Happy Thanksgiving!

The Korean would like to wish all readers happy Thanksgiving, wherever you may be.

Thanksgiving is truly the Korean's favorite holiday, although sadly it is increasingly becoming an inconvenient roadblock for American retailers to get the Christmas shopping season going early.

Thanksgiving is the most American of all holidays, save perhaps the Independence Day. It is the day for immigrants. The Pilgrim's dinner with the Native Americans symbolize our ideals as a nation of immigrants: newcomers and the natives, on the same table, sharing a meal.

Beauty of history lies in that the patterns in its fabric repeat endlessly. On the Thanksgiving Day of 1997 -- some 380 years after the Pilgrims -- the Korean Family arrived at the port of Los Angeles International Airport, full of anticipation for the Land of Opportunity. The Korean Family was greeted by natives, the distant family friends who have lived in the U.S. for decades as Korean Americans. And like a beautiful fugue, the pattern repeated once again; the natives helped the immigrants to get settled in, and begin their lives in the new world.

Thus, Thanksgiving Day is doubly special for the Korean Family. We never miss celebrating it. We are thankful for all the great things in our lives, but most of all, we are thankful to be in America. Like the Pilgrims who were grateful for their new lives and new opportunities, the Korean Family is grateful, each and every year, for our own new lives and opportunities.

Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@hotmail.com.

Dear Readers,

The Korean got an early start on the Thanksgiving Break, and decided to visit California. See you again soon.

Ask a Korean! News: "Charity Angel" and the Insanity of Anti-Communism

Recently, the Korean had a spirited debate on the Marmot’s Hole, on the topic of whether Sunshine Policy was a failure. The Korean’s position was that it was not. Although Sunshine Policy may not have been the most smashing success, in the very least it enabled engagement between the two Koreas. And the Korean believed that this achievement was underrated because the detractors of Sunshine Policy often underestimate the insane level of antagonism between the two Koreas. And recently, the perfect piece of news came up to show the amazing insanity in the inter-Korean relation.

Dear readers, meet the beautiful Moon Geun-Yeong.


Moon, 21, debuted as a child actress in 2000 at the age of 13. Because of her sheer adorability, she became a huge hit since, appearing in various movies, dramas, and advertisements. Recently, Roboseyo did a tribute the series of advertisements featuring Moon. (Perv.) Here is one example.





As it turns out, Moon doesn’t just look like the sweetest sweetheart in the world – she is in fact the sweetest sweetheart in the world. She has been the biggest individual donor for Community Chest Korea, a charity organization, donating around $800,000 over six years anonymously. Since she is now 21, she has been donating since she was 15 – anonymously! She has also been known to donate generously for various other charities.

Adorable, yes? Praise-worthy, yes? Positively angelic, yes? Korean media agreed, and spent many pages and airtime praising Moon’s good deed. Dubbing her the “charity angel”, they praised Moon’s kindness, her fine upbringing, and being a pioneer in establishing a charity culture in Korea.

Enter this guy. Man in the picture is Ji Man-Won, a professor known for his raging conservative politics, the concept which includes fervent anti-Communism and pro-military dictatorship (because it helped the Korean economy grow) in Korea.

As it turns out, Moon’s maternal grandfather was a communist guerilla who fought in South Korea during the Korean War. Also, Moon’s family is from Gwangju, a known stronghold for democratization movement and the home of Gwangju movement, a citizen uprising which was brutally suppressed by the military dictatorship, killing dozens. Moon’s maternal grandfather’s brother fought and died in that movement as well.

That did not sit well with Ji, who posted three articles about Moon after the media attention for her charity work grew. Below are some of the excerpts, translated by the Korean.

First Article – “Is Producing Charity Angel a Leftist Strategy?”

On Nov. 13, 2008, Community Chest Korea revealed that Moon Geun-Yeong was the actress in her 20s who donated $850,000 over the past 6 years. Since then, the leftist locusts have been obsessing to make Moon a heroine. …

But it does not sit well that the charity angel Moon is a granddaughter of a communist guerilla, and that she grew up with the love from that guerilla until her grandfather passed away in 2005. Although being a granddaughter of a communist guerilla cannot be faulted because guilt-by-association was abolished during Jeon Du-Hawn administration [read: early 1980s], it does not feel good that until three years ago, she must have received a lot of communist guerilla’s teaching while being loved by the communist guerilla grandfather. …

Recently, the fact that people from the Environmental Movement League and Environment Foundation and those from Kim Dae-Jung/Roh Moo-hyeon [read: non-conservatives] were handcuffed for corruption must have acted as a huge burden on the leftists. Leftists must have felt the need to change this milieu. It was already well known that the cute actress Moon was a granddaughter of a communist guerilla. It appears that Moon’s holding the firm position as an angel by raising her profile in TV dramas, and in addition praising her as an anonymous charity angel who donated $850,000, is a psychological warfare to create an image that communist guerillas are not people with horns, but they are people who are like angels. ...

