통일독일 수도 베를린의 발명 -도시공간의 형성과 기억의 도구화에 관하여-
Inventing the Capital of the reunified Germany, Berlin －The formation of urban space and the instrumentalization of memory－
0
조회
0
다운로드
6
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
A Space is to be “invented” by the process of differentiating itself from other spaces. Berlin, the Capital of the reunified Germany, is the arena of contesting identities, while the new Berlin’s city planners have appealed to alleged “lost tradition.” What distinguishes Berlin from other western metropolises is her extreme imbalance between remembering and forgetting, so that Berlin never comes to a collective memory in accord and only turns out to be “lieux de mémoire,” the artificially created sites of memory. Although the so-called “Berlin Republic” has staked much of her administration on a policy of national unity, her most representative “lieux de mémoire” such as Potsdamer Platz, the upcoming Berlin City Palace, and Reichstag cannot hide the unmasterable disparity between outward self-display and conflict at home, between selective memory and traumatic disturbances. This issue is getting more acute in the Holocaust memorial sites which have much more flourished since the reunification. Whereas the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe in the heart of Berlin is facing the dangers of using German people’s mourning for the victims for claiming their own moral superiority, the Topography of Terror has the merit of galvanizing the campaign against forgetting historical responsibility of the so-called perpetrator nation. So the case of Berlin helps to understand that modern city holds diverse identities, and therefore that the domination of a particular memory is always accompanied by the repression of other memories. (Busan National University of Education/jsc77@bnue.ac.kr)
Abstract
A Space is to be “invented” by the process of differentiating itself from other spaces. Berlin, the Capital of the reunified Germany, is the arena of contesting identities, while the new Berlin’s city planners have appealed to alleged “lost tradition.” What distinguishes Berlin from other western metropolises is her extreme imbalance between remembering and forgetting, so that Berlin never comes to a collective memory in accord and only turns out to be “lieux de mémoire,” the artificially created sites of memory. Although the so-called “Berlin Republic” has staked much of her administration on a policy of national unity, her most representative “lieux de mémoire” such as Potsdamer Platz, the upcoming Berlin City Palace, and Reichstag cannot hide the unmasterable disparity between outward self-display and conflict at home, between selective memory and traumatic disturbances. This issue is getting more acute in the Holocaust memorial sites which have much more flourished since the reunification. Whereas the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe in the heart of Berlin is facing the dangers of using German people’s mourning for the victims for claiming their own moral superiority, the Topography of Terror has the merit of galvanizing the campaign against forgetting historical responsibility of the so-called perpetrator nation. So the case of Berlin helps to understand that modern city holds diverse identities, and therefore that the domination of a particular memory is always accompanied by the repression of other memories. (Busan National University of Education/jsc77@bnue.ac.kr)
참고문헌 (64)
- Karen E. Till, "The New Berlin. Memory, Politics, Place", pp.5~ (2005), University of Minnesota Press
- Brian Ladd, "The Ghosts of Berlin", pp.234~ (1997), University of Chicago Press
- Andreas Huyssen, "Urban Palimpsests and the Politics of Memory", pp.72~ (2003), Stanford University Press
- 피에르 노라, "기억의 장소." (2010), 나남
- Brian, "The Ghosts of Berlin", pp.117~
- Alexander Richie, "Faust’s Metropolis. A History of Berlin" (1998), Basic Books
- Andreas Huyssen, "The Voids of Berlin", Critical Inquiry, 24, pp.57~81 (1997)
- Brian Ladd, "The Ghosts of Berlin", pp.7~39
- Hans-Hermann Hertle, "The Berlin Wall. Monument of the Cold War" (2008), Christoph Links Verlag
- Andreas Huyssen, "Present Pasts", pp.84~
- 최호근, "베를린, 냉전의 상징에서 유럽의 중심으로"
- 이영석, "도시는 역사다", pp.215~219 (2011), 서해문집
- Edgar Wolfrum, "Die Mauer. Geschichte einer Teilung" (2009), C. H. Beck
- Philipp Meuser, "Berlin. The Architecture Guide", pp.172~173 (2007), Braun Publish
- Karen Till, "The New Berlin", pp.261~, Philipp Meuser
- Dieter Hoffmann-Axthelm, "Ein Niemandsland, das nur der Geschichte gehört", Frankfurt Allgemeine Zeitung (1993. 1. 20); Brian Ladd, The Ghosts of Berlin, 229~231 (1993)
- Philipp Meuser, "Berlin. The Architecture Guide", pp.250~251
- Karen Till, "The New Berlin", pp.36~50.
