[KS] Japan-Korea, France-Algeria: Colonialism and language policy
Frank Hoffmann
hoffmann at koreanstudies.com
Sat Oct 26 13:16:06 EDT 2013
Dear Balazs:
Two things, very short:
1. We do not necessarily always have to understand similar developments
as a kind of "copy" of some model. After all we do talk about the same
wider East Asian cultural and historical Sino-centric world here that
both Korea and Japan belonged to. The Koreans were certainly inspired
by the Meiji period reforms, no doubt. But then, given the similar
cultural past, and also given that, when talking about cultural purism,
which I just called the lowest common denominator model, we may see the
very point that this was an easy step! That cannot be compared with the
adaptation of a far more complicated political model such as Marxism
with its theories about society and economics (and culture), that a man
like Kim Il Sung seems not to have understood until long after he was
in power. It really just does not "take much" to get to what you call
cultural purism.
2. You just wrote:
> 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.
I doubt that this statement about a "softened" Taiwanese reaction can
factually be sustained. Taiwanese history may not be very well known in
Korea. But I see no such "softened" Taiwanese reaction -- what I see is
the same fights, resistance, and collaboration issues as in Korea.
Except, Taiwan is an island with no Manchuria or Russian Far East in
the neighborhood where resistance troops could operate from or flee to
for a hiding, or where they could create an alternative system and
culture, more or less independent communities (so it was easier for the
Japanese to control). ... And also, the differences I was talking about
in my last message was more with those South East Asian countries in
mind that had been British or French colonies. Books hardly make you/us
understand these differences, but once we see how people talk about the
colonial period and their own part in it, then there is a huge
difference there.
Best,
Frank
On Sat, 26 Oct 2013 17:48:03 +0100 (BST), Balazs Szalontai wrote:
> 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
>
>
--------------------------------------
Frank Hoffmann
http://koreanstudies.com
More information about the Koreanstudies
mailing list