It is not easy to clarify the historical perspective of architect through his architecture. Exceptional cases, it will be the time to design a history museum. As an institution, a Museum already became an apparatus to represent the history to it itself. Libeskind’s Jewish museum Berlin has been presented as the controversial case most of all. In particular, in that it instead of dealing with history positive, that contains a tragic history, this building is a building that history a unique interpretation of the architect has been a problem. Therefore, it is difficult to find a suitable example to Libeskind’s Jewish museum in Berlin to try and look at the problem of the history of contemporary history and interpretation of the architect. In this paper, I am trying to interpret Libeskind’s Jewish Museum Berlin through the aesthetics and history philosophy of Theodor Adorno and Walter Benjamin. They are Jewish and the central figures of the Frankfurt School, known as ‘critical theorists’. Their critical theory was formed based on the experience of the Jewish genocide and war.

1. 서 론
 2. 발터 벤야민의 “파편”과 “미로”를 통해본유태인 박물관
  2.1 발터 벤야민의 “파편”적 역사
  2.2 벤야민의 “미로”
 3. 아도르노의 “아우슈비츠 이후의 시”
  3.1 계몽의 변증법과 유태인 박물관
  3.2 ‘아우슈비츠 이후의 시’
 4. 유태인 박물관에 대한 최근의 재평가
 5. 맺음말
 References

• 이경창(명지대학교 건축공학과 박사) | Lee Kyoung-Chang