Second Article – “Moon Geun-yeong is for Communist Guerilla’s Propaganda”

Searching for “Ryu Nak-Jin” [Moon’s grandfather] on a search engine shows a video file. The content was just as I expected. It was an advertisement that Moon was pretty, a good actress, has a kind heart, and has a great family. She was everyone’s adorable little sister, her maternal grandfather was a member of the unification movement, her great uncle was a fighter for democracy, and her uncle and aunts were patriots enough to be investigated by the police.

That is, communist guerillas are members of the unification movement, the communist guerilla family is a family with good heritage, the family that raised the daughter that did the goodliest thing in the world.

In short, it says communist guerilla family is a great family. This is a psychological warfare by the guerillas – as much as Moon’s good deeds are advertised, the message that communist guerilla family is good spreads as well. Also, I think they are engaging in a multi-purpose psychological warfare of diluting the disgust against communist guerillas and of eliciting a positive sentiment against Honam [region in which Gwangju sits] by turning Moon into an ideal woman. …

Third article – “North Korea’s Plan and the Case of Moon Geun-Yeong”

Moon vs. other good people

There are many people who do good deeds that are unimaginable to ordinary people. … These are the people who give their body, more precious than money, although they cannot produce a spectacularly large sum of money that would be decorated by the media. …

Next in order are those who contribute money. The charity from those who earn much, for example Bill Gates, is a good deed that not anyone can do. …

I have searched a few articles from the past. … It is up to the readers where Moon’s donation of $850,000 over six years to Community Chest Korea ranks among these righteous good deeds. But unlike these other good deeds, Moon’s good deed has a much larger impact. Even conservative media is praising Moon, creating video files with strong communicative power spreading strange messages. …

This writer does not find fault with the good deed and praising the good deed. The fault is found in the manner of praising and the hidden message latent in such praising.

The full drivel can be found here.

Remember folks, this is 2008. All this was only written within this week. Imagine how insane things must have been during the military dictatorship, which ended in 1993. For example, in the 1970s, the government investigated Gim Chu-ja, then a popular singer, because apparently her dance moves were codes for communist spies.

At least the Korean is comforted by the fact that even the most conservative Korean medias roundly criticized Ji. However, even more sickening is that there are at least some people who agree with Ji. This guy compiled the comments attached to the article on Chosun Ilbo, the most conservative newspaper among all. The Korean presents a selected few translated below. The Korean would laugh, except he knows they are serious when they wrote these:

“The charity angel’s deed itself should be praised, but if there is such a circumstance behind it, of course we should be wary. It would have been unimaginable without Mr. Ji Manwon’s insight. If you are not going to express respect to his patriotism, at least do not criticize him.”

“It totally makes sense. Moon donated under leftist governments, not under rightist government.” [Note: the last year of Korean conservative government was 1998, when Moon was 11, before her debut.]

“Those who slander Ji are mostly naïve people, leftists, stupid people, and those who know nothing; those who slander him most vigorously are the leftist flag-bearers who are carrying out their mission, and some but not all members of regional associations. People must know.”

“All the celebrities who were unknown or unpopular but raised their profile during Kim Dae-Jung and Roh Moo-Hyeon administration must be investigated. It smells suspicious.”

“You cannot deny that Dr. Ji’s point is correct and keen. Moon Geun-Yeong, granddaughter of Ryu Nak-Jin who denied the legitimacy of the Republic of Korea and lived and died as an enemy, must clearly reveal her view and position on her grandfather.”

The same type of people can be found criticizing Chosun’s editorial that condemned Ji. If you would like to venture in, the link is here. Try organizing by “thumbs up”, and the most despicable comments rise to the top.

This is utterly insane. But this episode is a perfect glimpse into how Korea was before it was democratized. Ji Manwon's views were exactly the mainstream view during the military governments of Korea, which only ended in 1993. Needless to say, politics of that era was just crazy. There was no reason, only madness. Although severely marginalized, the insanity is still surviving to this day.

Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@hotmail.com.

Nice article about Michelle Rhee, a Korean American chancellor of the D.C. public schools.

As the Korean had said, Europe is pretty far behind America in eradicating racism.

Three interesting articles about education.

Racial Imbalance Persists at Elite Public High Schools

School District Tries to Lure Asian Parents

Start-Up Teaches Math to Americans, Indian-Style

The Korean gave an interview with UCLA Radio about our new president.

