The Korea Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society will hold its final semi-monthly lecture-meeting of the year this Tuesday December 12th, at 7:30 pm, in the 2nd-floor Resident’s Lounge of the Somerset Palace Residence (near Anguk Station, downtown). All in English, for free and open to the public, as always; more info: 763-9483 and http://www.raskb.com/
This one should certainly be interesting to some of us: Prof. Suh Ji-moon will speak on “The Korean Yangban and the British Gentleman Compared”. She is a professor of English at Korea University and a dedicated translator of Korean literature into English; also an “avid student of Eastern and Western societies and cultures”, with a longtime “interest in mankind’s aspiration for moral perfection and the success and failure of the institutionalization of the idea of government by the virtuous”.
She will talk for an hour, making an in-depth comparison between the Chosun Dynasty’s “yangban” (elite & educated schoarly & governing class) and the British “gentlemen”, as they “are two outstanding examples of the successful institutionalization of mankind’s common aspiration for the ideal human being. Both the yangban and the gentleman had as their basic qualification high moral standards and refined personal conduct. And their role in their respective society was to uphold the structure of their society and ensure their continuation through their moral and cultural guardianship of the ignorant and ignoble masses.”
She will point out that “very few of the yangban and the gentlemen were able to (or even strove to) attain the moral and cultural perfection that they claimed as their distinctive mark, and their reason for being was often called into question. In the case of the British gentleman, most of whom had the wherewithal of comfortable existence and were uninvolved in politics, their crimes were mostly limited to personal misconduct, and the class as a whole did serve as a stabilizing force amid the turmoil of the agricultural and the industrial revolutions. On the other hand, the yangbans, most of whom had insufficient economic means for independence and could not escape involvement in politics, ended up as deadly oppressors of the masses and cannot be exonerated from blame for the demise of the Chosun Dynasty.”
This touches on several subjects we’ve discussed here on the Hole, so should provide some good food-for-thought. Make it over there if you can…
64 Comments
… or indeed the Japanese Samurai? Would you agree or disagree, Professor Suh? Why or why not?
Good question; why don’t you come on Tuesday evening and ask her that at the end
By the way, i still have no new information about the project of posting videos of these lectures up on the net — i was forced to skip the Council meeting held that the end of November… If it gets going in early 2007 I’ll notify this blog right away…
Thanks for the invite sanshinseon, but note the flag icon on my comment — I blog from the other side of the Sea of Japan.
Aw, hell, you guys are so rich over there, it should be no problem for you to travel across the East Sea for such an important event like this
OK, i’ll try to ask the question on your behalf…
I’m still confused about this Yangban thing. They were but 5% of the population right? How are the Korean society adjusting to the fact that more than 50%(?) are now claiming to be Yangbans?
“I’m still confused about this Yangban thing. They were but 5% of the population right? How are the Korean society adjusting to the fact that more than 50%(?) are now claiming to be Yangbans?”
I think it is starting to change. A few years ago I was hard pressed to find any Koreans that would say their family were commoners, but recently I find that quite a few say their family were commoners. I have yet to meet anyone that admits to slave ancestry, though.
A comparison, you say? Really? Seems a bit rich. “Deadly oppressors” by default aren’t gentlemen, no matter how noble the aspirations may be.
Shakuhachi said:
“I have yet to meet anyone that admits to slave ancestry, though. ”
An American friend married to a Korean national casually mentioned that her husband’s family register dated back to the 1890s. I informed her that during the Donghak Rebellion, many escaped slaves burned records to erase their slave histories and wondered if her in-laws were descended from slaves. She shook her head and wouldn’t even ponder the thought.
Since Korean educational materials devote pages to slavery in the West while virtually ignoring its long existence in Korea, I suspect that Koreans with slave ancestors may simply be unaware. A group of Korean middle schoolers I taught several years ago knew that America had imported slaves from Africa but were astonished to learn that there were slaves in Korea, too. The late Dr. James Palais published research on slavery in Korea, drawing criticism from Korean scholars.
