지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
이 논문의 연구 히스토리 (2)
- 이 논문의 후속연구가 궁금하신가요?
- 연관 학술논문 또는 학술발표를 통해 보다 발전된 연구결과를 확인하실 수 있습니다.
- 이 논문의 연구 히스토리 확인하기
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
The Taiwan Expo on October 10, 1935 was not much different from todays big events as well as very modernistic. The Exposition included many local pavilions such as Tokyo pavilion(東京館), Osaka pavilion(大阪館) and Cho-sun pavilion (朝鮮館). The Taiwan pavilion (臺灣館) was located in remote place during the 5th Osaka National Industrial Exposition(第五會勸業博覽會, 1903) It implies Taiwan's position as the first colony of Japan. Afterward the Colony pavilions came to be a sort of Japanese Expositions requisite to satisfy Japanese exotic taste and were means of making colonists identity with people of the empire. A number of pavilions for Japanese cities, which were built in colony expositions reflected the trade of labor and material between Japan and host country and the strict demarcation between the colonies pavilions and Japanese had disappeared in colony expositions.
There was no Japanese city pavilion in Taiwan Product Exhibition (臺灣共進會) in 1916, what matters for Taiwanese is not any local area but Japan itself as motherland at that time. However, Every Japanese city pavilion was established in Taiwan Expo 20 years later. Which means that Tai wan had progressed in Japanization and then industrialized regions had pursued to expand their markets to the low-industrialized. The findings derived from the city pavilions in Taiwan Expo is that the main industrialized cities represented Japan by the equation, Japan = modern civilization. Thc east-north region was, so to speak, not included in japanese modern civilization. Osaka and Tokyo were called as The oriental leading city of commerce and industry and the spearhead of culture. That caused reaction of Taiwanese intellectuals. While Kyoto and Nara pavilion displayed the tradition, which premised the existence of Tokyo and Osaka pavilions symbolizing the modern civilization.
There mayor may not be a distinction between regions images desired to show and to sec. The former was Manchuria pavilion(滿洲館) and the later was Cho-sun pavilion(朝鮮館) in Taiwan Expo. The distinction was decided by the economic factors. What Taiwanese wanted to find about Cho-sun is not the administrative work of Cho-sun colonial governor(朝鮮總督府) or the attractive sites but the real situation of media, the autonomy issue and peoples cultural activities.
The South Area pavilion(南方館) had different regional images according to the host. That it is not found in other expositions, confirmed the position of Taiwan in Japan Empire as The strongpoint for expansion to the South China and South-East Asia. Fujian pavilion(福建館) in the South Area pavilion implies that there were interchanges between local governments when the international conflict was severe. The exotic South Area pavilion contrasted Taiwan as modern and South-East Asia as tradition. To represent modern Taiwan was where Taiwanese Orientalism emerged.
There was no Japanese city pavilion in Taiwan Product Exhibition (臺灣共進會) in 1916, what matters for Taiwanese is not any local area but Japan itself as motherland at that time. However, Every Japanese city pavilion was established in Taiwan Expo 20 years later. Which means that Tai wan had progressed in Japanization and then industrialized regions had pursued to expand their markets to the low-industrialized. The findings derived from the city pavilions in Taiwan Expo is that the main industrialized cities represented Japan by the equation, Japan = modern civilization. Thc east-north region was, so to speak, not included in japanese modern civilization. Osaka and Tokyo were called as The oriental leading city of commerce and industry and the spearhead of culture. That caused reaction of Taiwanese intellectuals. While Kyoto and Nara pavilion displayed the tradition, which premised the existence of Tokyo and Osaka pavilions symbolizing the modern civilization.
There mayor may not be a distinction between regions images desired to show and to sec. The former was Manchuria pavilion(滿洲館) and the later was Cho-sun pavilion(朝鮮館) in Taiwan Expo. The distinction was decided by the economic factors. What Taiwanese wanted to find about Cho-sun is not the administrative work of Cho-sun colonial governor(朝鮮總督府) or the attractive sites but the real situation of media, the autonomy issue and peoples cultural activities.
The South Area pavilion(南方館) had different regional images according to the host. That it is not found in other expositions, confirmed the position of Taiwan in Japan Empire as The strongpoint for expansion to the South China and South-East Asia. Fujian pavilion(福建館) in the South Area pavilion implies that there were interchanges between local governments when the international conflict was severe. The exotic South Area pavilion contrasted Taiwan as modern and South-East Asia as tradition. To represent modern Taiwan was where Taiwanese Orientalism emerged.
목차
Ⅰ. 머리말
Ⅱ. 박람회 공간 속의 지역 배치
Ⅲ. 일본지역관
Ⅳ. 朝鮮館과 滿洲館
Ⅴ. 南方館
Ⅵ. 맺음말
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
식민지 이미지의 형성과 멘탈리티 : 大阪 勸業博覽會(1903年)의 臺灣館을 중심으로
역사학보
2005 .06
-
The Clear Water Pavilion
Korea Journal
1975 .08
-
安東地方 樓亭文學 硏究 - 樓亭板上詩文을 中心으로 -
어문학
2004 .03
-
1950년대 초 臺灣의 反共과 대륙 反攻計劃
史叢(사총)
2012 .01
-
식민지권력의 두 가지 얼굴 - 조선박람회(1929년)와 대만박람회(1935년)의 비교 -
역사와경계
2004 .06
-
朝鮮總督府 編纂 初等敎科書에 表象된 臺灣 ─ <지리> <일본어> 교과서를 중심으로 ─
日本語敎育
2017 .01
-
≪臺灣日日新報≫ 中的 ｢南支南洋｣ 與 ｢臺灣籍民｣ 報導
석당논총
2012 .01
-
US Aid and Taiwan
The Asian review of world histories
2014 .01
-
｢嶺南樓重修記｣의 結構와 그 特性 -1851년경의 安氏 작품을 중심으로-
동방한문학
2009 .01
-
대만 현대문학의 기원에 대한 연구 : 셰춘무(謝春木)를 중심으로
중국문화연구
2017 .11
-
냉전기 한국사회의 ‘자유중국(대만)’ 인식
한국학연구
2019 .03
-
장흥의 樓亭과 樓亭詩의 사회ㆍ문화적 맥락
지방사와 지방문화
2011 .05
-
台灣初期植民地教育文化の研究
아시아문화연구
2008 .11
-
대만의 중국에 대한 해외직접투자의 산업구조와 지역구조 특징
중국학논총
2013 .01
-
재대만 동포의 한국어 교육-대만 한국어 교육 전반적 현황-
이중언어학
2007 .01
-
식민지 대만과 조선의 對中貿易 구조 비교
대구사학
2005 .01
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-910-016406208