Scribblings of the Metropolitician

Seoul.com Is As Racist as the Rest of Them, and Can Kiss My Ass

From whence cometh this ire, wondreth you, dear reader?

(Don't know where that last sentence came from, but I'm in a strange mood.)

Here's the original story as it broke on Korea Beat, and here's the original Korea.com press release in Korean.

Now, they come back with an English-language-only clarification/apology (who cares, if it's only in English, and not clarifying/apologizing in Korean?) that's truly Korean style -- only enough to save face and embarassment, but doesn't actually address the moral/ethical transgression in the first place, nor will it likely change its approach to the issue in the future.

Don't believe their bullshit.

There's no Korean press release. It's not being released on Naver, nor will any Korean hear about it.

So you know what, Seoul.com? Fuck you. 퍽유 베리 머치.

I know that's immature and 유치해, but you have to deal with these people on a level commensurate with which they deal with you. And it doesn't matter, anyway, right? Since Koreans don't read what's going on in the Korean English-language blogosphere, anyway, right?

Except for the foreigners on whose side Seoul.com is disingenuously trying to get back on the good side of. Whew -- that's a lot of preposition problems in that last sentence, no?

Anyway! I digress. Don't believe a word of that BS apology-in-the-Korean-police-station kind of line. Seoul.com is obviously just as negatively biased and anti-foreigner as the rest of the Korean news media.

They just got caught.

Here's another little gem, called "The Types of Bad Native Speaking English Teachers" (sic):

Run away
Teach for a month and get a salary, then disappear.

Have fun
Just drink, fun with girls. Drink heavily after Hakwon and absent Hakwon next day execusing Headache, but drink again at that night.

Raise up the salary
At first accept salary level, but soon asking higher salary.
Meet several other Hakwons asking such higher salary, and increase the competition among Hakwons.

I don’t remember what I said
Agreed first but change his mind later, and repeat to say I don't remember what I said, for the case he is defensive.

I got angry
Finished all process including interview, documents, and came to Korea. But he has so many complaints about Korea, Hakwon, students but still staying in Korea.

Yeah, they're a little site, but that little press release they had has every bit of an impact as any other piece of obviously prejudice-based, anti-foreigner garbage being published on Naver. So let them hear from you!

I have a fun rebuttal to their little list. I call it "Lovely Standard Practices of the Hagwon Industry"

Not Getting Paid
Teach for a year, then the hagwon will catch you being 5 minutes late or some minor violation during the last week of your contract and then fire you. No severance pay. Or how about just NOT paying your for your last month at all? They know that most foreigners won't go through the long process of suing, and just give up.

Getting Screwed or Being Lied To
Signed a contract for a certain salary, number of hours, a private apartment, and all sorts of other benefits? Then you arrive and realize it was all a lie! But you're fresh out of college and naively expected that a contract means something, right? Wrong! Not in Korea! Since you don't have any other options right now, you accept 75% of the salary, 5 more hours per week than you had agreed, and live in a shitty apartment with 3 roommates. Welcome to Korea! And you wonder why some people just leave the country without finishing?

Not Getting Raises
Usually, in the modern world, if you decide to work longer and renew a contract, you get a raise because of your experience, the money they'd save from not having to train another person, reduction of turnover, gratitude -- something. I guess when a foreigner asks for that, they're considered a greedy snake.

"Have Fun"
Wait -- going out and drinking with girls, stay out late at night, have hangover in the morning...we're talking about a Samsung 회식, right? Oh, that's right. All the FOREIGNERS drinking here like madmen -- not Koreans. Riiiiiight.

"I Don't Remember What I Said"
Sorry. This is the Korean hagwon owner's #1 line. Not the foreigner's. I simply call BS on this one, and refer you to the first three practices on this list.

"I Got Angry"
With that standard bullshit being listed above, wouldn't you be fucking angry, too?

"Run Away"
What I suggest you do from the nearest Korean hagwon recruiter or advertisement to teach or work in Korea, unless they come highly recommended from a trusted source, or are affiliated with a reputable international organization. I am only in Korea because I'm NOT an English teacher and have an F-4. If I had to take an HIV test, a criminal background check, and endure constant suspicion that I am a criminal just to teach English in a hagwon (and a system) that doesn't give two shits about standards, anyway, I'd say go to Japan. At least the work and residency visas aren't linked (i.e. if your boss is an asshole or is screwing you, you can quit and not have to leave the country, making you effectively NOT a 17th-century-era INDENTURED SERVANT, which is exactly what you are in Korea.

Thanks, Korea.com, for being a shining example of the worst assumptions and sentiments that continue to be a barrier between Korean-foriegner relations! And if you'd like to thank them yourself, through email, phone, or even in person, here's their contact information, garnished from the link on their own site:

USA : 5 Malibu Irvine, CA., 92602 USA.
Tel : 714-389-4273, [email protected]

Korea : Rm. 402, 876-2 Bangbae-dong, Seocho-gu, Seoul, 137-832, Korea
Tel : 82-2-568-2255 Fax : 82-2-425-2263
[email protected]

If not, just remember to associate Seoul.com in your head with "two more asshole ajussis trying to exploit foreigners in Korea even as they vilify them for being here."

This is the same MO as the rest of the Korean media and English-industrial-complex here. Don't believe their hype.

The Spatial Economy of the Hamburger

Now, that's a haughty blog post entry. Trying to get back in academic mode -- that would sound like a sexy paper title to present at a conference, since people would come just to hear what the hell this is about.

Well, starting with ExpatJane, people are talking about the politics of bad service, especially around getting a burger, which is getting increasingly easier to get here. There are better options, Koreans have figured out how to make a good one themselves (Kraze Burger is good -- just relatively expensive), and I think people are going to take less and expect more. I remember being here in 1994 and paying the equivalent of $20 for "hamburger steak" accompanied by a dollop of corn from a can and an equal helping of macaroni salad -- but try to pawn that off on the Korean populace now -- ain't gonna happen.

