Here is a quick look back at the most popular AAK! posts of 2013, by the number of page view.
Most Viewed Posts of 2013 (All-Time Posts)
1. Culturalism, Gladwell, and Airplane Crashes
2. Lose Weight with Korean Diet
3. The Ultimate Korean Looks List
4. Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About Korean Men
5. Fan Death is Real
Incredibly, the dog meat post dropped out of the top five list, supplanted by yet-another eternal Korean curiosity that is fan death. Apparently, the ladies around the world decided that they learned enough about Korean men, and decided to lose weight instead.
Most Viewed Posts of 2013 (Written in 2013)
1. Culturalism, Gladwell, and Airplane Crashes
2. How do Koreans Feel About the Chinese?
3. Malcolm Gladwell's Response to the Culturalism Post
4. Ten Most Influential Korean Movies
5. Here are Some Korean Slang Terms
The Korean's friend put it the best: "If you're going against Malcolm Gladwell, you'd better bring some elephant guns." By that measure, 2013 might be the year the Korean went on elephant hunting--but instead of blood and death, there was only a lively clash of opinions. It was a memorable experience.
The Korean wishes everyone a warm and happy end of the year. As always, thank you for reading this humble blog. See you next year.
Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.
Sunday, December 29, 2013
Friday, December 13, 2013
Asiana Crash and Culturalism, Again
The NTSB recently held a hearing regarding the crash-landing of Asiana Flight 214 at the San Francisco Airport earlier this year, in which a testifying expert said that Korean culture may have contributed to the crash. This, again, is giving rise to the discussion about the correlation between Korean culture and airline crashes. For example, as they did previously, CNN put out a vignette that wondered whether Korean culture caused the plane to crash.
Because of my previous post about the culturalism surrounding the discussion regarding Flight 214, many people think that I was arguing Korean culture had no role whatsoever in the crash of Flight 214. That idea is a misread of the post. The main point of the post was not that culture does not exist, or culture plays no role in airplane crashes. Although part of the reason why the post turned out to be well-read was because it argued against Malcolm Gladwell's claim that culture was the primary determinant of airplane crashes, the gravamen of the post was not even about Mr. Gladwell's argument. The main point of the post was to raise a question about how we talk about culture.
Did Korean culture actually play a factor in the Asiana crash? Perhaps. I am in no position to question the expert, seeing that I am not an expert in flight safety. (Most of us are not.) Nor do I begrudge the fact that the expert probed whether a national culture impacted airline safety. It is important to ensure that flights are safe, and it would be irresponsible for the person in charge of the investigation to not examine all potential factors for the crash. If a well-supported research, backed by solid evidence, states that culture plays a role in airline safety, wonderful. That knowledge will make our flights safer.
But again, the point was not about whether or not culture plays a role in airline safety. The point was about culturalism. That is to say: why does this curiosity about the correlation between culture and plane crashes arise selectively? Why is it that, in the 2009 Air France crash, there was no discussion at all about the role of French culture in plane crashes? Why was there no discussion about American culture when a Southwest flight crash-landed in New York, mere weeks after the Asiana crash? (Is there anyone who sincerely believes that, in the upcoming NTSB hearing about the Southwest flight crash, there will be an expert discussing the American culture's contribution to the crash?) If national culture is such an important concept that must be examined to promote airline safety, why does the discussion about cultural factors never happen when a European or an American plane crashes?
The honest answer to these questions must inevitably involve the concept of bias, for culturalism is a form of bias. I am not willing to equate culturalism and racism, because the two terms do not overlap completely. For example, culturalism is evident in the manner in which the rest of America discusses the Deep South, in a way that racism is not. But as I wrote previously, culturalism and racism are related, as they are two streams from the same source--the desire to reduce an identifiable group of people to some kind of indelible essence.
