<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=ks_c_5601-1987">
<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { padding-top: 0 ; padding-bottom: 0 }
--></style><title>Re: [KS] Koguryo inquiry</title></head><body>
<DIV id=idOWAReplyText12786 dir=ltr>
<DIV dir=ltr>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; WORD-BREAK: keep-all; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: ideograph-numeric; TEXT-ALIGN: left; mso-pagination: widow-orphan"
align=left><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; mso-font-kerning: 0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: ±¼¸²">Dear
Frank Hofmann, <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; WORD-BREAK: keep-all; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: ideograph-numeric; TEXT-ALIGN: left; mso-pagination: widow-orphan"
align=left><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; mso-font-kerning: 0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: ±¼¸²"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; WORD-BREAK: keep-all; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: ideograph-numeric; TEXT-ALIGN: left; mso-pagination: widow-orphan"
align=left><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; mso-font-kerning: 0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: ±¼¸²">Re.
your comment on my last posting, <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; WORD-BREAK: keep-all; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: ideograph-numeric; TEXT-ALIGN: left; mso-pagination: widow-orphan"
align=left><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: ±¼¸²; mso-bidi-font-family: ±¼¸²; mso-font-kerning: 0pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; WORD-BREAK: keep-all; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: ideograph-numeric; TEXT-ALIGN: left; mso-pagination: widow-orphan"
align=left><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; COLOR: #333399; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; mso-font-kerning: 0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: ±¼¸²"><EM>What
is wrong with such statement? There was a pretty clear labeling attempt here,
and as you know a very intense discussion followed. Wouldn't it be too blue-eyed
to claim there was no such intended labeling going on? UNESCO declaring that
things should not be this way seems wishful thinking at best. What is wrong here
with Dr. Petrov's statement?<o:p></o:p></EM></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; WORD-BREAK: keep-all; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: ideograph-numeric; TEXT-ALIGN: left; mso-pagination: widow-orphan"
align=left><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; COLOR: #333399; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; mso-font-kerning: 0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: ±¼¸²"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; WORD-BREAK: keep-all; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: ideograph-numeric; TEXT-ALIGN: left; mso-pagination: widow-orphan"
align=left><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; mso-font-kerning: 0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: ±¼¸²">I
think my comment was not very well understood. My apologies for Dr Petrov, if it
sounded criticizing, which was not my intention. <U>I did not say there was no
such attempt, but simply wanted to take this opportunity to bring attention to
what is the appropriate definition of being in the WHList</U> and accurate
understanding on the UNESCO WH Convention ( I think accurate understanding on
the Convention is also important).<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; WORD-BREAK: keep-all; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: ideograph-numeric; TEXT-ALIGN: left; mso-pagination: widow-orphan"
align=left><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; mso-font-kerning: 0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: ±¼¸²"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; WORD-BREAK: keep-all; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: ideograph-numeric; TEXT-ALIGN: left; mso-pagination: widow-orphan"
align=left><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; mso-font-kerning: 0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: ±¼¸²">After
that, independently from how Convention should work, how member states would use
it in reality for any political purpose, is a totally different matter and these
two things should not be mixed and must be dealt with separately. So as a South
Korean, before being UNESCO official, I fully agree with you that in the case of
Koguryo, there was and still is ¡°clear attempting¡± , no doubt. But again, I also
would like to insist that does not mean that inscription of Koguryo heritage in
the Chinese side on the WHList brings an automatic official recognition by the
Committee for their cultural identity. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; WORD-BREAK: keep-all; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: ideograph-numeric; TEXT-ALIGN: left; mso-pagination: widow-orphan"
align=left><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; mso-font-kerning: 0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: ±¼¸²"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; WORD-BREAK: keep-all; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: ideograph-numeric; TEXT-ALIGN: left; mso-pagination: widow-orphan"
align=left><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; mso-font-kerning: 0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: ±¼¸²">That
is why I mentioned the role of ICOMOS. I am currently in <?xml:namespace prefix
= st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:City
w:st="on">Seoul</st1:City> for my holidays and there is an ICOMOS executive
committee member who was in <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Seoul</st1:place></st1:City> for WH Business. Yesterday, when I had a
dinner with him, took the opportunity of being in Korea (I can say more freely
as a Korean citizen rather than UNESCO official), I severely critised ICOMOS for
the fact they have become almost an IGO, and did not pay enough attention on the
issue clarifying cultural identify of proposed cultural properties for the WHL.
