Re-Thinking South Korean Postcolonial Multiculturalism in the Fine Art Textbook for Fifth- and Sixth- Graders

Home , Culture of South Korea, Ethnosymbolism, Imagine Asia, I Think U, The Hankyoreh, War Memorial of Korea

Re-thinking South Korean Postcolonial Multiculturalism in the Fine Art Textbook for Fifth- and Sixth- Graders

Dissertation

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University

Young Lim Nam, M.A.

Graduate Program in Art Education

The Ohio State University

2014

Dissertation Committee:

Professor Christine Ballengee-Morris Advisor

Professor Deborah L. Smith-Shank

Professor Shari Savage

Professor Vesta Daniel

Young Lim Nam

2014

Abstract

This study is a critical analysis of the context of image examples for the multicultural art education portion in a Fine Art textbook, which is currently used in

South Korea for 5th and 6th graders. The purpose of this research is to evaluate how multiculturalism is represented in the text. To this end, this research focuses on ethnicity construction: how politico-economic contexts and cultural representation of ethnic arts have influenced the content of the textbook. Postcolonial multiculturalism is designated as a theoretical framework and a critical discourse analysis (CDA) as a methodological framework for this research. Through CDA, I understand invisible beliefs and cultural identities that people share by paying attention to power, ideology, and intertextuality that are infiltrated in language.

The findings revealed that inside/outside the Fine Art textbook promotes the pedagogy of South Korean ethnicity construction through postcolonial multiculturalism, which disrupts the idea of multiculturalism. The government is involved in narrating

South Korean ethnicity and its visual art forms in a traditional artistic format. This seems to be a response to the political context where this competitive particular culture is desired and promoted to engage and respond to both opportunity and crisis in the global economy. The top-down narrative affects the image examples in the book, a national curriculum, and the entire process of the textbook production system. Recommendations are provided, including ways in which educators can encourage their students in ii

deconstructing the myths of South Koreanness.

iii

Dedication

Dedicated to my parents

Acknowledgments

I would like to express my sincere appreciation and gratitude to my advisor, Dr.

Christine Ballengee Morris, for her continuous guidance and support with not just this dissertation, but with my entire doctoral degree program. I appreciate the guidance in formulating my dissertation topic, the feedback she gave me on my chapter drafts, her willingness to listen to me, and her dedication to helping me move through the process.

My sincere appreciation and gratitude also goes to the members of my doctoral committee Professors Dr. Deborah L. Smith-Shank, Dr. Vesta Daniel, and Dr. Shari

Savage for their efforts in reading the dissertation manuscript, and valuable comments and recommendations.

I wish to thank Dr. Patricia Stuhr for encouraging me to undertake the doctoral journey and for giving me vision and impetus I needed to embark upon this dissertation process.

Finally, my deepest gratitude goes to my friends, Namhee, Vincent, Kangyong,

Verona, Connie, Jaewhan, Hyunsook, and Brad, for being with me throughout this doctoral journey. They all laughed with me and commiserated with me throughout my doctoral program. I thank them for their sacrifices.

Vita

1997 ……………………………………….. B.A. Elementary Education, Chuncheon National University of Education

2004 ……………………………………….. M.A. Elementary Fine Arts Education, Korea National University of Education

2007-2008 …………………………………. Graduate Teaching Associate, Department of Art Education, The Ohio State University

2009-2012 …………………………………. Graduate Teaching Associate, Department of Art Education, The Ohio State University

Publications

Kim, H. S., Min, H. J., & Nam, Y. L. (2007). Inquiry of teaching lesson plans for application to DMZ regions’ ecology and culture. Art Education Research Review, 21(3), 247- 266, KINX2008032294.

Kim, H. S., Min, H. J., & Nam, Y. L. (2007). Inquiry in the method of art instruction based on ecology in the region of Yang-gu Hae-an. Contributed a thesis to 2007 InSEA Asian Regional Congress in 2007, 768-773.

Fields of Study

Major Field: Art Education vi

Table of Contents

Abstract ...... ii

Dedication ...... iv

Acknowledgments...... v

Vita ...... vi

List of Tables ...... xiii

List of Figures ...... xiv

Chapter 1: Introduction ...... 1

1.1 Background ...... 1

1.2 Statement of the Problem ...... 11

1.3 Research Question ...... 15

1.4 Research Design...... 18

1.5 Limitation to This Study ...... 42

1.6 Conclusion ...... 44

Chapter 2: Literature Review ...... 47

2.1 Review of the Literature ...... 47

2.2 Conclusion ...... 63

Chapter 3: Theoretical Framework and Methodology ...... 64

3.1 Basic Concepts ...... 65

3.1.1 Race and Ethnicity ...... 65

3.1.2 Nation and Nationalism ...... 68

3.1.3 The Viewpoint on the Nation in Relation to History ...... 73

vii

3.2 Multiculturalism and Postcolonialism/Postcolonial Theory ...... 77

3.2.1 Multiculturalism ...... 78

3.2.2 Postcolonialism/Postcolonial Theory ...... 83

3.2.2.1 Colonial Knowledge and Orientalism ...... 84

3.2.2.2 Postcolonialism ...... 87

3.2.2.3 Postcolonial Theory ...... 89

3.3 Framework for South Korean Postcolonial Multiculturalism ...... 97

3.3.1 Essentialism and Ethnic-nationalism ...... 98

3.3.2 Ethnic-nationalism, Politico-economic Context, and Postcolonial Multiculturalism 102

3.3.3 The Characteristics of Postcolonial Multiculturalism ...... 107

3.3.3.1 Othering ...... 107

3.3.3.2 Politics of Difference ...... 107

3.3.3.3 Inclusion/Exclusion ...... 110

3.3.4 Conclusion: South Korean Postcolonial Multiculturalism ...... 110

3.4 Summary. Framework for South Korean Postcolonial Multiculturalism ...... 113

3.5 Critical Discourse Analysis ...... 119

3.5.1 Overview of the Critical Discourse Analysis ...... 120

3.5.1.1 Key Ideas of Critical Discourse Analysis and This Research ...... 120

3.5.1.2 Speech Act Theory and Critical Discourse Analysis ...... 125

3.5.1.3 Intertextuality ...... 126

3.5.2 The Design of the Study ...... 129

3.5.2.1 Data Collection ...... 131

3.5.2.2 Data Analysis ...... 133

3.5.2.2.1 Ideology of South Korean Ethnic Culture ...... 133

3.5.2.2.2 The Power to Construct the Idea of South Korean Ethnic Culture ...... 135 viii

3.5.2.2.3 Intertextuality ...... 137

3.5.2.2.4 Interpretation or Data Performance ...... 138

3.6 Conclusion ...... 140 Chapter 4: The Politics of Difference, Postcolonial Multiculturalism, and the Fine Art Textbook ...... 141

4.1 The Politics of Difference and Postcolonial Multiculturalism ...... 141

4.1.1 South Korea during and after the 1990s ...... 141

4.1.2 South Korean Multiculturalism Policy ...... 145

4.1.3 Politics of Difference in Cultural Policy from the 1990s to the Present ...... 147

4.1.3.1 Overview of Multicultural Matters in South Korea ...... 147

4.1.3.2 Politics of Difference in Cultural Policy ...... 151

4.1.3.2.1 Encouragement of Other Countries’ Cultures ...... 151

4.1.3.2.2 Encouragement of South Korean Culture ...... 153

4.1.4 Politics of Difference in Education ...... 155

4.1.4.1 Cultural Understanding in Contemporary Education ...... 155

4.1.4.2 Encouragement of Difference in Fine Art Curriculum ...... 158

4.2 Deconstructing the Politics of a Fine Art Textbook ...... 162

4.2.1 Analysis of the Content of the Fine Art Textbook ...... 163

4.2.1.1 Unpacking the Textbook Content ...... 163

4.2.1.1.1 Difference and Politics of Difference in the Image Examples ...... 164

4.2.1.1.2 (De)construction of Difference ...... 169

4.2.1.1.2.1 Establishing “Ours” versus “The Other” ...... 170 4.2.1.1.2.2 Politics of Traditional Art: The Politics of Establishing “Ideal” Imagery ...... 171

4.2.1.1.2.3 Creating (Ab)normalcy ...... 172

4.2.2 Analysis of the Discursive Context of the Fine Art Textbook ...... 173

4.2.2.1 Sociocultural Discourse and the Image Examples in the Textbook ...... 174

4.2.2.1.1 The Pensive Bodhisattva (BC 7) ...... 177

4.2.2.1.2 The Thinker (1880)...... 180

4.2.2.1.3 Discussion: “Our” “Traditional” Art Works ...... 182

4.2.2.2 Unpacking the Textbook Formation System ...... 186

4.2.2.2.1 The Textbook Formation System ...... 187

4.2.2.2.1.1 Positioning a Textbook ...... 187

4.2.2.2.1.2 The Process of Textbook Selection ...... 191

4.2.2.2.2 Deconstruction of Textbook Publication ...... 195

4.2.2.2.2.1 Textbook Authorization ...... 195

4.2.2.2.2.2 Economic Aspects ...... 200

4.2.2.2.2.3 The National Curriculum ...... 203

4.3 Conclusion ...... 205

Chapter 5: Analysis of the War Memorial ...... 207

5.1 Overview of South Korean Modern History ...... 208

5.2 Overview of Public Art ...... 210

5.2.1 The Meaning of Public Art ...... 211

5.2.2 The Private Sector vs. Public Sector in Public Art ...... 212

5.2.3 Economic Culture...... 215

5.3 Analysis of the War Memorial ...... 218

5.3.1 Description of the War Memorial ...... 219

5.3.2 Interpretation of the War Memorial ...... 221

5.3.2.1 Strategy of Modernism: Preparing to Pass the Grand Narrative ...... 221

5.3.2.2 Iconic Meaning Making ...... 226 x

5.3.2.2.1 A Strategy of Time(lessness) ...... 227

5.3.2.2.2 The War Memorial and War ...... 232

5.3.2.2.3 The Socio-Political Meaning of the War Memorial ...... 235 5.3.2.2.3.1 Technical Factors Associated with the Construction of the War Memorial ...... 235

5.3.2.2.3.1.1 Planning ...... 235 5.3.2.2.3.1.2 Funding ...... 238 5.3.2.2.3.1.3 Other Political Aspects ...... 241 5.3.2.2.3.2 Discourses Associated with Socio-Political Culture ...... 244

5.3.2.2.3.2.1 Lee’s Speech ...... 245 5.3.2.2.3.2.2 Mudori’s Greeting ...... 249 5.3.3 The Meaning of the War Memorial ...... 258

5.4 Ethnic Identity Formation and the War Memorial throughout History ...... 259

5.4.1 The Public Art Scape ...... 260

5.4.2 (Re)production of Ethnicity in The War Memorial and The Peace Clock Tower ...... 261

5.5 Discussion: Ethnic Scripts of South Koreanness ...... 267

5.5.1 The Social Norm, Ethnicity, and South Koreanness ...... 267

5.5.1.1 Social Norm ...... 268

5.5.1.2 Ethnicity ...... 268

5.5.1.3 South Koreanness ...... 271

5.5.1.4 South Koreanness and The War Memorial ...... 273

5.5.2 South Koreanness and the Invisibility of the War in the Fine Art Textbook ...... 275

5.6 Conclusion ...... 279 Chapter 6: Recommendation for the Fine Art Textbook: Image Examples and Critical Pedagogy for/against South Koreanness ...... 282

6.1 From Inside a Textbook: The War Memorial and Multicultural Art Education ...... 282

6.1.1 Diversity Affirmation and Celebrating Difference ...... 283

6.1.2 Multicultural Art Education, Ethnicity, and Public Art ...... 286

6.1.2.1 Overview of Multicultural Art Education ...... 286

6.1.2.2 Deconstructing Ethnicity in The War Memorial ...... 289 6.1.2.2.1 Acquainting Students with South Korean Ethnic Cultural Identity Construction Practice ...... 289

6.1.2.2.2 Acquainting Students with the Social Structure in History ...... 290 6.1.2.2.3 Encouraging Students’ Critical Thinking through Engaging in Self-Gaze Deconstruction ...... 291

6.1.2.2.4 Cooperating and Encouraging Students’ Action by Community Based Art.. 294 6.2 From In-between a Textbook: Encouraging Students’ Critical Thinking to Deconstruct Fine Art Textbooks ...... 295

6.3 From Outside the Textbook ...... 297

6.4 Conclusion ...... 304

References ...... 309

xii

List of Tables

Table 1. Theoretical Framework for South Korean Postcolonial Multiculturalism ...... 29 Table 2. Inquiries for the relationship between South Korean ethnicity construction and postcolonial multiculturalism in the study ...... 32 Table 3. Questions for the relationship between South Korean postcolonial multiculturalism and South Korean ethnicity construction ...... 33 Table 4. Questions for the relationship between South Korean ethnicity construction and postcolonial multiculturalism in the image examples in the book ...... 39 Table 5. Questions for the relationship between South Korean ethnicity construction and postcolonial multiculturalism in the textbook production system ...... 40 Table 6. Questions for the relationship between South Korean ethnicity construction and postcolonial multiculturalism in the War Memorial ...... 41

Table 7. Theoretical Framework for South Korean Postcolonial Multiculturalism ...... 114

Table 8. The Rate of Manpower Shortage from 2003 to 2011 ...... 148

Table 9. The Inductive Effect of Foreign Laborers’ Total Output ...... 149 Table 10. Changes in the Government Designed, Authorized, and Approved Textbooks ...... 190

Table 11. The Meaning of the War Memorial ...... 259 Table 12. The result of the relationship between South Korean ethnicity construction and postcolonial multiculturalism in the study ...... 306

xiii

List of Figures

Figure 1. Structure of the Research Questions...... 17

Figure 2. The Relationship between Theories and Research Variable ...... 27

Figure 3. Theories and the Politics of Difference ...... 28 Figure 4. Factors to Examine in the Relationship between Postcolonial Multiculturalism and Postcolonialism ...... 30

Figure 5. Discursive Event Model ...... 34

Figure 6. Discursive Event Model for This Research ...... 35

Figure 7. Historical Discursive Model for This Research ...... 36

Figure 8. The Relationship between Theories and the Research Variable 1 ...... 115

Figure 9. The Relationship between Theories and the Research Variable 2 ...... 115

Figure 10. Postcolonial Multiculturalism in Space ...... 116

Figure 11. Theories and the Politics of Difference ...... 117

Figure 12. The Groundwork for the Postcolonial Multiculturalism Model ...... 118

Figure 13. Discursive Event Model ...... 122

Figure 14. Discursive Event Model for This Research ...... 131

Figure 15. The Modified Living System Model for This Research ...... 134

Figure 16. Relationship between Power and the Texts ...... 135 Figure 17. The Pensive Bodhisattva Featured in The New York Times, 2013, December 8 ...... 154

Figure 18. The Pensive Bodhisattva and The Thinker in the Fine Art textbook ...... 165

Figure 19. Global Village Met by a Festival...... 167

xiv

Figure 20. Opening Ceremony at The Masterpieces of Korean Art Exhibition at the Metropolitan Museum of Art (February 7, 1958) ...... 180

Figure 21. Outer Cover of the Textbook ...... 188

Figure 22. The Process of Textbook Authorization ...... 193

Figure 23. The Process of Textbook Authorization in South Korea...... 194

Figure 24. Inside and Outside of The War Memorial ...... 220

Figure 25. The Peace Clock Tower ...... 221

Figure 26. The War Memorial’s Symmetrical View ...... 222

Figure 27. The Peace Clock Tower with Cherry Blossom ...... 228

Figure 28. Power Struggle and Ethnicity ...... 271

Figure 29. South Koreanness ...... 275

Chapter 1: Introduction

1.1 Background

The country that is known as Korea was established in 2333 BCE. Throughout its

5,000-year history, other countries have invaded Korea frequently. After one such invasion in the nineteenth century, Korea was forced to open its three ports to Japan as a result of unfair diplomatic treatment. This led to Japanese colonialism in Korea for thirty- six years (1910-1945). After finally gaining independence from Japan in 1945, the southern and northern parts of Korea were put under the trusteeship of the U.S.A. and the

Soviet Union, respectively. Before long, the Republic of Korea (South Korea) and the

Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea) were established: South Korea on

August 15, 1948 and North Korea on September 9, 1948. The national division remained unresolved even after the Korean War (June 25, 1950–July 27, 1953), which not only divided the country in half but split many families as well.

Right after the Korean War, Korean nationalism1 was connected to the ideology of ethnicity, in order to unify the nation’s people and to justify the country to the world based on the peoples’ unified companionship. Indeed, for many years indigenous Koreans had believed that they are rooted in “common blood and shared ancestry” (Shin, 2006, p.

1 In general, the study of nationalism is divided into three stages: 1) 18-19 C–WWI, the beginning of nationalism; 2) WWI-WWII, the academization of nationalism, and 3) 1945-Present, diversified debate. Of these paths, South Korea appears to have experienced the third path; “[t]he third stage of the study of nationalism . . . was heavily influenced by the process of decolonization and the establishment of new states in the Third World” (Turker, 2008, p. 27). 1

17). This belief developed into a blood-based ethnicity: the idea that they were descended from one ancestor and, as such, were grounded in a homogenized singular ethnic culture

(Han & Han, 2007). The Korean War, however, led to seminal changes in terms of ethnicity. Instead of blood-based ethnicity throughout Korea, blood-based ethnicity in

South Korea had to be foregrounded. South Korea’s efforts to establish an independent nation state for the first time required reconstructing the whole social system, which inevitably modified of the traditional notion of ethnicity. In addition to these postcolonial efforts to establish a new idea of national cultural identity, since South Korea was obliged to overcome severe ideological confusion right after the war, it was necessary for South

Korean national knowledge builders to establish strong doctrines that included notions of ethnicity. For instance, the First National Curriculum (1954-1963) designated the primary educational goal of this period as “infus[ing] anti-communism into the people's minds”

(Choi, 2006; Kim, 2004).

The emphasis on anticommunism in the curriculum was thought to be specified by the One Nation Principle, which was promoted by Hosang Ahn, the first Minister of

Education Ministries (Choi, 2006). It was a doctrine to request South Koreans to be unified as a whole, based on a democratic, anticommunist mindset. In this sense, a blood- based idea of ethnicity must have been regarded as an important medium by which indigenous South Korean people formed a strong bond, justifying their country as the only country in the territory and differentiating themselves from North Korea right after the war. In short, ethnicity construction through postcolonialism is not only used for designating who they are, but also is used for unifying people in the name of nationalism.

To construct a national cultural identity, emphasizing South Korea as a singular ethnic culture became even more important after the late 1980s, when South Korean society was thought to confront a period of strong cultural, political, and economic change. Culturally, a range of international events, such as the Seoul Olympics in 1988, the Liberalization of Overseas Travel in 1989, and the Daejeon Expo in 1993 noticeably increased South Koreans’ cultural recognition and appropriation of culture for politico- economic purposes, which influenced the social and educational realms. Politically,

South Korea gradually succeeded in achieving a peaceful and legitimate transfer of power at the expense of peoples’ civil rights by gradually turning the president election into a direct presidential election, while retaining significant ideological conflicts between the two nationalist/political knowledge builder groups, generally called “conservative” and

“liberal.” And economically, the unified desire to establish national prosperity via neoliberalism gradually improved and achieved incredible success2. Facing increasingly complex measures of diversity, the notion of South Korean blood-based ethnicity had to be modified.

The focus of the deconstruction was on constructing ethnicity that is appropriate to modern society. Just as ethnicity had to be used to unify people right after the Korean

War, so did ethnicity after the late 1980s. Ethnicity remained propagate in competing to establish legitimacy, both between South Korea and North Korea and between a patriarchal government and the pro-democracy civilian groups (Han & Han, 2007). The collective ethnic victim mentality, which refers to a community with a group

2 Right after the Korean War, the 1953 South Korean GNP was $67 per person, while the first officially measured GDP in 1970 was $254 per person. In 1986, this number increased about ten times to $2,643. Almost 10 years later, in 1995, the GDP had jumped to $10,000, and it leaped to $21,655 in 2007 (T. W. Kim, 2010). 3

consciousness based on ethnicity feels as if they were victimized, was revived when

South Korea had to seek economic revenue during an economic crisis3 in the late 1990s; just as the domestic working class was exploited by a patriarchal government and businessmen at the beginning of the domestic industrial development from the 1960s to

1980s, so too did South Koreans view themselves as being in the marginalized position of being exploited by other countries in the global world.

This research is in line with such an understanding of ethnicity, by which South

Korean knowledge builder groups are thought to solidify people to be against whatever they think threatens the country and their culture, and to protect themselves from whatever they think causes a crisis within the group. The ideology of a singular ethnic cultural identity, which I call “South Koreanness4,” focusing on its fantasized characteristics of cultural identity, was developed and enhanced based on nationalism and color-blind racial discrimination in post-colonial South Korea. All in all, postcolonial ethnicity construction became an ever more important ongoing process, one with a changed meaning but with the perpetual goal of unifying the nation’s people.

Accordingly, South Koreans have been reluctant to accept issues or policies associated with different/multi-ethnic groups5 due to nationalism and the long-held belief

3 South Korean GDP has continually increased ever since statistics started being collected in 1970, and by 1995 the GDP per individual surpassed $10,000. However, the economic crisis lowered GDP to $7,355 per person in 1998. 4 Since the term “Korea” and “Korean” are common usage for South Koreans to call their country and themselves in South Korea, the term “South Koreanness” should be an unfamiliar term to them. In this paper, however, I coined the term “South Koreannness,” discarding “Koreanness” when I refer to the South Korean’s understanding of themselves and their culture. It is because the word “Koreanness” can make those who are not in the country confused, as well as the term of “Koreanness” also involves a rather complicated and different political issues than this paper deals with. 5 In this paper, this term is used interchangeably with “Different/multi ethnic families” and “Multicultural family.” In common usage, a direct translation of the Korean, “multicultural family,” refers to a family group where one spouse is ethnically Korean and the other is not. 4

of their “homogeneous” culture (“A true Korean,” 2010, p. 21). Multiculturalism had initially been promoted by President Youngsam Kim’s (r. 1993-1998) declaration of

Segyehwa (meaning globalization), and it became an issue when the Education

Supporting Plan for Children from Different/Multi-ethnic Families (2006) was publicized under President Moohyun Roh (r. 2003-2008) (Chun, 2011, cited in Ahn, 2011, p. 4).

However, the discussion about multiculturalism has been moving at a snail’s pace. The reluctance has inevitably resulted in producing the attitude of being closed off against different ethnic groups. For example, in 2007 the UN’s Committee on the Elimination of

Racial Discrimination pointed to the South Korean government’s resistance to letting go of the image of being a single-ethnicity country. In 2008, the World Competitiveness

Center announced that South Korea ranked last out of fifty-five respondent countries in terms of being open to foreign cultures, and in 2009, it was fifty-sixth out of fifty-seven

(Jung, 2009). These evaluations drew people’s attention to multiculturalism, and triggered a full domestic debate on unfairness that confronted different/multi-ethnic groups in South Korea.

In response, South Koreans’ interest in multiculturalism has grown.

Multiculturalism is thought to achieve human equality pertinent to the status of modern countries, and to have made nations and people overcome the economic crisis in the late

1990s. According to a census launched by the Ministry of Public Administration and

Security (2009), the number of foreigners6 in South Korea increased from 490,000 in

6 A foreigner refers to a person of non-Korean nationality who has lived in South Korea for more than ninety days. It includes foreign workers (575,657; 52%), marriage migrants (125,673; 11.4%), students (77,322; 7%), overseas Koreans (43,703; 4%), other foreigners (103,115; 9.3%), and those whose Korean nationality was not considered. Since the Foreign Work Permit system was enacted in 2003, the number of foreign workers has rapidly increased compared to other groups. 5

2000 (Jung, 2009) to 1,106,884 in 2009. Along with the increase in immigrants, reports in a local newspaper, The Kyeongin (2009), revealed a vicious circle that students with different skin colors went through7. On the other hand, socio-economic context also plays a significant role in motivating people to consider multiculturalism. One of the recommendations that the International Monetary Fund made for South Korea during the

1997 economic crisis was to request deconstructing the conservative conventional social system, as reported in The MK Business News (“Special talk,” 1998. 6. 29; Kim, 1999. 4.

7). The MK Business News identified conservative attitudes and economic policies against different cultures and peoples as the crucial factors hampering South Korea’s economic resurrection (Jang, 1997). South Koreans reflected on themselves in terms of the injustice and conservatism that the different/multi-ethnic groups felt, which was thought to be inappropriate by modern global citizens. Not only did the morality consider the rights of foreign workers and immigrants, but the socio-economic context also motivated the native South Korean people to consider multiculturalism.

Multiculturalism in South Korea refers to cultural diversity and celebrating differences primarily in terms of ethnicity (Watson, 2010), and in common usage, it refers to an immigrant integration policy. In general, multicultural education proponents agree that the target of education is both immigrant students and native South Korean students, and the objective of multicultural education is both to help the immigrants adapt to South

Korea and the native South Korean students let go of their prejudice toward the immigrants.

7 Their mostly working-class parents could not support them economically or educationally, which caused them to fall behind academically and become alienated from their teachers and classmates. 6

Reflecting multiculturalism’s popularity, many have weighed in on what multicultural education models are most appropriate for the South Korean context. The debate over selecting an appropriate model mainly contrasts two models: the diversity focus of the U.S. model, and the assimilation focus of the French model. For example, K.

S. Lee (2008) in the field of cultural education proposes a flexible assimilation model that combines diversity with the assimilation model, while Hong (2008) believes that the diversity model does not fit into the South Korean social context. On the whole, almost all seem to agree with the value of affirming cultural diversity. However, there is tension between cultural assimilation and diversity in South Korean multicultural education, while the structure of an assimilation model incorporated with a diversity focus seems to have been gradually embraced in South Korea.

In contrast to these opinions, the South Korean government overtly promoted cultural diversity-centered education in the Education Supporting Plan for Children from

Different/Multi-ethnic Families (2006). However, this policy has been criticized for its practices and plans that are a far cry from diversity affirmation. For example, Park and

Sung (2008) argue that almost three quarters of the multicultural educational policy covered ‘Korean education’ (70.5%) and ‘Korean culture education’ (72.7%). They argue that ‘Korean culture education’ publicizes a program for acquainting students with

Korean heritage and festivals about Korean food and clothing. K. S. Lee (2008) also diagnoses the government-centered plan for multicultural education as focusing on immigrants adapting to South Korea differently than the ideal plan. In addition, Watson

(2010) views state-led multiculturalism in South Korea overall as hiding the conditions of inequalities and exclusions, and as enhancing cultural assimilation toward the dominant 7

South Korean culture. These surveys commonly argue that assimilation to South Korean culture is at the heart of the state-planned multicultural education.

Overall, multicultural education in South Korea is debatable and undefinable.

Almost all agree with the value of affirming cultural diversity, but one side argues that the assimilation-focused model is more important, while the other side, dominated by the

South Korean government, plans a diversity-focused model. However, even though the diversity-focused model is overtly and officially promoted, the policies are often criticized for leaving a gap between the ideal plan and the reality of how it plays out. In some ways, South Korean multicultural education appears to designate educational focus somewhere between encouraging diverse ethnic cultures and promoting South Korean ethnic culture, keeping a balance −or tension− between South Korean ethnic culture and other countries’ ethnic cultures.

How to maintain this balance or tension between enhancing cultural diversity and sustaining the idea of South Korean ethnic culture is also an issue in art education in elementary schools. Units on diverse cultures as well as those on South Korean ethnic culture are increasingly embraced in the current fine art textbook series. Compared to the textbook corresponding to the 7th national curriculum, the revised textbooks overall tend to emphasize diverse cultures by distributing cultural portions over multiple pages. When it comes to other countries’ ethnic arts, it is noticeable that various previously excluded native arts, such as Thai and Mexican arts, have increased in importance relative to the dominant western arts. Accordingly, students are thought to be offered an increased chance to reflect on their indigenous traditional culture and diverse foreign cultures. In this sense, fine art textbooks appear successful in realizing equity education. 8

However, it is doubtful whether students are really learning about cultural diversity or affirmation of cultural differences, given the selection and organization of images covered in the book and the context where the images are formed as a representation of the ethnic culture. Most of all, it is difficult to expect diversity affirmation. The multicultural portions are constituted of numerous signifiers that remind students of South Korean ethnic arts and other countries’ native arts. The images are categorized under discrete titles, such as Our traditional art works and the other countries’ art works, based on a binary mechanism in a bounded system which borders self from/and other. All students in South Korea get to participate in the “violent8” process of looking while attending their fine art classes, even though the extent to which they participate would of course vary by student. Who would be free from “the impossibility of just looking,” the “possessing, controlling, objectifying and denigrating” facets of looking (Elkins, 1996, cited in Eisenhauer, 2007, p. 11)? Students might be able to distinguish the images of South Korean ethnic culture from those of the non-South

Korean cultures, based on the organization of the selected artworks or canons, and might be able to internalize South Korean cultural identification based on “othering” through

8 This term is used to focus on the way of looking that viewers tend to objectify the visual objects, classify the objects in terms of their physical appearances, and categorize the objects with a stable meaning. For example, when students look at the two images, which represent “our” culture and “other countries’” cultures respectively, they are supposed to consider looking at them through objectification, classification and categorization due to the physical appearance in the visual images and the textual references to indicate the photos. As a result, they re-check which one is “our” culture/arts and “others’” culture. Such a looking practice must be sort of an assault, because the perception by looking doesn’t allow any in-between understanding about ethnic culture due to the way in which the two quite different photos are displayed. Moreover, since the more familiar the representation of history the work is, the more the photo of the artwork fits into the category of an ethnic culture. Thus, visual images are chosen out of the most familiar, so called, ‘normal’ ethnic artwork. Thus, meaning that is associated with the value of normativity is imposed on the student. This is part of the process of constructing othering that is regarded as devaluing or that which cannot be included in any recognizable category, in order to distinguish “our” ethnic culture.

the expulsion process of looking within the bounded system. Given that cultural differences exist across any classification or categorization, I cannot help but ask how simply including as many artworks as possible from other countries could guarantee that the notion of cultural diversity is properly grappled with. The variety of ethnic art works in the textbook must have little to do with teaching/learning cultural diversity; rather, it is possible for the students to learn about a distinctively different “ethnic national” culture by considering what would be ‘South Korean ethnic culture’ vs. ‘other countries’ ethnic cultures.’

Moreover, even if I accept the fact that policy makers in public institutions encourage including cultural diversity in these textbooks, if their assumptions of what is ethnic culture have little to do with affirming cultural diversity, then it would be difficult to expect them to fulfill the purpose of the curriculum. For example, textbook makers or image producers are entities whose values and beliefs are already imprinted by social norms9. If their values and beliefs about the ethnic culture of South Korea and any other countries are already normalized in a certain way as an effect of postcolonialism, then in a Fine Art textbook, the images might function as ideoscapes addressing or evoking in students the ideology of “normal” or “proper” South Koreanness. In addition, given that the history of postcolonialism is continuous and a formal education is at the heart of the plan, it is likely that the fine art textbook is used as a text where postcolonialism circulates to construct the idea of national identity. If textbook makers reflect a political

South Korean postcolonial context, such that cultural identification has to be appropriated

9 It is this reciprocal relationship between knowledge/image producers in textbook-making and postcolonial South Korea in which dominant practices are able to perpetuate their social order. 10

for political purposes – that is, the ethnic cultural identification is appropriated for the national cultural identification and the issue of nation building is vital to enhance, then it would be even worse for the textbook makers to educate students on who they are in the post-colonial society. In this case, it is not difficult to imagine that something would be designated differently from how it is declared in the multiculturalism section. In short, it would be difficult to say that a Fine Art textbook is freed from selecting the representation of a master narrative of South Korean identity, and from organizing those representations to evoke the violent nature of looking as students identify with a visualized set of social norms.

In summary, post-colonial South Korea, which experienced colonization, national division, neoliberalism, and national political turmoil, has built a nation by de(re)constructing who are South Koreans. Although the efforts to specify the meaning of

South Korean ethnicity have undergone contextual changes, these efforts consistently occur in formal and informal pedagogical sites, and the notion of South Korean ethnicity has consistently played a role in nationalism. Meanwhile, after the late 1980s South

Korea’s cultural policy shifted away from national unity favoring a singular ethnic culture to multiculturalism, which favors cultural diversity. While state-governed or authorized cultural policy inside/outside the fine art textbook vigorously promotes multiculturalism, critical questions about the reality of South Korean multiculturalism are ongoing.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

Discussions of these issues, both in South Korean multicultural education and multicultural art education, commonly oversimplify or neglect the dynamic and complex characteristics of ethnic culture, which disrupt the ideology of multiculturalism. To be 11

specific, two sets of issues matter in the aforementioned situation: One is about the viewpoint through which ethnic culture is seen, and the other is about how to view postcolonial multiculturalism.

The former again diverges into two issues. The one is that cultural practices are executed on the basis of a categorization that assumes a stable and essentialist ethnic cultural understanding, and the other is that cultural representations are associated with nationality. The idea that multicultural education should be focused either on the diversity-focused model –or modified diversity-focused, in reality– or on the assimilation-focused model is grounded in an essentialist notion of ethnicity that is intertwined with nationality. Likewise, the efforts to give diverse cultures equal space with the South Korean ethnic culture in the fine art textbook are also in line with a particular view of ethnicity.

The latter issue that is involved in the situation mentioned in the 1.1 Background is about whether South Korean postcolonial multiculturalism has to do with postcolonialism of South Korean ethnicity construction. Given that cultural phenomena inevitably occur within sociocultural contexts, such concepts of ethnicity could have much to do with the postcolonialism surrounding South Korean ethnicity construction.

Numerous researchers (Said, 1978; Chilisa, 2005; Abdi, Ellis, & Sizha, 2005; Abdi,

2008; Chachange, 2001; Smith-Crocco, 2005) argue against the distortion of local knowledge by colonialism, and many scholars (Rizvi, & Lingard, 2006; Tickly, 2004;

Smith-Crocco, 2005; Mudimbe, 1994) argue that education plays a significant role in institutionalizing colonialism. Likewise, postcolonial knowledge builders consider schooling/education as the most influential and important site to tell students who they 12

are in the post-colonial society. In this sense, it is possible that fine art that embraces multiculturalism is infiltrated with postcolonialism, and any discussions and debates about multiculturalism in South Korea potentially involve constructing the notion of

South Korean ethnicity, which results in reinforcing notions of who South Koreans are and whether their culture is appropriate in the modern world. In other words, it is likely that the idea of multiculturalism is left out of the discussion when it comes into conflict with South Korean ethnicity construction. This assumption is reflected in the Fine Art textbook, as can be seen in one of the multicultural art education section titles: “Our traditional art works and the other countries’ art works” (Lee et al., 2011, p. 28). South

Korean multicultural (art) education appears foreign to those who consider themselves to live in/through a homogenized culture, but they feel obliged to develop and teach it in addition to South Korean ethnic culture.

The research problem that I propose in this study is that the South Korean postcolonialism surrounding South Korean ethnicity construction seems to disrupt the idea of multiculturalism in the Fine Art textbook. Specifically, in this textbook multiculturalism10 is predicated on a particular type of ethnic and cultural essentialism, which assumes universality and which is intertwined with nationality. What is “a South

Korean ethnic culture” and what are “other countries’ cultures?” While the South Korean education system promotes multicultural education, the selection and organization of the sample images in the Fine Art textbook, intended to represent diverse cultures, focus

10 The Fine Art textbook adopts cultural spheres in an integrated way throughout its content. The term multiculturalism is used for the convenience of this research, and refers to the portions of the book that include the image examples that I explore in this study. These portions include the page with The Pensive Bodhisattva and The Thinker under Topic 2, “Our Traditional Artworks and the Other Countries’ Artworks” (Lee et al., 2011, p. 28), as well as the page with the worlds’ masks under “Global Village Met by a Festival” (Lee et al., 2011, pp. 108-109). 13

more on the iconic images that reinforce the stereotyped imagery of ethnic and national cultures. Given that the philosophy of multiculturalism is grounded in promoting diversity, representations fixed to any iconic cultural images must hamper diversity.

Therefore, ethnicity construction associated with essentialist and nationality involved ethnic culture must be a problem from a critical multiculturalism perspective.

Indeed, it is important to consider what the multiculturalism in the Fine Art textbook has to do with South Korean ethnicity construction, and whether it is predicated on essentialist South Korean ethnicity that is associated with nationality. This research is important for several reasons. Above all, multiculturalism does not simply mean to celebrate certain classified ethnic characteristics. Given intersectionality, personal cultural identity should be understood as determined by the interaction of various cultural factors. Thus, it is impossible to attempt to understand people based on the stereotyped characteristics of an ethnic cultural category to which they are thought to belong. In addition, the essentialist understanding of ethnic national culture can cause misunderstandings about others by viewing them with a stereotyping gaze. Rather than assisting students to experience cultural diversity, these categorized cultural representations preclude their opportunities to encounter cultural dynamics and diversity.

Moreover, considering who present(s) what counts as South Korean culture and why, if the cultural representations are selected to enhance the stereotype of national culture that is designated from the top, then it is likely to dehumanize people by ignoring their everyday lives and cultures.

Furthermore, given the position that fine art textbooks have in the curriculum, these problems are even more important. Not all teaching-learning materials are eligible 14

to be placed in fine art textbooks, and they require certain qualifications to become the principal teaching materials. Moreover, all fifth- and sixth- grade students in South Korea use one of six fine art textbooks, so it’s not hard to imagine this book significantly influencing thousands of South Korean students. Last but not least, from the multicultural art education perspective, this study is critical because it can provide readers in South

Korea with insight into how they have been conceptualized in multicultural art education, and how context affects the establishment of a belief. This study grapples with concepts that are taken for granted by policy makers, but which represent significant challenges for teachers and textbook authors, as they try to prepare materials and lesson plans to prepare their students to be global citizens.

The South Korean postcolonialism surrounding South Korean ethnicity construction seems to disrupt multiculturalism in the Fine Art textbook. From critical multiculturalism, the significance of fine art textbook, and teaching-learning based on multicultural art education viewpoints, it is necessary to question the way in which the textbook’s ideas of postcolonial multiculturalism are constituted, and how they relate to the idea of ‘a South Korean ethnic culture’ inside/outside the textbook. Failing to ask these questions can lead to dehumanizing all learners, in the name of multiculturalism.

1.3 Research Question

The research question is: How does South Korean ethnicity construction affect multiculturalism in the Fine Art textbook? The situation undergirding this research is,

South Korean ethnicity construction whose focus is intertwined with postcolonialism and multiculturalism seems to operate in/through pedagogical sites for cultural education. The problem is, South Korean ethnicity construction in the pedagogical realms, on the whole, 15

appears to disrupt the idea of multiculturalism. The purpose of this research is to explore the way in which South Korean ethnicity construction, which is composed of the intertwined postcolonialism and multiculturalism, is taking place in the sites of inside/outside materials of the textbook that are allegedly thought to influence the understanding of the idea of multiculturalism in the Fine Art text book. This requires examining postcolonialism and postcolonial multiculturalism in a variety of contexts, to consider the complex relationship between the postcolonialism surrounding the idea of

South Korean ethnicity and postcolonial multiculturalism in South Korea.

This research focuses on examining 1) how ethnicity construction, which is based on the ethnic-nationalism in accordance with sociocultural change after the 1990s to the present, is related to postcolonial multiculturalism and 2) how the conflated form of postcolonial multiculturalism affects the idea of multiculturalism, diversity affirmation.

For the former: how ethnicity construction, which is based on the ethnic- nationalism in accordance with sociocultural change after the 1990s to the present, is related to postcolonial multiculturalism, this research focused on examining, to begin with, how the pedagogical sites in relation to the multiculturalism portion in the Fine Art textbook embraces postcolonial multiculturalism. And then, this research examines how the book with postcolonial multiculturalism is related to South Korean ethnicity construction. The focus is on examining the way in which postcolonial multiculturalism in the book embraces the postcolonialism of South Korean ethnicity construction. To be specific, this study considers the way that South Korean knowledge producers de(re)construct the idea of South Korean ethnicity through postcolonial multiculturalism in a) the visual and written texts inside the Fine Art textbook, b) a range of textbook 16

production processes, and c) public discourses outside the textbook (see Sub-Research

Question 1 in Figure 1 below). For the first sub-research question, the study examines a) the people who are primarily involved in constructing the idea of South Korean ethnic culture inside/outside of the Fine Art textbook, b) the way the idea of South Korean ethnicity is constructed inside/outside of the Fine Art textbook, and c) the politico- economic and historical context that influences the construction of these idea of South

Korean ethnicity.

Figure 1. Structure of the Research Questions

For the latter, how the conflated form of postcolonial multiculturalism affects the idea of multiculturalism, this research deconstructs cultural representations of ethnicity

construction/postcolonial multiculturalism. The second sub-research question considers how South Korean postcolonial multiculturalism contributes to constructing the idea of

South Korean ethnic culture and establishing the nation, which is thought to influence understanding the idea of multiculturalism (see Sub-Research Question 2 in Figure 1).

For the second sub-research question, this study examines a) what cultural representation is included and not included, b) how the politics of difference frame works in the selection or description of ethnic cultures inside/outside the Fine Art textbook, and c) how public discourses inside/outside of the Fine Art textbook create “the other” and thereby create the South Korean meaning of ethnicity. Figure 1 summarizes all the research questions discussed thus far.

In summary, this research explores how the two images of The Pensive

Bodhisattva and The Thinker inside of the textbook, the textbook production process, and various public discourses outside the book reflect postcolonialism and perform multiculturalism, and how the postcolonial multiculturalism affects understanding the idea of multiculturalism.

1.4 Research Design

This research is based on the assumption that the fine art textbook is used for postcolonialism to de(re)construct South Korean cultural identity and to educate students about who they are. The entire process and the product of the fine art textbook publication are thought to lie in the idea of postcolonialism. Accordingly, the premise of this research is that the alleged cultural diversity affirmation throughout the Fine Art textbook is dubious, given the content of the textbook and the context of its publication, both of which are thought to reflect postcolonialism. 18

This research evaluates the premise that a fine art textbook seems to disrupt multiculturalism. The key to solving the problem is uncovering how the fine art textbook postulates an idea of South Korean ethnicity. This research thus designates the ethnicity of South Korean culture as a research variable. The focus of the investigation is to find out whether the model of South Korean ethnicity in South Korean postcolonialism postulates an essentialist and nationalism-involved ethnic and cultural understanding.

Since the knowledge of “a South Korean ethnic culture” is socially constructed, it is necessary to investigate the historical and sociocultural discourses of the variable of

South Korean ethnicity, in order to perceive the meaning of South Korean ethnic culture and other countries’ cultures, as well as the values embedded in such meanings. It needs to be investigated how the meanings of ethnicity in South Korean culture have been constructed, mediated, or reconstructed in a post-colonial socio-political context. If the notion has been sustained, or changed, attention should be drawn to why the idea of

South Korean ethnic culture had to be retained, or changed for South Koreans’ epistemology of themselves and the world. In one sense, then, this study is concerned with demonstrating whether a fine art textbook pertains to diversity affirmation or to the construction of South Koreanness. Specifically, it offers three hypotheses: South Korean ethnic culture assumes a stable and nationalist type of South Korean ethnicity, the practice of ethnicity construction is embedded inside/outside the Fine Art textbook as a form of emphasizing the South Korean ethnic culture, and the idea of South Korean ethnic culture affects affirming diversity. In short, to consider how the ethnicity construction inside/outside of the Fine Art textbook affects multiculturalism in the book is, in some sense, to consider the way in which South Korean knowledge builders design 19

postcolonialism around a particular model of ethnicity.

For the research design, the data from a fine art textbook is selected and the scope of the research is determined. The textbook, of course, plays a significant role in this analysis of both postcolonialism and postcolonial multiculturalism. Specifically, for this research I analyze Fine Art11, the textbook associated with the Revised National

Curriculum in 200712. I refer to it as “Fine Art textbook” throughout the study. Chapter 4 specifically examines how that postcolonialism and/or postcolonial multiculturalism work through the content in the book and the textbook production system (see Text &

Discursive Context in Figure 5). Meanwhile, to articulate the meaning of ethnicity that postcolonialism intends to embrace in the textbook, Chapter 4 also draws attention to what is hidden in the book’s cultural representations. This research particularly highlights

The War Memorial (1994-Present) and discusses its cultural representation in Chapter 5

(see Socio-cultural Context in Figure 5). Given the premise of this research, the memorial is a significant data source because it is thought to help reveal the meaning of South

11 The fine art curriculum has six textbooks, all titled Fine Art. For this study, I chose the edition published by Chunjae Education in 2011. 12 Fine art textbooks have been revised several times since modern public education began in 1954. The recent 7th version of the national curriculum was developed in 1999 and updated in 2007, 2009 and 2011, updating the books on a grade-by-grade basis. For clarification of the target textbook in the midst of these changes, see the table below. Revised General Guideline of Revised General Guideline of National Revised General Guideline of National Sequence National Curriculum in 2007 + Curriculum in 2009 (2009. 12. 23) + Curriculum in 2009 (2011. 8. 9) +

Revised Separate Volume-Fine Revised Separate Volume-Fine Arts of Revised Separate Volume-Fine Arts of

Year Arts of National Curriculum in National Curriculum in 2007 National Curriculum in 2009 2007 (2011.8.9) 2011 ○ 2012 ○ 2013 ○ 2014 ● 2015 ○

Korean ethnicity that the textbook proposes in relation to postcolonialism, as well to provide context for the book’s development. Given that the text of Fine Art mirrors the sociocultural context where the cultural representation of the War Memorial makes meaning, the War Memorial as a cultural representation is expected to inform readers of the meaning of South Korean ethnicity that the Fine Art textbook promotes. For this reason, this research includes public discourses relevant to The War Memorial and designates them as data placed “outside” the Fine Art textbook. In addition to the data

“inside” the Fine Art textbook, the process and product of the textbook production and other texts relevant to the memorial are expected to reveal the relationship between postcolonialism and postcolonial multiculturalism.

To be specific, texts in which I explore South Korean ethnicity construction and multiculturalism in relation to the Fine Art textbook are primarily chosen from 1) a set of two images in the book, 2) the practices of the Fine Art textbook production system, and

3) public discourses relevant to the War Memorial. To begin with, a set of two images is chosen from the Fine Art textbook based on their formal characteristics. One, designated as the eighty-third Korean National Treasure, is The Pensive Bodhisattva by an anonymous artist. The other is The Thinker, by French sculptor Auguste Rodin. The formal characteristics of the two target images imply the “difference” of the works as an underpinning principle that displays the target images in a comparative structure. To complement these images, data to discuss the ethnicity construction in the textbook production process includes texts about the textbook authorization system and the national curriculum. Last but not least, outside texts relevant to The War Memorial (1994- present) include a speech by former minister of National Defense Lee (1989), The War 21

Memorial (1994), The Peace Clock Tower (2002), and the mascot of the War Memorial

Mudori’s greeting (n.d.).

The inquiry about ethnicity construction/postcolonial multiculturalism is based on the present, but it also adopts an inquiry into the past, in order to reflect on the contextual change that influences cultural identity and to consider continual historicity. The two images inside the Fine Art textbook and the other texts relevant to the textbook production system are based on the currently used textbook, so that we can check how the knowledge producers de(re)construct the meaning of South Korean ethnicity in the present. However, inevitably we must look to the past to examine the historicity of ethnicity, because no history associated with cultural identity construction can be based on historical discontinuity. The inquiry surrounding ethnicity construction outside the

Fine Art textbook through the War Memorial is mainly examined through materials from the late 1980s through the early 2000s, and even to the present, when South Korean society was thought to confront a period of strong change from cultural, political, and economic perspectives. Going through political and economic development and experiencing a string of international events, South Koreans’ cultural recognition and appropriation of culture for politico-economic purposes noticeably increased across social and educational realms during this period. Thus, this research adopts multiple timeframes in accordance with the way that South Korean knowledge producers/nationalist elites dealt with the idea of ethnicity.

The theoretical frame of postcolonial multiculturalism enables me to identify how differences and the construction of the idea of ethnicity under the post-colonial society have been managed. To fabricate this frame, each concept within postcolonialism and 22

multiculturalism should be foregrounded. To begin with, “multiculturalism” is a philosophy, policy, or strategy to manage/govern differences that are precipitated by categorization or naming (Hall, 2000) that is involved in power relations (Guilbault,

2011). Ever since human history began, humans have always been different, but the attempt to categorize people creates a “multicultural” society. Multiculturalism pursues diversity affirmation based on the understanding that everybody is the same in that they are all different. Both liberal multiculturalists and critical multiculturalists affirm differences and pursue unification through diversity. However, critical multiculturalism

(Lowe, 1996, cited in Guilbault, 2011; Mohanty, 1994) draws more attention to the inequality embedded in discourses and power relations. Rather than celebrating the categorized differences to precipitate everyone having equal opportunity, without any consideration of unsaid racial matters and cultural power relations, critical multiculturalism questions the categorization of cultural communities and power relations to control differences. Thus, for instance, it interrogates whose knowledge becomes a social norm, and how.

For the other axis, comprising the theoretical frame of postcolonial multiculturalism, postcolonialism/postcolonial theory should be considered. Colonialism underpins the origins of the South Korean “blood-based ethnicity,” and is related to orientalism-influenced viewpoints about who South Koreans are. Based on such an understanding, this research focuses on postcolonialism, in which the colonized knowledge producers respond to a given or internally developed representation about their value system, including their cultural identity. Postcolonialism, as a criticism of colonialism and an effort toward decolonization that post-colonial knowledge producers 23

make in and through texts, is useful to explore how South Korean knowledge producers give voice at the expense of colonialism – or orientalism. To be specific, postcolonialism makes it possible to explain how South Korean knowledge producers resist and challenge the South Korean cultural identity of blood-based ethnicity, which cannot be dissociated from the outside/western viewpoint, and instead re-establish a new meaning of nation.

This exploration must thus consider the meaning of ethnicity that knowledge builders attempted to de(re)construct in taking into account globalization and the existence of

North Korea. Thus, on the one hand, postcolonialism is appropriate to illustrate the notion of blood-based ethnicity that South Korean knowledge producers made an effort to resist.

On the other hand, it shows the modern meaning of South Korean ethnicity that they attempted to reconstruct. Accordingly, this theory draws our attention to public discourses, such as various visual and written texts inside/outside the Fine Art textbook, upon which the de(re)construction of the idea of South Korean ethnicity is established.

However, postcolonialism’s concern with how public discourses respond to the colonial origin of knowledge, such as blood-based ethnicity, is complex, because of the indeterminacy of South Koreans’ responses and the environmental changes. Employing

Young’s (2000) definition, postcolonial theory is expected to mark historical facts and situations where post-colonial state(s) and people attempt to decolonize and transform culture and cultural identities. Bhabha (1994) notes, the colonized peoples’ responses are not predetermined, which is backed up by other postcolonial theory. Postcolonial theory is also useful to consider diverse political and economic factors at the local and global levels, so that it enables us to explain how people attempt to decolonize but at the same time react to environmental changes, such as globalization. Regarding this research, the 24

inquiry about how South Koreans identify themselves goes along with the inquiry about whether South Koreans resist, accept, or negotiate the outside viewpoint about themselves: blood-based ethnicity. So, postcolonial theory helps us understand complex environmental situations, and the reaction of post-colonial subjects to those situations, in a more comprehensive way.

In particular, to focus on the colonized South Koreans’ response to colonial discourse, attention is drawn to Bhabha’s (1994) postcolonial theory, which addresses an indeterministic viewpoint of “the other” and the ambivalent power relationship between the colonizer and the colonized. From the postcolonial multiculturalism perspective, this research is, partly, an inquiry into how colonized South Koreans have been struggling to make meaning of South Koreanness in a discursive site of power. It is possible for the

South Korean dominant ruling group and its counter group to take turns exerting their power in a way that constructs the idea of a South Korean ethnic culture whose concepts are acutely in opposition. In this sense, Bhabha’s (1994) theory is appropriate to adopt because he argues that the power relationship between the colonial and the colonized is ambivalent, and that the fixed viewpoint on otherness should be replaced by ambivalent and in in deterministic modes of knowledge and power. In particular, the notion of

“mimicry” covers such ambivalent power relationships by enabling us to consider the fear or lack that the colonizer has in colonial discourse as well as the indeterminacy that the colonized takes up against the colonizer due to the desire for authority and power. I explore South Koreans’ resistance as a colonized people and their oppression as imitators of a colonizer in terms of the meaning making of South Korean ethnicity. Mimicry is also useful to explain the pressure or desire within the colonized group, who must go through 25

a power struggle relationship. Often, those who are in power relations in a post-colonial environment feel the need to justify their political positions and desire to gain power from the nation people. Mimicry is expected to underpin such dynamic power relations in terms of how knowledge producers use the idea of ethnicity. In this way, this research explores the transformation that mimicry brings about to people or different ethnic groups, which can be seen as ethnic-nationalism. Mimicry raises the question, though, whether knowledge producers/groups in different positions were decolonialists. In this research, the idea of mimicry is expected to be effective in describing the South Korea’s ambivalent position in managing cultural identity and ethnic-nationalism.

Postcolonial theory is also useful to describe the active and purposeful attempts that South Koreans made to defend their artistic choices and the impetuses behind those decisions. To verify the defense mechanism against the fear of wholeness that the colonized who mimics colonial discourse often takes up, in particular that surrounding the representation of the South Korean ethnicity, this research employs Bhabha’s (1994) viewpoint on stereotyping and fetishism. A fetish, as a “disavowal of difference,” is expected to explain why and how the inclusion of traditional artworks/cultures and the exclusion of the War Memorial function as fetishes and involve stereotyping South

Korean cultural representation (Bhabha, 1994, p. 74). Accordingly, this research, which explores the context surrounding the desire of the subjects in power, will be an inquiry into how the colonized South Korean knowledge producers—the imitators of the colonizer—have been going through an “ideological fantasy” (Zizek, 1989) against the fear of the antagonistic fissure, or difference. Postcolonial theory, such as mimicry, can back up the psychological motivation or pressure that colonized people put on themselves 26

to become like the colonizers.

So far, I have reviewed how multiculturalism and postcolonialism/postcolonial theory relate to this research. Postcolonialism and multiculturalism are similar in that they are interested in “labeling, categorization, and the identification of differences”

(Chanady, 1995, p. 429). Also, given the characteristics of critical multiculturalism, multiculturalism and postcolonialism are similar in that they question knowledge into which power is infiltrated. They commonly deal with inquiring why something that is presented as being a cultural representation is chosen, and who exert(s) political power when addressing what a knowledge builder considers a culture to be.

However, the two theories are in tension, especially in the South Korean context.

While both of them are interested in suturing meanings of culture out of unorganized multiple meanings, multiculturalism favors diverse meanings to promote diverse cultures while postcolonialism promotes a singular meaning for nation building. Multiculturalism and postcolonialism, in this sense, can be placed at a right-angle to each other: Figure 2 illustrates how they are thought to affect the meaning of the research variable, ethnicity of

South Korean culture.