The Korean realized he hates his own voice. (But it sounds so great once it reverberates through the Korean's cranium....)

How Dare You Call Me by My Name!

Dear Korean,

I was wondering why when you first meet a Korean, you can't casually call them by their first names. I've become acquainted with this guy on a professional level and we've talked on several occasions, but he has never addressed me by my name – come to think of it, I don't think he's ever asked what it was – even though he's pretty much asked every other question about me. Is it just this weirdo or is this a common Korean code of conduct?

Confused Korean American Chick


Dear CKAC,

The person you are dealing with is certainly not a weirdo. Not calling first name is a common Korean code of conduct, particularly in a professional setting. In fact, doing otherwise is extremely rude.

Confucianism is too often used to explain away Korean culture, and the Korean thinks it is unjustifiably overused. However, at least this much is clear: Confucianism envisions a society with a clear hierarchy. Every individual in the society has a rank, determined by age, family relations, or social status. People’s interaction every day must involve signifiers that remind each person where they stand in the society. Usage of one’s name, as such, is one of the most important signifiers.

In Korean manners, being able to use someone’s first name either meant very close intimacy or extreme superiority. Therefore, relatively few people may call you by your first name. Here is the list of those people: your parents, grandparents, uncles and aunts; your older (but not younger) siblings; your close friends of the same age or older; your owner (if you are a dog, cat, or other pets, or a slave in the old days.) That’s it.

On the other hand, here is the list people who can NEVER call you by your first name: your younger siblings; your children, nephews, nieces; your in-laws, regardless of age; your co-workers, regardless of rank; anyone who is younger than you, regardless of how close they are to you.

How would these people call you? For families and extended families, there is a particular term for each relation. For example, the Korean Brother (younger) has to call the Korean hyeong, the term for “a man's older brother”. (Although he rare does nowadays - the Korean Brother has gotten uppity ever since the Korean Family moved to America.) The Korean Sister-in-Law (older) has to call the Korean doryeonnim, the term for “a woman’s younger brother-in-law.” Yes, it’s that specific – men and women have different terms for each position in the family tree.

For people met through professional acquaintance, the correct term is to use the person’s last name, followed by his rank or profession. Thus, if you are a manager (bujang) whose last name is Kim, you would be called Kim bujang-nim. (nim is an honorific, which makes the whole thing translate to “Manager-Sir/Madam Kim”.) If you are an owner of a store whose last name is Kwon, you would be called Kwon sajang-nim. (sajang means “owner of a business,” so you are being called “Owner-Sir/Madam Kwon”.)

(An aside: unlike U.S., an attorney is a respected profession in Korea. Therefore, a lawyer whose last name is Lee would be called Lee byeonhosa-nim (“Attorney-Sir/Madam Lee”). Among Korean American attorneys, a convenient acronym of BHSN is used in emails. However, what would one do in a Korean law firm to show the rank? After all, everyone in a law firm is a lawyer, but managing partner of the firm has to be differentiated somehow. Answer: at least in the case of the largest law firm in Korea, the managing partner is called “Dr. Kim” (Kim baksa-nim), so that he can be signified as being “higher” than ordinary BHSNs.)

So, here is an important piece of business etiquette in meeting Koreans. Like any other business meeting, people would shake hands and introduce each other’s first and last name, sometimes exchanging business cards. But after that, first names are not to be uttered. This is so important that the Korean will repeat again. Never, never, never, never, never, NEVER use a Korean person’s first name in a business meeting. Dropping your pants and pissing in the person’s briefcase would be only a little ruder than calling him/her by his/her first name. Recount the people in the “okay to use first name” category – they are all family or close friends, except the “dog owner” category. When you just met a person for the first time, you are neither family nor friend. So guess what calling them by their first names mean?

(However, because contemporary Koreans are familiar with Americans’ barbarian habit of calling people by their first names, it may be ok if the Korean businessperson with whom you are meeting explicitly tells you to call him/her by his/her first name.)

Here is a bonus point: the word for “you” follows the same rule as first names. So watch out for whom you call neo or dangsin – in a wrong situation, the word “you” in and of itself could be a swear word. So instead of, for example, saying “I like your idea” in a business meeting, Koreans would say “I like Kim baksa-nim’s idea” (while speaking to Kim baksa-nim, or Dr. Kim, as if they are talking about someone who is not there.)

There is one important group that was not covered – what about husbands and wives? Traditionally, they did not call each other’s names either. Instead, they called each other yeobo, the term that is still in use in modern Korea, translated as “honey” or “sweetie”. However, the etymology of yeobo is definitely not as romantic as "honey"; the term originally means, “look here”. Yup, Koreans knew all about romance.

