[KS] Korea Studies List

[HS]

Dear all

 

Jim Hoare's comment that no one comes out well out of this discussion is
well taken. 

 

The dominant feeling among colleagues I have spoken to in the US and the UK
in the last couple of weeks, most of whom do not know the individuals
involved and therefore have no particular axe to grind, is of a discussion
that has stretched far beyond the professional boundaries of debate over the
substantive issue and into the realms of organised character assassination.

 

Allegations of inadequate professionalism in the use of sources should be
made in a professional manner which would be (a) a book review (b) a
complaint to the scholar concerned (c) a complaint to the publisher (d) a
relevant professional association, for example, the American Association of
Asian Studies and finally if those avenues do not prove satisfactory to the
complainant (d) a complaint to the employer. 

 

It is because such allegations are potentially career threatening that they
need to be made through procedures that can actually deal with the
complaints and give all involved a full and fair hearing.

 

The Korea Studies list cannot possibly provide a professional mechanism for
sorting anything out in terms of providing a fair outcome for all concerned.
It wasn't set up to do so and its function as a discussion group is only
that - as one means of having professionally respectful interaction.

 

This takes me on to the question of civility in interactions on the Korea
Studies list. For myself, I find the tone and approach of some regular
contributors, at best exclusionary, and at worst far from professional. This
is why I have thus far only posted straight information about job vacancies
etc. I contribute to this discussion only because it is getting to the point
that not contributing implies condoning manner of handling the substantive
issue and the tone of the discussion.. 

 

Swearing, sarcasm to the extent that a contributor feels insulted or
belittled is not a mark of vigorous intellectual debate. It is a sign of the
failure of intellectual debate. 


Finally, in the spirit of giving an example of how a book review can deal
with troubling sourcing I attach my own review of the book by Sheila Miyoshi
Jager, published in the Political Quarterly,
<http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/poqu.2015.86.issue-1/issuetoc>
Volume 86, Issue 1, pages 152-179, January-March 2015. I don't have the pdf
so need to attach my original word document.


If possible, it would be good to see a discussion of what we expect from the
Korea Studies List and what we expect from the moderators of the List.


With best wishes


Hazel Smith


 

Hazel Smith Ph.D FRSA

Professor and Director

International Institute of Korean Studies UCLAN (IKSU)

Adelphi Building AB107, University of Central Lancashire (UCLAN), Preston,
PR1 7BQ, UK
Professor Emeritus, Cranfield University, UK

Professorial Associate, School of Oriental and African Studies, UK

+44 (0) 1772 896426 (office)

+44 (0) 784 174 5233 (mobile)

 <http://www.uclan.ac.uk/iksu> www.uclan.ac.uk/iksu

 


 


 


                                         


 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://koreanstudies.com/pipermail/koreanstudies_koreanstudies.com/attachments/20161001/423b6239/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Smith review i1 2015 .doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 35328 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://koreanstudies.com/pipermail/koreanstudies_koreanstudies.com/attachments/20161001/423b6239/attachment.doc>