For those who are interested… and because blogs are nothing if not platforms from which to toot your own horn… I link to an interview with yours truly in the online edition of The Economist.
Thanks go to Brendan Greeley (who was quite the blogger himself) for running that.
56 Comments
Congratulations!
Yeah, congrats, looks really interesting.
6′3″? Damn you’re tall
super cool !
I’m actually 6′0. I just look bigger because I’m such a lard ass.
Always interesting to read people’s initial impressions about Korea…
He mentioned Hyang Music and their site said they have a CD I’m looking for in stock — anybody know where the store is?
If you’re still wondering whether to plunge in and read the article, let me tell you - the marginal utility is HUGE.
For a sec I thought, “Gee, Robert sure looks like Hines Ward.”
Congrats Robert,
I had a letter appear in Time Magazine International edition. Now they completely cut up my letter and changed it to the point where it lost most of its meaning. I’m curious, did that article accurately represent the gist of the interview?
Well, it was a long interview, and obviously, I said more than what you see at the Economist, but yeah, that’s pretty much the gist of it.
your posts on inter-racial dating brings the most controversy? i would say it would be posts about japan.
ps it’s because they’re men, robert, not because they see american movies.
Yeah, why IS Hines Ward in that pic, not you? odd…
^ because a hine wards pic is obligatory for an article relating to expat discourse relating to korea. it’s the esl-teacher version of godwin’s law.
Does that have any relation to the gyopo version, whereas derision of expat discourse related to Korea must include reference to ESL teachers?
If there’s any, it’s a superficial relation. “ESL teacher” is a factually justifiable stand-in for expat since it’s true that most expats in Korea are or once were ESL teachers. If my phrasing offends people here, then that ought to be strange. “Hines Ward”, otoh, is different. It’s not just a denotation and much of what’s implied or argued by those who reference HW is at least complex and at the most problematic, fallacious, or stereotypical. Potential for the latter group of complex properties doesn’t neccesarily exist within the phrase “ESL teacher.”
Ah, I see.
Alternatively, you can view this in the Hegellian frame. Godwin’s Law by the very fact that it accounts for a regularity of discursive behavior represents a synthesis, whereas lower level references to Hitler (or Hines Ward) is just simple antithetical and contingent on whatever it is for which it’s an antithesis. In other words, the “Kyopo version” would be the Law itself!
Well, we wouldn’t want to limit ourselves to just one analytical framework, now would we?
Of course, I’m just a dumb former ESL teacher, so it’s all Greek to me.
Nothing worse than a moron like Mr Alphabet trying to sound educated.
LOL at least spell “Hegelian” correctly when you butcher his dialectics.
Given the recent and significant influx of non-Koreans due to brokered mariages, and more so when coupled with ‘trainees’ and illegally-residing manual laborers here for indeterminable periods of time, I wonder if abcdefg’s epithetical ’stand-in’ is actually correct.
Clearly a limey bastard who never met Dram Man!
Mr. Greeley was, in fact, American. From Texas, in fact.
“‘Well-filled’ hanbok”? Robert, I see you already answered in #4, but OUCH!
Dram Man, the Economist’s style guide for writing insists on the British style. In this case the use of America vs. our preferred United States. And yes, I too resemble that remark (a tad).
Where’s King Baeksu chiming in that he did an interview with The Economist back in 2001?
I’d prefer we didn’t continue with the Baeksu bashing, Iceberg. Thanks in advance.
Okay.
I wondered about this passage from the interview:
“Korea, he explains, used to view China as its older brother, a recognition that China was the center of the world, the giver of civilisation. In Confucian society both younger and older brother carry rights and responsibilities; the older brother is supposed to be kind to the younger brother, to treat him with respect.
Now, in America, Korea has another older brother, but one with its own Western political inheritance of sovereign, equal states. When negotiating trade agreements, for example, America expects Korea to play by the same rules; Korea is waiting for its big brother to step in and help out.”
It’s actually little brother who treats big brother with respect and obedience, and in return, receives guidance and help. Korea wants the help owing to its small, developing country status yet at the same time, as a modern, democratic country, it expects the US to at least put up a facade of respecting Korea as an equal, not junior partner. In short, Korea wants one half of the senior-junior relationship - the help - but not the other - subordination.