Things change fast in Seoul, and food culture, like every other aspect of the culture, has been no exception. FatManSeoul has done a great writeup of some of this stuff, and brought up some of the fascinating issues that have come up when different food cultures and expectations collide. One excerpt, which reminded me of many of the anecdotes from the late 80's and the quirkiness of life in Korea that have been largely worked out in the much more cosmopolitan Seoul of today, was particularly interesting:

Bak’s article recalls the time when McDonald’s was new to Korea. Ah, back in the day when there wasn’t an 오곡 (ogok: five grain) shake to be had! Nowadays Mickey D’s is a shining example of successful integration into the Korean fast food scene, but in the beginnings were troubled times. Cash was flowing out, but not back in and it was all because of those pesky kids! And college students. And office workers. And pretty much every patron who came in the door.

You see, long ago Korean people weren’t yet trained in the ways of the fast food warrior, and they thought you could just come into McDonald’s and sit for hours chatting with your friends as you linger over fries. Because to Koreans, the 500원 ice cream cone wasn’t just money for ice cream, but a ticket to a place to sit and hang out. Which they did. But McDonald’s revenues depend on fast turnover, and every customer taking up space is costing the corporate headquarters moola. Something had to be done! For a more detailed and utterly fascinating discussion of this transition, FatMan strongly recommends Watson’s book.

Back in the day, McDonald’s had to hire young women to act as greeters - but the job description didn’t end there. According to Bak, a major part of the womens’ role was to subtly (or overtly) pressure customers to get the hell out of Dodge by standing behind them, pointedly asking them if everything was ok, and even seating customers at tables that were already occupied. Koreans eventually learned different eating behaviors for fast food restaurants, but at the time it was a major battle with the future profitability of the company at stake! The idea of eat-and-run in any place that wasn’t serving off the streets is a relatively new one.

Even now, Koreans conceptualize their bill as not just a payment for food, but also for time. Service is way down on that list.

Good stuff -- I remember other such interesting conversations from discussions over the entrance of Starbucks into Korea when editing a paper for the Korea Journal a while back called "From Strange Bitter Concoction to Romantic Necessity: The Social History of Coffee Drinking in South Korea." It's very, very interesting stuff, and you can download the compete PDF below, as well as from the link above.

The short version? Here's the abstract:

This paper explores the notions of Korean, American, and global identities as shared among Koreans by examining coffee drinking practices and the meanings associated with them. This research shows that coffee drinking is a useful window through which to view the diverse dimensions of contemporary Korean society, and produces and represents various identities of Koreans in the global world. As this research into the case of the Starbuck espresso chain demonstrates, the expansion of multinational business as part of the process of globalization and global business` interaction with indigenous cultures clearly show us how "universalization of particularism" and "particularization of universalism," respectively, operate in the border-crossing of food cultures. Furthermore, the Korean consumption of Starbucks coffee is not only a simple or passive adoption of American consumption products but an active process of selecting and creating their own modes of consumption, and participating in constructing a "global modernity." But the "globality" that is put together and constructed in an American way, as is the case with Starbucks, is already quite familiar and powerful for many Koreans.

More fascinating stuff can be downloaded from my workplace at the Korea Journal site, where you can search their database and out pops a complete journal article, with a database indexed all the way back to 1961. You don't get many free resources like that. Bookmark and remember it! We'd be happy to know people were using the database more.

Paper titles of interest from the same issue:

"Reinventing Korean Food: National Taste and Globalization"

"Colonial Modernity and the Social History of Chemical Seasoning in Korea"

"Rice and Koreans: Three Identities and Meanings"

Way to get things going, fellow K-bloggers. From ExpatJane to me to ZenKimchi and FatManSeoul, hopefully this conversation about food and culture can continue to reveal more fascinating things worth thinking about when it comes to the politics of what we eat and where.

Setting Up Hapless American Entertainers and the Rising Tide of Intellectual Thuggery

"Welcome to Korea!"

Read this post I made over at the Marmot's Hole about what the Korean press corps tried to do to RUN-DMC.

I attended that press conference and was totally disgusted with how the Korean press corps not only asked the question -- and what did they expect this American entertainer in Korea for the first time to know about a hot-button political issue that has nothing whatsoever to do with what he does or why he came to Korea in the first place -- but they pushed THREE times to get a "clearer" answer (i.e. the one they wanted to hear).

Is it really this bad? If Pak Se-ri went went to France and the French press corps grilled her for what she thought of the behavior of Muslim youth and the meaning of the rioting there, I'd rightfully be like "WTF?"

I don't know how well I am conveying the feel and granularity of the atmosphere over here, but the attitude on the streets these days is simply ridiculous. The only thing that bothers me is that when the ludicrousness of much of individual and collective behavior is pointed out, there will be no sense of ownership for how dumb one's own thoughts or actions were, which will therefore not lead to any introspection, which will therefore mean no one will have really learned from the experience.

The atmosphere is one of intellectual thuggery -- oh, and physical thuggery as well. Christ in Heaven -- one of the nicest guys I know was stabbed last week, requiring 42 STAPLES to the arm that he instinctively raised to protect his ribcage, which is where the broken bottle wielded by one of his two Korean assailants was aimed.

People say that I am losing perspective because of all these acts of violence being committed on friends and acquaintances of mine, a sudden rise in just the last 1-2 years. But I would pose another idea: perhaps this is a justifiable concern, considering the rise in stories of anti-violence I hear through the grapevine, the sheer number of cases of victims whom I personally know (and have seen their casts, bandages, or scars), and the seemingly concomitant rise in outright racist/violent representations of foreigners in the media here.

It isn't a radical argument, really: that foreigners are the easy "whipping boy" of a society that increasingly represents them as criminal threats to "their" women, children, and even safety on the streets. YTN reports of the streets not being safe, that we bring "AIDS", or any combination of idiotic representations that would cause Koreans to absolutely LOSE IT if such representations of Koreans were in currency in American media today.

And for apologists for all this -- at what point do you cut a culture slack for not having societal experience dealing with Otherness, and at what point do you have to just call racism and violence what it is?

And now, do we REALLY have to drag hapless guests into all this? Like an entertainer who said BEFORE being grilled about grilling meats that he does NOT like POLITICS or DIVISIVE ideologies, and that his love for hip hop comes out of the common ground it creates between the cultures it permeates?

Was the Korean press corps even FUCKING LISTENING? Obviously not, as they tried to drag DMC into probably the most politically charged issue in Korea right now, knowing FULL WELL how sensitively his words would be parsed, even as they also knew he knew ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about this particular issue.

GREAT setup, guys. If you're going to ask a pointed question, like the one I did during the press conference, at least relate it to HIP HOP and the music the entertainer actually PERFORMS. Because that's why he's here -- NOT to talk about the details of the KORUS FTA and the politics of US beef imports.

