Yi Gu, the only surviving son of Korea’s last crown prince, died what seems to be a very lonely death in Japan on Saturday — see the Korea Times and Chosun Ilbo reports. Sad doesn’t even begin to describe it.
Last year, the JoongAng Ilbo ran a story on the prince, along with some statements he made to the paper. See also the Wikipedia entry on the man.
27 Comments
I am not convinced that a restored Korean monarchy would be such a great asset to the country. Think of the investment it would take to A) select the ruler B) get the national assembly to change the constitution to allow one with or without power c) to feed, educate, clothe and house them, D) restore the royal palaces to the point that they can be lived in and still present a sence of statelyness and granduer all the while allowing the royals to live in safe, secure seclusion while still allowing access to the public to visit the historic palaces and last of all, maintaining the royal family. That is what I think would be the biggest issue. This expense would be aside from the housing, cloths, food and education-this would be for the yachts, planes, vacation villas on Jeju, East coast, Seorak Mountain, winter sport facilities and all of their added traveling to other countries and of course there is the entourage to take care of. Even IF all of that were taken care of, it would have to be done in a way that makes the Korean royal family and Korea look better than Japan which would be very expensive. I just do not see a Korean royal family adding a proportionate amount of value to any aspect of modern Korea.
On a side note, I seem to remember reading somewhere that the divorce of Yee Gu and his American wife Julia Mullock was at least caused in part by pressure from the royal Lee family association. Any one know anything about this. I have not been able to find anything about it. From what I have read about them, they seem to have gotten along well and Julia by all accounts was a gracious host that loved Korea and did what she could to make the lives of those around her better including trying to be a good dutiful Korean daughter-in-law. Yes, I am aware that there were other factors in their split such as business related financial difficulties for Yee Gu but I wonder how much that really was an issue. Anyone know more about this, I would love to learn more.
Don’t care about the monarchy one way or another. I can see teh arguments for and against. Sad to see a family line, any famiy, die out. but like, paratus, think talk about blood purity is ridiculous (except in the case of when they started up Greek royalty again 100 years ago and they imported someone who was neither ethnically Greek nor even raised in Greece)
The biggest story today is about MBC’s X-file. This file can damage the present government so much that the MBC decide not to broadcast the content.
It has to do with a secret recording made just before the Kim DaeJoong became the president. Two people(who are well-known figures in Korean society) discussing how much they will pay to Kim.
The content of this tape should be made known to public. Read more in Dongailbo.http://www.donga.com/fbin/outp.....0153main=1
That greedy pres. Kim loved money too much. One of the most corrupt president of entire Korean history.
C’mon Baduk, you really mean more so than Park Chung Hee, Chun Du Hwan, Roh Tae Woo or Kim Young Sam? I find that a little hard to believe.
I still would really like to learn what others have to say about the relationship of the crown prince to his American wife and what caused them to split.
I was thinking a little more about it over lunch and decided having a royal family was just like having a purebred show dog-one might say that the Japanese have a Shitzhu and the UK’s would of course be a Bulldog. They are not much good for anything, they are constantly going to the vet, have genetic problems that the average mutt is less likely to have, require special food, are too expensice to be really played with, tend to be high strung, are not always obedient, at times delight in causing trouble and can’t guard if their life depended on it.
I don’t these halabujees do it to preserve national identity, I think they do it for their clan pride.
When I asked a Korean mentor of mine why he disagreed with me on my belief that the destruction of the Korean monarchy was good for the Republic of Korea (emphasis on republic) his reply to me was,
“A Korean monarchy would be good for the Korean economy. Foreign tourists would want to visit the Korean palace like they do for Buckingham palace. Besides, they were not all guilty of crimes.”
Got me to think, I don’t think i ever want to go to the palace where the Al-Saud family resides. Or Akihito. Or go to Nepal to visit the palace. Ditto with Belgian monarchy. Nor Thai or Ethiopian. I confess I’ve been to Buckingham, but I was 9 and stupid and did not make the decision on where to go touring in jolly ol’ england. If it had been me, I would have visited Baker Street-i thought Sherlock holmes was a historical figure.
woops, let me be more clear, when i write “these halabujees do it” i mean a bunch of old kims and lees and whoever all going to the palace and bowing before the “King.”
The King is dead. Long live the Republic!
