OK, I’m going to say it — given both today’s column (which I’m not even going to bother fisking) and his columns in the past, don’t you think Jon Huer is precisely the person you WOULDN’T want writing a column entitled, “Understanding Korea, Koreans?”
Christ, and I thought my blog was unhelpful in promoting intercultural understanding.
Oh, speaking of which, I have a small piece in today’s KT on historical conservation.
{ 31 comments… read them below or add one }
Nice piece on conservation. I have been writing columns for the Korea Herald much of last year, but I prefer the Times. It is the least suckiest. (how’s that for fine journalistic grammar?
Bobby
http://www.idlewordship.com
Nice piece on conservation. I have been writing columns for the Korea Herald much of last year, but I prefer the Times. It is the least suckiest. (how’s that for fine journalistic grammar?
Bobby
http://www.idlewordship.com
Good article Robert about cultural preservation.
This is a complex issue in this society which claims
a strong link to tradition and the past, yet freely bulldozes
important archaeological sites in the name–not so much of “progress”–of profit.
The Cheonho area still baffles me, whereby the ancient Paekje
earthen fortress–possibly the important Paekje Wiryeseong capital– was totally bulldozed (a few decades ago)
in order to put up some ugly apartments. Sure, they left
a small strip of mound in tact, but what about the rest of the mound
and the countless artifacts beneath the soil?
Crazy.
That Jon Huer article was hideous.
Here’s your money shot: “. . . there is little evidence of goodness in Korea’s history or social system.”
You know, I really wanted to give Professor Huer some leeway, because I said some nasty things about him on the last thread. But this is just too much.
heee-larious!
Wow. This gentleman appears to have never met a lazy generalization he didn’t like. You’re quite, Robert: this is well beyond the fiskable category. I mean, where would you even begin? It’s mind-boggling.
“You’re quite, Robert” ==> “You’re quite right, Robert.”
Attempts to portray oneself in a positive light by making strawman attacks on others reeks of sad desperation.
The problem with these these incessant attempts to portray Koreans in a favorable light by portraying the rest of humanity as subhuman is that stupidity and prejudice are in themselves incomprehensible.
Perhaps Jon Huer could look to the recently departed Cardinal Stephen Kim as a post-colonial figure who showed others how to stand up for what’s right, despite personal peril.
I’m sure other examples of similar figures abound.
Sorry, I know that it’s not PC to say this, but after living among the japanese for the last 15 years, I agree with the guy’s observation about the Japanese.
Concerning the Koreans or Yanks,I wouldn’t know.
I’d even develop it a little further and say that the Japanese have a sense of themselves as a higher and unique form of humanity than ‘the other’ and therefore the experiences and feelings of ‘the other’ (the rest of humanity) are less important in any consideration.
With this last point, I’ve always assumed that the Koreans felt exactly the same.
However I would like to add that I find it hard to believe that Heur is considered a real academic in the USA.
Since sucking up to the blog master can be considered to be good form, allow me to say this:
When I cruise the Internet, I really don’t read but scan for all the obvious reasons. If something seems interesting and comes across coherent, only then I slow down and actually read.
Huer’s piece scanned as a bunch of drivel and rambling where as our Dear Blog Fuhrer’s piece held together to merit, IMHO, a read.
To which I say, Right on, Robert! My sentiments exactly, and more comments of this sort need to be aired. Unfortunately, it seems only the foreigners around here are airing such timely opinions. Sad.
About John Huer’s column…
I can’t speak for the Koreans or Japanese, because I wasn’t raised Korean or Japanese, but I can speak for myself, an American. I was raised to be a good person by my mother and father, not by any “public message”. I can’t even imagine the kind of public message system it would take to raise people to be something in particular. Maybe if all TVs were government TVs and they spouted the same propaganda campaign for 20 years straight spoken by a stentorian-voiced bearded man it might have that effect.
hojucandy says everyone looks better with a beard!
Jon Huer wrote:
Now how would Jon Heur know that “virtually all Japanese citizens showed pitiless evil”?
