Considering on the crisis and dilemma of monumentality in Modern architecture, this study analyse the historic reason of decay and new possibility of monumentality within the context of contemporary socio-cultural context. Historically monumentality has been considered as a main substance of High architecture in the tradition of Western Architecture. Difference between building and architecture mainly lies in monumentality which brings about esthetic quality. Usually architects take it granted that the physical and formal characteristics automatically cause the monumentality. But since the modern period the decline of communicative and representative function of architecture made this belief questionable. As Monumentality itself faced the dilemma with the modernity, ironically architects has to response to the task to handle the increasing social demands of monumental building. This study firstly shows the dilemma of monumentality in depth in case of the holocaust museum. Then we analyse the concept of monumentality itself by means of theoretical view of A Loos and A Riegl We also analyse the change of role which monumental building played in history. Cultural and social change of context, and fundamental change of architecture old way of building a monument impossible. In conclusion this study proposes the new concept and searches new horizon of monumentality with a finding of the otherness of monumentality. Conventional monumental building language has to give way to new approaches. With some examples we already can find a new possibility.
This paper is a study of Le Corbusier's trace regulateur of the 1920s, particularly its role in the design of the Villas La Roche Jeannerct and stein-de Monzie. It proceeds on the basis of the following three themes; first, the relation between the regulation line and the dom-ino frame; second, its status as p proportional device based not on a module system but one that defines relations; third, its function as an essential practical device in the design process. In the Villa La Roche-Jeanneret, the embedded horizontal planes of the dom-ino frame were constant, but the vertical lines of the columns were altered according to the changes in plan. Initially, a left-hand bay window formed a symmetry with the right-hand bay window, the only constant in the design process. With subsequent changes, mullion sections of the horizontal window and roof elements came to provide the reference points for the regulating line. Eventually, a regulating line different from the one that controlled the bay window and the elongated volume came to control the entrance hall of Villa La Roche, resulting in three different kinds of regulating lines in the final version. In contrast to the Villa La Roche-Jeanneret, a singular and consistent regulation line was anticipated in the earliest design stages of the Villa Stein-de Monzic. The repetition of its A:B grid and the standard 2.5m×1.0m sliding window determined the proportions of both its plan and elevation, and thus the regulating line became ""automatic,"" losing its viability as a practical tool. Though the regulating lines of the La Roche-Jeanneret look as if they ere an afterthought, drawn after the design was complete, they were most active, requiring tenacity and discipline in their application. On the other hand, the seemingly ""redundant"" regulating line of the Villa Stein-de Monzie gains its raison d'etre from the dom-ino frame. Its cantilevers and uninterrupted horizontal window could be used in decisive fashion because of the guarantee that the correct proportion would always be maintained. Thus we discover that LE Corbusier's discipline of the 1920s had a certain spectrum of flexibility. His ""parti"" ranged from the extremely loose and malleable grid of the Villa La Roche-Jeanneret to the fixed grid of the Villa Stein-de Monzie. In different ways, these projects retain the tension between the dom-ino frame and the regulating line. For Le Corbusier, as much as the grid was an object with fixed attributes, it was also an active medium manipulated by the will of the architect.
This study is to analyze spatial structure of Eupchi(邑治) on Chungchong province with Chungchong-do regional maps(忠淸道地方地圖) and Eupjis(邑治) being compiled in the late Chosun dynasty. According to the analysis of it in this study, we make conclusions a follows; 1. Gunhyeon(郡縣) which had been Eupseong(邑城) on Changchong-do in Chosun dynasty was 13 provinces, and the construction of Eupseong was the coast Eupseong built for the purpose of defense and military Eusaeong built at Byeongyeong(兵營) and Geojin(巨鎭). And a measure used in the construction of a castle was Pobaekcheok(布帛尺) used to survey a frontier defence in Chosun dynasty, also Jucheok(周尺) or Yeongjocheok(營造尺) could be assumed to be wide use at that time. 2. Eupchi of Chungchong-do Gungyeon was almost disposed to the south direction. also had been Jinsan(鎭山) safeguarding it. With relation to Jwahyang(坐向) and Jinsan, its Jinsan and Myeongdang-cheon(明堂川) match each other in location of Eupchi, as it get Jinsan sat, and take main river in front of it. And provincial government office to be the center of a Eupchi is organized into Gaeksa(客舍), Dongheon(東軒), Naea(內衙), Hyangcheong(鄕廳), and practical business facilities, Jakcheong(作聽) or Jangcheong etc, the others is composed for the use of support of those. 3. In most Eupchi in Chougchong province, the layout Sajikdan(社稷壇) and Yeodan(?壇) was gone with a principle as they were disposed in the west and the north with Eupchi province. Jangsi(場市) of Eupchi was opened in front of government office of Gaeksa, and the Gunhyeon which had Eupseong was established in the inside and outside of Eupseong.