South Korean Architecture

in the Postcolonial Era

Phil-Seong Choi

MArch (History & Theory)

The University of New South Wales

1998

ABSTRACT

The study aims to confine and stimulate discourses on Orientalism and Postcolonialism in South Korean architecture.

While those issues are dynamically examined and carefully justified in such

Commonwealth countries as Australia, Hong Kong, Singapore, they have rather been ignored and eluded in the historically, culturally, or even economically colonised countries in northern Asia including South Korea and Japan. In order to investigate the current situation in South Korea, its architectural developments in recent history in the

20th century are analysed by looking at the Japanese Invasion in the first half of the century followed by the immense westernisation in the postwar period on their architecture.

Modernism in Japanese architecture is briefly studied by referring to the projects that

Kenzo Tange and the Metabolist architects assuredly experimented in the 1960s and 70s with reference to western architectural trends such as ‘megastructure’, ‘plug-in construction’, and so on. Also, Australian critic Robin Boyd’s representation of

Japanese architecture to the west in the 1960s is comprehended as an aspect of cultural colonisation.

Having compromised with both Japanese and western modern paradigms that affected almost every social and cultural aspect since the late 19th century, architectural historians and academics in South Korea recently began to debate on the

Postcolonialism by re-examining the early modernist architects and principles. Two influential Korean architects, Jung-Up Kim and Su-Geun Kim, are selected for case studies and the conflicting paradigms of a major architectural trend between tradition and colonialism is arguably assessed. TABLE OF CONTENTS

Sources of Figures a

I. Introduction 1

II. The Advent of Western Modernism in Japan and Korea

2.1 Early Modern Architecture in Japan (1868-1945) 4

2.2 Implantation of Western Architecture in Korea by Japan (1876-1945) 6

III. Westernisation of Japanese Modernism

3.1 Kenzo Tange (b. 1913) and the Metabolism 11 3.2 Representation of Japanese Architecture by Robin Boyd (1919-1971) 17

IV. Colonial Impacts on South Korean Architecture

4.1 Modernisation of South Korean Architecture in the Postwar Era 24 4.2 South Korean Modernists

4.2.1 Jung-Up Kim (1922-1988) 27 4.2.2 Su-Geun Kim (1931-1986) 30

V. The Emergence of Postcolonial Debates in South Korea 33

VI. Conclusion 36

Reference 40 SOURCES OF FIGURES

SOURCES OF FIGURES

• Figure 1. Trading Affairs Building, South Korea PARK, Kil-Ryong (Apr/1993); ‘Korean Modern Architecture within the Universalism of the 1960s’ from Space; vol. 28; no. 3; The Space Group Co.; Seoul; p.29 • Figure 2. Japanese Red-cross Seoul Office, South Korea PARK, Kil-Ryong (Apr/1993); p.29 • Figure 3. E-Mun-Dang, South Korea PARK, Kil-Ryong (Apr/1993); p.31 • Figure 4. Gunma Music Centre, Japan ROSS, Michael F (1978); Beyond Metabolism: The New Japanese Architectures McGraw-Hill Book Company; New York, p. 19 • Figure 5. Harumi Apartment, Japan ROSS, Michael F (1978); p.19 • Figure 6. Peace Memorial Museum, Japan BOYD, Robin (1962); Kenzo Tanges George Braziller; London/New York; p.52 • Figure 7. Boston Bay Development, project BOYD, Robin (1962); p.56 • Figure 8. Helix City, project BENHAM, Reyner (1976); Megastructure: Urban Futures of the Recent Pasts Thames and Hudson; London, p.56 • Figure 9. City in the Sky, project BENHAM, Reyner (1976); p.56 • Figure 10. Montreal Expo Entertainments, project BENHAM, Reyner (1976); p.91 • Figure 11. Osaka Tower, Japan ROSS, Michael F (1978); p.56 • Figure 12. Capsule Homes Tower, project ROSS, Michael F (1978); p.57 • Figure 13. Youth Castle, Japan BENHAM, Reyner (1976); p.99 • Figure 14. Section of the Boston Bay Development, project BENHAM, Reyner (1976); p.49 • Figure 15. Section of the Lower Manhattan Expressway, project BENHAM, Reyner (1976); p.12 • Figure 16. Section of the Wohnberg structure, project BENHAM, Reyner (1976); p.203 • Figure 17. Le Corbusier’s Model of the Prefabricated cell for Unite d’Habitation ROSS, Michael F( 1978); p.69 • Figure 18. General view of the Nakagin Capsule Building, Japan ROSS, Michael F (1978); p.76 • Figure 19. Construction view of the Nakagin Capsule Building ROSS, Michael F (1978); p.71 • Figure 20. Gropius and Boyd in Australia SERLE, Geoffrey (1995); Robin Boyd - A Life; Melbourne University Press; Melbourne; p. 158 SOURCES OF FIGURES

• Figure 21. Gropius in Japan ISAACS, Reginald (1991); Gropius: An Illustrated Bibliography of the Creator of the Bauhaus; Little Town; Boston; p.276 • Figure 22.1966 Shikenchiku competition winning project BOYD, Robin (1968); New Directions in Japanese Architecture; George Braziller; London/New York; p. 18 • Figure 23. 1967 Shikenchiku competition winning project BOYD, Robin (1968); p.20 • Figure 24. The Saint Mary Hospital, South Korea PARK, Kil-Ryong (Apr/1993); ‘Korean Modem Architecture within the Universalism of the 1960s’ from Space; vol. 28; no. 3; The Space Group Co.; Seoul; p.31 • Figure 25. Dong-Do Building. South Korea PARK, Kil-Ryong (Apr/1993); p.36 • Figure 26. The UNESCO Centre. South Korea KIM, Bong-Yeol (Apr/1993);

‘Implication of Modernism of the 60s on Contemporary Korean Architecture’ from Space; vol. 28; no. 3 ; The Space Group Co.; Seoul; p.24 • Figure 27. Details of the French Embassy, South Korea KIM, Jung-Up (1984); Jung-Up Kim: The Light and Shade of the Architect, Yeol-Hwa-Dang; Seoul; p.42, 46, 52, 53 • Figure 28. Main office of the French Embassy, South Korea Editor (Dec/1992); ‘The French Embassy in South Korea’ from Space', vol. 27; no. 11; The Space Group Co.; Seoul; p.84 • Figure 29. Entrance View of the French Embassy, South Korea Editor (Dec/1992); p.85 • Figure 30. Roof and columns of the French Embassy, South Korea Editor (Dec/1992); p.87 • Figure 31. Main campus of Che-.Tu University, South Korea KIM, Jung-Up (1984); p.66 • Figure 32. Soe Obstetrics, South Korea PARK, Kil-Ryong (Apr/1993); p.33 • Figure 33. 31 Office Building. South Korea PARK, Kil-Ryong (Apr/1993); p.37 • Figure 34. Su-Geun Kim’s own office. South Korea PARK, Kil-Ryong (Apr/1993); p.35 • Figure 35. Walkerhill Hilltop Bar, South Korea PARK, Kil-Ryong (Apr/1993); p.33 • Figure 36. The Peace Centre. South Korea KIM, Bong-Yeol (Apr/1993); p.25 • Figure 37. Bu-Yeo Meseum. South Korea KIM, Bong-Yeol (Apr/1993); p.26

iii I. INTRODUCTION

Subsequent to the diverse discourses on Orientalism and Postcolonialism in socio­ cultural and political studies in the 1970s and 1980s, today’s consideration of cultural aspects in various parts of the world seem to be confined and explained by the two issues.

In terms of understanding the present situations of (post)colonised cities, either physically or culturally, the influences and impacts from the once or now colonising power-source are extracted and discussed by reflecting on their genius loci.

However, in such East Asian countries as China, Japan and South Korea, theories of

Orientalism and Postcolonialism, which seemingly claim to be universally debatable, have not been discussed as actively as in the areas once colonised by the British including India, Hong-Kong, Singapore and Australia where English is the official language.

In South Korea, for instance, whose whole peninsula was colonised by Japan from 1910 to 1945 and was near-governed by the U.S.A. during and after the Korean War (1950-

53), the endeavour to rehabilitate its national identity is stronger than ever in its history.

But the delicate issues within the country are still treated rather marginally and in a naive manner. Some commentators are eager to elicit the impacts of colonisation on their history (KIM, Bong-Yeol, 1992, 1993; SUNG, In-Su, 1997), while others intend to obliterate the persecuting complex by fixing their vision only towards the future and ignoring any colonised memories.

Another barrier to the proper investigation of early Korean Modernism is the dearth of research materials. As a result of the demolition due to the subsequent wars of the 1940s and 50s followed by the national development procedure since the 1960s, historically I. INTRODUCTION

significant buildings and written materials constructed during the Japanese era are hardly retrievable. Due to the extremely limited range of research materials on Korean architecture written in English most articles were photocopied and delivered from South

Korea, which left the illustrations in undesirable condition.

The situation in Japan, however, in terms of exchanging cultural elements with the western world appears different from that in Korea. While the westernisation of Korean culture was delivered unilaterally and repressively by the Japanese for the most part, that of Japan was done rather collaterally and voluntarily. In other words, historic issues on westernisation are more emotively and cynically debated among the Koreans than the Japanese.

Considering the different aspects of cultural exchange in Japan and South Korea, the realisation by Japan of its own culture is understood within the framework of the non-

Japanese debate on Orientalism which argues the Otherness of the East represented by the West (SAID, Edward, 1978). On the other hand, the debates on national and cultural identities among Koreans are compared with Post-colonial deliberations which are based on the self-realisation of the colonial memories.