I am calling the members of the press who not only asked the question, but pushed it so hard that the Hard Rock rep had to ask them to stop, INTELLECTUAL BULLIES and of questionable journalistic ethics. And when I post the MP3 of it, I will try to find out which paper asked what, name them here, and email them a copy of this URL.

When will Korean folks realize that such selfish and disrespectful behavior, in the end, only hurts Korea? Possibly turning a performer completely off on Korea for a SOUND BITE? Seriously -- I wasn't pissed as much because I was being defensive of DMC as an American as much as I was EMBARRASSED FOR KOREA.

For those who missed it, here's the resultant news story from NoCut News. I comment on it in-depth on the Marmot's Hole.

"DMC says 'In the importation of American beef…the safety of the people is most important.'"

Jeez.

The Jeong of Poo

I do admit that my previous post was a bit more snide and sarcastic than is helpful (thanks, JH) if one reads this post alone, So I thought I'd explain my own emotional rationale more clearly, since I think my own irritation and derision is coming out a little too strong and stinking up the whole dish.

My main emotional basis for having an allergy to the Korean left has to do with thinking that any "side" that smears with dung the house of the scientist PD Diary, or throws human feces at Lotte Department Store workers (I would understand top management a bit more, rather than workers in a similar class position as the protesters!), or who regularly engage in violence then try to blame it on the police -- I simply have very little sympathy for them, since I have no respect for them. To the extent that the American left sometimes veers into the realm of the irritatingly thickheaded, my hackles do go up for them as well. I try to keep the same standards for both sides. Unfortunately, I think the Korean protesting style is far deeper into the realm of what I call morally offensive and contradictory behavior than in the American left.

[Source]

Obviously, this is informed by perhaps an American tradition of non-violence in protesting that is the legacy of the Civil Right movement, but even that was informed by the commonsense calculation that violent protests don't garner much support, no matter how right one is, and that allowing the other side to embarrassingly display the immorality of its position by its own actions was a better move while the side of "right" simply held its moral and physical ground. That's obviously where I'm coming from.

And my feeling is that the protesters were instigating violent responses from the police and waiting with their cameras (and I knew they would eventually get violent, especially in front of a sympathetic crowd of civvies), which is why I refused to allow my high school students to go, even when some parents in the school were giving permission. Everyone insisted that this was a non-violent "candlelight vigil", like back in 2002-2003, none of which ever got violent. I knew, though, that the anti-FTA people were wolves in sheep's clothing, but it wouldn't stay so.

Guess who was right?

What I can't abide is how parents show up with their children (I've seen a picture of this) to these things, then blame the government for the inevitable shenanigans that ensue. It's like going to an anti-World Bank protest in Seattle, knowing the history of these kinds of protests, and being shocked when windows are broken and their children exposed to bad life examples. Given the history and behavior of a different kind of protest, in contrast, American anti-Iraq War protests were large, effective in their goals, and peaceful. I would allow my children to see such an example of democracy in action.

Perhaps this speaks to "cultural" differences, but one has to admit that these differences do occupy different ticks on the moral compass as well. One involves violence, one does not. One involves mental violence against fellow workers in a similar class position, the other does not.

Korean protesting style involves making as much noise as possible and being so annoying that everyone wants the problem to go away. Hence, the playing of loud and irritating music in front of the bank/building you're striking from at 7 in the morning on Sunday morning (which was the case in my neighborhood for 1.5 YEARS!) -- how many bank workers were there on Sunday morning? That'd be a zero. This was holding a gun to the people living in the neighborhood to do something, or else! Or else, no sleep for you.

You know, I'm radical enough to even accept this as an appropriate tactic, if that's when you want to stage your protest. The problem is that NONE OF THE PROTESTERS ARE THERE. They just send a van with a speaker, and a guy to man it. Guess he picked the short straw -- the rest of them are asleep in their beds. I can't abide that -- one should have the decency to at least SHOW UP for one's own protest.

The same is true of the speaker placed outside carious buildings in Myeongdong, where I work -- no protesters to be seen. Or the idiots who physically attacked me at the NewCore building, after a kindly ajumma protester told me to go in the back entrance if we wanted to return a pair of shoes. Hey, we were technically crossing the picket line, but we had also ASKED, and had been there just two hours before, when there WAS no picket line. And none of the people in view seemed angry or about to get violent about it -- they were sitting on the ground chatting and chilling. In fact, she was the one who told me to go in the back entrance. But then again, they were all in their 50's, and actually worked in the store. The ones who attacked me out of the blue were all 20-somethings with the red vests on and seemingly without the possession of the any common sense.

If you can't convince someone to not cross your picket line out of the moral force of the argument, what right do you have to touch them? Or restrain them? And what use is it, anyway? Not crossing picket lines is something you have to CONVINCE people not to do -- not physically restrain them from doing. This isn't 1880's America, nor 1960's Korea -- both labor and protest movements have come a long way since then, and have access to each others' histories. And I hold them morally responsible for their actions.

Saying this is not right for a foreigner to say anything, or to even be angry about this, is in itself not right. I live here, pay taxes, rent, and participate in the economy. I want the right to eat American beef not because I am American and the special American cell or genes or DNA I allegedly possess will interact with the special Americanness of American beef in a cold fusion reaction of nationalist recognition that will cause me to stand up and sing the Star-Spangled Banner, tears streaming down my cheeks, as I stuff my mouth full of American hamburger and steak -- which Koreans STILL mistakenly think Americans eat every day.

No, I am not even ANGRY about not being able to eat beef at 1/5 of the price it's presently being sold. If people want to carry out their political protests, so be it. If the people are slightly inconvenienced, I'm also willing to accept that. The traffic problems that result from large protests are to be accepted -- I can buy that as part of people's democratic right to fight the powers that be.

But the reason I am angry is because of the unreasoning, irrational, mentally and physically violent nature of both the hardcore, professional protesters (from whom this is, unfortunately, to be expected, even if not accepted), as well as the unthinking reception that turns the majority of Korean people I meet into Korean versions of the Red Guard.