@ pawikirogi
Re: “your posts on inter-racial dating brings the most controversy? i would say it would be posts about japan.”
The topic of white guy’s married with korean girls is a very sensitive topic for white guys (many of the commenter” as well.
Robert is wise to keep out gender politics, it starts a cat fight on both sides of the fence.
It has also been a while since he posted photographs disparaging of women.
Right, elder brother is obliged to grant benevolence and guidance to younger brother, who is obliged to respond with displays of respect and following-ship. The US performed its role well in decades past, but Korea often did not respond properly (Park CH’s defiance of Carter, for example). Now the US is no longer willing to be so benevolent with its military forces, money and trade imbalance. Now both sides are looking to a more equal partnership, both with a sense of injured pride “you didn’t play your role properly”.
We’ll see how S Korea does back under the wing of its traditional ‘elder brother’, in the coming decades….
Thanks to a link put up by michael onanother thread, I’d say that it’s fairly clear that abcdefg is wildly off the mark in saying that ‘“ESL teacher” is a factually justifiable stand-in for expat since it’s true that most expats in Korea are or once were ESL teachers’.
As would any reasonable and logic-minded individual when so informed, abcdefg will no doubt refrain from mislabelling people as he has, not because it’s strange but because it’s wrong.
I’m not sure if this strawman of yours is an honest mistake and you have difficulty reading contexts, or if you are one of those people who pontificates about “logic” often yet doesn’t know what the hell such a thing really is.
In short, when a subject about blogs comes up and I mention “expat” the universe of discourse is not going to be “Filipino”, “Vietnamese” etc mail-order bride immigrants in Korea. I was refering to expat in the sense of “non militiary Westerner in Korea”. If I’m not mistaken, “expat” often connotes that much.
Now is it true that most of such expats are or once were ESL teachers? I’d think the sine qua non even for the vast majority of them is ESL. But if this doesn’t ring true with your experiences, feel free to post about it. I’ll take your objections seriously then.
ps: both “Hegelian” and “Hegellian” are correct.
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/Hegellian
“The word you’ve entered isn’t in the dictionary.”
You’re also using “sine qua non” incorrectly, unless you think ESL is the essential condition of your category, “expat.” Please keep going though, it’s very entertaining. Fighting!
Google Hegellian, you twit. And my comment should read “sine qua non for the vast majority of expats’s being in Korea…”
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=hegellian
“Did you mean: Hegelian?”
I studied Hegel in college and know full well how the adjective form is spelled. You seem a bit “ESL” yourself.
The article stated:
“They watch American movies,” he says, “You see white guys with Asian women all the time. When does an Asian guy ever get the white girl?”
I think it has already been demonstrated that the Asian guy does occasionally get the white girl. So Jae-pil (Philip Jaisohn), one of the members of the failed coup in 1884 and one of the first Koreans, if not the first, to become an American, was married to the daughter of a very rich American (white man). Prince Eui Hwa, as given in one of my earlier posts, also had several affairs with white girls in the United States and even got his clock cleaned for being too popular with the white girls.
And to think - this was well over 100 years ago.
I’m not sure if this strawman of yours is an honest mistake and you have difficulty reading contexts, or if you are one of those people who pontificates about “logic” often yet doesn’t know what the hell such a thing really is.
As you live in the United States, I chose an American English reference, but it makes little difference: expats, or expatriates, are persons living in countries who retain the citizenship of another country. ‘Expatriate’ comes from Latin: ex-, out of + patria, native land.
I was refering to expat in the sense of “non militiary Westerner in Korea”. If I’m not mistaken, “expat” often connotes that much.
That much, and much more. It also includes all the other people who fit the definition whom you have chosen to exclude. Hey, it may work for you, abcdefg, but that doesn’t mean that it works for everyone. Like folks who actually know etymology.
