as a solidified remnant of inertness.

• 건축역사연구
• /
• 제16권5호
• /
• pp.41-54
• /
• 2007

The Fagus Factory at Alfeld on the Leine in Germany, which was built in 1911 and 1914, is a well-known and very important object in the history of modern architecture. Alan Colquhoun mentioned that it is "prophetic of the 'objective' (sachlich) Modern Movement of the 1920s". Vittrio M. Lampugnani evaluated it as "a Pioneer building of the architectural Realism". Most of historian of architecture explain that these achievements were accomplished mainly by the master architect Walter Gropius and sometimes by his co-worker Adolf Meyer. Through investigating the background in the planning stage and the process of design it is to try to find out what is truly happened during the project time. Furthermore, historical meanings of the building in the modern architecture is reinterpreted in the following aspects; who or which elements have influence on the Fagus Factory? and what kind of problems can be caused by the digested architectural history?

• 건축역사연구
• /
• 제27권6호
• /
• pp.41-48
• /
• 2018

For the proper preservation and utilisation of Regional Modern Heritage Buildings, it is necessary to study the history of local modern architecture based on a broad understanding of the region and also to architectural history. The aim of this study is expand the awareness and multi-faceted interpretation of modern architecture in Kwangju in the 1940's to 1950's, by exploring the origin of regional modern architecture from new perspectives. As a part of the discussions of the perspectives, this study will be therefore explained with the regional correlations between the architect Kim Han-seop's works and activity, influential politicians, strong enthusiasm of education, architectural characteristics of the main building of Chosun University, architecture schools and association in Kwangju. Then, it will be finalised that Kim Han-seop and the main building of Chosun University are directly and indirectly correlated and affected each other strongly.