Ironies, Epiphanies, and Unintended Consequences: Modern Korean History (Response paper to Prof. Georg Iggers, intellectual historian of comparative world historiography)
Jacqueline Pa !cto"er #$, #%%&
It is a great pleasure and privilege p rivilege to "e here. I am particularly honored to share the first session with Prof. Georg Iggers who is not only an eminent intellectual historian "ut also a civil rights activist. 'o dou"t, I will continue to "enefit from his many "oos. ith gratitude, Id lie to read a few lines from his edited volume, Turning Turning Points in Historiography (#%%#), Historiography (#%%#), from the chapter on *'ationalism and +frican istoriography- "y oyin oyin /alola. his passage struc a chord with a sense of irony and resonance on the twists and turns in the unfolding drama of historici0ing modern 1orea with the legacy of colonial and dictatorial oppression and ongoing division. (passage2) 3uch lie +frican or any other nationalist historiography, historiography, the struggles surrounding the *politics of historiography- of 1orean nationalism are still a"out acquiring power and asserting identity in the world as an anticoloniali0ing and decoloniali0ing discourse, contending with the past of colonialism, imperialism, 4old a ar, r, 1orean ar, ar, dictatorship, and censorship, and the present of racism, !rientalism and 3ar5ism, among others. I. Introduction I was assigned a daunting tas to cover the state of modern 1orean historiography in thirty minutes. ere, I will offer a "rief overview of the evolution of 1 orean historiography in the est, est, including a review of the most heated h eated controversy of the past decade, the +hn 4hangho controversy, which I survived the last decade to tell you a"out it today. o o e5plain the "acdrop of the controversies, I will also include a critique of methodological and philosophical issues in some of the most influential wors in modern 1orean historiography. historiography.
In fact, the two most heated controversies in the previous decades were the 4umings !rigins of the 1orean a arr and +hn 4hangho controversies. con troversies. +nd these controversies are actually heavily coded and coiled ideological de"ates that continue with vengeance in current 1orea, as shown "y the very recent 1ang Jeonggu Incident or this !cto"er issue of a 1orean 6ournal, Choson Monthly (o Monthly (olgan lgan Joseon) "y an activist7intellectual condemning the careless association that a colorful academic 1im 8ong7os 8ong7os made a"out +hn 4hangho and 1im Ilsung, from the supposed meeting claimed to have taen place in 1im Ilsungs official "iography. "iography. If you "elieve that 1ims official "iography is an accurate and dependa"le historical source, then its your pro"lem.
1
he controversies continue to reflect the ideological nerve and political pulse of divided 1orea, where the past defines the present and nationalism is a still a hot7"utton issue with strong ideological ramifications and rever"erations in the political arena. Related to these controversies, I "elieve that the critical points of de"ate in modern 1orean historiography can "e "roadly outlined as follows. 99:)7internal development; foreign or indigenous origins of development (e5.