From the OP:
“In the case of the British gentleman, most of whom had the wherewithal of comfortable existence and were uninvolved in politics, their crimes were mostly limited to personal misconduct, and the class as a whole did serve as a stabilizing force amid the turmoil of the agricultural and the industrial revolutions. On the other hand, the yangbans, most of whom had insufficient economic means for independence and could not escape involvement in politics, ended up as deadly oppressors of the masses and cannot be exonerated from blame for the demise of the Chosun Dynasty.”
While British gentlemen may have owned enough property to sustain themselves and their families, they were like the Yangban in that neither group actually worked for a living but rather lived off the fruits of others’ labors.
I am from a documented Yangban family from both sides. My parents said they could kind of tell who weren’t Yangbans by their behaviors.
I don’t really believe them.
But, that said, I have no desire or interest in marrying another Yangban. It’s silly.
I think my dad and his brothers used to bicker about the fact that everybody nowadays were claiming to be Yangbans. It’s going to be a moot point pretty soon. With 2 generations or so. Maybe they still dig up to the past in Korea, when people marry.
Sonagi, I heard that the current family registry system was created by the Japanese, which is not to say that you aren’t right about the peasants burning their records in the 1860’s.
I also suspect that one side of my family were collaborators with the Japanese, but one of my parents vehemently deny it.
Then I wonder how come they were able to study in Japan during the colonization, and gain high rank government positions.
Back in the days of the Chosun Dynasty, the seven most undesirable names were:
Cheon, Bang, Ji, Chook, Ma, Geol, and Pi. These names were ‘undesirable’ as they belonged to the lowest of low classes, that is, the vast majority of the population. These days it is very rare to find anyone with one of these names.
The most ‘desirable’ names were Lee (Lawyers) and Kim (Yangban). Often names represented certain occupations. Think of the English Smith, Green, Sexton etc.
Those with undesirable names used the opportunty presented by periods of social upheaval to change there names. Of course all the Kim’s and Lee’s would deny this.
Would the real Mr Kim please stand up!!!
A potential sequel: The Korean Gisaeng and the British Courtesan Compared.
Is there a Lee in Korea who doesn’t assert that he/she is descended directly from Yi Sun Shin? I’ve yet to meet one.
Yi Sun-Shine.
Re Austin’s comment above. Here’s a list of Korean surnames that includes the number of those with the surname. There are some external links of interest.
Keep in mind that the nobi weren’t permitted surnames until 1895. As Austin notes not all Kims and Lees belonged to the higher classes. One needs to know their ancestral hometown (bon-gwon) and clan to make that determination–assuming the family registry (chok-po) is genuine.
Someguy,
The Japanese did not take formal control of Korea until 1910, and the particular family’s registry dates back before that.
Just like there are tens of thousands of Americans who claim lineage to Lincoln or Washington or the first settlers at Plymouth Rock, it doesn’t take many generations for one person to have dozens of descendants.
To take one personal example, my great great grandfather immigrated from Scotland to Germany in the late 19th century. He married a local and had three children, all of whom returned to Britain before the First World War. We had a family reunion at his home in 2002, and more than 55 people attended, not to mention many more unable to attend. In grand total, including spouses of his descendants, close to one hundred people can today trace themselves back to my great great grandfather.
The point is, if people claim they are “pure” Yangban or something, that’s probably cause for raised eyebrows. But that half of Koreans are in someway descended from Yangban, that doesn’t sound unreasonable.
And several million Lees all direct descendants of Yi Sun Shin(e)? Sounds a tad unreasonable.
When I meet someone called Kim, I like to say, oh I know what Kim means, Kim that’s seaweed just like Kim in KimBap,(Mr Seaweed) or Lee 이 which means teeth (Mr Teeth) or Yang 양, which means sheep (Mr Sheep). You should see the look on their faces!
I do hope it touches upon their mutual love for prostitutes as well.
Curzon
Considering that Korean last names were so bound to social class and with confucius belief placing so much weight on ancestry, I guess it’s inevitable that everyone claims to be yangbans. I don’t think they can maintain democracy otherwise (How could a yangban sales person bow down to a nobi customer, ya know. It’s better to think everyone is yangban).
It is unfortunate, though that the surnames lack in variations.
Sonagi, that doesn’t disprove the story I heard. The family registry lists dates of birth, no? And you’d have to be an adult to be the first one listed, right? If the first registered births in your family registry are in the 1890’s, then these people would have been young adults in 1910, when the Japanese formaly took control of Korea.
