Art and Urban Regeneration in-between ‘youth’ and ‘compatriot’ in Guro: The Place making of the deindustrialized area behind the industrial gentrification/displacement

신현준

doi:10.19097/kaser.2016.26.3.77

Space and Environment

Log In/Sign Up
P-ISSN1225-6706
E-ISSN2733-4295
KCI

Home

ISSN : 1225-6706

Article Contents

Prev Next

e-Submission

Vol.26 No.3

Citation Share

Art and Urban Regeneration in-between ‘youth’ and ‘compatriot’ in Guro: The Place making of the deindustrialized area behind the industrial gentrification/displacement

Space and Environment / Space and Environment, (P)1225-6706; (E)2733-4295

2016, v.26 no.3, pp.77-114

https://doi.org/10.19097/kaser.2016.26.3.77

(2016). Art and Urban Regeneration in-between ‘youth’ and ‘compatriot’ in Guro: The Place making of the deindustrialized area behind the industrial gentrification/displacement. Space and Environment, 26(3), 77-114, https://doi.org/10.19097/kaser.2016.26.3.77

copy

Abstract

This paper investigates the socio-spatial changes and the place-making of Guro,a southwestern district of metropolitan Seoul. Home to the old ‘Guro IndustrialComplex’ in the 1960～90s, the area used to be consisted of organically formedworking class neighborhoods alongside low-rise factory buildings. Since the early2000s, the Complex has obtained a new name ― ‘G Valley(Digital Complex)’ ―through a state-sponsored, corporate-led industrial restructuring project that causeddisplacement on a massive scale. Old manufacturing industries of textile and electronicsgave way to new industries such as ICT and fashion, which located themselvesin newly built high-rise apartment-style factory and residential buildings. This restructuringsplit the district’s residential area into different segments, each populatedby old-time residents, community activists, young ‘creative’ industry workers, andKorean-Chinese returnees. In particular, artists and cultural entrepreneurs thatmoved into these run-down parts of the neighborhood have recently contributedto the physical preservation as well as symbolic reconstruction of the town. All thesechanges are interwoven in the name of urban regeneration and community building,which consists of both top-down policy and bottom-up activism at the same time. Thus Guro has become politically and culturally sensitive again because of the intersectionbetween industrial mobility, international migration, community activism,and local governance. Neither deindustrialized/gentrified nor dilapidated/deserted,Guro is an interesting place that may betray something unique about East Asianurban regeneration.

keywords: 구로, 산업적 전치, 젠트리피케이션, 도시재생, 문화예술, Guro, Industrial displacement, gentrification, urban regeneration, art and culture

Reference

구로시민센터. 2007. 『지역에서 희망을: 구로시민센터와 지역시민운동』. 구로시민센터.

구양미. 2002. ｢구로공단(서울디지털산업단지) 산업구조 개편에 관한 연구｣. ≪지리학논총≫, 39, 1～48쪽.

김경민·박재민. 2013. 『리씽킹 서울: 도시, 과거에서 미래를 보다』. 서해문집.

김번욱. 2014. ｢서울디지털단지 50년의 변천과정과 성과｣. ≪산업입지≫, 54, 34～41쪽.

김예란. 2016. ｢탈주와 모방－1970년대 청년문화의 감각과 정동 실천｣. ≪언론과 사회≫, 24(3), 178～224쪽.

김 원. 2015. ｢구로공단이라는 장소의 소멸: 90년대 구로공단의 ‘재영토화’를 중심으로｣. ≪한국학 논집≫, 59, 99～174쪽.

김지윤. 2015. ｢‘봉제마을’ 창신동: 도시재생과 산업재생의 엇박자｣. ≪도시연구: 역사·사회·문화≫, 14, 125～157쪽.

박용규·송영필·전영옥. 2007. 『‘구로공단’ 부활의 의미』. 삼성경제연구소.

박준도. 2014. 『서울디지털산업단지 노동환경 실태 2011-2013』. 노동자의 미래.

10.

배웅규. 2015. ｢가리봉지역 도시 마을만들기를 위한 재생 노력과 과제｣. ≪건축≫, 59(6), 29～36쪽.

11.

서울시. 2015. 『2025 서울시 도시재생 전략계획(안)』. 서울: 서울특별시.

12.

서울역사박물관 편. 2013. 『가리봉동: 구로공단 배후지에서 다문화의 공간으로』. 서울역사박물관.

13.

성공회대학교 노동사연구소. 2012. 『디지털 시대의 구로공단』. 한국학술정보.

14.

성공회대학교 노동사연구소. 2013. 『디지털 시대의 노동자들』. 한국학술정보.

15.

성공회대학교 노동사연구소. 2015. 『디지털 시대의 구로지역』. 한국학술정보.

16.

신현준·김지윤. 2015. ｢서울의 젠트리피케이션과 도시재생 혹은 개발주의 이후 도시공간의 모순과 경합｣. ≪사이間 SAI≫, 19, 221～246쪽.

17.

신현준·이기웅 편. 2016. 『서울, 젠트리피케이션을 말하다』. 푸른숲.

