The aim of this paper is to show how the paradigm of disaster resilience may help reorienting urban planning policies in order to mitigate various types of risks, thanks to carefully thought action on heritage and conservation practices. Resilience is defined as the “capacity of a social system to proactively adapt to and recover from disturbances that are perceived within the system to fall outside the range of normal and expected disturbances.”1 It relies greatly on risk perception2 and the memory of catastrophes. States, regions, municipalities, have been giving territorial materiality to collective memory for centuries,3 but this trend has considerably increased in the second half of the 20th century.4 This is particularly true regarding the memory of disasters: for example, important traces of catastrophes such as urban ruins have been preserved, because they were supposed to maintain some awareness and hence foster urban resilience – Berlin’s Gedächtniskirche is a well-known example of this policy.5 Yet, in spite of preserved traces of catastrophes and various warnings and heritage policies, there are countless examples of risk mismanagement and urban tragedies. Using resilience as a guiding concept might change the results of these failed risk mitigation policies and irrelevant disaster memory processes. Indeed, the concept of resilience deals with the complexity of temporal and spatial scales, and with partly emotional and qualitative processes, so that this approach fits the issues of urban memory management. Resilience might help underlining the complexity and the subtlety of remembrance messages, and lead to alternative paths better adapted to the diversity of risks, places and actors. However, when it is given territorial materiality, memory is almost always symbolically and politically framed and interpreted; Vale and Campanella had already outlined this political aspect of remembrance and resilience as a discourse.6 Resilience and the territorialization of memory are not ideologically neutral, but urban risk mitigation may come at that price.
목차
Introduction I. Risk mismanagements and political ambiguities 1. Misleading risk management and memory policies 2. The political ambiguities of disaster memory II. Resilience, perception and memory 1.Taking into account perception and complexity 2. The “positive” side of resilience 3. A different approach of scales, actors and territories III. Disaster resilience: from theory to practice 1. Memory as a complex system of links between people and territories 2. The memory of disasters 3. An example: preserving urban ruins 4. Urban resilience and oblivion Conclusion References Abstract
한국미술이론학회는 미술이론의 고유한 역할과 방향을 모색하고자 창립되었다. 미술창작과 해석에 필요한 제반이론을 생산하고 다양한 미술현장의 활동을 검증하고 비판하며 연구하는 학회로서 미술의 이론과 실제사이의 분리현상을 극복하는데 기여하고자 한다. 현재 미술관련 학회들의 성격이 대부분 이론영역에 치중해있고, 학과나 전공에 특화되어 있는데 반하여, 본 학회는 미술의 현장과 창작과정을 적극 반영하고 미학, 미술사 등 기존의 미술이론 영역 뿐 아니라 실기와 미술교육, 경영, 행정, 전시 등 다양한 분야를 총괄하는 학제 간 연구를 활성화시키고자 한다. 앞으로 다양한 미술이론 영역에 대한 심도 있는 연구는 물론 한국미술계의 발전과 변화에 조력할 수 있는 실천적이고 생산적인 미술이론의 형성에 본 학회는 최선을 다할 것이다.