[KS] Re: KSR 2000-10: _Spirit of the Mountains: Korea's SAN-SHIN and Traditions of Mountain Worship_, by David A. Mason

[David Mason]

REPLY sends your message to the whole list
__________________________________________

> _Spirit of the Mountains: Korea's SAN-SHIN and
> Traditions of Mountain Worship_, by David A. Mason.
>Seoul, Hollym Co.1999. 224 pages. ISBN:1-56591-107-5
> Reviewed by Henny Savenije

Dear Fellow List-Members,
As the author of this book, I'd like to respond to 
this review.  There are a few points which need 
clarification, where I did not really understand 
what was being said, and I fear that a false 
impression of this book may have been given to 
the worthy members on this list.

First of all, I'd like to thank Henny Savenije for 
having reviewed this book (my 4th on Korea) at all; 
this is the first review of _Spirit of the Mountains_
to appear "in print", to my knowledge.  But all the 
more reason to be concerned with accuracy...

Excerpts:
> San-shin (Mountain Spirit, Mountain God or Spirit 
> of the Mountains) is not very well known in the 
>wider world, despite being one of the most important
> figures in traditional Korean culture. Its various 
> cultural roles and manifestations are described,
> accompanied by photos of San-shin icons and shrines
> taken all over South Korea. Other deities and
> symbols which share paintings and shrines with
> San-shin are briefly introduced in order to shed 
> further light on the identity of this spirit.

I can't argue with this at all -- because it's 95% 
word-for-word copied from the back cover of my book.

> This subjective technique pervades the whole book 
> as Mason uses the first person to underscore his 
> viewpoint, and the text is laden with personal 
> comments, experiences and anecdotes. In this sense 
> it is not a "scholarly" book, although it gives 
> tables to show the frequency with which certain
> iconographical elements related to San-shin appear
> in temples and paintings. 

Hollym Publishers and I tried to pitch this book to
BOTH the tourist-or-general-public-interested-in-
Koreana-and/or-Shamanism-market AND the Professor-
market.  Perhaps we thus failed to fully satisfy 
either ;-)  but I can assure you that this very much 
IS a "scholarly" book, with hundreds of cites drawn
from a thorough review of previous literature and 
plenty of original analysis and sober speculation.

> In this chapter Mason introduces the concept of 
> six levels of progression by which an ordinary 
> person is transformed into to a Mountain God.

No, on page 25 I clearly state: "These 'steps' are 
not a representation of any progression known to 
have been 'actually' followed by the adepts of any 
religion, but rather just a conceptual system."  The
"six steps" and the "three levels" of mountain-
worship in Korea which follow are explicitly labeled
"my own theory" ... "for understanding the [varried]
religious manifestations of San-shin."  See note #25,
pages 31-32 for more.

> A San-shin is always originally a good person...

I certainly never wrote anything of this sort.  Most
San-shin were never "actual people" at all, as is 
explained in detail on my pages 34-37.  Those that 
were are usually a very POWERFUL person, who might 
then offer *protection* as a spirit; not "good"
in our modern sense of ethical virtue.

> B. describes the "Origin of the Paintings." The 
> title is somewhat misleading since Mason cannot 
> provide a satisfying explanation for their origin,
> although he ascribes their provenance to the Middle
> Kingdom, China; 

Well, I summarize everything that is currently known
by Korean scholars about their origin, as incomplete
as that may still be.  The link to the Chinese "God
of the Earth" is entirely from my own research.

> c. discusses Pass-spirits (Rang-shin), a variation 

In my book, that's "Ryo^ng-shin" (lyeong-sin).

> Next comes a brief consideration of San-shin in 
> relationship to shamanism (without references) that
> focuses on rituals and pilgrimages, and then ...

What does this mean "(without references)"?   There 
are 17 endnotes in my 6-page section on Musok's 
interactive (and still evolving) relationship with 
San-shin.  4 of the 17 are explanatory, while 13 are
journal-style cites of the published works of well-
known established scholars on Musok -- backing up 
most of the points I make.  I refer my readers to 
page numbers of L Kendall, Kim Duk-hwang, Yu Chai-
shin, HK Kim Hogarth, Kim Tae-gon, Jo Ji-hun, Yi Du-
hyun, Yang Jong-seung, K Howard, AC Covell and Zo 
Zayong.  If these aren't the scholarly authorities
on Korean Shamanism, I don't know who is...
Now, Mr. Savenije can fairly write that this 6-page 
section is "brief", but how can he POSSIBLY write 
that it is "without references"...???   