Well, I am a bit of a monarchist, so this is very upsetting. It really is the closure on the pre-Colonial period of Korean history. It is quite moving to think about…
I don’t think the monarchy is completely dead. If there ever were to be a re-establishment of a monarchy, for whatever ceremonial purposes, I think people would want the members of the Korean imperial family who had not married into the Japanese imperial family. That would mean coronation of a descendant of someone other than Emperor Sunjong, but that is not unprecedented and it would go over better with a lot of other people (despite the fact that the Korean royal/imperial family has Mongolian blood and the Japanese imperial family has Korean blood).
I see nothing wrong with having a monarchy, as long as it doesn’t have any power. Despite the costs in keeping up the British royalty, I expect that the boosts to tourism and the image of classiness would outweigh the negatives. A monarchy or royal prince/ess in Korea could be a source of pride for Koreans (as long as they didnt have any real power).
I agree with Snow. So long as there is no investiture of real power, I think royalty are a valuable cultural asset for all countries who maintain their royal families. I can’t think of a single country with a largely symbolic monarchy that has any significant movement to do away with them. As for this blather about pure bloodlines, that’s a bit silly, unless you’re breeding show poodles. All these cultures have interacted extensively over the centuries, and it seems perfectly natural that this would be reflected in royal ancestry.
After Liberation there was something of a small movement calling for the restoration of the monarchy. Got nowhere.
There’s an online club’?Œ€??œ??œ???™???¤?³?????¶”?§??œ??????Œ’ on Naver and ‘??°????™???¤?????‘??Œ’ on Daum that spends a lot of its time arguing that arguing that it wasn’t exclusively the royal house’s fault that Korea got eaten up by Japan. which is of course true since Korea has itself to blame for letting the royal house be so lame when it mattered.
For the record, from 1897, the “royal” house would more accurately be the “imperial” house. King Kojong became Emperor Kojong in 1897. Sunjong was never a king, but from 1907 to 1910, he was an emperor.
I pray that no one tries to make a “Last Prince” musical out of the man’s life. If they botch it as badly as the music for “The Last Empress”, it would be agony on top of tragedy.
God help the man and his nation.
“I can?€™t think of a single country with a largely symbolic monarchy that has any significant movement to do away with them…”
I think there exists significant (meaning more that n few percentage points in polls) “republican” sentiment in the United Kingdom.
And if I’m not mistaken, recently in Australia there was a referendum on making the country a republic. It was barely defeated (?), indeed the predictions prior to the vote were that the republic would be adopted.
“…Got me to think, I don?€™t think i ever want to go to the palace where the Al-Saud family resides…”
There was no “traditional” palace, the Sauds were Bedouin nomads who spent much of the year living in the same traditional way as their fellow Bedouins — in a tent.
Prior to the founding of the country (mid-20’s) the “old King” (Abdul-Aziz, died 1952, the founder of KSA) was as strapped for income as anyone else. Oil wasn’t discoverd until just prior to WWII and the real income didn’t start coming in until the 60’s.
Every male member of the family (last guesstimate as to the count was 6000 plus and it’s growing constantly) gets his own “palace”. Within the bounds of the clan there exists a rough meritocracy, so the more capable ones who have roles in the government may have many palaces (Saddam Hussein was by no means unique in this regard: in fact when I read about his dozens of “palaces” I wonder if he was consciously or unconsciously emulating the Sauds).
Riyadh area is on a large mesa, it was the traditional power base for the Sauds, mud brick construction in the old days, the Riyadh area was never really conquered by an outside power such as the Turks or Brits because there was nothing there that anybody wanted.
However, there were/are old palaces in the “Western Province” (old name = the Hijaz), where the holy cities are. These palaces belonged to the prior overlords (the Hashemites) and they were taken over by the Sauds after they drove the Hashemites out (the Hashemites only had a few years to enjoy their suzerainty after the Turks left).
“New” construction is the name of the game; the Sauds are not found of historical buildings as I think they find them “inconvenient” politically. The old Hashemite palace in Taif was used by the “old King” in his day, but as far as I know it remains currently closed up and unused.
KSA is a fascinating place, unique on the earth. The Sauds are far from being absolute monarchs in the sense of an “oriental despot”, indeed they would deny this role vociferously.
