[KS] Japan-Korea, France-Algeria: Colonialism and language policy

Balazs Szalontai aoverl at yahoo.co.uk
Sat Oct 26 12:48:03 EDT 2013


Dear Frank,

I certainly agree with most of your observations, particularly with regard to Taiwan and Southeast Asia. Still, I think that we should distinguish between the various phases of Japanese cultural influence in Korea. Your model is fully applicable not only to the 1880s and 1890s (with Kim Ok-kyun as a notable example) but also to the "cultural policy" in the 1920s. 1937-45 is another matter, however. In my opinion, the Japanese cultural impact that Korean society encountered in these periods probably would not have triggered a long-term policy of cultural purism, but the policy of naisen ittai did (see South Korea's official import ban on Japanese films, pop music, etc., which 
persisted until 1998, and which had no real equivalent in other 
post-colonial countries in Asia). I wonder if it was Taiwan's more ambiguous identity/identities (Chinese? or Taiwanese? or Fujianese/Hakka?) that somehow "softened" Taiwanese emotional reactions to naisen ittai.  

All the best,
Balazs Szalontai




>________________________________
> From: Frank Hoffmann <hoffmann at koreanstudies.com>
>To: koreanstudies at koreanstudies.com 
>Sent: Sunday, 27 October 2013, 0:08
>Subject: Re: [KS] Japan-Korea, France-Algeria: Colonialism and language policy
> 
>
>Hello Don:
>
>> It would be interesting to know the source of that "primitive 
>> culture" quote.
>
>You mean the percentage given, or you refer to the "primitive culture" 
>term? 
>I put, as a usual practice in such cases, scare quotes around the term 
>to distance myself from it (as I would also do it when using a term 
>such as "oriental"--with or without capital "o"--for the first time in 
>any given text), not because it is a quote. 
>
>As for the mentioned 80%, the source is given right below. That 
>dissertation is online at the link given. 
>
>Over the past 15 to 20 year I have looked quite intensely at modern and 
>contemporary Taiwanese art and art history, and same as with Korea, 
>that can only be understood and explained by looking at the wider 
>cultural policies. While you say that Taiwan was "far more amenable to 
>Japanese rule than was Korea" we see at the very same time the almost 
>exact same structural setup that we see in Korea (I looked at that for 
>the case of art on an almost microscopic level), AND we also see the 
>almost exact same "reactions" in terms of resistance and 
>collaborations. 
>
>Coming to "reactions" though, I like to note that I cannot share Balazs 
>Szalontai's observation: "I think this cultural shock played a decisive 
>role in the rise of cultural purism in both Koreas." (KS list message 
>of Oct. 25). Go to any country in SOUTH East Asia where the British or 
>the French where the colonial powers, and you see that the very old 
>people, if still alive, have a very different way of dealing with the 
>colonial past: many are happily sharing their pride to have been 
>participating in e.g. a British school, or even still are wearing 
>partially British cloth, and so on. This reaction in Korea is a 
>different kind of reaction: the early modernization movements on the 
>1890s already used Japanese models. Japan itself had distanced itself 
>from the model of "import modernization" as that would come with open 
>or hidden Western modes of colonization, and that Japanese model of 
>"internal modernization" then became a very attractive one for Koreans, 
>but also for e.g. the Chinese in cities like Shanghai. (Of course, 
>nationalist historiography in the various countries keeps that theme 
>small.) The problem, the failure in Korea, was that there was not a 
>single political group in that rather short time spam (mid-1880s to 
>early 1900s) that could gather sufficient political power to actually 
>stay on and modernize the corrupted, declining Chosŏn Empire using this 
>model. So, when the Japanese took over, then the same model was used to 
>fight them. Yet, there was an ongoing back-and-forth between desire and 
>objection, resistance and collaboration, and we see that when we follow 
>cultural or political leaders around through the years (and there often 
>drastic changes). The ideology of "pursim" is an ideology of the lowest 
>common denominator, probably never stronger than today. It was not a 
>reaction as such, it was more of an adapted or at least 
