Reflections from the Past: Demolition of the National Museum and its Correlation to Western Monuments

National Museum of Korea, formerly the Japanese Government-General Building (top), and its demolition (bottom). Source: Kim, H. (1998) “Removing the Legacy of the Korean Past.” Curator v.41 (3) pp. 178-186

When reflecting on art history, it is a commonality to miss reciprocal events in which modernity coincides with past decisions and actions cross-country and abroad. When reflecting on our country, it is hard for me to not make note of another instance in my lifetime where public monuments were at the forefront of national debate. Specifically, I want to shed light on the National Museum of South Korea.  

On June 1, 1996, the building of the National Museum of Korea was permanently closed when President Kim Young-sam decided to dismantle the National Museum building and relocate the museum “to safeguard national pride and prestige.” (Kim, p.180) To give context, in 1910, Korea signed the Japan-Korea Annexation treaty and came under Japanese colonial rule. Under the Japanese occupation, the Museum of the Yi Royal Family became a cultural auxiliary, renamed to the Joseon Governor-General’s Museum, and was housed in the Governor-General’s Office. The Governor-General’s Office was one of Japan’s most ambitious architectural projects because it amassed over 97,000 square meters and overshadowed the Gyeongbok Royal Palace- the largest palace built during the Joseon Dynasty. (Lee, p. 374-375) Korea’s cultural treasures were under Japanese control until 1945 when Korea received its independence. The museum was renamed the National Museum of Korea and, in 1969, the National Museum merged with the Museum of the Yi Royal Family. (Lee, p. 374)

With this in mind, the permanent closure of the building in 1996 leads to unique community dialogue and a division in thought. Specifically, there were “pro-demolition” people and “preservation” people. (Kim, p. 181) Regarding each position, the pro-demolition people aligned with President Kim Young-sam and the ideology of “restoration of the national spirit.” They not only wanted the building demolished but advocated for the removal of “geomantic” copper pitons driven into the mountain peaks. The site for the colonial headquarters and the suspicious poles on the sacred and scenic mountains were viewed as mechanisms for Japanese control. The preservation people opposed the demolition because the building built for Japanese colonial rule, although a disgrace, should be kept to educate the public on the shameful, unrepeatable history. As noted by a senior citizen, “The demolition of the former Japanese colonial government building cannot bury the disgraceful past. Why are we trying to forget the past when the Japanese government shows a flip-flop attitude and some of their cabinet members are trying to gloss over the war?” (Kim, pp. 181-182)

While reflecting on the “pro-demolition” people and “preservation” people, another unique viewpoint comes from Kim Hong-sik. Kim Hong-sik was the western equivalent to a registrar at the National Museum of Korea back when it was in the Gyeongbok Palace. Hired in the mind-1970s, Hong-sik dedicated 32 years of his life to the museum and retired in 2005 as the senior curator. (p.46-47) He was involved with the museum’s three relocations and transferred over 100,000 cultural treasures. When asked his viewpoint about the transfer of objects due to the demolition of the Japanese Government-General Building, he notes he only cared about the safety of the objects in the collection. (p. 49) Hong-sik noted, “I like being in close contact with the artifacts and I felt like they allow me to remain the person I am…People said I was difficult and obstinate, but I wasn’t too bothered. My number one priority was to protect the artifacts…Only a country that invests in its culture will last.” (Jae-suk, pp.47 & 49)

In closing of this blog, I hope you will reflect on each testimony and draw your own conclusion. Whether you are pro or anti demolition of monuments in this country, or if you are a museum professional, you are entitled to your opinion and should voice your concern. If those in charge of cultural heritage are unaware, we cannot perform our due diligence in rectifying the situation. As an American Alliance of Museums accredited museum, we serve the public and value your voice regardless of position. You matter and deserve to be heard.  

Tory Schendel Cox

The Virginia G. Schroeder Curator of Art

Works Cited

Chung Jae-suk. (2015). A Lifetime Passion and Career. Koreana, 29(3), 46–49.

Lee, J.J. (2011) “The National Museum as Palimpsest: Postcolonial politics and the National Museum of Korea.” In National Museums: New Studies from Around the World. S. Knell, P. Aronsson, A. B. Amundsen, A.J. Barnes, S. Burch, J. Carter, V. Gosselin, S. A. Highes, and A. Kirwan (eds.) Routledge, London. pp. 373-385 

Kim, H. (1998) “Removing the Legacy of the Korean Past.” Curator v.41 (3) pp. 178-186