Also, when it comes to nationalistic zombies, no one can beat North Koreans. Even South Korea has more nationalistic zombies than Japan. For example, many Japanese disagree or have no opinion on whether Liancourt Rocks (Dokdo) belong to Japan, but there is almost no disagreement in Korea on Korea’s historical claims to Dokdo. The anti-American candle-light vigils and the US beef protests are more examples of South Korea’s nationalistic zombies in action.
Jon Huer’s article is just a silly attempt to try to make the claim that Koreans are good and Japanese are bad. I disagreed with Robert on Jon Heur’s last article, but I have to agree that this Jon Heur article sucks.
The Korea Times will print virtually ANYTHING.
Contrast Robert’s thoughtful article to this imbecilic, preudiced emotionally immature tripe – the contrast couldn’t be more stark.
God, when I read such, I am sure am happy with my decision to finally leave that country behind me and wipe the dust off my feet.
gbevers wrote ‘For example, many Japanese disagree or have no opinion on whether Liancourt Rocks (Dokdo) belong to Japan, but there is almost no disagreement in Korea on Korea’s historical claims to Dokdo. The anti-American candle-light vigils and the US beef protests are more examples of South Korea’s nationalistic zombies in action’.
That’s because the government in Tokyo doesn’t want to make it a big issue in korean-Japanese relationship. However if the Tokyo government made Dokdo an important issue, the Japanese would follow in mass and sharing their government’s stance – no matter what the facts on the ground were.
To give you an example were Heur’s opinion does have some validity, look at the North Korean abduction of 13 Japanese more than 30 years ago.
(a) Before the political right in Japan made the abductee issue important, the majority of japanese were politically indifferent to the issue, although they did object to it as a criminal act. Now it is and has been for the last 5 years, the priori of Japan’s north east Asian foreign policy.
(b) The Japanese refuse to see there is any moral equivalency with the criminal acts of North Korea 30 years ago and similar criminal acts, on a much larger scale, by their own government 70 years ago with the issue of sex slavery. In this case, Japan is the only victim.
(c) Point (a) and (b) are accepted by nearly every Japanese as written in stone with very little discussion taking place.
The Japanese people, as a whole, are passive because there government is passive, but don’t get the idea that the passivity is anything more than compliance with authority. They can turn on the edge of a coin and all that energy now placed in their economy can so easily be diverted to other tasks; if the government deems it so.
Good to see Gbevers’ “Liancourt Rocks (Dokdo)” macro is working. Gerry, I expect to see you at next Tuesday’s RAS lecture in Seoul, at which a Korean professor will do a presentation about Dokdo using nothing but Japanese sources, I am told.
On another note, I was told a couple of years ago by a US military analyst who has been here for decades that he thought Japan a scarier place than SK because the people there can turn on a dime when their politicians try to lead them in a certain direction. More or less what Scipio said above.
If they’re the ones printing the garbage by EFL overlord Steve Shirtlifter, then yes, they do in fact print anything.
Hamel wrote:
Doesn’t it seem strange to anyone, besides me, that a Korean professor would do a presentation on Dokdo “using nothing but Japanese and Western sources”? It is kind of like painting a picture using only one color. If the professor’s goal is really to inform RAS members about Dokdo, then why wouldn’t he use all sources available? I think I know the reason.
The reason the professor will not be using Korean sources it that Korean sources would contradict his claims. For example, when he says that Japan recognized Korea’s claim to Ulleungdo and Dokdo (Usando) in the 1690s, he will not have to explain why Korean maps after the 1690s showed Usando as Ulleungdo’s neighboring island of Jukdo, which is only two kilometers off Ulleungdo’s east shore. Koreans claim that Usando was the old name for Dokdo, but both Korean and Japanese maps showed “Usando” (于山島 – 우산도) as a neighboring island of Ulleungdo, not as Dokdo (Liancourt Rocks).
Also, when he brings up the 1870 Japanese document that said Ulleungdo had a neighboring island named “Matushima” (Songdo), he will not have to explain why King Kojong, in 1882, said that Ulleungdo had a neighboring island called “Songjukdo” (松竹島 – 송죽도) that was also sometimes called “Songdo” (松島 – 송도 and sometimes called “Jukdo” (竹島 – 죽도). Again, Ulleungdo has a neighboring island named “Jukdo,” which was two kilometers off its eastern shore.