earnings modern scientific potential, whether you agree with him or not) #)7identity; capa"ility of self7government or democracy (his de"ate addresses the inherent 1orean capa"ility for democracy, or how early democracy appears, including the reality of nationalist struggle and leadership. his was of course used as a Japanese rationale for colonialism, along with other nations and dictators later. 3y 3y own wor addresses this issue of the indigenous development of co nstitutional democracy "y the preeminent nationalist leader +hn +hn 4hangho.) ?)7moderni0ation; e5ploitation or "enefit of Japanese colonialism (Ranean nationalist historians vs. the leftist social scientist historians who wish to interpret colonial data differently and as questions a"out whether modernity was actually o nly introduced "y Japanese and 1oreans could not "ring it on themselves) @)7ideology; nationalism or communism as the path of organic development and fulfillment of national destiny and unification potentialAA II. The Evolution of Korean Historiography in the U..: ! Critique " trengths and #i$itations
* the most successful mission field in the world in %st &eneration ; 1orea has "een called *the th the #% century- and indeed the 4hristian transformation of 1orea is one of the most phenomenal events in modern 4hristian history. history. In my analysis, this was made made possi"le "y a unique 1orean merger of nationalism and 4hristianity. 4hristianity. +nd the 4hristian missionaries such as Bnderwood, +ppen0eller, 4lar, omer and 3c4une, who introduced 1orea to the world since :$$@ were e5traordinary men of faith and conviction. hese "rave men7 and an d women7of7God missionaries indeed "ecame the first generation of scholars on +sia and 1orea. 8et, 8et, the early missionaries had an agenda agen da of 4hristiani0ing the heathens, so their descriptions of 1oreans were o ften as "ar"aric or hopeless who needed to "e saved. 'nd &eneration ; 8ou 8ou already now that names such as John 1ing /air"an,
2
here was a ind of preoccupation that e5isted with 4onfucian metaphysics in the early days of ater, /air"an was, of course, critici0ed critici0ed for *romantici0ing- 4hina and 3aos communist revolution too much. +lso, he and Reischauer were "oth indeed critici0ed for considering 1orea only as *a variant of 4hina-. Reischauer was a son of a 4hristian missionary. +s pioneers of ee and Caesoo =uh. ith his "iography of Kim of Kim Ilsung , =uh Cae =oo assessed and analy0ed various fictional accounts and propaganda on 1im Ilsung, a rather complicated tas. 8i 1i7"ais 1i7"ais "oo, translated "y ees Politics >ees Politics of Korean Nationalism, Nationalism, which was the most influential wor in 1orean nationalism since the :F%s. *tripartite division schema- of 1orean nationalist (ro)le$s of Chongsi* #ee ; >ees *tripartite leadership, mvt, politics, ideology, vision and strategy "ecame a particularly long7lasting paradigm which went unchallenged and unquestioned for decades. +fter scrutini0ing the private papers on +hn 4hangho and other documents on 1orean nationalist movement, I had to pro"lemati0e and confront this paradigm. In his conventional view, the formulaic assumptions of the 1orean nationalist leadership and movement were could "e summari0ed as a three7way division of strategic divergence; i) diplomatism or propagandism of =yngman Rhee and =o 4haepilH ii) militarism of 8i 8i onghwi onghwi and Pa 8ongmanH 8ongmanH and iii) *gradualist pacifism-, or su"sequently *cultural nationalism-, of +n 4hangho.i =uch conception of *tripartite *tripartite division- offered offered a convenient and facile e5planation for generations of scholars to e5plain away the personality conflicts, political and professional rivalries, strategic and a nd ideological differences, organi0ational divisions and other various incongruencies and c ontradictions found in 1orean nationalism.
3
he danger with such a view was that it implicitly, implicitly, if rather pe6oratively, assumed assumed that these strategic differences "etween the leaders led to the inevita"le division, eventual decline and su"sequent failure of the 1orean independence movement. his was also also sometimes e5tended as an analytical tool or framewor to understand the independence movement and pioneering pioneering activi activism sm among among the overseas overseas communit communities, ies, including including the the leaders leaders of early early 1orean7+merica, such as +n 4hangho, =yngman Rhee and Pa 8ongman. 8ongman. 8et, 8et, such an analysis did not effectively discern the fact that the leaders, +n 4hangho, =yngman Rhee and Pa 8ongman as well as =o 4haepil, 8i onghwi, were at one time or another militarist, diplomatist, diplomatist, or self7strengthening self7strengthening educator in their anticolonial revolutionary ii careers. +rd &eneration ; If the second generation 1oreanists were traditional historians who were mainly interested in 4hoson dynasty, many of the third generation mem"ers were modern historians more interested in contemporary 1orea and aggressively too on controversies and de"ates.
