21 replies to this topic

[WangKon936]

South Korea uses TV dramas in history spat with China

By Jon Herskovitz
Tue Apr 24, 2007 7:13PM EDT

SEOUL (Reuters) - South Korea is fighting a battle with China over ancient history using one of the most powerful weapons in its arsenal -- sappy TV dramas watched by hundreds of millions of viewers in Asia.

The dispute is over whether a 2,000-year-old kingdom, whose lands covered much of the Korean peninsula as well as parts of China, was an ancient Korean royal house or a vassal of China.

At stake is national pride in South Korea where the ancient origins of the Korean people have long been overshadowed by the histories and cultures of neighboring China and Japan.

"The Koguryo issue may be one of the smaller problems that China has but it is everything for Korea. Koguryo symbolizes the identity of Korea," said Kim Woo-jun, a professor at the Institute of East and West Studies at Yonsei University in Seoul.

The spat heated up about two years ago when Beijing announced plans to seek listing for Koguryo sites on a United Nations cultural heritage list, firing up a long-standing campaign by China to claim the kingdom as its own and assert historical ties to lands in its modern borders.

South Korea was incensed. It used diplomacy and academic papers to argue its case but its popular television dramas have proven to be the most powerful tool.

Three South Korean television dramas on the Koguryo kingdom released in the past six months were hits at home and abroad, with scenes of galloping horses, court intrigue and sword fights.

But the television shows raised hackles in China and Hong Kong, where viewers supporting China's claims to Koguryo crossed swords in cyberspace with those defending South Korea's position.

The dispute became so emotive that the user-generated Internet encyclopedia Wikipedia blocked readers from contributing to the section on Koguryo "until disputes have been resolved".

According to Seoul, the Koguryo Kingdom reigned from 37 B.C. to A.D. 668 and was a regional power fighting off Chinese invaders. The territory it once held is now home to many ethnic Koreans who live in China.

In China, scholars say Koguryo was founded in its territory and was a vassal state. They say the descendents of the royal house were assimilated into the Han Chinese people.

HISTORICAL ARGUMENTS

Debates over historical versus modern borders are argued all over the world. But they rarely fire up the passions of television viewers in the way that the argument over the Koguryo kingdom has in North Asia.

Television producer Lee Joohwan's historical drama "Jumong" was a big hit in South Korea where it was a ratings winner. But some Chinese viewers railed against the series on the Internet, branding it a Korean attempt to rewrite history.

A Hong Kong broadcaster went so far as to change the names of the entities in the series to make the show more palatable to its Chinese-speaking viewers.

"Despite the controversy, I don't think the drama would have been popular if it hadn't been interesting," said Joohwan.

The spat over Koguryo's origins rubs salt into wounds in South Korea, which is in the midst of modern day territorial disputes with its neighbors.

Seoul is still arguing with Tokyo over its 1910-1945 colonial rule over the peninsula as well as territorial claims over desolate isles in waters between the two countries.

Many in South Korea also resent China's control over part of a mountain considered sacred in Korean mythology.

Known as Paektu in Korean and Changbai in Chinese, the mountain straddles the China-North Korean border. Communist North Korea, with whom South Korea hopes to reunite in the future, ceded part of the mountain to China, its main benefactor, in 1963.

South Korean speedskaters caused a diplomatic incident when they held up signs saying "Mount Paektu is our Land" at the Asian Games earlier this year.

The Chinese Foreign Ministry summoned a South Korean embassy official to complain about what Beijing considered a political act at a sports event.

A few weeks later, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao tried to play down the controversy over Koguryo during a visit to Seoul.

"Research on the history of ethnic or territorial changes or movements should be based on the principle of separating academia from politics and reality from history ... and should not affect relations between two countries," he told South Korean reporters.

But there is little chance that the dispute will end soon as South Korea prepares to fire a new salvo in the historical debate with the launch of a big budget blockbuster television drama.

"Taewang Sasingi" is the story of what Koreans consider to be one of the greatest kings of Koguryo and will air in September starring Bae Yong-jun, a favorite for fans in many parts of Asia.

(Additional reporting by Jessica Kim)

WangKon936: Okay, I post this article because it summaries a lot of what's been discussed here over the past few months. I am NOT posting this article to start a flame war or anything like that. I will (as well as the other moderators) be keeping a close eye on this posting to make sure comments don't drift out of control and that things don't get overly emotional. So fellas, please keep a level head here. Thanks!

[Danny.T]

Quote :

"Known as Paektu in Korean and Changbai in Chinese, the mountain straddles the China-North Korean border. Communist North Korea, with whom South Korea hopes to reunite in the future, ceded part of the mountain to China, its main benefactor, in 1963."


I am not sure this is true or not. My understanding is Mao Tse Dong ceded about half of Tienzhi Lake and the related section of
Changbai to North Korea at NK request on friendly terms. It is not NK ceded Changbai to China. Before 1963 and considerable time back in history it is under Chinese / Manchurian control. It is common that South Korean newspapers always say that NK ceded Tienzhi Lake and Changbai mountain to China.

Fact twisting reporting makes me feel sad and uncomfortable.

[Intranetusa]

IMO, the Han Dynasty did control half of the Korean pennisula, but modern PRC-China has no valid claim over the same land.

[Borjigin Ayurbarwada]

Modern China never claimed these lands. Koguryo is mostly a historical issue.

[Intranetusa]

Modern China never claimed these lands. Koguryo is mostly a historical issue.

