The Media and North Korea (Part 1)

Anyone who calls South Korea home can attest that the presence of a nuclear political enemy just a few hours to the north does not, contrary to certain expectations, pose such a great threat to the day-to-day normalcy of life here. No matter what propaganda North Korea sends out from behind its tightly secured doors, people in the South don't pay much attention.

The same can't be said of Americans, who seem to fear North Korea more than is warranted. I think that the American media has a lot to do with this. While I don't obsess over the latest news pieces that address North Korean issues, I have been paying enough attention to notice that there is a strong negative bias against this subject. Not only is there never good news from North Korea, journalists tend to blow up the bad news, making problems out to be worse or more worrisome than they have to be.

I am not comfortable with the image of North Korea that Americans are being fed. To them, North Korea is a backwards country and a dangerous threat, a nation of brainwashed Communists who are all starving but also diligently training to go to war against the US as soon as the order is given from their dictator-king. It's like our own propaganda, supported by classic American xenophobia and the need for us to have an enemy so that we can feel protected from them. The more I read about North Korea on American news sites, the clearer this bias becomes.

Here's what I've been reading (3 links out of 6; the rest I'll post tomorrow):

While the Rest of North Korea Struggles, Pyongyang's Fortunate Few Go Shopping (TIME, 8/19/13)

This article seems to give some insight into the changes that are occurring in the North Korean economy, particularly highlighting the signs of an emerging middle class in the capital city, Pyongyang. However, it seems to be more important to the author to sharply contrast this with the survival struggles of the rest of the country, providing caveats to each sign of growth previously mentioned and ending with a criticism of the DPRK's human rights issues.

Now, I know that news reports must give a balanced view of any situation, and I don't deny that the social and economic problems in North Korea are very real. But I'm curious to know what the point of this article was, if not to contribute to the already well-established trope of North Korea being an incomparably problematic country. Even the headline says nothing new. The title could have been, "North Korea Is Just as Unequal and Scary as It's Ever Been, Or Maybe a Little More So". Breaking news, everyone.

Life Inside North Korea Revealed by College Student (Yahoo! Flickr moment, 6/13)

Benjamin Jakabek's flickr photostream

This short video (along with second one on the site and an accompanying blog post) displays some photographs taken by a college student who visited North Korea on a guided tour. I genuinely enjoyed seeing his photos and the moments he captured of happiness and leisure in Pyongyang. He visited during May Day, one day out of the entire year when people were allowed to "wander around freely without anyone following them." He got to see kids playing and families having picnics in the park.

On the other hand, I'm not as impressed by his attitude. Thanks to him being a Canadian "with no real political agenda," he was able to visit the "mysterious" country he's always been interested in. I wonder if he realizes how much privilege he actually has, as a white male Westerner with the means to travel? Did he ever reflect on how much his experienced depended on this privileged identity? I was a bit rattled by his insistence that things in North Korea looked normal, as well as his comparison of the morning Communist broadcasting to the daily calls to prayer of Muslim countries. It reeks of exotification.

At least he was smart enough to acknowledge that his tour was very tightly choreographed and monitored, but I'm afraid that what he's sharing, as well as the way in which he's sharing it, does exactly what the North Korean regime wants out of its rich Western visitors: paint a purely positive and humanistic portrait of the country.

It's difficult to strike a balance between constant vilification and broad stroke of propaganda; in my opinion, Jakabek's skewed piece falls too far on the end of the spectrum that brushes aside the country's problems in favor of a slick slideshow. It wasn't really a "glimpse of what ordinary life looks like for North Korea's 25 million citizens," especially since 22 million of them live behind the curtain he tried to peek behind but never did.

In 1983, All of Korea was Crying (KoreaBANG, 7/24/13)

Jo Rim-hwan's photography

Speaking of photography, this article from KoreaBANG has some very touching portraits. It also taught me something I definitely did not know: in the mid-1980's, about the time when South Korea's economy was rocketing skyward while North Korea's began to crumble, a South Korea television show called "Reuniting Separated Families" aired. This show aimed to bring families separated either by the 38th parallel or by other factors surrounding the Korean War, including Koreans who grew up outside of the peninsula. During recording sessions of the show, "thousands of people brought posters and signs to the front of the National Assembly, where television cameras would pass by and give them a chance at a nationwide audience." A Korean photographer took some very sad and moving photographs of them in their desire -- or desperation -- to see their families again.

This hope and heartache is one aspect of South Korea that I have hardly seen. Since the cessation of the Sunshine Policy, attitudes toward reunification and North Korea in general have cooled considerably. I hear South Koreans talk about the shift in public opinion somewhat sadly but without any conviction that things will change for the better (whatever that may entail).

