[KS] Hong Kil-tong discussion

[Kyung Moon Hwang]

Dear List,

I'm late, but I've become engrossed in this compelling discussion about
Hong Kil-tong and felt I should weigh in.

I devoted an entire chapter to the "soja/sool" topic in my dissertation
('97), which examined the Choson development of various "secondary status
groups", including the Sool, and the fate of their descendants at the turn
of the 20th century as they rose through the bureaucratic ranks.  Much of
my study was based on the nascent but impressive existing scholarship,
especially that of Martina Deuchler and Yi Chong-il, as well as on
genealogies, Sillok, and other sources.  And I'm convinced that the "Sool"
problem serves as one of the great tools for examining Choson society.  It
was a long-standing issue, for one, having arisen as a point of political
confrontation from almost the beginning of the dynasty.  Furthermore, as
time passed, and as the Sool problem became more of an urgent factor (if by
nothing else than simply by their increasing numbers), it came to
encapsulate a range of important issues--including merit vs. birthright,
bureaucratic access, local conflict, etc--in Choson society.  In many ways,
the Sool story through the course of the Choson dynasty reflected the
potential--as well as limitations--of social and political development.

Having said this, I think it's risky to inject certain
historically-specific categories when approaching Ho Kyun's work.  Calling
him a "radical", for one, seems to jump the gun.  Ho was not the only
person concerned with the Soja problem; in fact it was an intensely private
matter of concern to many, if not most, aristocratic males, for they had
their own Soja.  Secondly, Ho cannot be said to have been unique in
expressing his concern through satire/fiction; this was done by other
people (Pak Chiwon comes to mind; the "Tale of Ch'unhyang" also has a
similar moral).  Calling Ho "democratic" because of his call for
meritocracy also sounds somewhat strange.  I would support Kirk Larsen's
contention that Confucian teachings were inherently pro-meritocracy; but
these teachings (apparently) allowed room for societies and civilizations,
including Choson Korea and Tokugawa Japan, to blend in their own strong
traditions of hereditary hierarchy.  Ho in other words was not the only
person to accentuate the meritocratic elements of Confucian doctrine, and
in any case his vision of meritocracy did not amount to "democracy."

Anyway, I've learned a tremendous amount from this thread and would welcome
any further contributions.

*****************************
Kyung Moon Hwang
Assistant Professor
Department of History, USC
Los Angeles, CA  90089
(213) 740-1672
fax:  740-6999
http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~khwang/




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