Another traditional term is dangsin, which simply means "you", although this term is used in more intimate situations. (Almost all "you" in old Korean pop songs are dangsin, while new Korean songs tend to use neo or geudae more often for "you" -- an interesting development.) Alternatively, after having children, husbands and wives often call each other as their children’s father and mother. That is, if a child’s name is Jinyoung (a solid, unisex name), the husband may call his wife Jinyoung umma (Jinyoung’s mom), and the wife may call her husband Jinyoung appa (Jinyoung’s dad). Romance all the way, those Koreans.

However, modern times have a way of changing traditions. So while many husbands and wives still use the old terminology, still others go on a first-name basis. (Because your spouse is your best friend!) Or others retain their terminology while they dated. Thus, (because women tend to be the younger one in a relationship,) many younger wives call their husband seonbae (“class senior”, the term for anyone who went to the same school before you did,) or [first name]-ssi (“Mr. [first name]”, the catch-all term for all other ambiguous situations, often happening during dating scenarios.) Or – horror of all horrors to purists like the Korean himself – some young wives carry on calling their husbands oppa, women’s term for calling older brother or men who are a little older them.

Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@hotmail.com.

Ask a Korean! Wiki: Books about Korea

Dear Korean,

I was wondering if you could list a few Korean books for me about its culture and history. I am 100% Korean but I was born in the U.S. and so I don't know much about Korea's history. I wanted to educate myself since my college doesn't offer any classes.

Lina

Dear Lina,

The Korean would offer Carter Eckert's Korea Old and New. Since it was published in 1991 it may be a little dated, but it is solid overview of Korea history. For a little more trivial interest about how life in Korea was in early modern days, the Korean would recommend Dawn of Modern Korea by Andrei Lankov, which is a fascinating book. But beyond that, the Korean never had any need for a comprehensive Korean history book in English.

So readers, help out Lina here. The Korean knows some of you guys are actual scholars with fancy titles in universities and such. With everyone's input, this would be a great resource for self-motivated people who would like to learn more about Korea.

Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@hotmail.com.

Really awful pictures of Unit 731 experimentations can be seen here.

Ask a Korean! News: Depressing News about Depression

Actress Choi Jinsil's death highlighted, among other things, the inadequacy of Korean approach for mental illness, particularly depression. On that theme, Dong-A Ilbo reports that nearly 80 percent of depression patients in Korea stop taking anti-depressants within three months without consulting their doctors. Amazingly, 53 percent of the patients decide to stop the treatment after only one month, although anti-depressants generally require 6 months to take effect. This rate is two to three times higher than depression patients in Europe.

The article cites the prejudice against mental patients as one of the leading causes of patients' stopping the treatment. One of the examples given in the article is that of Mr. Kim, age 30, who developed depression while searching for a job. After seeing some improvement after one month of treatment, Mr. Kim stopped treatment against the doctor's advice for fear that the history of depression treatment would hinder finding a job. He returned to the doctor 6 months later, with stronger symptoms of depression.

In the last two or three years, the Korean has observed Korean society's attempt to change the public perception of depression. However, clearly more work could be done.

Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@hotmail.com.

Ask a Korean! News: Hollywood to Cure Oldboy's Deficiency by Removing All Asians

Old readers of this blog would know that this is a topic that really pisses off the Korean:

Steven Spielberg and Will Smith are in early discussions to collaborate on a remake of Chan Wook-park's "Oldboy." ... Spielberg had been looking for an opportunity to make a film with Smith, who would play the kidnapped man if all the pieces fall into place.

(Source)

This is bullshit. This is going to be The Departed all over again.

The Korean does not play the race card very often, but this situation calls for it. This flurry of Asian movie remake has racism written all over it. Yellow face doesn't sell; Asians are too foreign.

The Korean does not buy the idea that the remakes are happening because Americans are too lazy to read the subtitles. How do you explain the wild success of Life is Beautiful, Pan's Labyrinth, and Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, all shown in American theaters with subtitles?

In fact, all three movies were so successful that they were all available in English-dubbed version in theaters and on DVD. You are telling the Korean that Oldboy, a legend among Korean movies that hooked numerous non-Korean moviewatchers to Korean movies for the first time, would not sell in American theaters with subtitles or dubbing? That makes no sense.

The fact that Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon was fine without a remake featuring Chuck Norris, but Oldboy requires a remake featuring Will Smith, is telling. Hollywood is operating under the assumption that people would watch Asians wielding swords and walking on air, but not Asians portraying intricate emotion that accompanies a complex plot. This is purebred racism, no more, no less.

