| 기사명 |
근현대건축의 모폴로지 이론과 건축설계 / Morphological Theory and Design in Modern and Contemporary Architecture |
| 저자명 |
김성홍 |
| 발행사 |
한국건축역사학회 |
| 수록사항 |
건축역사연구(한국건축역사학회지) , v.13 n.4(2004-12) |
| 페이지 |
시작페이지(89) 총페이지(17) |
| ISSN |
15981142 |
| 주제분류 |
역사 |
| 주제어 |
모폴로지 이론 ; 근현대건축 ; 건축설계 ; 건축도시 ; 도시건축//Morphological Theory and Design ; Modern and Contemporary Architecture ; Architecture and Urbanism |
| 요약1 |
이 논문은 모폴로지와 타이폴로지 이론의 변화와 건축설계와의 연관성을 고찰하는 문헌연구로 크게 네 부분으로 구성하였다. 첫째, 1940년대 후반부터 1980년대까지 영국과 미국의 지리학, 도시학, 건축학계를 중심으로 전개되었던 모폴로지 이론과 배경, 건축설계에 적용된 사례를 조명하였다. 둘째, 이태리 건축계에서 시작된 타이폴로지(이하 類型學)이론과 설계, 이에 대한 영미권의 논쟁을 고찰하였다. 셋째, 도시적 모폴로지와 건축적 유형학을 포괄하는 대안으로서의 제3의 건축도시 모폴로지를 제시하였다. 넷째, 국내 건축도시 연구의 성과, 경향, 문제점을 논의하고 변화하는 한국도시에서의 모폴로지 연구와 건축설계와의 연계 필요성을 논의하였다. |
| 요약2 |
This paper investigates morphological theory as an intellectual framework for research and design. The first part of the paper will review morphological studies in the fields of urban geography, urban planning and architecture, particularly in England from the 1940s to the 1980s. While urban geographers and planners were concerned primarily with town plans, building forms and land use, architectural theoreticians were more interested in the topological relationship between urban and architectural space. The underlying premises and principles of these two approaches will be reviewed.
The second part of the paper will focus on typology in Europe and North America. The reinterpretation of typology by Italian architects helped to bridge the gap between individual elements of architecture and the overall form of the city. However, typological theory became less accessible in post-war England and the United States. After 1980, the debate on typology became muted by the onset of vague notions such as functionalism, bio-technical determinism, and contextualism. This paper will propose a redefinition of morphology as a heuristic device, in contrast with the dichotomic view of urban morphology and architectural typology. Morphology will be shown to combine the geometrical and topological; the intentional and accidental; the real and abstract; and a priori and a posteriori.
The last part of the paper discusses the lack of comparative theories and methods surrounding the physical form of architecture and the city by Korea commentators. Empirically rooted facility planning, non-comparative historical studies, and iconographic criticism emerged as a central preoccupation of architectural culture between the 1960s and 1980s, a time when international debate on architecture and urbanism was most intense. This paper will give consideration to the built environment as a dynamic physical entity and space as an epiphenomenon of daily urban life, such that collaboration between urban designers, architects, and landscape architects is seen as both beneficial and necessary. |
| 소장처 |
한국건축역사학회 |