<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Dear List: </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>If I may chime in on Historical accounts
again. It might be inconvenient for historians of Korea to deal with or
respond to those who see history with the capital H as in the final
truth.....but it is simply an occupational hazard. If we self righteously
claim that we see history as multiple voices then why the cant against
some Korean historians that might want to distill their version into a single
mononarrative.....against all reason. Let them. AFterall isn't it
just another of the many voices and narratives that history produces. In
my reading of kwago chongsan there is a reasonable meaning of balancing
accounts.....whereby previously repressed voices are recorded on the
leger. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Mike R.</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=Afostercarter@aol.com
href="mailto:Afostercarter@aol.com">Afostercarter@aol.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=Koreanstudies@koreaweb.ws
href="mailto:Koreanstudies@koreaweb.ws">Koreanstudies@koreaweb.ws</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Cc:</B> <A title=choeyh@hawaii.edu
href="mailto:choeyh@hawaii.edu">choeyh@hawaii.edu</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, September 08, 2002 6:37
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [KS] History's twists: thoughts
on kwago ch'ongsan and the MOPE syndrome</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face=arial,helvetica><FONT lang=0 face="Times New Roman"
size=3 FAMILY="SERIF">For Korean Studies List completed 8 September,
2002<BR><BR><B>History's twists: thoughts on kwago ch'ongsan and the MOPE
syndrome</B><BR><BR>If - as I hoped it might - this discussion has now burst
the bounds of the purely linguistic, I should like to strongly support Prof
Yong-ho Choe's critique of kwago ch'ongsan as such. <BR><BR>My sense is that
some Koreans essentialize History (capital H) through a mindset which, by
confusing many things, guarantees that none of them ever get resolved.
Philosophically, the notion of "cleansing the past" is just a category error.
History can be interpreted and debated endlessly, but it can't be changed.
Shaking a fist at history is pointless. By all means uncover new facts or
offer fresh interpretations, but these will always be multiple There is no
single right account, factually or morally, nor ever could be. So why go on a
wild goose chase?<BR><BR>For instance: coming to Korea from Africa, it puzzled
me how hard it is to have a grown-up discussion about colonialism here. In
this at least, Africa is well ahead of Korea. Teaching in Tanzania barely a
decade after British rule had ended, despite a highly politicized atmosphere
of anti-imperialism, there was neither personal nor academic animus involved
in researching the colonial past. (It helps, of course, if you call it
colonialism rather than occupation, not least in avoiding divisive and
fruitless arguments about so-called "collaborators".)<BR><BR>One lesson here
is the merits of comparativism. Koreans should get more interested in other
peoples' colonial histories. This helps to put your own fate in context, and
avoid the solipsism which some wag, in another nation rather given to
self-pity (my motherland), has named the MOPE syndrome: Most Oppressed People
Ever. As an Irishman, my 800 years of oppression trump your mere 40 any day.
But why would anyone want to play this game in the first place?<BR><BR>The
academy aside, what really worries me is how kwago ch'ongsan holds present and
future policy choices hostage to the past. This is downright dangerous. For
example, many Koreans give China the benefit of the doubt, but never Japan. (I
call this "penultimate oppressor love"; just so do some Latvians forgive the
Germans everything, the Russians nothing.) Yet on any objective criteria of
shared interests, today's South Korea and Japan should be close allies,
whereas China's future is a question mark. Past hurts are no basis for taking
such decisions.<BR><BR>On contentious matters within living memory - the
colonial era, the civil war, the struggle for democracy - then those who
demand a reckoning should think very hard what it is exactly they want, and
why. If crimes are yet unpunished, then the proper court is the law as such,
not history. As for the inevitable political dimension, what is the goal:
reconciliation, or revenge? How can kwago ch'ongsan help those in South Korea
who supported or opposed dictatorship to kiss and make up - much less those
who took sides between capitalism and communism? Endlessly refighting
yesterday's battles means wounds never heal. Why not close the book?<BR><BR>In
all of the above periods, some Koreans did things for which other Koreans
cannot forgive them. (Another question: Why does Asia's second most Christian
nation find forgiveness so difficult?) But peoples, like individuals, need to
heal and move on. In all three of these eras, honourable men and women, as
well as knaves, faced difficult, sometimes life-threatening choices. Some went
one way, some another. It is time now for understanding, not reproach.