Figure 2. The Relationship between Theories and Research Variable Note. P: The Idea of Postcolonialism; M: The Idea of Multiculturalism; E: Ethnicity; H: History 27

In Diagram A, any idea regarding multiculturalism is on the horizontal axis (M) while ideas on postcolonialism are on the vertical axis (P). The ethnicity of South Korean culture (E) is thought to be determined by the connection between the two axes of postcolonialism and multiculturalism. Due to the tension between postcolonialism and multiculturalism, postcolonial multiculturalism in a post-colonial society requires a certain politics to deal with differences. The politics of difference are primarily concerned with how subjects create nation building out of diversity, while at the same time promoting diversity. Figure 3 below is another way to illustrate Diagram A, and describes the relationship between postcolonialism and multiculturalism and the politics emerging out of the relationship.

Figure 3. Theories and the Politics of Difference

In order to consider the meaning of ethnicity that is constructed throughout history, and to consider the power of knowledge builders, Figure 2 also includes Diagram B, which is a

three-dimensional version of Diagram A, as well as a modified diagram (C) in accordance with the system model. Specifically, peoples’ power to make meaning of ethnicity is expected to determine the extent that the two axes work together, and the associated width of the social system (D).

Based on the discussion so far, the groundwork for a theoretical frame surrounding the idea of South Korean ethnicity can be developed, as can be seen in Table

1 below.

Multi- ▪ How to promote difference and diversity affirmation? culturalism ▫ How to promote ethnic cultural differences and diversity Post- affirmation? colonialism/ 1 Postcolonial ′ Theory ▪ How to ▪ What is the ▪ What are the benefits knowledge builders can gain build a implementation of an by having people recognize and affirm cultural essentialist understanding nation? of culture in the diversity? construction of national identity? 2 ▫ How to 3 appropriate ▪ What are the ▪ Postcolonial multiculturalism the idea benefits : Managing/Affirming difference in post-colonial of ethnicity knowledge South Korea for the purpose of nation building for nation builders can gain ▫ Ethnic-nationalism contributing to cultural building in from the identity and nation building post-colonial (de)reconstruction ▫ Politics of difference society? of national 1 identity? 2 4 ′ Table 1. Theoretical′ Framework for South Korean Postcolonial Multiculturalism ′

The ideas in the table are written from the knowledge builders’ perspective – whoever uses postcolonialism and multiculturalism. The main ideas constituting multiculturalism and postcolonialism/postcolonial theory structure the horizontal and vertical axes, respectively, while the research variable (ethnicity) is combined with the main ideas of

each theory and placed under those ideas (see cells 1 & 1′). The two theories and their associations with ethnicity generate the question, on which I focus in considering the knowledge builders’ intention to create meaning (see cells 2 & 2′). The common question is induced by the main ideas in 2 and 2′ (see cell 3), and it generates an idea (see cell 4) which is expected to underpin the theoretical frame of postcolonial multiculturalism. The theoretical lens of postcolonial multiculturalism will enable me to explore ethnicity construction or multiculturalism inside/outside the Fine Art textbook.

Meanwhile, regarding the research question for this study, how South Korean ethnicity construction affects multiculturalism in the Fine Art textbook, it is necessary to develop the framework by which South Korean postcolonial multiculturalism can be compared to South Korean ethnicity construction. To describe the principle and factors by which I examine the conflated form of postcolonial multiculturalism and postcolonialism,

Figure 4 below presents their relations.

Figure 4. Factors to Examine in the Relationship between Postcolonial Multiculturalism and Postcolonialism

Ethnic-nationalism, as a principle to undergird both postcolonialism/postcolonial theory and postcolonial multiculturalism, is concerned with who, under what context, and how make(s) meaning; who are the primary knowledge producers inside/outside the Fine Art textbook for decolonization and/or multiculturalism; what political-economic contexts at the local and global level motivate knowledge builders to de(re)construct the meaning of ethnicity and/or embrace multiculturalism; how knowledge builders or postcolonial multiculturalism advocates use various texts inside/outside the Fine Art textbook to manage differences after the 1990s to the present.

The research question includes questions that are to be asked inside/outside the

Fine Art textbook, as can be seen in Table 2 below.

Textbook Space ■ Inside ■ In-between ■ Outside the Fine Art textbook the Fine Art textbook the Fine Art textbook Texts □ Texts of □ Texts relevant to the □ Texts relevant to The Multi-culturalism textbook production War Memorial

in the book system Research Data ◦ The Pensive ◦ The Textbook ◦ The War Memorial Inquiry Bodhisattva Authorization System ◦ The Peace Clock Tower Topic ◦ The Thinker ◦ A national curriculum ◦ The former minister of Sub- National Defense Lee’s research speech question ◦ The War Memorial 1&2 mascot Mudori’s greeting □ Knowledge ▪ Who are the primary knowledge producers inside/outside the Fine builder(s) Art textbook for decolonization and/or multiculturalism? ▪ How do knowledge producers/postcolonial multiculturalism advocates use various texts inside/outside the Fine Art textbook to manage differences after the late 1990s to the present? ■ Inclu- ▫ What cultural representations of South Korean culture are How □ sion/ Exclu- included and not included in the textbook? (e. g. Why is the The is the sion image of The Pensive Bodhisattva selected as a representation of ethnicity way South Korean culture, and The Thinker as of one of other con- to countries’ cultures? And why is the War Memorial not included man struction in the book?) related to age post- diffe Poli- ▫ What category does the politics of difference in relation to colonial renc tics of ethnic cultural representation belong to? (e. g. Encouragement multi- es differ- of other countries’ cultures, encouragement of South Korean cultural- ence culture) ism? ▫ Who/what is created as the “other” as a result of the selection Other- ing and organization of the cultural representations inside/outside the Fine Art textbook? □ Politico- ▪ How does the political-economic context at the local and global economic level motivate knowledge producers to de(re)construct the context meaning of ethnicity and/or to embrace multiculturalism? Table 2. Inquiries for the relationship between South Korean ethnicity construction and postcolonial multiculturalism in the study

In general, these questions are grounded in a cultural standpoint, which is likely to inform us of the characteristics of postcolonial multiculturalism. This frame is expected not only to articulate the role of multiculturalism in a post-colonial South Korean context but also to reveal the meaning of South Koreanness, when it comes to reading visual and written texts. Several relevant questions to assist the inquiry about South Koreanness are

below.

▪ How does postcolonial multiculturalism contribute to constructing cultural identity and nation building? ▫ Given the selection and organization of the cultural representations, does South Korean postcolonial multiculturalism serve to create the meaning of South Koreanness? ▫ How do knowledge builders associate social norms with the cultural norm, and how do they associate this notion with the mechanism of war? What meaning is created as a result? What does such a South Koreanness have to do with multiculturalism? ▫ Does the selection and organization of the cultural representations and practices reflect nationalism and/or multiculturalism, or ethnic-nationalism? Table 3. Questions for the relationship between South Korean postcolonial multiculturalism and South Korean ethnicity construction

From a methodological viewpoint, Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is an appropriate method for this project; as it enables me to read socio-political discourse about ethnicity that is embedded inside/outside the Fine Art textbook. Since CDA assumes that discourse informs invisible beliefs and cultural identities that people share, as well as demonstrates visible language, using it can help uncover a pattern of discourse and its associated social structure. The goal of CDA is to identify the hidden agenda in constructing ideology through the process of discourse.

In practice, Fairclough’s (1995, cited in Burns, 2005) insight into the constituents of discourse or the relations of a discursive event with social structures needs to be foregrounded. CDA understands discourse to be composed of three levels: Text,

Discursive context, and Sociocultural context. The Text, which is considered an ideological recording, will be analyzed systematically. The Discursive Context is anticipated to analyze the process of producing meaning. The Sociocultural Context

focuses on analyzing the use of the text based on its social, political, and cultural context.

Figure 5 below shows the discursive event model in which I conceive the CDA frame.

Figure 5. Discursive Event Model

Regarding South Korean ethnicity construction, I place any questions relevant to the two sample images, The Pensive Bodhisattva and The Thinker, into a Text area. Any questions relevant to the textbook production system, such as the Textbook Authorization

System and the national curriculum, are placed in a Discursive Context area. Any sociocultural context surrounding the Fine Art textbook where public discourses relevant to the War Memorial are circulated is placed into the big Context area. Specifically, I classify four texts as Sociocultural Context: The War Memorial, The Peace Clock Tower, former minister Lee’s speech, and Mudori’s greeting. Figure 6 below shows the frame for this research based on the discursive event model.

Figure 6. Discursive Event Model for This Research

This frame, however, does not mean that the three areas are separate from one another or that the realms are a spatial division. The realms should be understood as technical distinctions, designed to illustrate the research structure used to examine how

South Korean ethnicity construction occurs inside/outside the Fine Art textbook. To this end, three realms are established in relation to the textbook, and representative texts in each realm are selected. The texts in each realm should be understood as being connected to the other texts in the other realms, as implied by the dotted lines separating two adjacent realms.

In particular, an intertextual approach enables me to investigate the way in which those who are in power participate in the process of constructing the ideology of South 35

Koreanness by virtue of the language use that mutually formulates social structure.

Intertextuality in CDA can be viewed as being at the heart of the meaning-making process of South Korean ethnicity: it makes it possible to inquire how the sociocultural, political, and historical contexts influence the selection of the representations inside/outside the Fine Art textbook to promote the idea of South Korean ethnic culture through multiculturalism. While attention is drawn to texts in each of the three realms − two texts in the Text area, and two texts in the Discursive Context area, and four texts in the Socio-political Context area− I examine how these texts create the meaning of South

Korean ethnicity in a connected way throughout history. This is explored in Figure 7, which is a three-dimensional modification of Figure 6 that incorporates the time sphere.

Figure 7. Historical Discursive Model for This Research

The focus in intertextuality is on interpreting how the texts in the three realms are interconnected and create meanings of South Korean ethnicity. In this way, this research 36

discusses how larger sociocultural contexts are connected to the texts of The Pensive

Bodhisattva and The Thinker via the intertextuality of the textbook production system.

This raises two important questions such as: What does the textbook publication system have to do with the idea of ethnicity described in the multicultural section in the Fine Art textbook? How does the grand narrative regarding the construction of South Korean national cultural identification influence the selections of the representation(s) of South

Korean ethnic culture in the multicultural portion of the Fine Art textbook? The intertextuality enables me to examine why and how the ideology of a South Korean ethnic culture associated with nationalism has been created and sustained.

Intertextuality enables me not only to trace the way in which the ideology of

South Korean ethnicity is constructed, but also to uncover the meaning of South Koreans’ epistemological understanding of who they are: South Koreanness. Given that people construct and internalize ideologies not because of propaganda based on a singular and explicit regime, but because of multiple and precisely regulated ways of construction, several interconnected discourses, such as gender and nationality, are expected to enable me to uncover a complicated politics of signification and the meaning of South

Koreanness13.

As can be seen, this research adopts CDA in rather mediated ways, in consideration of a socially normatized meaning of ethnicity and history. Since I examine the texts in relation to South Korean ethnicity construction in the historical context and through intertextual analysis, a discourse-historical approach should be used. Also, since I

13 In some ways, this research can be viewed as exploring the hegemonic process of South Koreanness. However, since it is not a primary purpose of this research to discuss the meaning of South Koreanness, any intertextual relations constituting the meaning in the Context realm are not designated as texts in this research. 37

pay attention to the discourse of the dominant knowledge builders from a political perspective, I cannot help but go through the texts from a socio-cognitive perspective. In analyzing several visual and textual discourses, this research will focus more on a semantic perspective than a syntactic approach, using the linguistic elements of a CDA approach.

So far, I’ve addressed several theoretical and methodological frames, which enable me to read socio-political and historical discourses about South Korean ethnicity construction and/or multiculturalism that are embedded inside/outside the Fine Art textbook. This argument is thought to demonstrate how knowledge builders throughout history have intervened in the construction of the idea of South Korean ethnic culture, and whether it is based on a top-down grand narrative or a bottom-up style. It is also important to consider how public discourses inside/outside the Fine Art textbook create

“the other” and whether, thereby, they create a South Korean meaning of ethnicity.

Accordingly, the research asks whether cultural representations have been organized in conflicting relationships throughout history inside/outside of the textbook, and what this relationship implies in terms of multiculturalism and South Koreanness in South Korea.

Last but not least, this study considers how the politics of difference frames work in the selection and description of what counts as South Korean ethnic cultures inside/outside the Fine Art textbook, and how public discourses inside/outside of the textbook turn the idea of a blood-based ethnicity into nationalism. Specific questions for this sociopolitical discourse about South Korean ethnicity construction or multiculturalism, using the theoretical and methodological frames in each realm of the discursive event, are described in Table 4 below. 38

The Pensive Bodhisattva The Thinker

□ Knowledge ▪ Who are the primary knowledge producer(s) that create the myths for the builder(s) image examples? ▪ What cultures/arts are included in the multiculturalism portion of the Fine □ Inclusion/ Art textbook? exclusion ▪ What cultures/arts are not included in the multiculturalism portion of the Fine Art textbook? ▪ Why are the images of The Pensive Bodhisattva and The Thinker chosen for the multicultural portion in the book from the elements and principles of a design perspective? ▪ Why are The Pensive Bodhisattva and The Thinker thought to be selected □ Politics of for the cultural representations in the book? Are they distinctive ethnic difference in cultures? The Pensive ▪ Why is the War Memorial not included in the cultural diversity portion of Bodhisattva the textbook? vs. The ▪ What kind of South Korean ethnic culture/arts is encouraged? Thinker ▪ What kind of other countries’ culture/arts are encouraged? ▫ What countries’ cultures/arts have been newly added, compared to the previous textbook? Why are they thought to be included and what meaning do they contribute to make in terms of multiculturalism? ▪ Which countries’ cultures are encouraged between South Korea’s and the other countries’ cultures? ▪ How do these visual texts in conflict support the idea of South Korean ethnic culture? □ The Pensive ▫ How is the meaning of South Korean ethnicity produced through The Bodhisattva Pensive Bodhisattva that is displayed next to The Thinker? Which is the vs. The other? Thinker ▫ Given the title for this portion, Our traditional art works and the other and countries’ artworks, why are particularly “traditional” artworks chosen the Other for the representation of South Korean culture/arts?” What is, then, the other in this case? ▪ How does the War Memorial work as the other in the textbook by its invisibility? ▪ Why are the image examples thought to be selected for the cultural representations in the book, considering the socio-political and neoliberal context where the images have been known as some of the most representative South Korean ethnic arts? □ The Impact of ▫ What kinds of preconception or myths exist regarding the image Context examples? ▫ How have these myths been created throughout history in the postcolonial context? What viewpoints on ethnicity are involved in the story? Table 4. Questions for the relationship between South Korean ethnicity construction and postcolonial multiculturalism in the image examples in the book

Fine Art Textbook Production System

National Curriculum Textbook Authorization System ▪ Who gives a textbook authority? ▫ What legal system is thought to endow textbooks with a certain position? ▪ Who narrates a national curriculum? □ Knowledge ▪ builder(s) Who gives authority to the Textbook Authorization System? ▫ What legal system backs up the authority of the deliberative council, so that they determine the selection of textbooks in the Textbook Authorization System? ▪ Who takes responsibility to produce and distribute the textbook? ▪ What kind of ethnic cultural representation is promoted in the □ Inclusion/ curriculum? exclusion ▪ What kind of ethnic cultural representation is dismissed for the multiculturalism portion in the national curriculum? ▪ □ Politics of How does a Textbook Authorization System facilitate South Korean difference in ethnic culture and/or diverse ethnic cultures? the Fine Art ▪ How does the national curriculum facilitate or regulate South Korean Textbook ethnic culture or diverse ethnic cultures? Production ▫ What purposes does the fine art national curriculum set regarding System diverse cultural affirmation? ▪ How do a range of textbook production systems support the idea of South Korean ethnic culture? ▫ □ Textbook How does the textbook authorization system have textbook Production producers self-regulated, and how does it affect the meaning of System South Korean ethnicity? and ▫ How does a national curriculum create the other such that the the Other system promotes people to be unified?

▫ Who is the other? How do the knowledge producers use the strategy of divide-and-conquer by/with the national curriculum? How does the strategy serve as national belonging? ▪ How did the changes in post-colonial political regimes and neoliberal economic systems before, throughout, and after the late 1980s □ The Impact of influence the meaning of South Korean ethnicity that was taken on Context by the current national curriculum and in the textbook? ▫ How the textbook price assessment affect both the process the book companies go through for textbook publication and the quality of the content of the book? Table 5. Questions for the relationship between South Korean ethnicity construction and postcolonial multiculturalism in the textbook production system

The War Memorial

Minister Lee’s The War Memorial The Peace Clock Mudori’s Greeting Speech (1989) (1994) Tower (2002) (n.d) □ Knowledge ▪ Who narrates the idea of South Korean ethnic culture in the four texts? builder(s) ▪ Who planned, funded, and managed The War Memorial? ▪ What kinds of diverse ethnic cultures are included in the War Memorial? ▪ What kinds of diverse ethnic cultures are not included in the War □ Inclusion/ Memorial? exclusion ▪ What kind of idea about diversity are shown, and not shown, in the War Memorial? ▪ How does the public discourses relevant to the War Memorial facilitate South Korean ethnic culture and/or diverse ethnic cultures? ▫ What events does the War Memorial set regarding South Korean ethnicity construction and/or diverse cultural affirmation? ▪ How does a politics of difference through public discourses relevant to the War Memorial create a South Korean epistemological viewpoint of South Koreanness? ◦ What is the connotative meaning of the War Memorial, and what □ Politics of relation does the connotative meaning have to ideological signs that difference in alert a nation’s people to protect themselves, or that make them proud of the War Memorial themselves as a nation? ◦ What does South Koreanness mean in the War Memorial? What does the term have to do with social norms of unity and cultural norms of blood-based ethnicity? How does the cultural norm of blood-based ethnicity transform to a social norm of unity, and as such what is the meaning of South Koreanness? ◦ How does the South Korean ethnic script of South Koreanness function in the terrain of social reproduction? What can we infer from this transformation in relation to multiculturalism/diversity affirmation? □ Public ▪ How do the four texts respectively create the War images by which they discourses of invoke people to be conflicted? How do they divide people and impose a the War certain form of nationalism? Memorial ▪ Why do they need the other? What function does the other have for nation and building in the post-colonial context and particular political context? the Other ▪ How does the War Memorial function as a mediator to contribute to nationalism? ▪ How do national political contexts influence the creation of the War Memorial regarding how it represents a viewpoint on ethnicity? ▪ How did the changes in post-colonial political regimes and neoliberal □ The Impact of economic systems before, throughout, and after the 1990s influence how Context the viewpoint of ethnicity is represented in the four texts of the War Memorial? ▪ What values are in the district where the memorial is located, and how does this influence how it represents South Korean culture? Table 6. Questions for the relationship between South Korean ethnicity construction and postcolonial multiculturalism in the War Memorial

In sum, CDA associated with postcolonial multiculturalism is expected to enable me to unpack how the idea of South Korean ethnic culture has been saturated into the images in conflict, from the inside/the outside of the Fine Art textbook and in the postcolonial South Korean context. CDA with a postcolonial multiculturalism lens will also enable me to identify the epistemology of South Koreanness through the images in the

Fine Art textbook by linking it to external discursive and socio-political contexts.

1.5 Limitation to This Study

This project was initiated with the assumption that the image examples in the Fine

Art textbook could teach the idea of South Koreanness rather than diversity affirmation. It is important to clarify some meanings in relation to this assumption. One is the viewpoint about canon, another is the meaning of ideology, and the third is the range and scope of the multicultural section.

Advocates who are aware of the value of canon could challenge the argument for this study. There is no doubt that canons are a heritage worth preserving. Smith (1992, cited in Barrett, 1998, pp. 60-62) suggests four reasons why high cultural work should be taught:

(a) there is a tradition of great art that is worth preserving and transmitting. …(b)

there are people (artists, historians, critics, educators) who care about this

tradition and whose judgments are the best guides to artistic excellence that we

have. …(c) works of high culture are inestimable sources of intense enjoyment,

gratification, and humanistic insight. …(d) such works are significant constituents

of national pride and unity. (Smith, 1992, cited in Barrett, 1998, pp. 60-62)

Instead, what I discuss in this study must be understood not as concerning the value of 42

heritage, but rather the usage of heritage. Hegemony construction often appropriates heritage, and the oppressed’s narratives are often hidden, suppressed, or distorted by dominant groups. In a similar vein, from a political viewpoint, canons, which have been regarded as high art, can be treated as popular culture, which Adorno and Horkheimer

(2007) regarded as low art pertinent to being commodified14. Adorno and Horkheimer

(2007) distinguish high art from popular culture, and they view high art as having the capacity to critically challenge standardized society, unlike popular culture. According to their argument, whatever supports capitalism becomes low art. Popular culture serves as a medium by which people get to have a fantasy of fulfillment. If canons are printed and distributed in a textbook that students consume without reflection or any critical thinking, then the canons cannot be considered exceptions. This study questions whether textbook makers might possibly create a promise of reality (Adorno & Horkheimer, 2007) whereby students living in a capitalist industrial society are supposed to consume the commodity of South Koreanness.

It is also important to articulate the meaning of ideology. Ideology should move away from being seen as falsity. Since there is no truth, there is no falsity. All knowledge is contingent and bound to a particular historical and cultural condition. Therefore, the fragmented meanings of commonsense cannot be judged as false or as true (Barker,

2004). This study, which grapples with the ideology of South Koreanness, is not to argue that South Koreanness is rooted in falsity or that the falsity of South Koreanness deceives or propagates people by false representations. Instead, it argues about what kind of and

14 I do not advocate the idea of high art versus low art. In this part, I just pay attention to the political usage of alleged high art to use as a heritage for people’s consumption. 43

how a certain type of social knowledge of South Koreanness has been constructed, in the particular context of a postcolonial situation and in a textbook.

Last but not least, I pay attention to the two image examples titled Our traditional art works and the other countries’ art works in the Fine Art textbook, while considering the appropriateness of the multiculturalism section in relation to the image examples. Yet, this does not mean that these two images are representing the entire multiculturalism section in the book. The Fine Art textbook adopts cultural spheres in an integrated way throughout the whole content. Therefore, the target images that I employ for this research cannot be the only definitive examples. An attempt to investigate the whole content of the

Fine Art textbook in depth, in relation to multiculturalism, should be considered in future studies, in order to make up for this limitation.

1.6 Conclusion

Post-colonial South Korea, which experienced colonialization, national division, and political and economic turmoil, has been under pressure to adopt multiculturalism as well as to solidify the nation throughout the whole social and educational realm since the late 1980s, and has made efforts to keep a balance –or tension− between enhancing the

South Korean ethnic culture and embracing cultural diversity. Under this situation, the research problem is that South Korean ethnicity construction in the pedagogical realms, on the whole, appears to disrupt the idea of multiculturalism. The Fine Art textbook for

5th- and 6th- graders is not an exception so that it appears not to promote the diversity affirmation, given that the content that deals with cultural understanding is grounded in the stable and essentialist ethnic cultural understanding that is infiltrated with national culture. Given the significance of a fine art textbook as a cultural and pedagogical site, it 44

is important to examine the assumption.

This research aims at unpacking how South Korean ethnicity construction affects multiculturalism in the Fine Art textbook. This research focuses on examining how ethnicity construction, after the 1990s to the present, is related to postcolonial multiculturalism and how the conflated form of postcolonial multiculturalism affects the idea of multiculturalism.

To this end, first of all, attention is drawn to the way that South Korean knowledge producers de(re)construct the idea of South Korean ethnicity in a) the visual and written texts inside the Fine Art textbook, b) a range of textbook production processes, and c) public discourses outside the textbook. Employing a postcolonial multiculturalism lens, the focus is on examining who de(re)constructs the idea of South

Korean ethnicity, by what way, and under what politico-economic and historical context inside/outside of the Fine Art textbook from the late 1980s to the present. Secondly, this research grapples with how South Korean postcolonial multiculturalism contributes to constructing the idea of South Korean culture and establishing the nation. The focus is drawn to several matters: a) inclusion and exclusion in the selection of cultural representations, b) politics of difference, and 3) othering, both inside and outside of the

Fine Art textbook.

Employing critical discourse analysis with intertextuality, this research investigates how the data inside/outside the Fine Art textbook contribute to the construction of South Koreanness. In this research, “inside” data refers to the content in the book and “in-between” data refers to the textbook production system. The texts in which I explore South Korean ethnicity construction and/or multiculturalism inside the 45

textbook are The Pensive Bodhisattva and The Thinker, and the texts in-between the textbook are the textbook authorization system and the national curriculum. The outside texts refer to public discourses relevant to The War Memorial (1994-Present) that are currently absent in the book. Overall, the focus is on exploring the meaning of ethnicity that South Korean postcolonialism embraces in the textbook by considering the context where the book is developed.

Overall, the focus is on exploring whether inside/outside the Fine Art textbook promotes the pedagogy of South Korean ethnicity construction through postcolonial multiculturalism and how it affects understanding the idea of multiculturalism.

Chapter 2: Literature Review

2.1 Review of the Literature

To contextualize the research question, i.e., whether the multicultural section in the Fine Art textbook for 5th and 6th grades is disrupted by postcolonialism inside/outside the book, I reviewed articles that use postcolonial frameworks that deal directly or indirectly with multicultural art education, and those analyzing the matter of cultural identity inside/outside school textbooks in South Korea. Literature related to multicultural art education15 in South Korea is included in the literature review because this research explores how the Fine Art textbook embraces the multicultural section, an important concern for multicultural (art) educators (Sleeter & Grant, 2009). Literature related to postcolonialism is likewise included, as this study’s goal is to examine how the postcolonial construction of South Korean ethnicity affects multiculturalism in the book.

Several South Korean researchers have examined school textbooks from postcolonial perspectives. A. Y. Kim (2010) explores four kinds of national World

Geography textbooks used in a South Korean high school in terms of postcolonialism, and discovers a lack of historic and geographic information about Asia and Africa, and that the textbook authors used capital-oriented or economic value as a priority in selecting geographic information. Kim suggests that teachers must engage students in

15 The first influential studies of multicultural art education appeared around 1999, and especially since 2006 scholarly activity in the field has increased radically (Ahn, 2011).

reading a textbook in a critical way and seeking out more information on Asia and Africa, and that teachers must provide students with diverse and delicate supplemental instruction on other countries with different economic value systems. H. J. Yoo (2009), in

Korean education, explores the world literature portion of high school literature textbooks in South Korea, and similarly suggests that the literature of third-world countries must be supplemented and the growth-centered values discovered in the post-colonial literature of

Korea must be critically analyzed. Park (2012), in Geography education, explores the contents of the Africa unit in South Korean Geography textbooks, as well as teaching styles, from the postcolonialism perspective. He discovers that the description of Africa relies structurally on dichotomous comparisons with Europe. Park suggests teachers and students must read textbooks with a critical eye, and that teachers must utilize balanced materials between Europe and Africa to discard their essentialized perspectives and prejudices regarding Africa.

More broadly, W. P. Hong (2009) explores the secondary school social studies curriculum in the U. S. A., focusing on how Asia is discussed, how American students’ might imagine Asia, and what underlying sociocultural assumptions are embedded in the textbook. He points out that the meaning of Asia that is continuously constructed based on Asian contexts and images of Asia, which are mostly grounded in images of China and

Japan, turn out to be stereotyped. Joo (2006) likewise explores a South Korean high school English textbook, which is supposed to integrate cultural aspects in accordance with one of the foci of the 7th National Curriculum. He finds that the book focuses on the culture of America, Europe, and (South) Korea and on male-centered contents, resulting in devaluing or misunderstanding other cultures. These studies, revealing a constructed 48

silence (Freire, 2007), conclude that the information about the Third World is devalued in the given textbooks, and that the colonial legacies of regarding the third would as “other” needs to be deconstructed in the curriculum.

This research has a few important differences from previous scholarship on postcolonialism in South Korean textbooks. First, these studies assume that ethnic culture is fixed and stable, so that it is possible for them to classify, for instance, Third World culture or western culture. I question this classification, because it could be a colonial attempt. According to Fanon (1968), the colonized nations psychoanalytically internalize the collective consciousness of the colonizers’ violence, so that they themselves paradoxically put the colonized to the margins of being ‘the other,’ “the wretched of the earth.” On the surface, the attempt to emphasize third-world countries’ cultures appears to be an attempt to recover what was once marginalized, othered, exploited, and oppressed by colonialism. However, it must be a mutated type of violence, which had been infiltrated into the colonized’s ethnic trauma under colonialism. It is arguable to define the Third World, but in common usage, most of the colonized countries in the past or those who are on the margin in the global economy are usually called the Third World. It must be certain that the meaning of the Third World became stereotyped to refer to poor countries or countries on the periphery in the global world. This implies that this terminology should be based on the categorization of the countries in the world from social, political, and economic viewpoints. In this sense, here I used the term, mutated violence, to point to the way that researchers set the binary between countries and objectify the countries on the margin with this stereotyped name. The usage of the term must be another way of attacking those who are on the periphery, given that there is no 49

singular ‘third world county’s culture’ as long as we pay attention to the peoples’ cultures.

Such the researchers’ attempts to unearth the diverse ethnic countries’ cultures are to evaluate them in a positive way. However, it must be also important to consider whether there is any oppression caused by the researchers when the postcolonial knowledge builders attempt to decolonize the country; i. e., whether those who are interested in textbook research are really interested in a culture or cultural diversity that are on-going amongst the people in the countries, or they simply replicate the term as traditional colonizers did due to the internalized desire for power over people or their culture. They can be viewed as trying to be positive by recognizing the third world people and their culture, but they can be viewed as making those who are on the margin as different but not giving them equality. The violent viewpoint on the world that is undergirded by a binary and colonial understanding of the world should be discarded. In this paper, accordingly, I do not classify South Korea as part of the Third World; however, as that term generally refers to countries “which were not settler colonies but conquered nonwhite societies with state boundaries that correspond to the administrative units of nineteenth-century late colonialism” (Goh, 2008, p. 233).

Secondly, previous studies do not consider what comes from South Korean ethnic culture, since their focus was to look into how “other” countries’ cultures are presented in the textbooks, based on a dichotomous understanding of ethnic culture. By contrast, this research focuses on articulating the substantial and political meaning of South Korean ethnic culture as a postcolonial plan: meanings behind the idea of South Korean ethnic culture and South Koreanness, the way that these meanings relate to nationalism, the way that the idea of ethnicity relates to a blood-based concept, the way that attempts at 50

postcolonialism are embedded inside/outside the textbook, and the mechanism through which any attempt to fix the ideology of what counts as South Korean ethnic culture is facilitated as South Koreanness. Here, I focus on the cultural representation of the Fine

Art textbook through which this mechanism is expressed, and the way that the mechanism works as a postcolonialism.

Thirdly, these studies do not focus on describing the resistance or negotiation between conflicting cultural ideas. I propose that the process should be the focal point to address in examining culture: if we do not pay attention to the process of cultural meeting/conflicts, we may have to be satisfied with just identifying the fixed hegemony and consider that as a universal truth. In this study, the question of whether a fine art textbook is used for ethnicity construction goes along with the inquiry about whether

South Koreans resist, accept, or negotiate the blood-based viewpoint about their own ethnicity. In particular, because there are power relations within the country, which appropriate the knowledge of who they are in a different way, it is necessary to consider how the identification of ethnicity has been contested between the groups.

Park’s (2009) study overlaps the most with my research, as it also examines postcolonial elements of the South Korean fine art curriculum. She focuses on tracing the path by which South Korean public art education was influenced by Japanese art curriculum, whose contents and the associated (art) educational philosophy were influenced by the west. This research departs from Park’s (2009) approach in a couple areas. To begin with, Park’s research pays attention to a set of linear colonial determinations to determine how colonial Japanese education greatly impacted the colonized South Korean fine art curriculum. For example, the unit on designing an 51

environment and an interior house in the 1955 South Korean curriculum was described to have originated in Japan’s 1949 curriculum. The 1949 textbook in turn incorporated

Ruskin’s (Haslam, 1988, cited in Park, 2009, p. 188) nature-focused curriculum from the

1930s, showing the Japanese interest in Reconstructionism. In this sense, Park (2009) attempts to historicize the origins of South Korean art education, and shows how the so- called ‘original’ educational notion (Ruskin’s) had been mutated in another country

(Japan) based on that country’s cultural interests. However, she does not specifically cover either the postcolonial South Korean effort to set forth an independent education or any other political and economic factors surrounding the textbook production system. For example, Park (2009) neglected to explain why ‘nature’ could be adapted to the curriculum in post-colonial South Korean education. The attempt to identify colonial relations in a linear way can reductively simplify the elusive context surrounding textbook production. With regard to the present study, it is necessary to consider the way that post-colonial South Korea coped with education and with various other political and economic factors that influenced the Fine Art textbook production.

Likewise, in a broad sense, Park (2009) does not examine what it looks like for a given idea of ethnicity to determine South Korean culture or South Koreanness in postcolonial South Korea. I examine an idea of South Korean ethnic culture that is considered to have originated in South Korean indigenous culture, and later to have been presented as representing a South Korean cultural index. For example, there is a possibility that South Koreans had a special interest in blood-based ethnicity in their indigenous culture, so that the colonized South Korea did not resist or hesitate to accept the content. It is also not Park’s concern to explore the means by which colonialism in 52

relation to ethnicity – regardless of who exerted the idea – formulated the notion of South

Koreanness through images. Park mentions one of the units, which has to do with nature or natural beauty, but does not argue that nature or nature-evoking images have something to do with the South Korean perception of what it is that they purport to represent in South Korean cultural identity, and why they believe in that ideology. By contrast, I want to take into account the overlapping or complex space where the colonial and the colonized interact with each other, and where some meanings are chosen and some are discarded. The selection or refusal arises from two factors: the existence of an indigenous culture and the political characteristics of culture. I will inquire how South

Koreans who had experienced the Korean War used a notion of ethnicity that was given to them for a political purpose, and how the dominant knowledge builder groups who were in dynamic power relations transformed or reproduced the idea of ethnic culture.

The work reviewed thus far has focused on the content of the textbooks: how colonialism affects their contents or how the process of textbook content production has been intermingled with other countries’ ideology due to a colonized history. Other studies, however, more directly analyze how textbooks construct and express South Korean ethnicity. Han (2007) explores a Korean textbook published during the period when the U.

S. military governed South Korea, a time when removing the remnants of Japanese colonialism and building the modern nation state were hot social issues in South Korea.

Han discovered that tradition-focused and progressive optimism-oriented contents are used as the primary discourses in the textbook. The author believes that policy makers in the post-colonial context want to establish the identity of South Korean ethnicity using the mechanism of colonialism in a textbook, the political text, but in an ambivalent way. 53

I agree with Han’s (2007) analysis for several reasons. First, the idea that the essentialized ethnic culture and ethnic tradition undergird the establishment and enhancement of authentic subjectivity for South Korea; secondly, the idea that a colonial mechanism operates by virtue of enlightened reasoning, progressive optimism, and violence over the other16; and thirdly, the author’s implication that the contents, deprived a relationship to students’ daily lives, serve to make the students others and violate their identity.

This research attempts to fill the gap in terms of how to look at history and heritage. First, I assert that Han (2007) assumes a discontinuity between the post-colonial and the colonial periods due to different perspectives on history. Han (2007) believes that

South Korean heritage or tradition was considered inferior under Japanese colonialism, while postcolonial South Korea wanted to challenge the internalized and disparaged image of South Korean art. This argument implies that all South Korean heritage was disregarded or suppressed under Japanese colonialism, and began to be highlighted only after independence from Japan. But history should be understood as an on-going process

16 According to the author, the unit on Thomas Edison and Marie Curie in the textbook acquaints students with a passion for progressivism predicated on the modern science priority ideology, and it motivates textbook writers to utilize this modernism for the purpose of nation development. In some sense, there must be violence because students’ real lives are not being considered as part of daily school life, in order to conform to the essentialized ethnic culture through modernism. Curriculum that does not consider the negotiation between conflicting cultural ideas reflects the political culture infiltrated into education. The political cultural in education can destroy individual agency or differences, which could give birth to inequality in human beings. Such an avoidance is necessary to instill the habits of the aforementioned essentializing culture. To avoid the idea of agency and difference in what is not to be revealed is considered to be problematic in terms of normalized post-colonial culture. In such circumstances, curriculum to have people become national citizens results in creating and solidifying the dichotomous understanding of the world, such as national culture vs. local culture or culture possible in the public realm vs. in the private realm. What follows the social value will be revealed in public, but what is outside or in between the categories is kept for the private realm. These characteristics continue the maintenance of essentialized ethnic culture that serves to classify those others as excluded and maintains those, who through colonial mechanisms, are included in essentialized ethnic South Koreanness.

in which people are always making meaning. The reason that one period appears to be disconnected from previous periods is not because of any inherent discontinuity, but because particular people and groups have used history differently depending on their agendas. Unlike Han, I have a somewhat ambivalent viewpoint on historicity. In some sense, I assume discontinuity between the post-colonial and the colonial periods due to the efforts that the post-colonial dominant knowledge builder groups made toward nation building. At the same time, however, I do not neglect to consider the possibility of historical continuity in analyzing cultural identification. For example, identification about ethnic culture in South Korea should not go beyond or should be rooted in the indigenous belief, although I agree with the idea that dominant people maneuver cultural identification for their own political purposes. All in all, this study is concerned with the

South Korean epistemological understanding of ethnicity, which lasts throughout history but is thought to be appropriated for the political purpose of nation building.

Secondly, Han (2007) pays little attention to the political perspective of heritage, although to some extent he assumes that heritage can be used for political purposes.

Hegemony construction involves reforming the practices of the past to formulate the present. It is well-known that world heritage was excavated or renovated to meet some political needs (Mitchell, 2002) and that history is a process of dynamic dispersions, so that a certain type of particular traditional culture is (dis)connected for political reasons.

Therefore, it is possible that some heritage reminding indigenous South Korean people of authenticity might be traced from a certain historical point in relation to postcolonialism, and it is possible that ‘South Korean’ arts associated with the traditional idea of South

Korean ethnic culture −that is, with blood-based ethnicity− were unearthed by post- 55

colonial knowledge builder groups for political purposes. This research is in fact grounded in such an assumption, and argues that the War Memorial is at the center of this idea. To this end, I focus on investigating how the Fine Art textbook/War Memorial work as newly-appeared authentic South Korean ethnic culture, when they were constructed, who was involved in the construction, and for what purpose.

Overall, this research departs from prior studies in several ways. First of all, the studies that I reviewed in this chapter focus on examining the content of the target textbooks in relation to ethnic culture. A. Y. Kim (2010), H. J. Yoo (2009), and Park

(2012) point out a lack of or imbalanced information about the Third World; Joo (2006) points out that other cultures are devalued; W. P. Hong (2009) argues against the stereotypical Asian image; Park (2009) explores the first fine art textbook whose contents were influenced by Japan and Europe; and Han (2007) considers a Korean textbook as postcolonialism. These studies all argue that the target textbooks have colonial legacies and imply the necessity to deconstruct the other.

By comparison, this research focuses more on context than content. This study’s goal of unpacking whether the ethnicity construction inside/outside of the Fine Art textbook disrupts the idea of multiculturalism, in some way, considers the ways in which

South Korean knowledge builders design postcolonialism around a particular type of ethnicity. That is, the research question requires exploring the way in which knowledge builders de(re)construct South Korean cultural identity and educate students as to who they are. In particular, since the textbook is thought to be developed as part of postcolonialism, it is necessary to investigate both the textbook’s context and the book itself. To be specific, by context I mean both contexts in which the target textbook 56

publication system supports the idea of ethnic cultures and the sociocultural and historical context surrounding the construction of the idea of ethnic cultures.

This focus on context sets the study apart from previous work, but it does not mean that I discard the significance of the textbook’s content. Rather, the content provides the groundwork with which to read the notion of ethnic culture. When exploring the textbook content, attention is paid to the invisible as well as the visible South Korean ethnic culture, another important departure from previous work. In this sense, this research postulates the War Memorial as a mediator that fits into the topic of invisible cultural representation from the content perspective, as well as the medium through which sociocultural discourse(s) of ethnicity are derived from the contextual perspective.

Examining the context of the textbook further enables me to identify how culture is appropriated for political purposes from the postcolonial theoretical perspective. The aforementioned studies do not pay attention to, for instance, how the subject(s) of knowledge producer(s) have a colonial leaning. Han (2007) argues that the colonial desire to rule and to be decolonized is infiltrated into the target textbook production. However, I believe that the relationship between the physical context and the content of the textbook should be examined in a more comprehensive and direct way than his research does. A textbook, as a postcolonialism plan or heritage, can potentially justify a certain group’s political regime. It is thus important to discover who was involved in these politics, and how the meanings of heritage were developed throughout history as different groups held politically dominant positions.

Secondly, researchers who critique textbooks from the postcolonialism/postcolonial theory perspective in South Korea tend to pay attention to 57

Japanese colonialism. This allows for critiques of how the Japanese viewed South Korean culture from the perspective of colonialism. Yanagi Muneyoshi (Lee, 1994, cited in

Critical Plateaux, 2002) is often cited as a Japanese person who was fascinated by Korean ceramics; he introduced Korean art to Japan in his writings Thinking of Korea and

Korean Tourism around 1919. However, as Karatani (1997, cited in Critical Plateaux,

2002) contends, Yanagi’s praise17 of Korean art is critiqued as being merely a strategy of othering Koreans, regarding them and their arts as being beautified and as being gazed at18. Kim (1991, cited in Critical Plateaux, 2002) views Yanagi’s ideas as being derived from a combination of personal sentimental humanism and Japanese colonialism, which focused on degrading the colonized culture. Kang (1997, cited in Critical Plateaux, 2002) also suggests that the stereotyped19 image of Koreans being in sorrow or grief was derived from the Japanese colonial hegemony, to degrade the colonized’s existence as being gazed at, feminized, and insecure based on the dichotomous understanding of the self/other. In this way, these studies present Yanagi’s writing as colonialism that is thought to have influenced Koreans’ views of themselves and their own art.

The present study, in some way, cannot avoid considering modernism’s aesthetic viewpoint, which dates back to Japanese colonialism. It is likely that modernism, which was transferred by Japan, has influenced South Korean knowledge builders’ views of what heritages could be “good” and deserve to “represent” universalized values for South

17 Yanagi wrote, “Chosun gave birth to quality of beauty. Chosun is a country in which the populace embraces beautiful lives” (Kim, 1994, cited in Critical Plateaux, 2002). 18 “Kim (1994) argues this because the year when the book was published was around 1919 and Mar. 1. 1919 was recorded as the time of Koreans’ desperate fight against Japanese colonialism at its peak. Kim argues this because of Yanagi’s ambiguous criticism of Korea’s anti-Japanese movement and his views on Japanese universalism and the solidarity of Asia” (Critical Plateaux, 2002). 19 “Yanagi described the Korean aesthetic of focusing on lines as an expression of Koreans, which embodies and internalizes the emotions of grief, sorrow, or sadness” (Critical Plateaux, 2002). 58

Koreans. Furthermore, the agreed concept might have influenced the commonsensical idea of South Korean ethnic culture, the fine art curriculum, or any number of policies.

However, it is too simplistic to say that South Korean modernism is only influenced by

Japan. Given this research’s emphasis on cultural struggles after the late 1980s, the

United States’ influence is unavoidable, especially in terms of how South Koreans identify who they are and what their culture is. For example, for Masterpieces of Korean

Art (Metropolitan Museum of Art, December 1957-June 1959), the first20 large modern exhibition of Korean art abroad, decisions about selecting the artwork were primarily dependent on American committees (Kim, 2000, cited in Chung, 2005, p. 16). Chung

(2005) argues that the artworks selected for the exhibition show the American way of viewing South Korean art; the exhibition included artworks presumed to be influenced by

China and to influence Japan. In this sense it is not hard to imagine that the success of the exhibition helped promote the cultural and national pride of South Koreans, and thus must have affected the directions of South Korean cultural policy. The goal in this study is not to trace the origins of South Korean cultural representation, but given the country’s complicated historical context, we need to consider diverse impacts on its identification and definitions of culture.

Several researchers have investigated and analyzed the extent of knowledge about multicultural (art) education among elementary school teachers (Hwang, 2007; E. M.

20 The Masterpieces of Korean Art exhibition was not the first display outside country. There was a photo exhibition, focusing on Ancient palace, Buddhism temple, Hyanggyo (The Confucian temple), royal tomb, at the Pantagon in U.S.A. in 1955. November. Similar photo exhibition was held in the State Department in 1959. October. In 1957, October, Exhibition for Asia and the West supported by San Francisco Museum also included the contemporary Korean artworks. Moreover, The Fifth International Modern Lithogrph Biennale in 1958. February included five Korean artists’ eight pieces of artworks (Chung, 2005, p. 9). However, the exhibition of Masterpieces of Korean Art must be the first large-scale South Korean’s international exhibition. 59

Hong, 2009; Park, 2009). In a study of 224 elementary school teachers, Park (2009) discovered teachers believed the objective of multicultural art education was art education for international understanding. Hwang (2007) conducted a similar survey on social studies teachers’ perceptions of multicultural education. In a study of 358 middle school social studies teachers in South Korea, teachers turned out not to know very much about multicultural education, and teachers believed the objective of multicultural education to be consideration of others. Given these results, the present study is intended to engage art teachers, to encourage them to pay attention to what they have taken for granted in their everyday lives, and to consider how to apply this recognition to multicultural art education. As Keifer-Boyd, Amburgy, and Knight (2007) believes, art educators are the people who can awaken students and others to understanding both the power embedded in social structures and the necessity to question those structures.

Interest in multicultural art education is increasing, and several scholars have proposed frameworks for studying it. Cha (2012) diagnoses the goals of multicultural education in contemporary South Korea as being grounded in humanitarian consideration for others, pursuit of social integration, and human resources development. Cha points out that these reasons deepen the discrimination and injustice towards immigrant groups/people by objectifying them. She claims that multicultural education should instead be grounded in the recognition that no nations are free from the core cultural principle of global society, which emphasizes non-aggression and the empowerment of agency. Further, she argues that multicultural education is mandatory for the nation state to become one of the substantial components of the structural web. Finally, Kim (2012) summarizes the value and role of multicultural art education as enlarging the social 60

function of art and promoting art for life. In a broad sense, this research can contribute to the justification of multicultural art education, in that the argument for this research is also based on the social function of art. To be specific, this research is grounded in the belief that knowledge/image creators are entities whose values, beliefs, and way of life are imprinted by social norms. Thus, the knowledge/images that the producers create become a visualized set of social norms. In this case, as a part of the world, the two visible image examples and the one invisible image in the textbook represent a sociocultural norm and play a significant role in affecting South Korean learners’ national and cultural identity. It’s through this reciprocal relationship between knowledge/image creators and the South Korean world that the (post)colonialism practices are able to perpetuate the social order.

Discussions on specific multicultural art education curricula are also pressing. H.

K. Kim (2010) proposes a set of multicultural art education curriculum for 10th grade students with an interdisciplinary approach, combining social science, Japanese, and

English. The main activity is to engage students in discussing differences in art from different countries/ethnic groups. She identifies multicultural art education as important because it embodies national/ethnic identity. Ahn (2011) proposes a curriculum focusing on revealing the voice of those who are marginalized. She diagnoses current South

Korean multicultural art education as focusing on teaching traditional Korean art and diverse countries’ cultures. Employing both the domestic migrant artists group Mixrise and Kara Walker’s artwork, the author proposes a curriculum that reveals the reality of marginalized groups/peoples’ experiences of discrimination and degradation. The author states that this approach is thought to counter the problem of current South Korean 61

multicultural art education, which focuses on ‘exotic’ differences.

In terms of studies focusing on the context of multicultural art education, Shin’s

(2003) study on the process by which globalization affects South Korean multicultural art education is worth mentioning. According to Shin, multicultural art education was introduced to South Korea for the purpose of promoting its identity in the early 1990s, so traditional culture was emphasized. In the meantime, the economy-focused globalization in South Korea grew and influenced the cultural sphere to focus on cultural commercialism, through animation, film, and traditional culture in the mid-1990s. The author argues that multicultural art education, which was influenced by neoliberalism, was transformed to a tool to enhance traditional art after the mid-90s.

S. M. Kim (2009) conducted a survey to discover whether South Koreans have symbolic boundaries against foreigners21, such as being ignorant of cultural differences or treating foreigners unfairly. Applying the theoretical tools of symbolic boundaries to the study and comparing the result to data from 23 OECD countries, he discovered that the result is universal: like people in the other surveyed countries, South Koreans exhibit symbolic distinctions toward foreigners. At the same time, he found that South Koreans uniquely base these boundaries on strong ethnic boundaries. Specifically, they put decisive value on “ancestry” in defining someone as a Korean. This precedent highlights the significance of the present study, for two reasons. First, S. M. Kim (2009) clarifies that the discrimination against foreigners is not simply rooted in cultural issues, which can be resolved through civilized tolerance of “the other,” but rather in the socio-

21 He regards “foreigners” as a symbolically constructed concept: not simply the people who originated from foreign countries, but also people who do not meet the criteria of being South Korean. 62

economic structure of South Korean society. Secondly, although the survey respondents consider ancestry to be an important factor, the notion is somewhat flexible, so that South

Koreans do not hesitate to accept foreigners as kin as long as the foreigners respect and follow social norms and traditions in South Korean society. This study’s concern is in line with Shin’s (2003) and S. M. Kim’s (2009) studies, in that all three consider the structure of society as having the power to control the interaction between human action and the environment. In some ways, this is a study about whether the system within and surrounding the fine art textbook makes room for different values, whether the power embedded in social structures strengthens privileged groups’ cultures, and how this privileged knowledge reproduces itself through the fine art textbook.

2.2 Conclusion

So far, I’ve reviewed previous studies on textbooks in South Korea. The articles about cultural representation inside/outside school textbooks from postcolonial perspectives can be classified into several categories. Some emphasize the way that postcolonialism is involved in the content or context of textbooks, others consider how

South Korean cultural identity is constructed in the textbook, while still others analyze how history is related to cultural representations of South Korea. The articles about multicultural art education cover schoolteachers’ perceptions of multicultural art education, justification for multicultural art education, curriculum development, the way in which globalization influences multicultural art education, and South Koreans’ symbolic boundaries against foreigners. While these studies are useful starting points, this research is distinguished by a more comprehensive consideration of the role of the textbook in/by which the postcolonial multiculturalism plan takes shape. 63

Chapter 3: Theoretical Framework and Methodology

The purpose of this study is to find out whether material inside/outside the Fine

Art textbook, which deals with South Korean ethnicity construction and postcolonial multiculturalism, realizes the idea of multiculturalism. To this end, it is important to investigate how South Korean ethnicity is managed. This chapter discusses the theoretical and methodological framework I use to explore how South Korean ethnicity construction inside/outside of the Fine Art textbook affects multiculturalism. The theoretical framework focuses on theorizing South Korean postcolonial multiculturalism, while the methodological framework focuses on unpacking the postcolonial multiculturalism inside/outside the textbook.

First, to establish the theoretical framework, I begin by identifying basic concepts about race/ethnicity and nation/nationalism. Secondly, I specify the groundwork for the theoretical framework based on the meanings of multiculturalism and postcolonialism/postcolonial theory. The theoretical framework section ends by discussing a framework for South Korean multiculturalism. With regard to the methodological framework, I first give an overview of how I use critical discourse analysis for this research, and then discuss a specific research design. The methodological framework section ends by identifying factors that influence personal bias.

3.1 Basic Concepts

This section’s purpose is to identify the meaning of race/ethnicity and nation/nationalism. Furthermore, regarding the research concern, this section is expected to enable readers to consider what constructed postcolonial South Korean ethnicity looks like, to consider the role that the idea of ethnicity plays in the name of multiculturalism for political purposes, and to consider the form that ethnicity takes within multiculturalism.

3.1.1 Race and Ethnicity

Race is understood as a socio-historical concept, which cannot be dissociated from the given social paradigm. According to Appiah (1990), during biblical times, Greek people believed race was determined by environment and Hebrews believed race was determined in relation to God, while in the nineteenth century and the era of imperialism, people viewed race as biological essences, that is, as determined by genes that transfer not only physical characteristics, but also intelligence and morality (cultural behavior) (p.

276). Contemporary scholars (Alatas, 1977; Wallerstein, 1991; Gould, 1996) view race as a false concept, and as the outcome of modernism. They argue that the contemporary notion of race was constructed in the “historical context of European exploration, colonial expansion and scientific development” (Goh, 2008, p. 235). Hall (2000, cited in

Guilbault, 2011, p. 1) views race as a socio-politically constructed “category,” “around which has been constructed a system of socio-economic power, exploitation and exclusion – I.e. racism” (Hall, 1992). Therefore, race is in one sense a category, but not one randomly constructed based on artificial factors. Rather, race is a socio (political), logical fact that is constructed based on specific historical contexts. 65

With regard to ethnicity, in general, an ethnic community is defined as “a group of people who are united by a common inherited culture, racial similarity, common religion, and belief in a common history and ancestry and who exhibit a strong psychological sentiment of belonging to the group” (Taras & Ganguly, 2006, p. 1). Ethnicity is thought of as a way of performing the rituals of daily life such as language, religion, etc. However,

Hall (2000) views ethnicity as similar to racism in the cultural sphere. Ethnicity, he believes, is nothing other than racism happening in the sphere of a nation, in that ethnicity is also regarded as being transmitted genetically in terms of fixed things. In the context of post-colonial society, race and racial knowledge often became associated with ethnicity22 (Goh, 2008). Similar to race, the notion of ethnicity is also a type of empty signifier, whose meaning and relations should be constructed by discourses in which the dominant group’s interests are often involved.

From the perspective of postcolonial multiculturalism in this research, ethnicity will be viewed as a matter of meaning-making and a way of organization, in terms of what the dominant group wants to legitimate or reinforce about the political structures it supports (Gunew, 2004, p. 22). According to Hall (1992), a foundational myth23 is used to build new nations. In the case of South Korea, the myth of ‘Tankun,’ which is a singular homogenized racial knowledge and ethnic cultural origin, was highlighted in the 19th

22 In sociology, race is often interchangeably used with ethnicity (Goh, 2008), but in general, when race is distinguished from ethnicity, race contains “domination and false biological meanings” that should be drawn out, while ethnicity is used to refer to “natural or organic socio-cultural life” (Goh, 2008, p. 239). 23 Here a myth means “a story which locates the origin of the nation, the people and their national character so early that they are lost in the mists of, not’ real’, but ‘mythic’ time” (Hall, 1992, p. 294). The foundational myth plays a role in converting the mistakes the nation made or what the nation went through. As Hobsbawm and Ranger (1983) point out, the mythic time that cannot be revealed helps the colonized recover from hardships they experienced under colonialism, by conceiving and expressing their resentment (p. 1). 66

century (Han & Han, 2007) against Japanese colonialism by a group of national knowledge builders. That is, post-colonial South Koreans’ convictions about their ethnicity is undergirded by a belief in “common blood and shared ancestry” – a long- lasting belief that all Koreans are interconnected by blood (Shin, 2006, p. 17). While experiencing colonialism, South Korea had established a strong notion of singular companionship. After South Korea became independent from Japanese colonialism, the political and economic knowledge builders highlighted the story of ‘Tangun’ and attempted to convince people that they’d been born with a unique ethnicity, which is distinguished from that of any other ethnic group. This myth played a significant role in unifying people to fight against Japanese colonialism and in preparing the new form of governance, at least until the Korean War (1950-1953). However, after experiencing the

Korean War and the severe ideological conflicts between liberal and conservative groups at the local level, the modern South Korean nation state discontinued the notion of “one ethnicity.”

