[KS] Percival Lowell
hyungpai at eastasian.ucsb.edu
Mon Apr 20 15:14:49 EDT 2015
Dear Roger, Martina, Frank, Shulman, and others,
I am overwhelmed by the new information and helpful resources offered by learned members.
I especially want to thank Roger and his comments about the connections between Korea’s implementation and Japan’s national treasures systems.
I have to go back and look at the meeting minutes of the Munhwajae Wiwon hoe committee ( In which Prof Im in fact was one of the five members) dating to the mid 1960s, which I remember I went through when I started my book research more than a decade ago. My memory is fuzzy now, but the members did discuss Japan’s intangible system, definitions of poyuja ( holders of tradition), and means of preserving such as surveying remote provinces, recording performances, and cataloguing survivors, etc. And yes, Roger is right, the mask dance was not the first priority since the elite royal cultural relics took precedence as in other countries ( Taylor Atkins has a great chapter in his book, “Primitive Selves” in tracing the colonial origins of Kukak preservation methods by Japanese scholars.
Unfortunately, Percival Lowell and 19th century is fascinating but only a small part of my current project in which I am trying to go beyond my last book and work on travel history, tourist images and representations of Korea focussing on photography, preservation and management of heritage ruins.
Hyung Il Pai
Professor, East Asian Languages and Cultural Studies
HSSB Building, University of California, Santa Barbara
CA 93106. U.S.A.
Email: hyungpai at eastasian.ucsb.edu
Dept Home-page profile: http://www.eastasian.ucsb.edu/home/faculty/hyung-il-pai/
On Apr 17, 2015, at 7:00 AM, Robert M Oppenheim <rmo at austin.utexas.edu> wrote:
> Dear Frank,
> I did in fact misread your question as purely historical - smiley was lost on me. Anyway, I certainly agree that a study of Choson hats, now, would have the potential to be very interesting in the right hands, bringing in art history, social history, material culture (also necessarily being a history of fabric and technique), gender studies, etc., and maybe making some telling points.
> From: Koreanstudies <koreanstudies-bounces at koreanstudies.com> on behalf of Frank Hoffmann <hoffmann at koreanstudies.com>
> Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 4:18 PM
> To: koreanstudies at koreanstudies.com
> Subject: Re: [KS] Percival Lowell
> To Dr. Oppenheim, and All:
> I would put a very big smiley here, if I could. Your reply again brings
> us back to the early 1900s, while I would really wish to see a 2015
> reply to the question itself -- not an explanation why there is no
> answer. To me the explanation given for the lack of an answer, for
> explaining why we do not seem to know, is not really convincing either.
> The center for ethnological research was then in Europe, much less so
> in the United States. But there was nothing done in Europe either,
> although the history of ethnology there is quite different to that in
> the United States. (However, there were publications on e.g. Korean
> tools in agriculture, and that sort of thing.) Still, the reference to
> the early 1900s -- therefore my imagined smiley -- has little to do
> with 2015, to explain why we have no true research knowledge on Korean
> hats. There are now Korean studies programs at many universities, and I
> see a hundreds of PhDs and M.A. theses, so many of them on just a tiny
> area of themes, rotating the same approaches, terms, and questions. The
> "visual studies" approaches, for example, have found their way into
> fields they might better not have found. While this swarm research is
> to a certain degree entertaining, I find it still amazing that the
> Korean hat theme (and some other themes) disappeared with Japanese
> colonialism just like that, and that those themes have not been
> reconsidered in the decades after liberation. It was not Percival
> Lowell who "formed" that theme somehow, but the these hats *are* a
> topic that should have a much higher "trade value" among researchers.
> What would we see in 1885 in Korea, in the late Chosŏn period? What we
> call the "fine arts" (court art, but also Buddhist 'art' at temples and
> monasteries, porcelain manufacturing) had all been in a downward spiral
> during the entire 19th century, and that had been obvious to anyone
> visiting the country. When we look at "art" being produced in the
> period from 1876 to say 1915, we deal with the worst of the worst, a
> "dark period" (to re-assign the term Korean historians otherwise use
> for the early colonial 1910-1919 period). There is hardly anything,
> other than maybe calligraphy, if one includes that, that gets us
> excited as representing KOREAN culture at the age of early
> modernization. At the same time, though, the hat-making handicraft
> seems to continue as ever before, with no decline in aesthetics or
> material or creativity -- and how about the "rules" applied to that?
> Who wears which hats at what occasions, etc.? Percival Lowell tells us
> that he received a Western-shaped hat (from the court) as a present,
> made of horse hair in the Korean manner. That story tells us how open
> even this most Korean of all Korean handicrafts was to social and
> political change! If Korean guys had a 65 styles or more for their hats
> (and the ladies around 20 only), and if they kept that up all the way
> into the early 1900s, and if the hat stores were pretty much the only
> impressive stores in all Korea (we have many similar observations by
> travelers from other countries in Europe), it will be very interesting
> and promising to have a far closer look at the entire subject --
> especially if combining that with depictions from painting, sketches,
> and early photography (such as the photo of Lowell and the group of
> Koreans). We cannot "generalize" the outcome of such research before it
> is done, but I have no doubt there will be some very concrete cases
> were we would gather new insights. What does it exactly mean that
> these Korean yangban in that photo wear these transparent (rather than
> translucent) hats (that was new to me)? Is that, for example, a fashion
> of that time, or does it relate to status (I mean within the yangban)?
> These Korean hats (and cloth) were a purely KOREAN fashion! -- and
> other than today's or yesterday's touristy publications with some nice
> photos and references (again and again) to those late 19th century
> Western publications nobody seems to look into that. Or what are your
> grad students writing about? Can you imagine Japanologists would have
> ignored and the Japan Society would not have pushed for research on
> kimono and flip flops culture? Little magazine articles and summarizing
> 19th century Bostonian essays will not et us new insights, I fear.
> There are some essays on the far less sophisticated and socially
> important female clothing -- obviously because women were allowed to
> keep their dresses, as those were not made an obstacle to
> modernization, not until the 1920s at least. But hats?
> On Thu, 16 Apr 2015 18:14:47 +0000, Robert M Oppenheim wrote:
>> Hi Frank and others,
>> It is always hard to figure out why a research focus DIDN'T have
>> legs, but, there are perhaps a couple of local answers for the USNM:
>> 1) Jenings, who was the one to run with hats at the Smithsonian, dies
>> before the publication of his hats article in 1903.
>> 2) Despite the focus of the 1889 exhibition - which may or may not
>> have accorded with the curators' aims, it may just have been Mason
>> playing to the crowd - hats or clothing more generally was never
>> really theoretically productive for Mason or Hough. Both were
>> interested in telling grand evolutionary stories; Hough's obsession
>> was the dialectic of the "taming of fire by man" and the "taming of
>> man by fire." Hats didn't help.
>> 3) So Pyonggyu comes to Washington in the mid-1890s and spurs a new
>> wave of Korean publication on Hough's part, but after that, as far as
>> I know, the string of Korean helpers there ends for a bit.
>> 4) The leading candidate: Mason, Hough, et al. simply became
>> distracted by other things. A decade or so later, around 1910, you
>> can find a letter from Hough to Frederick Starr happily passing on
>> the torch of interest in Korea and expressing regret that he never
>> was able to do more with it. He had moved on.
> Frank Hoffmann
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Koreanstudies