- - -

Well, it does seem as if the links I posted went off tangentially from my main point. I do have a few more to share, but I'll post them tomorrow. I hope you enjoy reading and looking at those photos! What do you think about North Korea and the American media?

Hong Seok-cheon and Korean LGBTQ Culture

From KoreaBang, about a month ago: Gay [Korean] Celebrity Receives Letter from Nephews, Is Moved to Tears.

I was reminded by my host mother that tomorrow is White Day, the unofficial follow-up to Valentine's Day. In Korea, the tradition is for women to give chocolates to their loved ones on February 14th and for men to reciprocate the gesture by giving candy on March 14th. I wonder what gay Korean couples do on these two extremely heteronormative holidays? Probably nothing. To be queer is to be countercultural, so might as well reject the consumerist bent of these "traditions" as well and demonstrate your love with actions, not gifts.

Anyway, LGBTQ culture in Korea is quite subdued and still very much underground (i.e. on the Internet via forums). The US does have its culture wars with their fierce legal battles (California, I'm looking at you), but its queer community also has tons of pride, love, and support. We've got politicians, athletes, entertainers, religious leaders, and moms and dads doing their part to show the world what an accepting society should look like. Hello Neal Patrick Harris, Ellen DeGeneres, Anderson Cooper, Orlando Cruz, Nate Silver, Tammy Baldwin, Rachel Maddow, and Judith Butler!

Hong Seok-cheon (via gooddrama.net)

As for Korea... there is only one openly gay celebrity in the entire country. His name is Hong Seok-cheon, and he's paid dearly for his bravery. When he came out of the closet in 2000, he effectively destroyed his acting career; as the news spread, he was dropped from all his shows and struggled to land other jobs due to the stigma of homosexuality. In recent years, however, he's found success as a restauranteur and has finally begun reappearing on talk shows and in other media without much backlash.

In fact, at least one of Hong's restaurants is in Hongdae, and I'm disappointed that I didn't get a chance to check it out last month when I was living there. My hagwon Korean teacher said she ran into him once in this neighborhood, and that he is a very down-to-earth, funny, and genuine person. From what I've seen and read, I really respect him and his resilience. Most of the younger generation of Koreans also seem to support him and, whether or not they support equal marriage rights, recognize that LGBTQ people also deserve to be happy. Here's to hoping he can be a pioneer and help pave the way for other Koreans to feel safe being their full selves in public.

So what am I going to do tomorrow? Nothing romantic or materialistic, unfortunately. Besides visit Daegu Gyeongbuk Institute of Science and Technology with my students on a field trip, I'll probably scour my city in search of a single bakery that sells pie. Teehee.

Let's Talk About Issues

Tonight was the final community center Korean class of the year, and there were much fewer students and teachers than usual. I suppose most people were busy with travel or end-of-the-year preparations, or maybe they were partying it up since, hey, no work tomorrow! Most of the country will have the day off on the 19th because it's election day. (What a great way to encourage people to vote! Why can't we do that in the U.S.?)

In class, I decided to chat with my conversation partner about the election. It seems to be either illegal or very frowned upon to share who you've decided to vote for in a public forum, so I didn't press the question. I did, however, pick up tons of election-related vocabulary. Here we go:

선거 (seongeo) is election, and 대선거 (daeseongeo) refers to the Presidential election. The two main 후보 (hubo), or candidates, are Park Geun-hye (박근혜) and Moon Jae-in (문재인). There was a somewhat substantial third-party candidate, Lee Chung-hee (이충희), but she declared right from the beginning of her campaign that she was only running in order to get a national platform upon which to attack Park as much as possible, then proceeded to do so, and finally withdrew from the election yesterday. Sneaky woman. But that's a pretty baller way to use politics (정치/jeongchi). Anyway, now Park and Moon are 서로 경쟁하고 있다: competing with each other, and the polls right now show a 박빙, or a very close race.

Park Geun-hye of the Saenuri Party and Moon Jae-in of the Democratic Party. Courtesy Yonhap News.

Park's party is called the 새누리당 (Saenuri Dang), which means the "New World Party". They are politically conservative (보수적), wary of North Korea, and well supported by the older generations and the nation's elite (including chaebols, or business conglomerates like Samsung and Hyundai). They are the party of Korea's troubled string of dictators, who controversially led the country to miraculous economic prosperity despite horrific human rights abuses, as well as the current President Lee Myoung-bak (이명박). Park herself is the daughter of Park Chung-hee, an important figure in modern Korean history. She has been involved in politics essentially as long as her father has, which means she already has strong ties to the government (정부) over which she is trying to gain control.