In order to discuss the procedures and impacts of westernisation in Japan and Korea in this century, architectural developments with reference to the Modernism of the West in both countries in the same period will be examined and analysed.

In the Japanese chapter the influences from the Western world on Japanese Modernism are examined by referring to the education and oeuvre of the Modern master in Japanese architecture, Kenzo Tange, especially his participation in the movement of Metabolism since the Second World War. This is followed by a discussion on what was, in fact, a

2 I. INTRODUCTION

colonising act by the Australian critic, Robin Boyd, who introduced Japanese architecture to the West with his two English texts on Japanese architecture, Kenzo

Tange (1962) and New Directions in Japanese Architecture (1968).

In describing the westernisation of Korean architecture, two layers of westernisation are studied, one indirectly implanted by Japan through the invasion period (1911-1945) and the other imitated directly from America in the postwar period (1950 -).

Notwithstanding the fervent imitative period of Western Modernism in the postwar era, two Korean architects, Jung-Up Kim and Su-Geun Kim, were said to be differentiated from the rest with their applications of the Korean spirit in design. By investigating the works of the two Kims both western influences and the Koreanness are distilled and examined in relation to the current unripe and infantile debates on Postcolonialism in

South Korea.

Though Orientalism and Postcolonialism that might have been discussed in socio­ political and linguistic studies in South Korea are beginning to be elicited by fairly limited number of architectural critics (SUNG, In-Su, 1997), the intrinsic understanding of the issues seems rather inauthentic and unscrutinised enough to be applied into architectural debates.

As most accessible materials on Korean architecture were in Korean, translated texts from Korean into English by myself are marked as. [trans.]

3 II. THE ADVENT OF WESTERN MODERNISM IN JAPAN &

KOREA

2.1 Early Modern Architecture in Japan (1868-1945)

Since the beginning of the historic period, with Far-eastern countries including China,

Japan and Korea have exchanged their cultures with one another. The so-called Han-Ja

District, whose cultures are based on Chinese language, shared their religions, customs, arts, and architecture. The stream of cultures among these countries, in many aspects, flew from the mainland to the sea; from China to Japan by way of the Korean peninsula.

The resilience and adaptability of the Japanese to other cultures are articulated by

Michael Franklin Ross in his book, Beyond Metabolism.

During the fifth and sixth centuries Japan borrowed technical skills, expertise, and philosophy from the Korean Shilla and Han dynasties; during the eighth and ninth centuries it borrowed the alphabet, architecture, art and religion of T’ang dynasty from China; and it borrowed again from the advanced Chinese Sung dynasty in the thirteenth century. In each case, alien cultures were imported, studied, imitated and absorbed and finally given new life, being refined and moulded into Japanese society. 1

After two hundred years of total isolation during the Edo period (1615-1867), Japan again threw itself open to the world in the Meiji period (1868-1911), but this time it was the Occidental civilisation that the Japanese adopted and followed by way of industrialisation. Railway stations, office buildings and factories were commissioned of western architects, and constructed using western materials and methods.

By the end of the 19th century, many younger Japanese architects were influenced by such European masters as Ende and Bockmann from Germany who designed law courts and parliament buildings in Tokyo, Josiah Conder from England who introduced the

English Gothic Revival by teaching in Tokyo, Cappelitti from Italy who designed the

4 II. THE ADVENT OF WESTERN MODERNISM IN JAPAN AND KOREA

Tokyo Military Museum and Offices. Consequently, Japanese architects imitated foreign styles by repetition. Udo Kultermann saw these buildings as ‘tasteless artificialities’ and comments,

At that time people in Japan did not realise that they were also adopting the follies and mistakes of the much admired western world, and suffered in silence...Most of these architects, and official Japan as well, were caught in the vicious circle of representative 19Ih century architecture.12

As a result of the hasty imitation of western styles in the late 19th century, the break-off with Japanese traditions in architecture was accelerated by the influences of the

Jugenstil group architects including Otto Wagner, Joseph Olbrich, Henry van der Velde,

Josep Hoffmann and Peter Behrens, as well as of Frank Lloyd Wright, Le Corbusier,

Walter Gropius and Mies van der Rohe until the war with China in 1930. According to

Kultermann, though Mies van der Rohe and Le Corbusier were most favoured among the Modern masters of the west by Japanese architects between 1901 and 1930, the western paradigms are said to be not regionally adaptable to Japanese milieu.

Japanese architects recognised the fundamental tendencies in western architecture and with a sure instinct made both these masters their teachers. But this architecture of contrasting planes was bound to seem unsuitable for Japan in the long run, even if it had much to give. Owing to the Japanese climate and the need for maximum cross­ ventilation, and because of frequent earthquakes, skeleton frame construction was essential. Moreover, architectural forms originating in Europe and arising out of her ascetic, formalist attitude were hardly appropriate to Japan, so that developments inevitably followed other lines.3

Japanese architecture that had developed in western paradigms since 1868 began to decline from the beginning of the war with China in 1930 to the end of the Second

1 ROSS, Michael Franklin (1978); p.8 2 KULTERMANN, Udo (1967); p.l 1 3 ibid/, p. 12

5 II. THE ADVENT OF WESTERN MODERNISM IN JAPAN AND KOREA

World War in 1945. As most architects were compelled to take routine jobs for military purposes in Manchuria, Korean peninsula and China, any significant building during the war period was hardly traced.

2.2 The Implantation of Western Architecture in Korea by Japan

In order to understand the history of foreign influence on Korean culture, one would refer to the agreement made between Korea and Japan in 1876, called the ‘Kang-Hwa

Treaty’, which is understood as the beginning of the western sense of enlightenment in

Korean history. The background of the treaty between the two countries is detailed in

Korea Old and New: A History as following,

Japan deliberately provoked a confrontation with its neighbour by creating the so-called Unyo Incident in 1875. The Japanese navy vessel Unyo was sent into the waters off Kang-Hwa here it promptly was fired upon by Korean defenders on the southeast tip of the island. Although the Japanese government charged that Korea was guilty of an unprovoked attack upon a ship engaged in a peaceful mission, in fact the Japanese commander had been instructed to provoke some sort of incident that might serve as a pretext. The following year, then, Japan dispatched General Kuroda Kiyotaka as minister plenipotentiary, with a force of three warships and four transports carrying about eight hundred soldiers. Landing on the East Coast of Kang-Hwa Island, General Kuroda demanded that Korea enter into treaty negotiations. Although a majority of Choson’s [the former Korea] high officials maintained there should be no dealings with Japan, Pak Kyu-Su persuaded the king to adopt a conciliatory policy. The result was the Treaty of Kang-Hwa, concluded on February 22, 1876. The treaty of Kang-Hwa was Korea’s first modern treaty. Signed under foreign pressure, it featured provisions typical of an unequal treaty. 4 Japan tended to use this treaty to advance their political aims on the Asian continent.

And when it was learned by western countries, another agreement was forced upon

4 ECKERT, Carter J. (1990); p.201

6 II. THE ADVENT OF WESTERN MODERNISM IN JAPAN AND KOREA

Korea by America which resulted in the ‘Korean-American Treaty of Amity and

Commerce’ on May 22, 1882.

New technologies, various goods, different languages amazed, educated and gave experiences to the people in the peninsula, the so-called enlightenment, which finally was to result in an invasion by one of them, Japan, after three decades.

The Japanese control over Korea of thirty-four years totally ignored the Zeitgeist and the genius loci of the peninsular. Korean language was forbidden and replaced with

Japanese. The official name of each person and village was changed and registered in

Japanese, and uniforms for students and officials followed those in Japan5. Major institutions, roads, and railways were constructed by colonial architects and engineers who were sent from Japan. During the Japanese era in Korea, while Japan was practicing the western technologies in architecture they had learned since the Meiji period, Korean architecture still depended on traditional building methods and materials. Chang-Bok Yim, professor at Sung-Kyun-Kwan University in Seoul, explains the pre-industrial architecture of Korea.

Just as in Europe in the Middle Ages, carpenters planned and constructed buildings in yesterday’s Korea. By and large, these of course were wooden structures. The story changed drastically after 1876, when Korea, known up till then as the Hermit Kingdom, began opening its doors to the rest of the world. Traditional Korean building skills proved all but inadequate in meeting the fast growing demand for modem schools, railroad stations, banks and churches. These structures had to be put together with bricks, concrete and glass, the materials hitherto not found in the Korean carpenter’s warehouses. 6

5 Japanese-style uniforms at Korean schools remained until 1983. 6 YIM, Chang-Bok (1989); p.58

7 II. THE ADVENT OF WESTERN MODERNISM IN JAPAN AND KOREA

Even though every aspect in the fields of architectural practice and education turns into a new phase that Korea had never experienced previously, the study of westernisation in

Korean architecture has been ignored and distorted for decades until quite recently, primarily because the debate about westernisation in Korean history was considered as that of Japanisation. This persecution complex mind set of Koreans dealing with

Japanese influence is found in the article, The Review of Korean Modern architecture’, an English translation of Kil-Ryong Park’s Korean text by Jung-Dong Kim, lecturer at

Kyong-Sang University. Classifying the westernisation of Korean architecture, Park terms the period between 1876 and 1910a ‘golden era’ by comparing it with the

Japanese era;

Taking Kyong-Bok Palace enlargement (1865) as the final point, the Modern western architecture was transferred into Korea...It must be a golden era (1876-1910) what defined Korea’s character in modern architecture. Even in those days, Korea had the capacity to adopt western style architecture independently. However, since 1910 the annexation by the Japanese colonial regime brought about severe intervention in Korea’s architectural heritage. Therefore, what appeared was Japanese style modern architecture in a way to destroy Korean traditions.7

In his comment one would easily find the discrimination in describing the two periods;

one between 1876 and 1910, the other between 1911 and onwards. While the former

period by the west was termed positively as the ‘golden era’, the latter by Japan termed

negatively as the ‘bad old days’. This problematic emphasis in describing the

westernisation in Korean architecture has been an obstacle to delve into objective

history in the country.