And anyone who has been here, either in times of late or in late 2002, knows what I mean. I know a lot of Koreans now in their late 20's and early 30's who chuckle at the silliness of 2002, and lip service was given to that fact when the Cho Seung-hui incident happened, and Koreans were all shocked and impressed that Koreans weren't being assaulted and chased down in the streets. They certainly expected to be, which is why many Korean exchange students were seen going into hiding, or at least not going to school for a couple weeks. News stories were done on both sides of the ocean on this phenomenon, although there was some irritation and offense taken on the American side, since no one really expected that to happen.

Yet, on the Korean side of the water, both foreigners and Koreans alike knew what would happen were the situation reversed. Say some American guy popped caps in dozens of people, taking the lives of around 20 of them, some of them children. Jeezus -- I wouldn't leave my house for a month. And not doing so would be justified. Koreans know this. Foreigners living here know this. We know how different the Korean reaction would be -- and regardless of history, or culture, or whatever else explanative matrices get activated to let Koreans off the moral hook, in the end, hate crimes would have been committed here in large numbers, whereas that simply did not happen in the US.

After Cho Seung-hee, what are typical major news stories, specifically about Korean kids coming to study in the US? Not only a puff piece on how foreign language high schools are "heaven" for Korean kids coming to study in the US, but a more interesting cultural angle piece on the "goose father" syndrome and sending more Korean kids overseas.

My point? That yes, the American media is more responsible, and holds itself up to higher journalistic standards than the Korean media. Has it always been? No. Are there markedly different histories between our democratic traditions and the government's relationship with the media? Of course.

But that doesn't change the force of my critique. One side is still markedly unprofessional, doesn't double-confirm sources, doesn't take notes or record during interviews, and even regularly engages in the making up of facts in stories as a common practice. The other side engages in such practices at great professional peril. The blacklisting of a photographer for altering a piece of foreground in a West Bank picture, or the infamous Jayson Blair case are actually examples of overall journalistic integrity in the US, and reassuring. Because the exact practices that caused the ends of careers and huge professional embarrassment to entire organizations are common practice in Korean journalism.

And hence, one point of my argument -- that the Korean media's unprofessionalism was a huge source of the problem in this case -- should be clear, and it is a problem particular to Korea, not a function of the dismissive "well, it's the same anywhere." No, it isn't.

And if you push a Korean friend on the opposite side of the fence, as I have started to very recently, by asking the question, "Do you mean to tell me that you think Korean journalism has the same standards as American journalism?" the answer will be clear. Koreans are very dissatisfied with their OWN newspapers and journalism. Everyone was a media expert and amateur omsbudsman when "PD Diary" revealed Hwang Woo Suk's Great Lie to the people. They received death threats and the show was taken off the air for some time. People criticized their means of new gathering, their journalistic ethics, their sources, on and on. But it was all for naught, since the conclusion was ever the same -- he had lied, he had fabricated data. In the end, the conclusion was hard, concrete, incontrovertible. The public shrieking for blood had no choice but to reluctantly -- very reluctantly -- give it up.

But what makes the Korean public so willing to believe everything coming out of PD Diary's mouth this time, and with claims that seem so obviously sensationalistic and scientifically questionable this time? Where are the amateur omsbudspeople now? What's the difference?

I say, and I'll say it again, is that the factors are different this time and boosted by political winds puffing the sails in the same general direction -- patriotic sentiment, dissatisfaction with the government, and a healthy dose of anti-Americanism.

Actually, the shitstorm that took place in the wake of PD Diary's revelation took place along nearly the same fault lines: How dare the show disgrace the nation like that? Why didn't the government know better than to trust such a man? Isn't this just the Americans trying to take away a small nation's pride? Few remember that in the immediate wake of the revelation, there was some pushing to focus attention on perhaps the other lead American author having been the problem and trying to pass it off on Hwang. These things get lost in the shuffle of the big story, especially if you're not looking hard.

My thing is, one has every right to hold the fire right under the ass of the Korean media, to call "idiots" people who act as such, to expect people to hold higher critical thinking standards for themselves, especially when they do hold them, to a fault, for any issue not related to foreigners or hot-button issues such as American beef, or middle school girls who get run over by an American armored car, or even some speed skater named Ohno, who did nothing but compete to win. If anyone should have been vilified, it should have been the referee who made the bad call. That is, IF you're going to embarrass your collective self by vilifying anyone over a sports call.

People who say I'm a cultural imperialist, or some unapologetic nationalist for holding people to high moral standards, or who constantly say that "you can't compare" are actually doing the very thing they're accusing ME of doing, on a deeper level. Sure, I try to stick to my self-defined standards I outlined in my "Why Be Critical" post, but the funny thing is that this is one of the areas in which KOREANS COMPARE THEMSELVES ALL THE TIME. Journalistic standards, media responsibility, and even these days, the excesses of kneejerk nationalism -- they're all being constantly reexamined and lamented by a lot of Korean folks.

People bemoan the low quality of all kinds of newspapers here all the time (with the exception of their newspaper), wonder why Korean television is so crappy (with the exception of the drama they happen to like), and now generally dismiss the "danil minjok" idea as silliness (except when one attacks a sacred cow they happen to like). But the critiques and the comparisons are there. As is the inherent problem that one can't say anything about anything in a society without resorting to some degree of generalization, since patterns of thought and behavior DO exist; it's just most important to be careful about the limit of one's claims.

But if I really did "look down" on Korea, if I were reproducing the mode of thinking of a 1930's-era, white, American anthropologist studying the Hmong for the first time in Western scholarship, I'd just simply dismiss their "emotionalism" as "quaint and unavoidable", since they are simple people who don't know any better. Who haven't been given a modern education. Who hadn't been exposed -- incessantly, no less -- to our own media, infused largely with the same values, whose very government and nation-state hadn't been intertwined with our own since its very inception in 1948.

The Korean people aren't a subject of colonialistic anthropological study, nor do they deserve such kid glove treatment. To me, that's the ultimate insult to Koreans -- well, there's nothing you can do about it -- they're KOREAN, after all. To me, there are no fixed, inherent aspects to being "Korean", and no reason to invoke the Federation's "prime directive" of non-interference, because the Koreans are not some pre-contact people living in the Amazonian rain forest.

To me, the ultimate respect is to get out there and treat the Korean "side" of the argument as equals, and not as children to be humored, constantly "pardoned", or given a free pass when intellectual thuggery rears its occasional head, or when rampant emotionalism gets amplified by political dissatisfaction and nationalism to the point of no longer being anything other than a problem to itself.