This is why Europeans and Americans get a pass from the culturalist desire. It is not that Europeans and Americans do not have a culture that impacts their behavior; they clearly do. It is that Europeans and Americans are always afforded the luxury of being treated as individuals who are not slaves to their cultures. The same luxury is rarely afforded to South Americans, Middle Easterners, Africans and Asians. This is why Robert Mugabe's dictatorship is discussed as if it is a result of Africa's cultural pathology, while Vladimir Putin's dictatorship does not invite the same discussion about European culture. This is why, in the minds of the public, the Fukushima nuclear power plant disaster had to be related to the Japanese culture, while the BP Deepwater Horizon disaster provoked zero discussion about the British culture.
People who are beholden to culturalism often fancy themselves to be an intrepid seeker of truth, undeterred by political correctness in search of greater knowledge. But for those people, the opposite is true: the culturalist impulse, rather than illuminating the truth, distorts and obscures it. For a speaker with culturalist tendencies, the desire to find some connection between culture and events becomes so strong that he elides the true facts for the sake of good story. The listener with culturalist mindset accepts that faulty narrative without raising questions, even though the story has obvious, glaring holes.
In the previous post, I critiqued Malcolm Gladwell's "Ethnic Theory of Plane Crashes" to illustrate this culturalistic distortion. To draw the line connecting Korean culture and Korean Air Line's spotty safety record in the late 1990s, Gladwell engaged in a series of legerdemain. Gladwell ascribes several of KAL crashes to pilot errors, when those flights were actually victimized by terrorist attacks. Gladwell discusses at length the crash of KAL Flight 801 in 1997, and the inefficiency of Korean language to convey urgent messages in an emergency situation--except the pilots of Flight 801 were speaking in English. Gladwell quotes the black box transcript to claim that the co-pilot did not speak up clearly enough about the bad weather condition, but the part of the transcript that Gladwell failed to quote shows that the co-pilot in fact spoke up clearly, and the pilot acknowledged the poor weather.
The overall story that Gladwell thusly constructed is something that strains credulity: that Korean pilots are willing to die and kill hundreds of their passengers for the sake of keeping manners. Exposing the shoddy groundwork upon which Gladwell built this story was not difficult--after all, a nobody like myself, an anonymous blogger with a full time job, could do it. But the ease of this task only serves to highlight the gullibility that culturalism fosters. It is shocking that so many people--millions of people who bought Outliers and made Gladwell the most influential non-fiction writer of the last decade--simply accepted Gladwell's extremely unlikely story without asking themselves, "Seriously? I'm supposed to believe this?"
Let me make this clear one more time, because too many people, perhaps following their culturalist impulse, chase this idea as if it is a shiny object. This discussion is not about whether or not culture impacts plane crashes. For all we know, Korean culture really may have contributed to the Asiana crash. But that changes nothing about the way in which we discuss culture and plane crashes. CNN will continue running stories about Korean culture whenever a Korean plane crashes, while never raising questions about American culture when an American plane crashes. That is the discrepancy that I want you to think about.
Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.
Because of my previous post about the culturalism surrounding the discussion regarding Flight 214, many people think that I was arguing Korean culture had no role whatsoever in the crash of Flight 214. That idea is a misread of the post. The main point of the post was not that culture does not exist, or culture plays no role in airplane crashes. Although part of the reason why the post turned out to be well-read was because it argued against Malcolm Gladwell's claim that culture was the primary determinant of airplane crashes, the gravamen of the post was not even about Mr. Gladwell's argument. The main point of the post was to raise a question about how we talk about culture.
Did Korean culture actually play a factor in the Asiana crash? Perhaps. I am in no position to question the expert, seeing that I am not an expert in flight safety. (Most of us are not.) Nor do I begrudge the fact that the expert probed whether a national culture impacted airline safety. It is important to ensure that flights are safe, and it would be irresponsible for the person in charge of the investigation to not examine all potential factors for the crash. If a well-supported research, backed by solid evidence, states that culture plays a role in airline safety, wonderful. That knowledge will make our flights safer.