Belief in a singular ethnicity within the country was revived when South Korea had to seek economic revenue during an economic crisis in the late 1990s. To overcome this crisis and confront an ever more competitive neoliberal global world, South Korean politicians began to consider North Koreans as coworkers, with whom cooperation was necessary to ensure economic prosperity. It is problematic to simplify South Korea’s complex politico-economic regimes in such a dichotomous way. However, my point is that ethnicity is an idea that is constructed in accordance with the context. Contemporary

South Korea, which is a member of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and

Development (OECD) and whose cultural wave is sweeping over Asia, no longer 67

blatantly emphasizes the old belief of blood-based ethnicity. The country even vigorously adopts multiculturalism.

From this perspective, this research can be described as an exploration that shows how the notion of South Korean ethnicity has developed in a complex sociocultural and politico-economic context. By doing so, this research examines whether the current idea of the South Korean ethnic culture, as particularity, goes along with multiculturalism. In short, the notion of singular ethnicity in South Korea should be understood as a medium that was unearthed and reinforced by the political nationalist elites, for the purpose of nation building in a post-colonial context. In this sense, it would be meaningless to define ethnicity in terms of what counts as who belongs to a given ethnic group, because ethnicity is constructed based on ‘relations’ of difference (Appiah, 1990, p. 288).

In sum, just as the category of race reflects the sociocultural landscape, so too is ethnicity an empty signifier which a) mirrors the given sociopolitical context and b) is constructed by the dominant groups. In particular, the post-colonial South Korean context is thought to have reinforced the myth of a singular homogenized ethnicity that originated in attempts to resist other countries’ colonization. Specifically, I draw attention to how the notion of ethnicity has been dealt with after the Korean War, in particular from the late

1980s through the 2000s, to the present.

3.1.2 Nation and Nationalism

There have been several attempts to define the meaning of nation (Deutsch, 1953;

Anderson, 1991; Connor, 1994; Miller, 1995; Renan, 1996). Ernest Renan (1996) defined

it as a community with social solidarity that is historically formed24; Karl Deutsch (1953) focused on communicative interaction25; Connor (1994) emphasized imagined family/kinship26; Anderson (1991, pp. 5-6) viewed nations as sort of a pseudo-religion; and Miller (1995) defined nations as teams cooperating for the same end27. (Turker, 2008, p. 28). A nation, in general, is viewed as a group imagining community and desiring a whole society. Overall, “nation” can be defined as a sense of belonging or comradeship associated with a range of mental and physical practices, which are formed in a society throughout history.

On the whole, nationalism assumes “what ‘nations’ do” (Turker, 2008, p. 28).

Nationalism has two features: it is intermingled with emotion and with political doctrines

(Turker, 2008, p. 32). From the emotional perspective, Kohn (1944, cited in Turker, 2008, p. 32) believes nationalism is “first and foremost a state of mind, an act of consciousness.” Shafer (1955, cited in Turker, 2008, p. 32) also views nationalism as a sentiment that binds a group of people to live as a separate and distinct unit. From the political perspective, Gellner (1983, cited in Turker, 2008, p. 32) describes nationalism as

“a political doctrine that requires congruence of political and national units.” Smith (1983,

24 Renan (1996, cited in Turker, 2008, p. 28) states: “[a] nation is a soul, a spiritual principle. Two things, which strictly speaking are just one, constituted this principle. One is in the past, the other in the present. One is in the common possession of rich legacy of memories; the other is actual consent, the desire to live together, the will to continue to value the heritage that has been received in common.” 25 Deutsch (1953, cited in Turker, 2008, p. 28) offers this functional definition of nationality: “membership in a people essentially consists in a wide complementarity of social communication. It consists in the ability to communicate more effectively, and over a wide range of subjects, with members of one large group, [other] than outsiders.” 26 Connor (1994, cited in Turker, 2008, p. 28) states: “[a nation] is a group of people who feel that they are ancestrally related. It is the largest group that can command a person’s loyalty because of felt kinship ties….The sense of unique descent, of course, need not, in nearly all cases will not, accord with factual history.” 27 Miller (1995, cited in Turker, 2008, p. 28) states: “[a nation’s citizens] see themselves as co-operating to achieve some end, that they regard one another as having obligations to the team.” 69

cited in Turker, 2008, p. 32) similarly states, “[nationalist doctrine] is distinguished by the fact that the objective of their [nations’] social action can only be the ‘autonomous polity’ a sovereign state of their own; and they derive their sense of community from historically specific political actions.”

These two features work complementarily, so cannot be dissociated from one another. According to Anderson, since World War II, every revolution has tended to justify itself in national terms, which evoke the idea of an “imagined community” among those who have been in a bounded territory, sharing the pre-revolutionary past. Once people imagine a nation, they are thought of as having a highly horizontal comradeship, that is, nationalism. Even though some experience inequality and exploitation, nationalism leads people to gladly sacrifice their lives to the development of the nation.

In this sense, from the political perspective, establishing nationalism among the nation’s people must be the most important task for those who are in the state or in the pursuit of the state, in order to gain or perpetuate their power.

In particular, state authority associated with mass media evokes what Anderson calls “official nationalism.” In this sense, it is no exaggeration to say the true power of the nation state lies in the extent to which it can convince people to regard themselves as subjects of the state. The cultural forms of a novel or a newspaper, grounded in the development of new technologies of print media, enable people to imagine the nation and comradeship. Although national citizens will most likely not meet the people whose opinions the news media reflects, they could potentially imagine themselve as having something in common with those people. This research, which examines the Fine Art textbook and a public artwork (the War Memorial), in this sense explores how public 70

discourses function as a medium through which the grand narrative of the nation state is manifested. This exploration is an attempt to discover how the nation state addresses official nationalism.

Another outlook, globalization, blurs lines between territories and evokes questions about the power of the state in maintaining national culture. Several authors

(Gupta & Ferguson, 1997; Malkki, 1997; Appadurai, 1996; de Landa, 2006) challenge the concept viewing the world as a collection of autonomous discontinuous spaces, and they argue against the presupposed links between nations and states. States no longer appear to exert their power to unify and control a nation’s way of life. Appadurai (1996) addresses the separatist transnational movements in which people identify themselves with the dissociated from the state, and yearn to obtain the power equal to the state’s. It is true that nationhood is under threat from globalization, which makes it hard to control the local culture because of the influences and mutations of multiple flows (Appadurai, 1996). It is also true that the relationship between nation and state is being loosened compared to the past (Appadurai, 1996). A nation, which according to Appadurai “properly [means] groups with ideas about nationhood” (Appadurai, 1996, p. 39), tries to capture state power, while states, meaning public institutions, pursue nations, i.e., imagined communities.

However, these changed relationships do not override the fact that there is a power to fabricate a certain meaning for national identity. Rather, because of the looseness, the states are ever more often forced to “seek to capture and monopolize ideas about nationhood” (Appadurai, 1996, p. 39). Appadurai (1996) states:

States find themselves pressed to stay open by the forces of media, technology, 71

and travel that have fueled consumerism throughout the world and have increased

the craving, even in the non-western world, for new commodities and spectacles.

On the other hand, these very cravings can become caught up in new ethnoscapes,

mediascapes, and, eventually, ideoscapes, such as democracy in China, that the

state cannot tolerate as threats to its own control over ideas of nationhood and

peoplehood. (Appadurai, 1996, p. 40)

For this research, it’s more important to consider the postcolonial country’s distinctive history. Given the fact that a postcolonial country has the memory of being colonized, its people must have considered globalization as another colonization mechanism. Thus, solidifying people within the country by virtue of nationalism must always be more important than anything else.

Nationalism can be used for either the legitimacy or illegitimacy of the state, depending on who asserts it under what circumstances. For example, it is likely that the authoritative South Korean state utilized nationalism for the purpose of legitimizing and supporting the state’s own claim to a monopoly of coercion. Nationalism coincides with a state’s contention that a centralized administration integrates and promotes socio- economic development (Turker, 2008). However, those who challenge the state might have also utilized the ideology of nationalism for the purpose of delegitimizing or threatening the state’s coercive powers (alternative nationalism). For example, in South

Korea, the liberalists’ nationalism challenges the images, which the South Korean government imposes, arguing for an anti-government or anti-western nationalism. The liberalists’ argument is predicated on the perception that the official imagined community is derived from the nation-state, which is deeply associated with other colonizer countries. 72

As Chatterjee (1993) argues, in the postcolonial Indian context, the colonized people who are on the liberal side utilize nationalism as an emancipatory tool against colonial powers.

Thus, nationalism is an empty signifier whose meaning is determined by whether the user coincides with an existing state or not. Needless to say, however, the ideology of nationalism is a common denominator to the two parts28, in that it requests a “‘nation- state’ in which mass allegiance and institutional power coincide” (Turker, 2008, p. 30).

With regard to the concern about how South Korean ethnicity construction affects multiculturalism in the current Fine Art textbook, the matter of South Korean nationalism raises an important question: why is the cultural idea of ethnicity used for a political purpose, and why does South Korean postcolonial multiculturalism have ambivalent characteristics, e.g. encouraging and/or discouraging South Korean ethnic culture? This concern about nationalism likewise highlights the potential for inequality or exploitation in the cultural/pedagogical sphere.

3.1.3 The Viewpoint on the Nation in Relation to History

There are three viewpoints of the nation in relation to social change or history: primordialism, modernism, and ethnosymbolism (Turker, 2008). The first viewpoint, primordialism, regards nations as “natural and ‘given’ historical units” (Turker, 2008, p.

34). Ozkirimli states, “[f]or the primordialist, the past determines the present: nations have existed since time immemorial and they are a natural part of human existence, as sight of speech” (Ozkirimli, 2000, pp. 64-65). The second viewpoint, modernism,29

28 Here, the new group who protests the ruling party is not always the opposition party. The point is, they propose distinct opinions against those of the ruling party. 29 Ernest Gellner (1964) and Elie Kedourie (1971) are thought to have been pioneers, and Eric Hobsbawn (1983), Tom Nairn (1981) [1977], John Breuilly (1993) [1982] and Benedict Anderson (1991) [1983] followed their approach (Turker, 2008). 73

regards nations and nationalism as having existed for, more or less, the last two hundred years, as outgrowths of modernization or rationalization that have been precipitated by

“capitalism, industrialism, the bureaucratic state, urbanization and secularism” (Turker,

2008, p. 34). Breuilly (1982, cited in Turker, 2008) identifies the characteristics of the modernist viewpoint, claiming that it assumes 1) a unique nation in existence, 2) its interests and values are prioritized over all other interests, and 3) its discontinuity from pre-modern ethnic communities. Regarding the past, nations can be viewed from the modernist perspectives as “appeal[ing] to the past to validate their existence in the present and project themselves into the future” (Turker, 2008, p. 38). In this sense, their position assumes that “the past is exploited by the present” (Turker, 2008, p. 38).

The third viewpoint, ethnosymbolism, regards a nation as “an outgrowth of the preexisting ethnic communities and the resilient feature of social and political landscapes as they respond to real human needs” (Turker, 2008, p. 38). Ethnosymbolism is characterized as seeking not only the modernity of nations and nationalism but also the origins of nations. Smith (1986), Armstrong (1982), and Hutchinson (1994) argue that earlier symbols, myths, and values have been overlooked by the modernists, who have instead focused on the characteristics of modern nations. For example, Smith (1986) claimed that pre-modern ethnic communities were transformed, but not eradicated, by modernity (Smith, 1993, p. 13). Ethnosymbolists interpret change as a shift, rather than a radical break. Regarding the past, the ethnosymbolist perspective assumes that the “past constrains the present” (Turker, 2008, p. 38).

The division between modernist and ethnosymbolist viewpoints on nations and nationalism highlights a conflict about the nature of nations: whether they are 74

invented/constructed or essentialist (Turker, 2008, p. 36). The modernist view includes

Hobsbawm and Ranger’s idea of the ‘invention of tradition’ and Anderson’s ‘official nationalism.’ Hobsbawm and Ranger (1983) argue that so-called ‘national’ traditions are not linked with traditions of the past. Rather, they are “responses to novel situations which take the form of reference to old situations, or which establish their own past by quasi-obligatory repetition” (Hobsbawm & Ranger, 1983, p.131). These new traditions serve to “symbolize social cohesion (national unity), legitimize institutions (arms of the state and institutions of civil society) and socialize people into particular ‘World views’

(national values)” (Turker, 2008, p. 36). Another constructivist, Anderson (1991), also views the idea of a nation as being constructed, as seen in the “imagined communities.”

However, his viewpoint about the ‘construction’ of history contains a somewhat different assumption than Hobsbawm’s notion of invention. Anderson believes that Hobsbawm’s idea of ‘invention’ is predicated on ‘falsity,’ while Anderson30 argues that it is the traditional worldview associated with “print capitalism” that invents the nation.

Considering nations in relation to viewing history or social change, I feel the need to employ both modernist and ethnosymbolist perspectives for this study. Above all, the modernist perspective is significant, in that it can explain the discontinuity of history as well as the new invention of tradition, particularly in terms of how South Korean governments viewed the idea of ethnicity in different ways at different times. Here several lines of inquiry are relevant. How do the South Korean post-colonial knowledge builders attempt to break down the idea of blood-based community? In that hegemonic

30 Anderson specifies the way that the imagined political is associated with the ‘print capitalism,’ replacing Hobsbawm’s term ‘fabrication’ and ‘invention’ with ‘creation’ and ‘imagining,’ while keeping the constructivist viewpoint. 75

process, in what position do they place North Korea in relation to ethnicity? How was the placement different from that of the previous ideology or policy? What result does the government produce in severing ties with the traditional notion of ethnicity? These questions will be unpacked via several visual and textual discourses, in particular those relevant to the War Memorial.

The ethnosymbolist perspective also cannot be neglected in this research, because it can explain what the modernist viewpoint cannot describe. Although we accept that the dominant knowledge builder groups establish a new tradition, it is impossible for them to discontinue the common ideology amongst people. This raises two important questions: in what aspects has the government failed in erasing the older notion of ethnicity, and what aspects of this notion remain the same or similar in their updated ideology?

Employing both the modernist and ethnosymbolist perspectives, I expect to discover evidence of both historical continuity and discontinuity, and of new inventions as well as reproductions of tradition, in relation to ethnicity. In other words, I’m interested in how the post-colonial ethnicity construction that adopts multiculturalism grows in a society where an older idea of South Korean ethnicity has been appropriated.

So far, this section has reviewed the basic concepts that could potentially underpin postcolonial multiculturalism: the idea of ethnicity is socially constructed, and groups/people in power relations surrounding the nation state try to establish an imagined community in an increasingly dynamic local and global context. This section also addressed how to view the idea of ethnicity in relation to history. Indeed, ethnicity and nationalism must be the significant media upon which multiculturalism and postcolonialism/postcolonial theory make meaning. In some way, it is likely that 76

de(re)construction of South Korean ethnicity is one of the most important post-colonial concerns, which could possibly be related to nationalism. Thus, any discussion surrounding ethnicity could imply that cultural understanding cannot be dissociated from politics. Putting this issue aside for a while and foregrounding the theoretical frame of this research, postcolonial multiculturalism, it is necessary to overview the two theories of postcolonialism/postcolonial theory and multiculturalism respectively. Attention will be drawn to the relationship that the notions of ethnicity and nationalism have with multiculturalism and postcolonialism/postcolonial theory.

3.2 Multiculturalism and Postcolonialism/Postcolonial Theory

In this section, I consider postcolonialism/postcolonial theory and multiculturalism, which underpin postcolonial multiculturalism. The focus is on considering the goal that multiculturalism pursues and the complexity that the philosophy and/or cultural policy encounters in the current time period. Attention is also drawn to how pstcolonialism/postcolonial theory is involved in the post-colonial society or by which dominant knowledge builders can establish the nation. Such understanding of these theories enables me to uncover how and why South Korean knowledge producers de(re)construct the idea of South Korean ethnicity in and through texts – here, inside/outside the textbook– under a complex postcolonial context, and what social norm this brings about in relation to identity construction.

3.2.1 Multiculturalism

Multiculturalism refers to philosophy, social practices, and policies that have to do with the matter of difference. Employing Hall’s31 definition (2000, cited in Guilbault,

2011, p. 2), while the term “multicultural” simply describes differences that are common in any society where cultural communities live together, “multiculturalism,” means a philosophy-policy agglomerated to manage/govern differences. Multiculturalism pursues not only revaluing degraded identities and representations, but also redressing political and economic disadvantages.

Kymlicka (1998), Parekh (1999, 2000), Taylor (1994), and Tempelman (1999) view multiculturalism as a set of social practices and policies that deal with the problems of social exclusion. This definition is predicated on the idea that ethnic groups’ different cultures should be respected so that their cultures can remain distinct (Jackson, 2000), rather than being assimilated into mainstream cultural norms. Assuming the instrumental value of cultural membership, Kymlicka’s multiculturalism is based on liberalism, in which he values autonomy and equality (Kymlicka, 1989, 1998, 2001). He argues autonomy by multiculturalism and justifies equality. According to him, there are numerous cultural categories and individuals can have the freedom to enjoy their cultures.

By belonging to a certain culture an individual becomes autonomous, because he or she will have a chance to be engaged in sufficient contexts by which he or she forms his or

31 Hall (2000) states: “Here multi-cultural is used adjectivally. It describes the social characteristics and problems of governance posed by any society in which different cultural communities live together and attempt to build a common life while retaining something of their ‘original’ identity. By contrast, ‘multiculturalism’ is substantive. It references the strategies and policies adopted to govern or manage the problem of diversity and multiplicity which multi-cultural societies throw up. It is usually used in the singular, signifying the distinctive philosophy or doctrine which underpins multi-cultural strategies. ‘Multi-cultural,’ however, is by definition plural” (p. 209). 78

her life. Drawing attention to communitarianism and nationalism, Kymlicka demonstrates a deep relationship between individual self-respect and the respect accorded to the cultural group to which s/he belongs. Cultural identity gives the individual not only self- respect but also belonging. One’s own self-respect is thought to become threatened if one’s community’s culture is not respected. As a result, liberal multiculturalism aims at equality amongst groups as well as unity, and regards difference as being worthwhile.

Multiculturalism does not simply mean tolerating groups with differences, especially minority groups – strictly speaking, individuals in a minority group and groups with differences. Rather, multiculturalism requests recognition of group differences and adaptation of policy in accordance with “group-differentiated rights” (Kymlicka, 1995).

This means that not all groups or members of the group have the same right as any other groups do. For example, some minority groups have a particular way to commit to their religious obligations, so that they are allowed to act or not act. Taylor (1992) believes that diverse cultural identities −and languages− are irreducibly social goods, which should be assumed to be of equal worth. Recognizing the equal worth of diverse cultures requires replacing the traditional liberal regime of indistinguishable liberties and opportunities for all citizens with a plan of special rights for minority cultural groups.

This could be viewed as a device to protect the minority groups’ cultures.

The liberal pluralist ideology of multiculturalism is often criticized for assuming that cultural communities are static and essential. Claiming that a marginalized group should be recognized tends not only to stereotype the group as having a stable and monolithic identity, but also to define the target groups as minorities (Vertovec, 1996;

Grillo, 1998). Lowe (1996, cited in Guilbault, 2011) points out the incompatibility 79

between the inclusion of ‘multi-cultural’ in activities that are ideologically promoted and the division of those communities associated with practical categorization, which does not exercise multicultural inclusion and gives way to cultural relativism, or celebrating differences. Mohanty (1994) believes this contradiction is predicated on the idea of noninterference between cultural categories and ideal coexistence, presuming no hierarchies.

Several scholars (Brunner, 1988; Lowe, 1996; Giroux, 1997) also criticize the liberal pluralist ideology of multiculturalism for disregarding “existing racial tensions, material inequalities, and political disenfranchisement” (Boscarino, 2011). Mohanty

(1994) argues that discourses of “harmony and civility” function to maintain the social system (p. 158), disregarding the pace and nature of change. Lowe (1996) believes that there is a gap between the representation of multiculturalism and actual shifts in power relations. From a policy perspective, the promotion of cultural recognition is criticized for neglecting to consider who this recognition is for. While less interested in the recognition that minorities experience in confronting the culture of the dominant, recognition-based multiculturalism helps the state or dominant society recognize the minorities’ cultures

(Uitermark et al., 2005). Institutionalized ethnic diversity multiculturalism is also criticized for its impromptu remedy, where government treats fears or tensions among different cultures from a social management perspective (Back et al., 2002; Kundnani,

2002).

Art is thought to serve as a crucial medium by which multicultural issues such as racism are represented, and by which people can have the opportunity to challenge social issues (Guilbault, 2011, pp. 3-4). Regarding cultural representation through art, however, 80

researchers point out that multiculturalism is often limited to only dealing with the

(re)presentation of diversity within the national territory and the acknowledgment of other coexisting cultures (Guilbault, 2011, p. 3). The problem is, the objects are dissociated from the coalition of the dominations, and the production of multiculturalism is expressed through “the homegenization, aestheticization, and incorporation of signifiers of ethnic differences,” all of which mask systemic inequalities and the demands of material differentiation (Lowe, 1996, p. 86). All in all, liberal multiculturalism is criticized for accepting the coexistence of races living in harmony by eliminating discriminatory exploitation, and for emphasizing democracy while masking racial and cultural power relations, to give everyone equal opportunity.

Contemporary multiculturalism is even more complicated due to sociopolitical and economic dynamics in the global world. Guilbault (2011) notes that multiculturalism has to do with power, that is, with “who has the authority to create norms and social hierarchies within society or to exclude anyone and on what basis” (p. 1). By situating multiculturalism within the question of power, Guilbault (2011) suggests that the problem of multiculturalism can be found when cultural communities challenge the authorities that have relegated them to a certain position and marginalized them. Since contemporary global technologies open up opportunities for people to transform and hybridize their cultures, those who were marginalized are no longer categorized in a singular way. In this sense, it becomes difficult to manage/control differences. In addition, another problem is that the activities of cultural communities are increasingly either localized or super nationalized, so that it is difficult for the government to be influential in managing differences. Consequently, the dominant norms are challenged. Turning multicultural 81

values into monetary values also creates a problem in managing difference. In the neoliberal era, those who were thought to have been in the margins have improved their economic standing. On the one hand, this process gradually serves the sociopolitical dynamics of the country, as the newly prosperous will not necessarily want to be categorized in a conventional way. On the other hand, it increasingly reduces the possibility of control and maintenance of the status quo. Hybridity of cultures, localized or super nationalized culture that gets beyond the government’s control, and conventional minorities’ economic growth, which makes it difficult to manage differences.

In spite of these complexities, or perhaps because of them, managing differences becomes ever more important from a social perspective. As often as we hear about dominant societies’ refusal of multiculturalism all over the world, we hear of immigrants’ struggles or conflicts with the recipient countries’ cultures. For example, recent reports show increases in repercussions against multiculturalism in the Western world (Mitchell,

2004), as well as the rise of xenophobia or anti-immigrant political parties in European countries that employed pluralist policies, such as the Netherlands, France, and Britain

(Kymlicka, 2004, p. 203). Along with these phenomena, the fact that immigrant policy was one of the most important factors affecting the recent U.S. presidential election informs us that conflicts with different ethnic groups have become a problem over the world. At the heart of these problems is the dilemma that multiculturalism cannot avoid.

Since multiculturalism requires equal rights for all citizens, but at the same time it requests particular commitments or demands of minorities, it cannot avoid conflicts.

In short, multiculturalism should be understood as a philosophy about how to view differences, as well as a policy to manage those differences. The strands of 82

multiculturalism foreground difference affirmation. Whether through respect for differences or a critical viewpoint about inequalities embedded in society, multiculturalism pursues diversity affirmation. Considering that multiculturalism cannot be dissociated from other sociocultural questions, such as who is involved in knowledge construction, for the purposes of my theoretical framework I define multiculturalism as

“diversity affirmation” and “managing difference.”

Like any other postcolonial society, South Korea must have, in some way, confronted the paradox of “insisting on creating unity out of diversity, while at the same time officially recognizing the need to manage diversity in ways that respect difference and promote each people’s heritage” (Guilbault, 2011, p. 7). South Korean multiculturalism grapples with how, out of diversity, unity should be produced, and by doing so, how to produce a culture different than others. However, countries that have gone through different (post)colonialism experiences develop multiculturalism differently

(Gunew, 2004). In light of this, it is useful to define postcolonialism and postcolonial theory at this point, because they are expected to enable me to understand sociocultural contexts or crucial factors in a more comprehensive way, and to understand how they determine the characteristics of South Korean multiculturalism.

3.2.2 Postcolonialism/Postcolonial Theory

Given South Korea’s post-colonial context, constructing a new nation using the idea of a South Korean ethnicity must have been a primary goal for the nation state(s).

Postcolonialism/postcolonial theory is expected to support this assumption by enabling me to inquire into how South Korean knowledge producers/groups utilize an aspect of culture that is often thought to be influenced by colonialism, in order to manage and 83

control people’s values and beliefs about themselves and the world. In this study, postcolonialism/postcolonial theory in relation to South Korean ethnicity specifically underpins concerns about whether the notion of blood-based ethnicity has been

(re)produced, and about how and why the hegemony of a South Korean ethnic culture has been constructed through public discourses. Postcolonialism as a form of knowledge or culture/cultural identity criticism will be described in order to focus on the meaning, or the change of the meaning, of South Korean ethnicity. Postcolonial theory will help clarify the dynamic process of knowledge (re)production that represents knowledge builders’ reaction in/against a sociocultural context.

To discuss the postcolonialism surrounding South Korean ethnicity construction, blood-based ethnicity will be discussed first in relation to colonialism, and to who South

Koreans are. Drawing attention to the South Koreans’ responses and the post-colonial environmental changes, I draw on Bhabha’s (1994) postcolonial theory. The focus will be on a non-deterministic viewpoint of the “other” and the ambivalent power relationship between the colonizer and the colonized. The impetuses behind the selection of cultural representations will be also addressed.

3.2.2.1 Colonial Knowledge and Orientalism

To discern the meaning of postcolonialism and postcolonial theory, it is first necessary to consider them in relation to colonialism. The purpose of this sub-section is to discuss the relationship that colonialism has with the idea of South Korean ethnicity.

In general, western colonialism is said to impose its values onto the colonized, and as such govern the colonized by having them regard themselves as the other. Said (1978) states: 84

Orientalism can be discussed and analyzed as the corporate institution for dealing

with the Orient-dealing with it by making statements about it, authorizing views

of it, describing it, settling it, ruling over it: in short, Orientalism as a western

style of dominating, restructuring, and having authority over the Orient. (Said,

1978, p. 3)

Western knowledge is often argued to have dismissed local knowledge systems in the colony as unworthy, uncivilized, and superstitious, ensuring that the colonizer’s knowledge system continues to the post-colonial era (Said, 1978; Chilisa, 2005).

The alleged inferiority of the colonized or their culture involves who primarily participates in building up knowledge, and whether those knowledge producers are connected to the cultural community. Researchers contend that western knowledge and values affect the rest of the world. For example, citizenship education in Africa is argued to impose western knowledge on the local African knowledge, without consideration for their local cultures and contexts (Abdi, Ellis, & Sizha, 2005; Abdi, 2008; Chachange,

2001). In comparison, some claim that knowledge formation is based on cooperation between the colonizer and the colonized32, but even there they argue that the basic framework for the cooperation mainly reflects western cultural values (Smith-Crocco,

2005). The invisibility of the oppressed culture precipitates a cultural hierarchy between the colonizer and the colonized (Said, 1978).

Colonialism is represented not only in formal educational but also in informal daily life. On the one hand, formal education is involved in the continuation of

32 Bhabha’s (1994) notion of mimicry shows how members of a colonized society imitate the practices of their colonizers. The colonizer allow the colonized to imitate the colonizer’s culture but not quite duplicate it. 85

colonialism. Several researchers (Rizvi & Lingard, 2006; Tickly, 2004; Smith-Crocco,

2005; Mudimbe, 1994) demonstrate the close relationship between schooling/education and colonialism, and they argue that education plays a significant role in institutionalizing colonialism33. On the other hand, informal pedagogical sites are as strong as any planned educational site. Said (1978) states,

The authority of academics, institutions, and governments. . . Most important,

such texts can create not only knowledge but also the very reality they appear to

describe it. In time such knowledge and reality produce a tradition, or what

Michel Foucault calls a discourse, whose material presence or weight, not the

originality of a given author, is really responsible for the texts produced out of it.

(Said, 1978, p. 94)

In this sense, it is meaningful to examine the narrative of both formal and informal pedagogical sites.

South Koreans’ cultural identification cannot be dissociated from outside viewpoints about who South Koreans are. Specifically, their ideas about blood-based ethnicity are thought to have been constructed in/against Japanese colonialism.

According to Shin (2006, cited in Han & Han, 2007), the notion of blood-based ethnicity was constructed relatively recently against Japanese colonialism; Han and Han (2007) also cite the influence of German colonialism. The notion is thought to have been derived either from Japanese blood-based dogma and adapted in South Korea under Japanese imperialism, or to have been developed in the process of opposing Japanese colonialism

33 For example, Mudimbe (1994) argues that the way that education is used as a disciplinary tool makes the colonized people consider themselves to be other. Education associated with Christianity relegates the colonized to subordination and dissociates the colonized from their community cultures (Mudimbe, 1994; Chilisa, 2005). 86

to unify indigenous Koreans (Han & Han, 2007)34. Regardless of its specific origins, it can be inferred that the blood-based identification of South Korean ethnicity originates from external or western ideas. Accordingly, part of this research investigates how the colonialism-influenced viewpoint on South Korean ethnicity affects cultural representations in formal and informal pedagogical sites, particularly in terms of fine art.

Although I agree that dominant knowledge in post-colonial societies is influenced by the forms and practices of colonialism, and that the post-colonial dominant knowledge continues to suppress other forms and practices of knowing, we should not neglect how

South Korean knowledge producers decolonize that knowledge in empowering ways.

Thus, postcolonialism should be considered.

3.2.2.2 Postcolonialism35

Postcolonialism can be viewed as a critique of colonialism, in which the colonized respond to a distorted representation about their value system, including their cultural identity. As can be seen in Said’s critique of orientalism, postcolonialism is an effort at decolonization that post-colonial writers or knowledge producers make in and through texts, in which they give their voices at the expense of orientalism. The crucial concepts in postcolonialism are overcoming colonialism (McClintock, 1992, p. 86) and

34 This does not, however, mean that the notion of blood-based ethnicity was first created during the Japanese era. Often, scholars date it back to BC 108, using evidence derived from The Heritage of the Three States (1281), which stated South Korea had one ancestor, Tankun. Han and Han (2007) argue that people interpreted this book as the evidence that proves South Korea is a blood-based society, but Han and Han argue that the written statement means that the origin of the South Korean community’s history dates back to Tankun’s era, whose meaning is far away from the notion of a blood-based ethnicity. Either way, given that the old belief was also constructed against another country (China) in the immemorial past, in this paper I view the notion as being related to (post)colonialism. 35 Postcolonialism shares common concerns, as Bressler (2007) highlighted: “European colonialism did occur. The British Empire was at the center of this colonialism. The conquerors dominated not only the physical land but also the hegemony or ideology of the colonized peoples. The social, political, and economic effects of such colonization are still being felt today” (p. 203). 87

the deconstruction of dominant representational practices.

Determining when postcolonialism begins in a given society is debatable.

Regarding this issue, Hall (1980, cited in Harewood, 2002, p. 64) argues, “What is important are the significant breaks – where old lines of thought are disrupted, older constellations displaced, and elements, old and new, are regrouped around a different set of premises and themes.” In accordance with Hall’s idea, this study’s premise is based on the idea that there was a rupturing point, sometime after the late 1980s, at which South

Koreans’ knowledge and beliefs about themselves had to confront seminal changes. As the idea of blood-based ethnicity belongs to ‘older lines of thought’ that are thought to have been constructed under colonialism, it must have been changed or transformed at the rupturing point.

Adopting Said’s concept of Orientalism, this research focuses on a viewpoint about South Korean ethnicity that was given by outside ideology. Just as Said critiques orientalism as a postcolonial effort, so too is this research interested in how South Korean knowledge producers respond to or challenge the outside viewpoint of South Korean ethnicity, as seen through various texts inside/outside the Fine Art textbook. By replacing the outside viewpoint with one that considered Korea as blood-based ethnic country that is divided into two parts, North and South, South Korean knowledge producers might have had to deconstruct the old belief about national identity, which was simultaneously expected to enhance the country’s political stance and decisively dissociate itself from

North Korea. It was, in other words, an effort to resist the given notion of blood-based ethnicity, and to establish a new, modern, and emancipatory meaning of South Korean ethnicity. This research thus investigates the de(re)construction of South Korean ethnicity 88

that is thought to have occurred through public discourses. But can this de(re)construction of identity be entirely seen as an effort of decolonization? The colonized’s non-deterministic and complex responses to postcoloniality should not be neglected, and require further attention to postcolonial theory.

3.2.2.3 Postcolonial Theory

Postcolonialism’s concern about how public discourses respond to the colonial origin of knowledge about blood-based ethnicity echoes the concern about whether South

Koreans resist, accept, or negotiate the viewpoint about themselves in response to environmental changes. To understand in a comprehensive way the cultural resistance, acceptance, or transformation that occurs in various contexts, this study employs postcolonial theory.

As Harrison (2003, cited in Bressler, 2007, p. 203) asserts in Postcolonial

Criticism: History, Theory, and the Work of Fiction, “[p]ostcolonial theory is not an identifiable ‘type’ of theory. […] [There is] no point in talking as if consensus about what postcolonial studies ‘is’ might eventually emerge.” Since cultures which are in the position of being subverted and conquered have different backgrounds, and the ways that the colonized respond to the colonizer are also different, the major concerns of postcolonialism must also be viewed differently depending on the colonized’s social background.

However, in general the primary concern of the postcolonial theory is the colonized’s response to the social value of cultural identity, which is oppressed under colonialism and/but transformed after colonization. To be more specific, Young’s (2001) definition of postcolonial theory is useful for this research. Young states: 89

The postcolonial is a dialectical concept that marks the broad historical facts of

decolonization and the determined achievement of sovereignty – but also the

realities of nations and peoples emerging into a new imperialistic context of

economic and sometimes political domination. (Young, 2001, p. 57)

Young’s definition informs us that postcolonial theory grapples with marking historical facts and situations where post-colonial state(s) and peoples attempt to decolonize and transform cultures and cultural identities that are thought to have been given. Thus, for instance, exploring the discourses embedded inside/outside a fine art textbook means examining the profession of the discourses in “modern” South Korean political history.

On the other hand, postcolonial theory explains complex phenomena that South

Koreans encounter after or during decolonization. It can explain the active history that people make when confronting the neoliberal global economy or postcoloniality36. In fact, several researchers (Tiffin, 1996; Griffiths, 1996 Mongia, 1996) argue that the inequality derived from colonialism still exists37 even after the formerly colonized people gain independence from the colonizer. Griffiths (1996) argues, “crucial as national independence has been to recuperation, it is not in itself a guarantee of the end of external manipulation and control at the level of politics, economics, or culture” (p. 165). Tiffin

(1996), similar to Griffiths, notes that postcolonialism is more about the “persistence of colonial legacies in post-independence cultures, not their disappearance or erasure” (p.

36 Young (2001) states, “[t]he term ‘postcoloniality’…puts the emphasis on the economic, material and cultural conditions that determine the global system in which the postcolonial nation is required to operate – one heavily weighted towards the interests of international capital and the G7 powers” (Young, 2001, p. 57). 37 They oppose interpreting the ‘post’ in postcolonialism as literally meaning ‘after,’ because periodization assumes the discontinuity of history, as if inequality did not exist anymore (Tiffin, 1996; Griffiths, 1996), or as if different inequalities existed (Mongia, 1996). 90

158). In addition, researchers contend that colonialism not only continues during the decolonization period but also continues in new ways, such as new imperialism (Tickly,

2004). Imperialism means “the practice, theory and the attitudes of a dominating metropolitan centre ruling a distant territory” (Said, 1978, p. 8). Said states:

[I]n our time, direct colonialism has largely ended; imperialism, as we shall see,

lingers where it has always been, in a kind of general cultural sphere as well as in

specific political, ideological, economic, and social practices. (Said, 1978, p. 8)

Likewise, Harvey (2003, cited in Tickly, 2004, p. 174) specifies that new imperialism acts in accordance with globalization, and defines it as “a contradictory fusion of politics of state and empire.” The contemporary economic power, globalization imperatively places states in an ambivalent position in relation to transnational corporations. States are supposed to participate in promoting the corporations with regard to managing global markets, but at the same time are destined to be against them to protect nations’ economies from the global economic power. All in all, the resistance, appropriation, recuperation, and/or empowerment that a postcolonial society goes through should be at the heart of postcolonial theory. The realm of education must likewise confront the globalization that flows from the west to the rest38. Global processes greatly influence local educational policies (Rizvi, 2004). Rizvi (2004) states:

Not only do international organizations like the World Bank and OECD now have

the capacity to constrain national policy options, a new global hegemonic

discourse of education also limits policy innovation at local and national levels... .

38 This research does not explicitly address whether globalization is good or bad, or whether its effects are uni-directional or bidirectional. The point is that the idea that cultural flows move from the west to the rest should not be underestimated (Razvi, 2004). 91

Whatever the debates, it is clear that global processes can no longer be overlooked

when determining or analyzing educational policies. (Rizvi, 2004, p. 158)

As can be seen, postcolonial theory explains not only why the knowledge enterprisers make an effort to decolonize, but also why their deconstruction efforts are not necessarily equal to an anti-colonial ideation, and thus cannot help but react in varied and indeterminate ways. In the context of this study, postcolonial theory makes it possible to ask whether postcolonial knowledge producers who try to disrupt the colonialism-based South Korean ethnicity pay more attention to the interest of colonial power itself than to deconstruction. Likewise, it raises questions about how globalization affects ideas of South Korean ethnicity and cultural representations, which, in turn make people respond to the concepts of culture and education.

All in all, the inquiry about how South Koreans’ view of themselves is related either to traditional colonialism or to the new imperialism goes along with inquiry about whether South Koreans resist, accept, or negotiate the outside viewpoint about themselves. Postcolonial theory enables us to consider diverse political and economic factors, at the local and global level, relevant to how people attempt to decolonize but at the same time react to global pressure. In short, this research employs postcolonial theory because it helps us understand the reaction of postcolonial subjects in a more comprehensive way.

To focus on the colonized’s response in (post)colonial discourse, attention is drawn to Bhabha’s (1994) theories, which address “the other” and the ambivalent power relationship between the colonial and the colonized. Regarding the other, Bhabha (1994) criticizes colonial discourse for its “fixity” of otherness (p. 66). As Fanon (1968) and 92

Said (1978) have shown in their critiques of colonialism, the other has been described stereotypically. For example, Fanon describes the colonized as being “the wretched of the earth,” who are continuously scripted to locate themselves as non-being or no-man, inferior through culture and education. Said’s theory also addresses how the colonizer objectifies and stereotypes the colonized in culture, through cultural representations. In contrast, Bhabha argues that the concept of the other should be understood as not being fixed and uncertain. The focal point encompassing otherness can be found in the ambivalent power relationship between the colonial and the colonized. Bhabha believes that Said employs Foucault’s notion of power to focus only on one way of power and its intentionality, such that colonial power is regarded as the colonizer’s intention to manipulate people through the political tool of colonial discourse. To Bhabha, power is dynamic and interactive, creating both oppression and resistance between the colonizer and the colonized. In this sense, Bhabha (1994) believes that the fixed viewpoint on otherness should be replaced by ambivalent, non-deterministic, and unintentional modes of knowledge and power.

Mimicry is useful in explaining such ambivalent power relationships, by enabling me to consider the fear or lack that the colonizer has in colonial discourse, as well as the indeterminacy that the colonized take up against the colonizer due to their desire for authority and power. Mimicry refers to “the desire for a reformed, recognizable Other, as a subject of a difference that is almost the same, but not quite” (italics in original, Bhabha,

1984, p. 126). Mimicry emerges as a strategy of colonial power and knowledge. It is about having the colonized imitate the colonizer’s culture, politics or cultural attitude, but not allowing them to be the same as the colonizer. From the colonizer’s perspective, the 93

colonized become the other under colonialism, but the colonized simultaneously become the subject of colonial authority by mimicry (Bhabha, 1994). The desire to have access to power precipitates the members of a colonized society to copy the colonizer’s strategies.

In this sense, sometimes a post-colonial government struggles to take power over people if they become like the colonizers. The colonized, who mimic the colonizer, tend to exaggerate the ways that colonizers take on, to prove that they can be like the colonizer.

In this way, mimicry can back up the psychological motivation or pressure that the colonized puts on itself to become like the colonizers.

The way in which knowledge producers use the idea of ethnicity in this study can be described as a type of mimicry. That is, this research explores the transformation that mimicry brings about in people or different ethnic groups, which can be seen as ethnic- nationalism. The knowledge producers, I argue, place themselves in the position to be designated as the subject[s] of a difference that is “almost the same, but not quite”

(Bhabha, 1984, p. 127), i.e., the position of the colonizer, when they mimic the western anti-racism or anti-blood-based ethnicity. In other words, this research is concerned with how they open up, creating transformative knowledge regarding a new South Korean ethnicity. Foregrounding the blood-based ethnicity, Chapter 5 further explores whether these knowledge producers, especially from the late 1980s through the present, have banned or encouraged the notion of blood-based ethnicity in representing South Korea in the public discourses of a national curriculum and public arts. Similarly, the study considers how the decolonization and/or globalization in the same period influences the understanding of culture in (in)formal educational sites and discourses of multiculturalism. 94

Under the umbrella of postcolonialism/postcolonial theory, it is notable to consider whether knowledge producers/groups in different positions are decolonialistic.

Since they challenge the given knowledge about blood-based ethnicity, it is likely that their ethnicity constructions are partly viewed as attempts toward decolonization.

However, it’s unclear whether, for instance, the two main South Korean political groups mimic the colonizers for the purpose of emancipation or simply to gain power over the people, which could be somewhat distant from any empowering efforts. In these complex situations, it is hard to determine whether South Korea was successful in decolonization or emancipation, though it is certain that the new emerging ethnicity grows in territory which is coated with nationalism, and that the locals can benefit from that nationalism.

Thus, it is necessary to consider this nationalism in relation to mimicry.

Indeed, both liberal and conservative South Korean governments mimic western nationalism. Chatterjee (1993) argues that Indian nationalism emerged as “a derivative discourse” that mimics and modifies western nationalism. The idea of justice, democracy, or equality was adapted to fit into the local context. Likewise, South Korean nation building can be seen as having emerged out of the mimicry of western nationalism, which opposes the idea of blood-based ethnicity. Leaving innate difference in terms of “beyond the blood-based ethnicity” that the western refers to, South Korean knowledge builders must translate the meaning in their own way. It is possible that knowledge producers use the idea of blood-based ethnicity, along with the progressive western notion of anti- racism, or the local context of a national security issue. As a result, the combination creates ethnic-nationalism to mobilize the nation’s people and to promote diversity while

banning racism. South Korean nationalists, in this way, become mediators to differentiate themselves from others and make themselves distinctive and unique.

Regarding the representation of ethnicity, Bhabha’s (1994) viewpoint on stereotyping and fetishism is employed. The separation or alienation of the subject, who is in the mirror stage, gives rise to the birth of the subject of desire to strive continuously toward colonialization. It is likely that the ego of South Korea has the ideal – I, and that

South Koreans identify their self-image with the ideal – I to create the self-identification of “I,” “South Koreanness.” Bhabha (1994) argues that colonial attempts to stereotype a culture are a way to fulfill the subject’s desire to establish a wholeness that is not split and not different. Thus, Bhabha justifies stereotyping colonial discourse in terms of fetishism.

A fetish is structurally a “disavowal of difference” (Bhabha, 1994, p. 74).

Psychoanalytically, a fetish can be viewed as the defense mechanism against the Other’s jouissance and against the fear that the Other’s jouissance produces. In this sense, a stereotype, to Bhabha (1994), does not mean that the colonizer – or the imitator of the colonizer– emphasizes the differences, but that the colonizer negates and masks the differences. All in all, a fetish, as a sort of secondary identification, is the object that hides difference and absence. Considering that The Pensive Bodhisattva is currently included in the Fine Art textbook and the War Memorial is not, in Chapter 4 I will discuss what this inclusion/exclusion or fetish has to do with stereotyping South Korean cultural representation, and what meaning will be created by the attempt. Postcolonial theory is useful to describe the active and purposeful attempts that South Koreans made for their artistic choices and the impetuses behind those decisions. In this way, this 96

research inquires how the imitator of the colonizer/the colonized South Koreans have been going through an “ideological fantasy” (Zizek, 1989) against the fear of the antagonistic fissure, or difference.

So far, I discussed the notion of postcolonialism/postcolonial theory and multiculturalism, which underpin the framework of postcolonial multiculturalism.

Multiculturalism aims at diversity affirmation. Postcolonialism/postcolonial theory focuses on decolonization, in which old beliefs about South Korean ethnicity are discarded and new beliefs about cultural identity are established. Since one focuses on affirming diverse values while the other focuses on affirming a unified value for nation building, conflict between the two ideas is expected. The meaning of ethnicity of which the social mechanism is grounded is thought to be determined by the interaction between the postcolonialism and multiculturalism. Due to the tension between the two theories, postcolonial multiculturalism is thought to need a politics to deal with differences. The ways in which complex phenomena in post-colonial societies make meaning via cultural representation, and how postcolonial theory helps explain those processes, are explored in more detail in the next section.

3.3 Framework for South Korean Postcolonial Multiculturalism

In this section, I discuss the framework for South Korean postcolonial multiculturalism. The focus is to consider who, under what context and how the knowledge builder(s) embraces multiculturalism. Along with such concerns, the body of this section is composed of three portions; essentialism and ethnic-nationalism; ethnic- nationalism, politico-economic context, and postcolonial multiculturalism; the characteristics of postcolonial multiculturalism. 97

3.3.1 Essentialism and Ethnic-nationalism

Essentialism is viewed as placing a subject in a fixed realm of difference into which the subject will be categorized, and it is used to refer to either content or strategy.

Fuss (1989, cited in Harewood, 2002, p. 77) notes, “To some, essentialism is nothing more than the philosophical enforcer of a liberal humanist idealism which seeks to locate and to contain the subject within a fixed set of differences” and “to others, essentialism may not be without a certain tactical value, especially in our political struggles and debates.” Without being differentiated from the cultures of other countries, or in other words, without recognizing who they are, South Koreans will not exist as a nation.

Essentialism can also function as a strategy. Regarding the political usage of essentialism,

Fuss (1989, cited in Harewood, 2002, p. 78) argues that “investigat[ing] what purpose or function essentialism might play in a particular set of discourses is more important.”

Spivak (1993, cited in Harewood, 2002, p. 78) coined the term “strategic essentialism,”39 and argued that essentialism can be used for mobilizing people to engage them in a political act. She also, as Fuss contends, warns against a fossilized essentialism40.

Strategic essentialism enables a nation’s people to experience a moment when they feel strong connections.

The attempt to construct a framework of postcolonial multiculturalism in South

Korea begins with foregrounding any common ground through which knowledge builders embrace multiculturalism. Essentialism raises questions about whether knowledge

39 Spivak (1993, cited in Harewood, 2002, p. 3) notes, “The strategic use of an essence as a mobilizing slogan or master word like woman or worker or the name of a nation is, ideally, self-conscious for all mobilized. This is the impossible risk of a lasting strategy. Can there be such a thing?” 40 Spivak (1993, cited in Harewood, 2002) clarifies that strategic essentialism should not shift to universal theory. 98

builders postulate the categories of South Korean culture and other countries’ cultures when adopting multiculturalism. In the meantime, the question about whether there is any common ground on which the dominant knowledge builders’ ideologies operate within the classification of South Korean ethnic culture is proposed. For example, attention will be drawn to the concern about how the meaning of South Korean ethnicity is transformed in adopting multiculturalism. The essentialist understanding of where community members belong is expected to provide them with local and global platforms on which to argue. The notion of essentialism helps explain why nation building is possible and important at both local and global levels.

In sum, essentialism is interpreted as a sort of homogenized difference that separates itself from the others, and is used for mobilizing people for a political purpose, such as engaging people in bonding through strong camaraderie. An essential understanding of South Korean singular ethnic culture can be thought as being incorporated with the nationalists’ regime for the purpose of a political tactic. In this sense, the concept of essentialism underlies ethnic-nationalism.

Postcolonial nation states often utilize ethnicity along with the ideology of nationalism for the purpose of nation building: ethnic-nationalism41. Some researchers have addressed the characteristics of South Korean nationalism. Shin (2006, cited in Blitz,

41 There are two types of nationalism: one is civic nationalism, and the other is ethnic-nationalism (Turker, 2008). Civic nationalism proposes one’s membership in the nation-state in terms of “citizenship, common laws, and political participation regardless of ethnicity.”(Kupchan, 1995, cited in Turker, 2008, p. 32), and ethnic-nationalism proposes membership in terms of “ethnicity and vernacular culture” (Smith, 1993, cited in Turker, 2008, p. 32). I don’t think any contemporary state will be absolutely on one side only. However, even though I see room for both viewpoints, it would be possible to see South Korea as being more lopsided for some reason. The analysis of South Korean nationalism, which affects the parameters of this research, appears to show that South Korean nationalism has been tilted more toward ethnic-nationalism. Despite the past, when the blood-based perception of ethnicity undergirded society, the recent nationalists try to balance it with civic nationalism, considering their adoption of multiculturalism from the West. 99

2009, p. 3), contends that South Korean ethnic-nationalism is a form of “mechanical solidarity” that enhances the idea of similarity between members of a society, and can

“grow only in inverse relationship to personality.” Blitz (2009) diagnoses South Korean nationalism as ethnic-nationalism, meaning “an imagined category used to naturalize state power and repress potential threats to the ruling political structure’s legitimacy” (p.

2), and he characterizes South Korean nationalism as being enhanced by “a protective bulwark against malignant forces of globalization and the taint of an Othered Japanese menace” (p. 4). This idea about ethnic-nationalism is also in line with that of Goh (2008).

Goh states that ethnicity is what people do naturally in their group interaction with each other, and nationalism is a self-conscious political derivative of ethnic identification (Goh,

2008, p. 239). Similarly, this research adopts the idea that the politics of ethnic- nationalism, which refers to ethnicity being used for the purpose of nationalism, are operating in South Korean multiculturalism. Taking the literature into consideration, I contend that particular socio-political groups use nationalism to articulate what a nation is on behalf of a large population, when they feel the need to assert a socio-political claim42.

It is not difficult to infer that the subject will be determined by the materialized ideology of nationalism, given that nationalism can be used as a strategy for “a mass sentiment for/against state power” (Turker, 2008, p. 30).

Camaraderie connects cultural identification to national identification, expressing who a group of people are and what they can do. The psychological belief of a nation should require the mindset of desiring wholeness. Society cannot actually be integrated

42 From Turker’s (2008) definition, ethnic-nationalism can be understood as the idea of ethnic loyalty combined with nationalism, used for either the legitimacy or illegitimacy of the state, depending on who asserts it and under what conditions. 100

into a unified whole, but people want to believe it can. From a psychoanalytic social perspective, a society has an antagonistic fissure, which cannot be categorized into a symbolic order. Social-ideological fantasy masks this split by generating a vision of society, which is not split by an antagonistic division. The object a, an ideological fantasy, makes it possible for people to believe in a society unified. Zizek employs Lacan’s theory to explain how people create ideological fantasy:

. . . how we can use this notion of fantasy in the domain of ideology proper: here

also ‘there is no class relationship’, society is always traversed by an antagonistic

split which cannot be integrated into symbolic order. And the stake of social-

ideological fantasy is to construct a vision of society, which does exist, a society,

which is not split by an antagonistic division, a society in which the relation

between its parts is organic, complementary. The clearest case is, of course, the

corporatist vision of Society as an organic Whole, a social Body in which the

different classes are like extremities, members each contributing to the Whole

according to its function – we may say that ‘Society as a corporate Body’ is the

fundamental ideological fantasy. (Zizek, 1989, p. 126)

In the South Korean context, people imagine an ideal society where there are no conflicts. As a society is viewed as a body, the fantasy produces a society viewed as a corporate body, in which all of the parts of a society contribute to the whole function.

However, the actual society is a kind of foreign body, which is anticipated to corrupt the sound social fabric. Accordingly, society creates a fantasy for the purpose of masking the antagonistic fissure, an inconsistent society.

So far, I’ve mainly paid attention to the essentialism and ethnic-nationalism by 101

which a subject is designated by the dominant knowledge builders as a South Korean in terms of his or her national and cultural identity. It is now necessary to consider how identity formation can be understood in relation to multiculturalism as an ongoing process in the temporal sphere, in response to environmental changes and the dominant knowledge builders’ power struggles.

3.3.2 Ethnic-nationalism, Politico-economic Context, and Postcolonial Multiculturalism

Regarding the concern about how ethnic-nationalism is related to postcolonial multiculturalism, in this section, I will focus on considering the matter about how the idea of South Korean ethnicity has been appropriated or transformed in relation to multiculturalism and under what context.

Neoliberalism43 becomes a crucial mechanism through which nations and people adjust to locality and universality. The theories of neoliberalists are grounded in the idea that no economic system can be delivered as rationally as that of the free market, which is based on individualism. Just as individuals in a nation are forced to be competitive to sell their productivity, so too do nation states feel pressure to lure others, and to sell their culture’s productivity on the local and global market.

Under this condition, the idea of national culture must become a commodity.

Nation states often try to sell the idea of what the country is, both on the local and global market. In South Korea’s case, it goes without saying that the primary strategy to sell the commodities is to emphasize South Koreanness, which is grounded in both sellers and buyers’ existing commonsensical imageries of the target people or places (Cook & Crang,

1996, cited in Edensor, 2002, p. 28). In this manner, South Korean culture must be an

43 Neoliberalism has been in play since the fiscal crisis of the 1970s. 102

idea that uses political and economic tools to create a cultural identification known as

South Koreanness (Mitchell, 1995).

Under globalization, the contemporary local/global contexts are more complex than ever before, so that nation states are obliged to deal with the impossibility of the distinction between local and global culture. On the one hand, the nation state feels the need to march with the global culture. For example, numerous international associations for human rights, such as NGOs, introduce universal values to the nation state’s people.

