A Comparative Study On The Development Of Nationalism Architecture In China And Korea After2^nd World War

This study is on comparing the development process of Nationalismarchitecture in China and Korea in the20th Century. The main purpose of thisstudy is to compare and analyze the characteristics of architectural expressionduring the development process of Nationalism between China and Korea.This study focuses on the architecture style formed after the Second WorldWar in1945.China and Korea are geographically close and has been in the samecultural zone for a long time. Korean traditional architecture was basicallyinfluenced by Chinese ancient philosophy and architectural culture, and alsohad inherited traditional methods like ‘Treatise on Architectural Methods (营造法式)’ until Joseon Dynasty. Korean traditional architecture was recreatedby adding Korean architectural philosophy and naturism on this basis.After opening their port to Western countries in the19th century, thearchitectural style and system of China and Korea had begun to change.During this process, western architects created a new architectural stylehaving the characteristics of Western and Asian culture in the same building.These buildings were built all around the country. In the20th century, Asiancountries began to reconstruct their countries by beginning reestablishingtheir national identity in every field of studies including architecture. At thattime, there was a big ideological conflict between the Soviet Union’sSocialism and United State’s Democracy all over the world. This also gavegreat influence and caused the difference in architecture of China and SouthKorea. Although China and South Korea had limits in cultural exchangeduring this period, they had the same purpose of inheriting tradition andreestablishing their own Nationalism, so similarities also exist. Under thesecomplicated circumstance, China and Korea recreated and developed their own Nationalism architecture.This study is carried out in the following four parts. First, we will definethe concept of Nationalism architecture, and arrange the development processof Nationalism architecture in China and Korea by periodic order. This waywe can understand the social backgrounds and architectural expression of eachperiod, and also the different pattern between China and Korea. In the secondpart, we will study about the first and second generation architects of Chinaand Korea, including characteristics and tendency in their design. Furthermore,we will also examine how the contemporary architects and scholars of Chinaand Korea have defined and classified these architectural designs. In the thirdpart, in order to compare the Nationalism architecture of China and Koreaminutely, we will reconstruct a framework for analysis, using researchmaterials from the past and present. By using this framework, we will qualifythe architectures in China and Korea, and analyze the difference inarchitectural expression between the two countries. At last, we will go overthe key points in this study. Then, we will emphasize the importance ofresearch and important role of architects and members of the society ininheriting Nationalism architecture.In conclusion, the progress of development of Chinese and KoreanNationalism architecture were different from each other in two perspectives.First, in the perspective of the development process, Chinese architecturestarted with the traditional architecture establishment, which led to traditionalarchitectural system, modernistic application and new architectural creationsequentially. In contrast, Korean nationalism architecture relatively developedthese four steps simultaneously. Secondly, by comparing the practicalexamples of Nationalism architecture from1945to1980, we can point outthat the architectural expression systems were different, and they were basedon different kinds of elements. We can see that the Chinese architectures werefounded on the quotation of traditional elements of Chinese architecture and they are mostly composed of practical expression of social ideology of thosetimes. As compared with Chinese nationalism architecture, KoreanNationalism architecture was usually based on the variant expression oftraditional architecture system. However, we may also see that the forthrightreactionism, quotation and abstractionism of elements of traditionalarchitecture develop relatively even. These kinds of the characteristicscoincide with the fact that China strongly emphasized the political ideologywhich led to the development of top-bottom style architectural expressiontendency which contrast with the Korean Nationalism architecture thatallowed flexible and liberal architectural expression.This study is to compare Nationalism architecture of China and Korea byusing renowned research achievements from the past and present. Variousdefinitions and concepts of Nationalism architecture and methods ofinheriting this architectural style still exist. Due to the fact that Nationalismarchitecture is an important subject in the field of architecture to China andKorea, it is still under vibrant investigation these days. This study will be abasic material for understanding the main characteristics of Nationalismarchitecture, and also provide a different point of view for Nationalismarchitecture studies in China and Korea.