But again, the point was not about whether or not culture plays a role in airline safety. The point was about culturalism. That is to say: why does this curiosity about the correlation between culture and plane crashes arise selectively? Why is it that, in the 2009 Air France crash, there was no discussion at all about the role of French culture in plane crashes? Why was there no discussion about American culture when a Southwest flight crash-landed in New York, mere weeks after the Asiana crash? (Is there anyone who sincerely believes that, in the upcoming NTSB hearing about the Southwest flight crash, there will be an expert discussing the American culture's contribution to the crash?) If national culture is such an important concept that must be examined to promote airline safety, why does the discussion about cultural factors never happen when a European or an American plane crashes?
The honest answer to these questions must inevitably involve the concept of bias, for culturalism is a form of bias. I am not willing to equate culturalism and racism, because the two terms do not overlap completely. For example, culturalism is evident in the manner in which the rest of America discusses the Deep South, in a way that racism is not. But as I wrote previously, culturalism and racism are related, as they are two streams from the same source--the desire to reduce an identifiable group of people to some kind of indelible essence.
This is why Europeans and Americans get a pass from the culturalist desire. It is not that Europeans and Americans do not have a culture that impacts their behavior; they clearly do. It is that Europeans and Americans are always afforded the luxury of being treated as individuals who are not slaves to their cultures. The same luxury is rarely afforded to South Americans, Middle Easterners, Africans and Asians. This is why Robert Mugabe's dictatorship is discussed as if it is a result of Africa's cultural pathology, while Vladimir Putin's dictatorship does not invite the same discussion about European culture. This is why, in the minds of the public, the Fukushima nuclear power plant disaster had to be related to the Japanese culture, while the BP Deepwater Horizon disaster provoked zero discussion about the British culture.
People who are beholden to culturalism often fancy themselves to be an intrepid seeker of truth, undeterred by political correctness in search of greater knowledge. But for those people, the opposite is true: the culturalist impulse, rather than illuminating the truth, distorts and obscures it. For a speaker with culturalist tendencies, the desire to find some connection between culture and events becomes so strong that he elides the true facts for the sake of good story. The listener with culturalist mindset accepts that faulty narrative without raising questions, even though the story has obvious, glaring holes.
In the previous post, I critiqued Malcolm Gladwell's "Ethnic Theory of Plane Crashes" to illustrate this culturalistic distortion. To draw the line connecting Korean culture and Korean Air Line's spotty safety record in the late 1990s, Gladwell engaged in a series of legerdemain. Gladwell ascribes several of KAL crashes to pilot errors, when those flights were actually victimized by terrorist attacks. Gladwell discusses at length the crash of KAL Flight 801 in 1997, and the inefficiency of Korean language to convey urgent messages in an emergency situation--except the pilots of Flight 801 were speaking in English. Gladwell quotes the black box transcript to claim that the co-pilot did not speak up clearly enough about the bad weather condition, but the part of the transcript that Gladwell failed to quote shows that the co-pilot in fact spoke up clearly, and the pilot acknowledged the poor weather.
The overall story that Gladwell thusly constructed is something that strains credulity: that Korean pilots are willing to die and kill hundreds of their passengers for the sake of keeping manners. Exposing the shoddy groundwork upon which Gladwell built this story was not difficult--after all, a nobody like myself, an anonymous blogger with a full time job, could do it. But the ease of this task only serves to highlight the gullibility that culturalism fosters. It is shocking that so many people--millions of people who bought Outliers and made Gladwell the most influential non-fiction writer of the last decade--simply accepted Gladwell's extremely unlikely story without asking themselves, "Seriously? I'm supposed to believe this?"