The fact that the South Korean nation state encourages multiculturalism also shows how the universal values of human rights are placed more graciously than ever. The pressure to open up to diverse cultures is not only precipitated by the South Korean state, which felt the need to sell their products to other countries and to its own citizens under the inevitable flows of the global cultural economy, but also by local people who want to contact other cultures and to consume the new commodities. In this sense, the mutation of flows seems to deprive the state of its power to control nationhood.

On the other hand, however, the nation state feels pressure to maintain its

“particularity.” Gupta and Ferguson (1997) state, “the irony of these times is that as actual places and localities become ever more blurred and indeterminate, ideas of culturally and ethnically distinct places become perhaps even more salient” (p. 39). It is true that nationhood is under threat from globalization. However, national culture cannot be dismantled by globalization anyhow, because citizens also want the coercion of a conforming ideology that is governed by the state. In particular, given the post-colonial context, attempts to encourage a particular national culture increase due to the memory of being colonized by other countries. Or, in the realm in between global and local contexts, 103

it could have also been important to prepare a justification for South Korea as a country, one descending from what existed before yet still distinct from North Korea. In this sense,

I agree with Wallerstein’s (1984, cited in Hall, 1992, p. 295) opinion. He states:

[T]he nationalisms of the modern world are the ambiguous expression [of a

desire] for . . . assimilation into the universal . . . and simultaneously for . . .

adhering to the particular, the reinvention of differences. Indeed it is a

universalism through particularism and particularism through universalism.

(Wallerstein, 1984, cited in Hall, 1992, p. 295)

The local and global context seem to urge nation states to keep a fine balance between keeping up with universal human rights and pursuing the nation state’s particular culture.

Needless to say, the commodity of national culture, which is the idea of representative national culture, becomes ever more imperative under a particular sociocultural and political context at the national level. As discussed in 3.1.1, the Korean

War made South Koreans question the view of ethnicity that they believed was a sacred and peaceful realm and the groundwork for their social order. The modern South Korean nation state discontinued the notion of “one ethnicity” with North Korea throughout its entire society. For example, both travel and correspondence between South and North

Korea were prohibited by law, as were any positive statements about the North Korean regime. Education, combined with strong doctrine, was regarded as playing an important role in forming the national culture. For example, the First44 National Curriculum, which

44 In education, there was a Syllabus Period under the U.S. Military Administration (1946-1954), which began right after South Korea gained independence from Japanese rule and continued until the first national curriculum appeared. During this period, South Korean education followed the educational system of the United States. The primary goal of this period was to “overcome the existing imperial education system so as to foster the democratic mind which was assimilated with the western mind” 104

is regarded as the first official attempt at South Korea’s independent line of thought, set forth the goal of “infus[ing] anti-communism into the people's minds”45 (Choi, 2006; H. J.

Kim, 2004). The emphasis on anti-communism in the curriculum was thought to be specified by Hosang Ahn, the first Minister of Education, who promoted the One Nation

Principle (Choi, 2006).

This discontinuity with the idea of “one ethnicity” was not limited to the revision of legislation. Instead, constructing identity might have been considered more imperative.

As Mercer (1990, cited in Hall, 1992, p. 275) observes, “identity only becomes an issue when it is in crisis, when something assumed to be fixed, coherent and stable is displaced by the experience of doubt and uncertainty.” It must have been a crisis in which the dominant knowledge builders struggled with how to construct identity politics during post-colonial political turmoil.

Indeed, the identity politics surrounding one ethnicity within South Korea are not that simple. One reason could be power struggles between the dominant knowledge builder groups in opposing regimes. It must consider how the idea of ethnicity is used by particular groups for the purpose of building a nation, and for fulfilling their interests. In other words, this study will explore how a blood-based ethnicity is (de)reconstructed or transformed by the dominant knowledge builders.

Opening to multiculturalism, South Korea does not any longer stick to blood- based ethnicity that is thought to bring about a closing off other countries, but willingly opens to differences which is appropriate as global citizens. Or, the traditional way of

Choi (2004). 45 In addition to training skilled workers and emphasizing moral education (Choi, 2006; H. J. Kim, 2004). 105

regarding themselves as being of a blood-based singular ethnic culture appears to be obliged to transform or to be appropriated in accordance with globalization and the adaptation of multiculturalism, and as such grapples with multiculturalism. In some way, in the South Korean context, the idea of blood-based ethnicity divided into two countries became a significant commodity to determine South Korean cultural identification.

Under this context of neoliberalism, ethnic-nationalism appears to adapt the politics of difference in embracing multiculturalism. The politics of difference, which is primarily concerned with how knowledge builders create nation building out of diversity, while at the same time promoting diversity, appears to focus either on building up South

Korean particular national culture or on promoting diverse ethnic cultures.

In constructing a theoretical framework for this study, it is noteworthy to consider whether the idea of national culture as commodity is emphasized to compete on the local and global market under the regime of neoliberalism, and the commodity of South

Korean cultural understanding must have been regarded as an important medium, by which indigenous people could escape from colonization and differentiate themselves from other countries. The cultural representations inside/outside the Fine Art textbook upon which the changed meaning of ethnicity is practiced regarding multiculturalism will be one of the inquires to examine. On the other hand, the meaning shift of ethnicity through postcolonial multiculturalism can be seen as the change of the primary national regime or the dominant knowledge builder(s)/groups. That is, who took the ground and how the group or knowledge builders appropriate the long held belief of ethnicity and how peoples’ power to make meaning of ethnicity tries to keep the dimension of the

106

social system. It remains to be seen what principle enables this sociocultural context to induce people to practice differences in the post-colonial South Korean context.

3.3.3 The Characteristics of Postcolonial Multiculturalism

3.3.3.1 Othering

Needless to say, as a regime of ethnic-nationalism exercises its power over the people, the idea of the Other is established and pushed to the margins, which is thought to affect multiculturalism in South Korea. Except for the othering, it would be impossible to justify the ideology. The process of Othering, the dominant hegemony about the unified nationhood associated with ethnicity, is formalized as nation building. Just as “the Other” is required for both political groups46, the privileged and the subaltern, when the former constructs hegemonic discourses and the latter constructs counter hegemonic efforts to subvert the dominant ideology, so too is the other appropriated in multiculturalism.

3.3.3.2 Politics of Difference

The politics of difference is another significant element of South Korean postcolonial multiculturalism. It is primarily concerned with how knowledge builder(s) build nations, while at the same time promoting diversity. I would define the politics of difference as the strategic use of difference that is either encouraged or suppressed by the most dominant group, for the usefulness of the difference they envision. Based on the discussion so far about essentialism and ethnic-nationalism, the politics of difference in relation to South Korean postcolonial multiculturalism is related to the question about

46 For example, the previously subaltern group of Kim’s government (r. 1998-2003) used its marginality in discourses to contend with the privileged conservative-driven authority of Roh’s government (r. 1988- 1993), and the subaltern group simultaneously placed the privileged dominant group in the position of an excluded Other. Likewise, in Roh’s government the liberal groups, and in Kim’s government the conservative groups must have been billed as the Other. 107

whether South Korean dominant knowledge builders encourage the different ethnic groups’ cultures or whether they bolster the traditional South Korean understanding of a singular ethnic culture, as a sort of an essential difference that defines particularity.

The dominant knowledge builders who are associated with South Korean government(s) embrace(s) politics of difference inside/outside the Fine Art textbook.

They give recognition to the unique identity of an individual or a group and emphasize their distinctness. Recognition means “producing cultural knowledge of the population using its pluralist worldview so that groups in the population can become recognizable”

(Goh, 2008, p. 246). The attempts to establish laws like the Support for Multicultural

Families Act (2008) and the opening of the Multicultural Families Festival47 many times throughout the year can be viewed as an effort to realize the ideal of the politics of difference. This politics of difference is intended to give individuals and groups a chance to express and emphasize their particularity, which might be suppressed if they did not have this special chance. A vigorous policy of South Korean postcolonial multiculturalism enables people to enjoy increased opportunities to recognize and affirm other countries’ ethnic cultures.

However, a dichotomous understanding of the world precipitates people to perceive the social norm which makes people make a decision about what they can reveal in public as a public identity and what they have to keep private within. For instance, the politics of recognition does not apply to those who are Jehovah’s Witnesses in South

Korea, because their religious beliefs disrupt the social norm. To remain loyal to their

47 Taylor’s “politics of difference” against a politics of equal dignity are evident at these festivals. Taylor believes that politics of equal dignity, which respects everyone equally, “makes everything universally the same (…) an identical basket of rights and immunities” (Taylor, 1994, p. 38). 108

religion, men who are Jehovah’s Witnesses cannot choose but to go to jail instead of joining the army and pay a fine48. Likewise, the postcolonial knowledge builders associated with the state intervene in an individual’s culture by either banning or encouraging one’s performance, which disciplines people’s cultural acts that could be proper in public.

In one way, postcolonial multiculturalism is viewed as identity politics. From a cultural (though also political) perspective, the politics of difference can justify South

Korea’s national position itself, which is thought of as having a particular, distinct, and different culture from any other countries. At the same time, the particularity must bond people together in strong companionship. Thus, like any other postcolonial country, in managing multiculturalism South Korea also must be concerned with how to sustain or develop its distinct national cultures. In short, the politics of difference becomes ever more politically important at the local and global levels. Under this difference/particularity-focused politics, it is not unusual to suppress differences in individuals, in order to build up the universalized value of unification in the post-colonial context. Difference as a particularity, which dissociates South Korea from North Korea as well as from other countries, would in fact have to be encouraged.

This principle motivates the inquiries, in the following chapters, into whether the nation state(s) prioritized or ignored particular factors constituting personal identity49. If

48 Under the postcolonial South Korean context, it is required for the male to commit to do military work for 21-24 months. If not, those who reject the conscription are sentenced to prison terms. 49 Considering the complexity of decision making involved in difference, I draw attention to this determining priority amongst difference, the “politics of difference.” According to Hall (1992), one social issue that evoked politics of difference was the nomination of Judge Clarence Thomas to the US Supreme Court. Since he was an African American, the Bush administration expected to gain the support of African Americans if they appointed Thomas as judge, but Thomas’s sex scandal provoked 109

the state ignores the factors, that raises several questions. What factor or mechanism primarily substitutes for the cultural factors that constitute personal identity/identities?

Was the factor or mechanism strong enough to colonize all the differences that individuals have? Was it influenced by the neoliberal condition? Who can benefit from the politics of difference?

3.3.3.3 Inclusion/Exclusion

The efforts that the state makes in publicizing an individual’s/group’s culture is a highly selective decision and it implies what could be revealed and complemented upon in public and what should remain in the private realm. Accordingly, what is not revealed is considered to be problematic in terms of morality and politics (Goh, 2008, p. 245). In such circumstances, multiculturalism that is enacted by the government to have people affirm diversity necessary for becoming a national citizen results in creating and solidifying the dichotomous understanding of the world, such as ‘national’ culture vs.

‘local’ culture or culture possible in the public realm vs. in the private realm. What follows the social norm within the category is revealed in public; but what is outside or in between the categories is kept for the private realm. The ethnic script, what people, as ethnic cultural actors, should follow for their rule of behavior, that is an ethnic cultural norm, functions in the terrain of social reproduction. In this sense, postcolonial multiculturalism becomes pedagogy to educate people about the social norm, and it strengthens and sustains the dichotomous understanding of people and the world.

3.3.4 Conclusion: South Korean Postcolonial Multiculturalism

unexpected responses from voters within the African American community. This implies that personal identity is constituted by multiple cultural factors, such as gender, class, etc., so any single factor cannot be a crucial factor for an individual to make a decision. Any decision making relevant to difference will be determined by how much power those who are in power relations can gain from that difference. 110

Postcolonial multiculturalism, on the whole, can be viewed as identity politics and politics of difference which is grounded in the legacy of colonial ethnicity construction and post-colonial power struggles to consolidate nation building (Goh, 2008; Guilbault,

2011). South Korean postcolonial multiculturalism is not an exception, so that dominant knowledge builders who are in politico-economic and educational power relations use the idea of South Korean singular ethnicity as a primary organizing factor in “manag[ing] or control[ing] differences” for the purpose of consolidating the nation as well as gaining/sustaining their power in/against the nation state (Goh, 2008). Here, the South

Koreans’ particular social context of the Korean War, its associated nationalism, and globalization provide the foundation on which the dominant knowledge builders put forth to justify their position. To this end, postcolonial knowledge builders use the strategy of dividing and unifying nations based on the idea of ethnicity, by which South Koreans feel a sense of nationhood and unification, and at the same time experience marginalization and difference. By this reason, postcolonial multiculturalism leaves a question mark, because multiculturalism pursues unity but respects differences.

The postcolonial multiculturalism functions to unify as well as colonize people.

Each individual has differences of gender, race, etc., and the combination of the cultural factors determines one’s unique identity. This means, all people are different from one another and homogenized unification is nearly impossible, but for colonial effort. As Hall

(1992) argues, national culture ignores difference amongst peoples and tries to unify people to belong to the same national family. In this sense, Hall argues that unification is possible by canceling or subsuming cultural difference (p. 296). Hall (1992) proposes

111

three reasons why researchers in general disagree with the idea that national identity is naturally constructed:

1) Most modern nations consist of disparate cultures, which were only unified by

a lengthy process of violent conquest. 2) Nations are always composed of

different social classes, and gender and ethnic groups. 3) Modern Western nations

were also the centres of empires or of neo-imperial spheres of influence,

exercising cultural hegemony over the cultures of the colonized. (Hall, 1992, p.

297)

The fact that people are never unified voluntarily shows that cultural identity as unified has been formed by a long process that undermines the voluntary inclusion of differences to create national identity. In this sense, postcolonial multiculturalism could be possible to embrace colonialization, because differences in individuals could be suppressed in order to build up the universalized value of unification in the post-colonial context.

So far, I’ve summarized the structure of postcolonial multiculturalism. Ethnicity whose meaning is in line with the social paradigm is expected to change or transform its meaning, in accordance with the advent of multiculturalism and other environmental changes. The mechanism constructing the meaning of ethnicity depends on “difference.”

The ethnic particularity of blood-based ethnicity despite being divided into two countries is enough to differentiate South Korea from any other country in the world. This essentialism-based idea of ethnicity is appropriated for the purpose of identifying people with a South Korean cultural identity, as well as unifying them by evoking an imagined community. In this sense, ethnic-nationalism foregrounds postcolonial multiculturalism.

Or, in some ways, postcolonial identity politics −in this paper, ethnicity construction− is 112

performed by multiculturalism.

3.4 Summary. Framework for South Korean Postcolonial Multiculturalism

This section aims at constructing the theoretical lens of postcolonial multiculturalism, by which I explore how South Korean ethnicity construction affects multiculturalism in the Fine Art textbook.

The groundwork for my theoretical framework surrounding the idea of South

Korean ethnicity can be seen in the table below. Any ideas in the table are written from the knowledge producers’ perspective – whoever uses postcolonialism and multiculturalism.

The main ideas constituting multiculturalism and postcolonialism/postcolonial theory respectively structure the horizontal and vertical axes, and the research variable

(ethnicity) is combined with the main ideas of each theory and placed under its respective main idea (see cells 1 & 1′). The two theories and their associations with ethnicity generate several questions, in which I consider the knowledge builders’ intentions to create meaning (see cells 2 & 2′). A common question (see cell 3) is induced by the main ideas in 2 and 2′, and it generates an idea (see cell 4), which is expected to underpin the theoretical frame of postcolonial multiculturalism.

113

Multi- ▪ How to manage difference? How to promote difference and diversity culturalism affirmation? Post- ▫ How to manage/promote ethnic cultural differences and diversity colonialism/ affirmation? Postcolonial 1 Theory ′ ▪ How to build ▪ What is the ▪ What are the benefits knowledge builders can gain by a nation? implementation of having people recognize and affirm cultural essentialist understanding diversity? of culture on the 2 ▫ How to build construction of a nation by the national identity? 3 appropriation ▪ What are the ▪ Postcolonial multiculturalism of the idea benefits knowledge : Managing/Affirming difference in post-colonial South of ethnicity in builders can gain Korea for the purpose of nation building post-colonial from the ▫ Ethnic-nationalism contributing to cultural identity society? understanding of and nation building culture when they ▫ Politics of difference de(re)construc 1 t national 2 4 ′ identity? Table 7. Theoretical′ Framework for South Korean Postcolonial Multiculturalism ′

The two theories cannot avoid tension, particularly in the South Korean context.

While both of them are interested in suturing meanings of culture out of unorganized multiple meanings, multiculturalism favors diverse meanings for promoting diverse cultures and postcolonialism promotes a singular meaning for nation building. The relationships between the ideas of multiculturalism and postcolonialism, in this sense, can be placed at right angles to each other. Both are thought to affect the meaning of ethnicity in South Korean culture, as can be seen in Figure 8 below:

114

Figure 8. The Relationship between Theories and the Research Variable 1 Note. P: The idea of postcolonialism; M: The idea of multiculturalism; E: Ethnicity

In Figure 8, any idea regarding multiculturalism should be on the horizontal axis

(M), while ideas on postcolonialism should be on the vertical axis (P). However, the two ideas also interact dynamically with people in power relations. The tensions between postcolonialism and multiculturalism are caused by power-embedded people’s movements surrounding ethnicity, as shown in Figure 9 below.

Figure 9. The Relationship between Theories and the Research Variable 2 P: The idea of Postcolonialism; M: The idea of Multiculturalism; E: Ethnicity

115

Here, it is important that the flow of postcolonialism goes toward the point where the other facets depart from, the center, while multiculturalism tries to flow outward, to decenter.

Multiculturalism and postcolonialism are both discussed by people in power struggles, which are reactions to the contexts by which they are surrounded. Indeed, the post-colonial context plays a significant role in embracing multiculturalism. Figure 10 below illustrates how the dynamic cooperation of postcolonial and multicultural ideas makes meaning and forms history in a space. In other words, it shows how power struggles are involved in the construction of South Korean ethnicity, and how those struggles form the spatial culture and history in/by/through which the knowledge builders and people live.

Figure 10. Postcolonial Multiculturalism in Space P: The idea of Postcolonialism; M: The idea of Multiculturalism; E: Ethnicity

As we’ve seen, this framework posits the meaning making of South Korean

116

ethnicity in the context of postcolonial multiculturalism. While postcolonialism pursues a single meaning for national culture, multiculturalism pursues diverse meanings. Due to the tension between postcolonialism and multiculturalism, combining them in a postcolonial society requires a certain politics to deal with differences. As noted earlier, the politics of difference is defined in this paper as a strategic use of difference that is either encouraged or suppressed by the most dominant group, depending on the usefulness they envision for the difference. The politics of difference is primarily concerned with how subjects build nations, while at the same time promoting diversity. In particular, in a postcolonial South Korean context, I view the usage of politics of difference to be mediated by the idea of ethnicity that is undergirded by nationalism. Figure 11 below represents the relationship between postcolonialism/postcolonial multiculturalism and the politics emerging out of the relationship.

Figure 11. Theories and the Politics of Difference

117

My methodology focuses on developing a frame in which to analyze South

Korean ethnicity construction within postcolonial multiculturalism. To be specific, the focal point in this methodology is unpacking how discourses inside/outside the textbook manage South Korean ethnicity construction. This is because the purpose of this research is to decide whether the textbook promotes the idea of multiculturalism or disrupts it, and because the research variable of South Korean ethnicity is expected to be involved in the idea of multiculturalism. To consider the construction of ethnicity in depth, it is necessary to examine South Korean ethnicity in relation to a social system that reflects spatial and temporal phenomena in a three-dimensional way. Therefore, I need to transform the theoretical frame into a social system model perspective that is closely related to the methodological framework. Figure 12 below shows the model shift from a theoretical frame to the methodological frame.

Figure 12. The Groundwork for the Postcolonial Multiculturalism Model P: The Idea of Postcolonialism; M: The Idea of Multiculturalism; E: Ethnicity; H: History

In particular, considering the influence of ethnic-nationalism in South Korea, whose focal point is based on the idea of South Korean ethnicity, the point from which

118

multiculturalism and postcolonialism initiate is moved to the center of the social system.

Subsequent analysis will test whether the system surrounding the fine art textbook allows room for different values. While the attempts to open up diverse culture goes outward, the counter movements head to the center, towards the idea of South Koreanness. This is thought to create tension or balance within the social system. As a result, postcolonial multiculturalism is anticipated to exist somewhere in between. Overall, postcolonial multiculturalism can be viewed as identity politics and/or the politics of difference in relation to a particular sociopolitical context. Incorporating the focus of multiculturalism on ‘managing differences’ with postcolonial project(s) in a post-colonial society, it is possible to infer that postcolonial multiculturalism is about managing or controlling differences for the purpose of de(re)colonization.

3.5 Critical Discourse Analysis

This research evaluates the premise that the Fine Art textbook disrupts multiculturalism. The key to solving the problem is uncovering how the textbook postulates an idea of South Korean ethnicity, so this research examines the meaning construction of South Korean ethnic culture inside/outside the Fine Art textbook. Critical discourse analysis (CDA) will be applied to examine the pattern of the representation of

South Korean ethnic culture, both inside and outside the textbook.

The goal of the methodological framework for this study is to make a filter, through which I demonstrate how South Korean ethnicity construction inside/outside the textbook –that is, under postcolonial multiculturalism− affects the idea of multiculturalism. To this end, this section’s purpose is to construct a Critical Discourse

Analysis frame through which I can see two things: 1) the ideology of South Korean 119

ethnicity that is infiltrated into the image examples in the textbook and the ideology that reflects outside context, and 2) the dominant knowledge producers who are involved in the construction of South Korean ethnicity.

3.5.1 Overview of the Critical Discourse Analysis

Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is a methodology to analyze discourse, a form of social practice, critically. CDA is a critique of a discursive event50 for the purpose of revealing the structure of power and ideologies. Fairclough (1989, cited in Burns, 2005, p.

96) states the objective of CDA as

Uncover[ing] the ideological assumptions that are hidden in the words of our

written texts . . . in order to resist and overcome various forms of ‘power over’ or

to gain an appreciation51 that we are exercising power over, unbeknownst to us.

(Fairclough, 1989, cited in Burns, 2005, p. 96)

Wodak and Meyer (2009) describe the purpose of CDA as “enlightenment and emancipation” (p. 7) and its goal as “revealing structures of power and unmasking ideologies” (p. 8). All in all, CDA aims to reveal social practices in which people live with/through inequality-embedded ideology that operates through daily language usage, and to make people themselves aware of their complicity in that inequality.

3.5.1.1 Key Ideas of Critical Discourse Analysis and This Research

Advocates of CDA are not concerned with a theory; they pay more attention to what happens in society (van Dijk, 1993, p. 252). In the meantime, CDA is concerned

50 A discursive event means an “instance of language use, analyzed as text, discursive practice, social practice” (Fairclough, 1993, p. 138). 51 In this sense, Wodak and Meyer (2009) repeat Horkheimer and Adorno’s (1991, cited in Wodak & Meyer, 2009, p. 8) viewpoint that the critical impetus of CDA is somewhat a legacy of the Enlightenment. 120

with the ideas of discourse, critique, ideology, and power (Wodak & Meyer, 2009, pp. 4-

10). In this sub-section, I discuss the way in which the ethnicity construction in South

Korean society is in line with the key concerns of CDA. This helps to define this research, as well as to consider the best way to use CDA to analyze the South Koreanness embedded in the visual and written texts inside/outside the Fine Art textbook.

The first key constituent of CDA is discourse, which means a form of social practice (Fairclough & Wodak, 1997, cited in Wodak & Meyer, 2009, pp. 5-6).

Employing Foucault (1972, cited in Burns, 2005, p. 90), discourse can be viewed as language use relative to sociopolitical and cultural formations (Jaworski & Coupland,

1999, cited in Burns, 2005, p. 90). Language use, which is a particular discursive event, has a “dialectic” relationship with wider social and cultural institutions and structures.

Thus, advocates of CDA are interested in, on the one hand, how language is influenced by society; and, on the other hand, how social and cultural structures are either stabilized or changed by language. Discourse as social practice52 reveals not only visible language use but also the invisible beliefs, values, ideas, and cultural identities that people share.

With regard to this research, language use reflects the structured forms of, for instance, the singular ethnicity in South Korea, and how the relatively stable conventions of language usage (re)produce the institutions and structures of society and social life. In this study, the dialectical relationship between a discursive event and the social structures should be at the heart of identifying the discourse of South Koreanness.

In a more practical manner, CDA understands discourse to be composed of three levels: text, discursive context, and sociocultural context (Fairclough, 1995, cited in

52 Fairclough (1993) states, “language use [is] conceived as social practice” (p. 138) 121

Burns, 2005).

Figure 13. Discursive Event Model

The constituents of discourse, or the relations between a discursive event and social structures, are represented above. The text is considered as an ideological recording. The discursive context is anticipated to help analyze the process of producing meaning. The sociocultural context focuses on analyzing the use of the text based on its social, political, and cultural context. In this research, questions relevant to the two image examples in the

Fine Art textbook, The Pensive Bodhisattva and The Thinker, are placed in the text area, while questions related to textbook production are placed in the discursive context area.

Public arts discourses about the War Memorial belong in the main context area.

Incorporating Fairclough’s ideas into this study, I explore both language use and the context of language use, in order to identify the effect and function of language use.

The meaning of ‘critique,’ another focal constituent of the CDA model, likewise needs to be considered in relation to CDA’s objectives. While standard Discourse

122

Analysis aims at “describing” discourse, CDA aims at “understand[ing] and chang[ing]53 discourse processes in order to achieve equitable social relations” (Wodak & Meyer, 2009, p. 7) and at producing critical knowledge that helps people conceive their unquestioned complicity in inequality (Wodak & Meyer, 2009). From such a critical viewpoint, this research aims at exploring and unpacking whether the taken for granted notion of South

Korean ethnic culture has been constructed through visual and written texts, particularly in formal and informal education. By doing so, this research expects to influence readers’ attention to the issue of how this ideology has entailed inequality.

The third concept that I consider from the methodological viewpoint is ideology.

Fairclough defines ideology as “representations of aspects of the world which contribute to establishing and maintaining relations of power, domination, and exploitation”

(Fairclough, 2003, cited in Wodak & Meyer, 2009, p. 9). Van Dijk (1993, cited in Wodak

& Meyer, 2009, p. 8) defines ideology as “‘worldviews’ that constitute ‘social cognition’

[that is] schematically organized complexes of representations and attitude with regard to certain aspects of social world.” Both Fairclough’s and van Dijk’s definitions of ideology can be described as “a coherent and relatively stable set of beliefs or values” (Wodak &

Meyer, 2009, p. 8). This research, in part, examines the dominant ideology about ethnicity that has circulated inside/outside the Fine Art textbook. In terms of ideology, it is important to consider both the surface linguistic features and what is not said/written but is implied or presupposed as obvious. Accordingly, exploring South Korean ethnicity construction in terms of postcolonial multiculturalism can help reveal the “hidden”

53 CDA’s origin alludes to its characteristics. CDA was influenced by Max Horkheimer (1937) in the Frankfurt School and by Habermas, both of whom urged social theorists to contribute to “critiquing” and “changing” society, rather than simply “describing” society (Wodak & Meyer, 2009, p. 6). 123

agenda.

Last, but not least, this study can be viewed as an attempt to read power and to visualize invisible power, since language is intertwined with social power (Wodak &

Meyer, 2009, p. 10). Employing van Dijk’s and Bhabha’s concepts, I view power as a dynamic condensed energy used to control others54. Van Dijk (1993) believes that there is a dominant power with a normalized and conventionalized ideology, which controls other groups and in which discourse (re)produces social domination. As van Dijk’s (1993) approach to CDA is predicated on social theory and his purpose for CDA is to investigate social inequality critically, he uses the idea of power to refer to something prompting sociocultural conflict and inequity, based on a dichotomous view (the dominant vs. the marginalized) of the world. To van Dijk, the construction of a cultural – or national – image must be designed by certain groups/peoples, and the way language is used inevitably manipulates people55. From Bhabha’s (1994) postcolonial perspective, power can be described as an attempt to visualize a nation’s ‘desire.’ It is likely that the more desires people in that nation have, the more they can exert their power. The political basis upon which power converges for this research is the ideology of South Koreanness.

Because this research explores texts as manifestations of social action, I focus on what specific and dynamic or stable controls of the action –power− occurs inside/outside the

54 Even though I focus on texts that are primarily constructed by dominant knowledge producers/groups, a text should not be understood as a culmination of any one person or group. Similarly, power is not exerted with any one intention. Wodak and Meyer (2009) state that Foucault’s interest in ‘technologies of power’ should be understood as power being exercised with intention, but it is not individual intention. 55 Van Dijk (1987; 1991; 1996, cited in Cameron, 2001, p. 127) investigates the representation of race in mainstream discourse. He argues that the way people label those who are racially marginalized functions to exclude them as “the other” (Cameron, 2001, p. 129). For example, the European-born children of immigrants are called “immigrants” (by politicians), despite the fact that the children did not migrate from anywhere. The labeling conveys that they do not really belong in the society in which they were born, and that they are discriminated against by the indirect reference to racial differences. 124

Fine Art textbook. In other words, this research asks what desire the dominant knowledge builders who are involved with the Fine Art textbook envision in relation to the idea of

South Korean ethnic culture, and why and how they desire to construct the ideology of

South Koreanness inside/outside of the Fine Art textbook.

3.5.1.2 Speech Act Theory56 and Critical Discourse Analysis

The CDA perspective that Dijk advocates is based on Speech Act theory, which pays attention to the function of language and the reality that the language creates. A speech act is “the action that is performed when a word is uttered” (Madison, 2005, p.

161). Austin described two views of language: constative and performative. The former is to “describe, refer, or indicate based on accuracy,” and it refers to a mere sentence. The latter focuses on the performative function of language beyond simple reference, based on the idea that “words are indeed performative and do have material effects. Obviously, they do something in the world” (Madison, 2005, p. 162)57. Language has performative58 dimensions. When a speaker says something, the speaker is doing something. The performative dimensions of language thus create a particular reality: “language performs a reality.” In this research, for example, what Mudori is talking about on the War

Memorial website forms his position. In this vein, I ask with whom he is identified, e.g. with people or with government, and whether he is male or female. For example, when

Mudori defines his hometown as peace, he actually ‘confirms’ what the hometown should

56 Speech act theory was initiated by Austin and expanded by Searle. Austin (1962) believes there is a particular moment which evokes the performative function of language, while Searle (1969) expands the performative dimension of language to all language. 57 Madison (2005) summarizes Austin’s viewpoint about the characteristics of language as follows: “[Austin] states that language does more than describe; it also does something that makes a material, physical, and situational difference” (p. 161). 58 The term ‘performative’ was coined by Austin (1962, cited in Cameron, 2001, p. 69) to refer to utterances “because they perform a particular action in and of themselves” (Cameron, 2001, p. 69). Austin focuses on the function of language. 125

look like. His words will defend his role, and the role will reveal whom he wants to protect and who will be accused. Language creating reality means here that Mudori will defend himself and justify his role. Likewise, this research examines the performance of visual and written language that forms a certain perspective, indicating where the speaker/writer is from, his/her identity, his/her political role, and whom s/he is backing.

3.5.1.3 Intertextuality

Intertextuality refers to the way in which meaning is accumulated and generated by the relationships between texts, not by a single original source (Barker, 2004, p. 101).

Barthes argues in Death of the Author that a text generates meaning based on the

“existing cultural quotations,” and Derrida argues that all meanings which are deferred, unstable and in the ever ongoing process, contain traces of other meanings from other places (Barker, 2004, p. 101). Many cases of intertextuality entail networked-operations of multiple hegemonies. In the methodological sphere, the term “intertextuality” was coined by Kristeva, who was influenced by Bakhtin (Fairclough, 1992, p. 101). Bakhtin

(1986, cited in Solin, 2004, p. 268) argued that every text is dialogical, in that every text responds to the preceding texts in various ways, such as affirmation, refutation, or supplementation, and that a text gains its meaning from the relations that it has with other texts. In the same vein, Fairclough (1992) focuses on the transformation of the subsequent texts. Therefore, I view intertextuality as a meaning making process where a given text has a relationship with prior texts and (re)forms or transforms their meaning(s).

Studies on intertextuality as a method are classified into three dimensions (Solin,

2004). One is to examine the intertextual composition of a single text, focusing both on citations that are quoted explicitly and on allusions that are implied implicitly, in relation 126

to a belief or issue—in this case, South Korean ethnicity. Another is to approach intertextuality from the social practice perspective, focusing on how a certain language

(e.g. visual and written language) is used in a certain community with a conventional meaning. The final dimension is derived from power relations, focusing on how conventional meaning making excludes a particular voice. Here, intertextuality functions as a form of mediation, making it possible to discover the discursive relations among textual domains in public discourse.

Intertextuality can also be classified into two relational categories: one refers to specific prior texts, and the other refers to abstract sets of conventions (Solin, 2004). In particular, the latter refers to the ability to relate an individual text to a genre (Solin,

2004). In this sense, Solin follows Culler’s (1981) characterization of intertextuality:

“everything that enables one to recognize pattern and meaning in texts” or “the general discursive space that makes a text intelligible” (Solin, 2004, p. 271). Therefore, intertextuality should be understood as both a concrete and an abstract approach to textual relations59.

One of the most important concepts in understanding intertextuality deals with intertextual relations operating “within” and “across” discourse(s): texts are both open to change and at the same time stable, since elements constituting each text within a given genre flow within and across the text(s). On the one hand, the elements that constitute a given genre60 or text in a distinct way become open to composition with other elements.

59 These two types of relations can be described, in Fairclough’s terms, as “manifest intertextuality” for the concrete relations and “constitutive intertextuality” for the abstract relations, at the level of individual texts (Solin, 2004, p. 271). 60 Genre refers to a textual classification which differentiates particular and distinguishable resources from those of other texts. 127

Since these combinations are numerous, a genre/text is expected to have many styles.

However, on the other hand, the styles or texts that constitute a given genre will be reduced to a single representative genre, so that it will have the characteristics of stability, because each genre’s composition of elements is supposed to conform to the context of that genre. In this research, for instance, one element can combine with the other elements under the genre of the public artwork, or of the public announcement of the War

Memorial, and element(s) can cross visual and written texts to compose another text.

Fairclough (1992) proposes two concepts to analyze intertextual relations

“within” and “across” institution(s): the order of discourse and the intertextual chain. The order of discourse refers to the “totality of discursive practices of an institution and [the] relationship between them” (Fairclough, 1993, p. 138). An institution at a particular historical moment has several discursive practices, produced by the composition of discursive resources, i.e., genres. The order of discourse is appropriate to describe the discursive characteristics of a genre. For example, the institution of the War Memorial might have many genres of discursive practices, and all the genres that constitute the discourse of, for instance, the memorial’s visual data at a certain time will be stable and coherent in addressing the idea of South Korean culture. The second concept to analyze intertextual relationships “within” and “across” texts is the intertextual chain. According to Fairclough (1992), an intertextual chain is a “series of types of texts” whose members are “transformed” into one or another text in a “regular” and “predictable” way (p. 130).

An intertextual chain61 “points to the way in which texts relate to one another in a

61 It is worth noting that Solin (2004) differentiates intertextuality from chain analysis by using metaphors. Intertextuality is predicated on an open network of “webs,” where claims flow anywhere, regardless of domains, while chain analysis is predicated on the “conveyer belt” metaphor, where claims are 128

chronological sequence, forming channels of textual interaction” (Solin, 2004, p. 272).

Simply put, a chain is a channel that connects the preceding and subsequent texts, through which one claim flows to another institutional domain.

Intertextuality is not only “a form through which texts are interrelated, but . . . a social practice involving particular socially regulated ways of producing and interpreting discourse” (Solin, 2004, p. 270). Therefore, intertextuality in CDA can be viewed as being at the heart of the meaning-making process via the use of language in a given society. It is appropriate to use intertextuality in this research because South Korean cultural identity formation is not constituted by a single textual resource. Rather, the meaning of South Koreanness is discursively – relationally and interconnectedly – constructed from diverse cultural realms and history. Thus, the meaning of South

Koreanness that emerges from the interaction between discourses in various sources can be grasped through intertextuality. Furthermore, this research focuses on intertextuality because it enables me to investigate the way in which those who are in power relations participate in the process of constructing the ideology of South Koreanness, by virtue of the language use that mutually formulates social structure.

3.5.2 The Design of the Study

For the research design, a fine art textbook is selected and the scope of the research is determined. The textbook, of course, plays a significant role in the analysis of postcolonial multiculturalism. Specifically, for this research I analyze Fine Art62, the textbook associated with the Revised National Curriculum in 2007. I refer to it as “Fine

regulated and formatted with different wordings in each institutional domain (p. 289). 62 The fine art curriculum has six textbooks, all titled Fine Art. For this study, I chose the edition published by Chunjae Education in 2011. 129

Art textbook” throughout the study. Chapter 4 specifically examines how that postcolonialism and postcolonial multiculturalism work through the content in the book and the textbook production system (see Text & Discursive Context in Figure 5).

Meanwhile, to articulate the meaning of ethnicity that postcolonialism intends to embrace in the textbook, Chapter 4 also draws attention to what is hidden in the book’s cultural representations. This research particularly highlights The War Memorial (1994-Present) and discusses its cultural representation in Chapter 5 (see Socio-cultural Context in

Figure 5). Given the premise of this research, the memorial is a significant data source because it is thought to help reveal the meaning of South Korean ethnicity that the textbook proposes in relation to postcolonialism, as well to provide context for the book’s development. Given that the text of Fine Art mirrors the sociocultural context where the cultural representation of the War Memorial makes meaning, the War Memorial as a cultural representation is expected to inform readers of the meaning of South Korean ethnicity that the Fine Art textbook promotes. For this reason, this research includes public discourses relevant to The War Memorial and designates them as data placed

“outside” the Fine Art textbook. In addition to the data “inside” the Fine Art textbook, data on the process and product of the textbook production and other texts relevant to the memorial are expected to reveal the relationship between postcolonialism and postcolonial multiculturalism.

Figure 14 below shows the research structure used to examine how South Korean ethnicity construction occurs inside/outside the Fine Art textbook. Three realms are established in relation to the textbook, and representative texts in each realm are selected.

The three areas, as technical distinctions, are connected to one another. Accordingly, the 130

texts in each realm should be understood as being connected to one another, as implied by the dotted lines separating adjacent realms.

Figure 14. Discursive Event Model for This Research

3.5.2.1 Data Collection

To be specific, texts in which I explore South Korean ethnicity construction and multiculturalism in relation to the Fine Art textbook are primarily chosen from: 1) a set of two images of artwork in the book, 2) the practices of the Fine Art textbook production system, and 3) public discourses relevant to the War Memorial.

To begin with, a set of two images is chosen from the Fine Art textbook based on the works’ formal characteristics. One work, designated as the eighty-third Korean

National Treasure, is The Pensive Bodhisattva by an anonymous artist. The other is The

Thinker, by French sculptor Auguste Rodin. The formal characteristics of the two target images infer “difference” between the works as an underpinning principle, and the book displays the target images in a comparative structure.

In addition, data relevant to ethnicity construction in the textbook production 131

process includes texts about the textbook authorization system and the national curriculum. According to the Regulations on Curriculum Books, the Fine Art textbook is supposed to be published as an “authorized book,” meaning the Ministry of Education,

Science, and Technology (MEST) has authority to manage the whole process of textbook production, while delegating the authority to write the actual books. The process of authorization generates multiple texts, such as the selection of the study and deliberative council, a preliminary study and main review of submitted books, and a price assessment for the textbooks that pass the examination. The inquiry about texts in the national curriculum will include attention to the Revised National Curriculum in 2007, which structures the current Fine Art textbook.

Last, but not least, outside texts relevant to The War Memorial (1994-present) include two written and visual texts that are not found in the textbook. For the written texts, one is from The History of the War Memorial and the other is from the website of the War Memorial. The former text is a published speech originally given by Sanghoon

Lee, the former minister of National Defense, at the inaugural meeting of the War

Memorial Construction Supporters Association (WMCSA) on July 5, 1989 ([KWCPP],

1988, cited in Kim, 2007, p. 199). The latter was written by a staff member at the War

Memorial, and placed in the War Memorial Story section of the website as “Mudori’s

Introduction.” Mudori is the mascot of the War Memorial and introduces the memorial to visitors. For the visual texts, one is The War Memorial itself – including its displays and the environment inside/outside of the monument—and the other is a sculpture called The

Peace Clock Tower. The War Memorial, built in 1994, consists of 9,000 artifacts that are exhibited both indoors and outdoors. The indoor exhibition space, about 110,770 square 132

meters, is made up of seven halls and focuses on displaying Korean War artifacts (Kim,

2007). The overall environment inside/outside The War Memorial will be addressed as part of the visual data. Another piece of visual data is The Peace Clock Tower (9.5m x

2.3m x1.2m). It is made of bronze and was built in 2002, as one of the outdoor exhibitions of the War Memorial. The two public arts are important because they involve ethnicity and serious cultural issues that are prominent but are not included in the textbook.

3.5.2.2 Data Analysis

Focusing on the components of discourse surrounding the Fine Art textbook or the relations of a discursive event to social structures, The Pensive Bodhisattva and The

Thinker in the “text,” which is considered an ideological recording, will be analyzed systematically. Any questions relevant to the textbook production system, such as the

Textbook Authorization System and the national curriculum, in the “discursive context” will be discussed in terms of the process of producing meaning. Any sociocultural and political contexts surrounding the Fine Art textbook are likewise analyzed through the use of related texts, such as The War Memorial, The Peace Clock Tower, former minister

Lee’s speech, and Mudori’s greeting. Figure 15 below shows the discursive event model in which I conceive the CDA frame.

3.5.2.2.1 Ideology of South Korean Ethnic Culture

To analyze ideologies surrounding the image examples in the Fine Art textbook, the context of the textbook production is randomly separated into two parts. Figure 15 represents a frame for understanding ideological relations, which influence the construction of the ideology of South Korean ethnicity surrounding the Fine Art textbook. 133

Figure 15. The Modified Living System Model for This Research

The outer drum-like diagram indicates ideology at the broad social contextual level, and the inner one indicates the ideology at the textbook-making contextual level. Put another way, the outer diagram specifies global culture while the inner diagram refers to national/local culture. However, this does not mean the spatial distinction separates one realm from the other: the dotted lines between the diagrams emphasize the interactions between the textbook making context and the sociocultural context, and between national/local and a global culture.

This research represents an attempt to examine the dominant ideology that has circulated in national/local culture (Ideology 1) and the broader culture (Ideology 2).

Specifically, the analysis aims to gradually reveal the dominant ideology (Ideology 3) as a result of the conflation of Ideology 1 and Ideology 2, and language will be at the heart of this ideology formation. That is, tracing the way in which the ideology of South

Korean ethnicity is constructed is expected to unearth the meaning of South Koreans’

134

epistemological understanding of who they are: South Koreanness (Ideology 3).

3.5.2.2.2 The Power to Construct the Idea of South Korean Ethnic Culture

To read and interpret specific control of the social action inside/outside the textbook, the manifestation of social action is represented as texts and placed in the three realms surrounding the Fine Art textbook. Figure 16, below, shows the relationship between power and the other objects in this research.

Figure 16. Relationship between Power and the Texts

The texts should be understood both as power resources that (re)produce, and as a space for power that reflects the concept of South Koreanness. I will investigate how the texts

135

suture the meaning of South Koreanness.

The simple line in Figure 16 indicates the power stream of authorship, which determines the representation of the South Korean image. The line should be understood as condensed energy to mediate the idea of South Korean ethnicity, and it represents the sustainability of the idea of South Korean ethnicity. For example, I will explore whether the visual data of the War Memorial that was produced under Roh’s government (r. 1988-

1993) impacts the visual data of the Peace Clock Tower, which was built under Kim’s government (r. 1998-2003), in constructing the meaning of South Korean ethnic culture.

If so, I will analyze to what extent the notion of ethnicity associated with South

Koreanness is developed or transformed. In this sense, analyzing the process of nation building is an attempt to investigate power relations, which help form the meaning of

South Koreanness. However, this does not mean that the content or quality of the ethnicity is always the same throughout time. The line should be understood as indicating direction or mobility, not quality or content. In short, I simplify the ethnicity upon which the power relations work, in order to depict how power should be understood in the structure of this research.

Using CDA allows me to unpack how the dominant knowledge builders/groups are motivated to maintain their power. In fact, van Dijk (1993) views CDA‘s focus as unpacking the elites’ discursive strategies for maintaining inequality, which can be seen as the effect of their exercise of power (p. 250). Specifically, the elites use a top-down pattern that results in inequality. For example, the two written excerpts analyzed in this research, Lee’s speech and Mudori’s introduction to the War Memorial, come from those in power, that is, from those who own the discourse. It is not difficult to imagine that the 136

nationalists/elites are motivated to maintain their power, so that they can coerce people with their use of language. In this sense, I use CDA to interrogate the knowledge builders’ discursive strategies for maintaining inequality based on the principles that Dijk addresses (van Dijk, 1993, p. 250).

3.5.2.2.3 Intertextuality

Using intertextuality in CDA gets to the heart of the meaning-making process of

South Korean ethnicity. Intertextual analysis is useful to examine how meanings change or transform in relation to the idea of South Korean ethnicity, and how these processes occur within and across institutions/texts across history. While attention is drawn to separate texts in each of the three realms −two texts in the Text area, two in the

Discursive Context area, and four in the Socio-political Context area− I examine how these texts create the meaning of South Korean ethnicity in a connected way throughout history. This is explored in Figure 15, which is a three-dimensional modification of

Figure 14.

By considering how connections among these texts create meanings for South

Korean ethnicity, this research also discusses how larger sociocultural contexts are connected to The Pensive Bodhisattva and The Thinker via the intertextuality of the textbook production system. This approach raises several productive questions. For instance, what does the textbook publication system have to do with the idea of ethnicity described in the multicultural section of the Fine Art textbook? How does the grand narrative regarding the construction of South Korean national cultural identification influence the selections of the representation(s) of South Korean ethnic culture in the same section? Intertextuality enables me to examine why and how the ideology of a 137

South Korean ethnic culture associated with nationalism has been created and sustained.

Employing the order of discourse and intertextual chain that constitute intertextuality, my analysis draws attention to the totality of meaning within a text and the shift in meanings across texts. With regard to the order of discourse, for example, the institution of the War Memorial should be understood as having many genres of discursive practices, so the discourses available to language users at a particular historical moment represent the ‘order of the discourse of the War Memorial.’ Most importantly, all the genres found in, for instance, the visual data of the War Memorial at a certain time should be understood as being stable and coherent in addressing the idea of South Korean culture. For example, when I analyze The Peace Clock Tower, although I pay attention to the particular type of public art it represents among the 9,000 pieces inside and outside the War Memorial, my analysis considers both the sculpture’s individual characteristics and its relationship to the genre of public art. Just as the elements that constitute a given genre are reduced to a single genre, so too does the discourse of a government institution get reduced to a single representative discourse, despite numerous mutations. This is because the War Memorial cannot get beyond its position or the context in which it is grounded, and because it has a right to protect its nation’s people and culture. Addressing the order of discourse requires attention to both discourse types in the domain, and to the relationships between each discursive practice in the visual and textual data. Regarding the intertextual chain, a chain is a channel that connects the preceding and subsequent texts, through which one-claim flows to another institutional domain. The chain metaphor describes the transformation along the chain that takes place in a predictable way.

3.5.2.2.4 Interpretation or Data Performance 138

In interpreting texts, I use contextual information. Austin’s term ‘performative’

can be made clear when the illocutionary force63 is made explicit, and usually the verb

choice informs audiences of the force. However, it is also inferred from contextual

information. According to Thomas (1995, cited in Cameron, 2001, p. 70), the “meaning

potential of an utterance” occurs within a limited range because “people will make use of

contextual information.” Although a sentence may not make the illocutionary force

explicit, readers’ inferences tend to converge. In this research, both visual and written

languages are analyzed as performances of some act by the producer(s), and I also use

contextual information. For example, Mudori asserts: “I will fight until the entire

universe is happy. Even though the situation is tough and scary, I will not give up.

Because if I give up, then others will think that they can do the same.” When I read

Mudori’s assertion, I should not only seek out the proposed meaning, but also use

contextual information to understand Mudori’s intention to achieve his goal by making

this statement.

Instead of a conclusion, this methodology framework ends with a premise for my

interpretation: visual and written texts inside/outside the Fine Art textbook do something,

and I read their narration. Both the image examples in the book and public arts outside

the book are the cultural representations, and both are thought to say and do something; e.

g. when the War Memorial narrates itself, it is actually that the monument confirms what

the memorial should look like. Analysis of the texts inside/outside the Fine Art textbook,

63 Speech acts are composed of three parts: locution, illocution, and perlocution. “Locution is the actual words a speaker utters. lllocution is the ‘force’ of the utterance, what it is meant to be taken as (e. g. assertion, request, apology, promise). Perlocution is the effect on the hearer. So often, the investigation about the function of an utterance in discourse is a question about the utterance’s illocutionary force” (Cameron, 2001, p. 74). 139

in this sense, will be an attempt to read the performance of the visual and textual language −where the language/the speaker is from, what his/her political role is, and whom s/he is backing.

3.6 Conclusion

This chapter discussed theoretical and methodological frameworks for the exploration of whether or not South Korean ethnicity construction inside/outside the Fine

Art textbook disrupts the idea of multiculturalism. In the theoretical framework, the focus was on theorizing South Korean postcolonial multiculturalism. South Korean postcolonial multiculturalism turned out as either encouraging or discouraging differences, and is affected by sociopolitical and economic context. In the methodological framework, the focus was on addressing a framework through which I unpack postcolonial multiculturalism inside/outside the textbook, that is, the factors by which I critically identify the characteristics of public discourses inside and outside the textbook.

Since the purpose of this research is to decide if the textbook promotes the idea of multiculturalism or disrupts it, and the crux of the question depends on how discourses inside/outside the textbook manage South Korean ethnicity, the methodology section was focused on developing a frame by which I can see South Korean ethnicity, which is thought to be represented by virtue of postcolonial multiculturalism. Thus, the focus in the methodological framework is to investigate the phenomenon of South Korean ethnicity using CDA.

140

Chapter 4: The Politics of Difference, Postcolonial Multiculturalism, and the Fine Art Textbook

This chapter focuses on how the politics of difference, as a principle of postcolonial multiculturalism in South Korea, influences the Fine Art textbook. To this end, it explores several sociocultural, political, and economic contexts that affect cultural policies and education in South Korea. Grounded in this spatial and historical setting, this research examines how the textbook produces the idea of South Korean ethnic culture through postcolonial multiculturalism in its content and by its context.

4.1 The Politics of Difference and Postcolonial Multiculturalism

This section aims to address South Koreans’ lived experiences within spatial and historical contexts, in order to identify how sociocultural, political, and economic factors affect cultural policies and education in South Korea. I will discuss the attempts that

South Korea made to democratize cultural policies and multicultural education, to confront South Koreans’ increasingly diverse lives amid complex political, economic, and social changes since the 1990s. The focus will be on considering the principle of postcolonial multiculturalism, politics of difference, in terms of cultural policies and fine art curriculum.

4.1.1 South Korea during and after the 1990s

There is a close relationship between education and politics, economics, and social changes. Whenever the South Korean government administration changed, the new 141

administration made education reform a priority, in order to present its political position, respond to domestic and global changes, and plan for future generations. For example, the Education Law of 1949, under which the first fine art textbook was produced, was enacted in response to the establishment of the Republic of Korea in 1948 (Ahn et al.,

2008, p. 196). More specifically, the ways that political and nationalist knowledge builders react to contextual change often forms the heart of change in education. On one hand, to support their domestic agendas, during the 1960s and 1970s Korean governments promoted anti-communism through the national curriculum, for the political purpose of national development (Choi, 2007). Consequently, the objectives of this curriculum focused on moral development in relation to anti-communism, patriotism, nationalism and citizenship. On the other hand, the 5.31 Education Reform in 1995 was enacted as a reaction against the flux of globalization. Amid such changes, cultural identification must be dealt with differently, and often in a somewhat ambiguously inflated way. Accordingly, it is necessary to consider the broader social, cultural, political, and economic environment first, before exploring specific instances of ethnic cultural representation or the management of difference in fine art textbooks.

The 1990s can be regarded as one of the most important periods for South

Koreans, in terms of recognizing their own culture and others’ cultures, and more broadly of forming politico-economic cultural conceptions. It was around the1990s that a range of high profile, internationally recognized events took place in South Korea: the Seoul

Olympics in 1988, the Liberalization of Overseas Travel in 1989, and the Daejeon Expo in 1993. These became opportunities for Korean people to promote the recognition of the value of other countries’ cultures and to motivate themselves to work toward 142

globalization. At the same time, certain events stoked Korean nationalism, such as when foreigners interviewed about the upcoming Olympics did not even know that South

Korea was a separate country.

Meanwhile, culture and cultural understanding cannot be dissociated from politics and economics. Changes in South Korea’s post-colonial political regimes and neoliberal economic systems before, during, and after the 1990s profoundly influenced its cultural policy, which I argue in turn influenced the management of ethnic cultural differences in fine art textbooks. The 1990s opened with the presidency of Taewoo Roh (r. 1998-1993), who was succeeded by Youngsam Kim (r. 1993-1998) and later by Daejung Kim (r.

1998-2003). This research pays particular attention to presidents Roh’s and Kim’s regimes, because in some ways they accelerated South Korea’s political development.

Likewise, any discussion of Roh’s regime must consider the influence of two previous presidents—Chunghee Park (r. 1963-1979) and Doohwan Chun (r. 1980-1988)—since all three men had similar military roots.

President Park and Chun are often said to have embraced a centralized bureaucracy under tight control. Both tried to retain authority and power by central economic planning and management. For example, economic progress was driven by the authoritarian rule of President Park’s military regime. He promoted the Saemaeul

Movement −meaning the new community movement− as one of the government’s main priorities, and he carried out the first national program for economic planning, The Five-

Year Economic Development Plan. The focus for this economic development was on export-oriented industrialization, which turned the labor-intensive export industries into the heavy chemical industry in the 1960s (Choi, 2007). Responding to this structural shift 143

from an agricultural to an industrial economy, many Korean youth moved to the city to get jobs, which caused the social value of Confucianism to collapse and consequently dismantled models of family organization that were based on Confucian values. The widespread availability of mass media likewise downgraded the traditional value system and changed the social order, by acquainting people with social status, individualism, and material possessions (Choi, 2007). Given these rapid social changes, the government’s legitimacy was constantly questioned, and civil rights movements pressured it to change.

President Roh’s government is believed to have accomplished the first “peaceful and legitimate transfer of power” through the direct election of the president, and to have reduced the power of government (Choi, 2007). Then President-elect Roh announced the

Declaration of Political Reforms on June 29, 1987, as a response to the large-scale strikes and demonstrations. As a result, he became the first president of the Sixth Republic who was still military-oriented but directly elected. Economically, he embraced deregulation, pursuing a market-oriented model unlike the previous government-led investment model.