There are dictionary definitions and there is real language in context. Westerners using the word “expat” in the context of Korea are referring to non-ethnic Korean foreign nationals of Western countries. I agree with abc’s understanding of expat but challenge him to provide statistical proof that most Westerners in Korea are or were ESL teachers. Most Canadians, probably. Most Americans, Brits, and Aussies, maybe. But “Westerner” includes other Western European nationalities like the French, who are a visible community in Korea. Most French nationals in Korea aren’t teaching French, nevermind English. I think abc is underestimating the number of Westerners working in business or in business-related fields like law. I welcome abc to find for us statistics that support his generalization.
You really wear hanbok around Korea?
I can just imagine in your frontyard or apartment veranda, you have a dok of kimchi, ganjang, dwenjang… Hung from your veranda window are sun-dried cuttlefish.
Westerners using the word “expat” in the context of Korea are referring to non-ethnic Korean foreign nationals of Western countries.
Even if we accept this as true, bear in mind that it differs from what abcdefg wrote:
I was refering to expat in the sense of “non militiary Westerner in Korea”.
Your definition includes USFK and UN forces, Sonagi, while abcdefg’s does not. That’s a considerable difference.
I’ve heard Western Europeans say that expat should rightly only refer to those persons who have been sent by their employer to live and work in another country for a period of time - that is, it does not refer to persons who, of their own will and by their own decision, go to live and work in another country for a period of time. Their definition would include foreign military personnel, but exclude just about every current or former ESL teacher.
Are they wrong?
Precisely because persons differ about the definitions of words, reference sources serve as benchmarks. Sonagi is correct in saying that actual use is an important consideration, To that end, I would be interested to see what reliability either your or abcdefg’s concept of the word’s meaning has with an English-language corpus - one which only includes Korea-related sources, of course - before I consider throwing out a generally agreed upon definition.
I’d say they are. What’s their reasoning for this distinction? After all, the most famous historical “expats” I can think of are Ezra Pound and Ernest Hemingway, and they certainly weren’t sent overseas by an employer.
Indeed, my general sense of “expatriate” is a person voluntarily living outside his land of citizenship for work or another reason who does not intend to emigrate—as opposed to a refugee, exile, or otherwise displaced person.
And, by the way:
‘I’m not sure if this strawman of yours is an honest mistake and you have difficulty reading contexts, or if you are one of those people who pontificates about “logic” often yet doesn’t know what the hell such a thing really is.’
There’s no strawman argument here - I’ve said that the term you used is incorrect, but never widened my criticism beyond that. In what way is that a strawman argument?
By contrast, I’m not sure if this ad hominem of yours is an honest mistake and you have difficulty reading contexts, or if you are one of those people who pontificates about “strawmen” often yet doesn’t know what the hell such a thing really is.
“To that end, I would be interested to see what reliability either your or abcdefg’s concept of the word’s meaning has with an English-language corpus - one which only includes Korea-related sources, of course - “
I did a Naver search on “expat” and found that the current news links offered a usable corpus:
http://news.search.naver.com/s.....sm=tab_nmr
I would modify my earlier definition to include foreigners of any nationality but exclude laborers and military. If you look at the news links, you’ll see that “expats” are foreigners who have the time and money to socialize evenings and weekends and do artsy cultural things like participate in art exhibitions and join the rotary club. Military officers and some enlisted personnel may have the time and interest in participating in the events and activities described in the articles, but based on my own longtime personal experience, most of the expats I met at social gatherings and public events were white collar professionals working in education, business, and occasionally missionary work, or spouses of white collar professionals. One could argue for or against the inclusion of military personnel, but “expat” as it is used amongst English speakers in Korea would not include blue-collar foreign laborers.
Robert Neff, Is it true that Phillip Jaisohn was married to the daughter/granddaughter/… of an American president? (This knowledge was from Wiki.) Sounds too good to be true.
#43, Wiki says James Buchanan’s niece.
ghnhj,
Try this definition:
http://www.ucs.louisiana.edu/~.....%20Fallacy
Review comment #30 (emphasis added):
^ Conditions 1, 2, and 3 check off, plain and obvious. Thanks for wasting my time.