Let me make this clear one more time, because too many people, perhaps following their culturalist impulse, chase this idea as if it is a shiny object. This discussion is not about whether or not culture impacts plane crashes. For all we know, Korean culture really may have contributed to the Asiana crash. But that changes nothing about the way in which we discuss culture and plane crashes. CNN will continue running stories about Korean culture whenever a Korean plane crashes, while never raising questions about American culture when an American plane crashes. That is the discrepancy that I want you to think about.
Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.
Wednesday, December 11, 2013
What Does My Korean Name Mean?
[Series Index]
Dear Korean,
My question concerns my Korean name. The story I have been told all my life is that I was found on a street corner by a policeman in Seoul and subsequently placed in an orphanage. I was given a name and a date of birth, one of which stuck with me (the birth date), while the other (the name) was abandoned faster than a politician’s promise when I was adopted by a military family from the United States. I was adopted during a time when the philosophy was to assimilate foreign children into their new culture as quickly and as thoroughly as possible. For most of my life, it never even occurred to me that my Korean name might mean anything other than “Jane Doe.”
Recently, I was told that my name means “fate” or “destiny,” but upon a Google search, I found other meanings. I am wondering if you would be willing to set the matter straight. The romanization I was given is: Park Sook-Myung.
Rebekah M.
Believe it or not, this is one of the most common types of question that the Korean would receive: Korean Americans, usually adoptees, asking about the meaning of their Korean name. Although the Korean previously dealt with this issue several times, it wouldn't hurt to go over this one more time and have a post that is more explicitly focused on the name meanings.
Here is the short answer to Rebekah: there is no way to know the meaning of your name unless we know the Chinese characters behind your name.
Let's first get a sense of Korean language generally. Remember this important point: (classical) Chinese is to Korean is Latin is to English. Just like many English words have a Latin origin, many Korean words have a Chinese origin. Those words are called Sino-Korean. As is the case with English, Korean words that are on the more sophisticated side tend to be Sino-Korean.
For example, the word "boxer" originates from Middle English; the word "pugilist," which means the same but is usually used in a higher-level discourse, originates from Latin. Similarly, for example, Koreans may use the pure Korean word 아기 ("baby") to refer to a young child, in an everyday conversation. But in legal documents, Koreans are more likely to use the Sino-Korean word 영아 ("infant"). Because 아기 is a pure Korean word, one cannot write this word using Chinese characters. But because 영아 is a Sino-Korean word, one can write this word using Chinese characters, like so: 嬰兒.
Importantly, most Korean names are Sino-Korean, which means they use Chinese characters. To be sure, some babies are given purely Korean names, such as 하늘 (Haneul, "sky") or 나래 (Narae, "wings"). But these names tend to be the minority: depending on the year, between 3 and 9 percent of the babies are given purely Korean names. In all other instances, Korean names are Sino-Korean words. This means that, for most Korean names, one cannot know their meaning unless one also knows the Chinese characters behind them. This becomes even truer because a single Korean syllable does not correspond one-on-one to a single Chinese character. Instead, it is very common for a dozen different Chinese characters to have the same sound in Korean.
For example, let's take the syllables "sook" (숙) and "myung" (명) from Rebehak's name. Here are just some of the Chinese characters that are pronounced as "sook" in Sino-Korean: 淑 (to be clear); 宿 (to sleep); 肅 (to be somber); 熟 (to be cooked); 叔 (uncle); 夙 (early); 琡 (jade); 菽 (bean). Similarly, here are the Chinese characters that are pronounced as "myung" in Sino-Korean: 明 (bright); 命 (life); 名 (name); 鳴 (to cry); 銘 (to engrave); 冥 (to be dark); 螟 (inchworm); 皿 (dish; vessel); 酩 (to be drunk).
(Note: the Chinese language does a much better job at distinguishing these characters because the Chinese language is tonal. Centuries ago, Korean language used to be tonal as well--which probably helped navigating the Sino-Korean words. But today, Korean language only has the tiniest vestiges of tones, most of which are unnoticed even by Koreans themselves.)