The traditional role of the Bedouin chief was “first among equals” and a vestige of this tradition still survives. The best account of all this is “The Kingdom”, written 1981 and not updated but it is the best historical narrative account of the rise of the Sauds I have come across.
Could Korea use a monarchy again? Is the moon made of cheese? If a tree falls in the forest and no one’s there to hear it does it say ouch?
Korea will never again have a monarchy after the one in NK falls.
As for Baduk’s random comment above….
Baduk, have you no sense of shame? Where in that link does it say KDJ was in any way involved? If forced to make a guess on which presidential candidate was involved it would have been Lee Hoi Chang, not Kim Dae Jung. Why? Because the tape recording is of a conversation of the head of a major chaebol and the head of a major newspaper. You do the math. Factor in that LHC’s campaign was convicted of taking zillions in illegal donations from chaebols during his second attempt at the presidency.
as always i’m impressed with Paul H’s comment.
going to the issue of korean monarchy, i think that we are skirting the issue. on my american passport it says, “…is a citizen of the united states..” you take a look at a british passport and it says that, “…is a subject of her majesty the queen of england.” note the terms, “subject” and “majesty”. What this means is that the residents of the british isles is the serf, the peons, the slaves, the underlings of the queen. The Queen is somehow “majestic” somehow above a normal person in her supernatural qualities–in other words, is a superior human being to the “subjects”, the subjects being something like an undermenschen.
I just think it’s somewhat degrading. Well, I don’t even like the practice of calling US judges, “your Honor”, why would any british citizens call their queen, “your majesty?” It’s somewhat insulting and self-degrading to be a monarchist, no?
I was asking my Canadian friend what she thought about the Queen of England and his reply was, “oh you mean, the Queen Mother?” I have never been more grateful to George Washington. Thank God, she’s not MY mother.
Virtually nobody in Canada gives a rat’s ass about the monarchy. The only saving grace of that traditon is that it differentiates us from our friends down south. Who gives a shit? You read way too much into what your passport says…
Who cares if a republic is adopted in Australia, Canada or wherever else? Wonderful Canadian anecdote by Virtual Wanderer - I’ve got dozens too that might shed light on how much the average American teacher could tell me about George Washington…
“What this means is that the residents of the british isles is the serf, the peons, the slaves, the underlings of the queen…”
Actually this issue was pretty much settled for the English-speaking peoples in 1649, in terms of the absolute power of the monarch to do what he/she wants, contrary to the will of Parliament. The issue was who has to power to tax and to control the revenues received thereof.
In a rather dramatic way, with Charles I losing his head over the issue.
The American revolutionaries used George III as a convenient symbol but in fact the American revolution was against the British Parliament, of which the Crown was (and remains) the official symbol. The United Kingdom has no written constitution in the same way as the USA does.
“Virtually nobody in Canada gives a rat?€™s ass about the monarchy. The only saving grace of that traditon is that it differentiates us from our friends down south. Who gives a shit?…Who cares?”
You may be appreciative of the differentiation the formality of the monarchy affords you, but then in the same breath you curse the notion like a trooper.
Or should I say like an American? Samuel Adams could not have expressed disdain for the monarchy any better. Perhaps the “corrosion” of American influence goes deeper than you know…
I think I’ll go out and buy a six pack of Sam Adams and drink a toast to the monarchy, to try and cover for you Candu.
Heh, Candu, if I hit any raw nerve, mea culpa. But I wasn’t saying this so much to attack my tory friends up north, but rather to illustrate why Koreans shouldn’t go gaga over monarchic day dreams.
And the British Monarchy, being perhaps the world’s most famous examples of monarchs, is a useful example. I have only utter respect for British people for their proactive role in the world affairs doing good and sometimes even moderating our (US) policies in the world when we go wee bit far. That and the British people’s contribution to comedy, malted alcoholic beverages, and participation in the Korean war (yes this includes you Canadians and Aussies as well as others) makes them cool chaps. Besides Shakespeare, JK Rowlings also have made invaluable human cultural assets.
But you got to admit that the Monarch, who is supposed to be a figurehead, a representative of the people, I guess because the said monarch is majestically perched higher above her/his subjects in some metaphysical sense, isn’t always the best representative of the said subjects.