Moon's party is the 민주당 (Minju Dang), which simply means the Democratic Party. More progressive (진보적), more tolerant, and younger: altogether unsurprising. Moon himself is a lawyer 변호사/pyeonhosa) with less political experience, but he did serve as chief of staff for Roh Moo-hyun, the President of Korea prior to Lee.

I am admittedly not too well informed of the candidates' actual 정치철학 (jeongchicheolhak/political philosophies), knowing little more than what I hear from my Korean friends and read on Koreabang, but since I personally lean somewhat left of center, I think it would be good if the more liberal candidate become President (대통령/daetongryeong). My host family asked me not to write on this blog who they would voting for, despite their having already told me, perhaps due to the public nature of this blog and the aforementioned "keep your vote secret" thing. I can't vote, so my opinion doesn't matter much... but on the plus side, my host parents have promised to take me with them to the polling place tomorrow morning so that I can watch and take photos! This event only takes place once every five years, so I'm excited for the opportunity.

A vigil in NYC for the victims of the Sandy Hook shootings in Newton, Connecticut. Courtesy TIME Newsfeed.

And now for a much sadder 이야기 주제 (topic of conversation)... the Sandy Hook shootings. Like most 소식 (news) from the US, I first grabbed bits and pieces of information from Facebook, and then I went to Buzzfeed and TIME. The story was shocking and awful, but I honestly haven't stopped to mourn or even really think about it. Of course, it was on the news in Korea, but since I'm not surrounded by Americans and because I'm not in America, the issue was never shoved in my face. I actually avoided most of the dozens of articles being written on every corner of the Internet with updates to the story regarding the shooter's background, or more tales of heroism and survival. I just didn't want to confront it.

But tonight at class, and also afterward, I had to confront it. A lull in the conversation with my speaking partner led to the question, "What are your opinions on gun control in the United States?" My Korean tutor was extremely curious. In Korea, personal firearms are illegal, so you can imagine that the number of gun-related deaths in the country is extremely low. Compared to my trigger-happy country, well...

What struck me, however, was that as soon as I thought about the question for a moment, I realized that I actually really did not want to talk about this, least of all in Korean. Not only is gun control a hideously complex issue, it also requires grammar that I don't have yet to explain in a language I still can only barely grasp. But I tried, because that's what this class is for.

이사건에서 문제는 총이 않은데 정신병이었다라고 생각해요. 그 남자 정신병이 앓고 있었어요; 총이없으면 다른 사람을 아직 다치게 할수 있어요. 미국 사회는 총이 너무 좋아하는데 제일 중요한 문제는 정신 건강이예요. 몇 사람의 생각에는 더 많은 총은 더 많은 문제가 있다. 하지만 완전히 금하면 안되요. 이왕 불법총이 이젠껏 많아서 보통 사람들이 총이 받을수없으면 범인은 오직 총을 있을거예요. 그리고 으리 사회 보다 위험해져요. 그런데 이 주제 굉장히 복잡하네요.

Okay, that was probably all over the place in terms of grammar, but here's what I meant to say: "In my opinion, in [the Sandy Hook] incident, the problem was not guns but mental illness. That man was suffering from mental illness; without a gun he still could (have) hurt other people. American society likes guns too much, but the most important problem is mental health. Some people think that more guns means more problems. However, guns should not be completely banned. Up until now, the number of illegal firearms is already so high that if normal citizens are not able to procure guns, then it is only the criminals who will have them. Thus our society will become more dangerous. Anyway, this issue really is extremely complex."

So that is the gist of what I was talking about, reluctantly, with my Korean tutor. I tried to steer the conversation back to the election, but in the end I just announced that I was really sad now and couldn't think of anything else to say.

Late at night, when I returned from Korean class, I chatted with my host parents about the election. But inevitably, just as it had in class, the conversation switched to Sandy Hook and my thoughts on gun control. By this time, I really did not want to talk about it, but I tried my best to rehash the opinions I'd developed earlier. My host parents are fiercely anti-gun, and I could tell that they really didn't understand why "everyone in America has guns". ("Do you have a gun?" my host father asked me. I was too tired to mask my horror at the question.)

I also perceived their utter sorrow at the fact that the shootings took place at a school -- my host parents are both teachers -- and when I mentioned the argument some people have given for equipping teachers with guns, my host mother completed the thought: so that the teachers could have protected the children... There was so much conflict in her eyes. It was really telling.