:::SPOILER::SKIP THE NEXT PARAGRAPH IF YOU HAVEN'T WATCHED OLDBOY::SPOILER:::

Who knows -- maybe Spielberg would be less shameless than Martin Scorsese, and this film would contain some genuine creativity on his part, making it a true derivative rather than a straight-up plagiarism like The Departed. In fact, casting Will Smith shows a little bit of potential in that direction. Smith adds a little bit of humor element to the Oh Daesu character, and his reaction to the crazy confinement may make the movie entirely different. Also, the Korean has a hard time believing that there will be a graphic display of incest in a Spielberg movie.

After all, Oldboy is based on a Japanese cartoon, at least as far as the 15-year confinement part. Creativity relies heavily upon borrowing. So if the American version of Oldboy adds something new and unexpected to the story while maintaining the basic setup of the movie, the Korean would not get upset. However, if the movie ends up being like The Departed's plagiarism of Infernal Affairs, down to dialogues, character appearances, camera angles and stage setup, the Korean will just lose it.

Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@hotmail.com.

-EDIT 11/13/08 8:42 a.m.- While reading on this topic, the Korean found this gem:

If this is not a conclusive argument against the remake, the Korean does not know what is. (Source)

President Barack Obama Series: The Korean's Thoughts

The Korean is quite happy about this result. When the Korean first saw Barack Obama – at his televised speech at the Democratic National Convention four years ago, the Korean was convinced that Obama was going to be the president someday. He just didn’t think it would happen so soon. Especially as a racial minority, the rise of Barack Obama to the top truly gives the Korean hope.

But beyond the Korean’s personal reaction, what more can be said about the significance about the Obama presidency? That was the question that faced the Korean as he set out to write his reaction piece. The Korean does not believe in wasting in words, and he hates talking about things that had been ably articulated already.

The Korean likes to talk about race relations, and this election obviously presents a lot to talk about. But because of the historic nature of this election, writers with far greater skills and time than the Korean have already explored all kinds of angles. The effect of this election in other country’s race relations? Check. The effect of this election in America’s whites? Yup. What about this election’s effect on fat-thin relations of our nation? To quote Sarah Palin, you betcha.

However, there is one angle that people have not been talking about just yet – perhaps because the question is a little too delicate to be asked. But this is one question that has been nagging the Korean during the entire Obama campaign: doesn’t Obama’s victory eliminate all excuses for black men of America?

One recurring theme in American racial politics is the various explanations for the status of black men in America. The statistics are clear – African American men are more likely to be incarcerated, more likely to be jobless and in poverty, etc. To an uninformed mind, the natural question that follows is: what’s wrong with black men? Why can’t they get a job or stay out of jail?

To this, racial politics provided various reasons, all of them tracing back to racism in mainstream America. The police uses racial profiling; the jury is more likely to convict a black man; the employers are less likely to hire black men, and quicker to fire them, etc. And so far, these explanations have held water.

But now, we have a flippin’ BLACK PRESIDENT. The President! Of the United States! You can’t get higher than that! All the racism in the world didn’t stop him from reaching the highest possible place in the world! The Korean can’t stop using the exclamation marks! It’s unbelievably unbelievable!

To be sure, the Korean is NOT saying that the election of Obama made all racial problems magically disappear. The Korean doubts that anyone in America truly believes that. However, the Korean thinks that a subtle shift in gears is inevitable for mainstream America. By having a black president, an example of personal responsibility against all odds has become very, very available. Now, if anyone tries to explain the unique challenges that black men in America face due to racial discrimination – perhaps in a debate about Affirmative Action? – half the listeners will think to themselves: “that didn’t stop President Obama.”

This shift will be more pronounced because of Barack Obama himself. Obama did not endorse the old-school racial politics, in which black politicians are supposed to embody the interests of the African American subgroup, and fight the systemic bias against racial minorities in the mainstream society. (In fact, if Obama took to this line, it would have been a guaranteed loss for him.) While Obama recognized the larger forces of discrimination, his message for racial minorities never wavered from the idea of personal responsibility.

His most revealing moment was his Father’s Day speech. It’s not just that Obama emphasized that black fathers need to step up and take personal responsibility – it’s that he did that with incredible specificity. The Father’s Day speech literally drew a picture of a lazy black father for the whole world: “don't just sit in the house and watch "SportsCenter" all weekend long.” In another campaign stop, Obama told a mostly African American crowd that they can’t let their children have “eight sodas a day,” “a bag of potato chips for lunch,” or “cold Popeyes for breakfast.”