Ey far the largest in num"er, many of the third generation acade mics have "een mem"ers of the B= Peace 4orps to 1orea. Curing the :F%s, they did not "elieve in the ietnam ar and avoided the draft. hey went to 1orea *"y accident and not necessarily a choice-. hey learned the language, culture and history and "ecame academics on 1orea. ith this group, something of a critical mass emerged in the field. 9hey are considered the *revisionist- or su6eong 6uui generation which " egan to critici0e and re7e5amine earlier wors "y 1orean and other early e estern stern academics.A +mong them are the so7 called *Peace corps mafia or Palais mafia as their sheer num"ers currently consist the mainstream esta"lishment of 1orean =tudies, though ideologically pitted against a rivalry with 4umings students who are fewer and less influential. 9heir deep seated conflict was once descri"ed in Yoksa bipyong , a 1orean7language 6ournal of history.A =ince they were mostly war protesters with a particular ideological slant as a generation with its own "lend of promise and disillusionment, they are a highly politici0ed and polemical group in their approach to historiography on 1orea, dealing with the 4old ar ar,, dictatorship and division. he pro"lems of the scholarship of this generation with similar life e5periences and view a"out politics and society has "een widely acnowledged "y now and continues to "e reassessed, as the progress of the scholarship includes the process of rectification of earlier mistaes and mis6udgments. Cespite their efforts in num"er of do0ens, the pro"lematique is sheer lacuna of information that needed to "e filled on modern 1orea in the est. (ro)le$s of the (alais school !veruse of Japanese sources which are more plentiful and "etter organi0ed with easier accessH !veruse of old7fashioned or dogmatic 3ar5ist category of an alysis +n unintended consequence of their wor is that although they are well7meaning progressives, their wors have "een nonetheless touched "y !rientalist pre6udice which
4
neglect or denigrate the scope and reality reality of 1orean nationalism. hey are also ideologically7driven or partisan 3ar5ist 3ar5ist "eing too reductive and essentialistic. essentialistic. hey were heavily influenced "y the Japanese left, "ut these wors still have pro"lems as they still include ethnocentric pride and naivete n aivete as well as colonial superiority comple5 concerning modern 1orean history. history. In my own view, the pro)le$ of Cu$ings who sells the most history "oos on 1orea is his tendency to adopt a post a post hoc divisional hoc divisional logic which pervades his historiography on modern 1orea during the 4old ar era and "eyond. e too easily acc epts any and all points of historiographical departure as the peninsular division after the 1orean a ar. r. In In this way, his wor offers overly reductive and ideological portrait of pre71orean ar history. hus, he is not a"le to underscore the unique paradigm and the coherence of inner logic of the 1orean nationalist leadership and movement, "efitting the harsh colonial and diasporic circumstances of 1oreans. It seems to me that his wor needs to more carefully reassess the political and ideological mae7up of the 1orean nationalist movement which preceded the 1orean ar and division. +s the grand epic of modern 1orea, the philosophies, philosophies, politics and strategies strategies of the anticolonial struggle inherently em"odied the consequential seeds of historical development and evolution, including the origins of peninsular division and war, of the twentieth century and "eyond. "eyond. he history and interpretation of the independence struggle persist as a fervently contested ground of moral7political legitimacy of divided 1orea and the enlarged identity of transnational community of diasporic 1orea. th &eneration ;
he transforming composition of race and gender gen der in the field of 1orean history naturally invites diverse opinions and even spirited de"ates an d conflicts. ith ith the emergence of this group, the de"ates have "een characteri0ed "y revisionism to neo7revisionism and modern to postmodern with new controversies. his postmodern generation offers new energy and vitality with multiplicity of voices and perspectives. hey are also increasingly more interested in their own diasporic identity to enlarg the understanding the transnational reality of 1orea. 8et, 8et, some of the criticisms directed at postmodern or cultural studies scholarship may apply to them as well.