8 II. THE ADVENT OF WESTERN MODERNISM IN JAPAN AND KOREA

Fig 1 {left). Trading Affairs Building, Seoul (Unknown, 1929) Fig 2 {centre). Japanese Red-cross Seoul Office (Unknown, 1933) Fig 3 {right) E-Mun-Dang, Seoul (Kil-Ryong Park, unknown)

In this regard, the statement by Kil-Ryong Park, professor at Kuk-Min University in

Korea, in scrutinising early Korean Modernism by comparing it with western trends seems to accomplish a certain level of objectivity.

It had passed almost sixty years since 1876 through the Japanese era until the opening of Kil-Ryong Park’s 78 architecture office in 1932 when Korean architecture practically began to establish the Modernism. During this sixty years Korea ranged over an extensive history of western architecture, including Gothic, Renaissance, Neo- classicism, and Romanticism. Therefore, Korean architecture, in chaos, had to experience various commingled styles simultaneously. 1. Mixed Romanticism of Gothic, Renaissance, and Baroque 2. Japanese Imperialism 3. Functionalist and Rationalist Modernism 4. Korean traditionalism If we agree that Modernism comprises of Modern ideologies and Modem styles, we may have to limit the advent of Korean Modernism only since 1910.9 [trans.]

Among the public buildings in Korea designed by Japanese architects, the Trading

Affairs Building (figl.1929), Japanese Red-cross Seoul Office (fig2.1933), Je-Il Bank

Foreign Department (1935), allude to the Constructivist attitude. While Korean architecture was generally occupied by the Japanese, the emergence of Kil-Ryong Park with his design of Hwa-Shin Department store (1937) and E-Mun-Dang (fig3) is

7 KIM, Jung-Dong(1997);p.l 8 This Park who was an architect since the Japanese era and the Park who writes about him quoted here and above are different persons. 9 PARK, Kil-Ryong (1993); p.29

9 11. THE ADVENT OF WESTERN MODERNISM IN JAPAN AND KOREA

significant, for Park was the only Korean architect who opened his architecture firm to practice during the Japanese invasion period according to the accessible materials.

10 III. WESTERNISATION OF JAPANESE MODERNISM

3.1 Kenzo Tange (b.1913) and Metabolism

Westernisation of Japanese architecture in the post-war period can be typified by the works of two significant figures, Kunio Maekawa and Kenzo Tange, who fervently adopted the idioms of the International Style and searched for mature application mixed with Japanese identities at the same time.

Maekawa, who had learned from such western figures as Frank Lloyd Wright, Antonin

Raymond (fig.4) and Le Corbusier1, influenced many younger Japanese architects with his western-style competition entries for public buildings including the Hinomoto Hall of 1936, the Showa Steel Works of 1937 and the Dairen Town Hall of 1938, none of which won a competition or was ever built. However, Maekawa's projects which were built in the 1950s, such as the Fukushima Educational Centre of 1954 and the Harumi

Apartment of 1958 (fig.5) were more influential, conveying as they did the vestiges of

Le Corbusier's earlier brutalist aesthetics and the austerity of Chandigarh.

Fig 4 {left). Gunma Music Centre, Japan (Antonin Raymond, 1961)

Fig 5 {right). Harumi Apartment, Japan (Kunio Maekawa, 1959)

While Maekawa represented the Japanese architects who were educated by western masters, Kenzo Tange was one of the younger generation who saw both the achievements and the mistakes of the early generation2. The influence of Tange on

Japanese architecture has been significant, from the 1950s to the present, from the Peace

1 Maekawa worked in Le Corbusier's atelier in Paris and Antonin Raymond's office in Tokyo in the 1920s. [ROSS, op. city p.8] 2 Tange worked in Kunio Maekawa’s office from 1938 to 1941.

11 III. WESTERNISATION OF JAPANESE MODERNISM

Memorial Museum (fig6.1949-1956) to the New Tokyo City Hall (1987-1991), from the

International Style to the contemporary Japanese context.

Fig 6 {left). Peace Memorial Museum, Hiroshima (Kenzo Tange, 1949-1956)

Fig 7 {right). Model of Boston Bay Development (project, Kenzo Tange, 1959)

If Maekawa played a significant role in introducing western architecture to Japan,

Tange's role was even more momentous as the pioneer who introduced Japanese

architecture to the West, and as a patron of younger architects who later were to be

world figures, Fumihiko Maki, Arata Isozaki, Kisho Kurokawa, and others. With such

megastructural design in urban context in the late 1950s as the Headquarters of WHO

(World Health Organisation) of 1959, the Boston Bay Development of 1959 (fig7) and the Plan for Tokyo of 1960, Tange encouraged his disciples to manifest a strong movement called Metabolism in 1960.

In the 1960s the Japanese started to vitalise their architecture in terms of social needs and cultural identities with the benefit from the experience and knowledge of the 1950s.

Recovering from the bloodstains of more than a decade of war, the Japanese economy ascended speedily in the 1960s3, and the nation-wide action to improve the urban environment was high on the agenda. The emergence of Tange and the Metabolists with their strong volition for new urban development in the 1960s 'attracted a great deal of

3 Japanese government introduced a long-term economic program called 'Income Double Plan' in I960.

12 III. WESTERNISATION OF JAPANESE MODERNISM

attention not only in architectural circles but amongst those interested in social development'.4

Since the break-up of the CIAM (Congres Internationaux d'Architecture Moderne) in

1956, the progressive reformation in architecture in the 1960s was not a mere regional movement restricted to Japan, but a part of the acrimonious debates and approaches in the history of architecture throughout the world. Charles Jencks enumerates the belligerent trends of styles in the post-modern era.

...from the Japanese Metabolists to the English Archigram group, from the Italian organisists to the New York Five and Chicago Seven, from Jacobists (Jane Jacob’s followers) to vernacularists to regionalists to environmentalists to ecologists to Systems Thinkers and Methodologists, from the Whites to the Greys to the Silvers, from Semiologists to the Deconstructionists, from the Punk/New Wavists to the Zero Degreeists. In a way it all resembles the name of the Japanese group of some distinction- Team Zoo.5

The constitution of the Metabolist group has its origin in 1958 when four architects,

Masao Otaka (b.1923), Kiyonori Kikutake (b. 1928), Fumihiko Maki (b.1928), Kisho

Kurokawa (b. 1934), and an architectural critic, Noboru Kawazoe, congregated through the two-year preparation for the World Design Conference of 1960. Yet, though the

Japanese represented their new notion using a unique biological word, metabolism, which differentiated from western paradigms, the main idea seemed to be based on western megastructural paradigms. The principle of modern architecture in the 1960s, as defined in The Contemporary Japanese Architecture6 published by the Japan Institute of

Architects in 1988, was ‘Higher, faster, stronger, larger’. The emphasis of western technology by the Metabolists is described as:

4 KUROKAWA, Kisho (1977); p.43 5 JENCKS, Charles (1988); p.37

13 III. WESTERNISATION OF JAPANESE MODERNISM

The Metabolists group, which, together with Kenzo Tange, occupies the central position in the architectural world during the 1960s, was not a passive follower of social and historical processes, but attempted rather to stimulate these processes actively by means of technology.. .As a result, engineering technology came to dominate architectural expression. This tendency was in evidence until the mid-1970s.67

Fig 8 (left). Helix City (project, Kisho Kurokawa, 1961) m 11 • ' •' pHirK

Fig 9 (right). City in the Sky (project, Arata Isozaki, 1962)

Metabolism, as the first self-generated movement in the history of Japanese architecture, was accelerated not only because their design themes were megastructures, but also because they suggested solutions for the sloppy urban conditions of their time.

A series of urban-scaled projects designed by Tange’s disciples, both Metabolists and non-Metabolists, such as the Marine City (Kikutake, 1959), the Helix City (fig8.

Kurokawa, 1961), the Golgi Structure (Maki, 1965), the City in the Sky (fig9. Isozaki,

1962), the Kojimachi Project (Otani, 1961), and others were produced in somewhat exaggerated and overstated manners, as found in the Plan for Tokyo (Tange, 1960).

This ‘great ongoing international megastructure conversation’ in world architecture was once termed by Reyner Banham ‘Dinosaurs of the Modern Movement’, and quoted

Ralph Wilkoxson’s summary.