For example, he employed a northward policy, forming wide-ranging diplomatic relations with socialist countries in Eastern and Central Europe, including the former Soviet Union,

China, and even North Korea. The expansion of diplomatic ties during this time implies that South Korea became more involved in the neoliberal global economy than ever before (Choi, 2007). The next President, Youngsam Kim, made further progress, getting

South Korea listed as a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).

Along with the development of democracy in general, in education, the sixth

(1992-1997) and seventh (1997-2007) national curricula allowed each local school to 144

create its own curriculum, based on local students’ needs and interests. Overall, the 1990s were characterized by democratizing efforts all over the social realms of politics and education. Meanwhile, Korean people’s lives changed more than ever before, because of the tremendous political, economic, and social changes. The next section considers how the politics of difference works in relation to culture and difference, from the 1990s to the present.

4.1.2 South Korean Multiculturalism Policy

Multiculturalism in the US began as those who at the social margins, such as women, gays and lesbians, and African Americans, strove for equal rights and recognition in society (Gordon & Newfield, 1996). However, in South Korea, multiculturalism can be understood as part of government-driven policies on immigrant integration, which means the cultural policy by which the immigrants are included in the recipient society. Thus, while US multiculturalism relies on a bottom-up policy, South

Korean multiculturalism cannot avoid a top-down policy style that is driven by the state.

Among models of immigrant integration64 (Hiebert, 2000), South Korean multiculturalism appears to emphasize both assimilation and pluralism. Assimilation means “the process by which nations or communities and the sub-nations or minorities within them intermix and became more similar” (Ogden, 2000, p. 41). Accordingly, assimilation is based on adherence to core norms and values, a rejection of racialized group consciousness, and a denial of cultural equity among groups (Newfield & Gordon,

1996), premised on a hierarchy in cultures or ethnicities (Newfield & Gordon, 1996).

64 The integration model assumes three possibilities: isolation, assimilation, or pluralism (multiculturalism) (Hiebert, 2000). 145

Assimilation policy discourages the process by which immigrants’ cultures replace the mainstream culture in public, and instead encourages immigrants’ adaptation to the dominant culture and social norms. In contrast, a pluralist model prevents different cultures from being assimilated to the dominant culture, contends for their rights to retain their cultures, and embraces their interests in the public sphere, such as the school system and the military (Koopmans & Statham, 2001, p. 58). Thus, multiculturalism as pluralism encourages the immigrant cultures to remain distinct. Multiculturalism is viewed as emerging mainly from the tradition of cultural pluralism, and it opposes the ideology of assimilation from a practical point of view (Newfield & Gordon, 1996).

In some ways, it is hard to articulate the model that South Korean multiculturalism embraces. It cannot be totally described as an assimilationist model, given that it does not prevent minority ethnic groups from establishing minority organizations. Since assimilation ideology does not allow minorities to remain as minority cultures but rather expects them to be assimilated to the receiving country, minority organizations cannot be imagined. The state currently designs numerous integration events to encourage different/multi-ethnic groups to present their cultures in public, and regularly prepares and revises various policies to protect ethnic minorities’ rights. Thus, South Korean multiculturalism appears to open up cultural pluralism.

However, given several regulations on immigrants, it is also hard to view South Korean multiculturalism as fully embracing cultural pluralism. There are ongoing discussions and debates surrounding multiculturalism in legislation, but the specific workings of multiculturalism in these laws remains to be set out. For example, immigrants are prohibited from joining the military, which is required for all male citizens in South 146

Korea. As Young (2000) argued, differentiation or unification itself is not a problem at all as long as there is a negotiation between groups and an equal access to social resources, such as job and education opportunities. In this sense, South Korean multiculturalism can be seen as somewhat limited in that it does not allow immigrants to enjoy the same rights as regular citizens do. Overall, South Korean multiculturalism appears to be a hybrid between assimilation and pluralism: it celebrates differences that give immigrants opportunities to present their culture in public and connect themselves to the dominant culture, but does not allow them to remain distinct.

4.1.3 Politics of Difference in Cultural Policy from the 1990s to the Present

4.1.3.1 Overview of Multicultural Matters in South Korea

According to a census launched by the Ministry of Public Administration and

Security, (2009) there are 1,106,884 foreigners65 in Korea. Although this number covers only 2.2% of the total number of Koreans, given that the 2000 census only counted around 490,000 foreigners in 2000 (Jung, 2009), the foreign population has more than doubled in the last ten years. Further, the number of children with parents of different ethnicities has reached 107,689, 9.7% of the total foreign respondents. The flux of immigrants has radically increased recently, and their children are growing up in South

Korean society.

It is not news that globalization motivates ethnic groups to move. According to the UN International Organization for Migration World Migration Report (2005), two hundred million people are migrants, a number that has doubled in the last twenty years.

65 A foreigner refers to a person of non-Korean nationality who has lived in South Korea for more than ninety days. It includes foreign workers, marriage migrants, students, overseas Koreans, other foreigners, and those whose Korean nationality was not considered. 147

They are reported to migrate from country to country, due to what scholars call the 3D pursuit: seeking economic development by going from a developing to a developed country, filling gaps in demography to compensate for the aging population in developed countries, and seeking democracy. Some argue that the increased immigrant traffic in

South Korea responds to a social need for manual labor. As can be seen in the table66 below, companies in South Korea, in particular small businesses, have been struggling with the lack of manual laborers, because the society has been going through academic inflation and the majority of citizens who completed higher education are reluctant to apply for manual jobs.

Early Late Early Late Early Late Early 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2008 2009 2009 2010 2010 2011 Total lack of manpower 141 180 225 205 250 226 172 180 230 285 271 264 (Thousand)

The Total Percentage Indust- 2.18 2.54 3.07 2.74 3.23 2.8 2.1 2.1 2.7 3.3 3.1 2.9 of ries Shortage of Small Manpower Busine- 2.66 2.91 3.53 3.23 3.68 3.2 2.4 2.4 3.1 3.8 3.6 3.3 (%) ss

The Percentage of Shortage of 94.4 93.6 94.2 96.0 93.8 91.1 90.8 90.5 91.4 88.6 89.9 90.0 Manpower in a Small business (%)

Table 8. The Rate of Manpower Shortage from 2003 to 201167 Note. Adapted from Evaluation and improvement plans for Employment License System p. 36, by Yoo et al., 2011, Ministry of Employment & Labor.

66 The rate of the lack of labor increased until 2007, when an economic recession and the global economic crisis hit the local economy, but the rate resumed its rise after the first half of 2009. 67 This statistic is based on laborers working in companies, which hire more than five employees in South Korea. The employees in the agriculture and forestry marine industries are excluded from the survey (Yoo et. al., 2011). 148

Foreign workers’68 participation in the country’s production and expenditure creates additional value for Korean businesses. Thus, foreign workers not only compensate for the lack of native workers, but also induce economic output. They created a total output of 4.125.400.000.000 Won (about $40 billion dollars) from 2005 through June 2011, which amounts to 0.23% of the gross national product (GNP). Specific industrial categories and the rates at which the foreign workers created the production are specified in the table below.

(Unit: A billion Won, %)

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Rate Agriculture and 1,148. Forestry Marine 10.1 50.4 115.7 172.4 215.1 262.3 322.6 2.8 6 Products

Manufacturing 1,544. 3,208. 4,294. 26,101 341.7 4,736.1 5,674.2 6,303.3 63.5 Business 1 2 1 .7

1,658. 2,117. 13,875 Service Industry 218.4 899.2 2,488.2 3,203.6 3,290.1 33.7 2 7 .4

2,493. 4,982. 6,584. 41,125 Total 570.1 7,439.4 9,140.1 9,916.0 100.0 6 0 2 .4

National Economy 2,068, 2,202, 2,396, 2,740, 2,774,9 2,774,9 2,774,9 17,733

Gross National 807.9 986.4 329.3 117.2 76.9 76.9 76.9 ,171.5 Product Importance (5) 0.03 0.11 0.21 0.24 0.27 0.33 0.36 0.23

Table 9. The Inductive Effect of Foreign Laborers’ Total Output Note. Adapted from Evaluation and improvement plans for Employment License System p. 114, by Yoo, et al., 2011, Ministry of Employment & Labor.

The foreign workers’ contributions to the South Korean economy could potentially motivate natives to be interested in their lives. Indeed, the economic contribution that the immigrants make must involve the South Korean nation-state in

68 Here foreign workers refer to those who were hired by the Foreign Work Permit system that was enacted in 2003. The amendment allowed local companies to hire foreign workers legally and to employ them for up to three years, while providing foreign workers in the country with the same legal protection and welfare benefits that Korean nationals enjoy. 149

their ways of life in South Korea. This relationship between economy and diversity or diversity affirmation is not without precedent. Having experienced the 1997 monetary crisis, South Koreans had already experienced how their conservative attitude towards foreigners made foreign investors reluctant to invest in South Korea. Thus, any economic analysis of South Korean labor must consider diversity and diversity affirmation.

Unlike their economic contributions, however, immigrants’ different cultures must put some strain on the nation-state. People with different ethnicities were often reported to be marginalized and stigmatized, and alienated from some social issues. For example, children from ethnically different families were reported to struggle with a vicious circle: their mostly working-class parents could not support them economically or educationally, which caused them to fall behind academically and become alienated from their teachers and classmates (The Kyeongin, 2009). Other cultural struggles have more destructive effects. One in ten multiethnic marriages in South Korea end in divorce, and that number is increasing (Jung, 2009). Additionally, criminality rates among foreigners doubled from 2004 to 2008, with 20,623 convictions in 2008.

Whether for economic or social reasons, it’s clear that the nation of South Korea is embracing multiculturalism enthusiastically, as a way to cope both with the immigrants’ contributions and their struggles. This type of postcolonial multiculturalism appears to discard the old belief that South Korea is grounded in a singular ethnic culture, an idea that once played a significant role in unifying people under colonialism. The next subsection examines how the state has changed how it manages differences.

150

4.1.3.2 Politics of Difference in Cultural Policy

In this section, I focus on the politics of difference since 2000: the encouragement of South Korea’s particular culture and the encouragement of the other countries’ particular cultures. Counter emphasis on such each case should be respectively the case of discouragement of the other countries’ particular cultures and the discouragement of the South Korean culture. The purpose is to address the way in which the South Korean state grapples with postcolonial multiculturalism with the principle of the politics of difference.

4.1.3.2.1 Encouragement of Other Countries’ Cultures

Numerous events promoting diverse ethnic cultures have taken place recently in

Korea, in order to encourage the “particular” cultures among different ethnic groups at the local level. For example, to celebrate the Day for Global Citizens on May 20, 2013, many events were held in Seoul: The Foreign(ers’) Community Cultural Events in

Gwanghwamun Square (May 19), The Fifth One Mind Athletic Meet (May 19), Photo

Exhibition of Foreigners Experiencing Seoul (May 21), the 2013 Festival for

Companionship (May 23), Camping for Foreign Labor (May 25-26), Free Invitation

Event to Seoul Land for Multicultural Families (May 26), Multicultural Festival with

Citizens (May 26), and a multicultural/multinational soccer tournament for foreign laborers (May 26). The purpose of these events was to create an environment where citizens and resident foreigners can respect each other’s cultures and traditions and live in unity. Seoul’s local government administered and hosted the events, under the auspices of the Foreigner Support Centers, Foreigner Communities, and various autonomous districts.

Given the volume of events in just this one-month, it is not difficult to imagine that 151

numerous other events for encountering other countries’ cultures ensued throughout the year.

However, another facet of these politics makes us question whether diversity affirmation is truly comprehensive, given the usage of the term “multicultural.” Rather than discussing how individual identity is constituted by multiple cultural factors, anything relevant to “multiculturalism” is thought to mean cultural differences between ethnicities covering nations. Even the term multicultural is often used when referring to the cultures of immigrant groups who settle in South Korea. For example, in common usage a multicultural family indicates a family in which one spouse is Korean and the other has a different ethnicity. Academic usage follows the same pattern. For example,

Sul (2007) defines a multicultural family as a family group that is composed of different cultures, such as a family constituted by a marriage between migrants, a foreign worker’s family, a mixed-blood family, or a family composed of gay, lesbian, or transgender partners. Out of all these definitions, he points out multicultural family in Korea in common usage refers to the family group one of whose spouses is a different ethnic person. In addition to the common and academic usage, the term is present in government institutions as well. For example, there was a research study about migrant families’ life conditions and their influences on South Korean society, which was launched by the

Ministry for Health, Welfare, and Family Affairs in 2009. The title of the research was

“Actual Condition of Multicultural Families and the Degree of Social Unification,” and the survey only targeted families where one parent was of a different ethnicity. Since all people have multiple cultures in that they participate in more than one cultural group

(Ballengee-Morris & Stuhr, 2001; Gollnick & Chinn, 2009), regardless of ethnic 152

differences, it is questionable whether any policy or event for “multicultural” families promotes diversity affirmation.

4.1.3.2.2 Encouragement of South Korean Culture

Meanwhile, promoting the “particular” South Korean cultural representation is at the forefront at the local and global level. In many cases whatever the political and nationalist knowledge builders thought could represent and promote a particular type of

South Korean culture was selected from, in particular, traditional artworks, and the same works tend to be selected repeatedly. For example, the eighty-third National Treasure, a statue known as the Pensive Bodhisattva, has frequently been displayed to introduce or represent South Korean culture outside the country. Ever since its initial display at the

Metropolitan Museum of Art in 1957, it has been abroad seven times, and it again hit the road for the Silla: Korea’s Golden Kingdom at the Metropolitan Museum of Art from

November 2013 through February 2014. Interestingly, the New York Times reported the exhibitions that were held in 1957 and in 2013 and both cases were released against the backdrop of the statue (The New York Times, 1957, cited in Chung, 2005, p. 8; The New

York Times, 2013, December 8). Given the main front page of the Metropolitan Museum of Art website also features the statue as a model artwork, to attract viewers to the exhibition, such trends highlight how important or representative the statue is for South

Korean ethnic culture69.

69 It goes without saying that the statue is considered as one of the most prominent instances of South Korean cultural representation, given the report in the New York Times. Johnson describes the canon in The New York Times (11. 7, 2013) as “exud[ing] an infectious serenity,” and notes that “[o]ne of the most captivating pieces here is a three-foot-high sculpture of a young, lithe bodhisattva made of gilded bronze.” 153

So far, I have discussed the attempts that South Korea made to democratize politics and multicultural education, to confront Koreans’ increasingly diverse lives amid complex political, economic, and social changes since the 1990s. The politics of difference is certainly at the heart of the multicultural policy, and the principle is politically motivated. For example, an episode involved in the display of the Pensive

Bodhisattva enables us to construe how cultural heritage that is thought to represent

“particularity” is often motivated by a politico-economic purpose. Youngsup Byun, administrator of the Cultural Heritage Administration of Korea, initially refused to send the delicate statue abroad, since it had been exhibited for over 3000 days total during eight exhibitions. Finally70, however, the national treasure reached the U.S.A. through the mediation of the Minister of Culture, Sports and Tourism, Jinryong Yoo. These events suggest that displaying the statue abroad was likely not supported by those who were concerned about the physically damaging the ancient object—it is thought to have been

70 Curator SoYoung Lee’s interview notes how difficult it was to bring The Pensive Bodhisattva abroad. She said, “As challenging as it was to bring the Pensive Bodhisattva to New York, I am thrilled to introduce its beauty to the new audiences. This may be the sculpture’s last voyage” (Park, 2013) 154

created in the 7th period. However, those who viewed the significance of Korean heritage from a politico-economic perspective, as a commodity in the global economy, must have advocated for the delivery. The decisive involvement of Minister Jinryong Yoo and the support of Samsung confirms who actually manages differences71: the nation state and the entrepreneur, who embrace cooperative collaboration for the purpose of building the image of the nation state in the global economy.

While the government has embraced multiculturalism, the politics of difference in the cultural realm tends to be underpinned by the political and cultural concept of culture, and by the ability to retain an essentialized notion of ethnic culture. In the next section, I discuss how the politics of difference is insinuated into the current national curriculum, especially in art education.

4.1.4 Politics of Difference in Education

4.1.4.1 Cultural Understanding in Contemporary Education

One of the most important motivations for the politics of difference could be derived from a viewpoint that looks at culture from a politico-economic perspective, a strategy common in the school subject of social studies72. Social studies curriculum shows considerable evidence that the textbook editors have embraced the politico- economic cultural viewpoint. Relevant content categories in the national curriculum for

6th graders include: “Economic growth and challenges in Korea,” “Nature and cultures of

71 The statue was sent to the U.S.A. after triple-wrapping it securely, sending along a security escort, and insuring the statue for $50 million. The display was supported by the global company Samsung. 72 The national curriculum articulates some introductory material for Art Appreciation Teaching and Learning Methods. One of the guidelines in the fine arts curriculum encourages teachers to have students expand their “appreciation through the integrated approach to other disciplines” (Lee et al., 2009, p. 260). Integration of social studies into fine art is often used in dealing with cultural topics in the classroom. 155

various regions around the world, difference or particularity,” and “The information society and the globalized world.” In the section on economic growth and challenges, students are supposed to learn that South Korea is equipped with a market economy system that is “interdependent” and “compet[es] with those of other countries via global transactions”73 (Lee et al., 2009, p. 240). The curriculum articulates the impact of economic growth and recession on individuals and the importance of sustainable economic development. It states: “Amid increasingly fierce global competition, it is crucial for us [students] to improve our competitive edge in the global market” (Lee et al.,

2009, p. 239).

Similarly, in the section on global nature and cultures, students are supposed to recognize the “global village,” and they are expected to understand both the differences between countries and the necessities of cooperation in this global village: “(d) The student is aware that the world gets smaller with the development of transportation and communication, in spite of different races, ethnicities and nations.” Likewise, students are expected to understand “the physical and human characteristics of the selected regions using world maps and maps for each region, and the daily issues and topics all over the world” (Lee et al., 2009, p. 242). Students must also learn about “the physical and human characteristics of various regions around the world in geographical perspectives” in order to “develop an attitude toward international cooperation and world peace” (Lee et al.,

2009, p. 242). Of course, cooperation and peace are not always the normal state of global politics, so the curriculum also specifies how students should approach conflict:

73 Regarding who plays the central role in this global economy, the curriculum covers “(e) the roles of the entrepreneur, the laborer, and the government that contribute to promote our international competitiveness” (Lee et al., 2009, p. 240). 156

(e) The student understands that various conflicts and issues occur in the global

village and international agencies and organizations, and many people contribute

to solve these problems. (f) The student notes the cultural diversities of the

regions all around the world. (g) The student realizes the role of our nation in this

changing world and develops an attitude to make a great contribution toward it.

(Lee et al., 2009, p. 243)

Finally, in the section on the information society, students are encouraged to use information accessibility and globalization to understand and interpret both present and future life. Specifically, they are instructed to “analyze the future developments of science and technology, and discuss their impacts on our daily life. (c) [Students should] identify multiple aspects of globalization, and associate them with change in our lives”

(Lee et al., 2009, p. 243). One of the goals in this domain is to “(d) acknowledge the uniqueness of Korean culture in connection with globalization, and give creative examples of globalizing Korea’s cultural heritage” (Lee et al., 2009, pp. 243-4).

As can be seen in the national curriculum for social studies, students are supposed to prepare themselves to be competitive enough to engage and respond to both opportunity and crisis in the global economy. Since the content is categorized in a discrete way, teachers cannot help but connect the categories in their lesson plans.

Although the relationship between affirming cultural diversity and the political economic viewpoint is not directly stated, given that the curriculum emphasizes the space of the global village where both economic activities and cultural conflicts go hand in hand, it is not difficult to infer the connection. More importantly, supporting global contribution or cooperation is seen as justified, and as a natural reaction from the “national” perspective, 157

which may be an attempt to inculcate nationalism into the students. Such nationalism does not only remind students of the role of their nation in the global world, but also requests the students acknowledge the particularity of South Korean culture.

4.1.4.2 Encouragement of Difference in Fine Art74 Curriculum

Moving to the fine arts national curriculum, I take into consideration how the politics of difference infiltrates the curriculum for multicultural art education. This section begins by positioning fine art textbooks in a place where the school subject is proved as being at the heart of having students understand people and culture. Next I explore the history of the fine art curriculum. Its focus is on identifying the attempts that the national curriculum made to educate students in the particularity of South Korean ethnic culture.

Fine art textbooks are an appropriate medium to observe how the ideology of cultural identification is internalized through visual and written texts. The fine art curriculum specifies the definition and characteristics of “fine art” as follows:

Fine art is one domain of the arts through which one can visually express feelings

and thoughts, communicate with others through visual images, and understand the

world as well as oneself. Since art records and reflects the culture of a specific

time and place, we can understand the past and the present through art culture and,

furthermore, contribute to the development and creation of cultures. (Lee et al.,

74 Modern South Korean formal education was structured based on a series of American educational missions established during the American military trusteeship (1945-1946) (Ahn et al., 2008, p. 196). Fine arts textbooks, however, were limited to what was used in the Japanese colony, because the mission plans did not include any fine arts curriculum. The first official fine arts textbook was published in 1949 (Ahn et al., 2008, p. 196), which was influenced by American educational philosophy. Ever since then, the fine arts curriculum and textbooks have been revised in accordance with the national curriculum, so the current textbook depends on the revised seventh national curriculum. 158

2009, p. 245)

As can be seen above, the national curriculum defines fine art as an art domain involved in visuals, through which viewers communicate with others for the purpose of understanding themselves and the world. This definition is rather broad, and does describe various aspects of fine art, but given that art “record[s] and reflect[s] the culture of a specific time and place,” the curriculum must consider the relationship between art and society. The idea that visual art inspires communication with others must correspond to communicating with the socio-cultural environment embedded in oneself and others.

As a result, the curriculum associated with the target textbook adopts the viewpoint that fine art is a primary resource dealing with “culture.” In this sense, fine art textbooks are an appropriate medium to discover how textbook makers project their beliefs about how

South Korean ethnic culture or other countries’ cultures should be represented.

Assuming a close relationship between the meaning of fine art and culture in the curriculum, we cannot help but ask what the curriculum specifies about the significance and aim of art education75 in relation to cultural understanding. Often, art education is expected to improve students’ aesthetic attitudes, expression, imagination, creativity, and critical thinking so they can understand and enjoy the beauty of visual artifacts (Barrett,

1998; Lee et al., 2009). Accordingly, the national curriculum states, “Fine arts education aims to nurture whole individuals who understand, inherit, and improve art culture by learning to express themselves creatively through various activities to experience, make, and appreciate art” (Lee et al., 2009, p. 245). To this end, students are asked to pursue

75 In South Korea, art education refers to Fine Arts Education. In this research, both terms are used interchangeably. 159

work in three domains: ‘Aesthetic Experience,’ ‘Art Production,’ and Art Appreciation’

(Lee et. al., 2009). The Aesthetic Experience section is designed to acquaint students with

“exploration, inquiry, understanding and judgment of nature and visual culture,” while in

‘Art Appreciation’ students form “the basic knowledge and attitude needed for the understanding, criticism, and enjoyment of art culture” (Lee et al., 2009, p. 246). In particular, the art appreciation section intends that students “perceive the importance of art from the perspective of culture and…nurture the attitude of active participation in art culture activities” based on a cognitive approach (Lee et al., 2009, p. 246).

The aim of art education, in relation to culture, is specified by a sub-purpose within each domain. Firstly, students are encouraged to “learn to be interested in and participate actively in social phenomena such as cultural values, information, environments, and life” “by increasing aesthetic sensitivity and consciousness in [their] daily lives” (Lee et al., 2009, p. 245). Secondly, students are encouraged to “express themselves.” Thirdly, students are expected to “develop critical thinking based on aesthetic responses and judgments on artworks and visual culture environments” and to

“learn to contribute to the globalization of traditional art culture as they raise the aesthetic and historical understanding and pride of cultural heritage” (Lee et al., 2009, p. 245).

From a cultural perspective, the aim of art education in the curriculum can be described as teaching students to understand visual culture critically, and to have pride in traditional art. As can be seen, both these goals deeply implicate students in cultural politics.

Since the textbook production system tends to make textbook editors refer to the previous curriculum, it is also significant to go through the history of fine art curriculum.

It was the third national curriculum that explicitly identified the motivation to establish a 160

“(South) Korean way of fine arts curriculum” (Ahn et al., 2008, p. 199). The fifth general purpose of the fine arts, in this model, was to emphasize the appreciation, adoration, and preservation of “our country’s and other countries’ cultures” (Ahn et al., 2008, p. 200).

To support “our country’s culture,” teachers were encouraged to include traditional artworks. The fourth national curriculum, which was composed of a larger objective and two sub-objectives, stated in the second sub-objective that student should “develop the ability to appreciate and favor the beauty of our nature and artworks” (my italics). The fifth national curriculum used similar structure and content, but changed “our” to “our country’s” and emphasized both appreciation and viewing ability. The seventh fine arts curriculum states that [students] “can judge the value of the artwork and can respect the cultural heritage.” Unlike previous curricula, the seventh one does not specify “our culture” or “other countries’ cultures.” However, in the 5th- and 6th- grade section on Art

Culture, the Art Appreciation section states: “[S]tudents are able to understand the characteristics and importance of art culture.” This objective is supposed to be realized in two ways: “1. Experiencing traditional art and understanding its importance. 2. Visiting exhibitions and investigating the purpose and characteristics of exhibitions” (Lee et al.,

2009, pp. 253-54).

In conclusion, the politics of difference based on dualism forms a cultural categorization and a strategy by which certain people/groups benefit. Though this strategy does not allow any in-between possibilities where the room for cultural understanding is broadened, national administrators do embrace it in order to establish a nation. The particularity of ethnicity plays a primary role for the group of administrators amidst these politico-economic challenges. The fine art national curriculum first specified 161

an emphasis on South Korean art through the traditional artworks in the third edition, and this tradition appears to descend all the way to the present curriculum. Yet, the question still remains: how specifically does the Fine Art textbook embrace the politics of difference? It seems to be concerned about how the particularity of ethnic culture is dealt with differently than in the previous curriculum. Apple and Christian-Smith (1991) identify a textbook as a politics of culture, because a textbook is the product of a complicated set of socio-political power relations and because a textbook tends to devote itself to legitimating, validating and sustaining a particular group’s interests. Considering that a textbook is not a delivery system (Apple & Christian-Smith, 1991, p. 1) where facts or neutral knowledge (Apple, 1990, cited in Apple & Christian-Smith, 1991, p. 2) are only transferred, and that textbook making is not dissociated from its surrounding sociopolitical context, it is necessary to deconstruct the content and the context of the textbook, by evaluating the way that the current fine art textbook deals with the ethnic cultural representation.

4.2 Deconstructing the Politics of a Fine Art Textbook

The fine art national curriculum views fine art as being deeply involved in culture.

School textbooks are a medium into which sociocultural ideology has infiltrated, both in terms of its content and context. This section aims to address the way that the textbook produces the idea of South Korean ethnic culture in both elements. From the content analysis perspective, the focus will be on what kind of images are chosen and not chosen.

From the context analysis perspective, attention will be drawn to who chooses and organizes the image examples in the book, who publishes the series, and what kinds of procedures they follow. Both discussions will consider how the defining mechanism of 162

the politics of difference is embedded in determining the image examples for defining cultural understanding in the book. In this section, I explore the political cultural representation of South Korean culture: how the politics of difference underpins the image examples in the textbook, and what is presented—and not presented—as a representation of South Korean culture.

4.2.1 Analysis of the Content of the Fine Art Textbook

In this section, I explore how a set of textbook examples play a role in presenting an ideology of South Korean ethnic culture. To this end, this section begins by describing the image examples in the book, whose formal characteristics are based on difference. I then deconstruct why the images are chosen and organized in such a way, and what problems are embedded in the image narrative.

4.2.1.1 Unpacking the Textbook Content

The visual and textual materials are collected from a series of fine art textbooks, all of which are associated with the Revised National Curriculum in 2007. These textbooks have been revised several times since modern public education began in 1954.

The most recent (7th) edition of the curriculum was developed in 1999, and has been updated on a grade-by-grade basis in 2007, 2009, and 2011. I examined the fine art textbook for 5th and 6th graders, which is grounded in the revised 7th version of 2007. I will call the target textbook “The Revised Version of Fine Art in 2007.”

For this research, two sets of images were selected. The first set of visual and associated textual data for this study is comprised of two images. One, designated as the eighty-third Korean National Treasure, is The Pensive Bodhisattva, by an anonymous artist. The other is The Thinker by Auguste Rodin. The second set of image examples 163

show thirteen kinds of ethnic masks.

4.2.1.1.1 Difference and Politics of Difference in the Image Examples

The Pensive Bodhisattva and The Thinker are designed for an advanced study that is provided for those who have completed the prerequisite basic study, in order to enable them to enrich their learning. This level is mostly for six graders. The relevant section is under Theme 3, “Conversation with Artworks,” which includes Topic 1 (“Encountering

Our Artworks”) at the basic level and Topic 2 (“Our Traditional Artworks and the Other

Countries’ Artworks”) at the advanced level (Lee et al., 2011, pp. 24-29). Topic 2, which includes the two target canons for this research, is composed of three sections:

Comparing Painting and Drawing Artworks, Comparing Three-dimensional Artworks, and Comparing Architecture. The two canons for this study are included in the second section, which is primarily designed for having students appreciate the artworks. The objective for Topic 2 states, “Let’s discover similarities and differences between our country’s artworks and the other countries’ artworks” (Lee et al., 2011, p. 27). This second section is constituted by a total of five photos of sculpture and ceramics; two images are placed in the main part of the section, with the other three photos on the bottom of the page. The size of the two main photos is 11.57 inches high by 8.27 inches wide, and they are bigger than any other images in the section.

164

Figure 18. The Pensive Bodhisattva and The Thinker in the Fine Art textbook Note. Adapted from Fine Art for Fifth- and Sixth- Graders p. 28, by Lee et. al., 2011, Seoul: Chunjae Education.

The Thinker shows a male nude figure sitting on a rock. His chin rests on his right hand and his face is turned a little downward, to suggest that he is immersed in thought. The Pensive Bodhisattva shows an ambiguously gendered Buddha figure sitting on a pedestal. The figure’s round face also rests on its right hand, but unlike The Thinker, the hand does not hold the weight of the figure’s face. However, this figure also appears to be deep in thought. Given the index finger’s placement, the hand seems to touch the chin slightly. The slightly upward curved mouth and the crescent moon shape of the eyes 165

gives the figure a soft smile that reminds viewers of the Mona Lisa. Instructions for the students state: “Let’s talk about similarities and differences found [in the artworks] after comparing and appreciating the sculptures” (Lee et al., 2011, p. 28). Guide questions for students are “What physical characteristics can you discover in the artworks?” “[Do you think that] the artworks resemble real objects?” “What do you think the artists are trying to express?” (Lee et al., 2011, p. 28).

The mechanism for the selection and organization of the two canons and their textual instructions strongly emphasize their differences. By paying attention to the physical appearances of the two statues and reading the instructions for students, learners using the Fine Art textbook will perceive that each ethnic culture is different from one another. This idea is found in the other themes for Multicultural Arts as well.

The ethnic masks are likewise designed for an advanced study that is provided for sixth graders. This section is under Theme 12, “Multicultural arts,” which is constituted by a single topic, “Global Village Met by a Festival.” This topic includes photos of various ethnic masks and acquaints students with different style of ethnic masks through

‘Aesthetic experience,’ ‘Expression,’ and ‘Appreciation.’ The objective for this topic states, “Understanding the characteristics of diverse cultures, let’s make a small mask”

(Lee, et al., 2011, p. 108). A total of eleven photos of ethnic masks and three photos of an ethnic festival constitute this section.

166

Figure 19. Global Village Met by a Festival Note. Adapted from Fine Art for Fifth- and Sixth- Graders pp. 108-109, by Lee et. al., 2011, Seoul: Chunjae Education.

Both these units make students preoccupied with reading “difference” in the book. The elements and principles of design, which constitute the target images of sculptures, are conspicuous in their differences: they show similar figures, but different ways of carving. For example, The Pensive Bodhisattva’s physical silhouette is focused on the delicate line of the figure, composed of smooth lines, while The Thinker is focused on the dynamic volume of muscle, composed of active lines. In addition to the visual images, textual references direct students to discuss the differences between The Pensive

Bodhisattva and The Thinker. For example, the title of the cultural section contrasts “our” with “other countries’” cultures (Lee et al., 2011, p. 27). Although students are asked to 167

discuss the similarities between these works, the context, where the discrete title is associated with the contrasted styles of carving, has students focus more on the differences than similarities.

The curriculum articulates basic components of art education, such as: “[t]hrough various art activities, students develop aesthetic sensitivity, creative expression, critique skills, and the ability and attitude of appreciating art culture” (Lee et al., 2009, pp. 246-7).

In particular, one of the objectives for fifth and sixth grades is for “[s]tudents [to] discover the aesthetic characteristics of visual objects and phenomena” (Lee et al., 2009, p. 247). Instruction for the Art Appreciation domain states: “(c) Artworks should be appreciated in a comparative way according to gender, race, ethnicity, region, period, and style. Students should be instructed to understand cultural diversity and difference” (Lee et al., 2009, p. 260). Thus, I can infer that the “differences” between the two canons, in terms of principles and elements of design, are designed for the students to experience the

‘different’ aesthetic sensitivity inherent between the Western and South Korean ethnic culture.

The current curriculum ostensibly shows the principle of the politics of difference.

On one hand, it emphasizes South Korean contemporary culture/arts and various ethnic cultures, but on the other hand, it does not omit the emphasis on particularity of South

Korean artworks. The fact that the section introducing multicultural artworks is newly established in this current curriculum shows that the textbook encourages students to perceive and understand diverse cultures and arts. Likewise, the textbook reduces the percentage of Western arts in the multiculturalism section compared to previous editions, and increases examples of native arts from Asian countries, such as India and Thailand, 168

and Latin American countries such as Mexico. Students are expected to have an opportunity to encounter various styles of ethnic arts via the images of the traditional masks. However, as can be seen in the examples of The Pensive Bodhisattva and The

Thinker, the emphasis on particular South Korean artworks is not disregarded by dealing specifically with South Korean contemporary arts and various ethnic cultures. The particularity of South Korean arts and cultures appears to be emphasized in an incorporated way throughout several chapters. In establishing the particularity of South

Korean ethnic arts, traditional works must be a significant motivator for developing topics. For the particularity, on the one hand, the traditional artworks themselves are presented in the textbook. On the other hand, the textbook includes contemporary artworks that appropriate South Korean traditional heritage, which creates the particularity of South Korean ethnic culture. For example, the new edition highlights

Sangbong Lee, one of the most famous contemporary cloth designers, who prints the

Korean language on cloth. In response to globalization, a particular South Korean ethnic culture in a modified or original traditional style should be emphasized.

The chapter title for these target image examples is “Our traditional art works and the other countries’ art works” (Lee et al., 2011, p. 27). Why are traditional South Korean art works more emphasized when selecting the representative images of South Korean culture? It is necessary to examine the effect of the emphasis on difference and on a traditional image.

4.2.1.1.2 (De)construction of Difference

In this sub-section, I explore the meanings that the mechanism of difference brings about regarding the establishment of “our” culture, the emphasis of traditional 169

artworks, and the creation of values in it.

4.2.1.1.2.1 Establishing “Ours” versus “The Other”

The arrangement displayed in the Fine Art textbook based on difference could signify a postcolonial attempt to establish a subject by creating the other. The effect of designating self/other does not simply mean constructing companionship within the community, but rather it can be a postcolonial matter. The body is considered as a sort of bounded system (Longhurst, 2001) where a discrete subject is constructed through expulsion. Likewise, to make a nation involves a question about otherness (Mitchell,

2002).

Regarding the representation of the other, it is not only constructed as being visible by being distinguished from the self, but also formed as being invisible by being excluded. In the Fine Art textbook, the cultural section contrasts “our” and “other” countries’ cultures (Lee et al., 2011, p. 27), so that the other is visibly designated by the title. In addition, contemporary ambivalent/hybrid cultures or multiethnic families’ cultures are not shown in the textbook, which further shows us the invisible othering.

Viewers might question who “our” and “other(s)” refer to when they look at the images associated with this title. Paying attention to the images under “our” culture will inform them that “our” indicates the original heirs of South Koreans. Thus, we can infer that the function of the binary visual and textual display is to construct the “our” and

“other” categories. Consequently, the binary educates South Korean students about who they are or what their culture is. The display of the images based on comparison can form the foundation on which South Korean companionship and their cultural identification are constructed, within the category of South Korean ethnic culture. Since establishing 170

the meaning of South Korean ethnic culture might be impossible unless the other countries’ cultures could be pushed to the opposite or conflicted side, the display based on difference must be a colonial one.

4.2.1.1.2.2 Politics of Traditional Art: The Politics of Establishing “Ideal”

Imagery

The emphasis on traditional art gives rise to the hegemony of idealizing South

Korean ethnic culture. It is not difficult to discover the focus on South Korean traditional art in a fine art national curriculum. The Instruction for Art Appreciation domain states:

“(f) Traditional art materials and cultural spaces should be actively used in order to develop an interest in and understanding of traditional art” (Lee et al., 2009, p. 260). This guideline is in line with the objective (b) Art Culture section under the Art Appreciation domain, and its associated contents for 5th and 6th grades. The objective that “[S]tudents are able to understand the characteristics and importance of art culture,” is supposed to be realized by76 “[e]xperiencing traditional art and understanding its importance” (Lee et al.,

2009, pp. 253-54). Students get to construct a particularly idealized type of South Korean ethnic culture by encountering the traditional artworks. Hegemonic construction enables people to believe something to be better than any others (Heilman, 2007). Gramsci defines hegemonic constructions as “those to which most people give ‘spontaneous consent’ to the ‘general direction imposed on social life by the dominant fundamental group’” (Gramsci, 1978, p. 12; Heilman, 2007, pp. 9-10). The hegemonic process produces ideology, which means a set of belief systems by which people view and

76 In addition to the traditional arts, the objective is expected to be supported by “2. Visiting exhibitions and investigating the purpose and characteristics of exhibitions” (Lee et al., 2009, pp. 253-54). 171

believe the world and apply certain values to it. Although normality grounded in statistics changes as time goes on due to dynamic interactions in the living system, people tend to retain their community’s collective imagination (Heilman, 2007). This statistical norm, which is embedded in the traditional art works, is usually incorporated as an “ideal” or

“best” (Heilman, 2007). In the Fine Art textbook, the phenomenon where a part of South

Korean culture is conflated with Western culture and the newly emerging multiethnic families’ culture that is different than that of the South Korean traditional culture is hidden in the book. Thus, the emphasis on traditional artworks turns out to construct the idealized national culture, and as such can be viewed as a postcolonial attempt to construct a fantasy about contemporary culture by hiding reality.

In some ways, the focus on the traditional artworks is an attempt to make a myth.

Hall argues that many news photos highlight that the events they report have recently happened. However, all photos in the news are selected and organized from the past. Hall

(1981) states:

all history is converted into ‘today’, cashable and explicable in terms of the

immediate. In the same moment, all history is mythified – it undergoes an

instantaneous mythification. The image loses its motivation. It appears, ‘naturally’,

to have selected itself. But few news photos are quite so unmotivated. (p. 242)

Hall believes that this transition from the past to the present in producing news photos is the process of mythification, because the historicity embedded in the event is turned to the immediate present. Since the shift to the immediate present creates distance from the raw events, it must be a myth.

4.2.1.1.2.3 Creating (Ab)normalcy 172

Indeed, the effect of difference lies not only in bonding the community and designating the other, but also in specifying social (ab)normalcy. An emphasis on difference is not simply introducing viewers to “our” and “other” community’s culture, but also educating them for a “normal” way of life. Such a clear distinction inevitably requires a clear normative way of life upon which both categories are grounded.

Whatever conforms to the clearly distinctive role within the category will be considered as the norm, while anything transgressing the border will be stigmatized as abnormal or even called abject. What counts as a proper body or the idea of normality of South

Korean culture emerges by dividing South Korean cultural representation from that of the other countries. The invisible example images will make viewers infer both the negation of cultural style that is ambiguous, and the necessity of conforming to the South Korean commonsense way of life. In this sense, the invisibility of hybrid or transformative cultural styles can be viewed as a colonial attempt because it can potentially construct hegemony of hybridphobia.

So far, I have explored the effects of the mechanism of difference, which underpins the selection and organization of the images in the Fine Art textbook. The textbook can be viewed as an educational attempt to construct the hegemony of difference recognition regarding South Korean ethnic culture as a postcolonial design using three viewpoints: 1) establishing “ours” by expelling “the other,” 2) establishing

“Ideal” imagery about South Korean culture by emphasizing traditional artworks, and 3) creating (ab)normalcy.

4.2.2 Analysis of the Discursive Context of the Fine Art Textbook

Numerous researchers contend that it is not enough simply to interrogate a 173

textbook itself (Apple & Christian-Smith, 1991; Trend, 1992; Apple, 2004; Giroux, 2008).

It is also important to consider the context, which influences or even determines textbooks’ contents. In this section, I provide an overview of studies that address the importance of sociocultural context to those who participate in either publishing a textbook or conducting research about a textbook. I then discuss the context surrounding textbook formation in South Korea. The focus is on unpacking the institutional and organizational system of the textbook, which will enable me to discover how ideology and hegemony construction is grounded in a socio-cultural relationship. This section ends by tracing back the sociocultural meanings embedded in the two image examples in the book.

4.2.2.1 Sociocultural Discourse and the Image Examples in the Textbook

Raymond Williams believes that education is, in some way, a matter of a selection and organization from social knowledge at a certain time (Apple, 2004). Apple and

Christian-Smith (1991) state that the entire curriculum is “both the text and context in which production and values intersect; it is the twist point of imagination and power”

(Inglis, 1985, cited in Apple & Christian-Smith, 1991, p. 7). Young (1971, cited in Apple,

2004, pp. 29-30) believes that the primary inquiry that a curriculum researcher should make is one investigating the context in which the inside of schools are institutionally and interactionally grounded, as well as that by which schools are surrounded, in terms of sociocultural structure. Apple and Christian-Smith (1991) also argue that it is important to examine the political, economic, and cultural relations through which a textbook is produced.

The close relationship between a textbook and its sociocultural context implies 174

that a textbook reflects ideology, so textbook researchers need to investigate the sociocultural discourse(s) which cannot be dissociated from the textbook. Numerous researchers postulate the idea that a textbook or curriculum is a barometer of sociocultural discourse of the day, and they have shown the close relationship between the socio-cultural background and a given textbook (Apple & Christian-Smith, 1991; Bukh,

2007; Su, 2007, Camase, 2009; Yongbing, 2005; Weninger & Williams, 2005) or curriculum formation (Shimony, 2003; Tormey, 2006). For example, Shimony’s (2003) article pays attention to the process of how a sociocultural discourse, e.g. heroism in

Israel, plays a great role in constituting the contents of a textbook. In many cases, it is likely that textbooks are “national narratives” through which national cultural ideas are assigned (Jerdee, 2010, p. 5). For example, a language textbook teaches patriotism and values of ethnics to culture, in addition to reading and writing (Camase, 2009; Youngbing,

2005), in much the same way that a Chinese textbook politically reinforces the Chinese cultural identity (Camase, 2009; Ya-Chen, 2007). Similarly, the post-communist progressive structural development in Hungary does not make room for multicultural aspects in the curriculum (Camase, 2009; Weninger & Williams, 2005). Jerdee (2010) argues that textbooks represent what a nation wishes to teach future generations.

In the South Korean context, journalist H. K. Park (2011) points out two debates in 2002 and 2008 in relation to textbook adoption, particularly social studies textbooks.

Knowledge builders on both sides of the debate urged the book manufacturers to make changes to part of the books’ contents, due to their conflicting political viewpoints about interpreting modern Korean history. Park argues that forcing a change in textbook contents blurs the distinction between the government copyright books and the 175

government authorized books. This argument shows how political conflicts and ruling groups’ decisions sometimes violate the textbook making system by urging publishing companies to change portions of the book, and limit the schools’ authorities to make decisions about choosing an appropriate book. All in all, numerous researchers have argued that the dominant ideology is directly incorporated into the content of textbooks.

Putting aside the question of articulating the dominant sociocultural discourse for a moment, it’s important to note that any sociocultural context within a country could not go beyond the global economic context of neoliberalism. According to Giroux (2008b),

Lawrence Grossberg views neoliberalism as ‘a political economic project’ that ardently advocates the free market, and which gets rid of government regulation or control of businesses. Neoliberalism extends and disseminates its market values to every dimension of human life in bio-political form (Giroux, 2008, p. 160). First of all, human value is downgraded to a commodity. Human value is determined by its productivity, so that those whose productivity is not deemed to be useful would be expendable or useless77.

Secondly, the regime of market-driven discourse consolidates the aim of producing self- interested and competitive individuals. Subjects elevated by neoliberalism consider that individuals cause public difficulties and the responsibility to improve an individual’s life heavily relies in his or her own hands (Cheshire & Lawrence, 2005, cited in Giroux,

2008b, p. 160). Thirdly, the ethic of solidarity is downplayed and the value of equity gives way to the individual’s responsibility to manage his/her own life. Advocacy of

77 According to Giroux (2008b), not all individuals living in this market-driven society can be called citizens. Giroux contends that individuals who are eligible to consume are considered as citizens, and those who are not are seen as ‘disposable,’ a term coined by Bauman (2004, cited in Giroux, 2008, p. 153). This idea implies that citizens in line with consumer society can be protected by society as citizens, but those on the other side cannot (Comaroff & Comaroff, 2000, cited in Giroux, 2008, p. 153). 176

social provisions is considered inappropriate, since individuals under the market logic of capitalism are subject to being competitive in managing their own lives78. Just as individuals are forced to be competitive to sell their productivities, so too do nation states feel pressure to lure others and to sell their culture in the (inter)national market.

Undoubtedly, neo-liberalism is considered a precondition for political freedom, beyond an economic system. In this sense, the concern about the way in which a Fine Art textbook considers multicultural matters could be in line with concerns about whether the

Fine Art textbook surmises culture has a political-economic meaning. This connection partly animates the present study. The Fine Art textbook is used as a medium by which textbook makers sell students the commodity of South Korean ethnic culture as well as diverse ethnic cultures, based on a highly selective process of cultural representations.

Given the importance of context in the study of a textbook, then, I consider a specific sociocultural discourse in discussing the way in which the Fine Art textbook deals with postcolonial multiculturalism. To do so, the following sections provide an overview of how The Pensive Bodhisattva and The Thinker embed social meaning. I then identify the reason that traditional artworks have been considered as an authentic national art style.

4.2.2.1.1 The Pensive Bodhisattva (BC 7)

The Pensive Bodhisattva is one of the most well-known representations of South

Korean traditional art to evoke feelings of national pride. Apparently, this is because the artwork is designated as a national treasure. However, there must be a significant and definite historical point when meaning and positive values were embedded in the artwork.

78 Grossberg points out that since neoliberalism lies in individualism, appeals to inequity in relation to gender, race, or ethnicity are downplayed as the concerns of totalitarianism and socialism (Grossberg, 2005, cited in Giroux, 2008, p. 210). 177

In this sub-section, I trace the narrative back to the period when the statue became known as one of the most representative South Korean artworks.

. The statue was part of Masterpieces of Korean Art, the first large exhibition to show South Korean art abroad, from December 1957 to June 1959. The exhibition, which promoted the cultural and national pride of South Koreans, arrived79 at the Metropolitan

Museum of Art in New York City in 1958. Alan Priest at the Metropolitan Museum of Art and Robert Paine at Boston Museum were put in charge of curating the selection80 in

1956. For this exhibition, they chose a cross-section of traditional South Korean artworks from 200 BC to about 1900 AD. The exhibition was successful, with more than 43,393 viewers visiting the museum over the course of 27 days in Washington, D.C. (Chung,

2005); NBC also reported on the exhibition. Reviews, overall, focused on the particularity of South Korean art, as seen in “Exotic Treasures” by Howard Devree (1958,

February 9, The New York Times, cited in Chung, 2005, p. 22) and in “Treasures that join ancient China to Japan” by Horace H. F. Jayne (1958, Jan., Art News, cited in Chung,

2005, p. 22). Jayne was an assistant director of the Philadelphia Museum, and differentiated South Korean artworks from their Japanese counterparts. Other reviews included “The Art Galleries” by Robert M. Coates (1958, March 1, New Yorker, cited in

79 The plan for Masterpieces of Korean Art was initiated in 1947 under U. S. A. trusteeship, when Jaewon Kim (the chair of the National Museum) met Langdon Warner (a professor at Harvard University), Robert Griffing (the director of Honolulu Museum), and Damon Giffard (the director of the restoration department under the US military government in Korea). The discussion was interrupted by the Korean War but re-initiated in 1954 when Griffing and Giffard visited South Korea and requested the South Korean government’s support for the exhibition. 80 According to Jaewon Kim (2000, cited in Chung, 2005, p. 16), a Korean-American committee was established for the preparation of the exhibition, but the main decision about the selection of the artworks primarily depended on American committees because the South Koreans had little experience with international exhibitions at that time. Chung (2005) views the artworks selected for the exhibition as showing the American way of viewing South Korean art, including works presumed to be influenced by China and to influence Japan. 178

Chung, 2005, p. 23) and “Art” by Maurice Grosser (Feb. 22. 1958, Nation, p. 74, cited in

Chung, 2005, p. 23), which critiqued South Korean art as being different from Chinese art. The brochure designed by Paine became a canon of Korean arts (Jayne, “Treasures that join ancient china to japan”, p. 60, cited in Chung, 2005, p. 24). Needless to say, numerous South Korean intellectuals welcomed the display and expected it to change the negative national image, which was dominated by the war and poverty, by showing people all over the world the gracious traditional Korean artworks (Kim, 2000, cited in

Chung, 2005, p. 23). These optimists included Chunggang Kim (1957, 5. 22, The

Kyounghyang, Magnificent Ethnic arts festival), Youngkim Kim (1957, 5. 22, The Seoul,

Elegant Korean art trends), Sangbak Lee (1957, 5, 15, The Hankook, The Masterpieces of

Korean Art exhibition without National Treasures), Pildong Han (1957, 5. 27, The

Younhahp, Reviewing the Exhibition), and especially Taeoh Kim (Korean ancient artworks and ethnicity, SasanGye, 1957, 11, pp. 103-109, Our national treasures journey abroad, The Hankook, 1957, 6, 23, Ethnicity shown off outsider the country, The Dong-A,

1957, 5. 20; cited in Chung, 2005, pp. 20-21). In particular, Jaewon Kim argued that the display would demonstrate that [South] Korea was no longer regarded as a cultural transferrer between China and Japan, but had its own distinctive art style.

The Pensive Bodhisattva must be regarded as one of the most representative

South Korean artworks in the international exhibition, given the photo below.

179

Figure 20. Opening Ceremony at The Masterpieces of Korean Art Exhibition at the Metropolitan Museum of Art (February 7, 1958) Note. Adapted from “Korean Art Represented in the United States in the 1950s” by Chung, 2005, Korean Modern & Contemporary Art History, 14, p. 8.

Along with complementing other South Korean artworks at the local and global level, the

Pensive Bodhisattva, in particular, was cited to prove that (South) Korea had influenced

Japanese culture in depth in the past, since the first national treasure of Japan is similar to the Pensive Bodhisattva. Given that it had not been long since South Korea was liberated from Japanese colonial rule, this must have promoted South Koreans’ cultural and national pride.

4.2.2.1.2 The Thinker (1880)

South Korea has a close relationship with Rodin. The Rodin Gallery opened in

South Korea in 1999, and the only countries outside of the West to possess The Gates of

Hell are South Korea and Japan. The statue is one of the best-known western artworks to

South Koreans. Overviewing the artwork in this sub-section, I focus on how South

Koreans have been familiar with the artwork and impose value to it. 180

Rodin has been mythicized in South Korea. H. W. Lee (2008) demonstrates the way that the wide circulation of images and written texts regarding Rodin and his artwork produced Rodin’s myth in East Asia. This myth in South Korea, Japan, and China is based on several written texts from the Western viewpoint, published in the late nineteenth and early twenty century. For example, in La France 18, Octave Mirbeau

(1885, cited in H. W. Lee, 2008, p. 57), a French novelist and critic, focuses on describing

Rodin as an artist who attributes mysterious energy to human spirit in “Chronique

Parisiannes.” South Koreans were introduced to Rodin or his works by print or photos (H.

W. Lee, p. 59). Regarding print, Moonjib Kim circulated an article titled Rodin’s art and

Malicious aspect of modern art: Monument to Balzac and Man with the Broken Nose nine times in The Dong-A (H. W. Lee, 2008, p. 56). Regarding the books relevant to Rodin,

Rodin, written by Rainer Maria Rilke and published in 1903 and 1907, was translated in

South Korea in 1960 and was republished at least nine times (H. W. Lee, 2008). Paul

Gsell’s (1911, cited in H. W. Lee, 2008, p. 58) L’Art: Auguste Rodin (Rodin’s Art) was also translated as Quotations from Rodin81. Similarly, photos of Saint John the Baptist

Preaching and a sculpture of a woman’s head were printed in Western Art, which was translated by Bal Jang in 1959, and the first color print was included in Degas, Rodin, and Bourdelle, published by Kumsung Publication in 1973. H. W. Lee (2008) thinks that

The Thinker might have been a popular image among intellectuals even before Rodin’s work was released in South Korea through prints or books, given that there was a souvenir buckle from Seoul National University imprinted with The Thinker in 1946 (H.

81 Gsell’s book consisted of ten chapters, but this edition had four translated chapters and the rest were introduced as appendices (H. W. Lee, 2008, p. 58). 181

W. Lee, 2008, p. 62). South Korean artists were also thought to have been acquainted with Rodin’s style before MoonJib Kim’s articles in the Dong-A (1936. 3. 4), given that

Rodin’s style was popular in the Exhibition of Chosun Arts (H. W. Lee, 2008, p. 57).

More importantly, Rodin’s work became familiar not only to the intellectuals but also to the public. It was through middle and high school textbooks that the public encountered his fame and works in the mid-1950s (H. W. Lee, 2008, p. 63). The Thinker was one of the most popular of Rodin’s artworks – along with The Burghers of Calais – and was frequently included in textbooks (H. W. Lee, 2008, p. 63). When the first Rodin exhibition was held in 1985, it was expected that the majority of the visitors would be middle and high school students who were longing to view the art work in person (H. W.

Lee, 2008, p. 63).

The exhibition itself also contributed to the construction of Rodin’s myth (H. W.

Lee, 2008). News media, in particular The Chosun, a sponsor of the exhibition, interviewed people during and even before the exhibition, to ask them what they expected from the exhibition (H. W. Lee, 2008, p. 64). Also, the national TV channel, KBS, released the Rodin Special focusing on his works. As a result, 3000-8500 people visited the museum in one day during the hottest season of the year (The Chosun, 1985. 7. 28;

The Chosun, 8.17, cited in H. W. Lee, 2008, p. 64).

