SPACE has now reached its 700th issue. It must have experienced many vicissitudes, but the fact that an architecture magazine that is published every month – not every year, nor quarter – has reached its 700th issue is a deeply meaningful ‘event’ in terms of Korean architectural culture. Twenty years ago, precisely, when I went to study in the U.S., I remember seeing a new issue of SPACE in the periodicals section of the library every month.
At that time, it was the only Korean architecture magazine, and my foreign friends gained an understanding of Korean architecture (which occupied a quite different position to that of today) through SPACE. Marking its 700th issue, we now seek to understand the trends, phenomena, and changes in our own architecture through SPACE, in reverse. Assuming that SPACE represents authorial architecture in Korea, I aim to look at – albeit broadly – the trends that have shaped Korean architecture over the past 60 years or so by structuring an analytical framework from a macro perspective.
●1 Number of projects by programme
●2 Number of projects by gross floor area
Smaller, and Even Smaller
Architects in their forties who are currently actively practising – that is, those affiliated with the first cohort to complete the five-year architectural education programme – are likely to have experienced design studio courses in which they designed buildings for programmes such as single houses, multi-family housing, schools, performance venues, art museums, and office buildings. Looking at the outline of works featured in SPACE that are representative of Korean architecture makes it easy to understand why the curriculum was structured in this manner during the 1990s and early 2000s. Excluding single houses, which have been a consistent feature of SPACE since its first issue, the primary programmes of works featured in SPACE during the 1980s and 1990s were, in general, mostly office buildings, schools, and cultural and assembly facilities. Given that Korean education runs alongside SPACE in terms of authorialism, it is unsurprising that programmes predominantly featured in SPACE serve as subjects for design studio assignments.
Then, consider the architects who designed programmes such as performance venues and office buildings in their design studios during their undergraduate years. What projects might they be working on now? If we look at the period following the 2010s, which is the time they would have begun practising in earnest, it is already evident from a phenomenalised perspective. Even judging by the list of works featured in SPACE, it is clear that neighbourhood living facilities and single houses form the majority of the projects.●1 Among them, single houses accounted for the highest number of features in the 2010s, while neighbourhood living facilities have done so since the 2020s. In terms of building scope, works with gross floor areas of 2,000 to 5,000m2 predominated in the 1980s and 1990s. However, since 2010, works with gross floor areas of just 200 to 50...