Not only a stmcture of great size, but also a structure which is frequently, 1. Constructed of modular units 2. Capable of great or even unlimited extension

6 Japan Institute of Architects (1988) 7 ibid.-, p.2

14 III. WESTERNISATION OF JAPANESE MODERNISM

3. A structural framework into which smaller structural units (for example, rooms, houses, or smaller buildings of other sorts) can be ‘built-4 or even ‘plugged-in’ or clipped-on’ after having been prefabricated elsewhere 4. A structural framework expected to have a useful life much longer than that of the smaller units which it might support8

Fig 10 (left). Montreal Expo Entertainments Centre (project, Peter Cook, 1963) Fig 11 (centre left). Osaka Expo Tower, Osaka (Kiyonori Kikutake, 1970) Fig 12 (centre right). Capsule Homes Tower (project, Warren Chalk, 1964) Fig 13 (right). Youth Castle, Kibogaoka (Tatsuhiko Nakajima & GAUS, 1972)

The elements of megastructure found in Wilkoxson’s definition were widely studied by the English group Archigram in the 1960s, and learned by Japanese architects and experimented with in the 1970s. Ross’s illustrations9, for example, give even a closer look into the conceptual similarities between the Archigram and the Metabolists. Peter

Cook’s Entertainment Tower for the Montreal World Exposition of 1963 (fig.10) seemed to be the fore-runner of Kikutake’s Osaka Tower of 1970 (fig.ll), and Warren

Chalk’s proposal for the Capsule Homes Tower of 1964 (fig.l2)could have inspired the

Kibogaoka Youth Castle by Tatsuhiko Nakajima & GAUS of 1972 (fig.13).

Furthermore, neither the Metabolists nor Archigram, which had fairly similar notions, were able to be totally independent from the early Modernists, especially from Walter

8 BANHAM, Reyner (1976); pp.6-8 9 ROSS, op. cit.\ pp.55-57

15 III. WESTERNISATION OF JAPANESE MODERNISM

Gropius and Le Corbusier, in terms of their imaginary works which had been suggested twenty or thirty years before the groups were constituted. For example, the A-frame structure, which was applied in Tange’s Boston Bay project or 1959 (fig.14) and Paul

• 'A\ /A_A\ f... _ ** V-st sS%. t....4* -/ • y . - •• f / AA

♦ rl .*,y|1"1* °V" W — A T , * v... llMlI III ill! ■ ■ .....

Fig 14 (left). Section of the Boston Bay Development (project, Kenzo Tange, 1960) Fig 15 (centre). Section of the Lower Manhattan Expressway (project, Paul Rudolph, 1970) Fig 16 (right). Section of the Wohnberg structure (project, Walter Gropius, 1928)

Rudolph’s Lower Manhattan Expressway project of 1970 (fig.15) seem to have their origin in Gropius’ Wohnberg project of 1928 (flg.16). And Le Corbusier’s prophetic conceptual model of 1947 (fig.17), which himself actualised as prefabricated cells in the

Unite d’Habitation, has been reincarnated in many of Japanese buildings, especially by

Kisho Kurokawa (fig.18 and 19), the youngest among the Metabolist members.

Fig 17 (left). Model of the Prefabricated cell for Unite d’Habitation (Le Corbusier, 1947) Fig 18 (centre). General view of the Nakagin Capsule Building, Japan (Kisho Kurokawa, 1972) Fig 19 (right). Construction view of the Nakagin Capsule Building

Considering the enthusiasm for the western megastructure by Tange and the Metabolist architects in the 1960s, Ross termed the circumstance as ‘Japanese spirit with western

16 learning’, rather than the ancient saying of ‘Japanese spirit with Chinese learning’1. In this regard, Noboru Kawazoe’s statement on Japanese architecture with western influences resonates with the re-presentation of the Otherness of Orientalism by the west.

This attitude caused Japanese architecture to use only the tendencies and external forms of the industrial civilisation of the west, without understanding its spiritual background. Consequently it was quite natural that they placed more stress on the engineering side in adopting Occidental custom.2

However, the architectural development that Tange and the Metabolists posed in the

1960s, as an amalgamation of occidental and oriental architecture, was the most-widely recognised exemplar of westernisation among the Far-eastern countries, and this recognition was engendered by Robin Boyd’s re-presentation of Japanese architecture.

3.2 Representation of Japanese Architecture by Robin Boyd

In the 1960s when the universalism of the International Style was fading away in western countries, its masters were either searching for alternatives or striving to transplant their paradigms into other areas where industrialisation and modernisation were prime necessities. The cultural colonisation of the East, especially the Far Eastern region including Japan and South Korea, by America began in the 1950s, and was so intense that by end of the 1960s Americanisation was regarded as the ultimate prosperity.

The active cultural exchange between Japan and America in 1950s, 60s and 70s have often been observed as peaceful and mediatory give-and-takes between the two sides by

1 ROSS, op. cit\ p.l 1 2 ibid.\ p.l 1

17 III. WESTERNISATION OF JAPANESE MODERNISM

critics in cultural studies including architectural historians. Western influences on

Japanese architecture were named sometimes as ‘modernisation’ (Noboru Kawazoe),

‘creative inspiration’ (Udo Kultermann), ‘cultural osmosis’ (Carlo L. Ragghianti),

‘industrialization and technology’ (William Coaldrake), or world architecture was even contrarily termed as ‘Japonization’ (Reyner Banham).

Probably it would not be appropriate, or even too dangerously radical, to term a cultural exchange between two countries as colonisation unless the one is politically ruled by the other, such as in the cases of India, the Philippines, Hong Kong and early Australia.

The westernisation of Japanese architecture in the 1960s, however, was seemingly a cultural colonisation in the sense that it was controlled by America purposely and unilaterally. Its outcome was documented in the writings of an Australian critic, Robin

Boyd (1919-1971), who also was motivated by the American master Walter Gropius

(1883-1969).

In 1954 Walter Gropius, the founder of the Bauhaus, visited Fiji, Australia, the

Philippines and, finally, Japan, his last and main destination ‘under the Rockefeller

Foundation’s program to further cultural exchange between East and West’ (fig.20 and

21).' Philip Goad, Australian architectural critic, observes ‘the interest by western

Fig 20 (left). Gropius’ (second from the left) visit Australia accompanied by Boyd (right end), 1954 Fig 21 (right). Gropius and the officials in Japan, 1954

3 ISAACS Reginald (1991); p.274

18 III. WESTERNISATION OF JAPANESE MODERNISM

architects in post-1945 Japanese architecture was a colonising act’4 , 5and quotes Isaacs about the hidden intentions of Gropius’ trip to Japan which sounds somewhat maladroit but convincing enough:

There were two hidden intentions for the visit of Mr. Gropius. One was to propagandise American culture, and the second was to relegate Japanese culture to history. The first was to demonstrate that the American culture is so superior to the Japanese that Japan cannot catch up easily; and the second was by parading the traditional low level of culture to curb or restrict the rapid development of mechanical industrialisation and preserve the Japanese system of handicraft so American control through colonialism might last longer.

During his ‘culture exchanging’ journey Gropius met two significant figures, Robin

Boyd in Australia and Kenzo Tange in Japan; significant because through this young architectural critic and the Japanese architect, Gropius was ‘to fulfil his lifelong dream in which he considered Japanese worthy of study as it continued to uphold the torch of modernism’.6 With Gropius’ intentional support and encouragement, these two young figures came to introduce Japanese architecture to the world, particularly the western part of it, by publishing some major texts on Japanese architecture in the 1960s- two by

Tange and another two by Boyd. While Tange simply exhibited traditional Japanese architecture by releasing ‘Katsura: Tradition and Creation in Japan’ (1960. Yale

University Press) and Ise: Prototype of Japanese Architecture’ (1965. MIT Press), Boyd recorded current architectural development in Japan with the first ever monograph on an oriental architect written in English, ‘Kenzo Tange’ (1962, George Braziller), and an informative study on a series of Japanese architects, ‘New Directions in Japanese

Architecture’ (1968, George Braziller).

4 GOAD, Philip (Nov/1996); p.l 13 5 ISAACS; op. cit.; p.328

19 III. WESTERNISATION OF JAPANESE MODERNISM

‘Why Boyd?’, Goad questions, ‘why should he be asked to write about an architect

from Japan, a country he had never visited nor in which publicly he had shown any

great interest previously?’ Goad gives rather intricate reasons addressing the

implications for both Japan and Australia as,

The implications however are not and I would contend that they suggest the need to reassess post-war International Modernism and its relationship to Japanese architecture, and importantly for Australian architectural history, possible and perhaps ironic reasons for the anguished late career of its pre-eminent critic and architectural thinker, Robin Boyd.67

Boyd’s role representing Japanese architectural development, therefore, not only was

appraised by his hero Gropius8, but also seemed to give the Japanese architects certain confidence with western megastructural themes throughout 1960s and 70s.

In the monograph of Kenzo Tange of 1962 Boyd dichotomised whole range of Tange’s work as a mediation and struggle between ‘functional and regional’, ‘technology and human existence’, ‘tradition and creativity’, ‘individuality and anonymity’.9 However,

Tange’s principal design rules typified by Boyd cannot be differentiated from those of the American Modernists’, or more correctly, of Gropius. These rules are:

1. Simplicity of plan and form

2. Typification (functional attitude)

3. Strength

4. Ban of ornament

5. Honesty to the materials

6 GOAD; op. cite, p.lll 7 GOAD; op. cit. ; p.l 10 8 Goad says, “Boyd’s description of Tange’s method was a clear reflection of Gropius’ own position. ” [GOAD; p.l 14] 9 BOYD, Robin (1962); pp.15-16

20 III. WESTERNISATION OF JAPANESE MODERNISM

6. Avoiding Furyu (which means ‘elegance’ or ‘femininity’)

Though Boyd describes Tange as a regionalist, shown by his comment that the Peace

Memorial Museum at Hiroshima ‘a long, strong pavilion that looked entirely modern and yet had a curiously evocative Japanese touch...’ 10 and by quoting Tange as saying that ‘a building in Tokyo should be different from one in L.A.’11 to persuade him that it was not just the product of American colonisation.