18.

이선영. 2016. ｢닐 스미스와 젠트리피케이션, 그리고 한국｣. ≪공간과 사회≫, 56, 209～234쪽.

19.

장세훈. 2014. ｢구로 수출산업공단 조성의 재해석｣. ≪대한지리학회지≫, 49(2), 160～177쪽.

20.

지충남. 2014. ｢재개발사업이 재한조선족 집거지에 미친 영향－가리봉동을 중심으로｣. ≪한국민족문화≫, 53, 235～277쪽.

21.

질 들뢰즈·펠릭스 가타리. 김재인 역. 1987/2001. 『천 개의 고원』. 새물결.

22.

최영숙. 2014. ｢구로디지털단지(a.k.a. 구로공단) 괴담: 창의도시에서 누락된 생산의손들｣. 구정연·임경용·청개구리제작소 엮음. 『공공도큐멘트 3 다들 만들고 계십니까?』. 미디어버스, 12～26쪽.

23.

최영숙. 2016. ｢구로공단: 전신성형, 그리고 유리빌딩의 환청｣. 신현준·이기웅 편. 『서울, 젠트리피케이션을 말하다』. 푸른숲, 323～363쪽.

24.

Cameron, S. and Coaffee, J. 2005. “Art, gentrification and regeneration: From artist as pioneer to public arts.” European Journal of Housing Policy, 5(1), pp. 39～58.

25.

Cresswell, T. 2004. Place: a short introduction. Oxford: Blackwell.

26.

Curran, W. 2007. “From the frying pan to the oven: Gentrification and the experience of industrial displacement in Williamsburg, Brooklyn.” Urban Studies, 44(8), pp. 1427～1440.

27.

Davidson, M. and Lees, L. 2005. “New-build ‘gentrification’ and London’s riverside renaissance.” Environment and Planning, 37(7), pp. 1165～1190.

28.

Hamnett, C. 2015. “Gentrification: its history, forms, causes and consequences.” in The 7th Seoul Art Space International Symposium: Artist, Gentrification and Urban Regeneration, 27 Nov 2015, 19～27, Seoul Foundation for Arts and Culture.

29.

Hamnett, C. and Whitelegg, D. 2007. “Loft conversion and gentrification in London: From industrial to postindustrial land use.” Environment and Planning A, 39(1), pp. 228～234.

30.

Lees, L., Shin, H. B. and López-Morales, E.(eds.). 2015. Global Gentrifications: Uneven Development and Displacement. Bristol: Policy Press.

31.

Lees, L., Slater, T. and Wyly, E. 2008. Gentrification. New York & London: Routledge.

32.

Lombard, M. 2014. “Constructing ordinary places: Place-making in urban informal settlements in Mexico.” Progress in Planning, 94, pp. 1～53.

33.

Maloutas, T. 2012. “Contextual diversity in gentrification research.” Critical Sociology, 38(1), pp. 33～48.

34.

Mathews, V. 2010. “Aestheticizing space: Art, gentrification and the city.” Geography Compass, 4(6), pp. 660～675.

35.

Mathews, V. 2014. “Incoherence and tension in culture-led redevelopment.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 38(3), 1019～1036.

36.

Shin, H. B. and Kim, S.-H. 2016. “The developmental state, speculative urbanisation and the politics of displacement in gentrifying Seoul.” Urban Studies, 53(3), pp. 540～559.

37.

Yoon, Heeyeun and Elizabeth Currid-Halkett. 2015. “Industrial gentrification in West Chelsea, New York: Who survived and who did not? Empirical evidence from discrete-time survival analysis.” Urban Studies, 52(1), pp. 20～49.

38.

Zukin, S. 1989. Loft Living: Culture and Capital in Urban Change. 2nd ed. Brunswick, NJ:Rutgers University Press.

39.

Zukin, S. 2008. “Consuming authenticity.” Cultural Studies, 22(5), pp. 724～748.

40.

인터뷰 A(30대 여성, 문화예술기획자)

41.

인터뷰 C(60대 남성, 상인)

42.

인터뷰 J1(20대 여성, 예술가·문화기획자)

43.

인터뷰 J2(30대 여성, 마을기업가)

44.

인터뷰 J3(40대 남성, 예술가·문화기획자)

45.

인터뷰 K1(40대 여성, 영화감독)

46.

인터뷰 K2(30대 남성, 사회적 기업가)

47.

인터뷰 K3(40대 남성, 지역활동가)

48.

인터뷰 S1(50대 남성, 문화예술기획자)

49.

인터뷰 S2(20대 여성, 예술기획자)

50.

인터뷰 S3(40대 남성, 지역문화활동가)

51.

인터뷰 S4(40대 여성, 지역활동가)

52.

인터뷰 Y(20대 여성, 예술가·문화기획자)

바로가기메뉴

Article Contents

Vol.26 No.3

Art and Urban Regeneration in-between ‘youth’ and ‘compatriot’ in Guro: The Place making of the deindustrialized area behind the industrial gentrification/displacement

Abstract

Reference

Space and Environment