I know Professor Suh Ji-moon personally and expect that the talk will be detailed and insightful. She’s a very thorough scholar and very careful.
I wish that I could attend, but I’ve got other duties to attend to.
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
Should be a great lecture. As to the slave issue - this is sort of a touchy subject because the Korean slaves for the most part not like the slaves kept in the “New World” and Africa. Many of these slaves elected to be slaves - and were fairly well treated.
This is a load of warmed-over, Korean apologist nonsense invented to lift the Dae-Han-Minguk above “savage” Africans. If Korean slaves were so happy and so much better off than those poor darkies from the depths of dark Africa, how come the slave rebellions occurred?
Nobi were slaves in just the same sense that blacks were slaves in America, or germanic captives were slaves in ancient Rome, i.e. nothing more than other people’s personal property, with all that implies in terms of mistreatment by capricious masters - the only difference between the American situation and Korea’s is that one can’t use skin color to pick out the descendants of Korea’s slave class.
Ah, yeah. These people must have loved being slaves. Sorry buddy, but apologetics for slavery is just too much. Go to hell.
Robert Neff said:
“Many of these slaves elected to be slaves - and were fairly well treated.”
Where did you get this idea? Hans is right. Slaves were slaves. Old Korea did have two classes of unfree, just like the West: indentured servants (nobi)and slaves (noye). In both cases, no one “elected” to be slaves - ugh! gimme a break! Men sold their wives, children, and finally themselves into slavery to pay off debts. People also became slaves during the various wars. As in most other countries, slaves could buy their freedom or be released by their masters, but this was rare. Hendrick Hamel noted in his diary that whereas most Koreans lavished affection on their children, slaves paid little attention to their offspring because they could be sold off or given away at any time.
If you are in Seoul and wish to see evidence of how happy Korean slaves were, visit Kyungbokkung Palace. In front of many of restored buildings are interpretive plaques that read in English, “destroyed/burned during the 1592 Japanese invasion.” The words are correct but obscure the fact that the Japanese had help from rebelling Korean slaves.
Knowing how Koreans treat even their immediate subordinates in organizations, and knowing how lineage is everything for them (even a dog’s lineage determines whether it’s a gangaji, i.e. pampered or a mere gae, i.e. hung up and blow-torched to death) I can’t imagine those slaves were treated well.
Oh, and of course, people were born into slavery. In old Korea, children inherited the social class of the lower parent if the two parents were of different classes, with the exception of children of the king. That is, a son or daughter of a yangban and a concubine were not yangban.
I don’t get the first part of “the moral and cultural perfection that they claimed as their distinctive mark, and their reason for being was often called into question,” but I do understand the second. The yanbang are the original slackers, or Korea’s version of “freeters.”
Ahh, nuances. There is a difference between imported slaves and indigenous slaves, and slaves born into a system of economic disenfranchisement rather bought and sold like goods. Peasants of Europe and Serfs of Russia were arguably slaves in that there was a fatalist destiny to their lives from which they could not escape. I know little of the subject, but wouldn’t the fact that slaves were a social caste in Korea make them more like serfs than slaves?
Hold on to your hats, ladies and gentlemen: according to this article on the Gabo Reforms that abolished slavery:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gabo_Reform
“The Gabo Reform was largely the work of a group of pro-Japanese public officials.”
Gahh!
After the first generation, American slaves were as “indigenous” as their white masters, so this is a meaningless distinction to make.
Again, American slaves were every bit as much a social caste with its own rites and cultural practices, which is why it is meaningful to speak of an “African-American” subculture today. The only real differentiator between American slavery and its Korean counterpart is that the later had no racial markers making it possible to continue to stigmatize the descendants of slaves, so everyone can now claim to be of pure Yangban descent.
Slaves have never been just slaves. The term has changed continually over the years, with manumission, owner obligations, legal status and such differing over time and place. In 16th and 17th century America, there was little difference between servant and slave, and white and blacks could both be slaves, with manumission coming after some period of time. Only over time did you see the meaning harden and become more racially connotive.
In Joseon Korea, a man could sell himself into slavey. Slaves could marry yangban (the kids were usually, although not always slaves… but there were more than a few disagreements on the subject). Korean slave owners had relatively more obligations than American owners, too. To put it one way, Korean slavery was much broader but more shallow than slavery in other traditions.