Because there are so many possibilities, it is nearly pointless to ask: "my Korean name is 'Sook-Myung.' What does 'Sook-Myung' mean?" Unless one actually knows the Chinese character behind "sook" and "myung", it is not possible to say what the name means exactly. It can mean anywhere between "clear and bright," "dark jade" and "drunk bean." Like Rebehak pointed out, "Sook-Myung" can mean "destiny," if one wrote the word with these Chinese characters: 宿命.
It is possible to make an educated guess. It is very unlikely for the name "Sook-Myung" to mean "destiny," if only because Koreans customarily do not use the characters 宿命 to name a child. There are certain sets of Chinese characters that Koreans commonly use for a name--which the Korean covered in this post. Based on the commonly used characters, one can somewhat narrow down the possibilities. If the Korean was forced to guess the Chinese characters behind "Sook-Myung," he would have guessed this: 淑明, i.e. "clean and bright" or "demure and wise." (These are the same characters used in Sookmyung Women's University in Seoul.)
But even this guess is inexact, because there are also multiple commonly used Chinese characters that share the same sound. For example, the common Chinese characters for the syllable "yoon" in a Korean name can be 潤 (rich), 允 (truth) or 胤 (first-born). So the bottom line remains the same: to know what a Korean name means, one has to know the Chinese characters used for that name.
Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.
Dear Korean,
My question concerns my Korean name. The story I have been told all my life is that I was found on a street corner by a policeman in Seoul and subsequently placed in an orphanage. I was given a name and a date of birth, one of which stuck with me (the birth date), while the other (the name) was abandoned faster than a politician’s promise when I was adopted by a military family from the United States. I was adopted during a time when the philosophy was to assimilate foreign children into their new culture as quickly and as thoroughly as possible. For most of my life, it never even occurred to me that my Korean name might mean anything other than “Jane Doe.”
Recently, I was told that my name means “fate” or “destiny,” but upon a Google search, I found other meanings. I am wondering if you would be willing to set the matter straight. The romanization I was given is: Park Sook-Myung.
Rebekah M.
Believe it or not, this is one of the most common types of question that the Korean would receive: Korean Americans, usually adoptees, asking about the meaning of their Korean name. Although the Korean previously dealt with this issue several times, it wouldn't hurt to go over this one more time and have a post that is more explicitly focused on the name meanings.
Here is the short answer to Rebekah: there is no way to know the meaning of your name unless we know the Chinese characters behind your name.
Let's first get a sense of Korean language generally. Remember this important point: (classical) Chinese is to Korean is Latin is to English. Just like many English words have a Latin origin, many Korean words have a Chinese origin. Those words are called Sino-Korean. As is the case with English, Korean words that are on the more sophisticated side tend to be Sino-Korean.
For example, the word "boxer" originates from Middle English; the word "pugilist," which means the same but is usually used in a higher-level discourse, originates from Latin. Similarly, for example, Koreans may use the pure Korean word 아기 ("baby") to refer to a young child, in an everyday conversation. But in legal documents, Koreans are more likely to use the Sino-Korean word 영아 ("infant"). Because 아기 is a pure Korean word, one cannot write this word using Chinese characters. But because 영아 is a Sino-Korean word, one can write this word using Chinese characters, like so: 嬰兒.
Importantly, most Korean names are Sino-Korean, which means they use Chinese characters. To be sure, some babies are given purely Korean names, such as 하늘 (Haneul, "sky") or 나래 (Narae, "wings"). But these names tend to be the minority: depending on the year, between 3 and 9 percent of the babies are given purely Korean names. In all other instances, Korean names are Sino-Korean words. This means that, for most Korean names, one cannot know their meaning unless one also knows the Chinese characters behind them. This becomes even truer because a single Korean syllable does not correspond one-on-one to a single Chinese character. Instead, it is very common for a dozen different Chinese characters to have the same sound in Korean.
