Here’s President Roh’s Liberation Day address, for those who are interested.
-
English Books on Korea... and More!
-
Visit My Brother's Film Review Site
Here’s President Roh’s Liberation Day address, for those who are interested.
Korea News via Google
19 Comments
No head nod to the US for defeating the Japanese in 1945? Good use of the passive voice: We were liberated… Also no mention of the billions of aid the US has provided.
bluejax21, I guess it’s a step forward compared to last year:
Hopefully next year there will be a thanks to all those nations who helped to make our freedom possible.
There was also no mention of Dokdo this time, so that’s progress I guess…
(”Japan should take substantive actions to resolve the issues surrounding Dokdo…”)
Still better than “We are separated from our Northern brethren because of the Yankee Imperialism™”…
Bah, most people are just happy that they have the day off from work and couldn’t care less about Roh’s speach.
#2,
Probably not appropriate to thank the U.S. EVERY year… maybe once every five years?
“Probably not appropriate to thank the U.S. EVERY year… maybe once every five years?”
WRONG
Without the US - there is NO Liberation Day.
C’mon — when was the last time you heard a US politician give the French a nod for help in the US revolutionary war? It’s their holiday — let them celebrate. (OK, I didn’t google and some smartass will probably come up with a reference, probably a congressman speaking in Paris to the US community munching on their hot dogs on the Fourth of July.)
What I found interesting (and I admit I only scanned the speech), was the reference to modest expectations for the inter-Korean summit. Wise, meaning a bit out of character.
The best possible speech: “Thanks for all you’ve done USA but you can start to leave now — we’ll handle it from here on out”.
and how often does the US President thank France on July 4th?
(Maybe this is because a French planner designed Washington, DC, but…) President Bush looks out his window at a statue of Lafayette everyday he is in the White House.
“Those heroes who shed their blood and lost their lives…you are now lying in the soil of a friendly country. Therefore rest in peace…You, the mothers who sent their sons from far away countries, wipe away your tears. Your sons are now lying in our bosom and are in peace. After having lost their lives on this land, they have become our sons as well.” - Mustafa Kemal
Now that’s the sort of speech that should have been given.
#5 “Probably not appropriate to thank the U.S. EVERY year…”
Why not. Goodwill/appreciation doesn’t cost a thing.
#7: “…C’mon — when was the last time you heard a US politician give the French a nod for help in the US revolutionary war?…”
An interesting question which has been posed here before! It got me thinking out loud on this blog (a couple of years ago?), but my previous speculative post was at the end of a long thread and most had moved on (not that I blame them).
The Royal French Army/Navy were the ones who helped “US” out — under the white “triple fleur-de-lis” royal Bourbon flag.
There was a documented event in early US diplomatic history, where President Washington was required to receive the new French ambassador of the Revolutionary French government (1793?).
The recently-beheaded (1792?) King Louis XVI’s portrait had been prominently displayed in Pres Washington’s offical reception area since at least 1789 (this was not at the White House which was not yet built, I think the seat of US govt at that time was in Philadelphia).
There was some debate within the Cabinet as to whether to advise Washington to leave the portrait in place — or not. Washington decided the honorable thing to do was to leave it up — of course that was yet another indicator of his basic character. After all, one shouldn’t stop being loyal to old friends just because they had had the misfortune to get themselves, non?
As best as I can recall the incident, both sides courteously and diplomatically ignored the portrait and the formal reception was unmarred by any discord. However, soon thereafter (1798) the US engaged in a brief “undeclared” naval war with the French “directory” government, still under the tricolor flag (successor to the revolutionary republic, predecessor to the Napoleonic “consulate” and later empire).
So — I think that a “tradition” of inviting French ambassadors/consuls to domestic US Independence Day celebrations just never had a chance of getting established–right from the very get-go.
A French consular official may be happy (if invited) to show up at a stateside formal 4th of July function and take a bow, but he/she is probably a little uneasy about speaking at aforesaid function — or even lingering too long — lest some ignorant and effusive American get a little too over-the-top about thanking him for what his “King” did for us, way back when.
“Vive le Roi!” I think even now it may still be against the formal law of the French Republic to utter these words (implying as they do possible political support for the current Bourbon “pretender”), or even to countenance any public official display of the old royal Bourbon standard.
(Note: probable facts cited above have NOT been checked with Wikipedia, lest I incur any oh-so-elegant aristocratic disdain for such proletarian behavior).
Correction to #12, just above:
“…After all, one shouldn’t stop being loyal to old friends just because they had had the misfortune to get themselves [beheaded], non?….”
Monsieur Ro-bert, once again I implore you — give us a “preview” function so we can detect and correct these monstrous typos.
January 21, 1793
Just proofread before hitting “Post”…
Bon. Thanks for the correction, I should have checked the exact date for myself.
As far as proofreading, I go through my posts very deliberately, more than once. Fat fingers, mind racing too rapidly, there are many sources of possible errors.
I even sometimes find myself typing “their” when I mean “there”, an error I’ve always scorned when others do it. There’s just something about proofreading/editing your own copy in its original font which can cause one to keep missing an egregious error.
Yet somehow, the transformation to a different font, page size, or format seems to make these prior missed errors blindingly obvious. But when that happens here, it’s too late.
I’d say this was my own peculiar failing, except for the fact that I’ve heard others mention they have the same problem (a scrupulous and exacting boss once warned us he was ruthless about typos in others’ work, but had a hard time seeing his own).
It’s our host’s call; I am grateful for his tolerance of my wankish postings. But he changes formats here so often that I figure it’s worth one more request for “preview”.
One other “pro-preview” argument — anything that serves to reduce error is surely of at least marginal assistance to foreign English students using this blog as an interesting place to practice reading/ writing English.
Here’s a link describing the status of the current Bourbon “pretender” to the extinct French Bourbon throne — for anyone who wants to be punctilious about thanking the “right” French/Spanish nobleman on the 4th of July, for the support provided to the US revolution by his great-great-great-etc.
Warning; the line of succession is not a direct one from 1830 to the present, and like it says in the Bible you’ve got to beware of false prophets (ref: the “Dauphin/King” in Huckleberry Finn).
In fact, I’d say that the strain on the brain in trying to figure out the genealogy of the current Bourbon pretender is enough to turn even the most romantic royalist into an avid republican (you have to get at least peripherally involved in tracking the Spanish royal house of Bourbon as well).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L.....e_of_Anjou
Despite the differences between the independence of a colony and the liberation of previously established then conquered country (well, don’t tell the Chinese Korea was it’s own country, but that’s besides the point), there is also the difference that what became the US was the major player in it’s own independence with France providing assistance, where in the case of Korea she herself was not the primary force that got her freedom. Perhaps instead of saying it in a way which means the Korean freedom fighters did everything, it could be said in a way that the Korean people must never forget the efforts and sacrifices they gave, without making it seem as though their small numbers single-handedly were enough to overthrow the entire Japanese imperial military.
But personally I agree that there is no reason to turn the liberation day address into a ‘thank-you American led coalition forces’ day, I just think it’s rather interesting that it gets left out while at the same time there are more than justifiable anti-American feelings in Korea, feelings that became more apparent — perhaps originated — during Roh’s presidency.
and how often does the US President thank France on July 4th?
President Bush looks out his window at a statue of Lafayette everyday he is in the White House.
I think the drag-wearing, lipsticked, historically erudite British stand-up comedian Eddie Izzard expressed it the best while performing in front of an American audience: talking about a visit to NYC, walking along Lafayette Avenue, launching into a discussion of the Revolutionary War and Lafayette in particular…then sudden silence, pause, followed by “You DO know who Lafayette is, don’t you????”