The Korean’s reaction to this was: is Obama crazy? Does he have a death wish (for his campaign)? Did he decide that he doesn’t need black votes anymore? How is airing out black folks’ dirty laundry going to help him? Of course, it turned out that the Korean was wrong – Obama was just fine getting African American votes. Perhaps African Americans themselves are getting tired of the old racial politics as well.

Nonetheless, the forces of systemic, societal racism are still very real, and they daily affect the lives of racial minorities. The fight against such forces must continue. But -- irony of ironies -- as a black man rises to assume the presidency, the fight against racial discrimination may have gotten more difficult.

Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@hotmail.com

President Barack Obama Series: Interlude

Now, for a moment of levity --

In 8 years, there will be schools named after Barack Obama! There will be "Barack H. Obama Elementary School" or "OHS - Obama High School".

Even more amusing is, what would the school mascot be for OHS? The mascot for every single John F. Kennedy High School that the Korean knows of is "Fighting Irish", a decidedly racial mascot. So what about Barack Obama High School? "Black Knights"? "Hapa Warriors"? Suggestions are welcome!

Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@hotmail.com.

President Barack Obama Series: Korea's Reaction

Dear Korean,

What is the Korean news media saying about our new president-elect Barack Obama? My mom reports that according to some Korean radio program, an Obama administration would not be beneficial for South Korea. 진짜? Is that the consensus in S. Korea?

Annalog


Dear Annalog,

First, a shout-out to your lovely blog.

For the ease of writing, “Koreans” in this post means “Koreans in Korea,” not “Korean Americans.”

There are mainly two reactions from Korea about the Obama administration: admiration for American democracy that enabled black presidency, and caution for his stance on free trade and U.S. military outside of America.

First, Koreans are genuinely impressed by the fact that America did elect a black president. Because there is so much publicity about the history of racism in America, Koreans have a perception that America is an extremely racist country. The fact that a black candidate won shatters that perception.

Certainly, there are some detractors. Some media outlets in Korea are noting that Obama is half-white, practically raised as a white child by his white mother and maternal grandparents in a relatively racism-free Hawaii, or that his father was not a descendant of a slave, but a well-off Kenyan elite. However, overwhelming majority of Korean newspapers are expressing nothing about admiration on this point, some using this opportunity to look back upon Korean people’s own (crappy) treatment of racial minorities in Korea.

However, Koreans are concerned about what Obama administration may bring to the U.S.-Korea relations based on Obama’s campaign stumps. Essentially, Korea needs two things from U.S.: trading in a preferred status, and military guarantee in case of a North Korean invasion. McCain administration would have guaranteed both. John McCain repeatedly asserted the virtue of free trade agreements, and no one would doubt that McCain would react swiftly and decisively if there were a North Korean invasion of South Korea.

On the other hand, the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement and the South Korean auto industry were two of Barack Obama’s favorite whipping boys during his campaign. Obama consistently stressed that KORUS FTA was not fair with respect to its auto industry arrangements, suggesting that he would renegotiate it.

Few Americans know about KORUS FTA, but all Koreans know what KORUS FTA does for Korea. Except for a small group of vocal minority (farmers who would lose business to cheap U.S. agricultural products,) everyone in Korea loves the FTA. Koreans realize that they must trade or perish, and they fully understand the benefits of KORUS FTA. Indeed, although the presidency of Roh Moo-Hyun, preceding the current president, is considered an unmitigated disaster, his success in negotiating KORUS FTA is considered a significant achievement.

So it does concern Koreans a great deal when Obama calls KORUS FTA “badly flawed”. In fact, how Obama presidency would affect the FTA is the dominating headline in Korean newspapers right now. This is probably where Annalog’s mother was coming from.

The Korean thinks Obama was not serious about these characterizations. Democrats need union voters, and union voters dislike free trade agreements. If you remember, one of the issues during the Democratic primary was whether Obama and Hillary Clinton opposed NAFTA strongly enough. Once past the primary, Obama could not turn around and say that he favored free trade agreements; he had to continue the same message, not in the least because he needed to differentiate himself from McCain, who is vocally pro-free trade agreements.

So the Korean personally thinks that Obama will not go as far as his rhetoric may have suggested. But truly, no one knows if Obama meant what he said, or was throwing out campaign-specific sugar words. If Obama seriously tries to significantly alter KORUS FTA, Korean people’s opinion of him will quickly turn.

Another possibility is more remote, but potentially much more disastrous for Korea. Before the economy dominated the headlines for the last month of the campaign, the war in Iraq was the top priority in the presidential campaign. And Obama’s stance was quite clear: Iraq war was a mistake, and the U.S. military will get out as soon as practicable.