In his second volume on Japanese architecture of 1968, New Directions in Japanese

Architecture, Boyd’s analysis became more subjective and confident as Tange and his disciples, the Metabolists, were by then already the main force in the adoption of western paradigms. Tange’s Tokyo Plan of 1960, for instance, impacted a great deal on young architects and architectural students and Boyd was to discern a resolute megastructural trend among them in the second half of the decade. Boyd reviewed drawings and models of visionary city schemes by the Metabolists members and the

Shinkenchiku competition (judged by Tange) winners (fig.22 and 23), whose approaches can be closely compared with that of the British Archigram group.

Fig 22 (left). Shikenchiku competition winning project (Akira Shibuya, 1966)

Fig 23 (right). Shikenchiku competition winning project (Kunihiku Hayakawa, 1967)

10 ibid.\ p.9

21 HI. WESTERNISATION OF JAPANESE MODERNISM

However, it was not until the 1980s that the Japanese began to revise their architectural development and to criticise the influences of past western colonisation. Though it is not deniable that Boyd has contributed to the history of world architectural development by introducing Japanese architecture to the west, there is a fundamental contradiction in the assessments of Tange from Boyd in the 1960s and recent Japanese critics like Riichi

Miyake.

Miyake, lecturer at Tokyo University of Art, viewed the principles that Tange and his followers applied in the 1960s and 70s as typically Modernist in the sense of the CIAM, and criticised their approach for being, ‘Not applicable to Japanese urban environment. .

. [because] Japanese cities had not gone through mature modernism in the western sense.’ 12

The situation in which Japanese cities found themselves in the 1950s may be compared

with that in American cities in the 1920s in terms of their civic environmental conditions such as poor water supplies, sewage control, road paving, and so on.

American cities had undergone improvement to these urban infrastructures through

urban planning concepts such as The City Beautiful Movement for a couple of decades

in the early 20th century before they became mature enough to superimpose

megastructures upon them.

Japanese cities in the 1950s, on the contrary, were not prepared to erect such huge

architecture with the civic standard of America, even though many Japanese architects

attempted to do so. Boyd pointed out the problematic situation in Tokyo:

In the cities, and especially in Tokyo, the pressure of the twentieth century on an ancient web of spidery streets and flimsy, inflammable houses has seemed to be at tearing point continuously for about two decades. The proportion of the total urban area

11 BOYD (1962); op. cit. ; p. 12

22 III. WESTERNISATION OF JAPANESE MODERNISM

devoted to streets is usually no more than one third of the Western average, and then the streets often seem hardly wider than a car. 13

We were content that Gropius’ intention to westernise Japanese cities through Tange was a success in the 1960s and 70s, and that Boyd’s status as an architectural critic also was advanced, as for him ‘Japan was the meal ticket to an international reputation with support from the founder of the Modern Movement, Walter Gropius’(Goad, p.l 18), only if we could ignore the current chaotic situation of Japanese cities.

12 MIYAKE, Riichi (Jan/1987); pp.6-7 13 BOYD, Robin (1968); p. 12

23 IV. COLONIAL IMPACTS ON SOUTH KOREAN

ARCHITECTURE

4.1 Modernisation of South Korean Architecture in the Postwar Era

While the Japanese nightmare vanquished the sprit of the people in Korea, the following three-year war between the former U.S.S.R. and the U.S.A. on the peninsular thoroughly terminated the physical structures of cityscapes, country towns, roads and railways. Since the end of the war in 1953, South Korea has been totally exposed to another culture, this time, to western culture, long believed to be dominant and supreme by the Koreans from the 1950s through 1970s.

While the hereditary military governments in South Korea during this period were playing a marionette-like, self-deprecating role in their relationship with America, the colonisation of Korean culture accelerated and became wide spread. Their beloved pets, for instance, would be called after such typical English names as John, Kerry, Mary,

Happy, and so on1; western songs were merely translated with no re-arrangement by

Korean composers, and Italian, French, British, and American stars were imitated by singers 2; western-style furniture became popular at homes in major cities; cinemas projected western movies with Korean captions; poets and novelists spoke of western trends like Romanticism, Classicism, Surrealism, etc; various types of factories launched by producing the bare-necessities that had hardly been consumed before like tooth-pastes, soaps, breads, sneakers, suits and dresses, bicycles, radios, and so forth.

Among many of now well-known Korean enterprises, Hyun-Dae, Kia, Sam-Sung,

Ssang-Yong, LG (Lucky-Goldstar), Dae-Woo were launched right after the war, and progressed rapidly under the protection of the military governments.

1 Among the names for a dog, ‘Do-Ku’ was the most popular one, which simply is the Japanese pronunciation of ‘dog’.

24 IV. COLONISING IMPACTS ON SOUTH KOREAN ARCHITECTURE

Fig 24 {left). The Saint Mary Hospital, Seoul (Jung-Su Kim, 1958-63) Fig 25 (centre). Dong-Do Building, Seoul (Hak-Jae Park, 1964) Fig 26 (right). The UNESCO Centre, Seoul (Kee-Hyong Bae, 1967)

The Modern movement in Korean architecture with reference to westernisation began to

be characterised since the 1960s when the transformation in world architecture

occurred. Following the break-up of the C.I.A.M. of 1956, the Modern movement saw

its finale with the deaths of the masters including Frank Lloyd Wright (d. 1959), Le

Corbusier (d. 1965), and Mies van der Rohe (d.1969). New paradigms were declared by the next generations of Team X (1956-), Metabolism (1959-), Archigram (I960-).

Due to limited building materials, rudimentary construction methods and restricted finishing skills after the war, Korean architecture was characterised more by pervasive

spaces of tasteless concrete masses than by conceptual and philosophical expressions.

Korean architects of the 1960s still had reason to imitate the International Style of the

1950s, as it pursued such patterns as industrialisation and standardisation which were essential goals for the impoverished environment. The so-called ‘curtain-wall’ was

experimented with in the Saint Mary Hospital (fig24.1958-63) and the YMCA Seoul

Office (1960) by Jung-Su Kim, and the International Style was revived in such

buildings as the Central Meteorological Centre (1959-60, In-Guk Jung), Dong-Do

2 Those singers with the acoustic guitar were called ‘the Blue-Jean Division’ until the 1970s but do not sing the same style any more.

25 IV. COLONISING IMPACTS ON SOUTH KOREAN ARCHITECTURE

Building (fig25.1964, Hak-Jae Park), the UNESCO Centre (fig26.1967, Kee-Hyong

Bae), the Koreana Hotel (1968, Hee-Chun Park), and so on.

Acceleration of Western influence on Korean architectural development both in practice and education began to be more clearly visualised when some Korean architects returned from their study in America, Japan and Europe. Yim describes Western

influence on Korean architectural education:

Before World War II, Japanese influence on education for obvious reasons was strong. The main source of influence after the war shifted to Europe and the U.S. After the Korean War (1950-53) many architectural students began doing their studies in the U.S. and western Europe. On return home, many of these students occupied increasingly important positions in universities and the private sector. Indeed they have exerted a considerable influence on architectural thinking in our country. Even so, improvements in the content and system of our architectural education have been notably few.3 Among these returned Korean figures, Jung-Up Kim and Soo-Geun Kim are generally believed as the most prominent in constructing the Korean Modernism since the 1960s.

The importance of these two architects is commented by the critic, Bong-Yeol Kim in relation to the emergence of genuine Modernism in Korean architecture.

Korean architecture of the 1960s should be defined as Modem not in terms of mere adaptation of the International style, or the emphasis of nationalism, but in terms of the emergence of personal expressions contributed by Jung-Up Kim and Su-Geun Kim.4 [trans.] Bong-Yeol Kim describes that Korean architecture in the 1950s was still in the realm of

industry and technology, not in the form of culture and art, and in that sense Jung-Up

Kim and Su-Geun Kim were the first Modernists in terms of their realisation of western

modernity and Korean identity equally expressed in design.

3 YIM; op. cit. ; p. 60 4 KIM, Bong-Yeol (1992); p. 81

26 IV. COLONISING IMPACTS ON SOUTH KOREAN ARCHITECTURE

4.2 Korean Modernists

4.2.1 Jung-Up Kim (1922-1988)

Jung-Up Kim, a mentor of Corbusian design paradigms in South Korea, worked in Le

Corbusier’s office in Paris for three and a half years until he returned to Korea in

1959. On returning to South Korea, Kim won the first prize in the competition for the Fig 27. Details of the French Embassy, Seoul (Jung-Up Kim, 1961) French Embassy in Seoul in 1961, his first and seemingly most admired project in his life until 1988. Bong-Yeol Kim, professor at

Ulsan University, reports that Jung-Up Kim was the first figure who proposed the expression of Koreaness in modern architecture, and that the study of originality in

Korean Modernism should refer to the French Embassy (fig.27).

The spiritual expression imposed in the embassy stands on a different level from the stylistic imitation or remodification of traditional motifs which engendered polemic debates on the 1960s on the devotion of traditional esprit occurred... The esprit and essence of Korean tradition are articulated in the relationships between the site and the buildings, and among the buildings of the embassy. Considering the situation in Korean architecture of the 1960s that the adaptation of western Modernism was the only answer, this project engendered the possibility of personal expression and rehabilitated the intrinsic nature of Korean tradition.5 [trans.] For designing the embassy Jung-Up Kim was granted the Annual Cultural Award from the city of Seoul in 1962, and was conferred the title of Chevalier from the French government in 1965.