5
III. !hn Changho Controversy
'ow let me turn my attention to the +4 +4 controversy. controversy. ho was +hn 4hangho anywayK 4ompara"le to George ashington of the B=, Gandhi of India, or =un 8at7sen 8at7sen of 4hina, +hn 4hangho was the chief architect and strategist of the 1orean nationalist movement. e created myriad associations throughout his life all over the world. +4 esta"lished esta"lished the Kongnip the Kongnip hyôphoe (Bnited hyôphoe (Bnited 1oreans in +merica, :F%&) in +merica, Sinminhoe ('ew Sinminhoe ('ew PeopleLs =ociety, :F%M) in 1orea, Taehan Taehan kungminhoe (1orean kungminhoe (1orean 'ational +ssociation, :F:#) in 3anchuria, Russia and +merica, and Hungsaan and Hungsaan (8oung (8oung 1orean +cademy, :F:?) in +merica, and su"sequently in 4hina and 1orea, the Provisional Government of the Repu"lic of 1orea (:F:F), the 'ational Representatives 4ongress (:F#?), and the 1orean Independence Party P arty (:F#F), among others. +s an avid constitutionalist, he wrote a series of constitutions for his revolutionary organi0ations and drafted the constitution of the Provisional Government. Inevita"ly, the earlier interpretations of +n 4hLangho reflected and em"odied the painful legacy of colonialism, the 1orean ar, ar, division and successive military dictatorships of modern 1orea. 4aught at the ne5us of 1orean history history and historiography, historiography, +n +n 4hLangho was misinterpreted or mis6udged as a Ngradualist7pacifistN "y 8i 1wangsu, 4hu 8ohan, 8ohan, : 4hong7si >ee and +rthur Gardner from the :F@%s to the :FM%s H Ncultural nationalistN "y 3ichael Ro"inson in the :F$%s# and Nself7reconstruction nationalistN "y 1enneth ells ells in ? the :FF%s , among others. +s disciple7"iographers, disciple7"iographers, 8i 1wangsu, the cele"rated novelist of Nnew literatureN and 4hu 8ohan, the poet of Nnew poetryN presented +n 4hLangho as a Ngradualist7pacifistN and set the tone for su"sequent interpretations of +nLs life and thought. If their wors were mared "y inconsistencies and parado5es, 8i and 4huLs colla"orations further clouded and complicated und erstanding of +n and the 1orean li"eration struggle. Included within these e5changes was the interpretive pro"lematique and critique of revisionist and polemical *cultural nationalism- (such as "y 3ichael Ro"inson and 4arter :. 8i 1wangsu, Tosan Tosan !n Ch"angho, Ch"angho, ungsadan, =eoul, = eoul, :F@MH 4hu 8ohan, 8ohan, !n !n Tosan chônso (4omplete chônso (4omplete ors ors of +n osan), osan), =am6ungdang, =eoul, :F?H 4hong7si >ee, Politics of Korean Nationalism Nationalism,, Bniversity of 4alifornia Press, Eereley, :F&H and +rthur Gardner, The Gardner, The Korean nationalist Mo#ement an !n Ch"angho$ !#ocate of %raualism, %raualism, Ph.C. dissertation, Bniversity of awaii, :FMF. #. 3ichael Ro"inson, Cultural Nationalism in Colonial Korea, Korea, &'()*&'(+, &'()*&'(+, Bniversity of ashington a shington Press, =eattle, :F$$.
?. 1enneth ells , Ne, , Ne, %o$ Ne, Nation- Protestants Protestants an Self*.econstruction Nationalism in Korea$ &/'0*&'12 , +llen O Bnwin,
6
@. Ro"inson adopted the radical leftist critique of the :F#%s which arose from the intense political and propaganda struggle "etween 1orean nationalist and communists. e e5amined 8i 1wangsuLs Min4ok 1wangsuLs Min4ok kae4oron (
7
+gainst the former understanding of +n 4hLangho as a gradualist7pacifist or cultural nationalist, a careful scrutiny of the private papers reveals that +n +n 4hLangho was actually a militarist revolutionary who sought to wage an independence war throughout his life, rather than a Lgradualist pacifistL or Lcultural nationalistL, as some of the earlier scholars have suggested. 3ost of all, +4 +4 was a repu"lican revolutionary, pioneering institution7 "uilder, constitutional constitutional writer and war strategist. +s a nascent constitutional democrat who "rough t a"out the constitutional revolution for 1oreans, +4 trusted that democracy was a matter of survival and the most radical yet enduring revolution of all. /or him, the anticolonial self7governing and the independence war were the meansH the creation of a new sovereign democracy was the end. +fter "eing arrested in 4hina in :F?#, +n +n was forci"ly returned returned to 1orea. In :F?$, he died from torture in the Japanese prison. is life and destiny destiny em"lemati0e the unfulfilled unfulfilled promise of the collective quest of his nation and people.