For example, let's take the syllables "sook" (숙) and "myung" (명) from Rebehak's name. Here are just some of the Chinese characters that are pronounced as "sook" in Sino-Korean: 淑 (to be clear); 宿 (to sleep); 肅 (to be somber); 熟 (to be cooked); 叔 (uncle); 夙 (early); 琡 (jade); 菽 (bean). Similarly, here are the Chinese characters that are pronounced as "myung" in Sino-Korean: 明 (bright); 命 (life); 名 (name); 鳴 (to cry); 銘 (to engrave); 冥 (to be dark); 螟 (inchworm); 皿 (dish; vessel); 酩 (to be drunk).
(Note: the Chinese language does a much better job at distinguishing these characters because the Chinese language is tonal. Centuries ago, Korean language used to be tonal as well--which probably helped navigating the Sino-Korean words. But today, Korean language only has the tiniest vestiges of tones, most of which are unnoticed even by Koreans themselves.)
Because there are so many possibilities, it is nearly pointless to ask: "my Korean name is 'Sook-Myung.' What does 'Sook-Myung' mean?" Unless one actually knows the Chinese character behind "sook" and "myung", it is not possible to say what the name means exactly. It can mean anywhere between "clear and bright," "dark jade" and "drunk bean." Like Rebehak pointed out, "Sook-Myung" can mean "destiny," if one wrote the word with these Chinese characters: 宿命.
It is possible to make an educated guess. It is very unlikely for the name "Sook-Myung" to mean "destiny," if only because Koreans customarily do not use the characters 宿命 to name a child. There are certain sets of Chinese characters that Koreans commonly use for a name--which the Korean covered in this post. Based on the commonly used characters, one can somewhat narrow down the possibilities. If the Korean was forced to guess the Chinese characters behind "Sook-Myung," he would have guessed this: 淑明, i.e. "clean and bright" or "demure and wise." (These are the same characters used in Sookmyung Women's University in Seoul.)
But even this guess is inexact, because there are also multiple commonly used Chinese characters that share the same sound. For example, the common Chinese characters for the syllable "yoon" in a Korean name can be 潤 (rich), 允 (truth) or 胤 (first-born). So the bottom line remains the same: to know what a Korean name means, one has to know the Chinese characters used for that name.
Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.
Saturday, December 07, 2013
North Korea 2014 Calendar from NK News is Here
If blogs could be friends, Ask a Korean! would be hanging out with NK News all the time, watching KBO baseball and knocking back some Taedonggang beer (as seen in the Economist.) And when the holiday season rolls around, the two blogs would exchange gifts.
Unfortunately, blogs can't be friends. So you, the Ask a Korean! reader, can receive the gift from NK News instead! NK News unveiled a gorgeous 2014 North Korea calendar, showcasing a glimpse in the life in North Korea. And just for Ask a Korean! readers, NK News provided a special discount code: at the check out, enter the coupon code "askakorean" to receive $5 off.
The proceeds will support NK News, one of the best English language blogs about North Korea. With your help, the awesome features like Ask a North Korean can continue. Happy shopping!
Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.
Unfortunately, blogs can't be friends. So you, the Ask a Korean! reader, can receive the gift from NK News instead! NK News unveiled a gorgeous 2014 North Korea calendar, showcasing a glimpse in the life in North Korea. And just for Ask a Korean! readers, NK News provided a special discount code: at the check out, enter the coupon code "askakorean" to receive $5 off.
The proceeds will support NK News, one of the best English language blogs about North Korea. With your help, the awesome features like Ask a North Korean can continue. Happy shopping!
Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.
Friday, December 06, 2013
Who's Coming to SXSW 2014?
What is the future of international K-pop?
The early stages of K-pop's foray into the international arena was dominated by idol groups, backed by strategic, long-term corporate planning and funds. The dominance was such that the term "K-pop" mistakenly come to be equated to "idol pop," despite the fact that "K-pop" plainly stands for "Korean pop music." Ignorance of the deep history and the broad range of Korean pop music, and focusing only on the internationally visible part of it, caused many prognosticators to make their prediction only on the continued viability of idol groups outside of Korea.