Well, in my history books, it shows the Han empire extending into the Northern half of the Korean pennisula...so I'll side with the viewpoint that Koguryo was a vassal state of the Han empire.

They should invite non-biased, non-aligned historians to debate this issue... :/

[caocao74]

They should invite non-biased, non-aligned historians to debate this issue... :/

Good luck in finding either an objective historian on this subject, or one who will be accepted by the various camps as objective.

[DaMo]

Well, in my history books, it shows the Han empire extending into the Northern half of the Korean pennisula...so I'll side with the viewpoint that Koguryo was a vassal state of the Han empire.

It did for a while from about 108 BC, establishing commanderies around there. But as Koguryo expanded, the Han and succeeding dynasties were progressively pushed back and out of the Korean peninsula, and successfully kept out by Koguryo's armed forces. So I would side with the view that Koguryo was not a real vassal of Han.

[WangKon936]

Well, in my history books, it shows the Han empire extending into the Northern half of the Korean pennisula...so I'll side with the viewpoint that Koguryo was a vassal state of the Han empire.

Well...

Of course you'll see Han territory extend into northern Korea, but that is not in reference to Koguryo, but to the Chinese commandaries after the fall of Go Joseon (i.e. Chaoxian in Chinese) of Lelang, Lintun, Xuantu and Zhenfan. I write more about these commandaries here: http://www.chinahist...p;hl=wangkon936.

[WangKon936]

Good luck in finding either an objective historian on this subject, or one who will be accepted by the various camps as objective.

I would consider several as non-biased:

- Mark Byington, Phd candidate at Harvard, dept. of Korean History
- Gina Barnes, Professor of Japanese Studies, Durham University
- Hyung Il Pai, Associate Professor East Asian Languages and Cultural Studies, University of California, Santa Barbara

Pai is particularly interesting as she is someone who is Korean, but stanchly against Korean nationalistic interpretations of history.

[MengTzu]

I think there's a bit of narrow-mindedness on both sides, not so much on the factual issue, but on how they are approaching this problem.

The thing is, "national history" isn't really rational. Nations overlap. They are constantly redefined in hindsight. I bet if we have a time machine and go back to Koguryo, and tell them about this debate, they might look at us funny and ask us what are China and Korea.

This has nothing to do with the postmodernist notion that everything is a matter of construct. Of course nations exist -- for all PRACTICAL purposes, it's pointless to question their "existence." The problem is that people who support "national history" never bothered to prove that such a thing exists in the first place. What I mean by "national history" is not merely the history of a nation, but the notion that some history belongs exclusively to a nation, and is some sort of property of that nation.

This is why I think United Nations should throw out the whole "national heritage" bull c**p. It's ridiculous.

I can't care less if Koguryo was or wasn't a vassal of China back then. As of the present moment, that land that Koguryo stood on are split between China and North Korea. That's the present reality, and that's all that matters to us now. EVEN if China is right, it's one of the stupid ideas to say that it can claim a land because it was a vassal more than a thousand years ago.

But the television shows raised hackles in China and Hong Kong, where viewers supporting China's claims to Koguryo crossed swords in cyberspace with those defending South Korea's position.

Let me say on behalf of my people -- Hong Kong people -- that I'm very, very sorry and apologetic that even one Hong Kong person would get involved in this. Hong Kong is known for its neutrality in Asian affairs. It is known for liberalism and its cynicism toward such issues. I can assure everyone that the majority of Hong Kong people don't give a c**p about this.

Pai is particularly interesting as she is someone who is Korean, but stanchly against Korean nationalistic interpretations of history.

But that's the way it SHOULD be. I suppose that such historians are so rare among Asians that, achieving such standard level of academic integrity is a noteworthy feat. It's truly, truly tragic. So many Asian "scholars" are still living in the mentality of the 19th century European thinkers.

Edited by MengTzu, 03 May 2007 - 04:31 PM.

[caocao74]

I would consider several as non-biased:

- Mark Byington, Phd candidate at Harvard, dept. of Korean History
- Gina Barnes, Professor of Japanese Studies, Durham University
- Hyung Il Pai, Associate Professor East Asian Languages and Cultural Studies, University of California, Santa Barbara

Pai is particularly interesting as she is someone who is Korean, but stanchly against Korean nationalistic interpretations of history.

I didn't say there weren't any unbiased scholars (I actually was an undergrad under G.Barnes) there; what I said is would they be accepted outside of the academic circles???

[jebusrocks]

Modern China never claimed these lands. Koguryo is mostly a historical issue.

Actually, China tried to claim North Korea as "Chinese Land" and not Korean. I believe UNESCO got that pretty clear that NKorea is a Korean land though

[DaMo]

Actually, China tried to claim North Korea as "Chinese Land"

And when was this exactly?

[WangKon936]

Actually, China tried to claim North Korea as "Chinese Land" and not Korean. I believe UNESCO got that pretty clear that NKorea is a Korean land though

I think jebusrocks is referring to the Koguryo debate. However, the opinion of some Chinese scholars on a long dead civilization is VERY different then claiming territorial ownership. If you want to be a respected contributor to this site, that is a distinction that should be understood.

[Ying Zheng]

Anyone actually seen Jumong? It looks really good. I'm going to be ordering the whole series. Sappy kinda, you're right, it has a soap opera-ish feel, but nonetheless...

Can anyone verify if it's historically accurate? And is the costuming accurate as well?

Thanks,
Ying Zheng

(EDIT: Oops! My question was answered in another thread.)

Edited by Ying Zheng, 13 August 2007 - 03:03 PM.