Point being, Neff was hardly being anyone’s apologist. He just said that “slave” had a different meaning in Joseon Korea compared to what Americans generally think of… and on that point, he was correct. He was not necessarily saying better or worse, just different.
Is Baby VOX descended from Yangban? I’d like to sell myself into slavery if that’s the case.
“They were but 5% of the population right?”
I think that figure is way off, by the end of the Josun dynasty. People already point out that the surname system is largely due to Japanese administrators randomly assigning names to people for government (probably tax) purposes.
We know that rich merchants routinely paid money to poor Yangban’s to be included into their family tree–thus making them yangban. You figure that only the first born son would inherit the family wealth, so there probably was a very big business in name selling. Then you have to figure that Yangban status wasn’t always a good thing in Josun Korea. Being Yangban meant that you were a scholar and a very proud scholar would refuse to do manual labor. There is a lot of stories of poor Yangban families in Korea’s history.
Then after the Japanese came in, the Japanese administrators would go to the Kim family “musuhm” and ask for his name. He would reply, “I am Ddol Ddol ee” and the Japanese administrator would ask for surname. Then the “musuhm” would say “I am just a simple musuhm and have no last name.” Then the Japanese administrator would say, “You work for the Kims, you are Kim too.” So on and so forth. If you have no idea what a “musuhm” is, you are probably the same guy who adamantly believes Robert Neff is an unabashed Korean apologist.
I heard that the Japanese themselves more-or-less assigned names like this to Japanese peasants, so we get tons of Japanese last names with different combinations of the chinese characters for Rice paddy, Mountain, River, Tree, etc. Presumably the administrator said, “you live by a Mountain and Rice paddy, so that’s your name.”
In a small country like korea, everybody is related to EVERYBODY. You don’t even have to go that far back in generations to show the mathmatics of it either.
How is this “different” from slavery under the Roman Empire, or in 19th century Africa?
Again, how is this “different” from slavery anywhere, even in the 19th century United States? How is this different from, say, Mauretania, Sudan and Saudi Arabia today?
Where’s the evidence for this claim, and where’s the evidence that it was respected in fact even if it really was so on paper? Muslim and Roman slaves had rights on paper too …
It’s only possible to believe this if one is ignorant of “other traditions”.
Oh yes he damn well was. Saying stuff like
qualifies as apologetics under any objective measure, and it isn’t far off from the nonsense spouted at one time by American slavery apologists like John Calhoun.
No, he wasn’t: Korean slaves were human beings treated as property and subjected to arbitrary, often brutal treatment, so much so that both times the Japanese interfered in internal Korean affairs, the slaves rose up in droves to take advantage of the opportunity to seize their freedom. You seem to think Korean slavery had to be exactly like the American version to be comparable, which is simply nonsense - if that’s what you mean by “different”, then no two instances of slavery anywhere in the world are similar.
His own words, which I quoted above, belie your assertion - as do your own, for that matter, e.g. “Korean slavery was much broader but more shallow than slavery in other traditions”.
Next, “virtual wanderer”:
Didn’t they teach you in school that ad hominem is a fallacy? Next time try and construct an actual argument.
Well duh, Captain Obvious to the rescue! Guess what? In the entire world, everybody is related to everybody, and you don’t have to go that far back to demonstrate it either: saying that all Koreans are related is just passing off a mathematical triviality as if it were fraught with great significance. Go back enough generation and any population whatsoever will share all of its ancestors in common.
The question isn’t whether all Koreans have some ancestor somewhere along the line who was a Yangban - sure they do, and at this time probably so does everybody in Asia if you look far back enough; indeed, if the question were just about having highborn ancestry, then looking at the United States, the average black descendant of slaves has a much higher probability of highborn Southerner ancestry than the average white American. The question is whether the predominant ancestry of the average Korean today is of the Yangban or the slave class, and simple mathematics tells us that the answer is with almost 100% certainty the later.