This gave rise to a valid concern: is the United States heading toward more isolationism under Barack Obama? It would not be very surprising if it is – American people are tired of dealing with another country’s mess, especially when they have their own economic mess to deal with. Then, as a country that depends heavily upon the U.S. military for its security, Korea may be in a more precarious position that it was before.

Of course, North Korea is not Iraq. No one was thinking about preemptively attacking North Korea, and such attack definitely would not happen under Obama administration. Thus, Korean War II would only happen when North Korea, again, invades the South. The chance that U.S. would not assist South Korea in such case appears quite remote.

But while the chance may be remote, it did increase by a little bit by having Obama administration rather than McCain administration. For example, consider this scenario: around March 2009, Kim Jong-Il suddenly dies. The top two factions of North Korea began to commandeer their own section of the army and begin a civil war. One of the factions, sensing defeat, asks for Chinese intervention. Chinese army gathers by the Yalu River, and begins the march toward Pyongyang.

South Korean government, sensing once-in-a-century opportunity for reunification and a real danger of Chinese occupation of half of Korean Peninsula, decides to roll its military in a race toward Pyongyang. Of course, South Korean government does not realistically expect that it can win a war against China; it is counting on the fact that, if South Korea were ever seriously threatened, U.S. military would intervene. Meanwhile, the U.S. military is still mostly tied up in Iraq.

Everything above is a realistic scenario, and the question is – would the Obama administration provide military support? The Korean is inclined to say yes, if South Korea is seriously threatened. (U.S. may, however, let the South Korean army get destroyed in Pyongyang.) However, this is just an educated guess, and America, under President Obama, may as well say no. Then it would be a disaster scenario for South Korea.

So all in all, the future of Korea-U.S. relations under the Obama administration is not all sprinkles of flowers and candies. As an American, the Korean prefers Barack Obama. (Although, unlike other liberals, the Korean would not have minded John McCain presidency.) However, Korea just needs two things from the U.S.: trade and security. McCain would have guaranteed both. Whether Obama would provide those two things are not as certain. There is the source of Korean people’s concern over the coming Obama presidency.

Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@hotmail.com.

President Barack Obama: The Series

Dear readers,

It’s a new day in America.

This morning, the Korean walked around a three-block radius to find a copy of New York Times to keep, but every New Yorker apparently had the same idea – every newsstand has completely run out of newspapers.

For this historical occasion, the Korean prepared a two-part series on Obama administration – how Koreans in Korea see this election, and the Korean’s own reaction. The posts will come this evening.

Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@hotmail.com.

The Korean would like to urge all Americans to get out and vote.

Ancient Yellow Fever Sold Here

Dear Korean,

Were there any intermarriage between Koreans and other ethnicities (during the 1500s-1800s) and if so, what were the ethnicities likely to be? I've been very curious to know if in fact we are mixed because we are often mistaken for Japanese or mixed with Caucasian. I know that this "mix" is not recent and was probably during that period.

Grace K.


Dear Grace,

The Korean thinks what you said is a little odd – how does “mixed with Caucasian” equate to Japanese? And how did you come up with those three centuries, when the history of Korea goes for several millennia?

At any rate, it may surprise people that Koreans did have some degree of genetic mixing (otherwise known as horizontal mambo) with non-Koreans, or even non-East Asians. Early Korean history is full of accounts in which heroic figures were born from an egg that floated from faraway land. Korean historians now believe that such legends are metaphorical indications that there were immigrations from Southeast Asia or South Asia to Korea. (It sounds silly written this way, but the evidence – in terms of artifacts or matches between legends of Korea and legends of South Asia, etc. makes it the theory sound at least plausible.)

Earliest case that concretely recorded a non-East Asian emigrating to the Korean peninsula happened around 11th century, when Goryeo dynasty established a trading post in Byeokran-do, an island at the mouth of Yeseong river (near Gaeseong, North Korea.) The picture is a re-creation of the Byeokran-do trading post, built for a historical drama. (Source)


Byeokran-do was frequented by hundreds of Arabian merchants, who were known to trade with China via sea. In fact, historians usually credit these merchants for the name “Korea”, a derivation of Goryeo. Koreans called the merchants saekmok’in, “people with colored eyes.”

Historical records show at least one Arabian merchant staying Korea, presumably marrying a local Korean woman. The Goryeo king awarded him a Korean name of Jang Sunryong, who became the starting point of Deoksu Jang clan. (More discussion about Korean surnames here.) The Korean would not be surprised if there were many more such cases not recorded into history. The picture is Goryeo people's rendition of the Arabian merchants. (Source)


Another instance of non-East Asian immigration is with a person named Seol Son. Seol was an ethnic Uyghur, who live in what is now western China, bordering the “stan” countries. He had an official position in China, and immigrated to Korea in order to run away from a rebellion in 1358. He received an official position and a surname from the Korean king.