Comment #30 does not contain a strawman argument, abc. Condition #1, “misrepresenting an opponent’s view,” was not met. Gbnhj’s statement, “I’d say that it’s fairly clear that abcdefg is wildly off the mark in saying that ‘“ESL teacher” is a factually justifiable stand-in for expat since it’s true that most expats in Korea are or once were ESL teachers’” used your exact wording in comment #14,““ESL teacher” is a factually justifiable stand-in for expat since it’s true that most expats in Korea are or once were ESL teachers.” Gbnhj’s words preceding yours are merely expressing his strong disagreement with your words and did not misrepresent your views at all.
I’m still waiting for those links that show that a majority of “expats” in Korea have worked as ESL teachers.
“Gbnhj’s words preceding yours are merely expressing his strong disagreement with your words and did not misrepresent your views at all.”
Which is not tenable, S, unless you’re unlike me and you welcome a high threshold of bullshit for the views you espouse. The problem is that g is not even arguing with my views at all and shows no consciousnesss of it. If he is going for a subtler position, one that only relates to mine in a roundabout way, he has a funny way of doing it. Then again sifting out what the heck was going on in 30 was the point of responding.
Anyway, have the majority of expats in Korea (the subset of them important to my comments here) worked as ESL teachers (in Korea)? I don’t think it’s unreasonable to believe it. But is it actually true? It’s true I presumed it in my comment but I don’t know for certain and grant that I may be wrong. But I’d like to know. If anyone is willing to dig up some links for or against, then be my guest.
Robert, do you really wear a hanbok in your daily life? If so, may I ask why? I do not mean this question disrespectfully, I am just sincerely curious. Thanks.
“Which is not tenable, S, unless you’re unlike me and you welcome a high threshold of bullshit for the views you espouse. “
As opposed to untenable statements like this one (boldface mine):
““ESL teacher” is a factually justifiable stand-in for expat since it’s true that most expats in Korea are or once were ESL teachers.”
You finally conceded there was no factual evidence to support your generalization after the second time I challenged you to provide some. And let’s not forget the misapplication of the term “strawman argument.” Keep sputtering, abc.
Not supported is not same thing as untenable. And I don’t finally concede anything. I defer it. Likewise, I write “factually justifiable” which is not the same thing as “factually justified.”
And you forget that’s the bull I’m criticizing you for.
Let’s go through this again. When a person 1) admonishes that I should “refrain” from doing something based on informaiton that has absolutely no importance to me or relevance to my position in a dispute, and 2) shows absolutely no awareness of the impertinence of that information, “strawman” is the first observation any “reasonable and logic-minded” individual should make. That’s no misapplication. Perhaps it is in your stuffy little world of self-importance. But you’re presuming this mode of reason of yours is something I take seriously.
Ultimately, if gbnhj is only disputing “expat” from the stance of terminology, he needs to understand that he didn’t make that clear when he should have, and he neglects to see the purpose of responding to comment 30 was in part to determine what his angle is. In general, it’s the point of discussion: Give a view, revise a view if untrue. Nobody here has misunderstood “straw man”. To claim I have is as absurd as it is obnoxious.
Sonagi, you just don’t get it. abcdefg is invoking of “deterritorialization” as a recursive, rhizomatic means of problematizing the post-Lacanian Other. Seeing this gradation of Althusserian neocolonial critique, one might question the original paucity of thought as an isolated incident, rather than one that encodes the dominant ideologies and power relations of the culture that produced it. abcdefg engages in a subtle subverions of expat “phallogocentritheatricality” using the Cixousian supplement of the Derridean “text.”
Got it?
Yep.
Don’t know. I just like’ em, I guess.
Robert, do you really wear a hanbok in your daily life?
Yep.
If so, may I ask why?
Don’t know. I just like’ em, I guess.
F R E A K
Amen.
Robert, do you really wear a hanbok in your daily life?
Yep.
If so, may I ask why?
Don’t know. I just like’ em, I guess.
F R E A K
BANNED
abcdefg, what’s bothering you - that I’m right to simply question your substitution of terms; that the two terms actually describe different groups and so cannot be used in place of one another; or that you can’t correctly identify a strawman attack (although you seem able to use an ad hominem attack)?
I’m done here, btw, but by all means type away - I’m sure you’ve got lots more to say.