27 IV. COLONISING IMPACTS ON SOUTH KOREAN ARCHITECTURE

In commenting of Kim’s award of ‘The Best Architecture in Last Twenty-five Years’ by the Space Group, one of the most influential architecture magazines in South Korea,

Chang-Bok Yim asserts that Jung-Up Kim’s architectural paradigms in the embassy project should not be assessed as an inheritance from Le Corbusier, but as a proposition for new paradigms which diverge from those of Le Corbusier.

In conveying the design principles of Le Corbusier, one often refers to the Domino theory, Free-movement, the Five elements, and so on. However, as far as Jung-Up

Kim’s embassy is concerned, his design principles in this particular project should not be seen as falling into the orthodox Corbusian idioms.

Firstly, while Le Corbusier’s Domino theory, which was applied to standard housings, is intended for vertical and horizontal expansions, the roofs in the embassy are designed separately and each building is positioned unattached (fig.28). For the second distinction, Le Corbusier achieved a new level of movement between inside and out and between floors in the Villas Savoy and Roche by adding a ramp. On the other hand, Jung-Up Kim did not apply a ramp, instead, he pursued a stereoscopic experience by positioning the main office on the hill away from the entrance (fig.29). The final and most significant distinction between the two is in the design of the roof. While Le Corbusier made a full use of the flat roof as terrace for an active space, Jung- up Kim’s roof design in the embassy took the motif from that of the traditional Roo, a typical outdoor observatory and banquet space (fig.30).6 [trans.]

0®"' a, Ovi&ng

--v ,

Fig 28 (left). View of the main office, French Embassy, Seoul (Jung-Up Kim, 1961) Fig 29 {centre). View from the entrance Fig 30 {right). Roof and columns

Jung-Up Kim once recapitulated the meaning of the roof in his design as:

5 KIM; op. cit.; p.81 6 YIM, Chang-Bok (1992); p.83

28 IV. COLONISING IMPACTS ON SOUTH KOREAN ARCHITECTURE

The command of the roof in architecture is immense. Soft or wretched, a new nature, architecture, which is constituted between heaven and earth, continually in contact with the sky. How flexible the roofs were when they were the skyline in the ancient Orient! It is now that we should recover the humanity of the village where we could sit close and talk together. The effect whereby the decorous and orderly roof enhances the house into an art should be a modern application of the stupa and the pavilion that has permeated our long tradition. As our sky is so beautiful, the roof is to be created as a song of praise to it. And let it be reborn as a resistance to the savage modern house.7 [trans.]

Departed from the successful amalgamation of Corbusian paradigms and Korean identities found in the French Embassy in 1961, many of his major works in South

Korea seem to have followed western design methodologies, including the main campus of Che-Ju University (fig31.1959-1966) and the Soe Obstetrics Hospital (fig32.1965) and the 3.1 Building (fig33.1973).

Fig 31 (left). Main campus of Che-Ju University, Che-Ju Island (Jung-Up Kim, 1959-66) Fig 32 (centre). Soe Obstetrics, Seoul (Jung-Up Kim, 1965) Fig 33 (right). 31 Office Building, Seoul (Jung-Up Kim, 1973)

However, his reinstatement of Korean identity was achieved in the last design of his life, the Olympic Memorial Tower (1988), with roofs and eaves as Jung-Su Won describes:

7 KIM, Jung-Up (1984); p.244

29 IV. COLONISING IMPACTS ON SOUTH KOREAN ARCHITECTURE

Throughout his brilliant career, this man was fascinated by Oriental wooden post-lintel constructions, the curving eaves of tile roofs and the horizontal curves of roofs. Clearly he bore in mind the enchanting images of traditional beauty designing the tower for the Games.8 [trans.]

4.2.2 Su-Geun Kim (1931-1986)

Su-Geun Kim acquired most of his academic background in Japan during the period between

1951 and 1962 including his Doctoral course at

Tokyo University where Tange was teaching at that time. Consequently, his design in many aspects resembles western architecture filtered by Japanese modes.

Su-Geun Kim’s roles in Korean architecture have varied from an active designer and a cultural contributor to an educator. His Fig 34. Su-Geun Kim’s own office Space, Seoul (Su-Geun Kim, 1970) academically strong background made it ------possible to launch the first and only total-art magazine in South Korea, called Space, in

1966 when architecture was conceived as an industrial and technological event. Also, his acknowledgment of architecture of as an art forced the Korean Educational Ministry to found, again, the first and only architecture school within the Faculty of Design where architecture students could participate in a design-based environment, rather than being engineering-based as most other architecture schools in South Korea are.

8 WON, Jung-Su (1989); p.6

30 IV. COLONISING IMPACTS ON SOUTH KOREAN ARCHITECTURE

Su-Geun Kim’s indebtedness to western architecture was via Frank Lloyd Wright and

Antonin Raymond who passed down their paradigms to Yoshimura Junzo under whom

Kim was supervised at Tokyo University. Due to this complex influence on him by

Japanised western Modernism, Su-Geun Kim agonised throughout his life as an architect with triple-layered Modernism- west, Japan and Korea, as he raised questions himself:

What is my background? Even though both Japan and Korea are under the influence of Chinese culture, while Japanese culture is double-structured with western, Korean culture has another layer of colonialism on it. What is left of our originality after excluding Japanese colonial culture? What is my characteristic in this peninsula? Human harmony with nature, costumes, dishes, lives in Han-Ok [traditional houses for the novel] and Cho-Ga [humble houses for the poor], the affordable beauty, human’s five senses and the beauty of their consensus, genius loci, what is regional character?... 9 [trans.] Kim’s constant attitude of asking such questions in defining himself, his architecture and the culture of his country have, more or less, characterised his uniqueness, as Kil-

Ryong Park states:

That Su-Geun Kim’s influence on Korean Modernism is significant is because of two unique values that differentiate him from the others. Firstly, he uncovered the value of individuality, which enhanced architecture from technological service to cultural service publicly. His second value is the unceasing consideration of space in design. For the poverty of space in Korean Modernism, as a sacrifice of economical rationalism, has been ubiquitously indicated. 10 [trans.]

Amongst Su-Geun Kim’s design works, extensive application of western Brutalism, or

Japanese Metabolism in other words, is found in such buildings as the Walkerhill

Hilltop Bar (fig35.1961), the Peace Centre (fig36.1964), Bu-Yeo Museum (fig37.1967) and others, whereas the consideration of space, the ultimate goal in his life, is embodied

9 CHO, Young-Mu (Jul/1990); p.l 14

31 IV. COLONISING IMPACTS ON SOUTH KOREAN ARCHITECTURE •gm

Fig 35 (left). Walkerhill Hilltop Bar, Seoul (Su-Geun Kim, 1961) Fig 36 (centre). The Peace Centre, Seoul (Su-Geun Kim, 1964) Fig 37 (right). Bu-Yeo Meseum, Bu-Yeo (Su-Geun Kim, 1967)

in his own office building called Space (flg34.1977). Human scale, traditional interior

spaces and organic layout of rooms and levels are simultaneously achieved by characterising each space for its own use. Jung-Soo Won praises the building,

Kim’s Space office building is a striking manifestation of his basic concept. Though four-storied, the building measures but 130 square meters in building space and 360 square meters in floor space. The interior space is full of magic. It is rhythmical in the sense of contraction and of expansion alternated with a rhythm that is his own and nobody else’s. The exterior surface, done with greyish black bricks, beautifully reflects the sunshine. To view this building is an enhancing experience. All its features would seem to enhance each other harmoniously. "

Another major contribution that Su-Geun Kim made in Korean architecture was designing a series of sports complexes including the Pusan Multipurpose Sports Centre, the Olympic Main Stadium (1988) and the Olympic Gymnastics Hall (1988) which received the prestigious Quartenario Gold Medal awarded for technology in architecture

in Sydney in the same year.

It is a definite shame that Koreans lost their most influential, and still young, architects,

Su-Geun Kim in 1986 and Jung-Up Kim in 1988, right before the Seoul Olympic

Games to which they had enormously contributed and from which they would have

gained much energy.

10 PARK, Kil-Ryong (Apr/1993); p.35 11 WON; op. cit. ; p.4

32 V. THE EMERGENCE OF POSTCOLONIAL DEBATES IN SOUTH

KOREA

Seemingly affected by current Postcolonial debates that widely discussed in other parts of the world, many Korean architects and critics, now, seem to bring back and reassess their understanding about such issues of identity, nationalism, foreign influences, heritages, and, after all, proper application in their works comprising all those issues.

Such attempts for Korean architects to define the position on the extended line of global architectural development seem to allow them the chance to compare the pursuits of somewhat nationalistic applications during the harsh preparation of the Olympics in the

1980s and the current consideration of the Postcolonialism.

With the various kinds of experiments in design by Korean architects in the 1960s and

70s, the technical and aesthetic skills they had acquired encouraged them to debate their originality and future direction. Yet, even though a number of subjective assertions in defining Modernism in Korean architecture exist amongst architects and critics, an authoritative theory that comprises the nationwide debates seems not yet to have been firmly structured.

At the beginning of the 1980s Korean historians, artists and architects could earnestly draw the long-ignored public attention to the Koreaness of their own domains. T-shirts were produced with cultural symbols other than English characters on them, traditional orchestras were constituted and sponsored by provincial governments, ‘Korean painting’ was positioned comparatively with ‘Chinese painting’ for the first time in

5,000 years of its history, comic plays were dramatised from fairytales, the uniqueness of traditional houses, temples, and palaces were reinterpreted, studied, and materialised

33 V. THE EMERGENCE OF POSTCOLONIAL DEBATES IN SOUTH KOREA

by professionals and students, and numerous indications towards the genius loci have been widely experimented with and positively accepted during the decade.