Indeed, the issue of ¡°<U>ancient civilization and modern geography</U>¡± is a
wide, complex and complicate issue, and he agreed that at least there should be
a serious deliberation on this among the ICOMOS members dealing with WHC and
responsible for evaluation of the proposed properties. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; WORD-BREAK: keep-all; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: ideograph-numeric; TEXT-ALIGN: left; mso-pagination: widow-orphan"
align=left><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; mso-font-kerning: 0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: ±¼¸²"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; WORD-BREAK: keep-all; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: ideograph-numeric; TEXT-ALIGN: left; mso-pagination: widow-orphan"
align=left><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; mso-font-kerning: 0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: ±¼¸²">In
reality and officially, it is only the Central Government of China who is
entitled to submit the Koguryo sites in <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:country-region
w:st="on">China</st1:country-region></st1:place> to the WHCommittee for their
inscription on the WH List, neither DPRK nor ROK can do it under the current
geography! And I should say that I am very pleased to see that three Koguryo
historic sites <SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>in <st1:place
w:st="on"><st1:country-region w:st="on">China</st1:country-region></st1:place>
along with the tombs and mural paintings were put on the WHList. The inscription
of the Koguryo heritage in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">China</st1:place></st1:country-region> shows the Koguryo civilization
in a more complex way, rather than inscription of the individual tombs as
monuments (the DPRK side). <SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>And
after all, thanks to this initiative, by now the ICOMOS executive members are
aware of Koguryo¡¯s sensitive issue, they had no idea on Koguryo: its sensitive
nature and meaning for Koreans, neither its linkage with China nor political use
from Chinese side¡¦I can not go further details here, but I can say that it was
one of the most sensitive and highly politised
inscription.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; WORD-BREAK: keep-all; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: ideograph-numeric; TEXT-ALIGN: left; mso-pagination: widow-orphan"
align=left><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; mso-font-kerning: 0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: ±¼¸²">At
the Secretariat there was even reminder of the code of ethics on <SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN><SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>conduct of international civil servant¡¯,
and of course that was more or less targeted officials like me with delicate
nationality (Korean in this business). ¡¦<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; WORD-BREAK: keep-all; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: ideograph-numeric; TEXT-ALIGN: left; mso-pagination: widow-orphan"
align=left><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; mso-font-kerning: 0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: ±¼¸²"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; WORD-BREAK: keep-all; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: ideograph-numeric; TEXT-ALIGN: left; mso-pagination: widow-orphan"
align=left><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; mso-font-kerning: 0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: ±¼¸²">I
hope this time, I made myself understood. There was clearly a political attempt
from Chinese side, but I wanted to explain there theoretically how UNESCO
Convention functioned and again would like to insist that this should be dealt
with separately from how state parties would use it according to their
intention¡¦ <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; WORD-BREAK: keep-all; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: ideograph-numeric; TEXT-ALIGN: left; mso-pagination: widow-orphan"
align=left><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; mso-font-kerning: 0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: ±¼¸²"></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; WORD-BREAK: keep-all; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: ideograph-numeric; TEXT-ALIGN: left; mso-pagination: widow-orphan"
align=left><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; mso-font-kerning: 0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: ±¼¸²">Regarding
your comment on authenticity, <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; WORD-BREAK: keep-all; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: ideograph-numeric; TEXT-ALIGN: left; mso-pagination: widow-orphan"
align=left><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; mso-font-kerning: 0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: ±¼¸²"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; WORD-BREAK: keep-all; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: ideograph-numeric; TEXT-ALIGN: left; mso-pagination: widow-orphan"
align=left><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; mso-font-kerning: 0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: ±¼¸²">I
