Since the dawn of humankind pottery has played a role in civilization. Pottery can be used to pinpoint geographical expansion or migration of a people. It can be a way to determine events...Show moreSince the dawn of humankind pottery has played a role in civilization. Pottery can be used to pinpoint geographical expansion or migration of a people. It can be a way to determine events surrounding civilisations. This historical consciousness of pottery is also what illustrates some iconic events in the history between Japan and Korea, but it may also link the contemporary relationship of each respective ceramic tradition since there are many people interested in the Korean and Japanese pottery of the past. The content of this thesis argues that they are never completely separate from each other. Through the nineteenth and twentieth century Japan and Korea each developed their cultural heritage policies and respective nationalist discourses. In Japan anxiety of westernization crept in. In Korea anxiety of westernization came simultaneously with a struggle for their cultural identity because of the Japanese colonial rule. Both countries took countermeasures in the form of folklore programs and revitalization and other searches for nostalgia and identity. Due to such dynamics, the effect of state policies and national narratives affected how craftsmanship was perceived. It was often labelled as symbol of the state, and something to find your ethnic and national identity in. These post-war policies created a sense of cultural essentialism that was hard to alter, even in the social context. Institutionalisation, as part of ‘heritagisation’ created a web of museums, government advertising, government organized or endorsed festivals and the ‘National Living Treasure’ program. Especially in Korea was this a scholarly source of critique. Through analysis from which context each heritage discourse came from and how it is maintained today it seems as if it obstructs the possibility of creating an image of cultural connectedness. Nevertheless a certain different dynamic is rising. The contemporary communities of potters and ceramic artists may pose as an alternative level to portray pottery heritage juxtaposed to the grand narrative of the heritage industry and government. Will or can redirecting our view to the level of the people as artists involved with Korea’s and Japan’s ceramics heritage change an obstinate cultural essentialism and disconnectedness?Show less