Now let’s go back to our original posting about some korean people’s feelings about a Korean monarch. First of all, the money that is spent subsidizing the grandiose lifestyle of a monarch is probably a lot more than the profit from foreign tourists who would want to come to Korea to gawk at the Korean monarch. I don’t know a single Korean tourist who went to Thailand to see the king of thailand. Second of all, I really doubt the restored Korean monarch, would, “make us proud.” If anything else, they will embarrass us tremendously, and at best, they will remain silent. I can just see it now… instead of talking about the hungry people of NK, Korean media will be writing incessantly about the philandering of the Korean crown prince… And lastly, think about these poor kids growing up to be “King?” It’s a form of child abuse! I don’t know why some Korean people would want to assign a random person to be their “natural” superior.
The only Queen that I honor is Freddie Mercury and the only King I honor is Burger King.
Also to add, people visit the Forbidden Palace in China, because it’s magnificent. If some dude lived there, would that really make a difference in the tourism business?
And furthermore, what a lot of Korean people aren’t admitting is the fact that, they like the idea of a King because it would become a convenient nexus of fascistic orgy. To a lot of Korean people, they think the Japanese people “robbed” them of a king! You know, there are still people in Korea who says, “I’m Kimhae Kim.” Pretty obnoxious if you ask me.
Is the moon made of cheese?
Why, of course it is. Zoom in as much as possible, and you shall see the truth finally revealed…
This is a reply to James who asked for some explanation for the divorce between Julia and Yi Gu. I was living in Korea at the time and was a friend of Julia’s and saw her often, both while she was living at the Naksonjae residence on the grounds of Changdok Palace, and after the divorce, at her other residences in Seoul. In the late ’70’s, Yi Gu, a talented architect, had taken a commission in Iran and while there began an affair with a European woman and followed her to Paris. I don’t remember the details but after returning to Korea, he had other affairs and for awhile was living with a Korean artist in a house just outside Changduk Palace. Meanwhile, Julia continued living in Naksonjae, where the Government provided her a portion of the living allowance provided the family for their living expenses and for upkeep of Naksonjae. I don’t now remember who initiated the prolonged negotiations leading to the divorce, whether it was Julia, Yi Gu, Princess Pangja (Yi Gu’s mother), the Yi family association, or the Korean Government, but the issue of the lack of a male heir was not the cause of the divorce but just one argument used in the negotiations. The royal Chonju Yi clan is very large and many of its members are prominent in the life of the nation - in business, politics, government, etc. Julia had, and continues to have very close connections with some members of the family, but has strained relations with others. From my observations, she seemed to have a good relationship with Princess Pangja, but that relationship somewhat soured during the long negotiations over the terms of the divorce and after. It was, I thought, the typical reaction of a mother-in-law siding with her son. After the divorce became final, Julia had to move out of Naksonjae, but continued to live in Seoul for several years until moving to Hawaii to be near the daughter she and Yi Gu had adopted (and her new grandson). Yi Gu, himself, had never felt comfortable in Korea and did not ever learn to speak the language well. He eventually returned to Japan to live and became involved with a sort of cult who convinced him that he was a reincarnation of a long-ago Korean/Japanese prince and conned him into turning over to them large parts of his and his mother’s inheritance (properties in Japan and some in Korea). From my observations over the years, I saw that many Koreans had a lot of respect and affection for the royal family, including Julia. Both Julia and Princess Pangja contributed significantly to certain Korean charities and their good works were often cited in the Korean press.
As something of a conservative, I always considered the Yi Dynasty a bunch of usurpers. It’s one thing to raise one’s own army, battle one’s rivals and become king. It’s simply sedition and usurpation to take one’s king’s army, turn around and march on the capital to seize his throne.
Also, as a Republican as well as a republican, I find the notion of monarchy laughable. It doesn’t matter whether the royal status is “symbolic” or not (as if symbols don’t matter). No man is inherently superior to me by birth alone. I am a free-willing citizen of a republic, not a subject of another human being. Monarchists? Bah!
Oh, and, Anglo-Saxon invaders go home, Britain for Britons (Celts).
. . . as a Republican as well as a republican . . .
Is that a virtue to brag of? I seem to recall some believe G.W. Bush is a usurper as well, especially considering how he was placed in power at the digression of judges who were never elected in a democratic election either. Perhaps Korea and America do have more in common that meets the eye.