4.2.2.1.3 Discussion: “Our” “Traditional” Art Works

So far, I’ve reviewed two image examples in the Fine Art textbook. The focus was on identifying what kind of discourse and values surrounded the two canons throughout history in South Korea, and how. This set of images has often been used to have students compare one image to another, and the comparison is so popular that the content has been 182

carried over from the sixth to the seventh version of Fine Art. Moreover, the image of the

Pensive Bodhisattva ranks second82 in terms of the most frequently reprinted Buddha artworks in the seven different types of middle and high school textbooks (I. C. Kim,

2008, pp. 234-236). This implies that students are likely to recognize and learn that just as the canon signifies a representation of the Korean heritage, it is distinctively different from the other countries’ artworks; therefore, so too is South Korean culture “different” from that of the western world. Having reviewed the historicity embedded in the two canons in South Korea, I can infer that the textbook makers might have been influenced by the environment where the images have been mystified, which led to the images’ frequent inclusions in the textbook. It is not difficult to imagine that those who participated in selecting the image examples might have envisioned a certain meaning for the images, and we’ve already seen how South Korean people throughout history have projected meanings onto the images. Meanwhile, regardless of their substantial meanings, the two canons might have been regarded as representative of South Korean and the other countries’ art styles.

Considering South Koreans’ identification of what authentic South Korean art style might look like, the collective memory about the national art that was evaluated outside a country under post-colonialism, and within of the neoliberal system, must be one of the most important turning points in determining their epistemology of what is

South Korean art. This conception of ethnic art, I believe, was first set forth in 1958. In addition to the Masterpieces of Korean Art exhibition, Contemporary Korean Paintings

82 I. C. Kim (2008) conducted surveys on twenty-one fine art textbooks for middle school students. The textbooks covered total seven companies that published the twenty one books; Kyohaksa, Kyohak Research, Daehan Textbook, Doosan, Life and Dream, Jungang Research for Educational Imporovement, Jihaksa. 183

was held at the World House Galleries, New York, from February 25 to March 22, 1958.

This exhibition was designed by Ellen Psaty Conant, who was a far-East expert at the

University of Georgia, in consultation with Alfred R. Krakusin at World House Galleries.

The motivation of the exhibition was derived from the public attention to South Korean art, which was precipitated by the Masterpieces of Korean Art (World House Galleries,

1958, cited in Chung, 2005, p. 25). The whole selection process of 107 artworks was managed by Psaty in 1957 under her criteria: “modern, original, and created within 10 years”83 The tendency to choose young artists’ works derived from the selector’s intention to show people the dynamic relations between traditional and modern South

Korean artworks (Chung, 2005, p. 29).

Dominant artists and groups criticized84 the selection as showing “the backwardness of the Korean art scene” and insisted, “the selection could not be representative of Korean art” (Chung, 2005, p. 27). Outside the South Korean art world, however, numerous South Korean newspapers reacted to this event as an important opportunity to boost national pride: “Overseas expansion of our drawing and painting” appeared in The Yunhahp, 1958. 2. 25, and “Overseas expansion of promising modern art” was printed in The Seoul, 1958. 7. 13 (Chung, 2005).

The reputation outside the country was not as positive as the impression that the

Masterpieces of Korean Art embraced. Although Art in America released a short comment on the exhibition and Art News evaluated the artworks as an attempt to combine

83 The result of her selection, however, created severe debates in the Korean art scene, in that she gave priority to young artists, such as Kich’ang Kim, Naehyon Park, and Ungno Yi who were against the dominant Korean Exhibition at the given time (Chung, 2005, p. 29). 84 Artworks finalized for display were sixty-two pieces and some artists were changed (Chung, 2005, p. 27). 184

the authentic Korean art style with that of the West, overall the South Korean oil paintings, which were not considered traditional Korean art, failed to gain positive responses in New York. Parker Tyler (March, 1958, Art News, cited in Chung, 2005, p.

31) complained that the contemporary South Korean art works were behind the latest trends of international arts in “Contemporary Koreans.” Similarly, in “Month in Review”

Hugo Munsterberg (March, 1958, Arts, cited in Chung, 2005, p. 31) argued that most contemporary Korean painting merely reflected the School of Paris both in its realistic and abstract phases, except for the Korean subjects and a preference for dark tonalities.

Unlike oil painting, the oriental style of painting combined with a more abstract style was central in the public’s attention. Munsterberg wrote:

More typically oriental are the hanging scrolls executed in Chinese ink with a

little color, such as [Ki-ch’ang] Kim’s powerful Loquar which recalls the work of

the great Chinese contemporary Chi Pai-shih. The mixture of old and new is

evident in [No-su] Park’s Rock and Flute, which combines traditional oriental

landscape painting with abstraction. (Munsterberg, 1958, cited in Chung, 2005, p.

41)

These evaluations of the artworks in Contemporary Korean Paintings can be summed up as comments based on a dichotomous understanding of South Korean art, pitting South Korean traditional art against a Westernized style of more modern South

Korean art. Given that the westernized works were critiqued as not being of high quality as traditional art, these responses must have influenced what kinds of styles South Korean cultural workers or artists chose to pursue in the up and coming neoliberal tide. Jaewon

Kim (2000, cited in Chung, 2005, p. 30) recalls that people took it somewhat for granted 185

that South Korean artists had been behind in catching up with the western style because it was not an indigenous art style. For this reason, we can guess, the Pensive Bodhisattva, which captured international attention and national pride, might have been regarded as representative South Korean authentic culture, while The Thinker, which had already been known as a familiar and great western artwork, was regarded as representing the western art in peoples’—especially textbook makers’—minds.

Up until now, I have discussed the significance of the context in and which produces textbooks. In addition to the sociocultural macro context, the discursive context surrounding textbook production should also be considered. Given the sociocultural commonsense of a singular ethnicity or blood-based ethnicity and its particular history of being colonized in South Korea, we cannot help but ask how the social practice of textbook publication systematically supports or discards the idea of a singular ethnicity and South Korean national cultural identification through multicultural art education. In the next section, I discuss the fine art textbook publication process, in which I can explore these discursive contexts.

4.2.2.2 Unpacking the Textbook Formation System

In this section, I demonstrate how the system of textbook production contributes to constructing the idea of South Korean ethnic culture. This section seeks to deconstruct the politics of the textbook embedded in the textbook creation system. To this end, I inquire who makes the Fine Art textbook, to discover why the textbook is created in a certain way. Specifically, this inquiry asks who determines both the goals and contents of the textbook, and who selects and organizes the visual examples used in the textbook.

Doing so addresses the question from two angles. In the first part of the section, I address 186

the Textbook Authorization System in which the fine art textbook is produced as a primary teaching/learning material. The second part deconstructs how the process of publishing and distributing textbooks determines the content of a textbook. Three aspects are important here. One is the legal system associated with the Regulations on

Curriculum Books, which underpins textbook formation. Another is the economic dimension, and the third is the national curriculum, which both facilitate or regulate the system for textbook production.

4.2.2.2.1 The Textbook Formation System

4.2.2.2.1.1 Positioning a Textbook

According to the Regulations on Curriculum Books85, textbooks are defined as

“the books, sound records, visual and electronic86 works, etc., which are used in schools for the education of students” (Article 2-2). The target Fine Art textbook for 5th and 6th graders, which is associated with the Revised Curriculum of 2007, relies on a paper form size of four inches wide by six inches high (187mm X 257mm). The books average 200 pages long. Fine art textbooks are a paper based teaching and learning material used in the classroom.

85 According to the regulation, “[t]he term “curriculum books” means textbooks and guide books” (Article 2-1) and “[t]he term “guide books” means the books, sound records, visual and electronic works, etc, for the teachers, which are used in schools for the education of students” (Article 2-3). 86 Textbooks are not limited to paper books, and digital textbooks are becoming more widely used. For example, in the Revised Curriculum in 2007, the elementary school Music and English programs used digital textbooks (on CD), and other fields are actively discussing switching to digital textbooks. 187

Figure 21. Outer Cover of the Textbook

Fine Art textbooks are made from special materials equipped with special technical/physical characteristics. The cover pages are 250g/㎡ paper coated with UV, the title page is GR 75g/㎡ certified textbook paper, and the interior pages are made of

120g/㎡ coated paper (Korea Authorized and Approved Textbook, ktbook.com). The pages in the Fine Art textbook are thicker than the pages of other textbooks, and have a glossy coating.

Technically, fine art textbooks, which are specially designed, are thought to enable teachers to teach content effectively as well as to make the books themselves valuable. The technical characteristics seem to be designed to display visual images with greater clarity, since a Fine Art textbook’s purpose is primarily to introduce visual references to students, as clearly as possible. Indeed, it can hardly be overstated that the image examples in these textbooks play a significant role in teaching content or in regulating social behavior/knowledge. Photography is used as a tool for recording objects

188

in an objective way under a modernity that believes in objectifying, categorizing, and recording everything (Sturken & Cartwright, 2001). Needless to say, clarity can add credibility to such photos. Given that the majority of Fine Art books are filled with more photographic examples than any other textbooks, the attempt to enhance the photographs’ clarity, also, must be an effort to increase the value of the Fine Art textbook. The paper materials – which are printed at a degree of four colors clarity – might have been thought of as an appropriate medium for this end.

Textbooks are the qualified principal teaching materials used in schools.

Regarding the application in which teaching materials are utilized in the school, guidebooks for the curriculum articulate textbooks as one of several teaching-learning materials. Thus, not all contents in the textbooks are required to be taught, and the textbook is understood as a material for achieving the objectives of the curriculum.

However, the way textbooks are used in the classroom cannot ignore the fact that the textbooks are the major teaching materials, given that not all teaching-learning materials are eligible to replace textbooks. Regarding the extent to which teaching materials are used in schools, the Regulations on the Curriculum Books87 stipulates that textbooks used at all levels of school and in special education schools must be published under the government’s copyright, or be either authorized or approved by the Minister of Education,

Science, and Technology [MEST]. These books are categorized, respectively, as

87 “The principal of a school shall use government-designated books when they are available, and when the government-designated books do not exist he/she shall select and use authorized books: Provided. That the same shall not apply in cases where he/she approved books approved under Article 16 when no government-designated books and authorized books exist, or when it is difficult to use them or it is necessary to supplement them” (Article 29 (2) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Amended by Presidential Decree No. 21687, Aug. 18, 2009).

189

“government-designed books88,” “authorized books89,” and “approved books90” (Korea

Authorized and Approved Textbook, ktbook.com).

The current school textbook publication system in South Korea has been changing from a copyrighted or authorized system to a government approval system (Gim, 2011, p.

90). As seen in Table 10 below, the number of government-designed and authorized books has decreased and the number of textbooks approved by the government has increased. For example, government copyright textbooks in the 6th curriculum reached

80%, but was reduced to 9% in 2011, while the rate for approved textbooks in the 6th curriculum shifted from 8% to 84% in 2011.

Textbook Approval Government Authorized Approved Designed Total Curriculum from 6th to the Present Textbook Textbook Textbook 6th National Curriculum 827 (80%) 123 (12%) 85 (8%) 1,035 7th National Curriculum 721 (69%) 187 (18%) 134 (13%) 1,042 Revised National Curriculum in 2007 (2009 present) 537 (56%) 181 (19%) 239 (25%) 957 Revised National Curriculum in 2009 (2010 Present) 334(39%) 138(16%) 392(45%) 864 Revised National Curriculum in 2009 (2011 Present) 53(9%) 42(7%) 494(84%) 589 Table 10. Changes in the Government Designed, Authorized, and Approved Textbooks Note. Adapted from “The purpose of the approved textbook,” by Gim, 2012, Textbook Research, 67, p. 14.

The system for Fine Art textbooks for 5th and 6th grades corresponds to this trend, though

88 Regulations on the Curriculum Books define them as “the curriculum books for which the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology holds a copyright” (Article 2-4, amended by Presidential Decree No. 20740, Feb. 29, 2008). 89 “the curriculum books that are authorized by the Minister of Education, Science, and Technology” (Article 2-5, amended by Presidential Decree No. 20740, Feb. 29, 2008). 90 “the curriculum books that are approved by the Minister of Education, Science, and Technology in order to use them where no government designed books and authorized book exist, or where it is difficult to use them or it is necessary to supplement them” (Article 2-6, amended by Presidential Decree No. 20740, Feb. 29, 2008) 190

it is currently under revision91. It adopted the government copyright system until the revised fine art textbook in 200792 but has switched to the government-authorized system, under which six volumes have been produced.

In sum, although not all learning contents are required to be taught, and not all textbooks for a given school subject are currently regulated by the government copyright system, now that potential replacement textbooks must obtain verification from the government, a textbook must be positioned as a primary and authoritative teaching/learning material in South Korean schools. The position of the textbook alludes to the idea that there are certain authoritative groups and a regulation system to determine the publication of the book. Thus, the next sub-section will deal with the process of making a textbook, to discover who selects materials and distributes the book.

4.2.2.2.1.2 The Process of Textbook Selection

The Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology [MEST] is responsible for preparing the national curriculum, and for designating a focal institute to manage the textbook publication and distribution. In accordance with the proclamation of the national curriculum, the MEST announces the basic plan for curriculum books, which determines what should be authorized or approved. After the MEST publicly announces93 the

91 Fine Arts textbooks for 5th and 6th graders associated with the Revised Curriculum in 2007 began using the textbook authorization system. For this study I focus on the authorized system in which the current Fine Art textbooks for 5th and 6th in 2013 have been grounded, since the Revised Curriculum in 2007. 92 The Fine Art textbook, along with books for other school subjects in all elementary schools in South Korea, had continued the government copyright system until the Revised Curriculum in 2007. Along with fine arts, the Revised Curriculum in 2007 turned government copyright standards for subjects such as Gym, Music, and Practical Course (for elementary school students) and Korean, Moral, and History (for middle school students) into government authorized books (Korea Authorized and Approved Textbook, ktbook.com). 93 “at least one year and six months prior to the commencement of a school year in which the said authorized books are to be first used” (Article 7, amended by Presidential Decree No. 20740. Feb. 29, 2009). 191

execution of an authorization plan, it establishes the guidelines for compiling a textbook and the criteria for execution of authorization. The MEST also reviews and appoints the study and deliberative council for curriculum books. The Regulations on the Curriculum

Books articulates the role of the council as follows:

The deliberative council for curriculum books shall. . . be established in the

Ministry of Education, Science and Technology in order to deliberate on materials

as to the compilation, authorization, approval, determination of prices, publication,

etc. of the curriculum books. (Article 18. Establishment of Deliberative Council

for Curriculum Books, Amended by Presidential Decree No. 18429, Jun. 19. 2004.

Presidential Decree No. 20740 Feb. 29. 2008. Presidential Decree No. 21687. Aug.

18. 2009)

The pre-authorization process is completed with the applicants’ submission of the application for authorization, the copies of the book to be examined, and the fees94 for the examination.

94 The Minister of Education, Science, and Technology determines the fees “by taking account of the number of their pages, the level of difficulty of authorization by curriculum, costs of authorization, etc” (Article 13-Fees for Authorization, amended by Presidential Decree No. 20740. Feb. 29. 2008; Presidential Decree. No. 21687. Aug. 18. 2009). 192

Figure 22. The Process of Textbook Authorization Note. Adapted from The Process of Textbook Authorization, n. d., Korea Authorized and Approved Textbook.

The authorization examination is executed by two reviews, “a preliminary study and then a main review” (Article 995-clause 1). The former step reviews “errors in the textbook content, markings, or expressions” (Article 9-clause 2) and the latter reviews whether the textbook is appropriate for the curriculum in accordance with the standards for authorization (Article 9-clause 3). Finally, in accordance with the review results, a decision for authorization is determined (Article 10 Amended by Presidential Decree No.

20740, Feb. 29. 2008). The disqualified applicants can file objections within one month after receiving the notification of the reason for disqualification (Article 10-clause2 -(1)).

95 This is wholly amended by Presidential Decree No. 21687 (Aug. 18. 2009) 193

Figure 23. The Process of Textbook Authorization in South Korea Note. Adapted from The Process of Textbook Authorization, n. d., Korea Authorized and Approved Textbook.

194

The books that pass the test are transmitted to each school, where the principal has the authority to determine which authorized books will be used at that school. At the school level, the process for this decision is conducted by a school operation committee

(Article 3-(2) Selection of Curriculum Books). Members undergo deliberation, referencing the result of the pre-examination by the school’s teachers in that subject area, as well as the guidelines that the District Office of Education makes. In particular, the guidance of the District Office of Education has been recently reinforced, as specified in the regulation:

The superintendent of the Office of Education or the head of a district office of

education may prepare and furnish to the principals of schools within a district

under his/her jurisdiction the data pertaining to the characteristics by book.

(Article 3-clause (3). Selection of Curriculum Books).

In this section, I focused on identifying the process of producing and distributing textbooks, in which the target Fine Art books are written and edited by authors associated with publishing companies and then submitted to the Korea Institute for Curriculum and

Evaluation, which is associated with the MEST, for authorization. Once the textbooks are authorized, they are sent to schools to be chosen by school committee members.

4.2.2.2.2 Deconstruction of Textbook Publication

4.2.2.2.2.1 Textbook Authorization

The system of textbook production, in particular the authorization system, which determines textbook adoption, cannot be dissociated from the Fine Art book’s contents.

Considering the subjects who make the textbooks and the examination for approving the textbook materials, the authoritative system of textbook production is occasionally 195

thought to produce high quality content. On the one hand, the authorized system is often advocated because of the collaboration between the government agencies and external private publishers. Teachers, professors, and researchers in both the public and private organization are thought to co-operate, and are compatible in the system (Crossley &

Murby, 1994). In particular, the system is thought to encourage creativity and originality in authors by leaving the task of writing and editing textbooks to private publishers. The private creativity, autonomy, and competition are expected to create diverse and qualified books. On the other hand, the authorization examination by the MEST is expected to ensure objective and fair provision of the books, and as such it is expected to guarantee an appropriate educational consideration. According to Korea Authorized and Approved

Textbook (2013, ktbook.com), the authorization examination is necessary, in that the examination serves as a filter to select commonly accepted social knowledge and value systems. Considering that elementary and middle schools are compulsory education for the nation’s people, it is considered important to select common knowledge to have them know the required minimum. In this sense, the examination can be thought of as determining the minimum required quality of content in terms of accuracy, neutrality, and universality. Also, judgments about whether or not the content is apolitical and non- religious, and how appropriate the content is in terms of student development, are thought to be needed, since the immature students are intellectually and emotionally sensitive enough to be influenced by the outer environment. In sum, the authoritative system is argued to take advantage of effective administration, as well as coordinate with the state- controlled and private sector initiatives, whereby the quality of textbook contents can be guaranteed. 196

However, it is arguable that the authorization system guarantees cooperation between the state and private entities. On the surface, it appears that textbook authors and publishing companies perform crucial roles in producing textbooks. However, given that the deliberative council establishes guidelines for compiling a textbook and the criteria for evaluating it, it is the committee members who influence or even determine the contents of the textbook. According to the Regulations on the Curriculum Books, article

19 (Composition of Deliberative Council), “the deliberate council of each level shall be composed of five or more members, and the members96 shall be commissioned or appointed by the Minister of Education, Science, and Technology” (amended by

Presidential Decree No. 18429. Jun. 19. 2004. Presidential Decree No. 20740, Feb. 29.

2008). In particular, Article 22 in the regulation mandates appointing an executive secretary who manages the affairs and states, who “shall be designated by the Minister of

Education, Science, and Technology” (Amended by Presidential Decree No. 20740, Feb.

29, 2008, Presidential Decree No. 21687. Aug. 18, 2009). In this sense, the authorization system can be seen as more closely aligned with government-led textbook publications than with cooperation, due to the hierarchical relationship between the government and the publishers in determining the content of textbooks. Given that the subject who determines the deliberative members and director has a relationship with the government,

96 The regulation specifies the eligible members as follows; “1. Teachers; 2. Persons having the research career in the industrial firms or research institutes; 3. Persons serving for the administrative agencies or educational research institutes; 4. Parents of students; 5. Persons recommended by citizens’ organizations (referring to the non profit not-governmental organization under Article 2 of the Assistance for Nonprofit Non-Governmental Organizations Act, hereinafter the same shall apply); 6. Persons having the expertise in the publication of curriculum books; 7. Relevant specialists belonging to the price survey agencies or the cost accounting agencies; 8. Other persons of profound learning as the relevant subject or books” (article 19, amended by Presidential Decree No. 18429. Jun. 19. 2004; Presidential Decree No. 20740, Feb. 29. 2008). 197

the contents of the textbooks that are designed under the authoritative system are inevitably strongly, if sometimes indirectly, influenced by the central government’s educational philosophy.

Both the time needed to prepare the investigation and the degree of regulation required make it hard for textbook makers to devote themselves to the creation of new content (Gim, 2012). The relatively short time available prevents them from sufficiently studying and discussing the contents, as applicants need to go through the deliberative institution’s examination in a timely manner. Since applicants have to submit the book for examination at least one year before students are to use it, the procedure limits the time available for authors to study writing the textbook (Gim, 2012). In some way, the book makers appear not to want to take on the adventurous task of adding any new ideas to a book (Gim, 2012), and this is also derived from the lack of time to verify whether any creative ideas are considered appropriate to teach or not. In addition, the rigorous criteria for approving the book (Gim, 2011) can restrict any attempt to include any new content.

Indeed, the textbook making system influences the contents of the textbooks on several fronts. Since the government copyright and authoritative system is implicitly grounded in the idea that textbooks have to contain a particular content that it is “required” to teach, it cannot avoid setting strict criteria for approving textbooks. The interview that Gim (2012) conducted with professors in South Korea proves that the authoritative system cannot produce various and creative textbooks. According to the interviews, experienced professors are cautious of the examination and are aware of the (im)possibility of passing the assessment. As a result, they try to develop a “safe” textbook rather than a creative one. 198

Given this background, it’s not surprising that 49.3% of teachers have difficulty in selecting a textbook because the authorized textbooks are so similar to one another (H. Y.

You et al., 2009, cited in S. M. Kim, 2011, p. 112). We can infer that the system of the textbook examination forces textbook makers to choose content they are sure will pass the test. It is not my argument that all radical contents are good or deserves to be taught, but rather that the textbook making system causes textbook makers to reproduce the previous contents. Given that this study is interested in a fine art textbook, which consists mostly of image references, it is possible that a certain image is reproduced in multiple textbooks in relation to the target subject matter.

Sometimes more rigorous examination is suggested (S. M. Kim, 2011, p. 112), in order to make it easier for teachers to select a book by providing them with a few highly selective textbooks that have passed the test. The rigorous investigation is said to differentiate a book from the others and minimize the burden on the school committee members. I do not agree with this idea because such rigorous restriction does not always allow for controversial content that can differentiate one textbook from others. It is even possible that publishing companies are more concerned with the external aspects of the textbook, such as the physical quality of the photos or supplements, than with the content of the book, because otherwise, the book is not differentiated from others and may not attract testers. Instead of this system, it would be better to reconsider the deliberative council from various perspectives.

In sum, it is difficult to expect ‘different’ content or an arguable culture to be added to a book within this context, because the more ‘normal’ knowledge is contained in the book, the easier it is for the publishing companies to pass the approval examinations. 199

In this sense, the content of the book seems influenced by the authorization system in which the nation state is in charge of producing the book. Additionally, it is not hard to imagine that including standardized content will result in more profit for the publishing companies. The next sub-section will grapple with how economic matters can influence the creation of a textbook.

4.2.2.2.2.2 Economic Aspects

Economic aspects must be as important as the textbook production system in influencing the content of the textbook (Apple, 2004). The way that book prices are set and the way textbooks are distributed could both influence the content of the textbook.

Since 1950, the South Korean government has determined textbook prices by assessing the total costs for development and a certain amount of profit that publishing companies should earn (Gim, 2011, p. 96). The system results in developing cheap textbooks at 1/4 –

1/10 of the cost of the reference or self-help books that are associated with the textbook

(Gim, 2011). With regard to the publication fee, since 1982 the approved publishing companies have financed together the entire publishing process, including printing, publishing, and distributing. They have also had the total earnings divided evenly, regardless of the number of books that each publisher sold (Gim, 2011). In the 1990s, the even distribution of profits was changed to a compromise policy that provides each company with differentiated interests based on the evenly divided income. In 2009 the government-managed price assessment system changed radically to a market price system, so that each publisher could determine the price for the books without

200

government interference97. In addition, the regulation about the cooperative publication fee and distribution was removed98.

The former policy reflected the central government’s primary concern to maintain a low-price policy and decrease the financial burden of the government. However, the revised policy is also a far cry from price liberalization. Article 33 of the Regulations on the Curriculum Books states that if the prices of authorized books and approved books are deemed unjustifiable, “the Minister of Education, Science, and Technology may recommended via a deliberative council that the prices shall be adjusted99.” As can be seen, the new policy seems to be designed to guarantee a good quality textbook at a low price. Since textbooks are supplied to all public and private compulsory education schools at the expense of the national treasury, the budget for the free supply of textbooks in a fiscal year is mandatory. Accordingly, it is important for the government to prepare a budget for the books and, from the government's position, a book’s price should be set as low as possible100. Given the regulation for price assessment and the provider of the books, it is not difficult to imagine that the publishing companies have to self-regulate themselves in terms of determining the price of the textbooks.

Publishers often complain that it is hard to expect the textbook business to be profitable under government-managed textbook production. Koh (2004), who is an

97 Regarding price assessment, Article 33 was wholly amended by Presidential Decree No. 21687 Aug. 18. 2009. It says, “The Price of an authorized book or an approved book shall be determined by the publisher having a contract with the author” (Article 33-1). 98 Gim (2011) anticipates that the price liberalization system will increase the price of the textbook because the companies will change the quality of paper or shape of the book in their own way to appeal to customers. In this case, he thinks that it is inevitable for the government to give way to the policy to distribute books to students for free. This must, however, be a matter for debate (S. H. Yoo, The Hankyoreh, 2009, September 15). 99 The Article was wholly amended by Presidential Decree No. 21687 (Aug. 18. 2009). 100 There is discussion about removing free textbook distribution from the government budget. 201

executive director of the Didimdol publishing company, argues that the textbook business is less profitable than people expect. For example, his company participated in developing textbooks associated with the 7th revised curriculum. Nineteen out of twenty- three textbooks were finally accepted to be authorized. Though this result exceeds an eighty percent success rate, the profit was only 13.5%. Considering the three years of investment and an eight-year payback period, he says this profit is even less than the opportunity cost. In the case of small publishing companies, given that the rate of passing the evaluation averages fifty percent, it gets worse – the dividend falls short in compensating for the loss of investment in a book that has failed in the evaluation test

(Koh, 2004). This fact is enough to dismiss the argument about the necessity of running a textbook specialty company (Koh, 2004; Lee, 2004; Y. J. Kim, 2011; S. M. Kim, 2011) and textbook editor group (Lee, 2004). Considering the situation that the companies face, it is indeed an unrealistic claim that publishers should manage the permanent organization for textbook research (Koh, 2004).

Concern with the publishing companies’ profits also involves whether these profits are invested in new textbook development, and how economic matters associated with textbook publishing influence the contents of the textbook. Several researchers (Gim,

2011; Y. J. Kim, 2011) argued for the government’s increase of the budget for the publication. Y. J. Kim (2011) articulates that from a publisher’s perspective, textbook making is a “profit-seeking business” and the publishers have to “generate adequate profits and re-invest them through business to last” (p. 163). Thus, he argues that the

202

government’s strong support101 enables textbook publishers to maintain their business and improve the quality of the textbook. From the researcher’s perspective, Gim (2011) argues that the vision of the best quality education must be developed by investment, given that textbook making is also compatible with market logic, but that the small expenditures by the government prevent publishers from maintaining a certain level of quality. Both the publisher and professor believe that increased financial support by the government will induce publishers’ contributions to leverage the re-investment of the profits into research for better textbooks. In the situation where publishers avoid investing their profits into the development of new textbooks, it is not difficult to imagine that the prior format or content of the textbooks is sustained, as long as the content coincides with the given national curriculum, because it will be able to lessen the necessity to study new textbook models based on investment, and to minimize the risk of being disqualified in the examination. In short, publishing companies are subject(ed) to self-regulate themselves in terms of determining the content of the textbooks, given the regulation for price assessment and the provider of the books.

4.2.2.2.2.3 The National Curriculum

As educators, we cannot ignore national curricula in considering the factors that determine the contents of textbooks. In South Korea, it is the national curriculum that the deliberative committee, publishing companies, and classroom teachers consider most in deciding content. For example, Y. J. Kim (2011) at Mirae N publishing company believes

101 The government subsidy is supplied to a trust company, which is supposed to publish the government’s copyrighted books. Government does not subsidize books authorized books by the Ministry of Education, and these books are 100% contributed by the publishing company. The books adopted by the Minister of Education are subsidized either by the publishing company or the District Office of Education (Cho, et al., 2011, p. 131). 203

that textbook publishers should conduct an “in-depth analysis of the curriculum set by the government and fully reflect[ing] them in textbooks” to make a good textbook (p. 163).

When considering the criteria for a good fine art textbook, teachers often tend to view the technical structure of the book as being the most important. H. K. Kim (2011) lists the factors that constitute a good quality fine art textbook as follows: 1) the overall structure and reference images have to be organized so that students can easily comprehend the contents, 2) the book acquaints students with clear image examples and specific explanations, and 3) the book contains an appropriate proportion of production and theory of art (pp. 30-31). As can be seen, the physicality, including the degree of color clarity or the arrangement of the reference images, is considered more important than any creativity or appropriateness of the contents, including questions about what images could reflect the curriculum or reality of everyday life from a cultural perspective.

As a former educator in the South Korean school system, I cannot help but ask if we pay more attention to the clarity of the image than the image itself or its appropriateness. This occurs because that we believe that 1) the initial assessment of the book’s suitability by the government is rigorous enough that we do not have to concern ourselves with the contents and, 2) there are certain stereotypical images that represent the objectives of the curriculum. For example, we assume there is a “South Korean ethnic culture” that should be accepted, and with which we must agree without any objection.

Needless to say, it is the national curriculum that influences the decision-making of those who are involved in producing textbooks’ content, and those decision markers envision certain stereotypical imagery of what counts as South Korean ethnic culture when they images for the textbook. The national curriculum must thus be one of the most crucial 204

authoritative systems that the deliberative committee, textbook publishing company, and the school committee consider in determining the contents of the textbook.

In sum, from the contextual analysis perspective, a Fine Art textbook turns out to be a postcolonial attempt administrated by the government, in that the state controls the whole system of the production process. This system often results in reproducing previous contents based on text book makers’ preconceptions of what counts as South

Korean ethnic art.

4.3 Conclusion

The Fine Art textbook is a space upon which a master narrative of South Korean government projects a postcolonial attempt, based on dualism. From the content analysis perspective, the focus on difference in the elements and design principles of the image examples is thought to create the other and to idealize culture. From the contextual analysis perspective – the discursive context – a government is revealed to be deeply involved in the creation of that content, by reflecting a dominant sociocultural discourse and by intervening in a textbook production system through the Textbook Authorization

System, price controls, and the national curriculum. Since the image examples in the book create the other by bordering, and the government intervenes in the whole system of textbook production, Fine Art is characterized as being colonial. At the same time, however, the image examples are expected to build companionship by bordering the other, which contributes to nation building. The notion of a singular ethnicity must be the common ground on which textbook makers establish the textbook politics surrounding cultural understanding. From a multiculturalist perspective, overall, the exploration so far seems to address how the desire for the particularity of ethnic culture gives body to the 205

content of the textbook and the context of textbook production.

This discussion lays out the factors that I examine in greater detail in the next chapter. It is necessary to investigate how the ideology of blood-based or singular ethnicity has been maintained or transformed, and how the idea of ethnicity in South

Korea has been incorporated with postcolonial multiculturalism. I also cannot help but ask why the War Memorial is not presented as a South Korean cultural representation, and how the invisibility of the War Memorial impacts the ideology of ethnicity that South

Koreans exhibit. Accordingly, in Chapter 5 I explore how the memorial has an effect on the ideology of the blood-based or singular ethnic cultural identification that is socially prevalent, and I infer why the relationship influences textbook makers’ decisions to prevent the War Memorial from being added to the book.

206

Chapter 5: Analysis of the War Memorial

The purpose of this chapter is to unpack the discourse of South Koreanness embedded in visual and written texts about the War Memorial, using Critical Discourse

Analysis. To this end, I explore how the dominant knowledge builders/groups in government construct and promote the ideology of South Koreanness through the War

Memorial. Employing van Dijk’s (1993) principles of meaning making, this chapter will analyze the visual texts of the War Memorial and the Peace Clock Tower, and the written texts of former defense minister Lee’s speech and Mudori’s greeting on the War

Memorial website. This involves several sub-questions. 1) How do South Korean knowledge producers use and appropriate the blood-based ethnicity model that is considered the western perspective about South Korea? 2) What strategies do the dominant groups use, and how do these strategies contribute to constructing the local meaning and coherence of the idea of South Korean ethnic culture? 3) How does the discourse produce self and othering throughout history? 4) How do the nationalist/ political elites’ positions and roles affect the production of discourse? Accordingly, this chapter is composed of five sections. In the first sub-section, I will overview South

Korean modern history. The focus will be on the relationship between modern South

Korean political and economic history and ethnicity. Secondly, public art will be defined, focusing on the subject(s) who are involved in its construction. In the third sub-section, I

207

interpret the War Memorial from the semiotic perspective and discuss its social meaning, focusing on the way in which the memorial is used for political purposes. Fourth, I consider how the spatial monument of the War Memorial functions in relation to South

Korean ethnicity and fulfills its role in the temporal sphere. Last, but not least, the final section explores the ethnic script of South Koreanness through the War Memorial.

5.1 Overview of South Korean Modern History

The South Korean nation state had to take on post-war reconstruction alongside economic development and political democracy. The first president of South Korea,

Seungman Lee (r. 1948-1960), exerted an anti-communism agenda in his centralized command regime. President Park (r. 1963-1979), who was grounded in military origins, inherited President Lee’s regime. Unlike Lee, though, Park transformed the regime into an effective bureaucracy that was controlled by a strong authority, and put economic development at the forefront of government policy102. President Chun (r. 1980-1988), maintained Park’s centralized authoritarian control and economic management. President

Roh (r. 1988-1993), who succeeded President Chun in terms of military origins, attempted to conduct the first direct presidential elections. Reconstruction was furthered through diplomatic relations with Third World countries to compete with the global economy. The next president, Youngsam Kim (r. 1993-1998), declared Segyehwa

(meaning globalization) in numerous aspects of South Korean society, which continued

South Korea’s economic development. Likewise, President Daejung Kim (r. 1998-2003)

102 This brought about the first national economic planning program based on expert oriented industrialization (Choi, 2007). 208

overcame the 1997 economic crisis and employed the Sunshine policy towards North

Korea.

The success of these post-colonial leaders contributed to the country’s political and economic growth. From the political viewpoint, South Koreans gradually succeeded in achieving a peaceful and legitimate transfer of power. The enactment of the direct presidential election system and the advent of the president who was for social causes indicate that South Korean society has changed to a space where both citizens and leaders gradually learned to communicate and increase their ability to achieve political democracy. From the economic viewpoint, its growth improved incredibly. Right after the Korean War, in 1953, the South Korean GNP was $67 per person, and the first officially collected GDP (in 1970) was $254 per person. In 1986, this number increased about ten times to $2,643. Almost 10 years later in 1995, the GDP leaped to $10,000, and all the way to $21,655 in 2007 (T. W. Kim, 2010). This political and economic success was the result of Koreans’ unified desire to establish national prosperity in post-colonial society.

Under this post-colonial context, however, South Koreans could not avoid social turmoil based on ideological conflicts. The two nationalist/political elite groups, typically labeled “conservatives” and “liberals,” generated and maintained the heart of these conflicts. The ruling party that is characterized as conservative in nature continued its rule for almost fifty years, until Daejung Kim (r. 1998-2003), who opposed the ruling party by advocating liberal civil rights groups, became president103. The liberal party held

103 When he was elected, CNN (1998, 2. 25) stated, “[O]nce persecuted as a dissident, Kim is the first member of the political opposition elected president since South Korea became a country in 1948.” 209

power from 1998-2008, and the conservative party has ruled from 2008 until the present.

Power struggles between these two groups have permeated South Korean politics since the first modern state was established in 1948. On the liberal side, which was primarily composed of college students and labor unions, pro-democracy movements104 represented a desperate struggle for freedom against autocratic leadership, and against economic development policies that ignored civil rights. In contrast, on the conservative side, which was primarily constituted by the traditional ruling politicians, the centralized administration sought an inevitable strategy to integrate and promote socio-economic development. Each party’s perception about North Korea was often thought to differentiate their political positions from one another. For the conservatives, North Korea was an enemy of the Korean ethnicity, and accordingly the liberal demonstrations were regarded as divisive and dangerous, both for being associated with North Korea’s communism and for potentially making the nation insecure. Conversely, from the liberal side’s perspective, the North Koreans were considered coworkers who cooperated for economic prosperity in the competitive neoliberal global world. Although it is problematic to simplify these complex political regimes in such a dichotomous way, their different perceptions about North Korea were often thought to underpin their political ideas.

5.2 Overview of Public Art

In this section, I identify the meaning of public art in South Korea. After discussing the ambiguous relationship between public and private domains in public art

104 The civil right movements urged President Seungman Lee to resign (April, 1960), ordered a direct presidential election system, and ordered President Chun to attend a hearing (1998). 210

in general, I explore who is involved in the construction of public art in South Korea, and what socio-political system—in conjunction with public funding—contributes to the establishment of a project. I also assess the cultural mechanism that makes it possible for the nationalist/political knowledge builder group(s) to intervene.

5.2.1 The Meaning of Public Art

In practical terms, public art in South Korea refers to works of art in front of big buildings. However, the recently (2011) reformed legislation, Percent-for-Art, seems to have broadened the scope of public art by changing its name from “A Decorative Plan for

Architecture” to “A Plan for Artworks and Architecture.” The changed term appears to be in line with Cornwell’s views of public art as “art to be integrated with spaces open to the public” (1990, cited in Conard, 2008, p. 11). Based on the broadened concept, South

Koreans have turned their attention from monuments or big sculptures in front of buildings to community-based art, so that more people can enjoy the public art close up.

However, the analysis in this section complicates this simplistic definition of public art. Specifically, I argue that defining what is “public” demands attention to who contributes to the funding, who manages the project, and what procedures they use. In this sense, Mitchell’s definition of public art is helpful: “1) [art that] has been initiated or overseen by a public agency, 2) is displayed in a public place, and 3) has been paid for with public money” (1992, cited in Conard, 2008, p. 11). However, it is arguable whether all three of these elements are required to define a project as a public art. Given, for instance, the construction fee for the War Memorial and the Peace Clock Tower, I believe that public art should be defined in a more flexible way. Therefore, in this chapter, public art refers to an art project in public, as defined by the place where it is set up, the funding 211

which is used to establish it, or the management required to maintain it.

Public art is a double-edged sword, as it can be good or bad for viewers. On the one hand, it provides “the right and opportunity to experience the advantages of public art” for every individual regardless of economic class, race, or gender (Conard, 2008, p.

11). Filicko (1992) similarly states that “[p]ublic art can also be viewed as a “public good” . . . with “a potential for all citizens to benefit” (p. 9). On the other hand, public art can be a repressive tool, by imposing the dominant ideology on the public and not allowing them the right to choose the art (Stalker, Glymour, & Clark, 1982). In this sense, public art can be either a public good or an oppressive tool, depending on the viewers’ standpoint and the degree of their participation in the public art process.

Furthermore, public art is deeply involved in publicity in terms of agency, space, and funding, and it has the potential of either propagandizing people or providing them with a viewing opportunity. Even this landscape, however, admits much complexity, as it entails the interplay of the public and private sectors.

5.2.2 The Private Sector vs. Public Sector in Public Art

Public art is a complex site, where the public and private sectors intermingle. The distinction between public and private domains is ambiguous, given 1) the funding system and 2) the role and scope of government intervention. On one hand, the private sector is found to be deeply involved in public art in terms of funding resources. Private donors, such as building or company owners, are the main funding sources for public art endeavors. Often donors, especially building owners, tend to consider the piece that they paid for as their private work (Kim, 2005). In this situation, the public seems to have little influence over the works. For example, the process that the deliberation committee goes 212

through in South Korea calls into question the ownership of the artwork. Ever since the

Decoration Deliberation Committee launched in Chungju in 2003, the committee has been required to evaluate all public art in terms of the appropriateness of its form and its harmony with the environment. However, this committee is hardly influential in deciding whether a piece is chosen or not, because the pieces themselves are not selected by the public in a competitive process. Instead, the committee assesses a work of art that the owner or company has already chosen (Kim, 2005). To solve this problem, public art policy was reformed to establish a public institution that manages public art. However, some producers of public art in South Korea resist the revised policy, because they think it may trespass on ‘their’ private property (Kim, 2005). This debate derives from the idea that public art supported by private funding should not be under public control.

On the other hand, however, the public sector appears to be even more deeply involved in public art than the private sector, given the high degree of governmental involvement. The extent to which the government is involved in the public space through the medium of art seems to be broadening. The government’s efforts to create new spaces are justified by the new name of the amendment for public art: the Plan for Artworks and

Architecture. Since public art is not limited to the artworks in front of private buildings any longer, but refers to any art project in public space, it can be said that the extent of government influence has widened. Unlike the previous amendment, the current amendment specifies public art as being publicly funded (versus private building owners under the old law), and gives the government latitude to manage public facilities more thoroughly than ever before.

In particular, it is likely that the enactment of the Public Fund could provide for 213

specific financial support that the government can use to carry out its plan. The Public

Fund was originally designed to alleviate the burden on individual building owners, who were required to cover one percent of the total construction fee for public art. In comparison, the revised amendment gives owners the option to make a donation to the

Public Fund of less than one percent. Interestingly however, this reduction has served to increase the Public Fund, which financially supports the involvement of the government in public spaces.

The Public Fund not only operates as an economic system, which increased governmental presence, but also as a regulating system that prohibits the visibility of public art. An artwork cannot escape its “public-ness,” although we accept that privately funded artwork guarantees artists’ freedom of expression. Deutsche (1992) states that public art and public spaces often “implicitly support the exclusionary rights of property as well as repressive and disciplinary power exercised in public spaces in the form of curfews, surveillance systems, policing, control through design, and forcible dispossession of users” (p. 35). The establishment of Public Funds associated with the newly revised Percent-for-Art Act in South Korea indicates that public control will be more systematically enacted, to plan, produce, and manage a given artwork. The establishment of the management foundation can be developed as a policing system to confirm whether or not any public artwork fulfills communal standards for appropriateness or effectiveness.

So far, I’ve paid attention to how public art is constituted by the intertwined private and public spheres, focusing on how public authority has gradually increased in the case of South Korean public art. The South Korean government has become 214

increasingly involved in managing public art, which partly accounts for the confusion between public and private ideas embedded in public art.

5.2.3 Economic Culture

Culture becomes integrated into the whole process of producing a commodity.

According to Jameson (1984), postmodern culture corresponds to late capitalism105, where culture itself is commoditized and consumed106 in a global market. Discussing the close relationship between economy and culture is not new, given Marxism. However, while the older Marxist theory views cultural forms as an ideological veil, designed to prevent people from conceiving real economic relations, Jameson focuses on the

‘process’ of culture’s economic activity in which cultural forms are “produc[ed], exchang[ed], market[ed], and consum[ed]” (Connor, 1989, cited in Thompson, 1992, p.

232). Rather than considering images, styles, or representations as the mediums used and produced in the economy, Jameson pays attention to the cultural process as an economic expression.

Needless to say, national culture is also going through the process of being manufactured in the culture industry. From the perspective of producing and exchanging, the fact that Pil-yun Ahn was chosen to design and create the War Memorial, an emblematic public artwork, could mean that the judges thought it would be advantageous to select this artist rather than another. Selecting a particular artist implies that the project

105 Jameson divides the development of capitalism into three stages: 1) market capitalism, characterized by the development of an industrial capital in the national market; 2) monopoly capitalism, characterized by the development of international markets, and derived from imperialism when European nation states exploited cheap labor and resources through the colonies; and 3) late capitalism, characterized by the growth of “multinational corporations with global markets and mass consumption” (Thompson, 1992, pp. 231-32). 106 Consumption is now “part of everyday life, located in a particular context and concerned with social relationships with particular kinds of things: commodities” (Edensor, 2002, pp. 109-110). 215

planners conduct a delicate prior investigation starting at the beginning of the production, as if they were conducting market research. From the artist’s perspective, Pil-yun Ahn also joined the procedure of determining the value of the subject: South Koreanness. She might have strived to enhance the work’s value by fulfilling the need of the sponsor, the

South Korean government and donors. The artist would need to consider concepts of

Koreanness, in addition to considering the physical location where the piece would be placed.

In addition, from the perspective of marketing and consumption, the government might have discussed where exactly the work should be placed to attract as many people as possible. Just as Edensor (2002) describes the location where the commodity is placed as second nature, so too is the location of the memorial, where the South Korean national culture exists, ever more important. On one hand, the location of the War Memorial becomes a landmark, providing South Koreans with the mundane material form to communicate who they are at the local level. On the other hand, the space of the War

Memorial must function as a landmark where tourists can experience South Korean ethnic culture as long as they ‘visit’ the memorial; otherwise, they cannot experience this particular culture, living in the so-called global homogenization that some worry about.

The War Memorial is included in Yongsan District, which is in the center of Seoul and which has maintained its role as Seoul's traditional business center. There is also a large

US military base, the Yongsan Garrison, which will be relocated to Pyeongtaek by 2017.

In particular, Itaewon, in which the War Memorial is located, is known as a commercial district to attract foreign tourists who come to shop and enjoy the nightlife. It is also widely known as one of the most ethnically diverse regions in South Korea. The high 216

value of this district informs visitors of the power and authority of the owner of the memorial, and who are South Koreans. The War Memorial alludes to the function of public art in relation to tourists at both domestic and global levels. The whole process of producing the artwork must be measured by its economic value.

Indeed, the culture industry gets ever more competitive in commodifying national culture in the contemporary global economy, given nation states’ increasing involvement in cultural policy at the global level and in the cultural budget at the local level. Ever since the UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of

Cultural Expressions107 was enacted in 2005, contemporary nation states have made a commitment to protect and promote their respective national cultures competitively.

Being freed from the regulation of the Free Trade Agreement, nation states can use the

UNESCO Convention to control their public cultures in a certain way108. In this case, it is expected that the public would more deeply control the content of public artworks. It is also likely that the increased budget for culture and art policy is relevant to this global cultural industry. The South Korean national budget for culture for 1997 was ₩437.3 billion ($4.15 billion), comprising 0.62% of the entire governmental budget (Ministry of

Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan). However, the 2010 budget for culture increased to three trillion (Mok, 2012), reaching 1% of the total South Korean budget109. Overall, public sector cultural management is becoming an ever more

107 "The Convention recognizes the rights of Parties to take measures to protect and promote the diversity of cultural expressions, and impose obligations at both domestic and international levels on Parties" (UNESCO, 2005). The convention is based on the UNESCO’s advocacy of ‘cultural diversity’ which was declared in 2001. 108 In the case of South Korea, the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions was ratified by the National Assembly in April 2010 and was put into effect in June 2010. 109 This rate exceeds that of any other country in Asia. Some argue that trusting these statistics is absurd 217

important task in this neoliberal world. The Korean government plays the role of facilitator as well as sponsor in this neoliberal context. When it needs to sell a certain ideology to its citizens, such as South Korea’s national image, in order to maintain and prosper its political system, the government cannot help but get deeply involved in planning, funding, marketing, and selling that national image through public art.

Overall, public art is a realm in which public and private spheres are conflated in terms of funding and management systems, but the public institutions get to play a more significant role than their private counterparts. Since the primary funding sources depend on the private donors, those donors seemingly have ownership of the project. However, considering the enactment of the Public Fund which applies different rates to the public and private building owners, future public art projects are expected to systematically increase the intervention of the government. Moreover, public art, as a landmark of commodified and consumed culture, is expected to lead people to internalize what it means to be South Korean. Therefore, the government’s role as a sponsor for public art projects is thought to be ever increasing. Along these lines, the next section will grapple with how the government was involved in the construction of the War Memorial.

5.3 Analysis of the War Memorial

The purpose of this section is to explore how various influential cultural actors planned, funded, and managed any political and technical factors, and how they use the notion of ethnicity. First, I describe two public artworks, the War Memorial and the Peace

because the budget likely includes a wider range of sectors than in any other country, and they argue that the state budget for culture is not enough (Mok, 2012). The budget for culture in South Korea even includes activities relevant to tourism, physical activity, and religion. In my opinion, given the general understanding of what culture is, I do not believe South Korea’s concept of culture encompasses dimensions any broader than those in other countries. 218

Clock Tower, focusing on their physical characteristics. Secondly, the War Memorial will be interpreted based on its elements and principles of design, to identify how the monument influences national identity construction. Next, I explore how the two public artworks are associated with the socio-political and economic context in South Korea, in order to discover how the memorial was connected to political imperatives that upheld the dominant political groups. By this process, I expect to identify the way in which the idea of ‘a South Korean ethnic culture’ represented through war images generates South

Koreans’ epistemology of “South Koreanness.” In other words, I interrogate here how culture is used for a political purpose in a post-colonial South Korean context.

5.3.1 Description of the War Memorial

The memorial consists of 9,000 artifacts that are exhibited both indoors and outdoors. The indoor exhibition space, about 110,770 ㎡, is made up of seven halls110 that display records of war and war heroes from the Three Kingdoms Era until the present.

The outdoor exhibition contains weaponry and several monuments and statues.111

110 The seven halls are The Memorial Hall, The War History Room, The Korean War Room, The Expeditionary Forces Room, The Armed Forces Room, The Large Equipment Room, and The Korean Defense Industries Room. 111 The weaponry contains actual equipment used in the Korean War as well as that used in other countries. The monuments and statues include The Korean War Monument, The Monument of King Kwanggaeto the Great, The Statue of Brothers, The Peace Clock Tower, The Monument of fallen soldiers, police, and Korean war participants, and The UN forces’ fallen soldiers (The War Memorial.com) 219

Figure 24. Inside and Outside of The War Memorial Note. Adapted from Google Image, n.d., Google.

One of the outdoor exhibitions, The Peace Clock Tower (9.5m x 2.3m x1.2m) is made of bronze and was built in 2002. It depicts two thin girls, each holding a clock, with another clock buried in the ground: one girl is standing and carrying a clock on her shoulder, and the other girl is sitting and holding onto a clock at her side. The clock on the first girl’s shoulder indicates the current time; the other girl’s clock has stopped at

4:00, indicating the time that the Korean War began in 1950; and the underground clock indicates the future time, waiting to be unearthed when South and North Korea are unified. The two girls are placed on a foundation of indeterminate forms and pieces of scrap metal.

220

Figure 25. The Peace Clock Tower Note. Adapted from Google Image, n.d., Google.

5.3.2 Interpretation of the War Memorial

In this section, I identify the two ways that the War Memorial performs nation building. One strategy is to utilize modernism in order to maximize promoting the grand narrative as well as disciplining people about war in a rational and effective way. The other one is to make time (the temporal dimension) vague in order to enhance the recognition of South Korean reality and the effect of eternal mysteriousness.

5.3.2.1 Strategy of Modernism: Preparing to Pass the Grand Narrative

Both the inside and outside of the War Memorial narrate its story, depending on 221

its module of modernism. According to Hall (1992), “time and space are . . . the basic coordinates of all systems of representation” (p. 301). He employs Harvey’s (1989, cited in Hall, 1992, p. 301) insight that the ordering of space and time of the Enlightenment should be different than that of Late Modernism, e.g. in the Late Modernist works of

Picasso, Braque, Surrealists, and Dadaists. Given that modernism is based on a scientific rationale and formal purity by excluding any emotion and imagination, the War Memorial can be classified as a modernist art style.

The War Memorial embodies the modernistic grand message in several ways.

First of all, from the outside, the perfectly symmetrical and simple shape of the War

Memorial building invites veneration by eliminating any emotion that can be evoked by embellishment.

Figure 26. The War Memorial’s Symmetrical View Note. Adapted from Google Image, n.d., Google.

Given that Modernism is rooted in rational reasoning, it is expected that every medium of

222

representation that embodies the ideology of the Enlightenment should be in order, keeping a strict balance.

Secondly, the diorama of the objects deprives viewers of the will to imagine any other possibility of interpretation. Viewers are supposed to gaze at the moving images and to accept the provided narrative in a passive way.

Thirdly, the linear flow of visitors entering the building doubles its rational functionality by acquainting viewers with the message that the displayer wanted to show.

More specifically, once viewers enter the first room inside the Memorial, they are led to another corridor whose end is connected to a small circle that links the first room to another room. While viewers flow and circle through, they are supposed to give up trying to find out where they are and give up trying to return to the entrance they had passed through. The only thing that the viewers can do is to move further in the direction in which the arrows on the floor lead. Thus, their bodies become entirely controlled by the arrow signs, and they are not allowed to move away from the prescribed routine. Once they have entered, the viewers are supposed to sense all of the grand narrative until they exit the building.

Fourth, modernism echoes its grand message to the viewers from a far distance, like a lone dictator. Neither the War Memorial nor the Peace Clock Tower allow viewers to get close to the artwork; visitors are at least required to keep their distance to the extent where they can perceive a wide perspective of the building’s symmetry and capture the sight of both clocks simultaneously. The required distance indicates the extent of power that the iconic sites maintain as a grand narrative.

Fifth, the images of the War Memorial and the Peace Clock Tower set up a 223

coordinate where the nation of South Korea positions itself and performs embodied knowledge, using the senses of the body and the script of its ethnic identity. For example, viewers of the Peace Clock Tower are supposed to hear a ‘peace melody’ every hour. The melody must be a strong ideological medium to educate the South Korean nation on who they are by awakening their senses of vision, touch, and hearing. By absorbing the aura with their senses, visitors gain the meaning that the representations signify.

Last but not least, the hyper-realistic technique enhances the topic of “South

Koreanness” that the monument wants to address. The primary guideline in displaying the objects in the memorial is that “significant battles in each session should be described in a three-dimensional way, so that viewers can experience the Korean War as real as possible and the triumph in the war can be illustrated well” (IWM, 1997, cited in Kim,

2007, p. 212). The consultants for the War Memorial also requested the displayers to describe the battles during the first three months in as much detail as possible, since they were the fiercest (IWM, 1997, cited in Kim, 2007, p. 205). In accordance with this guideline and request, several techniques such as diorama, light, and the direction of the figure’s gaze are considered to enhance the reality of the war. For example, the background light is a little dim while a spotlight highlights the object’s foreground, in order to maximize the gravity of the Memorial. These techniques are not simply devices to make the war as real as possible, but also impress certain emotions on viewers.

