1960년대 광화문 중건과정의 특성

강난형,송인호,Kang, Nan-hyoung,Song, In-Ho 한국건축역사학회 2015 건축역사연구 Vol.24 No.6

After the Korean war, two major attempts were made to reconstruct Gwanghwamun Gate as an important part of Korea's lost cultural heritage. In December 2006, the Korean government replaced the concrete gate with a wooden one, yet traces of the attempts made in the 1960s to transform Gwanghwamun Gate and the main road remain to this day. At the time, the Third Republic of Korea, sought to legitimize itself in the name of modernity, and went on to modernize the architecture and urban landscape of Seoul. The location and design selected for the rebuilt Gwanghwamun illustrated the symbolic relationship between historic heritage and urban development. The reconstruction of the gate began as part of the Third Republic's project to restore the Central Administration Building and culminated in the transformation of the main road in front of the gate. By reconstructing the traditional gate using concrete, the military government intended to convey the message that we could inherit our proud tradition using modern materials, and that we should actively adopt the new technologies of the modern era. This study begins with the premise that the Gwanghwamun reconstruction project of 1968 represents the application of new technological thinking to Korea's architectural style, and has two objectives. The first is to summarize the reconstruction process and method using the records and drawings from the 1968 project, which was then under the leadership of architect Kang Bong-jin. The second is to analyze the characteristics of the architectural style and structure of the reconstructed Gwanghwamun so as to reinterpret the relationship between Korean tradition and modern technology.

국보건설단 강봉진과 국립종합박물관

강난형(Kang Nanhyoung) 한국근현대미술사학회 2017 한국근현대미술사학 Vol.33 No.-

The JonghapMinjokMunhwa Center and the National Museum were grand developmental state projects that pronounced "history as that of the nation(minjok)". Yet, such a process of "ownership through historical appropriation" cannot simply be described as a state-led – and hence homogenous, reactionary and out-of-the-ordinary - project. Various fields, including architecture and art, were particularly vocal in empathizing, conflicting and resisting against state-led "exclusive ownership of history". The archival surveys and subsequent stylistic design of cultural heritage by the National Treasure Construction Corps (NTCC) reveals the complex relationship between post colonialism and modernity, by showing how tradition was represented and produced. The master architect of the NTCC, Kang Bongjin utilized archaeological design methods to conform to the design guidelines "to express tradition through concrete." He re-interpreted modernity as an issue of re-illuminating, hence succeeding, the Chosun era. For such ends, he adopted the methods of colonial scholars and officials, using the height of pillars(柱高) and the ratio measurements of Cheok(尺) (a Chosun era unit) to seek out the geometrical principles of cultural heritage, namely, timber structure architecture. He researched historical records, collected scientific evidence, and validated the materials with professional auditing. These newly created surveyed floor plans, sections and reports were used as a historical yardstick for "selecting, ranking and registering" new cultural resources. This project by Kang Bongjin was one of the forerunners to an epoch in which developmental state led discourse of modernity - as that of a "the ethnically homogeneous nation state" - transitioned towards a modernity that embraced a trans-regional approach – East Asian regional characteristics such as timber structure architecture. This transition was also the result of fierce ongoing debate between traditional-succession and non-traditionalist architects. It also marked an era in which concrete was accepted as a common material to realize East Asian timber structure architecture. Ironically, tradition became both an object of consumption, an objectified "other" against "the modern", and a tool for recovering ownership through historical appropriation; revealing the complex characteristics of modernity in the 1960s developmental state South Korea.