By the way, in the 1870 document, the Japanese said that Ulleungdo’s neighboring island of “Matsushima” (Songdo – 송도) was an island that they had no record of, which means it could not have been Liancourt Rocks, which the Japanese also called “Matsushima,” since Japan did have maps and records of their Matsushima.
I had thought about going to the lecture, but I have decided it would just be a waste of time and money to travel to Seoul and sit among 100 other people listening to the same bullshit that I have already heard a 100 times. When Korea’s RAS invite both Korean and Japanese scholars, who hold opposing views, to debate the Dokdo isssues, then I will definitely go. However, I think it is more likely to snow in Manila than for Korea’s RAS to invite a speaker who supports the Japanese historical claim to Liancourt Rocks.
Gbevers: congratulations, you have just become the Serdar Argic of this blog (for those who never used USENET in the 1990s or have forgotten: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serdar_Argic).
All I have to do is mention a lecture about Dokdo, and I get a counter lecture from you pre-empting everything that might be said.
I’ll take your snowflake’s chance in Manila and raise you an icicle in hell’s chance that you will ever have an open mind on this issue. You’re an advocate; not a seeker.
“When Korea’s RAS invite both Korean and Japanese scholars, who hold opposing views, to debate the Dokdo isssues, then I will definitely go.”
Yes, yes, when the world conforms to your demands, you will come and take a look. Nice one. I tell you what, just for laffs, I may print out your screed above and bring it to the lecture and read from it during question time. Pity you won’t be there.
Hamel,
I simply guessed at some of the claims he will be making because Korea’s Dokdo advocates repeat them over and over. Is there something wrong with my preempting his lecture by being a Paul Harvey and giving you “the rest of the story”?
When I first started studying Korea’s historical claims on Dokdo, I believed Dokdo to be historically Korean territory. In other words, I started out as a “seeker,” but I have found that Korea’s historical claims on Dokdo are bogus. Hamel, if someone told you that 2+2=5, would you continue to be a seeker or would you be an advocate for 4?
Hamel wrote:
That’s called freedom of choice. I am not going to pay ten bucks to see a movie I have already seen or hear an argument I have already heard.
“That’s called freedom of choice. I am not going to pay ten bucks to see a movie I have already seen or hear an argument I have already heard.”
Lol. The day that 5,000won equalled 10 bucks US are long gone. You HAVE been here too long, Bevers. Besides, the 5,000won covers the coffee and snacks that are provided, too. And I thought you’d be pleased to reunite with one of your past employers, a regular RAS attendee.
Hamel,
Actually, the cost would be more that ten bucks because I also have to buy a bus ticket to and from Seoul.
A past employer?
That is a nice article. It raises the quality of writing of editorials in the KT, which are too often garbage, Michael Breen’s stuff excepted.
But I wonder why RK chose to focus so much on colonial period architecture and at the same time not even mention the fact that Koreans aren’t exactly proud of that era? Not to justify knocking down historical buidlings but I think that’s relevant background.
See, the excuses never stop coming. Do you need us to pass the hat around and spot you the 2만원?
Past employer: yep. You heard me right. So now there is an element of surprise and mystery too. All the more reason for coming.
Hamel,
My past employers would not go to an event like that unless they served beer.
We usually drink beer afterwards.
Gerry, if you want to go to this thing, then please go. I won’t be there filming you and posting vids on YouTube.
If you were going to promise a title bout, sure, that would have been fun, but if there are to be no hysterics, I don’t care about the Rocks enough to show up for whatever blend of scholarship and nationalism is in store.
I’ve been to a few RAS lectures; they’re well-behaved and well-moderated, and I’m sure it can be an edifying and civil event for those who care to learn more on this issue. And – probably 9 in 10 waegs in attendance will already be aware of such things as the full-page ads in US newspapers advertising Korea’s claim to the Rocks. They’d probably appreciate a little healthy and informed skepticism from the other side.
Is there something wrong with my preempting his lecture by being a Paul Harvey and giving you “the rest of the story”?
Wow, you listen to AM 770 WABC also? Personally, I like Mark Levin. I like it when he gets all irascible and calls a listener “a coconut” or a “schmuck”.
You must log in to post a comment.
{ 1 trackback }