Indeed, the controversies and paradigm shifts on modern 1orea have emerged "ecause of the pro"lems of the earlier historical legacies, such as co lonialism, war, division, division, dictatorships and the pro"lem of censorship for most of the past century. here is also the fragmentary effects of the overarching "inary conte5t of the 4old ar, ar, including =talinist 3ar5ism of 'orth 1orea and narrow nationalism of =outh 1orea, and *hy"rid !rientalism- of Japan and e est. st. In the historiography of 1orea and e est, st, these have sometimes led to purposeful colonial distortions and accidental post7colonial misrepresentations, as well as misinterpretations motivated "y well7intentioned
8
ideological appropriation of history as a political tool to change the dictatorial reality in the :F$%s. hat I call as *hy"rid !rientalism!rientalism- of Japan and est est is unique in that it is an amalgamated framewor of colonial perception filtered through the prism of Japan to the est e st imposed on modern 1orea. =uch = uch framewor has inevita"ly led to the underestimation of indigenous 1orean enterprises, including the 1orean nationalist pro6ect, or the scope and progress of internal development. In terms of how and why a controversy emerges in the field of 1orean = tudies, not only an analysis or interpretation of a piece of evidence at stae, "ut also a matter of different *perception-. Is there a *structure of perception- or *structure edifice of pre6udice-, far more deeply rooted and accumulated over time, as
9
*o"6ect-K hat ind of su"6ectivityo"6ectivity su"6ectivityo"6ectivity are we measuringK +nd whose whose yardstic do we use to 6udge, measure, assess, analy0e or interpretK +s I write this, I am reminded of the "oo, Gao Qing6ians *=oul 3ountain- which I quite en6oyed reading the past summer. summer. his e5iled 4hinese playwright and artist in /rance adopts numerous narrative voices; *I, 8ou, 8ou, =he and e- and achieves a ind ind of universal transcendence "y adopting and engaging various perspectives in this auto"iographical novel. he "oo is composed of essayistic setches which seems at once quite traditional 4hinese and far7flung postmodern /rench in form. !r may"e he is e5perimenting with postmodern esthetic and nihilism of formlessness. =peaing of perspectives, the 3e5ican writer 4arlos /uentes essay taled a"out the great estern e stern literary tradition this way; *I read Rousseau, or the ad ventures of the I; Joyce and /aulner, or the adventures of the eH 4ervantes, or the adventures of the 8ou.8ou.- e calls the idle, the +mia"le Reader; (in this case, a small) you.+s in the case of an individual life, the ironies of 1orean history are too many to ponder. he epiphany has "een to accept the unintended consequences of life and scholarship on modern 1orea, as much as my own search for roots of families of nationalist and womens movement movement leaders who closely wored wo red with +hn 4hangho and =eo Jaepil, as the *road less traveled.-
10
i
he *tripartite division- framewor first appeared in 4hong7si >ee, Politics >ee, Politics of Korean Korean Nationalism, Nationalism, Bniversity of 4alifornia Press, Eereley, :F&. +dopting this approach, +rthur Gardner wrote *he 1orean nationalist 3ovement and +n 4hLangho, 4hLangh o, +dvocate of Gradualism-, Ph.C. dissertation, Bniversity of awaii, :FMF.
ii
+ series of critiques of the pro"lems of the past decades of scholarship and its theoretical and empirical underpinnings were offered in a num"er of my earlier presentations, including the shared aspects of militarism, diplomatism and so7called gradualism that can "e found among the anticolonial 1orean revolutionaries.