However, the renaissance in recent Korea was not seemingly unrelated to the designation made in Baden-Baden in 1981 of Seoul as the host to the 1988 Summer

Olympic Games. Not only architects, but also every citizen was stimulated by the opportunity to contribute something to the world for the first time in their history particularly with their own materials and aptitudes. Every sector of the government, social groups and cultural organisations was ready to display their uniqueness to the world. The significance of hosting the Olympics was recognised most seriously by

Korean architects and critics; they not only had to erect sports complexes, accommodation, leisure facilities, and so on, all to international standard, but they also had to exhibit their cultural heritage and potential. In order to go through this global ceremony successfully, debates on defining their identity were inevitable and outlining the Modernism in Korean architecture, after all those complex influences from China,

Japan and the west, was pressingly required.

The roles that architects in Korea have adopted in the Modern period were articulated by Jung-Soo Won, professor at Inha University in Korea.

The task that confronted Korean architects after the Korean War was formidable. The housing shortage was such that in the interest of quick reconstruction, long-term urban planning was all but ignored. The quality of those that got built was, to say the least, often shoddy. Only with the designation of Seoul as the site for the 1988 Summer Olympic Games in 1981 were Korean architects for once given an opportunity of carrying out major construction projects with careful consideration for the future. 1

1 WON; op. cit. ; p.7

34 V. THE EMERGENCE OF POSTCOLONIAL DEBATES IN SOUTH KOREA

On the contrary, Kil-Ryong Park perceived the Olympics not as just an opportunity to reassess national identity, but as a further step towards westernisation.

Because of marginal market opening against foreign countries in the 80’s, more and more foreign designs were introduced to Korea. In case of Seoul, the capital city, the 1988 Olympics gave a decisive motivation to renew the city’s figure. It became an opportunity to renovate polluted Han river and the city’s scene. These efforts played a crucial role to represent today’s Seoul in fact many large-scale projects were initiated and encouraged during the period. The Olympics complex for the ’86 Asian and ’88 Olympic Games provided formative experiment with new architectural techniques and, additionally, apartment town for the athletes displayed new prototype for apartment architecture. In spite of the architectural promotion, the Olympics didn’t meet the proposed demand, it was a crucial opportunity to internationalise the architecture in Seoul and some large cities one step further.2

Though there are already activated discussions on various issues, including culture, tradition, identity, nationalism, globalisation, and so forth, through the Seoul Olympics, the development of South Korean architecture in the 1990s seems not as alive and active as in the 1980s. Together with the loss of the prominent Modern masters in national architecture, Jung-Up Kim and Su-Geun Kim, in the 1980s, recent architectural trends in South Korea seem rather confused, fragmented, and distracted coping with the global debates on the Postcolonialism.

As much as in economy and politics, the protectionism in South Korean architecture has been greatly challenged by the western power. For truly protecting their national culture, tradition, and identity under the transitional circumstances, the South Koreans are required proper understanding of globalisation in this Postcolonial era.

2 PARK, Kil-Ryong (1997); p.3

35 VI. CONCLUSION

Though the emergence of western architecture in Japan and Korea began almost

simultaneously in the second half of the 19th century, western attitudes and outcomes

were unassimilated. While Japan opened its gate to the West voluntarily and has

accepted western paradigms spontaneously since the Meiji revolution in 1868, Korea,

which has had numerous encroachments by powers from both inland and the sea in its

history, yielded to foreign powers which coerced it to open its gate from the Kang-Hwa

Treaty in 1876. The different attitudes of the two countries to westernisation have not

only produced different outcomes in architecture, but have also resulted in the ultimate

relationship between Japan as the modernised powerful invader and Korea as the

suppressed unenlightened sufferer until the end of the Second World War.

Westernisation of Japanese architecture with reference to western Modernism lasted for

almost a century until the 1940s. Foreign architects and scholars taught the Japanese

and practiced in Japan with such western idioms as concrete, steel, urbanism,

megastructure, and so forth. Among western architects influential in Japan were the

Jugenstil group, Frank Lloyd Wright, Josiah Conder, Le Corbusier, and Walter Gropius.

In the Korean peninsular, on the other hand, motifs of early western Modernism were

implanted after their incorporation in Japanese versions. Amongst the buildings

constructed in the Japanese era, few have survived the excessive and retaliating acts of

demolition during the postwar period by the South Korean government.

At the turn of the second half of the 20th century Japanese architecture became a force

on the world scene with its new solutions for urban reconstruction after the war, and

substantial efforts were made in a positive and courageous manner. Kunio Maekawa

and his pupil Kenzo Tange were among the significant figures who typified Japanese

36 VI. CONCLUSION

architecture in the postwar period. In doing so, however, Japanese architects still

referred to such western masters as Walter Gropius, Mies van der Rohe, Le Corbusier,

and Frank Lloyd Wright. Early Modernist concepts such as the ‘plug-in structure’ by Le

Corbusier, the ‘A-shaped structure4 by Walter Gropius, the ‘megastructure’ by the

English Archigram, have been widely experimented with and practiced by Kenzo Tange

and the Metabolist architects including Arata Isozaki, Fumihiko Maki, Kisho

Kurokawa, and others in the 1960s and 70s.

While these Japanese architects were engaged in their prospective, promising, and

futuristic architectural contributions, an Australian critic, Robin Boyd brought Japanese

architecture to the attention of the west by publishing Kenzo Tange (1962), the first ever

publication on an oriental architect, and New Directions in Japanese Architecture

(1968). While quite controversial in Robin Boyd’s view, architectural developments in

Japan in the 1960s and 70s are perceived as merely an extension of western Modernism

by Reyner Banham (1976), Michael Franklin Ross (1978), Riichi Miyake (1987), and

others. Japanisation of western ideas, according to the Australian critic, Phillip Goad,

was even described as a ‘colonising act’ of the West by means of Boyd’s representation

of Japanese architecture and Walter Gropius’ aim to westernise Japanese architecture by

matchmaking Kenzo Tange and Robin Boyd.

While Japanese architects reached a mature standard of Western Modernism in the

postwar period and experimented with a high-technology constructions in the 1960s and

70s, the westernisation of South Korean architecture in the same period was still on the

level of awkward imitation of design motifs from western architecture without

comprehending the philosophical and theoretical underpinning. After the nasty and

hasty period of physical and spiritual reconstruction in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s,

37 VI. CONCLUSION

Modernism in South Korea began to emerge finally in the 1980s when the genius loci and Zeitgeist were stimulated and revived on the designation of Seoul for the Olympic

Games for 1988.

Amongst many older and younger generation architects in South Korea, two prominent figures who had been educated overseas, Jung-Up Kim and Su-Geun Kim, have been the most praised and influential since the 1960s. In some of their design works Korean traditional spaces and concepts have been applied in a unique manner, a trend which now seems to be disconnected and undeliverable because of the early deaths of the both capable pioneers in the 1980s.

The current situation in South Korean architecture in the late 1990s is somewhat lacking direction as a result of a half-fledged understanding of ‘globalisation’ in political and cultural studies coupled with a sudden decrease in economic growth in the second half of the 1990s. Considering the dynamic debates on Orientalism and Postcolonialism in most Commonwealth countries, substantial issues of identity and value in South Korea, on which it is believed that future directional discussion in social studies could be based, are relatively vague and indefinite.

As South Korean architecture is still struggling between globalism and nationalistic protectionism, it is strongly believed that the discussion on current status and future direction of South Korean architecture should begin with total understanding of

Orientalism and Postcolonialism that have been seriously debated in most

(post)colonised countries.

Understanding that architectural globalisation has made such bad impacts as no identity, no humanity and no character, better comprehension of cultural inheritance including

38 VI. CONCLUSION

colonised memories should be attempted, which I have learned so far through this study, and which my future effort will be constructed from.

39 REFERENCES

BOOKS

□ BENHAM, Reyner (1976); Megastructure: Urban Futures of the Recent Past;

Thames and Hudson; London

□ BOYD, Robin (1968); New Directions in Japanese Architecture', Studio Vista;

London/New York

□ BOYD, Robin (1962); Kenzo Tange; George Braziller; London/New York

□ ECKERT, Carter J., K. Lee, Y. Lew, M. Robinson, E. Wagner (1990); KOREA: Old

and New A History, Harvard University Press/IlChunKak Publishers; Cambridge,

Mass./London

□ GROPIUS, Walter (1968); Apollo in the Democracy, McGraw-Hill Book

Company; New York/Toronto/London/Sydney

□ HAMMAN, Conrad (1993); Cities of Hope; Oxford University Press; Melbourne

□ ISAACS, Regionad (1991); Gropius: An Illustrated Bibliography of the Creator of

the Bauhaus; Boston; Little, Town

□ KIM, Jung-Up (1984); Jung-Up Kim: The Light and Shade of the Architect; Yeol-

Hwa-Dang; Seoul

□ KULTERMANN, Udo (1967); New Architecture in Japan; Thames and Hudson;

London

□ KUROKAWA, Kisho (1977); Metabolism in Architecture; Westview Press;

Colorado

□ ROSS, Michael F (1978); Beyond Metabolism: The New Japanese Architecture;

McGraw-Hill Book Company; New York

□ SAID, Edward W (1978); Orientalism; Penguin Book; New York

40 REFERENCES

□ SERLE, Geoffrey (1995); Robin Boyd A Life; Melbourne University Press;

Melbourne

ARTICLES

□ AHN, Byung-Ui (1989); ‘Rememberances: Jung-Up Kim’ from Koreana (A

Quarterly on Korean Culture); vol.3; no.3; International Cultural Society of Korea;

Seoul; p. 18-21

□ BOYD, Robin (Jun. 1966); 'Kenzo Tange-An Architect of the World' from AIA

Journal; vol. 45; A.I.A.; New York; p.82-89

□ BOYD, Robin (Apr. 1966); 'Olympic Buildings in Tokyo' from Architectural

Review, vol. 139; Architectural Press; London; p.263-270

□ CHANG, S. (editor, 1989); ‘I Remember Soo-Geun Kim’ from Koreana (A

Quarterly on Korean Culture)\ vol.3; no.3; International Cultural Society of Korea;

Seoul; p.22-26

□ CHANG, S. (editor, 1989); ‘Twilight over Architecture: Interview with Prof. Junzo

Yoshimura’ from Koreana (A Quarterly on Korean Culture)', vol.3; no.3;

International Cultural Society of Korea; Seoul; p.31-34

□ CHO, Young-Moo (Jul/1990); ‘Projects & Ideas of Su-Geun Kim’ from Space', vol.

