¼ö·Ï»çÇ× |
°ÇÃ࿪»ç¿¬±¸(Çѱ¹°ÇÃ࿪»çÇÐȸÁö) , v.11 n.1(2002-03) |
ÁÖÁ¦¾î |
´Ù´Ï¿¤ ¸®º£½ºÅ²Æ® ; ÀÚ·á2 |
¿ä¾à1 |
º» ¿¬±¸´Â ±Ù´ë°ÇÃà°ú´Â ¿ÏÀüÈ÷ ´Ù¸¥ »õ·Î¿î °ø°£ °³³äÀ» ¼±º¸À̰í ÀÖ´Â ´Ù´Ï¿¤ ¸®º£½ºÅ²Æ®ÀÇ °ÇÃà°ø°£ °³³äÀ» ±Ô¸íÇϰí, À̸¦ ÅëÇØ 1980³â´ë ÀÌÈÄ¿¡ µîÀåÇÑ °ÇÃà °ø°£°³³äÀÇ Æ¯Â¡À» ¸íÈ®È÷ Çϴµ¥ ±× ¸ñÀûÀÌ ÀÖ´Ù. À̸¦ À§ÇØ ¸ÕÀú ¸Þ¸¦·Î-ÆþƼÀÇ Çö»óÇп¡ ³ªÅ¸³ Çö»óÇÐÀû °ø°£ °³³äÀ» °íÂûÇÑ ´ÙÀ½, ÀÌ·¯ÇÑ Çö»óÇÐÀû °ø°£ °³³äÀÌ ¼ø¼ö Á¶Çü ¿¹¼úºÐ¾ß¿¡¼ ¾î¶»°Ô ³ªÅ¸³ª´Â°¡¸¦ ÀÌÇØÇϱâ À§Çؼ ¹Ì´Ï¸Ö¸®Áò°ú Çö»óÇаúÀÇ °ü°è¸¦ »ìÆìº¸°íÀÚ ÇÑ´Ù. ±×·± ´ÙÀ½, ´Ù´Ï¿¤ ¸®º£½ºÅ²Æ®ÀÇ ÀÛǰµéÀ» À̵é°ú ¿¬°ü½ÃÄÑ ºÐ¼®ÇÔÀ¸·Î½á ±×ÀÇ °ø°£°³³äÀ» Á¤È®ÇÏ°Ô ±Ô¸íÇØ º¸°íÀÚ ÇÑ´Ù. ±×·¡¼ ±Ã±ØÀûÀ¸·Î ¸Þ¸¦·Î-ÆþƼÀÇ Çö»óÇÐÀû °ø°£ °³³äÀ» ÅëÇØ¼ Çö´ë °ÇÃà °ø°£ °³³äÀ» ÀÌÇØÇÏ°í °ø°£¿¡ ´ëÇÑ »õ·Î¿î ½Ã°¢À» Á¦½ÃÇÏ°í °ÇÃà Àû¿ë °¡´É¼ºÀ» ¸ð»öÇϰíÀÚ ÇÏ´Â °ÍÀÌ´Ù. |
¿ä¾à2 |
The purpose of this study is to analyze the Daniel Libeskind' spatial concept in view of the Merleau-Ponty's Phenomenology. After the coming of postmodern architecture, the concept of space ceased to be discussed between architects. Instead a sign and a form were supposed as much more important subject to define architectural discipline. But after 1980, the new concept of architectural space was experimented by the architects like Frank Gehry, Peter Eisenman, Steven Hall, and Bernard Tschumi, which was clearly distinguished from modern spatial concept. By the Daniel Libeskind' architecture, this study are to make clear this tendency. For this, we accept as an important instrument Meleau-Ponty's phenomenology and the spatial concept of Minimalism, which stress the relationship of inter-subjectivity between space and human body. Consequently, Daniel Libeskind' spatial concept is characterized by fragmental, accidental, heterogeneous space by accidental events which is occurred by movement of human, which was indentified with Merleau-Ponty's spatial concept. |