In any case, one can debate with my points of fact, with my logic, has the right to get down and dusty with my arguments. But to say, like some foreigners and many Koreans do, that I don't have either the right to say something, or that someone like me is being inherently colonial in criticizing at all. I don't think that's fair to say, and in the end, doesn't do "Korea" any good.

[Source]

The only argument on the other side is about "Korea's image" in the world -- but I think that's a pretty weak argument, especially considering the fact that Koreans themselves, both as individuals who create negative impressions by virtue of drunken shouting at foreigners, racist patterns of media representations of them, overzealous government and media persecutions of any foreign company that dare turn a profit on Korean commodities, as well in the aggregate by attracting undue international attention in a kneejerk nationalist mode over thing such as sports calls, traffic accidents, and "mad cow" beef -- Koreans seem to be doing a pretty good job of tarnishing any international "image" all by themselves. Or the fact that foreign investment has dropped to nearly nothing, small hagwons are having trouble staying open because the number of foreigners is apparently dropping, and that the racial harassment experience is getting common enough to appear in major American newspapers now -- why aren't people worried about the "national image" then? I'd say word-of-mouth bad PR trumps any "Korea, Sparkling" video, even if you put Rain in it.

To me, the ultimate respect is caring enough to roll up one's sleeves, cancel one's appointments for the day, and put one's energy into dealing with your friend or family member. If I truly didn't give a flying frack, or had washed my hands of this place, I would have left a long time ago. Or I would actually treat them like immature, petulant children.

One doesn't spend the time I do writing this blog or engaging in the real work that I do outside of it -- of which, unfortunately, doesn't get reflected in a public way such that I appear more well-rounded than I do here, which is where I vent and try to mount some kind of social critique that gets above the emotional noise floor of my intense frustrations with this society -- one doesn't expend this kind of energy if one doesn't truly consider oneself part of the family, or the group.

I bitch and moan and complain and don't leave. Most Koreans who see couples like that stick together even when they're bristling and being irritated at each other would call that "jung" -- the mystical, allegedly especially Korean force that binds people together far more permanently than the seemingly "stronger" forces of fleeting romantic love or friendships of convenience. That's gotta be why I'm in Korea -- it's the jeong, people. Because the girls in short dresses, beautiful palaces, and the other "sparkling" aspects of Korean life just can't be the explanation.

I ask myself the same question from time to time, but I do at least know the answer when it comes up. Thank God, because otherwise, I'd have packed it all up years ago.

Let's Make a Point...

As someone always up for making creative points, would anyone with artistic skills like to assist in making a satirical cartoon illustrating the folly of making racism-tinged generalizations? Here's one that comes from a Korean blogger (HT to the Marmot):

I wrote a comment on his blog asking how Koreans would feel if American newspapers and bloggers started making cartoons based on sweeping generalizations of certain minority groups appearing in the news, as in the Koreans such as Cho Seung-hui or more recently, Choi Kang-hyuk.

A cartoon of say, a sweat-drenched, crazed Korean man clutching a knife dripping with blood in one hand, and a Tech-9mm in the other one outta do it. It would go in a mock post, and the point will be made that this is a shoe-on-the-other-foot kind of thought experiment, and not our actual opinion.

Of course, certain netizens would try to lie and say that we really believed in this, but those idiots would just spread the word, while hopefully the Korean press would get ahold of it. Who knows? The worst that'll happen is that it'll go unnoticed. The best is that it would be.

I'd do the illustration myself, but I can't draw to save my life. Anyone care to collaborate and make a point with me? Rather than phone calls that go unreturned, or online petitions/protests that go unnoticed, let's get creative.

And turnabout is always fair play, especially when the other guy is even more sensitive than you are to low blows. Playing to the Korean sense of national pride and "image" just might be an effective strategy in this case, methinks.

A Voice of Rationality

CORRECTION: An astute reader pointed out an error in this post, which is pertinent to what I'm saying and should be noted:

"김 교수는 자신의 논문에서 밝힌 광우병의 위험성을 적극 알리지 않았다는 이유로 '분뇨 테러'까지 당한 것으로 전해졌다. 광우병 논란 사태가 불거진 후 몇몇 사람들이 집에 찾아와 욕설을 하며 동물 분뇨를 뿌렸다는 것이다. "

which describe that the shit terror occured prior to him making the statement revealing the truth, not after the fact. The actual reason for the shit attack was because he did not actively spread the word of danger to the public as 'described' in his research paper, not because he turned around to say 'no thats not what it says.'

Duly noted, although I still don't think it says much for the rationality of the protesters in attacking an innocent researcher, it is an important point. I just skimmed through the article and trusted the summarized translation of others, instead of fact- and error-checking myself. I stand corrected. Thanks, Greg.

------------

I love being right. I really do.

No, I'm not a scientist, as certain irrational people point out -- I love when people point out the obvious -- but I am a reasonable, educated person who has the ability to discern substance from, ahem, bullshit. (Yes, I am trying to be "punny.")

So -- as I've been saying from the beginning, when I have been taking people to task for 1) not really knowing what the actual source was for the "Korean genetic predisposition to mad cow disease" argument, and 2) for misinterpreting what even the apparent meaning of that statistic is -- the media and the general populace has been freaking out over nothing. Let me repeat:

It has not been established that American beef is any more unsafe than any other country's beef.

And so says the author of the scientific paper being (mis)used by PD 수첩, crazed netizens, petrified students, and anti-American FTA activists (who must be complimented for an amazing PR coup, since this was, admittedly, a master stroke of political theater and manipulation):

국내 광우병 사태를 촉발한 ‘한국인 광우병 취약’ 논문의 저자인 김용선 한림대 의대 교수는 자신의 논문이 일부 언론에 의해 과장 보도됐고 정치적으로 악용됐다고 주변 인사들에게 말한 것으로 확인됐다.

김 교수는 4일 한림대 의대 학장 자격으로 핀란드의 헬싱키 의대 등과의 업무 협의를 위해 윤대원 한림대 이사장 등과 함께 핀란드로 출국했다.

6일 헬싱키 시내 호텔에서 만난 윤 이사장은 기자에게 “김 교수의 논문은 일부 미디어에 의해 부풀려졌고 이를 다시 정치권이 마녀사냥 식으로 악용하고 있다”고 말했다.