Where do people get this idea that Koreans slaves were different or happy because slaves had rights and owners had obligations? As Hans points out, slaves had rights and owners had obligations even in ancient Rome. It is the system of owning another person and directing all their activities, being able to divide and sell families at their merest whim that is degrading. What is worse in Korea is that it is the descendent’s of slaves that suffer the stigma, not the oppressors of slaves. How else could you have vast numbers of people clamoring to claim membership in an oppressor class when their ancestors were most likely from the classes of the unfree?
@Curzon,
As Haisan correctly pointed out, the definition and conditions of slavery have changed over time. Some Korean slaves were serfs, tied to the land. Others, apparently were not. I have not done any research using The Annals of Chosun, which includes many references to slavery, but in Heindrik Hamel’s Diary, there is a passage mentioning that slaves, unlike other Koreans, paid little attention to their children because they could be taken from them at any time. This implies that some slaves were not tied to the land and could be given or traded away, if not sold.
Korean slaves, unlike African slaves, did not get yanked half-way across the globe to a foreign land.
The bigger point that I made originally is that Korean history glosses over or ignores slavery/serfdom.
@Haisan,
I agree with most of what you wrote but question “Slaves could marry yangban (the kids were usually, although not always slaves… but there were more than a few disagreements on the subject.” As I understand, a Chosun man usually took a woman of the same social class as his first wife since Confucian laws recognized only offspring of two yangban parents as true yangban. Concubines usually came from lower classes. Chosun women almost never married into a lower class. Children of a yangban father and a lower class mother did not enjoy full yangban privileges, but some caring fathers did provide education, financial assistance, and marriage arrangements to their “illegitimate” children. In Korean history, there is one particularly famous son of a yangban father and a concubine who fought for the rights of those like himself. I cannot think of his name. Do you happen to know it?
Hans - Nice vitriol. But completely misplaced. The only way your enthusiasm makes sense is if you hear a moral argument coming from Neff or myself. And neither of us said that slavery in Korea was less morally wrong than in other countries. You can choose to infer that all you want, but it was not in what we wrote. (If I may speak for Robert…)
Slavery is wrong (duh). But the details of how it takes place differs in all countries and in all times. Understanding those details are important for understanding history better.
Haisan,
I agreed with much of what you wrote and perceived no moral arguments or attempts to whitewash slavery in Korea. Robert, however, wrote:
That is whitewashing because of the words “elected,”which disguises the horrible desperation of one who sells himself or his family into slavery to pay off a debt and “fairly well treated,” which implies a favorable comparison with slaves elsewhere.
Fellow readers:
Directions to the RASKB are urgently needed!
I got that it’s in the vicinity of Anguk Station. Why doesn’t their website supply an 오시는길?
Without precise instructions on getting there from the station, I see myself getting lost later tonight, cussing out the RASKB people for failing to do something so obvious with their website, blaming the Marmot for my impending frostbite . . .
Help, please?
Haisan, I do not think I will accept you speaking for Mr. Neff or his apologetics for Korean slavery.
As for Mr. Neff, I am sure it has occured to him that he will likely be mistaken with the well known author and East Asia correspondent Robert Neff. Rather than dragging the name of the well known Robert Neff through the mud with your ignorant comments, why don’t you change your name, or at least make it clear that you are not the well known Robert Neff.
fluffylittleducky (can’t believe I just typed that),
Here’s a map
There are two Robert Neffs around, writing/posting on Korea? That’s news. Are you serious, or is this further sophmoric attack-tactic?
> Directions to the RASKB are urgently needed!
The lecture is in the 2nd-floor Resident’s Lounge of the Somerset Palace, as stated. Take Exit #6 out of Anguk Metro Station and keep walking straight west (towards Gwanghwa-mun) 5 min, across that big intersection (of the top of Insa-dong & the big street going past Jogye-sa), and it’s before the Korea Times Bldg, you can’t miss it on your left, it’s gigantic. Access is also easy, with a bit more walkin’, from Jonggak and Gwanghwamun Metro Stations.
> Why doesn’t their website supply an 오시는길?
There is in fact a nice map — just click on “Lectures” at bottom, then on “LECTURE VENUE”.
Ah, thanks seouldout — that’s the same map.