Then Gangnam Style came along and changed everything. From the domestic perspective, Gangnam Style is not a major break from the history of Korean pop music. PSY was a known quantity in Korea for more than a decade; his music, though evolved over time, retained the same character throughout his career. But internationally, Gangnam Style broke new ground for K-pop. That a goofy song, almost entirely in Korean, sung by a chubby rapper doing a funny dance, would be one of the greatest worldwide pop culture phenomena, is the last thing that those who only focused on idol pop could have expected.
The lesson: the next phase of K-pop will not be the continuation of Korean pop music that is internationally visible today. Rather, it will be a sudden explosion of K-pop's as-yet unexplored potential--vibrant and dynamic within Korea, but not yet widely available outside of Korea. In short, it will be the international introduction to Korea's indie scene, with its highly sophisticated line-up of hip hop and modern rock standing ready to make their marks.
Which brings us to South by Southwest (SXSW) 2014. SXSW is a pop music conference held in Austin, Texas since 1987. Almost since its beginning, it has been a reliable gauge on the worldwide trend in pop music. More to the point--SXSW 2014 will bring more Korean indie musicians to America than any other occasion before. The lineup so far includes 13 Korean artists, including such luminaries as Crying Nut, Nell, Jambinai and Kiha & the Faces, as well as the up-and-coming bands like Glen Check and Idiotape. If you want to see the future of international K-pop, there is no better place to be.
Now, the question is...
Normally, the Korean would simply travel with the Korean Wife in blissful anonymity, and all will be well. But SXSW 2014, which happens March 11-16, unfortunately conflicts with the Korean Wife's own performance schedule. (Sadly, SXSW 2014 was not interested in opera and classical music.)
So: who's coming with me? The Korean will be honest: SXSW is a huge, week-long event with more than 30,000 attendees. Travel will not be cheap, and neither is the ticket. Right now, the "Music Badge" is $725--ultimately a deal considering the number of artists making an appearance, but a steep amount nonetheless. As of now, the Korean is not even certain that he can make this trip next year given the constraints of time and budget; but it will make his decision a lot easier if he knew he would meet some cool people along the way.
Consider this as a public gauging-of-interest. Who wants to come to Austin, attend SXSW 2014, witness the future of K-pop, and hang out with the writer of this humble blog? If you are interested, please do NOT leave a comment--instead, SEND AN EMAIL directly to the Korean, with a short introduction of yourself. If it looks like we will have a party going, the Korean will update further.
The website for SXSW 2014 is here. The preview for Korean talents appearing at SXSW 2014 can be found here at koreanindie.com. Let's make this happen.
Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.
The early stages of K-pop's foray into the international arena was dominated by idol groups, backed by strategic, long-term corporate planning and funds. The dominance was such that the term "K-pop" mistakenly come to be equated to "idol pop," despite the fact that "K-pop" plainly stands for "Korean pop music." Ignorance of the deep history and the broad range of Korean pop music, and focusing only on the internationally visible part of it, caused many prognosticators to make their prediction only on the continued viability of idol groups outside of Korea.
Then Gangnam Style came along and changed everything. From the domestic perspective, Gangnam Style is not a major break from the history of Korean pop music. PSY was a known quantity in Korea for more than a decade; his music, though evolved over time, retained the same character throughout his career. But internationally, Gangnam Style broke new ground for K-pop. That a goofy song, almost entirely in Korean, sung by a chubby rapper doing a funny dance, would be one of the greatest worldwide pop culture phenomena, is the last thing that those who only focused on idol pop could have expected.
The lesson: the next phase of K-pop will not be the continuation of Korean pop music that is internationally visible today. Rather, it will be a sudden explosion of K-pop's as-yet unexplored potential--vibrant and dynamic within Korea, but not yet widely available outside of Korea. In short, it will be the international introduction to Korea's indie scene, with its highly sophisticated line-up of hip hop and modern rock standing ready to make their marks.