>Japanese-inspired versatile model that was then assigned various tasks, 
>depending on the political situation--working fine in North Korea, 
>South Korea, colonial Korea, etc.  
>
>I must say though, that I am not at all a big fan of system comparisons 
>when it comes to what they say about culture. The issue with those 
>country-level comparisons is the same as with statistics: don't believe 
>any statistics which you haven't forged yourself! When we do a 
>comparison between two political, economic, and cultural mega systems, 
>then I would tend to switch my brain to energy-saving mode: whatever 
>one finds is as valid as it is completely invalid. I get more 
>scientific evidence out of a Picasso drawing with an oversized dig and 
>a virgin with a Stalin beard to then talk about the political and 
>cultural situation of a person or country at any given time than a 
>comparison of the general colonial situation in Japan-Korea with 
>France-Algeria produces. Japan-Taiwan seems at least closer in that (a) 
>it is within the former sino-centric world, and (b) one of the players 
>is identical. So, if we look at very specific issues, then it *may* 
>make some sense to compare, but MOSTLY, in my opinion, to become more 
>aware of issues and connections not seen or thought of before, and of 
>getting to know other new ways of looking at already known data. (This 
>is the exact same positive approach there, in the social sciences, that 
>also makes sense in the hard sciences.) That kind of comparison can 
>lead to new ideas of what to do and how to interpret data. But as such, 
>as a "comparative study," it makes usually little sense--it is more 
>what follows that can make sense. George E.P. Box, a very dangerous man 
>who revolutionized how statistics processing (Bayesian model) is being 
>used by computers for forward-looking tasks (NOT just for analyzing 
>past occurrences)--without him Google would not be possible and the 
>speed of the Internet would not be there--has this very useful and 
>simple insight to offer: "All models are wrong, but some models are 
>useful." (1979) If a model can be useful, we may want limit for what 
>exactly. A model that compares two colonial systems, not just on an 
>economic or political level, but even culturally, and those compared 
>systems are geographically (and culturally) THAT far apart, then the 
>very first thing I would want to know is what exact aspects can still 
>be useful, and what for? The outcome of such a multi-country comparison 
>*on such a wide scale* is in itself without doubt completely invalid. 
>But there might be something that it leads to, as it might have brought 
>up new issues and questions.
>
>Best,
>Frank
>
>
>The Taiwan experience with Japan was very different 
>> from that of Korea. Taiwan did not exactly appreciate the demands, 
>> from time to time, from Beijing and was far more amenable to Japanese 
>> rule than was Korea. Japanese culture penetrated deep into Taiwan in 
>> ways that it never did in Korea -- a legacy that continues to this 
>> day.
>> Don Kirk
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> From: Frank Hoffmann <hoffmann at koreanstudies.com>
>> To: koreanstudies at koreanstudies.com 
>> Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2013 1:03 AM
>> Subject: Re: [KS] Japan-Korea, France-Algeria: Colonialism and 
>> language policy
>> 
>> 
>> By 1945 about 80% of the population of Taiwan was speaking Japanese. 
>> And Taiwan, let us not forget that, was considered a "primitive 
>> culture" in the late 19th century when the Japanese colonized it.
>> Just something to think about.
>> 
>> See:
>> Catherine Shu-fen (Yu) Fewings, "Japanese colonial language education 
>> in Taiwan and assimilation, 1895-1945," PhD diss., Curtin University of 
>> Technology, 2004.
>> 
>(http://espace.library.curtin.edu.au/R/?func=dbin-jump-full&object_id=15269&local_base=GEN01-ERA02)
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Frank
>> 
>> 
>> --------------------------------------
>> Frank Hoffmann
>> http://koreanstudies.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
>
>--------------------------------------
>Frank Hoffmann
>http://koreanstudies.com
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://koreanstudies.com/pipermail/koreanstudies_koreanstudies.com/attachments/20131026/da4a29b9/attachment.html>


More information about the Koreanstudies mailing list