In this section, I addressed the way in which grand narrative is addressed in a rational and scientific way. It is necessary to discuss how the grand narrative makes itself idealized. Concerns about where meaning is located in image analysis suggest a linguistic structure. Indeed, Saussure argues, “meaning is generated through a system of structured 224

differences in language” (Barker, 2004, p. 190). Meaning is created based on a language system, including the relation of signifiers, opposition-based binary structure, and grammar. To be specific, a signifying system operates by the mechanism of relations: signifiers that refer to one another in a sign system generate meaning. On the one hand, the relation of a sign system operates at the signifier level. When I analyze the War

Memorial, I pay attention to each part of the signifiers, which constitute the whole figure, and I inquire how the previous signifiers become a reference to the next signifier. In doing so, I generate a particular meaning. For example, when I described the War

Memorial, the gaze moves from the signifier of the inside of the War Memorial to the signifier of the Peace Clock Tower, and I inquire into the relations between both signifiers. The relation of the signifiers of the past and the present creates the meaning of the future. The three signifiers in a row again create the meaning of the “War space where time is conflated.” The relations of a sign system work at the sign level. For instance, when I look from the inside of the War Memorial to the hour hand indicating the current time on the Peace Clock Tower, I ask what meaning can be generated by associating the signifier of the hour hand on the clock, which links to the signified of indicating the current time, with the signifier of the War Memorial, which links to the signified of the war in the past. In some sense, this research is about how I can find the colluding signifiers of South Korean ethnic culture in the War Memorial.

Meaning is also generated based on a system of opposition. For example, in the

War Memorial, the meaning that the inside of the War Memorial and the clock at the lower position on the Peace Clock Tower create is in opposition to that of the clock in the higher position in terms of movement, which creates meaning. The interpretative tool of 225

the opposition is concerned with the question about how the forms of two quite

‘different’ signifiers make meaning.

Finally, a language system is grounded in the arbitrary association between signifier and signified, which becomes a conventional meaning. There is no essence or intrinsic truth in the sign. For example, when I look at The Peace Clock Tower (signifier) of the War Memorial, I connect the signifier to a certain meaning (signified) of two sisters with the same parents, but this connection must be made arbitrarily, and the randomly connected relations of signifier to signified might be conventionalized.

Saussure (1966) views language as a system of rules. Although signifier and signified were associated arbitrarily, once they are associated, then the sign is fixed and its meaning is fixed. Anything that I know as, for instance, the connection of the two girls to sisters with the same parents should be an ideology that has been generated throughout history, based on the association between a certain image and its corresponding concept.

So far, I addressed the way in which grand narrative tries to indicate ideas in a rational and scientific way. However, the meaning of this grand narrative remains unclear.

Thus, it is necessary to articulate what it is that the grand narrative of the War Memorial tries to address. To this end, the next section will begin by exploring the reason why the

War Memorial narrates by demystifying time.

5.3.2.2 Iconic Meaning Making

Codes make it possible for images to signify. There are two systems of signification, denotation and connotation, and both require codes for the signification.

Codes of denotation are literal and unambiguous, while codes of connotation are

“configurations of meaning” and open-ended (Hall, 1981, p. 226). The two signification 226

systems are mediated by an ideological theme. For instance, Hall (1981) states that a news photo already has a denotative meaning, but when it is incorporated with an ideological theme, then the news photo begins to have a connotative meaning and becomes an ideological sign. Hall believes that this change to signification is the change from the “visual/denotative chain” to the “mythical/ideological chain” (p. 238). In this sub-section, I will focus on identifying the meaning of the War Memorial: its denotative meaning, ideological theme, and connotative meaning.

5.3.2.2.1 A Strategy of Time(lessness)

Gallner (1983, cited in Hall, 1992, p. 294) views the representation of national identity as “primordial – ‘there, in the very nature of things’ sometimes slumbering, but ever ready to be ‘awoken’ from its ‘long, persistent and mysterious somnolence’ to resume its unbroken existence.” Political leaders allude to the essentials of the nation and emphasize eternity whenever they precipitate a nation’s agreement or unification (Barnett,

1982, cited in Hall, 1992, p. 294). This eternity can be represented in several ways, e.g. by an “emphasis on origins, continuity, tradition, and timelessness” (Hall, 1992, p. 294).

In my view, emphasizing the complexities of time is also in line with these representations, as it serves to express eternal mysteriousness.

The War Memorial and the Peace Clock Tower lead viewers to a particular space where they can experience the past, present, and future simultaneously. The highly selective objects inside the War Memorial, designed to commemorate the Korean War in a retrospectively constructed way, tell about the ‘past.’ However, coming out of the War

Memorial, viewers will feel that they are living in the ever more ‘modern’ world, leaving behind the weapons that are regarded as a culmination of contemporary domestic 227

technology. The confrontation of the present becomes clearer and more visible when viewers see the hour hand indicating the current time on the Peace Clock Tower. We can imagine that when viewers walk through the tragic past inside the memorial and pass by the present progress, they might experience a contrast between the past and present, and this contrast paradoxically urges them to create a certain meaning in relation to the future and their national identity. In this sense, although the viewers are now in front of the other clock beneath the current time, which indicates the time that stopped with the

Korean War, I dare say few people try to remember the past time, four o’clock. Rather, they might internalize the future of the nation by experiencing the virtual reality and the narrative of coexisting time.

Figure 27. The Peace Clock Tower with Cherry Blossom Note. Adapted from Reviewing War Memorial exhibition, n.d., The Kookbang.

In particular, both the War Memorial and the lower clock would remind viewers of the idea of stopping, lethargy, and death, while the movement of the higher clock’s

228

needles symbolize movement, revived energy, and life. Put another way, the objects displayed inside the War Memorial and the stopped clock might remind people of the ferocious battle in the past. This image must give viewers pause, having no energy and offering only dead imagery. Although the most important images in the War Memorial are created by diorama so that viewers are able to see the movement, they must be remembered as a frozen movement, because when the diorama is arranged in a certain order, maximizing its grand narratives, it creates a story that would be enough to ‘embed’ a fixed, violent message to viewers. For viewers who are absorbed by the organization of the displays and lose their will to interpret images, the mobility of the images must be a fixed imprint upon them. This mobility leaves no energy to prepare room for new meaning. The impression of the dead energy is doubled when the viewer’s vision moves to the Japanese cherry blossoms in the background of the Peace Clock Tower. With the relationship between the memorial and the Peace Clock Tower indicating past time, the signifier of the clock that is arranged next to the signifier of the Memorial will remind viewers of the tragic past that nobody wants to experience. By contrast, the current clock in the syntagmatic order will remind viewers of the revived energetic present that everybody must live through. According to Edenser (2002), iconic sites are, on the whole, constituted by selective features, which embody both specific past memories that deserve to be remembered as well as the present, to prove the community’s progress. He states,

[I]conic sites are highly selective, synedochal features which are held to embody

specific kinds of characteristics. Typically these spatial symbols connote historical

events, are either evidence of past cultures, providing evidence of a ‘glorious’ past

of ’golden age’ and antecedence, . . . or they are monuments erected. . . to 229

commemorate significant episodes in an often retrospectively reconstructed

national history... .They also frequently celebrate the modernity of the nation, are

symbols of its progress. (Edenser, 2002, p. 45)

Apparently, the monument continuously creates meaning in various ways throughout the time sphere, so people have not been reluctant to appropriate it as a space for peace. Numerous indoor and outdoor events are held at the Memorial to attract students and other citizens, including a Digital Photo Contest in April, Celebration Day

Caricatures for Children in May and September, and Writing Contests in June, July, and

December. Similarly, the Memorial hosts weekly musical performances, art exhibitions, and military parades in warm weather. Participants, who are tired of living in a crowded and polluted concrete jungle, are expected to encounter the clean green zone of the Peace

Plaza surrounding the monument, and enjoy a peaceful environment. The building itself is also open to various exhibitions. Almost every day, visitors can enjoy a range of scientific or entertaining exhibitions. In 2013, for example, they could see the Seoul

Snow Festival (December 18-February 9), The Great Worldwide Animal Exhibition

(December 1-March 3), Vroomiz BigToyland (March 29-August 25), a science exhibition called The Body (April 5-March 2), and Cocomong Green Playground (December 1-

March 3). These temporary events are also significant resources to create a continuous meaning for the monument. While some onsite events deal with the Korean War or with the theme of war more generally, such as a recent memorial ceremony for the victims of the Cheonan Warship or a special exhibition entitled “Reviewing the Imjin War Back to

420,” other events, notably the Peace Concert and the Peace Camp for Youth, deliberately create distance from war. 230

The monument is not only open to any one related to the institution, but also to any individuals who are concerned with the matter of peace. The monument is thus used as a space for peace demonstrations. For example, in 2013 civil rights activist E-Seok

Kang staged a nude performance against war in the monument, on Armed Forces Day

(October 1, a national commemoration holiday). He performed in front of one of the sculptures in the monument The Statue of Brothers (1994), hoisting a placard on which he’d written “Korea Celebrates the War.” In 2013, the biggest opening ceremony since

2003 was scheduled to take place in Sungnam, to celebrate the 65th Armed Forces Day, and a big street parade was also scheduled in Seoul, for the first time since 2008. The statement on the placard was meant ironically, to ridicule the events that apparently sought to praise war. He articulated the purpose of the performance via social media: “In order to urge people to stop commemorating war and to usher in the peaceful era, I just performed an ‘unarmed’ nude [performance] in front of the war memorial” (Kang’s

Twitter, 2013, cited in The Korea Herald, 2013). Similarly, by comparing South Korea’s street parade on Armed Forces Day with North Korea’s military parades, Kang claimed to differentiate South Korea’s policy from North Korea’s by disrobing in pursuit of peace.

He staged a similar performance in 2008 as well. He stated: “The primary purpose of the nude performance in front of the tanks was to express the state of being completely unarmed. If I wore underwear, I could hide a weapon in there” (The Korea Herald,

October 1, 2013). The statement on the placard, in some way, sounds sarcastic if we see/hear it on the spot, because the literal meaning of the monument itself indicates

“celebrating war.” Yet the monument is generously open to anyone, even those who are against the monument itself. In this sense, the War Memorial constructs an open space 231

where it not only transmits a grand narrative, but where any individual can communicate to South Koreans and to the world in peaceful terms.

I’ve considered how the monument evokes people’s memory of the War and the progress of the nation simultaneously or “fear and/or hope,” in a space where the past, present, and future coexist. Both the stable objects in the space and the many events hosted by the institution construct the iconic site of the War Memorial as a continual meaning making space. Central to the meaning is to evoke in people a companionship about where they belong or the nation they imagine. Though these ideas help clarify how the grand narratives are transferred and incorporated with the emotions of fear and hope, they have not yet considered the important notion of South Korean national culture, which is the topic of the next section.

5.3.2.2.2 The War Memorial and War

The War Memorial emphasizes simulation: “objects and discourses that have no firm origin no referent, no ground or foundation” (Thompson, 1992, p. 243). Simulation is distinguished from a fiction or lie, in that “it not only presents an absence as a presence, the imaginary as the real, it also undermines any contrast to the real, absorbing the real within itself” (Thompson, 1992, p. 244). At first glance, the visual objects and dioramas displayed inside the memorial may engage viewers in the illusion that the war took place in the past and is not happening at this moment, and that the war illustrated in the memorial is just imaginary. However, from Baudrillard’s (1970, cited in Thompson, 1992, p. 245) viewpoint, it is the whole nation in “microcosm” that viewers look at and play with in the memorial, not the imaginary (Poster, 1988, cited in Thompson, 1992, p. 245).

232

In a similar analysis of Disneyland, Poster (1988, cited in Thompson, 1992, pp. 245-6) states:

It [Disneyland] is meant to be an infantile world, in order to make us believe that

the adults are elsewhere, in the ‘real’ world, and to conceal the fact that real

childishness is everywhere, particularly among those adults who go there to act

the child in order to foster illusions of their real childishness.

Baudrillard believes that the real society where people live is not real any more, in that people are programmed to follow the mechanisms of that society. In effect, consumption becomes the groundwork for social order and the classification system that encodes behavior and groups.

Just as Disneyland, at least on the surface, makes people believe in it as an imaginary world (Baudrillard 1970, cited in Thompson, 1992, p. 245), so too does the

War Memorial appear to use the same mechanism. The belief that visitors encounter an imaginary world by entering the War Memorial reminds them that the imaginary world of the memorial is different than the real world. That is, in the War Memorial, visitors who recognize the war inside the memorial will be relieved by the fact that the war imagery is indeed a fantasy about what happened in the past, and they will be proud of themselves for having won the war and for having developed the country despite hardships; this promotes nationalism. Baudrillard views society as simulacra in that “society itself is increasingly composed of constructed images” (Thompson, 1992, p. 246). With regard to this study, this does not mean that the War Memorial aggravates people’s fear by displaying all materials relevant to the War, which is thought of as concealing real

233

contradictions in South Korean society. Rather, it means that the War Memorial presents an imaginary “in order to make us believe that the rest is real” (Thompson, 1992, p 245).

With regard to ‘the rest’ of society during the time the War Memorial was built, it may be reduced to a description and/or construction of crisis. On the one hand, there must have been a crisis in the lives of those who were physically and mentally involved in the numerous pro-democracy movements, led by college students and labor unions for freedom against autocratic leaders and demanding human rights against economic development that would sacrifice civil rights. On the other hand, the movement must have posed a crisis to those who were in the dominant power group, so they constructed a crisis of their own in response. It is likely that the government propagated the idea that the pro-democracy movement was associated with North Korean communism, which agitated the nation and made people feel insecure. In this case, what viewers imagine or learn in the War Memorial is that there is another “war” outside the War Memorial, given the already constructed reality. By being made to believe in experiencing the imaginary world of the War Memorial, the viewers will never perceive the myth of childishness, and in this sense, the hyper reality of their regular life is expected never to change. In short, it is as though the dominant power created both wars: one inside the memorial, and one outside. The imagination of visitors to the War Memorial thus cannot be disassociated from their nationalism.

Thus far, I have interpreted the War Memorial based on its formal style and how it gives rise to psychological meaning-making to provide insight about the war. Although this method gives us insight into the monument’s relationship with the war, it does not sufficiently explain what kind of war exists “outside” the monument, how it contributes 234

to build up the monument as an ideological sign, and what meaning the monument entails as an ideological sign. Accordingly, I turn now to the sociocultural context that is embedded in the War Memorial’s discourse, in order to discover how the War Memorial creates the ‘outside’ of the war.

5.3.2.2.3 The Socio-Political Meaning of the War Memorial

In this section, I explore the socio-political meaning of the War Memorial, focusing on the subject(s) who were involved in the construction of the War Memorial and the viewpoint that grounds cultural meaning in a sociopolitical perspective. I explore who planned, managed, and funded the monument, and what kind of other socio-political context influences the construction of the memorial. I analyze former defense minister

Lee’s speech and Mudori’s (the mascot of the War Memorial) online greeting, to explore the socio-political intentions that were engaged in the monument. In particular, the analysis of Lee’s and Mudori’s discourses will identify the way that the “outside” war is constructed through language.

5.3.2.2.3.1 Technical Factors Associated with the Construction of the War

Memorial

5.3.2.2.3.1.1 Planning

President Roh’s government (r. 1988-1993) played a significant role in the construction of the War Memorial, supplying the project manager and the principal agents of construction. This project was initiated by President Roh, in his speech of June 22,

1988, when he visited the Minister of National Defense (History of the War Memorial

Construction [HWMC], 1997, cited in Kim, 2007). Before long, the motivation for the project was specified in the Korean War Commemoration Project Plan (KWCPP), in July 235

1988 (HWMC, 1997, cited in Kim, 2007, p. 199). The plan explained that the purpose of constructing the War Memorial was to remind post-war nations of the reality of the

Korean War, and to enhance anti-communitarianism and national security. After the president’s speech, the construction of the War Memorial was run by the War

Commemoration Promotion Committee (WCPC),112 which was composed of seven generals and thirty-nine army officers under the Ministry of National Defense. The

WCPC’s construction plan was examined, regulated, and approved by the deliberating council members of the War Commemoration Service Control and Supervision Board

(WCSCSB), which was composed of the assistant minister to the vice minister, and the directors of the General Services Division under the Ministry of National Defense. Those who selected the objects displayed in the memorial were members of the Display

Consultant Committee (DCC) under the Institute of the War Memorial (IWM).

Consultants included 12 militarists and 20 experts on display, lighting, imagery, military systems, battle, ancient weaponry, interior design, art, history, and ancient costumes. In short, the project was proposed by President Roh, but executed by the military under the

Ministry of National Defense.

Projects that are undertaken to imprint and fix national meaning in a particular space for all time are doomed to fail, due to the power struggles that attempt to ‘translate’ the monument’s purpose in their own way. The War Memorial was claimed by President

Roh, who needed to invest the symbolic site with meanings in line with his political project of identity113. However, after President Roh finished his presidential term in 1993,

112 The name was later changed to The Institute for the War Memorial (IWM). 113 He criticized the War Memorial for its narcissistic placement in the central square. On the left side of 236

the new ruling party, Minja114, criticized the project for having no process for sharing public opinion about the project. Along with the public statement from the political party, there were also a string of negative opinions that circulated among the public about opposing the opening of the Memorial. These opinions delayed the opening. The arguments against the project were complex, but they primarily had to do with the lack of mechanism to gather public opinion, and concerns about the economy. For example, one newspaper editorial, published in The Chosun (1993, June 11, cited in Kim, 2008, p. 204), argued that “[i]t is possible to build up ten Science Museums with the money spent for the construction of the War Memorial.” Another newspaper, The Hankook (1993, June 9, cited in Kim, 2008, p. 204), stated that the economy “has been greatly damaged…since the authoritarian military-based government has competed to build enormous commemorative buildings.” Though the memorial had originally been scheduled to open on June 17, 1993 (Kim, 2007, p. 204), it was delayed nearly a full year, finally opening on June 10, 1994.

In comparison, Daejung Kim’s (r. 1998-2003) government was deeply involved with the construction of The Peace Clock Tower. The statue was created by Pil-yun Ahn whose background was in public art and feminist performance, but according to War

Memorial publicity manager Koungeun Lee (The Kookbang, 2011), the idea for this artwork was provided by Uh-ryung Lee. Given that Uh-ryung Lee was a former Minister

the monument are carved images of Korean ancestors fighting against the Japanese, and on the right side are images of the army. He viewed this two-dimensional work as being designed to justify the coup, and imply that the government of the day was considered to be rooted in its origin, by connecting the soldiers’ image (the coup) with those who fought against Japanese colonialism. 114 The new ruling party, Minja, calls itself a literary-oriented government, positioning itself opposite the previous military-oriented government while sustaining its legitimacy to succeed them. The Minja party attempted to prevent the construction of the War Memorial from being completed, but later on the leader of the party, President Youngsan Kim, agreed to open it to the public. 237

of Culture (r. 1990-1991) and devoted himself to establishing Koreanness in the academy and practices, the Peace Clock Tower is perceived as having been supported by Daejung

Kim’s government. The motivation for building the Peace Clock Tower was to express the earnest desire for peace and for the unification of South and North Korea, while reminiscing about the tragedy and lessons of the Korean War (Lee, 2011)

5.3.2.2.3.1.2 Funding

Because a construction plan without execution remains only an ideal, it is necessary to explore who contributed the funding for the monument. This section will give an overview of the funding system for public art in general, and will identify the subject(s) who supported the construction fee for the War Memorial and Peace Clock

Tower.

The procedures for public art policy and management were legislated by the

Culture and Arts Promotion Act, and enforced by local ordinances in South Korea (Kim,

2011). The Culture and Arts Promotion Act (1972)115 has ensured that South Koreans can enjoy their cultural right to be surrounded by a visually pleasing environment. It also promoted South Korean culture to attract local tourists, and provided more job opportunities to artists.

More importantly, in addition to legitimizing peoples’ rights in relation to public art, the focal point in the Act is found in its Percent-for-Art policy, which legitimizes the primary funding for public art. Percent-for-Art requests the owner of a building to set aside no more than one percent of the total construction fee to install public art. The

115 The Culture and Arts Promotion Act provided for the establishment of the Culture and Arts Promotion Fund. 238

earliest Percent-for-Art legislation (the Decorative Plan for Architecture) in South Korea dates back to 1972, and requested all individual owners who build new or extended buildings of a certain size116 to set aside at least 1% of the total construction fee for art.

The law initially targeted all areas of Korea, but a 1984 amendment limited it only to those who build buildings in Seoul. In 1995, however, the law was restored to its original scope, and applied to all of South Korea. Regarding the rates, the 2000 amendment changed the donation amount from at least 1% to no more than 1%, most typically around

0.7%.

The Percent-for-Art legislation has recently been reformed again, with the most recent version passing in 2011. One of the changes in this legislation broadens its target, to include owners of both private and public buildings and facilities, with different donation rates for public and private buildings. In addition, the revision enhanced its flexibility by setting up a Public Fund, which relieved private building owners from the obligation of setting up artwork. Instead, private owners can make a donation to the

Public Fund, which would cost them less. New public buildings are mandated to set aside one Percent for Art (0.7 % for public art and 0.3 % for the public fund).

Since the funding gathered by the Public Fund is expected to be used in various ways for various types of projects, the revised law can be evaluated as changing the focus of the Percent-for-Art legislation from placing public art only in front of the buildings to placing in more diverse public spaces, such as public facilities, parks, or squares. Overall, the revised ordinance appears to lessen the burden on private owners, and increase the

116 This law was made for a building of a certain size, and in 1972 the law targeted only buildings whose size was at least 3,000 ㎡. In 1988, the size changed to 7,000 ㎡ everywhere but Seoul and to 10,000 ㎡ in Seoul, and was finalized to 10,000 ㎡ for all provinces in 1995. 239

role of government.

There are two opinions about how the War Memorial was specifically funded. On the one hand, Kim (2007) explains that the total fee, ₩ 124,600,000,000 (about

$110,000,000), was covered by the Ministry of National Defense117. On the other hand, in response to an American critique of the memorial, the Institute for the War Memorial

(IWM) stated in The Dong-A (June 16, 1993) that part of the money came from individual donors, primarily military officers, as well as from the Ministry of National

Defense. The IWM states, “we collected the construction fee out of officials’ salaries on a voluntary basis, the amount depending on their rank.” Meanwhile, there is a discrepancy in the total money spent. Pahn (1992) states in the newspaper The Dong-A (June 25,

1992) that a “total of ₩ 62,200,000,000 has been invested for the War Memorial”

(emphasis mine), but he does not clarify who invested the money or what is meant by

‘total.’ Is it ‘the total construction fee’ or ‘the total construction fee at 65% completion of the construction’ when Pahn was reporting? In the final analysis, we can only guess that the National Defense budget must have been primarily used to fund the construction of the memorial, and those private donations might have contributed a little more. However, questions about funding still remain, like whether the funding was supported by both government and individual donors, how much each side contributed, and what the total amount was that was used for the construction. As for funding the Peace Clock Tower, I was unfortunately unable to find any information.

Although I define public art in a more flexible way by not requiring that all three

117 A critique of the memorial written by an American professor appeared in a South Korean newspaper (The Dong-A, June 16, 1993). One of the criticisms was about funding. The IWM’s states that the money came both from individual donors and government sources, which may be true, but the donations cannot have been enough to cover the astronomical cost of construction. 240

aforementioned elements are present, so that I accept the War Memorial and the Peace

Clock Tower as public art, they do technically violate the legal definition public art. One reason is that despite the Percent-for-Art legislation providing the groundwork for public art, the total expenditures and the funding process are both unclear, which seems to violate the principles of the public art system. The other is, although the total amount of money spent is unclear, a tremendous construction fee must have been invested in the project, and the government was clearly involved in funding it. Given that the memorial was built before the Percent-for-Art was revised, the only donors that were eligible to support public art were private donors. In this sense, the government must have intervened in the funding. It is therefore necessary to examine specific reasons why governments are involved in the construction of public art, even though they are potentially incurring risk by violating their own legislative systems. Before articulating these reasons, though, in the next section I explore more ways in which the War

Memorial got involved in the political sphere.

5.3.2.2.3.1.3 Other Political Aspects

Several factors about the building of the War Memorial offer clues of why the project might have been related to politics. Most of all, the Korean name118 전쟁기념관

[Junjaeng Kinyumkwan] (tr. War Memorial) implies that it had a special political purpose for being built. The name War Memorial [전쟁기념관] was brought up only at a

118 The Institute for the War Memorial (IWM) held an open competition asking its members to select a name for the memorial (Kim, 2007, p. 202). In the meeting, fourteen out of fifty-five members voted for 호국기념관 [Tribute to the Fallen Patriots] and seven chose 군사박물관 [Military Museum]. Interestingly, nobody voted for 전쟁기념관 [War Memorial]. 241

committee meeting119 and the name was finalized although it did not gain a majority vote.

Numerous people (Shim, 1994; Moon, 1995; Kim, 1998) have suggested changing this

Korean name on the grounds that it is an inappropriate choice. In Korean, ‘전쟁’

[Junjaeng] means The War, and ‘기념’ [Kinyum] means a certain activity usually used for remembering or celebrating something positive. Thus, “Junjaeng Kinyum” refers to

‘Celebrating War.’ However, despite heated debates, the name has not been changed to date. This alludes to the possibility that the selected name might not be a mistake. It may mean that it has an important message to inform or educate people about in relation to the monument’s focus.

The hidden message embedded in the name becomes clearer if the policy120 for the display is considered. The policy can be encapsulated to mean 1) the responsibility of war, 2) justification of the war, and 3) celebrating the triumph of the Korean War (Kim,

2007). In the case of the Australian War Memorial, Charles Bean formulated a basic policy for the display: “not to celebrate war and show off victory and sustain hatred”

(Kim, 2007, p. 206). This policy is based on the belief that the counter emphasis on these elements could enable a country to justify war as an act of self-defense.

Rather than interpreting the purpose of the War Memorial as justifying the war,

119 The meeting was comprised of thirteen journalists, six scholars, and some government officials. Although the name was mentioned, it was at first dismissed because it only got six votes, while the name Military Museum got thirteen votes. Given that the construction committee’s name was The Institute for the War Memorial from the outset, this institution must have had a preference for this name from the beginning, and it is unlikely that they reflected on any of the other names that were suggested. 120 As stated in the IWM guidebook, the principle for the display in the Korean War Memorial was to “have people recognize that the Korean War was the biggest national crisis that ever happened in Korea and that the unfinished war should be finished; the war was launched by North Korean Kim, Ilsung and we [South Koreans] did nothing but defend ourselves; South Korean soldiers almost defeated North Koreans and almost achieved national unification. Thus, we [South Koreans] deserve to feel triumphant, but at the same time we have to increase our military power. In addition, we have to appreciate the UN for its remarkable contribution to the South Korean army” ([IWM], cited in Kim, 2007, p. 206). 242

the Memorial could be interpreted as aiming to have South Koreans recognize the dangers of war and the necessity of peace. However, this purpose does not appear to fit perfectly. For example, at the time the War Memorial was built there was a National

Security Exhibition Center (NSEC)121 4 km away from the War Memorial. Since it was unnecessary to have two big exhibitions about the war, requests to merge the two institutions were made in public, but the executives on both sides never made an effort to negotiate or discuss this issue (Park, 1993). At the end, it was decided that the exhibition center should move to the southern end of South Korea. It is believed that the two institutions were not able to negotiate because the executives in charge were so different from each other. Generals and officials under the Ministry of National Defense constituted the War Memorial board, while soldiers who had participated in the War, governed by the United Nations, operated the NSEC.

In addition to the name issue, other factors to consider include the beginning date of the construction, term of work, the size of the land, location, the rate of the population passing by the memorial, and funding. These myriad factors reinforce the idea that culture cannot be dissociated from the politics of power. The priority when construction was initiated seemed to be efficiency and effectiveness, to attract people as soon as possible during the Roh’s presidency, and not to lament – or even celebrate – the War. For example, the various committees considered which location would allow construction to begin as soon as possible, whether the monument could be built as big as possible, how to make it convenient for transportation, and how to ensure a large population of passersby

121 The exhibition center had over two thousand weapons that were actually used in the Korean War. 243

around the monument 122(HWMC, 1997, cited in Kim, 2007, p. 201). As a result, the

IWM decided on February 21, 1989 to remove the building of the Headquarters of the

Army and to build the War Memorial in its place. Shortly after the IWM was founded on

September 1, 1988 to initiate the plan, a groundbreaking ceremony was held on

September 28, 1990, and four years later, on June 10, 1994, the opening ceremony took place123. This large investment in the process implies that the project was supported by

President Roh’s government, and despite the astronomical money spent on it, the government might have thought that it deserved to be built.

Up until this point, I have described the political and technical factors that Roh’s government considered in the construction of the War Memorial. Given the naming and the technical considerations for the construction, the War Memorial has an underlying political motive that was scarcely related to the goals of inciting the nation’s people to lament the lives lost in the war or to recognize the horror of war and the necessity of peace. This seems to continue in the present, so that the Korean War veterans would not be able to find their names on the Wall. Even one of the facilities of the War Memorial, the wedding hall, gives discounts to staff members who get married, but it does not give any benefits to the families of the Korean War veterans. Therefore, it is important to consider what motivations were behind the creation of the War Memorial.

5.3.2.2.3.2 Discourses Associated with Socio-Political Culture

In this sub-section, I discuss the relationship between culture and politics through an assessment of Sanghoon Lee’s speech at the inaugural meeting of the War Memorial

122 According to Kim (2007), one of the factors written in the HWMC concerned whether the location has to do with War or not. However, according to Kim, despite the formal statement historicity was ignored. 123 The Peace Clock Tower was built eight years later, in 2002. 244

Construction Supporters Association on July 5, 1989, and of Mudori’s introduction to visitors on the current War Memorial website. Lee was the minister of National Defense from 1988-1990, and Mudori, the mascot of the War Memorial, introduces the memorial to visitors. This sub-section is expected to help clarify how a discourse embedded in everyday life is appropriated for the political purpose of nation building, and how the discourse functions in constructing the idea of multiculturalism in the post-colonial South

Korean context.

5.3.2.2.3.2.1 Lee’s Speech

The War Memorial project seems to be primarily motivated by the sense of crisis felt by the ruling party, and was used to bolster the ruling party’s authority. In this section,

I use Critical Discourse Analysis to analyze Sanghoon Lee’s speech on the War Memorial, to assess the political motives behind building the project. Here is the most relevant excerpt:

Our society has recently been worried that some leftist groups involved in

subversive agitation are active. Given this environment, we cannot choose but to

honor the fallen and enhance national security by constructing the War Memorial.

I believe that this project will help the younger generation promote its national

consciousness, as well as help the next generation have a sanctuary of national

security. (at the War Memorial Construction Supporters Association [WMCSA] in

1989) (Korean War Commemoration Project Plan [KWCPP], 1988, cited in Kim,

2007, p. 199)

Designed to agitate a vulnerable country, Lee’s speech was most likely intended to establish “some leftist groups” as the other in contrast to the ruling party, by 245

selectively hiding or emphasizing certain ideas. This strategy prompts listeners and readers to neglect to consider the other side124. For example, in his speech, Lee mentioned, ‘our society has recently been worried that some leftist groups involved in subversive agitation are active.’ Here, he did not address who has been worried, or how the alleged agitation correlates to the construction of the War Memorial. More importantly, his speech does not cover how the government’s actions had precipitated division between South Korean people or how the government had suppressed people who held different perspectives. Based on the mechanism of difference, in reading Lee’s opening sentence, readers are led to imagine ‘some leftist groups’ as being positioned on the opposite side from the government. Emphasizing that ‘some leftist groups’ cause worry, i.e., emphasizing that the other side is wrong, directs readers’ attention and sympathy for the government, and implies that the government’s actions are right and just.

This strategy of focusing on the negative aspects of ‘some leftist groups’ amounts to hiding any negative actions that the government has taken. All in all, Lee was able to relegate the other to the margin and opposite side, by delicately disrupting the reader’s attention: emphasizing or hiding a certain part of the story in accordance with the macro- semantic meaning that the dominant group wants to address.

Lee instils in readers an idea about who the dominant knowledge builders are, and how strong they are in coping with the crisis. This enables the dominant knowledge builders to reinforce their position. In general, both speakers’ and audiences’ positions affect their viewpoints on something, and both influence their respective main

124 Social power relations are not only revealed by virtue of the speech act, but also by concealment (Dijk, 1993, p. 250). 246

philosophies to undergird their arguments. In this sense, meaning creation depends on the position(s) and role(s) of the participants (both speaker/writer and audience), which give the topic its significance, and more importantly determine the direction of the speech. Lee addresses the necessity of the War Memorial’s construction based on his own role as a member of the committee that initiated the construction of the memorial. In addition,

Lee’s position as the Minister of National Defense, making him institutionally involved in government matters, entitles him to endorse the construction of the monument as a nationally crucial project. Similarly, his other social identities, such as male or former general, will also influence the structures and strategies of what he addresses. These social identities that he engages in should be understood as constructing the identity and goals of the dominant political knowledge builder group at that time.

Lee must have had a specific and potential audience in mind before giving his speech. Considering these audiences is one of the crucial factors that shape the

“effectiveness and ‘authority’ of one’s speech acts,” that is, the effect of the speech lies in how the speech is associated with the audience’s particular frame of mind. For example, in one way, Lee’s speech can be viewed as a direct assertion about the necessity of constructing the War Memorial, but in another way, it can be viewed as an indirect accusation against the leftist groups. In particular, Lee appears to attack ‘some leftist groups’ and ‘the younger generation,’ as well as latently attacking detractors in ‘our society.’ As a Minister of National Defense, his claim to ascribe the agitation of ‘our society’ to leftist groups may be in some sense appropriated by his supporters, who place sociopolitical value on national security. A problem can occur, however, when his speech acts beyond the space where he first makes his statement. Unlike the members of the War 247

Memorial institute who agreed to the construction of the monument, anonymous people outside the institute may be exposed to Lee’s biased information about the left. Since the speech and the information about the left are derived from the dominant power group, the information can easily spread in public. Othering is established by the function of the speech act, in which the position of the audience is a crucial element. This implies that

Lee’s participatory audience becomes one of the most important elements of the rhetorical situation, as they hold the power to create a socially acceptable belief, or myth.

Lee justifies his speech by incorporating socially accepted values into it.

Specifically, he emphasizes and produces discourse about “peace and love,” both of which typically include sociopolitical implications. Lee has the power not only to define and redefine the topics of debate, but also to define the situation. That is, the point is no longer whether or not the War Memorial can function as a place for people to lament the fallen, who should be defined as the fallen in the War, to what extent the fallen should be viewed after the war, or what objects to use to lament them with. Rather, the point is whether Lee’s charge against the leftists is legitimate in the first place. Lee justifies his attack against the leftists by extending his argument to include the values that South

Korean people regard as being the most important, particularly national security. By generalizing the topic of his speech even beyond the necessity of the War Memorial, Lee simultaneously defines his opponents as enemies of South Korea and of the country’s fundamental values, such as peace and love. Likewise, by redefining his topic, he no longer merely defends national security, but attacks fundamentally undemocratic implications, and manipulates his secondary audience −the public at large− into believing that leftists are merely detractors, and that they are attacking South Korean values. That is, 248

Lee’s address is more than a statement that supports those who are involved in the construction and management of the War Memorial. Addressing the political values that are thought of as social norms, and that undergird his position, persuades the public to support his anti-leftist views. The topics he appropriates for his own interest can be justified within the framework of dominant ideologies of ‘peace and love,’ and at the same time, the logic of his opponents can be criticized, according to similar socially agreed-upon values – for instance, Lee’s opponents can be regarded as a group not wanting to have peace and love.

In sum, Sanghoon Lee, the former Defense Minister of South Korea, used his political speech to establish local meaning and coherence corresponding to the macro- meaning that the leftist groups agitate the nation. This argument is supported by Dijk’ principles for political speech, which include: 1) hiding or emphasizing certain parts of texts, 2) reflecting the speaker’s sociopolitical position, 3) considering the speaker’s potential participants who may be unfamiliar with the discourse, and 4) incorporating normal values into speech topics. The power involved in top-down discourse does not necessarily reflect the positive aspects of South Korean people’s lives. Rather, I view discourse as dividing people: listeners/readers are destined to be divided and are imposed with a certain form of nationalism. In this sense, I argue Lee’s discourse provoked an outside war.

5.3.2.2.3.2.2 Mudori’s Greeting

The inquiry into the effects of Mudori’s discourse should begin with identifying who he is. Below is an excerpt from Mudori’s introduction to visitors on the current War

Memorial website. 249

My name is Mudori: I was born in The War Memorial of Korea, the home of

Peace, with the lives of many heroes who fought to protect peace and the hearts of every individual who hopes for peace. The hearts of those that wanted to protect the Nation became the Helmet and the hearts of those that loved peace became the

Laurel Leaves. I do not have a particular shape like other things, but I dwell inside the hearts of people all over the world, including you! I can be the largest thing or even the smallest thing in this world. My goal is to concern myself with everything done in the names of peace and love. If you love me, then we can work together for a stronger future!

Mudori's Dream: Because I was born in the hearts of people who wish for peace, I will fight until the entire universe is happy. Even though the situation is tough and scary, I will not give up. Because if I give up, then others will think that they can do the same.

The world Mudori dwells in: Mudori remains within the hearts and minds of people (post, present, and future) all over the world. Korea, with 5,000 years of history, with stood many severe foreign threats. Many lives have been and continue to be sacrificed to protect our country, our culture, and most importantly, our people. Many heroes questioned whether there could someday be a time when the youth of Korea could live peacefully in a world without war. These heroes that protected Korea now gather hands and pray for peace. Their hope is now the light that brightens The War Memorial of Korea. Today, a strange helmet of a nameless hero turns into Mudori, guardian of peace at the corner of The War memorial of

Korea. Mudori was born within the hearts of those who wished to live in a world 250

without war. However, peace does not come easily and the birth of Mudori is a

message for us that we must not forget: That without power to protect there is no

peace at all. That power is within your heart. (“War Memorial Story”)

To begin with, we would expect the environment where Mudori was born and grew up to help clarify his identity. However, his narrative presents contradictions in relation to his hometown: Mudori was born in both “the hearts of people” and “The War

Memorial of Korea.” Accordingly, it is unclear whether he is a sort of invisible abstract thing or a visible, substantial being. However, I infer that he appears closer to an invisible thing, given that he “[does] not have a particular shape like other things, but [he] dwell[s] inside the hearts of people.” Meanwhile, his environment also forms his character. He says that he was born both “in the home of peace,” and “with the lives of many heroes who fought.” From these excerpts, I infer that perhaps he was born in/with war or the memory of war, even during peacetime. He must be living in/with a contradictory circumstance, because the war might not happen in “the home of peace.” Overall, I infer that Mudori must live within the sphere or idea of the imagined world, one which relates to the contradictory coexistence of peace and war.

Although these inferences are not direct enough to explain who Mudori is, one thing is for sure – that he neither represents peace itself, nor is he a being living in peace; rather, he is a ‘protector.’ Despite being “born in…the home of peace,” he does not live in peace, given that he has to fight for peace “until the entire universe is happy.” Therefore, he must be viewed as a protector of justice as seen in, existing alongside “the lives of many heroes who fought to protect peace.” But if he seeks peace in the name of justice, what counts as justice here? What or who it is that Mudori wants to protect? 251

The question about what or who Mudori wants to protect is open to speculation. It could be the South Korean people, or just history, or peace for South Korea’s future, or a business concern, or anything else that Mudori wants to protect. Given what Mudori has told us, a likely though abstract answer could be “peace,” given that his goal “is to concern [himself] with everything done in the names of peace and love.” However,

Mudori also seems to justify “war,” as seen in his mediator’s assertion that “[w]ithout power to protect, there is no peace at all.” It’s as if Mudori were saying, ‘you have to be strong enough to keep strong’ or ‘you need to have confidence in your ability to fight or confront others, in order to protect yourselves.’ Such an interpretation sounds as though

Mudori is defending war, which may cause people to overlook the atrocities of war. In this sub-section, thus, I argue that Mudori precipitates war with some strategies by which he encourages people to be conflicted. Understanding these strategies likewise helps clarify the targets, motives, and goals of Mudori’s discourse.

Mudori creates an imaginary war by using the strategies of “politeness” and

“political closeness.” To begin with, Mudori places his advocates within his realm and endows them with as much power as he has, by projecting himself as being equal to or lower than the visitors to the website. The strategy of politeness is revealed by the formal mode of address in “All of you [여러분],” whereas political closeness may be marked by

“I dwell inside the hearts of people...including you!” and “If you love me, then we can work together for a stronger future!” “All of you” refers to those who are interested in the

War Memorial and have access to the website to read the online text. The social power relations between Mudori and visitors to the website seem to be equal, and he even makes himself lower than the readers: “I can be the largest thing or even the smallest thing in 252

this world (if you want).” Since Mudori’s existence and size must be determined by the commitment of those who own him, Mudori seems not to have any autonomous right to make a decision about his own size. Mudori’s politeness and friendliness enable him to appeal to people to be his friend, while still allowing them to exercise ownership to determine what Mudori looks like.

Similarly, Mudori uses “political closeness” to unite his supporters and turn ordinary discourse into commentary on significant social issues, again in an effort to enhance the speaker’s position and discredit the opposition. By projecting a polite and friendly personality, Mudori wants people, in particular those who are on his side, to be unified, so that they are comfortable with the topic that he wants to address. Furthermore, he wants them to regard the topic as an important sociopolitical issue. In this sense,

Mudori’s statement ultimately functions as political, in that he encourages people to pursue the same goal as he does: “If you love me, then we can work together for a stronger future!” More importantly, even though Mudori’s attitude suggests equality or even deference, in fact he owns the discourse, giving him the power to unify his readers and ensure their agreement with his political positions.

So who exactly is on Mudori’s side? Mudori states: “I was born in The War

Memorial of Korea, the home of peace, with the lives of many heroes who fought to protect peace and the hearts of every individual who hopes for peace.” “The hearts of those that wanted to protect the Nation became the Helmet and the hearts of those that loved peace became the Laurel Leaves.” As can be seen, the “heroes who fought to protect peace” are among those who Mudori implies are on his side. Who he has in mind when he refers to the ‘heroes’ becomes clearer in the following sentences: 253

Many heroes questioned whether there could someday be a time when the youth

of Korea could live peacefully in a world without war. These heroes that protected

Korea now gather hands and pray for peace. Their hope is now the light that

brightens The War Memorial of Korea. Today, a strange helmet of a nameless

hero turns into Mudori, guardian of peace at the corner of The War Memorial of

Korea. Mudori was born within the hearts of those who wished to live in a world

without war. (“War Memorial Story”)

As this passage reveals, the “heroes” turn out to be people recruited by the government.

Since the heroes lived in the past given the past tense used to refer to their achievements, and since they are thought of as wearing helmets when protecting the country, they might either be soldiers in the Korean War or combat police. Either way, they must achieve glory and rise to the top, given that the helmet is ornamented with “laurel leaves.”

Meanwhile, the heroes are not limited to those who lived in the past, as Mudori also claims to be born in “the hearts of every individual who hopes for peace.” To be heroes, people should hope for peace. Thus, those who are on Mudori’s side include soldiers who fought against North Korea or any other countries, as well as those who hope for peace at the present time.

However, while it is common sense that all people hope for peace, Mudori’s discourse seeks to divide people into two groups: those who hope for peace vs. those who do not. Mudori’s viewpoint is questionable as to who the ‘heroes’ are and whom he wants to engage. Since nobody wants war and humans tend to prefer peace, the fact that Mudori specifically mentions “those who wanted to protect the nation” and “those that loved peace” reminds people that there has been somebody who was more eager to protect the 254

nation than others, and that there has been somebody who did not want to protect the nation. Even as Mudori is positioning himself to represent all people, he divides people and establishes his opponents. In other words, the companionship that I traced above was only able to be established by othering. This othering process also determines who

Mudori wants to defend. Given that Mudori divides people living at the current time into two groups, he does not seem to defend all people, and given that the government from birth supports him, he represents the viewpoint of the government. Thus, he advocates for the group of people whose views are in line with the viewpoint of the government, and accordingly, the defense Mudori mentions must be deeply linked with the defense of the country, not of its people. More importantly, this reveals the purpose of the War

Memorial to be discrediting the opposition.

I have argued that Mudori precipitates internal war in post-colonial South Korea by dividing people into its proponents versus its opponents. The ideology of war that is constructed by language, however, is difficult to perceive—in this case, because Mudori’s speech effectively incorporates the ideology of peace and love. On the surface, Mudori and his mediator seem only to introduce Mudori, as signaled by section titles like “My name is Mudori” and “Mudori’s Dream.” However, their real topic can be defined in various ways. For example, the narrative introduces the newly-opened War Memorial which traces South Korea’s history of having been invaded a lot, and implies that South

Koreans should remember those who sacrificed their lives for the development of their country. At the same time, Mudori’s explicitly stated topic is “peace and love,” which as I said is usually associated with sociopolitical implications. Since the value of peace and love is regarded as more precious than the values that those who are on the liberal side 255

advocate in post-colonial South Korea, such as non-discrimination or equality, Mudori justifies his position or ideology in people’s minds by emphasizing the value of peace and love, which nobody questions.

All in all, Mudori appears to be a protector of peace in an imaginary space where war and peace coexist. His speech reminds me of nationalism that encourages a nation to imagine a community, and to make a strong bond with one another in the imaginary war environment. In particular, the strategies of politeness and political closeness encourage the nation’s people to imagine a division between self/the nation and other/non-nation, and to build companionship centered on the nation, which serves to unify the people and discredit the other. It is debatable who is on the “self” and who is on the “other” side, though, since the position is determined by Mudori’s self-made speech.

Through Mudori’s message, the War Memorial is turned into a significant sociopolitical matter, and the shift to the political is realized by the political position of the government that endorsed building the memorial in the first place. Employing van

Dijk’s (1993) principle, the introduction of Mudori turns out to be a political act, and much more than a narrative on the website. The ‘communicative act’ of politeness and friendliness turned out to be political tactics for othering and unification. Given that the narrative is intended to persuade people to accept the government’s viewpoint on who would be good for the country, and on who would be harmful to the country, his narrative can also be viewed as a matter of ethics. In sum, Mudori’s speech clearly demonstrates that the idea of South Korean culture has been used as a medium by which nationalists/politicians exert their regime’s power, and whose form is associated with nationalism. Since these discourses did not allow people to exert their power or right to 256

choose the art works, the discourses could be criticized as being oppressive tools.

In this subsection, I have examined the meaning of the War Memorial, focusing on the subjects who built it and their political purposes. Despite the fact that Lee’s and

Mudori’s opinions were voiced at different times, their similarity in executing nationalism using a divide-and-rule strategy is evident in both texts. It was politicians and nationalists who used nationalism, not only in order to establish a nation, but also to sustain their power and the resulting social system in the post-colonial context. When the

War Memorial opened, South Korea had been in chaos domestically as a result of political struggles, such as the ideological conflicts between the liberal and conservative parties. In this context, the other had to be established on both sides and pushed to the margins, as the regime exercised its power over the people; otherwise, it would be impossible to justify the government’s ideology and to unify people. For example,

President Roh’s (r. 1988-1993) politics could not help but regard the protesters’ demonstrations as making the nation agitated and insecure, and as being associated with

North Korea’s communism. Othering, or establishing the dominant hegemony about a unified nationhood associated with ethnicity, is formalized as a tool for nation building, and represents its ideology through the national cultural representation of the War

Memorial. The War Memorial, in this sense, was a medium through which the Roh government pushes people toward nationalism. Government-centered nation building was likewise constructed through Lee’s and Mudori’s texts. These findings confirm the primary assumption of CDA: that power is exercised through discourse as control and coercion.

257

5.3.3 The Meaning of the War Memorial

Earlier in this chapter, I explored the denotative meaning of the War Memorial in

‘Strategy of Time(lessness).’ Ideological signs that are embedded in the monument were likewise explored in ‘The War Memorial and War’ and ‘Socio-Political Meaning of the

War Memorial.’ In particular, this last section focused on the way that social texts outside the War Memorial are imbued with the ideological theme of war. This section’s purpose is to articulate the meaning of the War Memorial.

The surface meaning of the War Memorial can be encapsulated as “the memory of the Korean War.” That is, the war memorial denotes “the memorial of the war” or “the memory of the war in the past.” It also represents the contemporary Korean situation: divided into North and South. In short, it reminds people in the present of the war in the past. I argue that the ideological theme infiltrated into the memorial’s visual texts is

“War.” The War includes conflict or dominance based on conflict. Specifically, the term includes unification based on the war, domination of the war, dominance over the people, hierarchy, and the authority of society. The connotative meaning of the War Memorial, however, is “South Koreanness,” which functions to regulate people. The inquiry into the hidden meaning of the War Memorial derives from its denotative meaning.

Considering why a memorial of the war should be constructed, I unearthed that the connotative meaning of this monument has a political purpose. As mentioned earlier, when the Roh government built the memorial, he needed to unify people as well as to justify his political regime, by employing the divide and rule policy and by creating the other. That is encapsulated as South Koreanness. The discussion so far is formulized below. 258

Denotative Meaning ( The memorial of the war ) + Ideological Theme ( War: unification based on war; domination of war; dominance over the people; hierarchy; authority of society; conflict ) ㅡㅡㅡㅡㅡㅡㅡㅡㅡㅡㅡㅡㅡㅡㅡㅡㅡㅡㅡㅡㅡㅡㅡㅡㅡㅡㅡㅡㅡㅡ = Connotative Meaning (South Koreanness) Ideological Sign (South Koreanness/Ethnic-Nationalism) Table 11. The Meaning of the War Memorial

The attempts to demonstrate the connotative meaning of the War Memorial ultimately demonstrate that the War Memorial becomes an ideological sign, one that alerts the nation’s people to protect themselves or that makes them proud of themselves as a nation.

It remains to be shown, though, how the outside war is associated with ethnicity: how the relationship between the war and ethnicity has been developed throughout history through the War Memorial, and how the relationship creates South Korea’s epistemological viewpoint of South Koreanness.

5.4 Ethnic Identity Formation and the War Memorial throughout History

In this section, attention is paid to the way in which the War Memorial mediates the relationship between people and the idea of ethnicity throughout history. Considering that cultural identification in a certain space is (in)directly influenced by the dominant discourses in a given temporal environment, this section is about exploring how the dominant discourse in relation to ethnicity has been (re)produced, changed, or transformed in different time spheres. In other words, it evaluates the perspectives on ethnicity that the dominant politicians/nationalists have proposed and that the majority of

South Koreans have agreed with throughout time, and why the dominant group(s) had to

259

construct the discourse. In particular, I’m interested here in how the War Memorial and the Peace Clock Tower develop the idea of South Korean ethnicity. Since these public arts were created in 1994 and 2002 respectively, exploring each work is expected to enable readers to identify how cultural identity construction using ethnicity has been developed throughout Korean history.

5.4.1 The Public Art Scape

Public artworks are significant because they mediate the discourse of who South

Koreans are, an ongoing dialogic process. Mundane objects reflect sociopolitical relations by which people are influenced and, in turn, which people influence in forming their identities. To be specific, human societies are supported by a material infrastructure, and

“[t]hings emerge out of and mediate social relationships” (Edensor, 2002, p. 103). Dant

(1999) states, “The things that we relate to have embodied within them the social relations that gave rise to them through their design, the work of producing them, their prior use, the intention to communicate through them, and their place within an existing cultural system of objects” (p. 2). The two artworks, which are material forms that people can encounter in their daily lives, inform South Koreans of the social relations within which they are positioned. For example, the War Memorial recounts the political turmoil that the nation state had to confront. As mentioned above, conflicts between liberal and conservative political groups had disrupted South Korea considerably. On the liberal side, primarily constituted of college students and labor unions, pro-democracy movements were desperately needed for freedom against autocratic leaderships and for human rights against economic development at the cost of civil rights. In contrast, on the Right, primarily constituted of the ruling politicians, strong, authoritative rule and effective 260

economic development were needed for national security during the political crisis.

Furthermore, the motivation to build the War Memorial emerged out of the necessity to secure the legitimacy of Roh’s military-oriented government (Kim, 2007). The War

Memorial, which was built during Roh’s administration, is thought to have emerged out of and mediated these social relationships. The sociopolitical relations are dynamic; thus, the War Memorial will reflect and influence the changed political landscape. In this sense, the attempt to explore the discourse about ethnicity embedded in the War Memorial throughout history is an attempt to identify the ethnicity in which dynamic political power relations are involved, and about which a majority of people agree.

Due to a socially agreed upon arrangement imposed on a mundane object, people accept the object’s embedded meaning without reflexive assessment (Edensor, 2002).

People are supposed to make a contract with others about the value of the War Memorial, what it symbolizes, how it should be used, who should claim ownership of it, and why. In this way, the familiar objects become part of “the way things are, discreetly contributing to forms of shared solidarity” (Edensor, 2002, p. 104).

5.4.2 (Re)production of Ethnicity in The War Memorial and The Peace Clock Tower

Objects are always non-neutral and political. Since objects emerge out of social agreement and relations and they usually reflect the dominant group’s ideology, the meaning embedded in them cannot be neutral. Also, their characteristic of familiarity deprives people of critical thinking and leads their belief system in a certain direction; thus objects are always political. The War Memorial is no exception. The object directs people about who they are now, which direction they were oriented in the past, and where they are headed in the future. In this section, I discuss the way that a familiar object, the 261

War Memorial, becomes a crucial object through which the idea of South Korean ethnic culture has been constructed throughout history. Attention will be given to the research variable, ethnicity, focusing on how the viewpoint on ethnicity has been developed in the temporal realm and what kinds of socio-political factors have influenced this viewpoint.

In different temporal realms, the space became a site where different discourses conflict, as different parties ruled the country with different political philosophies. For example, President Taewoo Roh (r. 1988-1993), whose background was in line with the previous two military-oriented presidents, followed their lead by taking an anti-North

Korea stance, while President Daejung Kim (r. 1998-2003), who was a pro-democracy leader and against the autocratic state, considered North Korea a coworker with whom to cooperate for ethnic prosperity. In this sense, the War Memorial during President Roh’s tenure and the Peace Clock Tower during President Kim’s could represent South Korea’s political struggles in relation to the idea of ethnicity. The War Memorial and the Peace

Clock Tower emerged out of these sociopolitical relationships, and they represent the viewpoints of those who were involved in the political and social relations to ethnicity.

In some way, however, the War Memorial could not radically change the representations in itself, despite interventions of both parties using the politics of ethnicity. Edensor (2002) depicts the changes in national culture with the metaphor of shopping baskets, in which various kinds of “necessities” can be different than usual. He states:

Shopping for things is most frequently a familiar, mundane activity, necessary for

the reproduction of self and household, as well as a means of experiencing

pleasure, marking status, and expressing identity. In most parts of the world, the 262

world of commodities is becoming increasingly diverse. Nevertheless, the most

commonly purchased items are the ‘necessities’ bought during the weekly or daily

shop. Decisions to buy these items are rarely the subject of great reflection or

planning but are enabled by the consistent act of purchase over time, so that

locating them on shop or supermarket shelves is second nature. (Edensor, 2002, p.