> In the end, however, one is left with the general
> impression that the book tries to cover too many 
> subjects in too brief a span. ...and some sub-
> sections are not longer than 120 words. 

Well, yes.  More pages means more expensive to print,
and publishers flat-out refuse.  I had plenty more 
photos, quotes, references and ideas, but 224 pages 
was as high as Hollym would go.  Its w30,000 / $50 
cover-price is bad enough!  For the second printing, 
in fact, Hollym wants to go paperback and trim the 
text and photos down, reduce the price.  So, any of 
you scholars deeply interested in this subject should
be sure to get a first-printing hardcover "while they
last"...  :-)

> As suggested above, the book is mainly descriptive 
> in character, 

I have to object to this.  The text is riddled with 
my own analysis, ideas, synthesized theories, etc.
If anything, too many.  The 4th of my 4 chapters is
little *except* my own speculations, insights, per-
spectives and even advocacy.  It is unfortunate that 
Savenije did not mention any of them (except the "6
levels of progression" above, from my pg 25-28, which
he failed to understand), or react to any of them.  
I would welcome some scholarly evaluation of all the 
original analysis and systemization that is presented
in this book, actually.

> It is also a pity that Mason never sets his book 
> on a firm scholarly basis, although statistical
> accounts of San-shin pictures ("55% of the images 
> have ...") attempt to convey this sense.  And
> yet since Mason offers no references, it is hard 
> to say whether his ideas derive from elsewhere or  
> if they are exclusively his.  The bibliography
> suggests that Mason has debts, but he does not
> footnote his sources through the text proper. 

This continues on into the realm of truly bizzare 
statements.  Mr. Savenije, take another look at this
book -- do you not SEE all those little numbers in 
the text?  Tiny numbers, elevated, most often at the 
end of a sentence?  There are 313 of them, perhaps 
averaging one per paragraph throughout the book.  
Mr. Savenije, WHAT do you suppose that those little 
numbers ARE???

Chapter I contains 28 notes on 3 pages at its end.
Chapter II contains 143 notes on 12 pages at its end.
Chapter III contains 125 notes on 8 pages at its end.
Chapter IV (mostly my own theories) contains 17 notes 
on 2 pages at its end.

That's 313 endnotes (Hollym insisted on end- rather 
than foot-notes, to make reading smoother). The great
majority of them are cites of published scholarly 
books and articles (as said in detail above), with 
further, deeper explanations and/or comments.

My editor actually complained to me that I included 
TOO MANY notes / references, and asked me to reduce 
them.  So to read Mr. Savenije claiming that I don't
have any at all truly puzzles me. I wonder what book
he was browsing through...?  Certainly not mine.

> Ultimately, though, this book may prove helpful to
> someone interested in a statistical account of the
> remains of the Korean San-shin along with relevant 
> images, but not to one who is seeking a truly in-
> depth understanding of this figure.

Well, all I can say is: this is the first full book 
on San-shin ever published in English.  No chapter or
article in English exceeds 8 pages on San-shin.  In 
Korean, no work on San-shin exceeds 100 small-format
pages.  I'm not aware of anything in Japanese over a
dozen pages long.  My 224 large-format pages took me
12 years to research and 3 years to compile, write 
and edit (part-time). There is nothing ever published
anywhere on San-shin that even comes close, that I 
have been able to find...

My bibliography lists 60 scholarly sources -- every-
thing I could find -- and most are repeatedly cited.
Most of the analysis and ideas presented in this book
are original and cannot be found in any other source,
period.  

Statistics alone do not add up to quality, of course.
However, I have a fair confidence to say that this 
is as much of "a truly in-depth understanding of" 
San-shin as any of you are likely to find in print.
Until someone does a bigger better book (or web-site)
of course!  :-)   If I am wrong about this, I beg for
anyone to point me to the superior publication...
and I apologise in advance for any immodesty.

I will await Mr. Savenije's response, on how these 
mistakes and mis-understandings could have happened,
if he indeed actually read my book carefully through 
before writing his review.  I cannot but suspect that
he did not -- no other explanation presents itself.
I am deeply disappointed that my book received such 
shabby and superficial treatment by him, and by the 
korean-studies list Review-series.

Sincerely,
David A. Mason



=====
Professor David A. Mason
#314 Cheong-song-gwan
Yonsei University, Maeji Campus
Wonju City, Kangwon Province,  220-710  
south KOREA
Mobile Phone:  [82] 017-378-7590
mntnwolf at well.com   or  mntnwolf at yahoo.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com/