I put it in Korean so it's clear to the several commenters who seem to take my critique of the poor critical thinking skills of the media and political groups as proof of my arrogance (guilty as charged, since I consider the rantings and ravings of stupid people, umm, stupid, and I don't consider myself stupid), or proof of me, once again, "hating" Korea. (You can read the English-language breakdown of the article quoted above at the Marmot's Hole.)

Well, it's not surprising, since the author of the study has had his house attacked by shit-throwing idiots. And I don't mean that in the rhetorical sense -- I mean that people have actually found his house and thrown shit at it. If even the author of the study in question gets shit on, is it surprising that anyone with lesser authority (ohhh -- I'm not a scientist!) would get the same treatment? Because we all need to be scientists or other specialists to make critical judgments of obviously faulty logic or specious claims, right?

We should be a clear expert or authority to make any claims? Kim Yong-seon has that authority! "He said Koreans are 94% more likely to...umm...I don't really understand it, but...anyway! He said it! See!"

But then that very authority turns around and says, "No. That's not what it says. You're wrong."

So people start throwing shit at his house, and he's afraid to even come back to Korea from his research trip. The man's nearly in hiding. And what did he do to deserve this? Umm, absolutely nothing. Lovely.

What is more obvious is that PD 수첩's research is shoddy and unprofessional -- I've said it before. And I'm right again: obviously, they never even contacted the professor to discuss the meaning of his paper. Otherwise, they wouldn't have made it the center of their claims, linking it with other specious claims.

The point is -- to those of you getting on my case for pointing out that the statistic looked fishy and taken completely out of context -- you need to ask yourself why it was so obvious to someone like ME that the "94% genetic predisposition" claim looked very suspicious, and NOT to someone like YOU. What separate us? Nationality? Genetics? What neighborhood in Seoul I lived in? Or perhaps my school names?

It's critical thinking skills, people. Link that with a little basic understanding of logical and statistical fallacies, a rudimentary understanding of the science we all should have learned in high school, as well as not being beholden to a slavish belief in "authority," or the petty maneuverings of a self-interested few of what is clearly a highly-politicized issue -- and you get the ability to not be driven into irrational hysteria over a minor trade dispute.

Does this make me arrogant? If so, I guess I'm arrogant, then.

Does pointing this out make me an asshole? If so, I guess I gotta be an asshole, then.

Does this make me anti-Korean? Again, I'm just pointing out what I consider to be the overreactions of the irrational. By some people's standards, that makes me "anti-Korean," I guess. Hmm.

But then again, by "some people's standards," this innocent professor who did nothing but write a paper on an issue that people not only didn't properly understand, but actively misused for political gain, and when he simply clarified the actual meaning of the research being misused by intellectual brownshirts (and I use the term "intellectual" hesitantly), a completely innocent academic who literally has been dragged into a political shitstorm now has cow dung being thrown at his house and fears for his physical safety.

I guess that makes me, him, and anyone else who raises a voice outside of the mass-mind of the angry crowd, "anti-Korean," right? But to the mob, what does the truth -- nay, even mere rationality -- matter? "You're either with us or against us." Or, as the great Captain Jean-Luc Picard once ominously warned while under the assimilative mind control of cybernetic alien nanoprobes, "You WILL become one with the Borg."

"대~한민국!"

Noooooo!

While my personal distaste for the Wonder Girls is well-known, this takes the ca -- err, ddeok.

Nooooooooo! The humanity! Oh, the humanity! (HT to Stephen!)

Hehe - I Called It!

Six months ago, baby! So, with all that Speed Racer prep and being denied a chance to come on Colbert last year because they wouldn't allow him to use a translator [didn't reader Cat drop the beans on that one?], it seems that Rain has been brushing up on his English.

Now, let the dance competition begin!

"Kickin' It in Keumchon!"

I am, apparently, late to the party. And the video almost makes me want to go to Keumchon. Almost.

That was stupid fly dope, not to mention funky fresh, guys! Keep kickin' it!

This Just Takes the Cake

OK -- I just about popped a gasket when I saw this. The important points (where they chopped together "negative" things she said) are where she jokingly said the facilities in Russia were old and the bathrooms smelled, but then she went on to say how not upgrading keeps things safe, how that's different from the accidents that happen at NASA, which always upgrades with fancy and expensive, new equipment, and how much she respects those who went up and died before her is a point she emphasizes in two videos, if memory serves. And it's also about two years ago and before she was chosen as the final candidate. Before even that, they take a snippet where she said that she'd buy her mom a house if she got rich and famous, but that was 2 summers ago, and she also happened to say she'd give to science programs and help fund one at KAIST as an example to other Koreans of how to use that power. But that's not what you get in the video. And that's just where they abused MY footage. They've got more.

[If you can't see the video, click here to the direct link.]

OK, I'm not sure how the Korean law applies here to attacking a person and what defines the Korean equivalent of "defamation", I can't be the one who would sue them for that, even if that's possible. But I could get them for copyright violations. As far as I understand copyright law, you can excerpt segments for educational purposes as well as for critique, but my understanding is that you still have to attribute. Hmm. I'm foggy on this, and any help would be appreciated.

As for the legitimate suggestion that I should just let things like this pass, I'd suggest you do a Naver search for 이소연 (Yi Soyeon) and look at what comes up in the video section. It's ridiculous. Or, you could check out the "Anti-Yi Soyeon Cafe" on Daum.

Link here.

It's amazing how much energy certain Koreans are putting into thinking about the monetary value of the space program all of a sudden, or are so eager to believe the ridiculous assertions that people are putting up. And now, they're even blaming Soyeon for the stupid questions SHE'S being asked by reporters, for example, how much she has swollen or gained 5cm in height. Those were stupid "issues" brought up by the idiotic Korean press corps, and now she's being attacked as if she was speaking out of vanity.

Here's the article that will be up on Ohmynews.com either today or tomorrow, as it's getting translated. I think it says what I need to say, although my English version is a bit rough. They edited my repeated points down a bit. Hence, the advantage of having an editor.

I'll link to the Ohmynews story here when it goes up. My goal here is to get the other angle on the Soyeon-attacks out there -- that it's totally misplaced, dishonest, and just vicious -- and look at the other issues that I think are mixed in here: how Soyeon's trip is actually stepping all over some very touchy Korean hotspots, as she violates certain rules of her gender, age, status, and even region, her being from Kwangju.

