Landmark and the Twentieth Century Urban Planning - Landmark’s Symbolic Transformations and its Implications for Urban Planning -
-
The purpose of this paper is to investigate the basis of philosophical interpretation of a landmark’s symbolic meaning as well as its transformation in modern urban planning. Literally “landmark” is formed from the words ‘land’ and ‘mark’. In a modern sense, landmarks are usually referred to as recognizable natural objects and artefacts used for navigation. It can also be applied to smaller structures or features that have become local symbols. Differing from this modern perspective, landmarks were originally symbolic: a place where since the advent of society the sky, land and humans were connected as one. From then on, the landmark effectively functioned on the one hand as a site for patterns of collective action, periodically through rituals, worship, and the use of language; the landmark helped to strengthen social integrity. On the other hand people reinterpreted the landmark as a means to solve social problems in times of social duress. Landmarks functioned not only as the symbolic from of societies, but also as a centre that produced and reinterpreted social meanings. In this study, I concentrate more on the latter role of a landmark rather than the former in order to emphasize the meaning of philosophical interpretation of the landmark. Departing from this definition of the landmark, I then focus on the implication of the landmark on urban planning by exploring a 20th century dispute concerning urban planning. When it comes to urban planning, I analyze the viewpoints of three urban planners: Le Corbusier, Lewis Mumford, and Jane Jacobs; all of who still influence contemporary urban planning field. In modern times, the landmark has broadened to include a variety of cultural objects, becoming blurred. The landmark has become an object of focus involved in the dispute between ‘city’ and ‘cityness’ or ‘urban planning’ and ‘good life of the urban community’. In order to explain the strained relationship between landmark and urban planning, I use Claude Lefort’s concept of ‘empty place’; impossible to occupy, to the extent that those who exercise public authority cannot claim to appropriate it. By ‘empty space’, I refer to the indeterminism of the social, so opens the possibilities for various interpretations. As a result, I show that Le Corbusier thinks of ‘empty space’ as a transcendental geometry, Mumford regards it as a source of new imagination and possibility to realize the purpose of urban planning, and Jacobs thinks of it as a social flag by extending the meaning of the ‘cityness’. Lastly, the results of these studies shed light on the present state of our urban planning, which is related to the landmark.
-
[book] 고일홍 / 2014 / 사상가들 도시와 문명을 말하다 / 한길사
[book] 루이스 멈퍼드 / 2014 / 루이스 멈퍼드 건축비평선 / 한길사
[book] 르코르뷔지에 / 2002 / 건축을 향하여 / 동녘
[book] 르코르뷔지에 / 2003 / 도시계획 / 동녘
[book] 에른스트 카시러 / 2008 / 인간이란 무엇인가 / 창
[book] 에밀 뒤르켐 / 1990 / 종교 생활의 원초적 형태 / 민영사
[book] 에버니저 하워드 / 2006 / 내일의 전원도시 / 한울
[book] 조지프 캠벨 / 2003 / 원시신화 / 까치
[book] 제인 제이콥스 / 2010 / 미국 대도시의 죽음과 삶 / 그린비
[book] 필립 판느네 / 2014 / 도시형태 : 도시블록의 생성과 변천 / 한국문화사
[book] 페르랑 브로델 / 1995 / 물질문명과 자본주의 Ⅰ-2 / 까치
[book] 퓌스텔 드 쿨랑주 / 2000 / 고대도시 / 대우학술
[book] 피터 홀 / 2000 / 내일의 도시 / 한울
[book] Lefort Claude / 1988 / Democracy and Political Theory / Polity Press : 213~227
[book] Lynch Kevin / 1996 / The Image of The City / The MIT PRESS
[book] Mumford Lewis / 1966 / The City in History / Penguin Books
[book] Mumford Lewis / 1944 / The Condition of Man / A Harvest/HBJ Book
[book] Mumford Lewis / 1938 / The Culture of Cities / A Harvest/HBJ Book
[book] Mumford Lewis / 1967 / The Myth of The Machine Ⅰ / A Harvest/HBJ Book
[book] Mumford Lewis / 1978 / The Transformations of Man / Torchbook
-
247 Viewed
Print this page
Search PDF