Goryeo was clearly more open to overseas trade than the dynasty followed, i.e. Joseon dynasty. Joseon was dubbed the “hermit kingdom”, as it sought self-sufficiency with minimal foreign contact. But there was at least two prominent occasions in which non-East Asians came, stayed and got married in Korea. Interestingly, they were both Dutch.

The first was a man named Jan Janse Weltevree. He was a Dutch sailor working on a ship that sailed between Jakarta, Indonesia (which at that time was a Dutch colony) and Nagasaki, Japan. In 1627, he and two of his shipmates were shipwrecked on the coast Jeju Island, the southernmost island of Korea. They were caught and sent to Hanyang, i.e. modern-day Seoul.

Weltevree and his shipmates worked as firearms instructors for the Korean military, and fought in a war against China in 1636. Only Weltevree survived the war. The Korean king at the time recognized his bravery, gave him a name Bak Yeon. (Bak = Park in many cases.) He married a Korean woman, and had one son and one daughter.

The second occasion was another group of Dutch sailors, a whopping 35 of them. The most famous one was a man named Hendrick Hamel, who eventually left/escaped Korea to return to Netherlands after thirteen years along with seven of his cohorts. Hamel later wrote a book about his experience, which ended up becoming the first book in Europe about Korea. (Source)

Similar to Weltevree, they were shipwrecked in Jeju Island in 1653, when Weltevree was 58. In fact, when the Dutch sailors were captured, Weltevree was asked to be an interpreter. Hamel's journal indicates that Weltevree's Dutch, after decades of inaction, was so poor that Hamel did not recognize it as a language at first. Korean historical records indicate that at least 10 of the 35 Dutch sailors married Korean women and settled in southwestern Korea.

Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@hotmail.com.

Ask a Korean! News: Japanese Air Force Chief Fired for His Remarks on WWII

The Korean wrote a four-part series on Korea-Japan relation already. On the issue of apology, this is what the Korean wrote:

To its credit, Japan did officially apologize for its colonial past several times, including at the level of the Japanese Emperor and Prime Minister. In fact, especially in the 1990s, Japanese Prime Minister Hosokawa and his successor Murayama both apologized pretty sincerely, acknowledging Japanese Imperialism to be “invasions”.

Problem is that unlike Germany, Japan somehow has trouble maintaining that party line. Each time there is an apology from Japan, there are two Japanese politicians who say such things as “the Imperial Japan in fact did a lot of good to Korea, like modernizing it.”

So the Korean definitely was not surprised when a Japanese general said Japan was not the "aggressor nation" in World War II.

JAPAN was not the aggressor in World War II, according to the country's air force chief.

The essay was authored by General Toshio Tamogami, chief of staff of Japan's Air Self-Defence Force, and won the top award in an inaugural contest aimed at describing "true views of modern history".

"Even now, there are many people who think that our country's 'aggression' caused unbearable suffering to the countries of Asia during the Greater East Asia War," said the English-language version of the essay.

"But we need to realise that many Asian countries take a positive view of the Greater East Asia War.

"In Thailand, Burma, India, Singapore, and Indonesia, the Japan that fought the Greater East Asia War is held in high esteem.

"It is certainly a false accusation to say that our country was an aggressor nation."

The Greater East Asia War was a term used by Japan to describe the conflict in the Asia-Pacific theatre, emphasising that it involved Asian nations seeking independence from the Western powers.

The essay, entitled "Was Japan an Aggressor Nation?", was posted on the website of a Japanese hotel chain which organised the contest.

Source: Here.

The Korean will give Japanese military kudos for this: they did have the decency to fire this guy. But consider the audacity of this statement. And the fact that there was an essay contest that elicited this type of answer!

Despite the passion with which Koreans hate Japan at the moment, the Korean really believes that Korean people will move on when the Japanese government officially apologizes AND stick to it on all levels. Really, Koreans are like that -- they are passionate people who get very excited easily and move on just as quickly.

Also see ROK Drop's interesting write up on this issue, touching upon the issue of Yasukuni shrine. A quick summary quote from the post:

One theme I have picked up on at the [Yasukuni shrine's WWII] museum is that every attack the Japanese conducted was only executed because of foreign colonizers threatening Japan and its neighbors. Japan never wanted to colonize any country, they just wanted to liberate Asians from foreigners. This is of course nonsense.

Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@hotmail.com.