THE KOREAN PAVILION AS A RITUAL SPACE AT EXPO 67 Winnky Chen ARCH 251: Architectural History 2 Professor Annmarie Adams T.A. Gina Lynn Page March 21, 2018 McGill University Peter Guo-hua Fu School of Architecture 1 Acknowledgements I want to extend my sincere gratitude to all those who inspired me, guided me and encouraged me for this research paper. Thanks to Professor Radoslav Zuk for sharing his memories of Expo 67 with me; Professor Annmarie Adams for her guidance; Mrs. Gina Lynn Page for her advice, and my parents and friends for their unconditional love and support. 2 Though located within Expo 67, a suitable showcase of nationalism, the Korean pavilion (Figure 1) stood apart from the hustle and bustle.1 The architecture of the Korean pavilion framed a sacred ritual space, and Figure 1. Meredith Dixon, “Korean Pavilion”, 2007. thereby provided an isolated environment for people to escape temporarily from daily chaos. Essentially, the Korean pavilion was an exhibition hall with pragmatic purposes. To associate the image of a ritual space with this ontologically secular exhibition hall, the definition of ritual spaces should be addressed. In the literal sense, a ritual space is where rituals take place and is often related to religious practice. For example, a Christian church is ritual space where Sunday worship takes place. However, rituals can be discussed in a broader sense. Having one’s morning coffee at the same place, using the same mug and drinking at the same time every single day can be regarded as a highly ritualized activity. In that case, the room in which the person has his routine coffee can be considered as a ritual space.2 In light of this concept, the research paper will illustrate how the Korean pavilion at Expo 67 transformed the act of visiting into a ritual activity; how the architecture created a ritual space for the Korean people through its religious connotations, and how this ritual 1 Meredith Dixon, Marilyn Berger, Troye Carrington, and Annmarie Adams. “Korean Pavilion”, Expo '67: a photographic journey. ([Montréal]: Digital Collections Program, McGill University.) http://digital.library.mcgill.ca/expo-67 (2007) 2 Robert H. Sharf, “Ritual”, in critical terms for the study of Buddhism, ed. Donald S. Lopez. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005), 245-246 3 space was also recognized by the non-Korean people without a related cultural background. Korean pavilion as a ritual space with Buddhist connotations The Korean pavilion was designed when the Third Republic of Korea stepped into the epilogue of the first Five-Year Plans of South Korea (1962-1966). The rapid economic boom dragged the once war-torn Korea out of poverty. There was a strong hope for a self-sufficient economy—as well as a more independent country. The urge of greater independence was not limited to just the monetary development of Korea, but also the realm of culture. One of the concerns underlying the design of the Korean Pavilion was how to retrieve the local treasure covered by the dirt of the chaotic wars and the contemporary modernization trend.3 Apart from the desire to fuse traditional architectural elements into the Korean pavilion, Won Kim—a junior architect working on the design of the pavilion—expressed his resolution to create a space with spiritual power: (The architecture of the Korean pavilion) shall be a proposal for (reversing) the loss of humanity in the context of modern civilization. 4 5 3 Won Kim, “Architectural History of World Exhibitions: Chronological research”, Space, Vol. 2 (December 1966), 73. 4 Won Kim, “Architectural History of World Exhibitions: Chronological research”, 73 Translated by the author. 5 Myengsoo Seo. “Architecture as Mediation: The Korean Pavilion at the Montreal Expo '67”, Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering, Vol.16, no.2 ,(May 2017), 273. 4 As he wished, the Korean Pavilion achieved more than a mere modern interpretation of pre-modern Korean architecture, but also became a ritual space for the search of cultural essence. The Korean pavilion adopted many elements from Buddhist architecture. For Koreans who had the cultural familiarity within their blood, the similarity between the pavilion and the well-known Buddhist structures brought the sacredness associated with the religion to the pavilion. The Korean pavilion was mainly inspired by two modes of Korean Buddhist pagodas: wooden and stone pagodas. The connections between the Korean pavilion and the traditional Buddhist pagoda, in terms of form, can be drawn from four aspects: the sense of flatness, the display of the floor plan, the function of the building, and the placement of the enshrined Figure 2. Sam Y Park, treasure. “Details of a stone pagoda”, 1991. The most distinct similarity between the Korean pavilion and the stone Buddhist pagoda (Figure 2) is the flatness of the constructed roof.6 Traditionally, stone slabs are employed in the granite pagoda design as layers of roof support in pre-modern Korea. In the case of the Korean Figure 3. Ghislain Bonneau, “Korean Pavilion”, 1967. pavilion, a more complex four-tier design 6 Sam Y Park, “Details of a stone pagoda”, An introduction to Korean architecture Vol. 1 (Seoul, Korea : Jungwoo Sa Pub. Co.1991), 204. 