- Goerd Peschken, "Das Berliner Schloß" (2000), Bebra Verlag
- Rudy Koshar, "Germany’s Transient Pasts. Preservation and National Memory in the Twentieth Century", pp.205~ (1998), The University of North Carolina Press
- Rudy Koshar, "From Monuments to Traces. Artifacts of German Memory 1870-1990", pp.157~161 (2000), University of California Press
- Brian Ladd, "Socialism on Display. East Berlin as a Capital, In Christof Mauch, Berlin-Washington, 1800-2000. Capital Cities, Cultural Representation, and National Identities", pp.217~231 (2005), Cambridge University Press
- Wilhelm von Boddien, "Die Berliner Schloßdebatte-Pro und Contra" (2000), Berliner Wissenschafts-Verlag
- Moritz Holfelder, "Palast der Republik. Aufstieg und Fall eines symbolischen Gebäudes" (2008), Ch. Links Verlag
- John Edward Toews, "Becoming Historical: Cultural Reformation and Public Memory in Early Nineteenth-Century Berlin", pp.153~ (2008), Cambridge University Press
- Christoph Stölzl, "Die Neue Wache Unter den Linden. Ein deutsches Denkmal im Wandel der Geschichte" (1993), Koehler & Amelang Verlag
- Wallis Miller, "A User’s Guide to German Cultural Studies, In Schinkel and the Politics of German Memory: The Life of the Neue Wache in Berlin, In A User’s Guide to German Cultural Studies", pp.227~256 (1997), University of Michigan Press
- Nikolaus Bernau, "Museuminsel Berlin" (2010), Stadtwandel
- Mitchell Ash, "나치 과거 해석의 주도권 경쟁, In 분단의 두 얼굴", pp.317~334 (1998), 역사비평사
- Werner Durth, "Architektur und Städtebau der DDR", pp.126~193 (1998), Jovis
- Bernd Wilczek, "Berlin-Hauptstadt der DDR 1949-1989. Utopie der Realität", pp.33~50 (1995), Elster Verlag
- Gabi Dolff-Bonekämper, "Das Hansaviertel. internationale Nachkriegsmoderne in Berlin" (1999), Verlag Bauwesen
- H. Glenn Penny Ⅲ, "The Museum für deutsche Geschichte und German National Identity", Central European History, 28, pp.343~372 (1995)
- Brian Ladd, "The Ghosts of Berlin", pp.221~222
- Jürgen Reiche, "Symbolgehalt und Bedeutungswandel eines politischen Monuments, In Das Brandenburger Tor 1791-1991. Eine Monographie", pp.304~ (1991), Arenhövel
- Rudy Koshar, "Germany’s Transient Pasts", pp.302~306
- Charles Maier, "The Unmasterable Past. History, Holocaust, and German National Identity", pp.121~159 (1988), Harvard University Press
- Christoph Stölzl, "Bonn oder Berlin?, In Hauptstadt. Historische Perspektiven eines deutschen Themas", pp.269~275 (1995), Dtv
- Laurence McFalls, "Living with Which Past? National Identity in Post-Wall, Postwar Germany, In A User’s Guide to German Cultural Studies", pp.297~308
- Michael S. Cullen, "Der Reichstag. Im Spannungsfeld deutscher Geschichte", pp.9~10 (2004), be.bra verlag
- Matthew Jefferies, "Imperial Culture in Germany 1871-1918", pp.83~ (2003), Palgrave Macmillan
- Iain Boyd Whyte, "The Cambridge Companion to Modern German Culture", pp.285~ (1998), Cambridge University Press
- Michael S. Cullen, "Der Reichstag. Die Geschichte eines Monuments", pp.38~ (1983), Frölich & Kaufmann
- Kurt Milde, "Neorenaissance in der deutschen Architektur", pp.303~ (1981), Verlag der Kunst
- Christo, Christo, "Projekte in der Stadt 1961-1981", pp.95~ (1981), Museum Ludwig
- Rudy Koshar, "Germany’s Transient Pasts", pp.329~340
- Karen Till, "The New Berlin", pp.51~
- Moshe Zuckermann, "Trauerarbeit und Trauerpolitik: Gedenken und Ideologie im Umgang mit der Holocaust-Erinnerung, In Trauer und Geschichte", pp.297~306 (2001), Böhlau
- Janet Ward, "Monuments of Catastrophe: Holocaust Architecture in Washington and Berlin", pp.166~185, Christof Mauch
- Karen Till, "The New Berlin", pp.123~168
- Lea Rosh, "Ein Mahnmal gehört in das Zentrum der Stadt", Tageszeitu, ~ (1989)
- Rosh, "Kein monumentales Denkmal", Tageszeitung, ~ (1989)
- "Schalten Sie nicht ab. Gedenkstätten in der Ökonomie der Aufmerksamkeit"[URL]
- James E. Young, "At Memory’s Edge. After-Images of the Holocaust in Contemporary Art and Architecture", pp.184~ (2000), Yale University Press
- Rosh, "Kein monumentales Denkmal", Tageszeitung, ~ (1989)
- Peter Reichel, "dPolitik mit der Erinnerung", 196~
- Aleida Assmann, "Erinnerungsräume. Formen und Wandel des kulturellen Gedächtnisses" (1999), C.H.Beck
- Pierre Nora, "노라의 기억의 터" (1990), Fischer
- Aleida Assmann, "과거의 죄업에 대한 독일 사회의 망각에 대해서는" (1999), Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt DVA
- Reinhard Rürup, "Topography of terror. Gestapo, SS and Reichssicherheitshauptamt on the “Prinz-Albrecht-Terrain.” A Documentation" (1989), Willmuth Arenhovel
- Erika Bucholtz, "Geländerundgang “Topographie des Terrors.” Geschichte des historischen Orts" (2010), Stiftung Topographie des Terrors
- 전진성, "홀로코스트와 문화적 기억, In 역사가 기억을 말하다", pp.219~226 (2005), 휴머니스트
- 슬라보예 지젝, "이데올로기라는 숭고한 대상", pp.328~ (2001), 인간사랑
- Marianne Hirsch, "Family Frames: Photography, Narrative, and Postmemory" (1997), Harvard University Press