Damn, i didn’t make it there, stuck in a ‘grading frenzy’ in my office (hittin’ the Road tomorrow!). Did anyone here go & listen, and can comment on what she said…?
virtual wonderer,
The Japanese did have last names before the Meiji period. However, in the Edo period, only those of the aristocrat and samurai class were allowed to use their last names officially. Those in the samurai & aristocrat class had clan names given by the emperor at some time in history. Combined with the clan name (which only about 10 or so exist in the whole of Japan), the family name was used to distinguish between different blood lines of the same clan. Normally, the geographic name of the land they governed was used as the family name. The common folks also went by such names, but since they lacked a legitimate clan name, they had no official name to go by. But family registers kept by shinto shrines (which acted as the local wards in pre-Meiji days) clearly show that common folks used family names, which were registered officially as their family names during the Meiji Reformations.
excellent lecture.
There was someone there with a video camera,
so it’s possible the recording will be available online at some point.
I have to disagree with the previous post. The lecture was very disappointing. Professor Suh said at the outset that she was flustered and mumbled something about not having had the time to reflect much on the topic before last evening because of other distractions. She evidently really hasn;t thought about it much at all. Her presentation essentially consisted of a very off the top of her head recitation of the plots of Beowulf and the Song of Roland to make a few points about the literary sources/reflections of the medieval concept of the hero and its transmutation from the Greek idea to that of the Renaissance courtier. This didn’t even rise to the level of a Classic Comics treatment. Her conclusion was that the the English idea of the gentleman was a product of the Greek/Roman/Christian heritage of the West, and the the yangban’s origins were in COnfucianism. Really!? Nothing illuminating about either the details of the origins of each concept or the evolution of either concept over time and in relation to socio-economic developments in their respective geographic loci. Nothing at all about how the differences in the societies’ articulation of the ideal man were realized in practice, how those implementations affected and were affected by other social developments or how the different ideas and their particular historical realizations might illuminate the relative success or failure of either culture. The precis of the topic in the announcement of the lecture looks like a proposal for a research topis to be undertaken, for which Professor Suh clearly has not even gathered all the necessary materials or mastered the existing theories let alone come up with anything worthwhile to say.
How, an incisive criticism, Sperwer. Was there a Q&A session?
“how” should read “wow”.
There was a Q&A during which a three or four people, including Peter Bartholemew and Brit Ambassador Warwick, lobbed a couple of slomo softballs. Peter’s concerned the issue of efforts by rich peasants to buy their way into yangban status, in connection with he referenced what he described as a “very well-known family” (that he didn’t name. Professor Suh’s response was little more than yes, it happened. Ambassador Warwick asked about the persistence of “yangbangism” beyond the fall of the Joseon dynasty, to which Professor Suh responded by observing that Koreans today will nearly all claim to be descendants of yangban. The only interesting thing she had to say in this connection was that when the yangban class first coalesced in the 16th century (a dubious proposition in itself), they constituted about 10% of the population, but by the end of the Joseon dynasty nearly 70% of the population were registered as yangban. In this connection, Suh also claimed that societies in general can sustain an elite of that sort that makes up as much as 5% of the population. I thought this was interesting because given the relative impoverishment of Korea all through the dynastic ages, it suggests that at all stages the yangban concept of elite rule was deeply flawed for failing to sustain the material well-being of the nation while steadily creaming off ever greater portions thereof for its own benefit. I didn’t dare ask any question, though, as I’m sure I would have upset everyone’s kibun.
Two lectures were announced for January that sound more promising. Early in the month, Sanshinseon (David Mason) will be talking about Jirisan as a sacred mountain; and later in the month, Samuel Hawley, who recently wrote an excellent account of the Imjin War, will speak about his current project, which (I think) is both a transcription and an account of the notebooks and the work of perhaps the first diplomatic military attache from the US to Korea in the 1880s, whose work Bartholemew characterized as the fullest and best portrait of old Korea in the 19th century.
That is interesting. Confucian law required that both parents had to be yangban for a person to claim yangban status; children of a yangban father and lower class mother did not qualify. If 70% were registered, there must have been enormous amount of fraud.
Thanks to Sperwer for the review. I’m sorry that it wasn’t any better than that, that she didn’t really talk about the interesting points of comparison that she said she was going to. Thus it goes in academia — some of these professors are not very responsible about preparing an interesting speech, and some others are just clueless about how to present their brilliant points in any effective and efficient manner — tho their topic be fascinating, they are just plain dull… If you’ve ever attended one of those three-day scholarly conferences, you know how cluelessly boring some of these professors can be… downright sleep-inducing.
