[KS] Different View on _Understanding ..._

sungjong.paik at uni-tuebingen.de sungjong.paik at uni-tuebingen.de
Mon Nov 30 16:31:08 EST 1998


Subject: Different View on _Understanding Korean Literature_

By Sungjong Paik

Understanding Korean Literature, by Kim Hunggyu. Translated by Robert J.
Fouser. Armonk: M. E. Sharpe, 1997. (ISBN 1-56324-773-9 cloth, US$66.95;
ISBN 1-56324-774-7 paper, US$21.95). xiii + 230 pp. (Photos.)

After reading Carolyn So's book review on Kim Hunggyu's book  _
Understanding Korean Literature _ (The review article first appeared in
Pacific Affairs, 71.1 (1998): 115-7, and sent to the list members
recently), I am afraid that the review may mislead potential
readers of the book.  In my view, So's review focuses on the translator
and translation, not on the meaning of what is translated.  In addition,
some details of the book were discussed without looking at the place of
the book in Korean studies.  Hence, I would like to try briefly
discussing academic merits of _Understanding Korean Literature_ and some
translation problems, such as omission and restructuring of the original
text.

Kim's book was first published in 1986 in Seoul, and thereafter has
been reprinted several times.  It is used even as a text book in
literature courses at universities.  The academic success of the book
can
be explained in many ways.  Three following points appear to me to be
most important characteristics of the book: Kim's analytical research
method, newly discovered historical facts, and his own interpretations
on them.  Concerning Kim's research method, we may have to stress that
his book is composed of chapters on crucial topics or themes, whereas
other introductory books on Korean literature follow from one period to
another.  Kim's investigation of changes and continuity of the one and
related literary genres ensures that readers do not to lose the "red
thread" that runs through a long history.

Referred to newly secured facts and Kim's interpretation on them, I
wholly agree, when the translator, Robert J. Fouser, states that "it [=
the book] covers areas typically ignored in ... [other] introductory
studies: Korean literary criticism and the history of printing and
transmission of literary works in the nation. ... [In addition,] Kim has
also given a great deal of attention to genres of Korean literature that
are often mentioned only in passing, and he adds a fifth category,
'mixed genres,' to the standard four-genre classification of Korean
literature, which has caused considerable debate in scholary circles"
(see "Translator's Preface", vii).

As consequence, reading  _Understanding Korean Literature_  enables
readers to understand "such issues as the cultural and social context of
literature as a linguistic system, the need to distinguish what we know
from what we need to know, the relationship between traditional and
modern literature, the relationship between past events and contemporary
meaning, the need for balance between detail and the big picture that
goes beyond textbook descriptions, and the need for a balanced
introduction to the entire range of Korean literature" (see "Author's
Preface", xi).

Omission of some sections and changes in order of the original text in
Korean are severely criticized in So's review.  Such reorganization by
the translator, however, cannot hardly prevent Western readers from
understanding of the main messages of the author, as it was proven in my
Korean literature class at Tuebingen University this spring.  On the
contrary, many readers or beginners in Korean literature will even
profit from restructuring.  In this sense, I will cite some words of
John
K. Fairbank, a great scholar in Chinese Studies.  On the role of the
translator, the sinologist maintained that "he [= Translator] begins a
translation, he will find himself standing alone in a middle position
between the two languages, each of which represents an entire
civilization and culture" (see John K. Fairbank, _ Ch'ing Documents. An
Introductory Syllabus _,  Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press
1965 (third edition, [1952]), 18).  In fact, there are very successful
academic translations in which sentences and chapters are almost
drastically changed from the original works for the sake of cultural
bridge between two different civilizations.  An outstanding example is
the translation of Lee Hye-ku's _ Essays on Korean Traditional Music_
by Robert C. Provine (Seoul: Royal Asiatic Society, Korea Branch 1981).

Because of its clear structure, readability, and lots of important
literary works covers almost every period and genre, Fouser's
translation can be not only used as a reference text in Korean studies,
but also as a general introduction to Korean literature for peoples
interested world literature.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Sungjong Paik
Seminar fuer Sinologie und Koreanistik der Universitaet
Tuebingen/Germany
E-mail: sungjong.paik at uni-tuebingen.de


%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%





More information about the Koreanstudies mailing list