think your point is exactly what I wanted to point out in my previous email, as
I felt the Tongmyong Tombs (in Dr Petrov¡¯ s paper) authenticity was questioned
in the article of Dr Petrov. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; WORD-BREAK: keep-all; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: ideograph-numeric; TEXT-ALIGN: left; mso-pagination: widow-orphan"
align=left><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; mso-font-kerning: 0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: ±¼¸²"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; WORD-BREAK: keep-all; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: ideograph-numeric; TEXT-ALIGN: left; mso-pagination: widow-orphan"
align=left><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; mso-font-kerning: 0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: ±¼¸²">Did
I misunderstood the article of Dr Petrov ? If yes, again my apologies. At least
that was my understanding when I read his article so I wanted to explain that
indeed, that beautification (I think Dr Petrov used another wording, maybe
¡®reconstruction?¡¯) was hotly debated but at the end it was accepted by ICOMOS
<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>that the beautification carried out
did not much damage authenticity of the Tomb. It is true that many European
historic cities, damaged during the second world war, were put on the WHList
after having gone through the reconstruction. <SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; WORD-BREAK: keep-all; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: ideograph-numeric; TEXT-ALIGN: left; mso-pagination: widow-orphan"
align=left><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: ±¼¸²; mso-bidi-font-family: ±¼¸²; mso-font-kerning: 0pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; WORD-BREAK: keep-all; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: ideograph-numeric; TEXT-ALIGN: left; mso-pagination: widow-orphan"
align=left><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; mso-font-kerning: 0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: ±¼¸²">Re.
Tangun tomb, I used the wording of reconstruction, because it was reconstructed
on the basis of a tomb, so actually the tomb itself of reconstruction. But
again, of course, one can argue that if the tomb originally placed is not the
Tangun tomb, then we can not possibly call it ¡° reconstruction¡±. We can go on
and on with these issue, but I will stop here. I thank Frank Hofmann for
providing me with the opportunity to bring additional comment.
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; WORD-BREAK: keep-all; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: ideograph-numeric; TEXT-ALIGN: left; mso-pagination: widow-orphan"
align=left><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; mso-font-kerning: 0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: ±¼¸²"></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; WORD-BREAK: keep-all; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: ideograph-numeric; TEXT-ALIGN: left; mso-pagination: widow-orphan"
align=left><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; mso-font-kerning: 0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: ±¼¸²">Best
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; WORD-BREAK: keep-all; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: ideograph-numeric; TEXT-ALIGN: left; mso-pagination: widow-orphan"
align=left><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; mso-font-kerning: 0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: ±¼¸²">Junhi
Han <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P><BR>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=±¼¸² size=2><B>From:</B> koreanstudies-bounces@koreaweb.ws ÀÌ(°¡) ´ÙÀ½ »ç¶÷
´ë½Å º¸³¿ Frank Hoffmann<BR><B>Sent:</B> 12/28/2006 (¸ñ) 11:53 ¿ÀÀü<BR><B>To:</B>
Korean Studies Discussion List<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [KS] Koguryo
inquiry<BR></FONT><BR></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>To Junhi Han:</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Reading your last posting I would like to make two points:</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>(A)</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>You wrote:</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#000000 size=-1><BR></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><FONT face=Arial color=#000000 size=-1>First of all,
through the article [by Dr Petrov], one could believe that when the
koguryo cultural heritage was put on the list of WH from Chinese side, then it
could be considered as if<I> ¨«Koguryo was named a Chinese state©ö.</I></FONT>
(...)</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><FONT face=Arial color=#000000 size=-1>Inscription of
a cultural or natural property on the List of WH provides in no case a direct
link to its cultural identity or nationality.</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>What is wrong with such statement? There was a pretty clear labeling
attempt here, and as you know a very intense discussion followed. Wouldn't it be
too blue-eyed to claim there was no such intended labeling going on? UNESCO
declaring that things should not be this way seems wishful thinking at best.