Which brings us to South by Southwest (SXSW) 2014. SXSW is a pop music conference held in Austin, Texas since 1987. Almost since its beginning, it has been a reliable gauge on the worldwide trend in pop music. More to the point--SXSW 2014 will bring more Korean indie musicians to America than any other occasion before. The lineup so far includes 13 Korean artists, including such luminaries as Crying Nut, Nell, Jambinai and Kiha & the Faces, as well as the up-and-coming bands like Glen Check and Idiotape. If you want to see the future of international K-pop, there is no better place to be.
Now, the question is...
Normally, the Korean would simply travel with the Korean Wife in blissful anonymity, and all will be well. But SXSW 2014, which happens March 11-16, unfortunately conflicts with the Korean Wife's own performance schedule. (Sadly, SXSW 2014 was not interested in opera and classical music.)
So: who's coming with me? The Korean will be honest: SXSW is a huge, week-long event with more than 30,000 attendees. Travel will not be cheap, and neither is the ticket. Right now, the "Music Badge" is $725--ultimately a deal considering the number of artists making an appearance, but a steep amount nonetheless. As of now, the Korean is not even certain that he can make this trip next year given the constraints of time and budget; but it will make his decision a lot easier if he knew he would meet some cool people along the way.
Consider this as a public gauging-of-interest. Who wants to come to Austin, attend SXSW 2014, witness the future of K-pop, and hang out with the writer of this humble blog? If you are interested, please do NOT leave a comment--instead, SEND AN EMAIL directly to the Korean, with a short introduction of yourself. If it looks like we will have a party going, the Korean will update further.
The website for SXSW 2014 is here. The preview for Korean talents appearing at SXSW 2014 can be found here at koreanindie.com. Let's make this happen.
Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.
Tuesday, December 03, 2013
TK's Favorite Figures in American History
Dear Korean,
This past week has included the anniversary of the assassination of JFK and also Lincoln's famous speech at Gettysburg. Both men are admired/respected and shaped our nation for the better. I wondered who in American history the Korean admired/respected (not necessarily political figures) and why.
A History Buff
Here is a light little post to work off the Thanksgiving turkey. :)
Because the Korean is an attorney, he spent his college and law school years admiring America's great jurists. After several phases involving John Marshall, William Douglas, Clarence Darrow and Earl Warren, he is now set on his favorite jurist of all time: Justice Robert H. Jackson.
Justice Jackson is widely regarded as the best writer of Supreme Court's history. By the Korean's estimation, the judge certain deserves the reputation. Justice Jackson's majority opinion in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943), may be the greatest Supreme Court opinion of all time, if one judged Supreme Court opinions simply by literary merit. In Barnette, Justice Jackson ruled that Jehovah's Witnesses need not participate in their school's flag salute. Justice Jackson's best line is still quoted often to this day: "If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion, or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein."
Justice Jackson was not simply a gifted writer. He was a fine jurist who understood both the power of the law and its limitations, which allowed him to exercise the Supreme Court's authority in the most effective manner: moving toward progressive ideals, employing conservative methods.
Honorable Mentions: In addition to the people named earlier, the Korean is also quite fond of Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt, Thurgood Marshall, Malcolm X, Sandra Day O'Connor, and many others that he must be missing right now.
Got a question or comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.
Justice Jackson was not simply a gifted writer. He was a fine jurist who understood both the power of the law and its limitations, which allowed him to exercise the Supreme Court's authority in the most effective manner: moving toward progressive ideals, employing conservative methods.
Honorable Mentions: In addition to the people named earlier, the Korean is also quite fond of Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt, Thurgood Marshall, Malcolm X, Sandra Day O'Connor, and many others that he must be missing right now.
Got a question or comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