25; no. 7; The Space Group Co.; Seoul; p.l 14-134

□ CHOI, Sung-Ja (1993); ‘Seoul Arts Center: Asia’s Biggest Arts Complex Looks

Larger Crowds, More Lunds’ from Koreana, vol.7; no.l; The Korean Loudation;

Seoul; p.79-81

□ COALDRAKE, William H. (Sep/1988); ‘Myths and Realities of Japanese Building’

from AIA Journal', vol.77, no.9; Architectural Press; London; p.l 13-117

41 REFERENCES

□ COALDRAKE, William H. (Sep/1994); ‘Western Technology Transfer and the

Japanese Architectural Heritage in the Late Nineteenth Century’ from AM

Fabrications', vol.5; The Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New

Zealand Architectural Press; Kensington; p.21-57

□ Editor (Nov/1992); The French Embassy in South Korea’ from Space', vol. 27; no.

11; The Space Group Co.; Seoul; p.84-91

□ Editor (Sep. 1966); 'AIA Gold Medalist Kenzo Tange' from AM Journal', vol. 46,

no. 3; A.I.A.; New York

□ Editor (Jun. 1966); 'Tange in Skopje' from AM Journal, vol. 45, no.6; Architectural

Press; London; p. 128

□ Editor (Jan. 1963); 'Japanese Club' from Architectural Forum, vol.l 18, no.l; Urban

America; Washington D.C.; p. 131

□ Editor (Feb. 1960); 'Japan Looks West' from Architectural Review, vol. 127;

Architectural Press; London; p.80

□ Editor (Mar. 1951); ‘Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum' from Architectural

Review, vol.l 11; Architectural Press; London; p.204

□ GOAD, Philip (Nov. 1996); ‘Robin Boyd and the Post-war Japanization of Western

Ideas’ from Architectural Theory Review, vol. 1; no.2; Department of Architecture,

University of Sydney; 110-120

□ HAN, Jae-Soo ( /1987); ‘An Introduction to the Koreanesque Nature and Essence’

from Space', vol. ; no. ; The Space Group Co.; Seoul; p.42-50

□ HOLLA, Alaka (Autumn/1997); ‘Post-colonial Residue’ from Political Discourse -

Theories of Colonialism and Postcolonialism ', Brown University;

http://dynaweb.stg.brown.edu/projects/hypertext/landow/post/poldiscourse/holla4.ht

ml

42 REFERENCES

□ HWANG, Kee-Won (1989); ‘Seoul Yesterday & Today’ from Koreana (A

Quarterly on Korean Culture); vol.3; no.3; International Cultural Society of Korea;

Seoul; p.9-14

□ Japan Institute of Architects (1988); The Contemporary Japanese Architecture',

The Japan Foundation; Tokyo

□ JENCKS, Charles (1988); ‘Late-Modernism vs Post-Modernism’ from Vision of the

Modern (UIA Journal of Architectural Theory and Criticism); vol. 1; no. 1; Rizzoli

International Publications; New York

□ KIM, Bong-Yeol (Dec/1992); The Meaning of the French Embassy in Korean

Architecture’ from Space; vol. 27; no. 11; The Space Group Co.; Seoul; p.81

□ KIM, Bong-Yeol (Apr/1993); ‘Implication of Modernism of the 60s on

Contemporary Korean Architecture’ from Space; vol. 28; no. 3 ; The Space Group

Co.; Seoul; p.23-27

□ KIM, Byung-Yun (1989); ‘Best Ten Korean Architecture for Tomorrow’ from

Koreana (A Quarterly on Korean Culture); vol.3; no.3; International Cultural

Society of Korea; Seoul; p.48-57

□ KIM, Cheong-Dong ( ? ); ‘Modern Architecture’ from Brief Review of Korea

Modern Architecture; http://nongae.gsnu.ac.kr/~mirkoh/cob. 1 .html; Architectural

Design Lab.; Gyeong-Sang National University; Jinju, Korea

□ KIM, In-Chul (1989); ‘Heritage in Architecture’ from Koreana (A Quarterly on

Korean Culture); vol.3; no.3; International Cultural Society of Korea; Seoul; p. 15-

17

□ KIM, Jung-Dong (1997); ‘Modern Architecture’ from Brief Review of Korea

Modern Architecture; http://nongae.gsnu.ac.kr/~mirkoh/cob. 1 .html; Architectural

Design Lab.; Gyeong-Sang National University; Jinju, Korea

43 REFERENCES

□ KIM, Kwang-Hyun (Nov/1992); ‘The French Embassy’ from Space; vol. 27; no.

11; The Space Group Co.; Seoul; p.80

□ KIM, Kyong-Soo (1989); ‘Top Five Architects in South Korea Today’ from

Koreana (A Quarterly on Korean Culture); vol.3; no.3; International Cultural

Society of Korea; Seoul; p.43-47

□ KIM, Sung-Woo ( /1987); The Meaning of House and People: Koreaness from an

Oriental Viewpoint’ from Space; vol. ; no. ; The Space Group Co.; Seoul; p.51-55

□ LEE, Sang-Hae ( /1987); ‘Problem in Contemporary Korean Architecture: The

Meaning of Post-westernism and Post-functionalism’ from Space; vol. ; no. ; The

Space Group Co.; Seoul; p.56-62

□ MIYAKE, Riichi (Jan. 1987); ‘Pursuit for Internal Microcosmos’ from The Japan

Architect; J.A.; Tokyo; p.6-9

□ PADDOCK, James A. (1989); ‘Thoughts of a Foreign Visitor’ from Koreana (A

Quarterly on Korean Culture); vol.3; no.3; International Cultural Society of Korea;

Seoul; p.35-36

□ PARK, Kil-Ryong (1997); ‘Current Architecture’ from Brief Review of Korea

Modern Architecture, http://nongae.gsnu.ac.kr/~mirkoh/cob. 1 .html; Architectural

Design Lab.; Gyeong-Sang National University; Jinju, Korea

□ PARK, Kil-Ryong (Apr/1993); ‘Korean Modern Architecture within the

Universalism of the 1960s’ from Space; vol. 28; no. 3; The Space Group Co.;

Seoul; p.28-39

□ PARK, Kil-Ryong (Nov/1992); ‘Tradition, Space and Rhetoric in the French

Embassy’ from Space; vol. 27; no. 11; The Space Group Co.; Seoul; p.82

44 REFERENCES

□ SHIINA, Masao (1989); ‘Korea’s Exportable Architecture’ from Koreana (A

Quarterly on Korean Culture); vol.3; no.3; International Cultural Society of Korea;

Seoul; p.37-42

□ SO, Heung-Ryul ( /1987); ‘Philosophical Speculation in Search of the Koreaness’

from Space; vol. ; no. ; The Space Group Co.; Seoul; p.36-41

□ SPREIREGEN, Paul D. (Mar/1966); Review of Tse: Prototype of Japanese

Architecture' from A/A Journal; vol.45, no.3; Architectural Press; London; p.96-98

□ STEWART, David B. (Apr/1989); ‘The Early Masters of Modern Architecture in

Japan: The Making of A Modern Japanese Architecture, 1868 to the Present’ from

A/A Journal; vol.78, no.4; Architectural Press; London; p.43-44

□ STEWART, David B. (Aug-Sep/1990); ‘Lightness’ from The Japan Architect;

vol.65, no.8-9; J.A.; Tokyo; p.26-33

□ SUNG, In-Su (1997); ‘Discussion on Globalisation in South Korean Architecture’

from http://www.archforum.com/intro/talkshow.html

□ WILLIAMS, R. Richard (1993); ‘Choon-Soo Ryu: For Prize-winning Architect,

The Future is Now’ from Koreana, vol.7; no.l; The Korean Foudation; Seoul; p.68-

71

□ WON, Jung-Su (1989); ‘Korea’s Contemporary Architecture’ from Koreana (A

Quarterly on Korean Culture); vol.3; no.3; International Cultural Society of Korea;

Seoul; p.4-8

□ YIM, Chang-Bok (1989); ‘Architectural Education in Korea: its realities and tasks’

from Koreana (A Quarterly on Korean Culture)', vol.3; no.3; International Cultural

Society of Korea; Seoul; p.58-63

□ YIM, Chang-Bok (Nov/1992); The French Embassy and the Theories of Le

Corbusier’ from Space', vol. 27; no. 11; The Space Group Co.; Seoul; p.83

45