I’m leaving tomorrow morning for one of these, in fact — the Pacific Asia Conference on Korean Studies (PACKS 2006) in New Delhi, India! Going to read one of my papers there, and will try to be less boring than average… So if you notice i’m not posting much on the Hole for two weeks, that’s why.
Yes, as Sperwer kindly noted, i myself am slated to be the RAS’s speaker on January 9th, same time and location, will talk about “the Sacred Aspects and Assets of Jiri-san” — a follow-up to my similar rant about Taebaek-san this past June — that went pretty well so they asked me to step up again. This may become a series, as there is no shortage of holy mountains in Korea. I promise to sufficiently entertain the masses…
shakuhachi:
“As for Mr. Neff, I am sure it has occured to him that he will likely be mistaken with the well known author and East Asia correspondent Robert Neff. Rather than dragging the name of the well known Robert Neff through the mud with your ignorant comments, why don’t you change your name, or at least make it clear that you are not the well known Robert Neff.”
Shakuhachi - I read your comments with some pleasure and confusion. I am not sure how I should answer. I am more than familiar with Robert Neff in Japan’s name, but to the best of my knowledge he only writes about Japan and from the last that I heard - can’t verify it - he recently passed away - God rest his soul.
I should change my name? Obviously you are rather new to the group otherwise you would have known that several years ago I kept pushing and urging that everyone use their real names so we could get rid of the “trolls” who merely post to incite people’s anger. To answer shortly - no, I will not change my name.
My apologistic views on Korea…..can’t claim I have been accused of that much - in fact when I wrote my column I generally received negative comments for painting Korea in a negative way. I call it the way I see it - regardless of whether it is pro-Korean or anti-Korean. I believe in history - not trying to satisfy someone else’s agenda.
Because it is the Christmas season - I thought that (Marmot please forgive me for linking my own article to your site)I would give you an example of my apologistic views and slavery all in one article. I thought about posting a history of slavery at the end of the Choson period - (my particular area of expertise is how Korea was viewed by the early Westerners)- but my book goes to the designer at the end of the month and I just haven’t had that much time.
Do me a favor shakuhachi and buy the book - help make me as famous as the Robert Neff in Japan
hmmmm….
for some reason the link didn’t work….
here is trying again
and if doesn’t work - you will just have to cut and paste the below address
http://search.hankooki.com/tim.....p;media=kt
Mr. Neff,
Your first link failed as there was a superfluous http// in the URL.
Thanks for reposting again because it’s a good article, though the last sentence is a bit of a cliché. Am interested to see what you dig up about about Ok Pun-ie’s life after 1910. Hopefully it doesn’t involve her selling her hair to buy a pocket watch chain for her husband.
Two Cents,
Thanx! I learn something new everyday. I wonder though, if people in Japan with “noble” last names like Takeda or Fujiwara make a big deal out of it like the very annoying Kimhae Kims.
Hans Castorp,
Thank you, I was trying to troll you in, and I succeeded! People usually ignore my post, so I am grateful that you took the time to actually read it.
First for my “Musuhm” comment, “musuhm” of course means “servant.” For practical purposes indentured servants in Korea are like slaves. But let’s first get into semantics.
In the West, when we talk about slaves, we usually don’t mean slaves in classical greek states or what not. We are talking about black slaves during 19th century America & South America. When we talk about slaves in Korea, we are talking about slaves in 19th century Josun Korea. Semantics is important.
Slavery in Josun Korea IS different from slavery in pre Civil War United States. Just as slavery IS different during earliest days of American colonies in the 1600’s as opposed to plantation economy 19th century slavery.
Agreed? Would you go so far as to define the term “slavery” in the sense I gave you?
If by slavery you meant slavery in the 16th century American setting compared to Josun Korea slavery of 19th century, I would agree that Robert Neff is an unabashed Korean apologist.
My “musuhm” comment was to point out to you exactly that you need to know the details of what we are talking about before you jump the gun. If you don’t know “musuhm” that tells me you didn’t bother to brush up on the subject as it pertains in Korea, because you automatically assume that things are same everywhere in the world.