What is wrong here with Dr. Petrov's statement?</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>(B)</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>In your "authenticity" discussion, quoted below, you make it sound as if
the adaption of a discourse that was going on in archaeology and art history a
product of UNESCO's policy. I guess you do this in your function as UNESCO
official. To me this seems like a reversal of reason and outcome. "Authenticity
should comprise not only the physical but also intangible value[s] of monuments"
-- that's indeed a one-to-one adoption of changes in perspectives of archaeology
and art history. Every archaeologist knows that authenticity is a very elastic
term that changes by the hour. Go to any Romanesque or Gothic European cathedral
and what the average tourist may think is an authentic building was in fact
restored and reconstructed ten times and each wall may show a different taste of
a different period and that period's taste and representation of the past. In
that sense we are never in a "historic" building "as it once was." If one looks
closer the meaning of authenticity in Japan and its wooden building
constructions and reconstructions are not any more extreme than is the case in
Europe. I find it therefore also very questionable to point to the
"beautification" of King Tongmyong's Tomb -- is what was done there any
different from what was done at Notre Dame de Paris or in Dresden or at
Sokkuram? I do not see any qualitative or structural difference. As for your
Tan'gun Tomb example -- why is this called a "reconstruction"? Isn't it a
construction? Or is there any archaeologic evidence that this completely new
constructed pyramid is even the geographic site for the *mythological* founder
of Koguryo? Not everything North Korea puts on the plate needs to be discussed
as if it where on the same level in a scientific discourse.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Best,</DIV>
<DIV>Frank</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>quote Junhi Han:</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><FONT face=Arial color=#000000 size=-1>Regarding the
authenticity, this is a very much argued issue, I must say. However, I also
would like to mention that the notion of authenticity has been evolved since
60s (since the declaration of the Venice Charter) and it is now applied into
much broader context, in particular since the adoption of the Document on
Authenticity declared in Nara 1994 (so-called the Nara Document on
Authenticity). Since then, the notion on authenticity blindly applied until
recently according to the Venice Charter (1964) is no longer
valid.</FONT><BR><FONT face=Arial color=#000000 size=-1></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><FONT face=Arial color=#000000 size=-1>Authenticity
should comprises not only physical authenticity but also intangible value of
monuments or sites. The intangible value can be traditional knowledge,
technique or even tradition(practice). For such reason, the beautification of
the Tongmyong Tomb (Jinpari X) provided an intensive debates and deliberation
between experts involved in the evaluation and in the WH inscription
procedure. It is true that in Korea, there is a tradition of taking care of
ancestors©ö tombs and beautification can be perceived even as duty even for
ordinary citizensŠ I do not know what is the usual practice in South
Korea or in China in care of a dynasty©ös founder©ös tombsŠbut it was from this
point of view that the beautification of the King Tongmyong©ö tomb was argued
and finally accepted. Fortunately, the tumulus itself was not included in the
beautification rangeŠ</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><FONT face=Arial color=#000000
size=-1><BR></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><FONT face=Arial color=#000000 size=-1>Certainly
the<U> beautification</U> of Tongmyong©ö Tomb is at a different level than
the<U> reconstruction</U> of the Tanggun Tomb which is not included among the
complex of the 63 Koguryo tombs inscribed on the WH List. I am not arguing
here that the beautification of the Tongmyong Tomb was appropriate or not, but
simply say that this issue could be seen from different
anglesŠ.</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV><BR><BR></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><BR><BR></DIV><PRE>--
</PRE>
<DIV>--------------------------------------<BR>Frank
Hoffmann<BR>http://koreaweb.ws</DIV></DIV>
</body>
</html>