Landscape and city evolving

2010 Seoul today

‘600 Year’s Maps of Seoul’ splits Korean history into chapters – Age of the Joseon Dynasty, Age of Japanese Rule and Age of Republic of Korea – documenting the development of the city through maps. The mountains are included from the earliest maps to the most contemporary, more evidence of their significance in the city.

1750 Map of Walled Capital; Seoul. Manuscript in colour

1939 New Map of Great Seoul

1973 Map of Seoul

From Kim Seon-ah’s article ‘Nature Inverted’:

          ‘To this day, Seoul remains tied to its natural characteristics, surrounded by the elements. The relationship between its orography and urbanisation is fundamentally important…
          Seoul was originally built within the bosom of nature, encompassed by mountains on several sides. The principles of urban formation always ordered the city to form a special bond with natural elements, and all the demands found their answers in selected regions. This gave the city a positive and dynamic force, but the growth of the city eventually began to consume nature. As construction boomed and spaces entered into increasing relationships with urbanised natural spaces with the city, the expanded city started to occupy natural spaces… In the end, nature is engulfed in the city, it belongs to it, collaborates in urban functions, relinquishes its autonomy and its specific identity, sustains development and does not shy away from the exploitation of its image and its significant value. It is considered an element of urbanisation.’

This excerpt speaks less of the dominance of the landscape and more of the city claiming the landscape as part of its urban fabric. The relationship is often described as one sided, but what is in control; the city or the landscape? Perhaps rather than approaching this subject as ‘either or’ it should be more about how each can enhance the other. Are we too greedy in our want to be close to the landscape? Should the city stop infringing, stop its sprawl and begin somewhere else?

It will be useful to visit Paju Book city and Heyri Art Village, two new ‘settlements’ stepping out of the city and beginning afresh. This somehow seems unnatural, surely cities should grow naturally developing as needs change – but when do we stop?

Seoul, we've arrived

From The River Han to the mountains

We've arrived. We rented bicycles yesterday and cycled along The River Han. It seems that every sight, in almost every direction seems to be framed by a mountain on the horizon. The subject of mountains is an important thread which may lead the project over the next few weeks. How has the city grown around the mountains?

Satellite photo of North and South Korea by night

Satellite photo - Nothing to Envy, page 03

'North Korea faded to black in the early 1990s. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, which had propped up its Communist ally with cheap fuel oil, North Korea's creakily inefficient economy collapsed. Power stations rusted into ruin. The lights went out.' (Nothing To Envy, page 03)

This revealing satellite image starkly contrasts the bright lights of Seoul (South Korea's capital) to the black mass of North Korea. The only glimmer of light in the North is Pyongyang, the capital. Its population of 23 million people are almost completely hidden from view.

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?