Professor Hanh Sung-jo, blasted by the Korean public for paying homage to Japanese imperial rule in the monthly magazine of the Sankei Shimbun, has resigned from Korea University. In an email sent to a number of media companies (including Yonhap), Hahn apologized for “inviting censure with his use of inappropriate words and phrases” in his magazine contribution. He announced his resignation as honorary professor at Korea University, and said he would avoid overseas activity from now on.
According to OhMyNews, the good professor was virtually forced to resign as vice chairman of the right-wing civic group Free Citizens Alliance of Korea as well.
The Daily Surprise has a write-up of the shame and outrage of Hanh’s alma mater and former place of employment, Korea University. Interestingly enough, the bulletin board of Hanh’s person homepage has received about 1,500 posts — mostly from outraged Netizens — in the two days since the story broke. Previous to that, it had received about 500 posts in the four years it had been up. Well, at least he generated a little traffic for himself.
The Korea Times ran an English piece on this fiasco, including this little tidbit about Korea University:
The controversy surrounding Hanh’s article is feared to puncture Korea University’s nationalistic image. The university’s slogan is “Minjok Kodae (National Korea University).”
The school, which was established in 1905, has prepared various events for its 100th anniversary celebration, even ordering 20,000 bottles of Chateau La Cardonne.
The university’s student council apologized to the country for the professor’s article and urged the school to relieve Hanh of his post on Saturday.
OK, there’s a minor piece of information missing. The ancestor of what is now Korea University, Bosung Technical College, was indeed founded in 1905. By 1932, however, bad management and interference from the Japanese Government-General had led to severe financial difficulties, and the school was acquired by Dong-A Ilbo founder and future vice-president of the Republic of Korea, Kim Song-su. It was his capital that built the school into what it is today, and his foundation that would go on to become the legal basis for what would later become Korea University. This would explain why his statue stands on the campus, and why the school apparently holds a remembrance ceremony for him every year (I believe there is a museum dedicated to him on campus as well, but don’t quote me on that). Now, a lot of positive things could be said about Kim (see Wayne Patterson’s review of the book A Korean Nationalist Entrepreneur: A Life History of Kim Songsu, 1891-1955), but a look at some of the organizations he worked for during the colonial period (see Naver.com’s Encyclopedia) reveals that he was, by anyone’s definition of the word, a collaborator (not that you’d get that from this Dong-A Ilbo eulogy to him). The man is said to have even written letters and given speeches praising Japan’s drafting of students into its army (this is disputed by some). Heck, some might argue that Hanh’s article, far from tarnishing the honor of the school, was simply in keeping with Korea University tradition.
No, I didn’t go to Yonsei, so no, I don’t have an axe to grind with Korea University. Nor do I have an axe to grind with the Dong-A Ilbo, which ran an editorial today condemning criticizing Prof. Hanh interestingly (in light of their piece on founder Kim Song-su, to which I linked above) entitled “We cannot accept Prof. Hanh Sung-jo’s historical view.”
Dailian carried some of the Japanese netizen response, which would seem to be diametrically opposed to the Korean one. Of course, this is coming from Dailian, so who knows what to think. Go News also covers some of the Japanese netizen joy, and expresses concern about some of the misconceptions Japanese may come away with from this incident.
BTW, the right-wing Independent ran the actual Korean-language original of Hanh’s column that was sent to the Sankei. This probably deserves a translation, both to give non-Korean speakers an idea of what all the hub-bub is about and because it’s kind of interesting in its own right. At 3:30 a.m., however, I’m not going to do it.
My own feelings about Hahn’s article and the resulting uproar are somewhat complex. To give you some idea of my view of the colonial period, check out this comment I made to a previous post in March of last year. Some other good comments from readers in that thread as well.
10 Comments
A victory for politically correct group-think, and a setback for free intellectual discourse.
In the name of “minjok godae,” they used to destroy and ruin women college’s festival and harass women students there. I would be proud if Korea university could get rid of fucking “minjok” from their logo. I agree with lirerou. I don’t like what he said, but I don’t think that he should resign. There is no freedom in or outside the ivory tower in Korea.
I think the biggest problem with Hanh’s argument was the medium through which he chose to express. It would have been one thing if he had run it in the Chosun Ilbo or OhMyNews. But instead, he sent the piece to a Japanese publication — the Sankei Shimbun’s magazine, no less! I mean, you can see how that looks. It would be like Bruce Cumings discussing the Korean War. If he does it in the NYT, fine. But if he goes on the KCNA and does it…
I haven’t made it through the whole article, however, he is very clear in the beginning of the article that he is writing in response to current efforts to label collaberators as anti-Korean criminals.
It was not the medium. He have faced the same condemnation no matter what forum through which wpi;d have communicated this alternative view. Korea has no room for independent thought.
The next step will be when collaberators with the US are likely to be declared criminals.
I agree with The Marmot, in that he did choose an inapproapriate medium. He also chose the wrong time, IMO, where Japan has declared Dokdo as their territory and published brand new controversial textbooks. If he had wrote it via a different medium, few months earlier (where Korea-Japan friendship year was hopeful), things woulda comeout differently.
I see good points made by Charles Tustison. You are right, but you must also understand that Koreans have a painful past of being unable to punish collaborators back in Lee Sung-Man’s time.
But I dont think this whole issue was about collaborators. It was about Japanese rule in Korea and his statement that Koreans should be thankful for that ‘blessing’.
If he was going collaborators with this, then totally wrong way to say it.
The hyperlink didn’t work. Please click june to see the open letter.
Good points all, but! The very idea of a university is that it is a forum for open discourse. Punishing free thought is supposed to be the hallmark of third-world colleges trying to pass themselves off as universities (as my Alma Mater, la Universidad de Puerto Rico). Korea is in many ways a first world nation, and in no small part to the bases that were laid during the Japanese era. I would expect to be able to argue that the English, for all their faults, actually made some positive contributions to Ireland within an Irish university. (The English did introduce potato agriculture to offset the devastation common to clan warfare in a cattle based society.) I would not stand up and make that argument at a Saint Paddy’s day parade. Taking adverse action against a professor within a university for free discourse published outside that school is simply evidence tht the university in question is subject to mob rule.
If you are teaching or researching at universities or institutes, please circulate this open letter to your colleagues. The University of Colorado is trying to fire prof. Ward Churchill. Although Prof. Churchill’s case is very different from Hahn Sung-jo’s case, it makes me think what is the boundary of free speech. In Hahn’s case, whether he chose the wrong media or not, I don’t really care; however, in Churchill’s case, his speech was part of his academic discourse, so it must be defended and respected.
June. Although an old veteran, I agree with you completely. Churchill may be an idiot, but he should not be fired for stating an honestly held opinion. The university obviously found him fit enough to teach. I am unsure of his time or tenure there, but if the university has any cause to fire him, they should step forward and present a case related to his performance as an educator. The right likes to scream that academia is hostile to free expression, now is their chance to step forward and defend it. Free speech is not about views we agree with. It becomes an issue precisely when we do not agree with them.
Tarion “where Japan has declared Dokdo as their territory ”
Japan has been claiming the islands since Lee Sung-Man took over it in 1952 which was against San Francisco treaty.
January 18, 1952
President Lee Seung-man of South Korea declares unilateral ocean rights and announces that Takeshima is included within the Lee Line
(the Lee Seung-man Line Declaration).
September 25, 1954
The Japanese Government proposes to South Korea that the Takeshima dispute be referred to the International Court of Justice.
S.Korea has refused to take the dispute to the court since then.