On Historical and Cultural Conservation

Cultural policy is a broad subject encompassing many areas ― tourism, sports, language policy, support for the arts and more. Rather than attempting to discuss all these in the limited space available, this writer will instead focus on two areas of particular concern ― historical and cultural conservation and heritage utilization.

By Robert Koehler
Contributing Writer

Cultural policy is a broad subject encompassing many areas ― tourism, sports, language policy, support for the arts and more. Rather than attempting to discuss all these in the limited space available, this writer will instead focus on two areas of particular concern ― historical and cultural conservation and heritage utilization.

Conservation

Over the last decade, there has been much positive development in regard to historical conservation. Since the adoption of the Registered Cultural Property system in 2001, for instance, over 300 pieces of the country’s contemporary history have been designated as protected properties, many on the initiative of the property owners themselves. The Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism’s Cultural Heritage Administration and a number of local governments have worked, albeit it not always successfully, to rescue historically significant properties in danger of destruction ? the recent acquisition of the former Bank of Joseon by the city of Gunsan, North Jeolla Province, after protracted negotiations with its owner being a case in point. Perhaps more encouragingly, social awareness of the need for conservation is higher than it has been in recent memory. Redevelopment plans for Seoul City Hall and the old South Jeolla Provincial Hall, for instance, have run into strident opposition from groups concerned about preserving the nation’s historical sites.

This being said, the overnight attempt by the Seoul Metropolitan Government to knock down the Taepyeong Hall of Seoul City Hall ? a registered cultural property ? overthe opposition of the Cultural Heritage Administration, reveals the limits of the system when confronted by a determined adversary. In recent years, historical neighborhoods such as Jongno-gu’s Pimat-gol area and Yongsan-gu’s Singye-dong area have been destroyed to make way for flashy (at least on paper) redevelopment projects. Rather than renovate old neighborhoods in a manner that provides continuity with the past, it has proven easier to simply destroy them, with a debilitating effect on the character and culture of entire cities. Culture and tourism suffer if cities are turned into soul-less urban landscapes.

Nobody would argue that cities should be kept frozen in time ? it is the nature of cities to change, after all ? but a balance should be kept between preservation and redevelopment, with crafted redevelopment plans that utilize, rather than destroy, a city’s history and culture. The Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism may wish to study ways to assist localities to develop such plans.

Utilization

It’s one thing to preserve one’s cultural heritage. It’s another thing to actually use it. Korea’s ancient Buddhist monasteries are such pleasant places to visit, in large part because they are pieces of living culture and history. Seoul’s royal palaces, by contrast, can be a bit disappointing, despite their architectural beauty, because, in the end, they are little more than empty shells.

Again, one doesn’t wish to sound overly negative. There are many positive examples to cite (again, this writer will focus on his area of “expertise,” contemporary cultural heritage). The city of Incheon, for instance, has turned the former Jemulpo Club, a turn-of-the-20th century social club, into a wonderful museum of the city’s early modern history. In the southwestern port city of Mokpo, an enterprising designer has renovated an exquisite Japanese colonial home ? the former residence of the head of the Mokpo branch of the colonial Oriental Development Company, no less? and turned it into the “House Full of Happiness,” a cafe/restaurant oozing in character and charm. In Busan, work has just finished restoring the former home of the Korean government during the Korean War into a museum.

Still, there are less positive examples. Five years after it was taken out of service, the old Seoul Station ? one of the most beautiful examples of colonial architecture in Korea ? is hardly used. Other heritage properties, meanwhile, languish in disrepair due to neglect.

Related to this is a lack of promotion. This writer recently visited Jipyeong Maggeolli, an 80-year-old brewery that has been producing maggeolli for three generations. Good luck trying to find anything about it in the tourist literature, though. Cities such as Mokpo, Gunsan, Incheon and Busan exude a wonderfully exotic charm thanks to their rich contemporary cultural heritage, but don’t do nearly enough to promote it. It’s a small wonder, then, when a well-known foreign tourist guide writes off Gunsan as an airport and little else, despite being home to one of Korea’s richest collections of contemporary/colonial architecture.

While promoting what they will build is important, it’s also good to remember to promote what you already have, lest one mistakenly give outsiders the impression that Korea is little more than a construction site with little in the way of culture and history, especially compared to neighbors such as Japan and China.

Robert Koehler is editor-in-chief of SEOUL, a monthly magazine copublished by Seoul Selection and Seoul Metropolitan Government. He is also a blogger who runs the Korean current events blog "The Marmot's Hole" (www.rjkoehler.com).