I want to point out that “serfs” in midieval europe would fall into our modern definition of the word slaves. In fact, using modern definition of slaves, the majority of anyone living under feudalism would be slaves–as would be residents of modern DPRK. But couldn’t we stretch the definition to include say the poor residents of Sudan who live under warlords? Whose personal freedom is limited by what someone with an AK-47 says?
Now tell me honestly. Do you think to be greek slave during the height of Rome is equally distubing as being an african sugar slave in Haiti during 18th century. Wouldn’t you agree that to be a Greek slave would be glorious compared to being a Haitian slave?
Also, for me being Captain Obvious, I was pointing out to a different posters assertion that 5% of Koreans were Yangban. I was pointing out that by the end of the Josun dynasty that could not be a mathmatical reality. And it seems the lecturer point out that by the end of the Josun dynasty, the official record of Yangban ratio inflated to 70%. So it seems, Hanscorp, this knowledge isn’t so obvious to everyone. I am glad to know that this is obvious to you. But historical, anthropological knowledge isn’t “obvious” but must be studied. And I think as far as the issue of Korean slavery is concerned, you should consider doing that before you assume everything is the same and means the same.
Look, if you say, “Koreans are racists”, I won’t disagree with you because I’ve seem many Korean racists in my time. But if you insist that slaves are slaves and the meaning is the same under any circumstances, then I would have to agree that ad hominem is not a convincing argument to a rational and objective crowd. But it doesn’t necessarily mean the person impugned doesn’t deserve it.
I would like to end my argument by pointing out, what difference is there between a Korean “slave” and a Korean peasant farmer in Josun Korea? The Korean peasant farmer has no legal protection against the landed class anyway and is more than likely face starvation in times of famine as oppose to the Korean “slave” who like the simple peasants, have no legal protection but at least won’t starve to death. This tells me that you didnt’ really think about the Korean condition in Josun Korea.
Virtual Wonderer -
My apologies
Fluffylittleducky -
Wow - I know what the person meant when he/she said they could not believe they typed that. You are indeed correct - the map needs to be updated on the RAS webpage and that should be taken care of very soon.
As to Sam’s lecture - should be very good - I have read a lot of the material - not just his but some of the other documents - but Sam is using some material that for the most part has been overlooked. Great stuff.
For Mr. Mason’s lecture - I definitely will attend - I need to get some more information on the ghost and spirits - I am still trying to gather “ghost stories” (preferably those that are alleged to be true or that someone has actually experienced). A couple of years ago there were some great posts to the article on Marmot’s Hole concerning ghosts - any of you new readers have any ghost stories?
Again - for the benefit of all -
My apologies…said with a smile
virtual wonderer,
>I wonder though, if people in Japan with “noble” last names
>like Takeda or Fujiwara make a big deal out of it
>like the very annoying Kimhae Kims.
Can’t really say, because I haven’t been acquianted with such people. I’m sure having famous ancestors would get some “Wows” from friends, but other than that, you probably have to be a member of the main family still operating for the family/clan to receive a more genuine reaction of admiration.
Also, the Fujiwara clan no longer uses Fujiwara as their last name, since the last names registered during the Meiji reformations were family names and not clan names. People who go by the Fujiwara name presently simply lived on various pieces of land owned by the Fujiwaras. The Fujiwara now uses the family names Konoe, Takatsukasa, Kujo, Nijo, and Ichijo. They still are the closest families to the imperial clan (they often provide the wives for the crown prince - although this tradition has been ignored by the Showa emperor, the present emperor, and the crown prince), so I guess they still have high social standings. I’m sure they are proud of their heritage, but I don’t know whether they go about perpetually reminding people of their family history. I have the impression that (former) aristocrats consider such outward show of pride to be unrefined.
Two cents,
Thanx. I thought Soga was also a clan name, but I guess they managed to keep it as family name?
What about former samurai class families? Do any of them talk about their samurai status? Or did that disappear too long ago to have any modern relevance? It must be pretty cool if you are a Japanese kid and you go into your dad’s closet to find a 200 year old sword with your family name on it. If you are a Korean kid and went into dad’s closet, you might find, I guess a brush or mookhyang or something. Not as cool, and probably doesn’t worth too much to auction off either.