Colony 2. A region politically controlled by a distant country; a dependency.

Observations on ‘Decolonization - Perspectives from Now and Then’, chapter 19: Colonial Formations and Deformations - Korea, Taiwan and Vietnam.

This chapter is of particular interest as it compares three colonized countries and comments on the ‘colonial legacies’ left behind:

'The nationalist point of view is that there is no such thing as a good colonial legacy, and therefore the contribution of imperialism to growth was zero, really minus-zero: for example, Korean historiography (South and North) sees anything good or useful deriving from Japanese colonialism as incidental to the ruthless pursuit of Japanese interests; even if a railroad from Pusan to Sinuiju is useful, a railroad built by Koreans, for Koreans, would have been better. Furthermore, without the Japanese, a native railway system would still have been built: Koreans assume that Japan aborted their drive for modernity, rather than merely distorting it' (page 278).

This is certainly supported by Angus Hamilton who in 1904 found conditions of Korean living to be far more superior than China and other Asian countries. 'Seoul was the first city in East Asia to have electricity, trolley cars, and water, telephone and telegraph systems all at the same time' (page 280).


Please click on 'references' to find full list of texts.

Royal Palaces of Seoul

This amateur video again emphasises the importance of a connection to nature in Korean architecture, in this case, using the Royal Palace in Seoul as an example:



Talking to a Korean friend, even the slopes of the roofs and colours of the decoration symbolise certain things. Do the palaces therefore truly represent Korean culture, or has Seoul moved on from this traditional approach? From a colonised country, Seoul has grown into a global economy. What, if anything, has changed?

Korean architecture and its relationship with nature

http://yeinjee.com/2010/namsan-snow-seoul-south-korea/

In the first blog post, I raised the question of why it was significant that the Japanese blocked the view from the Royal palace to the Namsan Mountain. The text below gives a few hints as to why such an undertaking would have been so offensive to the Korean people:

"The natural environment was always regarded as an element of supreme importance in Korean architecture.  Numerous Buddhist temples across the country, for instance, were located in mountains noted for their scenic beauty, and their structures were carefully arranged so as to achieve an ideal harmony with the natural surroundings.

In selecting the site for a building of any function, Koreans tended to attach special meaning to the natural environment.  They did not consider a place good enough for a building unless it commanded an appropriate view of "mountains and water."  This pursuit of a constant contact with nature was not only due to aesthetic reasons, but also because geomagnetic principles dominated the Korean psychology."

For more on this subject: http://www.asianinfo.org/asianinfo/korea/pro-architecture.htm

In order for architecture to be truly representative of Korea's culture, the relationship between nature and buildings must be considered.

Demilitarised Zone: North-South Korean border

http://visitasiaquide.com/visit-korea

I read recently that the Berlin wall is nothing in comparison to this border. Being interested in Seoul’s location next to North Korea, I have been recommended that I pay this place a visit. Having read a bit about it, it looks like it could be quite an experience. It’s interesting, if not surprising, that a website refers to it as ‘South Korea’s most popular tourist destination’. At four miles wide, the buffer zone between North and South Korea is the most militarised border in the world.

A European Comparison

http://upload.wikimdeai/commons//f/ff/Bundesarchiv_Bild_183_C12701,_Nurnberg,Reichsparteitag,_RAD-Appell.jpg&mgrefurl=http:peace.maripo.com

A political system captured through a single photograph showing its architecture and people. The Nazi Party commissioned architect Albert Speer to build a rallying stage at the Zeppelin Field which hosted 340,000 people providing another platform for Hitler to promote his ideologies.

It’s fascinating that Hitler himself spoke of wanting to be an architect. Perhaps he found power in the idea of shaping our cities?

How did colonial Japan symbolise control through architecture?

Seoul from above

The River Han and the Namsan Mountain are two unmissable landmarks of Seoul from above and (I am told) at street level too. Concrete highways linking the north and south of Seoul have resulted in endless leftover spaces which I’m looking forward to exploring. The group were shown a clip of The Host which is a film set in Seoul with lots of scenes set near, in, and under these crossings. Worth a watch. 

I also recently met with a friend who grew up in Korea but now lives in London. When discussing my project proposal with him, he said it might be difficult to find evidence of political manifestation everywhere but certain buildings have clear examples. The first example he gave was the Royal Palace built by the Koreans with an important view along the main axis of the city centre with a view to the Namsan Mountain (why this is so significant is still unclear to me). When the Japanese invaded, they blocked this view by building a new structure – two fingers up to the Koreans? This seems like an ideal place to start…