¼ö·Ï»çÇ× |
´ëÇÑÁö¸®ÇÐȸÁö , v.44 n.2(2009-06) |
ÁÖÁ¦¾î |
°æ°ü À籸Á¶È ; °æ°ü ¼Òºñ ; Àå¼Ò »óÇ°È ; Àå¼Ò¼º ; landscape restructuring ; landscape consumption ; commoditization of place ; placeness |
¿ä¾à1 |
µ¿´ë¹®¿îµ¿ÀåÀº 1926³â ÀÏÁ¦¿¡ ÀÇÇØ °ÇÃàµÈ ¿ì¸®³ª¶óÀÇ ´ëÇ¥ÀûÀÎ ±Ù´ë °ø¼³¿îµ¿ÀåÀ¸·Î, ¼ö¸¹Àº ½ºÆ÷Ã÷¿Í ¹®ÈÇà»ç°¡ °³ÃֵǾî Çѱ¹ÀÇ ½ºÆ÷Ã÷ »ê½Ç·Î¼ÀÇ »ó¡¼º°ú ¹®È¿ª»ç¼ºÀÌ ´ã°ÜÁø °ø°£À̾ú´Ù. ±×·¯³ª 1990³â´ë µé¾î¿Í ½Ã¼³ÀÇ ³ëÈÄ·Î ±â´ÉÀÌ Ãà¼ÒµÆ°í, 2005³â û°èõÀÌ º¹¿øµÇ¸é¼ ÁÖº¯ ³ëÁ¡»óµéÀ» À§ÇÑ Ç³¹°½ÃÀå°ú ÁÖÂ÷ÀåÀÌ ¼³Ä¡µÅ ¿îµ¿ÀåÀ¸·Î¼ÀÇ ±â´ÉÀ» »ó½ÇÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¼¿ï½Ã´Â µ¿´ë¹®½ÃÀå°ú ±× Àϴ븦 µðÀÚÀΡ¤ÆÐ¼Ç Á᫐ °ü±¤ Ŭ·¯½ºÅÍ·Î °³¹ßÇÑ´Ù´Â °èȹ ÇÏ¿¡ 2008³â ¿îµ¿ÀåÀ» ö°ÅÇÏ¿´´Ù. º» ¿¬±¸¿¡¼´Â µ¿´ë¹®¿îµ¿ÀåÀ» »ç·Ê·Î ¼¿ï½ÃÀÇ ±Ù´ë¹®ÈÀ¯ÀûÀÇ Ã¶°Å¿Í Áö¿ª°³¹ßÀ» Æ÷ÇÔÇÏ´Â ÀÚº»ÁÖÀÇ °æ°ü À籸Á¶ÈÀÇ À̸鿡 ´ã°ÜÁ® ÀÖ´Â Àǹ̸¦ »ìÆ캸°í À̸¦ ÅëÇØ ÇöÀç ³²¾ÆÀÖ´Â ±Ù´ë¹®ÈÀ¯Àû¿¡ ´ëÇÑ º¸Á¸ ¶Ç´Â ö°Å Á¤Ã¥, ±×¸®°í °æ°ü °ü¸®¿Í °ü·ÃÇÏ¿© ½Ã»çÁ¡À» ã¾Æº¸°íÀÚ ÇÏ¿´´Ù. |
¿ä¾à2 |
Dongdaemun Stadium was the nation¡¯s leading modern sports facilities built in 1926 by Japanese colonists. It hosted a number of the nation¡¯s sports matches and cultural performances, filled with cultural and historic significance as a birthplace of Korea¡¯s sports. As the facility was aging, however, its functions became limited. With the so-called ¡°restoration¡± of Cheonggye Stream, the stadium was reduced to a flea market, no longer used for its originally intended purposes. The Seoul Metropolitan Government demolished the stadium under the plan to develop the district into a tourism cluster dedicated to the design and fashion industries. This study takes Dongdaemun Stadium as an example to explain underlying meanings of capitalist restructuring of landscape which entails removal of modern cultural relics and redevelopment projects. Although Dongdaemun Stadium was not used in the way it had been designated to be used, it still had a value as a diachronic and synchronic record for the city. The rationale that the stadium should be torn down and reinvented as tourist attraction to reap huge financial benefits illustrates that the city government¡¯s development ideology gravitated towards public works projects. This approach may harm a place¡¯s genuine disposition or essence and create an artificially-induced placeness, undermining its historio-cultural values. |