Korean Wave: Cultural Imperialism vs. Cultural Coexistence

An entry based on this article:

http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/culture/200602/kt2006022620180311690.htm

I stumbled upon a rather interesting article on Hallyu published in the Korea Times over the weekend. The dichotomy of cultural coexistence vs. cultural imperialism was definitely an eye-catcher. Although we have somewhat brought up both nuances in earlier discussions, I believe that a more substantial discussion on the essence of Hallyu’s permanence will be conducted towards the end of the course.

Regardless, as we near the midpoint of our semester, I would like to slightly tease the class’ intellectual capital on this dichotomy – a prelude if you may.

The fact that Japan’s Ritsumeikan University is co-hosting an international symposium on “Korea’s Cultural Power Spreading in East Asia” with Changbi Publishing attests not only to the growing momentum and significance of the Korean Wave, but also to a certain underlining regional nervousness or fear of such a snowballing event. The symposium’s purpose is clear – to dissect and analyze the Korean Wave within a “cultural imperialism versus regional multi-culture-ism” framework.

The author builds the article around the comments of two academics - Lee Wook-yon, a professor of Chinese literature at Sogang University, and Kazuo Ogura, a Japanese scholar on Korean philosophy. Both individuals recognize the potential power of Hallyu, but addresses different facets of the phenomenon. Prof. Lee basks in a rather optimistic prediction that Hallyu will serve to reunite and strengthen an East Asian community with the unavoidable competition and integration of the 3-East Asian waves, which interestingly have never co-existed at any point of time.

Although I do see the logic that guides his conclusion, it is always tricky trying to predict a relatively polarized region, especially when it comes to politics. In terms of economy, the three East Asian Giants – China, South Korea and Japan – are very integrated and inseparable. But when it comes to regional politics, there are two distinct blocs that polarize the region, with China and South Korea routinely united against Japan’s wartime aggression, and its lack of closure – at least to the Chinese and Korean communities.

I can see how Hallyu can reaffirm economic dependency between nations with the import and export of “cultural goods” – the rise of domestic and international distribution rights, album sales, concerts, etc. However, I am somewhat missing the logical thread that heals regional divides. Perhaps Prof. Lee was referring to how Hallyu can serve to educate or even heightened the appreciation amongst the East Asian community of perhaps the similarities, the pride and the potential that we have as a strong regional co-sphere. Not too sure on the politic side, but at least in terms of international image, Hallyu has served to bask South Korea in the light of economic prosperity, fashion forwardness and indisputable creativity.

Kazuo, on the other hand, makes some rather explosive comments in his analysis of the Korean Wave. I strongly disagree with his categorization of Japan’s “Look towards Korea” as a form of envy. I think that for Japan, Hallyu serves as a rude realization that there is more to Asia than just Japan. The economic yardstick that has served Japan’s purpose for the past 3 decades is clearly losing its appeal within the international community. China has opened up and South Korea is recovering from its IMF-slump – regional competition is tougher than ever.

Also, his assumption that Japanese people look towards Korean actors because of their “modernity” is rather amusing. How are the acting capabilities of Korean actors/actresses more modern than others? What is “modern” acting anyways? If one reads columns in the Japan times or other Japanese newspapers, one will understand the reason for the female’s attraction to Korean actors – their inherent sensitivity, gentleman-ness and “reserved” masculinity (I think we can somewhat assume that the female populace in Japan gets more of a say here). The Korean actors successfully play into a sense of desire of the Japanese female populace for someone who is always sensitive, trustworthy and selfless – a backlash against the career-first and lack of romanticism within Japanese marriages (to stereotype of course). On the other hand, has Kazuo ever thought that perhaps to many women, Korean actors are just plain more attractive than Japanese actors?

Regardless, my point is that Kazuo’s assertion that Hallyu is linked to Japan’s frustration with a “Look to Korea” mentality begs for more verification and detailed analysis. So far, Hallyu has been more of an “entertainment wave” in the form of entertaining exports. There is a huge difference between someone who is learning Korean to understand Korean dramas and someone who is learning Korean to do business in Korea. Unfortunately, the former is the much more prominent reason. Thus, to suggest Hallyu’s potential to change a nation’s fundamental cultural heritage is quite a bold assertion at the very least.

But as with any phenomenon, only time will attest to its appeal and vulnerability. It will be interesting to see if Hallyu will ever snowball into a “Korean Tsunami,” or dwindle to a mere “Korean Breeze.” For me, Hallyu is by no means a threat to the cultural viability of other East Asian nations. In fact, it provides a much-needed distraction from the overbearing Japanese and Chinese movies/dramas/songs that I have been watching/listening to for ages. As for now, keep those Korean dramas coming!

- ARC