Earticle

This paper examines a public hall opened by the municipal government in colonial Seoul. Sited at one of the hub areas of downtown Seoul and currently used as the main building of the Seoul Metropolitan Council, Gyeongseong bumingwan or Keijō fuminkan (literally, a hall for Gyeongseong municipal people) remains one of only a few colonial edifices in the city. In particular, this study inquires into the questions of what the government has sought for through the building of a public hall and in what way the hall has become a way of urban life as a grand hall. By the early 1930s, dwellers of Seoul, especially the Japanese, have strongly aspired for the construction of a ‘grand hall,’ which would be capable of accommodating congregations and lectures, performances and movie screenings, and rite gatherings and other social- work meetings. Especially many of the urban Japanese yearned for performances of first-class Kabuki troupes of imperial Japan. On December 10, 1935, the opening day of the hall, the municipal government has tried to deliver the message of uniting officials and common populace and Koreans and the Japanese into municipal people or ‘bumin’ through a series of ceremonies; at the same time, it has proclaimed the completion of the hall to be a sacred project of the colonialist through a Shinto rite. Although rental fees of the hall were quite expensive, it has been utilized for many purposes. Not only those events of lectures, conventions, plays, films, and music concerts were held in the hall, but such social rites as weddings and memorial services could also be arranged in the hall. To be sure, the grand public hall has contributed to gather together the urban masses in the name of ‘municipal people.’ This collective mood was accelerated when the news of the Sino-Japanese War(1937) reached the colonial city, and the hall was swiftly transformed into a theatre for boosting war fever among the people. It was during the war period that Gyeongseong bumingwan could be best used as a grand public hall for unity.

Although it was impossible, Japanese colonialists tried to establish westernized medicalsystem in colonial Korea. There were no substitutions for medical labor force, and Koeransare not accustomed to it. Japanese colonialists cheapened Korean tradiotional doctor, butthey had to educate some of them about preventing cholera. They even made a suggestionto them to build Pibyongwon, which is Korean style isolation hospital. Strictly speaking,encouraging and inducing to discuss about korean friendly agenda in korean society is atrick to shift burdens of health care onto themselves, justified using public interest. But Koreantradiotional doctors and entrepreneurs responded actively on this proposal. Becauseprevention and treatment of cholera were a critical issue to Korean society. There were some logical arguments required to Park, Younghyo to speak out about Pibyongwoncampaign toward Korean society in Seoul, although it was induced. In the processof motion the first man on the initiator list was Kim, Yunsik. Park tried to use symbolicfeatures of Kim, who was a representative of Confucian scholars. Kim treated people whomake a huge effort to solve local problems by themselves as iconic figure. From the perspectiveof autonomist Park, ‘traditional literati’s way of solving problems by leading in autonomic area’ is the strongest logical argument to support his stance as the one of the leadersof Pibyongwon campaign. Although critical mind about leader’s autonomic role had beensucceeded to literati of late Chosun period, those Chosun style inertia was spoiled by Kimand spoiled inertia was reused by Park. The inertia and the condition of reinterpreting can be identified in the discussion aboutthe location. The designation to construct public hospital in the center of the city wascompletely different from perspectives in Chosun period, which was to build an isolationhospital in the outside of the city wall. Koreans’ disharmony to the public hospital was becauseof not only hygiene police system and western medical system, but also the locationof it which invaded Korean citizens’ life-world. As the campaign went into orbit, the locationof it became an issue again. Leaders of the campaign tried to find some suitable placesbased on the traditional perspective, they encounter opposition every time. Oppositionswere severe from outer city wall. As demands about improving residential environment increaseddramatically in Korean society, old locational inertia disappeared from the sights ofurban citizens.

After the liberation, the US Military Government used Gyeongseong or keijo as thename of Seoul. They decided to use ‘Seoul’ instead of Gyeongseong from September 14,but ‘Seoul-si’, ‘Hanseong-si(漢城市)’ and ‘Gyeongseong-bu’(京城府) were used in mix. Atthe end of 1945, the council meeting of Gyeongseong-bu decided to write ‘Hanseong-si(漢城市)’ and to read it as ‘Seoul-si’, but the US Military Government refused it that lingeredthe confusion regarding the name. On August 10, 1946, the US Military Governmentannounced 「Charter of The City of Seoul」 commemorating the 1st anniversary of theliberation. Based on it, Gyeongseong-bu was renamed to Seoul Special Free City under themilitary government ordinance no. 106 on September 19. President Seungman Rhee made a statement on September 16, 1955 suggesting the revisionof the name of Seoul because ‘Seoul’ is a common noun indicating the capital city, itis not a proper noun indicating a land name and it is hard for foreigners to pronounce andrequesting discussion of its alternative. Classical scholars of the country such as Choi Namseon,Lee Byeongdo, Choi Hyeonbae and Kim Yoongyeong and some people expressedopinion of agreement. As alternatives, ‘Hanyang’ and ‘Hanseong’ were suggested manyamong old names of Seoul. Korean linguists suggested a Korean name like ‘Hanbeol’. Also ‘Woonam-si’ was suggested with the nickname of the president. There were opposing opinions against rename. Lee Huiseung, a Korean linguist, manypeople and Donga Ilbo expressed opinion of disagreement. While Seoul is a commonnoun indicating the capital city, as it has been used as a name of a specific region, it must beconsidered to be converted into a proper noun. And difficult pronunciation for foreignersis not a matter of consideration in deciding the name of the capital city. And, the reason ofopposition include that it has been widely used for a long time and well known to overseas,and affection of people was formed. The issue of rename of Seoul came to nothing after 1year’ s discussion. The discussion of rename of Seoul was not appropriate in terms of time, and it tookplace abruptly without a proper context. But, considering the fact that representative classicalscholars such as Choi Namseon, Lee Byeongdo and Choi Hyeonbae supported, it wasnot a simple happening that some close associate with the president attempted to changethe name of Seoul to the nickname of the president. In consequence, it demonstratedplainly that the name of the capital city after the liberation was decided without properdiscussion process.