<BR><BR>I look forward to the special issue of Korea Journal. Besides
elucidating specific debates and issues, I hope Prof Choe's challenge will be
addressed. In that spirit, let me end polemically. As regards kwago
ch'ongsan's effects, the best 'translation' has to be "Twisting history". Its
development was misguided; its significance lies under social pathology; and
if either Korean historiography or politics are to move forward, the urgent
future task is to smash this murky prism and adopt a more pluralistic,
inclusive, and tolerant approach to both past and present.<BR><BR>AIDAN
FOSTER-CARTER<BR>Honorary Senior Research Fellow in Sociology & Modern
Korea, Leeds University<BR>17 Birklands Road, Shipley, West Yorkshire, BD18
3BY, UK<BR>tel: +44(0) 1274 588586 mobile: +44(0)
7970 741307 <BR>fax: +44(0) 1274 773663 Email:
afostercarter@aol.com <BR><BR><BR><BR>In a message dated 9/7/02 11:08:10 GMT
Daylight Time, choeyh@hawaii.edu writes:<BR><BR></FONT><FONT lang=0
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" face=Arial color=#000000 size=2
FAMILY="SANSSERIF"><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"
TYPE="CITE">Subj:<B>Re: [KS] Gwageo cheongsan (Kwageon ch'eongsan)
</B><BR>Date:9/7/02 11:08:10 GMT Daylight Time<BR>From:<A
href="mailto:choeyh@hawaii.edu">choeyh@hawaii.edu</A><BR>Reply-to:<A
href="mailto:Koreanstudies@koreaweb.ws">Koreanstudies@koreaweb.ws</A><BR>To:<A
href="mailto:Koreanstudies@koreaweb.ws">Koreanstudies@koreaweb.ws</A>, <A
href="mailto:Koreanstudies@koreaweb.ws">Koreanstudies@koreaweb.ws</A><BR><I>Sent
from the Internet </I><BR><BR><BR><BR>I challenge the basic notion of "kwago
ch'ongsan" or cleansing the <BR>past. How can one cleanse the
past? One can only study and learn lessons <BR>from the past so that
we do not repeat same mistakes. There is no way one <BR>can undo the
past. The current trend of "kwago ch'ongsan" in S. Korea is
<BR>inclined to finger-pointing, rather than making soul-searching
examinations <BR>of the past mistakes. If one needs a "kwago ch'ongsan," it
should be left <BR>to historians to examine comprehensively---free of
prejudgment---complex <BR>factors and circumstances within which one may
have acted in certain ways <BR>in the past. I raise this question
because I am alarmed by the recent <BR>attempt of "kwago ch'ongsan" dealing
with the issue of the collaboration <BR>under the Japanese colonial
rule.<BR><BR><BR>At 04:49 PM 9/5/2002 -0500, Michael Robinson
wrote:<BR>>Dear Korea Journal:<BR>><BR>>An interesting question to
be sure. my first thought for translation was <BR>>"settling
accounts from the past". I then read to the bottom of your
<BR>>message at see that in the Korean context there is more than a
neutral <BR>>balancing of accounts....but more a desire to insert the
idea of <BR>>correcting previously poorly kept and inaccurate
accounts. I would <BR>>suggest the neutral idea of
balance.<BR>><BR>>And for the wider audience of the list, I find it
interesting that the <BR>>Journal's question arrives on the same day that
our friend in Hungary is <BR>>asking about the politics of memory.
In response to his query....you <BR>>might consider that the era
post-1945 is both a time of actively <BR>>"forgetting" as well as a
struggle to selectively remember. My sense is <BR>>that if we are
to discuss some "Korean tradition" with regard to <BR>>memorialization,
we must consider the long history and active present of <BR>>hagiography
both official and private in Korean society. Statues, parks,
<BR>>grandiose buildings, etc. are new....the idea of spinning the memory
of <BR>>one's relatives or working to resurrect the name of same....has
been an <BR>>active Korean pastime for a very long time. The Korea
Journal question <BR>>falls as a project somewhere between official
memory...that cultivated and <BR>>enshrined by the state...and the
private cultivation of memory in <BR>>foundations, collected writings,
genealogies, etc.<BR>><BR>>Mike Robinson<BR>>----- Original Message
-----<BR>>From: <mailto:kj@unesco.or.kr>Korea Journal<BR>>To:
<mailto:Koreanstudies@koreaweb.ws>Koreanstudies@koreaweb.ws<BR>>Sent:
Monday, September 02, 2002 4:09 AM<BR>>Subject: [KS] Gwageo cheongsan
(Kwageon ch'eongsan)<BR>><BR>>Dear list
members,<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>The KOREA JOURNAL will deal with the
special issue titled <BR>>"Gwageo cheongsan (MR: Kwago ch'ongsan)
in Korean Modern History" in its <BR>>2002 autumn issue. Articles in this
issue will analyze the development, <BR>>significance and future tasks
concerning gwageo cheongsan. Articles to be <BR>>published in this
special issue are as follows.<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>1. "Gwageo
cheongsan" in Modern Korean History<BR>>2. Refracted Modernity and the
Issue of Pro-Japanese Collaborators in Korea<BR>>3. How To Reveal the
Iceberg under the Sea?: The Problems in Historical <BR>>Clarification of
the Korean War<BR>>4. The Significance of "gwageo cheongsan" of the
December 12 Coup and<BR>>the May 18 Gwangju Uprising<BR>>5. Attempted
"gwageo choengsan" in April Popular Struggle<BR>>6. Finding the Truth on
the Suspicious Deaths Under South Koreas Military
<BR>>Dictatorship<BR>>7. State Violence and Sacrifices under Military
Authoritarianism <BR>>and Dynamics of "gwageo cheongsan" during
Democratic Transition<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>However, we have had
difficulty in translating "gwageo cheongsan" into an <BR>>appropriate
English term. Some alternatives have been suggested such as <BR>>"dealing
with the wrong past," "liquidating the past," "rectifying the <BR>>past,"
and "righting past wrongs," but none of these is satisfactory. We
<BR>>ask anyone who is struck with a good idea regarding this matter to
let us know.<BR>><BR>>Sincerely,<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>Korea
Journal<BR><BR>Yong-ho Choe<BR>Department of History<BR>University of Hawaii
at Manoa<BR>Honolulu, HI 96822<BR><BR>Tel: 808 956-6762<BR>Fax: 808
956-9600<BR>E-mail: choeyh@hawaii.edu<BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR></FONT><FONT lang=0
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" face="Times New Roman" color=#000000 size=3
FAMILY="SERIF"><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></FONT></BODY></HTML>