This, on top of the intense levels of intense jealousy that one often sees displayed whenever someone receives something more than the rest of the group (I think it's important that she won a spot in an open contest, rather than come out of the Air Force as a test pilot or something equally elitist). I think a lot of things are coming together in and around Soyeon that would make for some very interesting international press treatment.

----------

Wow. As the maker of the "UCC" interviews of Yi Soyeon that have been going around the Korean Internet, I am a bit shocked and disappointed to see some people twisting Soyeon's frank and honest words made in a Shinchon coffee shop in 2006, before the marketing term "UCC" was even invented in Korea. Made by a foreigner (me), for a foreign audience (such shows are called "podcasts" in the US), she was far, far from being an "우주인." She was just my friend who had done well in this interesting contest, since she had made it to the final 30 in Korea's Astronaut program.

Who could imagine where she would be 2 years later? At the time, I was interviewing interesting people in Seoul, and I had found her insider experience with this program interesting. If she made it to the final 2, it would be so great that it would be nearly unimaginable -- I just thought it was really cool to have made it as far as she had. And she herself said so. She was humble, and was so surprised and happy to have made it that far. She talked about her dreams, why she became interested in science, and how the process was affecting her life. And as she progressed through the process, of course we made another video, after she had made the final 10, and what was interesting to notice was how quickly she was maturing, how well she was growing into the role of great responsibility that was now becoming all the more real.

By the third video, shot after she had made it to the final two, she had become much more serious about her role, because now, it had now become her reality. She would go through the training, and it was just as likely as not that she would go into space. I never interviewed her after the final decision was made, since I never had the chance and now, this was SBS's territory; I just found it poignant and fascinating to watch an everyday person grow into a public figure before one's eyes.

But that's not how certain Korean netizens took it. Partially based on sloppy journalism as found in the in the Donga.com article called "우주인 이소연의 솔직한 지구인 이야기", her words were misquoted, twisted, and taken completely out of context to a point that even I had never even imagined. The DongA.com article merely misquoted her, emphasized certain aspects of what she had jokingly said in 2006 with the headline “돈 벌어 엄마한테 아파트 선물”, and did so did so without properly attributing the source of the video, which was readily available, so that people could judge for themselves. To just read the DongA.com article or the words of some Korean netizens after that, Soyeon had joined the space program to get rich. Or perhaps it was to promote this "UCC" -- a concept that did not even exist in Korea at that time (remember that the large media companies started pushing this marketing term around Auhust 2006) Or perhaps she was going to space just to promote my web site, which Soyeon also jokingly said she would support? But if you watch the interview from the beginning, you would know she didn't even know about which site that was.

Firstly, it's amazing to see how little respect major UCC media companies and Korean bloggers have for copyright and intellectual property. Instead of taking my video and cutting into chunks that totally eliminate the context of much of what Soyeon actually said and how she said it, people should have just left the intact video as it was, so people could at least see for themselves. And I think, "Why cut out parts, especially when the other parts make the point you're trying to prove silly?" My point is, anyone presenting an excerpt from this video is suspicious. Simply watching the video, knowing when it was shot and why, you can see that the assertions being made by certain netizens are patently ridiculous. I shouldn't need to convince you. Just watch the video from beginning to end.

Then, you would have seen that any comments about "what would you do if you make it?" were no more real to her than if I asked any of you "What would you do if you became President?" when you were a child, but then upon becoming an adult, it really happens. I'm sure if one does become president, one's choices and sense of responsibility would be far more serious than when you were just an everyday person. And this is just what Soyeon was when she sat down with me for a cup of coffee that day in Shinchon in 2006.

If people didn't cut the video up into little pieces, you would see that this was a conversation between a FORIEGNER and her; you should also notice that the entire video was subtitled -- it's made for FOREIGN audiences, made BY a FOREIGNER. No one was interested in "UCC" in Korea at the time. No one was interested in Soyeon, either. In fact, most Koreans weren't even really interested in their own space program. But a few foreigners like myself found it interesting, and I decided to record her experiences in it. So the stupid conversations about "how will this look overseas?" are simply just that -- stupid. That firrst video was up on YouTube for about a year-and-a-half, and making very positive impressions about Soyeon as well as Korea far, far before the Korean audience learned about it, or cared.

Perhaps this is telling: I put it on MNCast and Daum, and there was nearly no reaction. No one cared, and I didn't expect them to. Almost no one watched it.

And the reaction on YouTube? Overwhelmingly positive. People remarked about what a great sense of humor she has, how humble she is, how intelligent her answers are, and how mature she seemed -- even from the beginning, far before she was actually chosen. The fact that she was a woman was a sign to most foreigners that Korean society was becoming more liberal and fair towards women, and even after the other candidate was initially chosen to go to space, all the foreigners I knew were rooting for Soyeon. Especially Americans, we like the underdog. Before Soyeon had even arrived in Russia, I had learned from the blogging community and people linking to my site that the NASA astronauts and people from other space programs had already seen Soyeon through the videos even before they had met her.

What continues to both surprise and disappoint me is that Koreans are still so worried about "what foreigners will think" and still so steeped in 사대주의 that people wring their hands over a few words spoken in passing well before the fact, despite the fact that Soyeon has shown nothing but respect for the people who have come before her at Soyuz, whom she mentions as having died so she can go into space safely, who have developed technology that she has dedicated her life to helping develop back in her home country.

Yet, context doesn't matter when you can simply attack someone out of spite or jealousy, right?

It seems to me that Korea is still so caught up in the psychological scars of bitterness over 사대주의, the national humiliation of having loss its sovereignty, the destruction and horrors of the Pacific and Korean Wars, followed by loss of freedom under dictatorship, rapid development and urbanization, along with the social problems created cutthroat competition for scarce resources, which has manifested in the education system, women feeling the social pressure to define their self-worth primarily through their appearance, and the drive to be first, first, first no matter what the cost, as we saw in the cases of the Sampung Department Store, Seongsu Bridge, Taegu gas explosion, or finally in the case of Hwang Woo-seok.

But in the case of the typical "national hero", he was from the establishment, old, and a man. He "deserved" his fame, right? He fits the image of the national hero. It doesn't matter that he violated ethical protocols to do it. Who cares where the eggs come from, right? When it comes to the nation, it's still "하면 된다" right? And when he's a Seoul National University scientist, an older man with connections, and wearing a white coat, he is names "hero" before the ink even dries on the textbooks. And then "Korea" embarrasses itself.