5 (Figure 3) was chosen for the roof support.7 The bottommost level of the roof support was composed of a typical bracket structure. Round wooden sticks that laid in a plane on top of the bracket structure acted as the second layer of the support system. For the third layer of the roof support, laminated wooden slabs were employed. The sense of flatness reached its climax at the roof of the Korean pavilion. A slab rested above the supporting elements for the roof. The geometric protuberance on the roof echoed the finial of a pagoda. Instead of continuing the practice of erecting a pointy finial, the protuberant part had a flat upper surface which corresponded to the sense of flatness. The traditional stone pagodas (Figure 4) and wooden pagodas (Figure 5) have radiated square plans.8 9 The practice of having multiple layers of square modules Figure 4. Sam Y Park, Figure 5. Sam Y Park, emanating from the center was “First story plan of Tabot’ap “P’alsangjon. Popchusa”, Pagoda”, 1991. 1991. retained in the design of the Korean pavilion (Figure 6).10 Within the square outer boundary of the Korean pavilion, a 7 Ghislain Bonneau, “Korean Pavilion”,48 - Photos of Expo 67 Montreal, P.Q. (1967) http://gbphotodidactical.com/page-photo-Expo-67.html 8 Sam Y Park, “First story plan of Tabot’ap Pagoda” in Pulguksa Temple, An introduction to Korean architecture Vol.1 (1991), 218. 9 Sam Y Park, “P’alsangjon. Popchusa”, An introduction to Korean architecture, Vol.1, (1991), 197. 10 Won Kim,“Plan of the Korean Pavilion”, in “Architectural History of World Exhibitions: Chronological research,” Space, Vol. 2 (December 1966), 72. 6 smaller square was employed to frame the central space. The Buddhist pagoda in the East Asian context is believed to derive from the Indian stupa.11 Originally, a stupa is a burial mound consisting of a square base and a dome-like upper Figure 6. Won Kim , “Plan of the Korean Pavilion”, 1966. part (Figure 7). It was later appropriated as the reliquary of the relics of Buddhist saints. The tradition of housing relics has been preserved in the pagodas in East Asian countries. In the same manner, the Korean pavilion was erected as the sacred shelter for the chosen exhibits. Figure 7. Dora P. Crouch and June Gwendolyn Johnson. “Great Stupa”, 2001. Exhibits were placed on the inner wall of the pavilion and in the central square section.12 As Professor Radoslav Zuk recalled from his visit to the Korean pavilion in 1967, “(the) central section received most attention;” it can be inferred that the exhibits placed in the central section were of better quality and significance.13 Among the items on display, there was a replica of Maitreya Buddha statue. (Figure 8).14 Although there is no picture showing that the Maitreya Buddha was 11 Dora P. Crouch and June Gwendolyn Johnson. “Great Stupa,” Sanchi, bird’s-eye view. Traditions in architecture: Africa, America, Asia, and Oceania. (New York: Oxford University, 2001), 13. 12 Professor Radoslav Zuk in discussion with the author, March 2018. 13 Professor Radoslav Zuk in discussion with the author, March 2018. 14 Meredith Dixon, Marilyn Berger, Troye Carrington, and Annmarie Adams. “Maiterya 7 placed in the central exhibition hall, given the importance of the Buddha icon—and the nature of it being a three-dimensional statue—, the central octagonal exhibition hall was the only reasonable Figure 8. Meredith Dixon, “Maiterya place to enshrine the statue. Furthermore, the Buddha”, 2007. central octagonal exhibition section in the Korean pavilion was wrapped three times by the inner square section, the pavilion and the outer wall. The practice of explicit layering indicated the significance of the icon of Maitreya Buddha, as well as of the other objects displayed in the central section. The placement of the most valuable items in the heart of the Korean pavilion echoed with the erecting of a central axis in wooden pagodas. In a wooden pagoda, the central timber pillar contacts the holy relics of Buddhist saints.15 As soon as people with Korean cultural background spotted the traditional elements of a pagoda that were incorporated in the design of the Korean pavilion, the sacredness and holiness attached to the religion were recalled and transferred onto the Korean pavilion in their eyes. Korean visitors associated their visiting experience in the inner square section of the Korean pavilion with one of the Buddhist ritual practices.