도시 기록의 재건과 실천

강난형(Kang, Nan-Hyoung) 대한건축학회 2022 建築 Vol.66 No.12

1960년대 서울의 시범도시계획에 대한 연구 - 「Asia Foundation Records 1951-1996」 자료를 중심으로 -

강난형(Kang, Nan-hyoung) 서울시립대학교 서울학연구소 2020 서울학연구 Vol.- No.78

연구는 서울 도시공간변화를 원조국과 피 원조국의 생산적 갈등공간으로 읽는다. 1960년대 남한 도시를 경제적·사회적 문제로써 접근하면서 도시 하부시설을 짓는 토목건설 방식과 도시 조사를 기반으로 다양한 주체들의 관계로 담론이 교차되며 동원되는 방식이 전환기적 상황 속에 공존했기 때문이다. 또한 연구는 아시아재단 지원으로 건설부 산하에 만든 도시 계획팀, HURPI의 활동 중 미국 도시계획가 Oswald Nagler가 활동했던 1965년에서 1967년까지 기간에 초점을 맞추었다. 본 연구는 스탠퍼드 대학교 후버연구소 문서관 소장 자료인 아시아재단의 서울 도시계획에 대한 일차적인 자료를 수집하여 세 시기를 중점적으로 연구했다. 젊은 건축가 팀을 구성하여 도시기반 공공시설 조사와 최소주거단위설계를 교육하는 ‘도시 설계반’ 시기(UDT, Urban Design Team, 1965.6~1965.12), 건설부 뿐 아니라 도시지자체와 연계하여 후보지를 선정하여 시범도시계획 지침 및 보고서에 집중되는 ‘도시 및 지역계획연구실’(URPI, Urban &Regional Planning Institute, 1965.12~1966.12)시기 그리고 다른 원조기구와 연합하여 장기융자 상품인 아파트공급계획을 고안하는 ‘주택·도시 및 지역계획연구실(HURPI, Housing, Urban and Regional Planning Institute, 1966.12~1967.5)’ 시기로 분류된다. 그 결과 ‘슬럼을 일소하고 저층아파트를 짓는’ 고밀도 도시재개발 방식은 한국도시주거문제에 대한 실리적인 해결책으로 여겨졌다고 판단된다. 미국 원조조직이 피 원조국 도시 빈민들의 주택 재건을 목표로 자금을 지원하는 도시 재개발 프로그램이면서 미국 건축연합단체들은 이러한 국제 원조 프로젝트를 신생학문인 도시설계 수법을 저개발국가에 실험하는 기회가 되었다. 한국 정부 관료들도 이러한 도시 재개발 방식을 도시계획수법으로 이해하였으며 서울시내 뿐 아니라 다른 주요도시를 통해 주거유형을 확산하고 적용하고자 했다. 그러나 재개발 프로그램을 통해 도시주거를 공급할 대상과 주거 규모에 대한 문제는 한국 관료와 원조조직 간의 분쟁지점이었다. 이미 한국정부는 원조 주택공급방식이었던 저소득층을 위한 자조 · 자가 소유 주택 모델의 유효성을 의심하기 시작되었다. 국공유지 대지화로 새로운 도시재개발 방식을 결합하면서도 최소 주거공급방식을 유지하려는 의견에 대한 반대였다. 앞으로 추후 연구를 통해 더 밝혀낼 부분이지만 기존 저소득층 거주민을 포함한 아파트를 계획하면서도 주택사용자로서 중산층을 의식하기 시작한 한국정부나 서울시의 입장이 원조프로그램과 다소 상충되기 시작한 지점이라고 생각된다. 이러한 일차적인 연구가 집적될 수 있다면 냉전체제아래 다른 아시아 수도들이 겪었던 도시계획원조에 따른 공간변화를 서울과 비교적 관점에서 연구하는 기초적 기반을 만들 수 있을 것이다. This study on the 1960’s Pilot Projects of Seoul, South Korea reads the urban spatial transformations of Seoul as productive spaces of conflict between donor and recipient countries of international aid as a transitional moment for South Korean urbanism departing from the existing infrastructure based approach towards introducing research-based methods and the mobilization of a system of actors. It focuses on the period of 1965 to 1967, during which the American urban planner Oswald Nagler led a team of young south Korean architects under HURPI, funded by the Asian Foundation. Drawing from research on the Asia Foundation records at the Stanford University Hoover Institution Archives, this study focuses on three distinct periods: 1) the Urban Design Team phase(UDT 1965.6~1965.12) composed of small teams of South Korean architects, who surveyed urban public facilities and learnt minimum housing unit design methods; the Urban & Regional Planning Institute phase(URPI, 1965.12~1966.12), which involved the Ministry of Construction and other municipal governments to elaborate pilot project guidelines and reports while designating potential pilot projects; and the Housing, Urban and Regional Planning Institute phase(HURPI, 1966.12~1967.5) which involved other international aid organizations to realize plans to provide apartment housing as a long term mortgage product. As a result, “high density urban redevelopment” methods for “eliminating slums and building walkup apartments” were adopted on Korean soil as a practical solution for urban housing policy. These programs can be characterized as urban redevelopment programs funded by American international aid foundations which aimed to reorganize housing for the urban poor in recipient countries, and as American institutions who saw these international aid projects as opportunities to experiment with the emerging field of urban design. Korean government officials embraced these novice urban design methods in urban planning strategies such as surveying housing typologies, seeking to disseminate them in other major South Korean cities. However, the scale of housing and target groups of these redevelopment programs emerged as a point of contention between Korean officials and international aid organizations, as they started to question the validity of self-help housing and homeownership programs from international aid, which donors organizations consistently advocated for as ‘citizen minimum standard’ housing programs in urban redevelopment projects. This research can be applied as a basic frame of reference for comparative studies of the spatial transformations undergone by Asian capitals as recipients of urban planning development aid under the Cold War system.