[Source]

There's a huge unspoken message behind the attacks on Soyeon, and how my videos are being used (stupidly, I think, but they are, nevertheless). It bothers a lot of people that she got into space through a process that had been open to anyone, and that she won it fair and square. It bothers a lot of people that she's a woman. It bothers a lot of people that she's a YOUNG woman. And for certain people, the only place for a young woman is in high heels and behind a cake of makeup, shaking their shoulders and calling them "오빠!" These are the people who seem to be the most offended by Soyeon's mere existence.

For Soyeon, I'm glad she wasn't chosen initially, and it was Ko San's own mistakes that got him disqualified. If she had been the first choice, I think the netizens would have been even worse: "Woman are too powerful" or "She was just chosen for PR because she was a woman!" Ridiculous, in a society that treats men like veritable kings, and a woman I know with a Ph.D. in the sciences was told by her mother-in-law to not work because it "would make her husband look bad." For certain people in Korea, for whom it is still the Joseon Era, Soyeon's success is very, very offensive, indeed.

If people are really concerned, as some say they are, with Korea's national image, then they would stop behaving as they are, for the obvious reasons that they are. It is absolutely shocking to see how eagerly and viciously so many of her fellow Koreans try to tear her down.

When YouTube came to Korea and opened its site, you know what appeared for the first time on Soyeon's videos? Statements appeared for the FIRST time attacking this nanotechnology engineer going up into space for "being too fat" or "having a big head" or just for the apparent crime of being a woman. You know what was the real "나라 망신?" It wasn't Yi Soyeon, but the negative and vicious words of her fellow Koreans, made in front of beweildered foreigners on YouTube. And I sometimes can't keep up with the 악풀, since I delete them. I wonder what the foreigners think of that?

The problem isn't really anything Soyeon said -- it is really the fact that no matter what, so many of her fellow Koreans (especially men) are eager to attack her, eager to tear her down. The content isn't important; vicious netizens would have found something. I think Yi Soyeon represents some very sensitive points in Korean modern society, and is the point at which public notions about ability, fairness, and relative success converge with older notions of traditional related to age, gender, scholastic background, and yes, even regionalism. In short, Soyeon is young, female, outspoken, and obviously articulate about expressing herself frankly. Honestly speaking, how are such women generally regarded in Korean society?

Are Americans perfect? Nope. But I think we have a sense of fairness about the people who become figures of public ridicule. Paris Hilton, Britney Spears, or any popular entertainers who make their own scandals, Americans tend to criticize, too. But do we attack Condoleeza Rice because of the gap between her teeth? She has one, you know. It's very apparent.

[Source]

But is that important to her job, though?

When Sally Ride became America's first woman into space, I can't remember -- and I can't even imagine -- people talking about how she needs to be prettier, or "fix her face" or "she should get rid of her freckles" or something like that. Yet, the Korean media asks the dumbest questions possible on the short and expensive time communicating in space. When I heard about this question, "Which star would you most like to travel to space with?" I just shook my head in embarrassment. This is the level of the broadcast media? Korea should be thankful that Soyeon handled such an obviously stupid question politely when she replied that she would rather take someone qualified to perform experiments with.

[Source]

Korea and the Koreans who live here always seem so concerned with becoming "globalized" or "international" or the "hub" of something. But it takes more than just words and the simple desire to be something in order to make it so. It takes a real change in attitude, a fundamental change in the way of thinking -- not just installing more western-style toilets or sweating bullets worrying about speaking a few words of English to a foreign customer.

What is really embarrassing to the nation? What should Koreans really be thinking about? It's the fact that there is such a strong desire to cut a figure like Yi Soyeon down because she's a woman, or young, or doesn't look like she's had thousands of dollars of plastic surgery. Or insipid questions such as the one noted above, asked in her ISS interview. Is the problem really that Soyeon doesn't take her ROLE seriously, or that really, even the broadcast media sponsoring her doesn't take HER seriously?

[The note at the top of this actual resume reads, "Too old."]

So what is really ironic is watching Soyeon's fellow Koreans abusing her in public on YouTube, while foreigners scratch their heads. These comments call her ugly, fat, a "disgrace to the nation." Yet, our impressions of Soyeon are fine. They are great, actually! In fact, they've been great for nearly TWO YEARS. The only thing that is sad is watching Koreans tear each other down for nothing. This is the only country I know of where netizens drive their stars to suicide. Several times over, in fact.

What is driving this incident isn't anything Soyeon said, but the sheer, pathological desire of certain netizens who have already decided to hate her for no real good reason, other than petty jealousy and traditional prejudices. Really, only in a culture such as this can the old maxim hold true: "If a cousin buys some new land, my stomach hurts."

Now, this is being played out on a national scale, since this was an open competition, and technically, any Korean was eligible. Now, old social prejudices related to age, gender, and region have mixed with new ones related to the hyper-commercialization of nearly everything in Korean society, including the commodification and over-sexualization of female bodies that was embarrassingly pointed out having the South Korean president make his appearance at the space launch ceremony surrounded by young women in tiny skirts, who asked all the questions.

[source]

Is everything in South Korea made more palatable by extremely young women in miniskirts? From a new bakery opening in the neighborhood, the girl selling toothpaste in the grocery store, all the way into space, apparently, a lot of South Koreans seem to think so. Frankly, I think Korea's first astronaut would have gotten less flak if she simply was another plastic surgery toothpick with a magic perm, rather than a nanotech engineer from KAIST with a Ph.D.

[Source]

What is even sadder than a cynical statement like this is the fact that I actually believe it to be true, given a lot of the comments I've read about her, which reveals the deep-seated prejudices and bitter jealousies that many South Koreans seem so eager and willing to display whenever they get the chance. To me, many South Koreans need to think about whether they want to live in the past, along with all the scars and wounds that it has produced, or a future without such petty jealousies and horrible rancor against anyone who seems to be getting ahead of oneself in the hyper-competitive rat race of Korean life.

Until then, the horrible words many South Koreans aim in Soyeon's direction will continue to bewilder many foreigners who see nothing but a spectacular candidate and a great representative for the Korean nation. It's too bad that today's reality is, at least on the global level and Korea's international image, the worst enemies of Koreans are Koreans themselves.