[KS] Lack of Readings on Confucianism

[Morgan Pitelka]

Thank you, Don Baker, for your response. While I realize that Confucianism
is heterogeneous, complex, and intricately interwoven with various aspects
of Korean society, so are many other cultural institutions and practices
about which we do, in fact, have meaningful and useful introductory texts
(or at least articles or chapters). Dare I say this is a project worthy of
someone's attention?

I regularly use _Sources of Korean Tradition_. The chapters on Choson period
political though are, as you suggest, helpful, but what of the 10 centuries
of preceding Confucian influence? The translations of earlier texts related
to Confucianism are not as enlightening for those lacking a background in
Chinese history or East Asian philosophy. This is in no way meant as a
criticism of the _Sources_ series, which are invaluable resources. It is,
rather, a comment on the limitations of using premodern primary texts in
certain undergraduate contexts. Sometimes it works very well, sometimes it
doesn't. Your translations of the texts in the "Encounter with the West"
section of volume 2, for example, are exceptionally clear, and very helpful
for students. 

The older texts are less useful, more bogged down by Korean terminology.
Take the passage on the Royal Confucian Academy from the _Samguk sagi_,
translated on pages 65-66 of volume 1. Sinmun's establishment of this
institution is clearly a key moment in Silla's history, transforming the
educational experience and socio-political outlook of the Korean elite. This
is what undergraduate readers encounter in the first paragraph:

"The Royal Confucian Academy belongs to the Ministry of Rites. Established
in the second year of King Sinmun [682], the academy was called Taehakkam by
King Kyongdok [742-765] but was again called Kukhak by King Hyegong
[765-780]. There was one director, which King Kyongdok called saop but which
King Hyegong renamed kyong. The director's rank was the same as that of
other directors. Erudites [paksa] and instructors were appointed in 651 as
well as two holding the rank of taesa, who were called chubu by King
Kyongduk but were again called taesa by King Hyegong. The ranks ranged from
saji to naema. There were two erudites of history, and two more were added
by King Hyegong." 

In an advanced seminar on premodern Korean history or political philosophy,
no doubt the instructor would have time to wade through this passage
explaining the historical context, drawing students' attention to key
morsels of information, and leading interpretation of the implications. But
in a large undergraduate lecture class, there is simply not time. We
desperately need a good introductory text on the history (or even just the
early history) of Confucianism in Korea.

Morgan   
 
*****************
Morgan Pitelka
Asian Studies Department
408 Johnson Hall
Occidental College
1600 Campus Road
Los Angeles, CA 90041
1-323-259-1421
mailto:mpitelka at oxy.edu
*****************