[KS] On Horace H. Underwood's paper

[Jong-Hwa Shin]

Dear Member

     I have currently read a paper written by Horace H. Underwood, titled as 
The Internationalization of «National Studies» and Intentional Korean 
Studies in ‘Korean Studies in the Information Age of the 21st 
Century’(Selected Papers of the 10th International Conference on Korean 
Studies), published by the Academy of Korean Studies and Korea Fulbright 
Foundation. 1998. pp.29-6?.
     It is very interesting to me, not only because the paper deals with 
current status of Korean studies outside Korea, but also because it unveil 
problems around Korean studies and ‘national studies’, especially inside 
Korea. The author well describes almost all aspects of Korean studies which 
I want to know in a short paper. I think that it could be possible because 
he is one of the most significant specialists on Korea. Even though his 
paper does not direct to develop any specific theoretical arguments for the 
social sciences, his description on Korean studies and introduction on the 
dilemma between ‘national studies’ and ‘Korean studies’ are enough to 
provide many ideas for theorising ‘Korean studies’ as an academic field.

     I would like to make three observations in my research interest on his 
paper. Please give me your feedback, if you are interested in it or you 
better know .

1. debate on ‘Korean studies’ and ‘national studies’
     It is a well known fact that none of academic institutions in Korea has 
the department of ‘Korean studies’. All departments in humanities faculty 
which study Korean language and Korean literature are called as ‘Studies for 
‘national’(with bold) language and literature’. As far as I am concerned, 
Underwood is not satisfied with this kind of naming style in Korea. He 
argues in turn that this is one of obstacle of internationalisation of 
Korean studies.
     I think that investigation of this phenomenon could be a research topic 
in Korean studies. I am not sure whether or not this style of naming 
academic disciplines is partly under the influence of Confucian heritage or 
the Japanese colonialism. Do you have any idea of other cases in East Asian 
countries, for example, China, Japan, Taiwan, and North Korea? Do they 
similarly call like ‘national studies’ in South Korea? Do you know any other 
paper dealing with this controversial issue?

2. Quantitative Increase of Korean Studies outside Korea
     It is needless to say that the economic growth of Korea opened and 
developed Korean studies. However, this thesis should be carefully 
investigated: there are double interests from Korea and other countries. 
Korean Government’s policy called ‘globalisation’ has provided a source of 
developing Korean studies, in terms of financial support. By the way, many 
countries ,which have made close economic relations with Korea, are also 
very active, at least positive, to build Korean studies in their 
universities. However, it should be stressed that many Korean students who 
studied in abroad play major role in developing Korean studies. In this 
observation, we can compare the case of Korean Studies and other regional 
studies. Maybe there would be similar ways of developing in Japanese 
studies, and partly Chinese Studies, but it must be different from those of 
major European countries and the USA. (Do you know any publications 
historically analysing the Japanese case and the Chinese case?).

3. Introduction and development of Korean studies in ‘the social sciences’
     If we observe Korean studies in ‘the social sciences’ rather than 
humanities, it will be more clear that how Korea has been analysed by social 
scientists and its contribution to the development of the social sciences in 
general. I think that the Korean case is illustrated as the major empirical 
example of ‘neo-institutionalist view’ in political economy, its unique 
formation of big conglomerates and strong labour movements in industrial 
relations, its unlinear but certain democratisation process in politics, and 
so on. However, it should be stressed that there emerges a new trend doing 
historical analysis of problems of Korean modernity(in broad sense) and 
relocating its theoretical formation in the Social Sciences, for example, 
distancing the Korean case from, what they call, Western theories, and 
Koreanisation of social theory. It is observed that some papers in this 
trend have already published. I am ready to read any papers, conference 
proceedings. Please contact to me.

     Underwood’s paper also provide many implications which are directly 
related to Korean government’s policy on Korean studies until 1998. Overall 
and once again, I am sure that this paper is very helpful. In spite 
importance and seriousness of the issues, it is very easy to read. Just try! 
Thank you.

Best Wishes

Jong-Hwa Shin


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com


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