110)

The War Memorial, as a ‘mundane’ object, produces self and nationhood; it particularly functions as a ‘necessity through which people can bond, or without which people cannot live. Just as people buy necessities consistently over time without consideration, so too do they consume the necessity of the War Memorial without any deliberate reflection.

More importantly, Edensor describes how although the necessities can be different than usual at certain times, “they tend to be knowable, being bought from familiar retail outlets” (p. 110). With regard to this study, although the ruling parties made an effort to divide and rule South Korea with the idea of ethnicity, the common ground on which they stand, and the common tools by which both parties compete for nationalism, were predicated on the shared idea of ethnicity in South Korea. For example, The Statue of

Brothers (1994), released on the same day as the War Memorial, illustrated the real story of two brothers who were destined to fight against each other for their countries, South and North Korea (Lee, 2012). This indicates that the then-commonly shared notion of a singular ethnicity in South Korea could not be ignored, even though numerous signifiers inside the War Memorial successfully exert the politics of ethnic125 division by depicting

North Koreans as the enemy.

125 By “politics of ethnicity” I refer to dividing the nation with the idea of ethnicity. 263

Alternately, from the political perspective, it can be argued that Roh’s (r. 1988-

1993) government was able to argue its political ideology by utilizing the commonly accepted notion of a blood-based notion of ethnicity. His administration’s policy in terms of ethnicity can be interpreted in two ways. Most of all, it can be viewed as breaking down the idea of blood-based community by designating the North Koreans as the enemy.

By pushing the North Koreans to the position of ‘the other,’ the enemy, Roh’s government discontinued the indigenous people’s ongoing belief that ‘blood is thicker than water.’ At the time, however, when Roh’s government discontinued historical

Koreanness, it needed a common ground on which it could establish its new ideology.

This common ground was the long-lasting belief in blood-based ethnic camaraderie in

Korea. That is to say, although Roh’s government was opposed to the North Korean regime, it does not mean that the government eradicated the blood-based notion of ethnicity. In fact, Roh’s government appears to have considered North Korea –as well as the liberal groups in South Korea –as challenging the same view of ethnicity that it had to disrupt to create the Other. In terms of the nation’s relationship to history, this discussion about what it means to be a South Korean nation can be evaluated alongside modernism as well as ethno-symbolism.

Just as Roh’s government exerted its authority to use history for its own political purposes, so too did Kim’s (r. 1998-2003) government attempt to discontinue/reinvent history. In some sense, Kim’s government policy can also be viewed as breaking with the historical viewpoint on ethnicity. Differentiating its regime from that of Roh’s government, Kim’s government did not try to designate North Koreans as the enemy any longer, but rather as coworkers. In this sense, Kim’s government discontinued the 264

ongoing belief, and the ongoing animosity toward North Koreans. Accordingly, the foundation on which President Roh could establish his regime, i.e., a blood-based notion of ethnicity, was also dismissed. The emphasis on the blood-based notion of ethnicity would not effectively indoctrinate the people any more, given the domestic and global environments. President Kim must have thought that this emphasis could be detrimental to the national image in terms of morality or economics at the global level. In particular, given that Kim’s government was burdened by having to resolve the bailout by the

International Monetary Fund, the South Korean national image must have been one of the most important factors to determine whether the country could induce foreign investment to overcome the national economic crisis. The emphasis on a blood-based singular ethnicity also did not effectively gain popular support for Kim’s government’s political foundation at the domestic level, in that the majority of national emotion persisted in viewing the North Koreans as sort of traitors to the realm of a singular ethnicity.

However, although President Kim’s government made it a priority to differentiate his regime from that of President Roh and discarded the policies of President Roh’s government, his efforts were not necessarily successful in severing ties with the traditionally accepted ethnicity. For example, the image of North Korea as a “coworker” was visually and symbolically initiated and reinforced with the symbolic image of

Juyoung Jung126 traveling across the 38th latitude, having driven a herd of cattle as a gift for the North Koreans. Furthermore, his interview about visiting his hometown, which he

126 Juyoung Chung (1915-2001) was the founder of the Hyundai Groups. He is considered to be an entrepreneur and businessman who led the post-war reconstruction and industrialization in South Korea. In particular, he took part in South Korea’s transportation infrastructure, such as the Gyeongbu Expressway in 1970, the world’s largest shipyard in Ulsan, and the Kori Nuclear Power Plant. Regarding his personal life, Chung was born in Kangwon province, which is currently in North Korea, and he often announced that his last contribution would be a business relevant to North Koreans. 265

had not done for over fifty years, was enough to leave a strong impression on South

Koreans in terms of their ethnic origin. In this sense, Kim’s government exploited history.

Overall, the content and scope of President Kim’s viewpoint on ethnicity was determined without losing its legitimacy against the military-oriented government, but also without breaking down the traditional viewpoint on ethnicity, and carefully considered the global culture industry. By exploiting the past, the government was yet again able to justify its regime. The perspective of Kim’s administration on what it means to be South Korean in relation to history is grounded in modernism as well as ethno-symbolism.

Despite their positions at opposite poles, Roh’s and Kim’s similarity in sustaining the idea of a singular ethnicity is represented by the War Memorial. From the political/cultural viewpoint, the War Memorial and the Peace Clock Tower were nationalists’/politicians’ attempts to unify people and sustain their positionality by virtue of peoples’ commonsensical notion of “South Korean singular ethnicity.”

Just as when manufacturers feel the need to change the design of the traditional goods in the market, they deliberately avoid alienating consumers who have been familiar with the traditional form for a long time, so too does the War Memorial have to balance the traditional and the reinvented idea of ethnicity. Otherwise, if the familiar imagery of ethnicity in the War Memorial were to disappear, it would create anxiety. The War

Memorial, as part of the fabric of daily life, must have retained a certain form indicating ethnicity and the ethnic group’s grief, although the memorial has had to be re-branded. In this sense, the War Memorial gives “a consistency to the material world” which is familiar to communities. Paradoxically, in some way, it proves the fact that everyday life centered on the idea of ethnicity is (re)produced. 266

In this section I have explored various public discourses, focusing on the way in which the power and authority of the governments throughout history have intervened in the construction of the idea of South Korean ethnic culture through top-down grand narratives. The public discourses of the War Memorial and the Peace Clock Tower serve as mundane materials that have people encounter the idea of ethnicity in their everyday lives. These public discourses present the consistency of the idea of ethnicity throughout history, and their familiar objects become the way things are. In terms of politics, economics, and culture, the discourses of ethnicity through the War Memorial, as necessities that the nation’s people have to consume, are operated by the dominant knowledge builders for the political purpose of bonding the nation with solidarity.

5.5 Discussion: Ethnic Scripts of South Koreanness

This chapter began with the question about why the War Memorial is not presented as a South Korean cultural representation in the Fine Art textbook, and has shown how South Koreanness has been built up throughout visual and textual discourses relevant to the War Memorial. In other words, this chapter explored whether the relationship between the idea of singular ethnicity and the absence of the War Memorial in the textbook could possibly be related to the idea of multiculturalism. To address why the memorial is absent in the textbook, this sub-section will begin by contemplating the relationship between South Koreanness and the idea of singular ethnicity. Based on the articulation of the two meanings and the mechanism to sustain the social system, I go on to present a theory of why the War Memorial is not included.

5.5.1 The Social Norm, Ethnicity, and South Koreanness

In this sub-section, I identify the South Korean ethnic script of South Koreanness. 267

The ethnic script −what people, as ethnic cultural actors, follow for their rules of behavior or ethnic and cultural norms— functions in the terrain of social reproduction. To this end, the South Korean understanding of the social norm, ethnicity, and South Koreanness will be identified.

5.5.1.1 Social Norm

To South Koreans, unity is the social norm. Because of their colonized history, national division, domestic and international political situation, and our neoliberal global world, it is likely that people desire to be unified. South Koreans have been conditioned and thus disciplined to conform to the social norm of unity. By seeing the phenomenon in which opponents to the political knowledge builders are supposed to be marginalized,

South Koreans learn how the social norm of unity means “not different.” Differences from the social norm are regarded as dangerous.

5.5.1.2 Ethnicity

Ethnicity in South Korea is a medium by which political knowledge builders exert their power under the mechanism of war, and whose practice is incorporated into nationalism. The knowledge builders, on both sides, use the peoples’ long lasting belief that they are grounded in a blood-based ethnicity as a primary organizing factor in

“managing or controlling differences” under the ideology of nationalism. To the conservative party, North Koreans were regarded to be agitating and ruining the inherited singular blood-based ethnicity, while to the liberal party, they were regarded as potential coworkers because they were in line with South Korea in terms of blood-based ethnicity.

Either way, their arguments assume the same understanding of South Korean ethnicity, and both sides incorporate it with nationalism. Consequently, both sides commit 268

themselves to reproducing the idea of a blood-based ethnicity throughout history. Media and intellectual groups often support projects undertaken by the dominant nationalists and politicians to fix national meaning. For example, in the newspaper The Dong-A (June

8, 1993, cited in Kim, 2007, p. 204), it was stated: “Is that necessary to build the memorial to reveal our humiliated history of separation of one ethnic group in the middle of Seoul?” Nine academic associations relevant to history issued a joint statement about banning the project because they thought that it is not helpful to reconcile with North

Korea and it does not help to recover ethnic homogeneity (The Hangyarae, 1993. 7. 10).

To them, the War Memorial was an example of distorting the sacred blood-based ethnicity.

In sum, the dominant politicians, due to the historical, socio-cultural and economic background, have reinforced the ideology of a blood-based singular ethnic culture with nationalism that South Korea has had to confront.

Secondly, both sides promote their regimes by the mechanism of the “war,” which refers to conflict and regulating/disciplining. Hardt and Negri (2005, cited in Giroux,

2008b, p. 151) describe a war as an “organizing principle of society and politics” that controls people by furthering the interest of the national security state and threatening the nation’s people. It is likely that post-colonial South Korea has been kept under the influence of war after the Korean War. Politicians play with ethnicity by creating and sustaining a social norm of unity. The liberal party was accused as being a group supporting socialism by the conservative party. Conversely, the liberal party accused the conservative party as being against the economic trend of neoliberalism. For example, the dominant political/national knowledge builders promoted people to regulate their identity to follow the rules and social order, by pushing those who are against the conservative 269

Roh government to the margin and regarding those who are on the liberal side as communists who are detrimental to social unification and by showing what is supposed to be normal in society.

This mechanism of war continues under the neoliberal global economy.

According to Giroux (2008b), a contemporary nation state, which is grounded in capitalism can be characterized as having little responsibility and regulation in economic activities, but at the same time as exerting its power greatly in discipline and a military state. On the one hand, the regime of neoliberalism promotes the politics of neoliberal inequality by not valuing the public good, public institutions, social security, or safety nets, since under neoliberalism the state considers concerns of social provisions to belong to the social state. On the other hand, a nation state under neoliberalism emphasizes its

“policing and militarizing functions” (Bauman, 2005, cited in Giroux, 2008b, p. 157), whose objectives lie in disciplining and regulating citizens by virtue of the term war. The

South Korean state has made a commitment to protect and competitively promote its particular national culture, the commodity of what counts as South Korean ethnic culture, in the culture industry. Both political regimes are grounded in the mechanism of war, in that the nationalists/politicians promote the conflicts between self and other, and by doing so they regulate/discipline the nation’s people.

Repetition is one of the most important strategies to have people internalize an ideology, using the “technologies of forgetting and remembering” (Darts, Tavin, Sweeny,

& Derby, 2008, p. 209). According to Darts, Tavin, Sweeny, and Derby, this strategy makes people consider war to be a “banality of images” and frees them from looking at the complexities and consequences of war (Darts, Tavin, Sweeny, & Derby, 2008). 270

Repetition also obliterates any discrepancy. In terms of this research, the ways that politicians/nationalists played with the ethnic script to promote their political regimes must use the strategy of repetition, in that their approach to war could be reduced to reproduction of blood-based ethnic identification.

Figure 28. Power Struggle and Ethnicity

In sum, the idea of ethnicity is used for political purposes by multiple groups, and as such its meaning can be determined. In South Korea, nationalists/politicians combined the notion of blood-based ethnicity with the mechanism of ideological conflict of war and used it repeatedly for the political purpose of nation building. As a result, the idea of a blood-based ethnicity in South Koreans’ minds seems to transform into a color blind racism associated with nationalism.

5.5.1.3 South Koreanness

Through this exploration, I have found South Koreanness turns out to “conform” to the scripted ethnic cultural norm. On the one hand, South Koreanness appears to be a social norm of unity, incorporated with the cultural norm of the traditional notion of blood-based ethnicity. South Koreanness in this sense refers to the cultural identification

271

that South Korea is based on blood-based unity. (Perceiving the assumption that underpins the public art, South Korean people are constantly reminded of their blood- based origin.) On the other hand, South Koreanness could also draw more attention to the post-colonial social context that South Koreans have to confront. Since the politicians/nationalist knowledge builders connected the idea of blood-based ethnicity to ideological conflicts/war, in this process all differences are supposed to be banned and to conform the social norm of unity, and as such South Koreans seem to be disciplined not to be different. In this case, the value embedded in the cultural norm of blood-based ethnicity transforms to a social norm of unity, and as such South Koreanness refers to conformity to the South Korean social norm of homogenous unity.

I believe that this transformation is significant because the meaning of South

Koreanness no longer means the unity in a blood-based idea of ethnicity, but means “not being different.” The “not being different” became not only the social norm but also the cultural norm. Thus, the transformation implies the birth of a new cultural norm of South

Koreanness. Earlier in this chapter, I defined an ethnic script as an ethnic cultural norm.

Given that “not being different” is now a socio-cultural norm, it is likewise the ethnic cultural norm− that is, the “ethnic script.” This transformation of the script content proves that culture is dynamic, but it does not mean that the blood-based notion of cultural norm has been removed. The question that still remains is in what way the script should not differ. The answer is, all categorization, which designates the roles embedded within the categories. The leading political group constructs the categorization. Therefore, I conclude that South Koreanness refers to conformity to the macro category of South

Korean sociocultural norms. 272

5.5.1.4 South Koreanness and The War Memorial

The War Memorial serves as a mediator through which people meet or are complicit in the discourse of ethnicity. Politicians and nationalists with different political regimes, and at different times, use the War Memorial to infiltrate the idea of an ethnic socio-cultural script over and over. That is, the War Memorial continues to create a certain style by which the South Korean political culture industry continually generates

South Koreanness. Although the specific styles of representing ethnicity appear to be different, as seen in the War Memorial and the Peace Clock Tower, people get to see a stylized version of ethnicity and learn about the ethnic sociocultural norm that underpins the public arts. This means that the War Memorial disciplines people who pass by the monument, located in the middle of Seoul, to practice and perform the socially assigned

“South Korean” identity. Caughie (1999, cited in Brueggemann & Moddelmog, 2002) points out that identity is a performance in which people come to be familiar with and practice a particular group’s way of life. The formation of an identity follows the practice of repeated performance, passing (Brueggemann & Moddelmog, 2002). Likewise, the repeated play with ethnicity based on the blood-based idea might involve having people become familiar with and internalize the idea of ethnicity through repetition.

Encountering the War Memorial, South Koreans experience war and fear/hope of war, which reminds them of the necessity of conformity to the South Korean rule of social order. In this sense, the War Memorial functions to discipline South Koreans with a top- down narrative.

South Korean national and global citizens are expected to consume the commodified South Koreanness to internalize/construct who they are, and to sustain and 273

develop the country. The War Memorial, in this sense, deserves to be there to inform people of the ethnic cultural norm and to discipline them. The idea of South Koreanness, considered as part of a global cultural enterprise to be consumed, corresponds to images of South Korean ethnic culture with an exchange value in the global economy. To sell

South Koreanness is considered to be one of the most important tactics in continuing to prosper by its system in the global economy.

Appadurai (1996) states, “‘Ideoscapes’ are also concatenations of images, but they are often directly political and frequently have to do with ideologies of states and counter ideologies of movements explicitly oriented to capturing state power or a piece of it” (p.

36). Just as countries use terms and ideas, the War Memorial uses images in the same way: as a representation of a master narrative of South Korean identity. Just as key words in a political narrative are used on the public, the politics of South Korean identity are used in key images for an audience to respond to. This is a kind of ideoscape that allows a national translation or vocabulary of images to form an impression, to make people identify with those images and to pacify populations to not question the meaning of their identity. Nationalized students are exposed to signifiers, which ranged from symbolized national iconic images to unnoticed habits of everyday life.

The way that culture is used for political and economic purposes implies that

South Korean everyday culture is no longer simply used to indicate everyday life, and that it is distorted by the ideology of South Koreanness that is consumed. Sewell (1999) argues that culture has its own realm that creates power separate and different from ideology. However, it is more likely that contemporary South Korean culture seems to lose its power, which is relevant to the construction of the politics of national identity. 274

Figure 29. South Koreanness

In sum, the rule of the social order must require people to perform their role of

South Koreans. In this sense, South Koreanness must be conformity to the category of a

South Korean way of life. In the next section, I demonstrate the reason that the War

Memorial is banned from being represented in the Fine Art textbook in relation to such a matter of categorization or bordering.

5.5.2 South Koreanness and the Invisibility of the War in the Fine Art Textbook

Despite the fact that reality cannot be fit into a binary structure, the image examples in the Fine Art textbook are grounded in binary mechanisms because of a power struggle. Several theoretical concepts, notably Douglas’s “Marking” and “Dirt”,

Kristeva’s “Abjection,” and Butler’s “Corporeal destruction,” explore who creates borders and how the mechanism of bordering is dedicated to maintaining its system by 275

the dominant group/people (Longhurst, 2001). The dominant group makes a border clear and/or makes a fragile border oppressive, in order to sustain the social system they uphold. On one hand, they need to establish a clear distinction based on a normative role, which serves as a significant strategy to maintain their social system. In the post-colonial society, for instance, the clear distinction between ‘our country’ and ‘another country’ can significantly bond the community together, which would result in maintaining social order. We see this, for instance, in the way in which the protesters were set up as the other under Roh’s government. Abnormality or being stigmatized as the other will contribute to consolidate the boundary within the self, by preventing people from practicing the inappropriate. In other words, to maintain or enhance a social system, those in power require the other, who is marginalized or sometimes stigmatized. The dominant public discourse embedded in the War Memorial constructs a hegemony of South Korean ethnic culture by signifying a “different” perspective as an odd or dangerous thing, and the consolidating border plays a significant role in maintaining the social structure that the dominant group wants to uphold. On the other hand, it should be necessary for the dominant group(s) to oppress the fragile border as being invisible. The abject is oppressed, because the confrontation of the abject in a fragile border could awaken people to the idea that the distinction between self and other is a fabrication which is not based on universal truth, but on what would be expelled from the dominant’s interests.

Thus, exposing the fragile border must coincide with the threat to the dominant group(s).

The ideology of South Korean cultural identification is formed throughout history, based on peoples’ fantasy of historical continuity. People unconsciously form the notion that contemporary culture succeeds traditional culture. However, history is a highly 276

dynamic process in which sutures and rhyzomatic dispersions occur, so that a certain type of particular traditional culture cannot be connected to contemporary culture. Given that

South Korea was invaded by other countries numerous times, it must be a fantasy of historical continuity that the ideology of ethnic culture continued as a blood-based or singular characteristic. In addition, due to the Korean War, the South Koreans’ epistemological viewpoint of who they are in terms of blood-based singular ethnicity has been threatened.

People continue the ideology by connecting its reality to the primordial tradition, and screen the conflict with what people believe. Employing a Lacanian point of view,

McGowan and Kunkle (2004) explores how ideological fantasy plays a role in formulating the way subjects relate to their past experiences. McGowan and Kunkle

(2004) states:

Ideology is constantly reinterpreting the past, placing it within a new interpretive

framework. That is to say, ideological revolutions do not simply change the way

we relate to present events but also the way we relate to past ones. . . . Ideology

prompts us to see the past as the prelude to an inevitable present rather than as a

time pregnant with other possibilities, possibilities that might challenge current

ideological structures. (p. 151)

Ideology reforms the past experience to formulate the present. In respect to the ideological fantasy of authentic South Korean culture, the hegemony functions such that the contemporary ethnic culture has been initiated by the past. Regarding the War

Memorial, it inculcates people with the idea of a singular ethnicity or the script of ethnic cultural norm, and it acquaints people in the present with the past, the primordial 277

condition. As a result of the hegemonic process that is infiltrated in the War Memorial, the idea of a singular ethnicity or South Koreanness is continuously (re)produced, and people get to construct the ideology of a particular South Korean ethnic culture.

Regarding the question that I asked in chapter four about why the War Memorial is invisible in the Fine Art textbook, the discourse embedded in Fine Art must construct the hegemony of South Korean ethnic culture by hiding the cultural reality that people do not want to reveal. There must have been a desire for unity in blood for one country. The division of the country, accordingly, causes South Korean people to desire to obliterate the reality that their ethnicity is divided into two countries.

The dominant nationalists and political knowledge builders are at the heart of promoting this fantasy for political purposes, in order to justify and secure the country.

Since traditional authenticity, which is central to blood-based ethnicity, is the symbolic image of South Korean national culture and the universal truth of being a South Korean, waiving that image challenges their structural ground for defining South Korea. Thus, it is necessary to maintain the ideology of blood-based ethnicity. However, when South

Korea puts emphasis on blood-based ethnicity based on historical continuity as the particularity of South Korean national culture, North Korea must be an obstacle to the argument, and it is even possible for the existence of North Korea to threaten the justification or foundation of South Korea. The textbook makers might have felt burdened to address the War Memorial due to North Korea, which is thought to share a fragile border with South Korea in terms of what they think is blood-based ethnicity.

Therefore, the reason that the War Memorial is missing in the book is because the memorial can remind people of ethnicity that could be connected to the “other” country 278

North Korea, which could threaten the justification of South Korea. The invisibility of the

War Memorial in Fine Art screens the reality that the separation between South and North

Korea has been in place for over fifty years, and that ethnic similarities between South and North Koreans are rarely found. That is, it shows the reality that they want to avoid confronting, lest their belief about a singular ethnicity underpinning South Korea should be disrupted.

Instead of any images pertinent to the War Memorial or the Korean War, traditional artworks are encouraged, in order to veil the reality. The textbook does not include any images relevant to the Korean War. Instead, presenting traditional artworks that were created in the primordial past directs viewers to fantasize South Korean history as continuing the traditional history of Korea. The idea of blood-based ethnicity, in this way, continues by the fantasy of historical continuity. Needless to say, not only do the image examples contribute to reinforcing the fantasy, but the verbal texts do so as well.

The section title of our, under which the traditional artworks are placed in the book, would prevent readers from imagining part of the contemporary culture that is disconnected from the past: the naming hides the discontinuity of history. Through intertextual chain analysis, I identify the sociocultural and historical context in which

South Koreans postulate a dichotomous understanding of the world, or where the subjects of desires continually attempt to put their ethnic culture in the center and others to the margins in an ambivalent way via language use.

5.6 Conclusion

South Korean postcolonial multiculturalism turns on identity politics and politics of difference, which are grounded in the legacy of colonial ethnicity and post-colonial 279

power struggles to consolidate nation building. As national/cultural identity politics, the formation of South Korean postcolonial multiculturalism is in line with the construction of South Koreanness. The postcolonial South Korean knowledge builders use the idea of ethnicity as a primary organizing factor in “manag[ing] or control[ing] differences” for the purpose of consolidating the nation, and for gaining and sustaining their power for or against the nation state. They take up the policy of dividing/unifying nations, by which

South Koreans feel a sense of nationhood and unification, but at the same time experience marginalization and difference. In this sense, the mechanism of war underpins the foundation on which the nationalist knowledge builders try to justify their position.

The politicians/nationalists connected the idea of ethnicity to the ideological conflicts, and in this process all differences are supposed to converge to unity in South Koreanness.

Postcolonial South Korean multiculturalism is, in this sense, a kind of identity politics that the political/nationalist knowledge builders attempt to colonize via an ethnocentric anchoring, as well as a politics of difference by which the ethnic socio-cultural norm becomes enhanced. Either way, postcolonial multiculturalism becomes a pedagogy to educate people about the ethnic script of South Koreanness, and it strengthens the dichotomous understanding of people and the world. It is particularly important to discuss South Korean postcolonial multiculturalism because it raises important ethical questions. A hegemonic process of bonding the nation’s people goes beyond building community to mediate the uncertainty of everyday life. South Korean nationalist multiculturalism has constituted the single most important site of resistance to opponents or to the opposition in/outside. In this regard South Koreanness may be as repressive as any colonial regime. 280

As long as the War Memorial exists, it will play a significant and consistent role in reminding people of who they are, and in this sense, the memorial deserves to be there as a constant reminder; this is why such public art works are important. Sometimes, the

War Memorial evokes a debate over ethnicity, which precipitates from conflicting representations of the War Memorial. Either way, public artworks and even the debate over them can remind people of who they are and what South Koreanness is. In this sense, the War Memorial as a “subject of everyday knowledge” mediates social relations, and it creates dialogue, something viewers can react to (Edensor, 2002, p. 110).

281

Chapter 6: Recommendation for the Fine Art Textbook: Image Examples and Critical Pedagogy for/against South Koreanness

The War Memorial represent contemporary South Korea. In this chapter I argue that both examples of public art should be included in the multiculturalism section of the

Fine Art textbook. The sculptures can assist students to explore diversity through ethnicity, colonialism and class. This chapter aims at considering why the public art of

The War Memorial should be included in a multicultural art textbook and how it should be presented with in the classroom.

6.1 From Inside a Textbook: The War Memorial and Multicultural Art Education

Scholars have often contended that art education prevents students from being alienated from society (Lanier, 1969; McFee127, 1961). McFee (1961, cited in Chalmers,

2005) viewed art education as a social study, and Lanier (1969) believed the aim of art education is engaging students in exploring social issues relevant to their lives and establishing social reform. Barrett (1998) describes the characteristics of postmodern art as an appropriation and “art tied to life128” (Barrett, 1998, p. 40). These opinions are

127 Both McFee (1961, cited in Chalmers, 2005) and Lanier (1969) contend that art education should have to deal with popular visual arts, such as mass media and cinema, in accordance with social change, and both favor art education that corresponds to students’ lives. In particular, McFee argues that studying mass media gives students the opportunity to learn about discrimination in relation to what they accept (Chalmers, 2005). 128 He states: “[Sherrie] Levin’s After Walker Evans #7 can be seen to illustrate other principles of postmodernism –namely, that art ought not be separated from life, that art can and should refer to things other than art, and that art can and should be about more than its own form” (Barrett, 1998, p. 40). 282

grounded in the belief that art is an “instrument for the achievement of whatever values we do espouse” (Broudy129, 1967, cited in Lanier, 1969, pp. 317-8) or a “vehicle for effecting social change” (Lanier, 1969, p. 315). Throughout this research, I have explored the way in which the idea of a South Korean ethnic culture has been constructed through images in a post-colonial context. The exploration demonstrates an assumption that the

Fine Art textbook supports the idea of a South Korean ethnic culture through its content and the context surrounding the textbook. In this sense, it is important to provide students with the opportunity to examine how they are living with/by, and why the attempt to challenge is important from an art education as well as an ethical viewpoint.

I begin this section by articulating the problem of including as many diverse cultures as possible. Using this groundwork, I then articulate a theory of multicultural art education, and show the necessity of employing it. Finally, I discuss how multicultural art education classes grapple with the matter of ethnicity, using the War Memorial.

6.1.1 Diversity Affirmation and Celebrating Difference

Affirming diversity is occasionally considered as the best strategy in multicultural education due to the expectation of realizing equity. Recognizing difference in multicultural education aims to understand and improve the world (Stuhr, 1999a), and

Levin appropriated Evans’s photograph, which portrayed poverty in the Depression, and reproduced it more than five times. As Philip Yenawine (1991, cited in Barrett, 1998, p. 38) points out, postmodernists resist the myth of creativity: “originality is impossible, anyway, given that there is nothing new under the sun.” According to Yanawine, this reproduction generates the effect of distortion (Barrett, 1998, p. 38) and “pathos” (Barrett, 1998, p. 40). Since Levin took a picture of the original work at least five times, the work loses subtle gradations from light to dark, Levin intentionally exaggerates the whites and blacks, and the work is distorted from its original negative. This distortion enables viewers to concentrate on the subject matter tied to life. 129 Harry Broudy (1967, cited in Lanier, 1969, pp. 317-8) makes the function of art rational: “I shall argue that the arts are not merely the celebrations of values to which we are already committed, and that even though art may need no other excuse for being, it nevertheless is a great instrument for the achievement of whatever values we do espouse. Indeed, without art we do not really perceive the value of anything, for art gives value a perceptible shape and makes it a candidate for imaginative appropriation.” 283

Sanford defines “celebration of diversity” as looking at the different value systems in which other people live. Thus, for them affirming difference aims at reading the other and the world, and at changing the world. In practice, narratives that reveal the marginalized are encouraged, so that students honor and value the different cultures and their identities

(Heilman, 2007). For example, advocates for multicultural education claim to add representations of previously excluded diverse groups into grand narratives (Cahan &

Kocur, 1996). It is important to think of the issue of difference in planning the contents of a multicultural art education curriculum.

However, simply including as many differences as possible does not guarantee equitable education, because it simply celebrates the principle of difference and is likely to homogenize culture that is actually various. First of all, putting the emphasis on difference itself and celebrating it causes students to enhance the norm/abnormal binaries, due to the objectification of difference (Kumashiro, 2002). Therefore, people need to break down knowledge in binaries, such as norm vs. the Other. For example, Kumashiro

(2002) states that the more people question the inconsistency of the meaning of “normal” and continue to cite the queer’s deviation from the norm, the more individuals and institutions gradually become aware of the problems of stereotypes toward the queer (p.

53). Likewise, it is important to distinguish the concept of adding a category of difference into the curriculum from the concept of interrogating difference critically, because the insertion is likely to be reduced to emphasize the difference itself and does not solve any inequality (Mayo, 2007).

Secondly, despite the fact that no cultural identity is constituted with a single category of difference, in practice celebrating difference per se is likely to homogenize 284

cultures, while neglecting conflicts within those cultures. Focusing on difference in multicultural education is sometimes considered one of the most useful strategies for cross-cultural study, for the purpose of seeking commonality among cultures. However,

Stuhr (1999a) believes that celebrating differences between cultures sometimes neglects to think of important cultural conflicts, even within a supposedly unitary culture. Stuhr

(1999a) states, “There is no such thing as a homogeneous culture anyway that you can get to know completely. . . Many of these aspects of a person’s cultural identity are always in flux and dynamic; they always move on” (p. 183). With regard to this research, for example, sometimes we cannot clearly differentiate the heirs of the South Korean ethnic culture from that of the other countries or the immigrants. Indeed, one should be cautious not to homogenize the characteristics of culture during cultural comparisons. Therefore, multicultural art education should not simply focus on difference, but rather consider a complex viewpoint that sees culture better.

In this project, I discussed concerns about difference through visual images, since the world presents its logic or values through visual images (Neperud & Stuhr, 1987) and since students gradually learn about social norms by looking at the images. Image creators might be entities whose values, beliefs, and way of life are imprinted by the social norms that are involved in power relations. Thus, the images they create become a visualized set of social norms. It might be through such a reciprocal relationship between knowledge/image creators and the given world that dominant practices are able to perpetuate their social order. The Fine Art textbook in the post-colonial environment, in this sense, must function as part of ideoscapes that address or evoke in students an ideology of normal or proper South Koreanness. Thus, moving back to the question of 285

“difference,” it is not hard to imagine that including many different images would do little to improve diversity affirmation, and in fact do far more to educate people about the social norms of ethnic culture. Therefore, it seems to be more important for textbook editors to consider how to engage students in discussing images of fine art using “key concepts” (Ballengee-Morris & Stuhr, 2001, p. 10) than to consider how many diverse images should be in the book. In fact, this is the purpose of multicultural art education: to consider how to achieve such a purpose. Accordingly, in the next section I articulate the theory of multicultural art education, and briefly point out the linkage points at which multicultural art education and ethnicity connect.

6.1.2 Multicultural Art Education, Ethnicity, and Public Art

6.1.2.1 Overview of Multicultural Art Education

Multicultural education, which originated in the Civil Rights Movement to combat racism, is a sort of ideal concept and process, and an educational reform movement pursuing equality for disenfranchised people (Ballengee-Morris & Stuhr, 2001;

Banks, 1993; Stuhr, 1994). In the similar vein, multicultural art education is a concept based on multiculturalism, which is a kind of consciousness reform movement grounding in critical thinking (Banks, 1993; Stuhr, 1994; Ballengee-Morris, & Stuhr, 2001).

Multiculturalism rethinks what is taken for granted, in order to emancipate those who have been devalued.

Multiculturalism does not simply involve the recuperation of “lost” traditions in

order to prove the richness and diversity of “America.”. . . Rather,

multiculturalism interrogates which traditions are valorized and by whom, which

are devalued and by whom, which serve to empower marginalized peoples, 286

which serve even further to disempower, which traditions provide strength, how

traditions provide agency, when traditions provide knowledge. (Sleeter, 1994,

cited in Cahan & Kocur, 1996, p. xv)

As can be seen above, advocates for multiculturalism believe that culture has been controlled and repeated by the dominant groups/people who want to sustain their culture throughout history. Knowledge is thought to be used for valuing the dominant culture and devaluing the marginalized groups’/peoples’ culture. In this sense, art educators grounded in multiculturalism teach students to question what, why, and how only some particular voices are inherited and made available throughout cultural history. Multicultural art education must thus raise critical questions about the self, the other, and the world.

Secondly, multicultural art education is a process in which students reflect on themselves and present their authentic voices, rather than simply accepting the assigned purposes of education (Ballengee-Morris & Stuhr, 2001; Goodman, 1996; Stuhr, 1994).

In this sense, multicultural art education must acquaint students with the process of becoming an agent through critical thinking. Some discussion questions are expected to direct students toward critical thinking. For example, Barrett (1998) introduces the argument by Karen Hamblen that all artworks displayed contain political motivations.

Thus, it is necessary to question the hidden intention of displaying an artwork by asking

“why certain objects have been selected, who made these choices, why, who is best served by the choices, and which objects were not selected and why” (Barrett, 1998, p.

287

55)130.

Thirdly, multicultural art education is a school reform movement (Ballengee-

Morris & Stuhr, 2001). During the Civil Rights Movement, multicultural education struggled with the oppression caused by racism, feminism, and opposition to queer rights, and it sought to reconstruct schools and social systems in the 1960s. In sum, multicultural art education does not simply mean involving students in discussing the diversity of culture. Rather, it should be understood as a range of critical thinking processes about the historical and political dimensions of a cultural democracy.

Indeed, multicultural art education is an education in cultural democracy through and with art. Its advocates believe that the goals of art education should go along with that of education: helping students figure out and create meanings of and for “life”

(Ballengee-Morris & Stuhr, 2001, p. 6). Ballengee-Morris and Stuhr (2001) expect students to think about how to live and to understand the complex process of living, and importantly, they believe that those issues should be taught through art. Life is constituted by meanings and structure through which people view the world and themselves. In fact,

I would even say that life is constituted by “culture,” i.e., by ranges of belief systems, and that culture can be viewed both as lived experiences and as a power-embedded part of the system. Accordingly, multicultural art education is expected to engage students in considering cultural complexities, including the inequity embraced in the power- embedded social structure. In sum, multicultural art education should deal with “power, history, and self identity” (Ballengee-Morris & Stuhr, 2001, p. 6), along with life-based

130 Barrett introduces the questions that were given to a viewer in Fred Wilson’s exhibition in 1992: “from whom was it created? For whom does it exist? Who is represented? Who is doing the telling? The hearing?” (Barret, 1998, p. 55) 288

subjects, as part of a cultural pedagogy. Multicultural art education pursues “social change and emancipation” (Sleeter, 1990, p. 11; Stuhr, Petrovich-Mwaniki, & Wasson,

1992, p. 16). The goal of multicultural art education is to establish social justice by helping students to perceive the necessity of the equitable distribution of power and resources, associated with the level of personal, national, and global cultural identities

(Ballengee-Morris & Stuhr, 2001; Stuhr, 1999a).

So far, I have discussed the meaning of multicultural art education, which I articulated as a range of concepts, processes, and educational reform movements through art that reflect on students’ own lives. I propose that students are expected to think critically and act for the purpose of social justice, so that they can develop democratic citizenship through the study of art.

6.1.2.2 Deconstructing Ethnicity in The War Memorial

To improve and enrich students’ experience of South Korean ethnicity, the primary variable in this study, I proposed earlier that the War Memorial should be included in a fine art textbook. In this sub-section, I explain in greater detail why the War

Memorial should be a part of multicultural art education. The public art, I argue, engages students in experiencing the process of an inquiry surrounding a social structure, which is at the heart of critical multicultural art education. By employing this framework, students can demystify the idea of ethnicity that is projected and sustained in the public arts.

6.1.2.2.1 Acquainting Students with South Korean Ethnic Cultural Identity Construction

Practice

First of all, the War Memorial engages students in exploring the knowledge construction process, which is one of the dimensions of multicultural education (Banks, 289

2008, p. 31). Knowledge means “the way a person explains or interprets reality” (Banks,

1993, p. 5). Employing the American Heritage Dictionary (1983), which defines knowledge as “familiarity, awareness, or understandings gained through experience or study,” along with sociology’s broad meaning of knowledge, Banks (1993) includes

“ideas, values, interpretation” within knowledge (p. 5). As this definition implies, knowledge should be understood as positional, pertaining to the knower’s values and experiences, and as leading to action (Banks, 1993). Knowledge includes the nature of the world as well as an individual’s identity, and encompasses intellectual, emotional, and behavioral dimensions. More importantly, knowledge is “a social construction that has social, political, and normative assumptions” (Banks, 2008, p. 41). In the context of the

South Korean art, students explore South Koreans’ knowledge of cultural identification and (political) cultural expectations.

I discussed the socio-political context in which the War Memorial had to be built, focusing on the primary narrative that undergirds the monument and the ethnic script that the War Memorial creates. I contended that the War Memorial represents the nation which was narrated by the political/nationalist knowledge builders, from which people were supposed to form a national and cultural identity. In this way, the War Memorial is at the heart of the identity construction process, by mediating public discourse and individuals’ identifications about culture. This allows it to engage students as they consider how their knowledge about their identity and/or their ethnic culture is constructed through the public arts, as long as the students are given the opportunities to examine the subject under multicultural art education.

6.1.2.2.2 Acquainting Students with the Social Structure in History 290

The public arts can inform students of the inequality that is embedded in social structure. Numerous studies deal with identity/knowledge transformation in this system

(Bastos & Hutzel, 2004; Buffington, 2007; McIntosh, 1988; Condon & Blandy, 2005;

Desai, 2003; Eisenhauer, 2007; Turner-Vorbeck & Marsh, 2007; Mayo, 2007). These researchers agree with the idea that contemporary (art) educators should prompt students to recognize the structure of the society where the inequity is coming from, and empower them to construct transformative knowledge/identity based on their cultural communities.

To critically investigate this ideological system, revealing “constructed silence” (Desai,

2003, Freire, 2007; Sleeter & Grant, 2009) and deconstructing the normalized binary category (Desai, 2003; Mayo, 2007) can both be used.

As can be seen in Chapters 4 and 5, the institutions of the Fine Art textbook and the War Memorial, in some ways, reproduce the blood-based ethnicity throughout history as a sort of constructed silence. Accordingly, it is likely that the unearthed knowledge construction practice becomes a social structure in which the South Korean commonsense of who they are could be rooted in the political meaning of culture, in unification amongst themselves and a conflict with the others. In some senses, the political culture can bring about a colorblind racism and hamper or even destroy individual agency or differences, which could give birth to inequality in human beings.

Because of this, the War Memorial should be included in the textbook, and students should be engaged in thinking through the unearthed ideology.

6.1.2.2.3 Encouraging Students’ Critical Thinking through Engaging in Self-Gaze

Deconstruction

291

The War Memorial provides students with a visual text in which students can practice the power of looking, though which power-embedded knowledge is deconstructed as well as reconstructed. Elkins (1996, cited in Eisenhauer, 2007, p. 11) claims “the impossibility of just looking” that presumes looking as neutral and normative, because he views seeing as naturally violent. Looking contains the violent facet of seeing:

“possessing, controlling, objectifying and denigrating” (Elkins, 1996, cited in Eisenhauer,

2007, p. 11). As I explored in Chapter 5.2.2, the War Memorial is filled with images for viewing and the looking practice constructs meaning, which in this case is projected from the grand narrative. Although I accept that a practice of looking functions as a manifestation and maintenance of social norms, this does not mean that there is no resolution. Paradoxically, the power of looking enables art/images to be effective media through which to challenge invisible hegemony. It is important for art educators to encourage students to 1) contemplate how violent looking in the War Memorial serves the establishment of power-engaged knowledge, and 2) to challenge the violent characteristics of the gaze.

Engaging students by questioning and challenging the violent characteristics of the gaze in establishing people’s value systems, multicultural art educators attempt to involve students with a critical perspective, by interrogating how people learn about social norms by gazing at themselves and others. Participating in the dominant cultural discourse about ethnicity, students will be able to learn of the binary understanding of normal/abnormal, objectifying the ethnicity or ethnic group. Artists’ attempts (Bardeguez

& Kocur, 1996) to challenge the power embedded in “looking” by creating discourse and

292

art that uses challenging strategies, such as humor and paradox131 or an intervention of peoples’ gaze, can be an intriguing discussion topic for students. By critically participating in art projects designed to challenge a given knowledge, students should be able to perceive and de/reconstruct their power-embedded gaze that is extended to different bodies and to their own knowledge.

Associating the War Memorial with South Korean ethnic cultural identity construction practice, social structure, and the power of looking will require some careful questions, to help students interrogate the ideological and hegemonic construction of cultural identity. These questions can also help students challenge the taken-for-granted ethnicity, and help them deconstruct the structuralized inequality embedded in society.

The questions are as follows: What it is that the visual and written texts relevant to the

War Memorial describe? Who describes or states the public art’s meaning? List the name or social position of the addressor(s). Why do you think the characters or what they are saying have to do with South Koreanness? How do you interpret North Koreans in the

War Memorial? What are the underpinning factor(s) between South and North Koreans and why do you think so? What relationship can you find between North and South

Koreans? Is their relationship stable or changeable? If the relationship is changeable, why might it disrupt the conventional notion of ethnicity? What do you think the War

Memorial adds to the notion of South Koreanness? What do you think this analysis has to do with the notion of South Korean ethnic culture? Who created the War Memorial? Who funded the War Memorial? Are the creators of the War Memorial and the Peace Clock

131 For example, disabled performers Mary Duffy, Carrie Sandahl, and Kuppers show how a social norm has been working in a society (Eisnehauer, 2007). 293

Tower different or the same? What were the motivations/goals that caused these artworks to be created? What role did the government(s) play in creating the public arts? The resulting discussions about the War Memorial are expected to enable students to unravel the hegemonic process in the public arts, to perceive the partiality of knowledge, and to establish mastery in knowledge formation.

6.1.2.2.4 Cooperating and Encouraging Students’ Action by Community Based Art

In addition, Multicultural Art Educators go further by engaging students in acting to change social norms by creating art. Action for change is primarily encouraged by art educators who advocate for Multicultural Social Justice Education (Cohan & Kocur,

1996; Stuhr, 1994, 1999a, Wasson, Stuhr, & Petrovich –Mwaniki, 1990) and by

Community Based Art educators. Community Based Art, aligned with the Multicultural

Social Justice Education approach, is characterized as art in, through, and for culture/life.

The cooperative art making process, emphasizing social issues embedded in their lives, enables community members to dialogue, to understand self and community, to express their emotions, and to act (Bastos & Hutzel, 2004, pp. 92-4) collectively in hopes of social justice. By engaging students to locate the gap between meanings defined by society and those in their own lived realities, and challenging them to reconstruct these meanings, students create new meanings for social issues that reflect their own community’s lives. Community art projects serve as collective responses to social issues, and those activities turn to community culture. By doing so, art can realize itself as giving community members empowerment. Community is a sort of open text, where the community’s people replace the traditionally considered authorities, such as well-known artists and researchers, and use collaborative processes of meaning making based on their 294

own lives in the uncontrollable space. In this sense, artwork –as a discourse to change oneself, one’s community, and the world– will likewise enable community members to empower themselves to change themselves, their community, and the world.

So far, I have explored the necessity of the War Memorial being included in the multicultural section. Researchers believe that art educators should awaken students to the existence of the power embedded social structure that they had not previously perceived, and to act to deconstruct this structure (Desai, 2000; Keifer-Boyd, Amburgy &

Knight, 2007). The strategy of the challenging gaze will enable students to question their position within the social structure and not take the social myth for granted.

In general, making meaning based on binary oppositions cannot cover all realities, and as such, it inevitably distorts truth. Therefore, in some sense, it is to be expected that students will form biases when they look at any two images arranged next to each other.

This idea seems to confine this research, which was initiated by pointing out the problem of comparing images in the multicultural section, because it sounds like there’s no productive resolution for the critique. However, this seeming limitation, at the same time, can enlarge our teaching/learning practice by engaging students in thinking visual culture critically.

6.2 From In-between a Textbook: Encouraging Students’ Critical Thinking to Deconstruct

Fine Art Textbooks

Encouraging students’ critical thinking is not only possible by using their own gaze in looking at the War Memorial, but also by interrogating the Fine Art textbook itself. This study treats education as one of the state apparatuses, and argues that school textbooks are one of the most important institutions to uphold a sociopolitical system that 295

features an essentialized meaning of ethnicity. Critical thinking about textbook construction will enable students to consider the hegemonic processes involved in knowledge production that they did not previously recognize. Kumashiro (2002) claims that by hiding the fact that curricular contents are chosen by certain authors, include subjective interpretations, or do not reveal the narrative voices of the author (Kumashiro,

2002, p. 54), students perceive the content to be objective and impartial (Kumashiro,

2002, p. 54). Kumashiro, employing Apple’s (1993, cited in Kumashiro, 2002) term, suggests we need strategies to trouble official knowledge. Specifically, he suggests that educators acquaint students with silenced voices and with the effect of the silence in making meaning through the text (Kumashiro, 2002). To him, it is important to reveal the narrative or authorial voices of the textbook, which Kumashiro thinks is more important than including the voices of marginalized people, as a means of finding out how the story contributes to the hegemony (Kumashiro, 2002, p. 62). Through a story, students are expected to be able to perceive what knowledge they learn, and how this partial knowledge facilitates the formation of their identity or knowledge about people/groups.

One of the most important premises for this suggestion is that teachers or policy makers should change the mindset of art curriculum, which has traditionally been considered as a collection of minute bits of information. An art curriculum should be viewed as a process, not a single text. It should open up interactive connections not only with other school subjects but also with life experiences, and it should be based on student-centered and inquiry-based learning so that students can consider the complexity of arts and culture. Indeed, numerous studies are in line with this idea. Keys (2008) views child-centered learning as “personalized learning of students by actively engaging their 296

environment and community” (p. 101). Garoian (2001) characterizes student centered learning as focusing on involving students in making a plan for what they are to learn. He states:

[I]n traditional school environments... the activities in which they engage are by

the teacher’s design or by the teacher’s choice of curriculum through which

culture is being transmitted. What about the ideas, questions, and activities, which

they bring from their respective cultural experiences, personal memories, and

cultural histories? (p. 122)

Darts (2006) points out another effect of student centered learning: “when students are personally invested in a topic, they are more inclined to engage with it in meaningful ways” (p. 7). Garoian (2001) likewise states that by participating in inquiry based- learning, “children learn how their cultural histories agree or disagree with the dominant historical assumptions that are taught in school and, in doing so, it authorizes them both to learn and challenge those assumptions” (p. 125). Collectively, all of them agree with the idea that students are encouraged to participate in teaching plans and issues based on their own interests and lives132.

6.3 From Outside the Textbook

Postcolonial South Korean contexts influence not only the way that government intervenes in the selection and organization of image examples in textbooks, but also the way that learners interpret the image examples in that textbook. As we’ve seen, these

132 Based on this mindset, the expansion of the range of visual art forms and education could be considered in terms of “issues [from] the critical aspects, the power of representation, the formation of cultural identities, functions of creative production, the meanings of visual narratives, critical reflection on technological pervasiveness, the importance of interdisciplinary connections” (Freedman & Stuhr, 2004, p. 816). 297

interpretations are based on the sociocultural norm of ethnicity that they learn from, for instance, public arts in their daily lives. Cultural workers should reflect on how to widen the horizon of South Koreanness in the public space, rather than considering how to have students recognize the top-down narrative embedded in public arts.

Trend (1992b) believes that cultural workers, such as artists or writers, should be

“political educators,” and that they should be critical in investigating “internalized assumptions, naturalized languages, and invisible power structures” (p. 106). For the same reason, hooks (1990, cited in Trend, 1992b, p. 108) suggests being at the margins.

She states: “the “outside” is a space of radical possibility for all of us who find ourselves at odds with the status quo” (p. 108). hooks believes that the site will enable cultural workers to exercise the capacity to resist133. Cultural workers are asked to act for social justice, based on critical interrogation of knowledge, language, and social structures.

Specifically, it is necessary for artists to reflect on how sensitive to sociocultural context they are, and to attempt to make room for the hidden or bottom-up voices (Barrett,

1998), given the historicity embedded in art culture in the post-colonial condition. Seo

(2007) argues that the Korean Jeonwee134 (avant-garde) has an origin in which artists did not adopt a decadent way to challenge social absurdity, immorality or convention, unlike the European avant-garde artists (p. 36). Seo views Jeonwee as “ethics that [South

Korean] artist[s] should develop” and views its characteristics as enlightening one’s nation’s art and society by making one’s art moral (p. 38). Above all, the desire for

133 This does not mean replacing one center with another center. As Trend (1992b) argues, the problem of most of the hegemonic regimes is in totalizing ideology, which refers to questioning the single set of attitudes or norms to which all must conform (p. 106). 134 Seo (2007) characterizes the discursive flows of art movements in Korea during 1920-30 as being based on ‘Jeonwee (前衛, avant-garde),’ (p. 38), which, she believes, is pertinent to South Korean artist’s consciousness or mentality. Literally, ‘Jeonwee’ is a translation of the French word ‘avant-garde.’ 298

progress that was grounded in the desire for enlightenment played a significant role in constructing artists’ normalized style of art, as well as in the substantiated135 art movements or associations that arose around 1958136. Seo contends that the desire for progress prevented artists from attempting to deconstruct convention, because artists looked at anti-development or anti-modernization as regression137. In addition, the

Jeonwee artists in the 1930s believed that art should be moral when confronting social absurdity. They should not have to agree with the form of materialism directly, but rather should keep their distance from immoral forms138. As a result, on the one hand, tradition or ethnic classic arts were considered deserving of the role to fulfill morality, and they were thought to be incorporated with the form of modern art (Seo, 2007, p. 33). Peoples’ reality and ethnic traditions were regarded as a medium to revise and compensate progressivism (Seo, 2007, p. 35). On the other hand, modern art is equated with Abstract

Art. In “Opinion about abstractionism,” Whankee Kim proposed Abstract Art as “avant- garde” or “modern” art practice while discarding the conventional idea that drawing indicates or is imitation (The Chosun, 1939. 6. 11, cited in Seo, 2007, p. 31). Artists regulated themselves, and they did not produce any artwork that challenged social

135 For example, artists’ desire to enlighten people and society motivated the establishment of art associations; Abstract Art initiated efforts to be accepted in the National Art Exhibition; the Museum of Modern Art was constructed; artists attended the world art festival; and Art critique was also in favor of the modern desire for progressiveness. 136 Seo (2007) believes that art movements after independence did not, however, appear abruptly by external impact, but rather date back to Shinhung Art in the 1920s and Jeonwee Art in the 1930s: an inner struggle with new art in the changed situation. 137 For example, the Dadaism that Shinhung artists favored in the 1920s was excluded from the main art world, while Informal Art in the 1930s was absorbed into the logic of progressiveness, abstract, or modern ideology (Seo, 2007, p. 35). 138 Intellectuals and artists thought that modern art was integrated into commercialism and that artists should keep their distance from the immoral art. Seo views such a distancing from commercialism as saving artists’ morality. Shinhung artists in the 1920s were fascinated by new art trends such as Dadaism, Cubism, Futurism, or Happening. But before long they deferred or negated these movements, because they thought they did not suggest any solution or did not show social inequality. 299

conventions or moral taboos139. Even if there was an attempt, the artists and their works were excluded by the dominant art world140. Seo also believes that the Minimalism and

White Monochrome’s strict and ascetic poets in the 1970s, and Minjung art’s accusation of the capitalism-driven state in the 1980s, dealt with the artists’ mentality of Jeonwee in association with morality in the 1920s and 1930s (p. 36). Seo ends the argument with the opinion that Jeonwee has lasted for a while as a convention amongst artists, and suggests that contemporary artists break down taboos and moralities in terms of traditional convention (p. 36). Considering the visual and written texts in this study, I cannot help but ask whether contemporary cultural workers and artists are avant-garde, and whether textbook makers, as intellectuals, reveal various voices in relation to ethnicity.

The War Memorial should be a discursive space where various voices are communicated, and where the voice, which was silenced by the mainstream discourse should be able to be critiqued (Trend, 1992). In other words, the space should be able to open up the grand narrative of who South Koreans are, which could then be questioned.

Trend argues that the first priority in the discussion of discursive space is to discover the dysfunction of the existing narratives. Resisting the dominant ideology or reinventing meaningful change in the War Memorial will be realized by recognizing not only the tendency that we ourselves are reluctant to change the possibilities, but also “the way we arrive in our social circumstances” (Trend, 1992b, p. 113). West (1990, cited in Trend,

1992b, p. 113) defined demystification as an awareness of making a change. For example,

139 In the interview with Kangja Chung, who performed the Happening, Transparent Balloon and Nude in 1968, she states that she was asked not to continue performing the project during a meeting with an artist (Seo, 2007). 140 Their works are often included in the Sunday Seoul, which at the time was considered a gossip magazine distant from high art. 300

in Geography Lesson: Canadian Notes (1986-1987), Allan Sekula photographed and narrated the various views on the nickel, focusing on how the currency museum made its money; it is the story of how the bank gained its wealth from the land. This is a critique of how an institution exerts its power through corporate power. Trend points out that this art project can be viewed as implying how Canada’s nationalistic emblem could be established at the cost of land and people.

Likewise, the War Memorial also can be critiqued in terms of how the government and institutional power use art as a way to demarcate public and private space. For example, living Korean War veterans or those who are involved in the war would not be able to find their names on the Wall. Even one of the facilities of the War

Memorial, the wedding hall, gives discounts to staff members who get married, but it does not give any benefits to the families of Korean War veterans. By questioning these practices, cultural workers can acquaint people with the question about who has the ownership of the War Memorial. The War Memorial is a place to commemorate the veterans’ commitment, but the commitment that is theirs only in imagination. It will be the cultural workers’ role to intervene in the given narratives embedded in the War

Memorial. In sum, the public space should create opportunities for diverse and critical communication amongst people. Cultural workers should recognize their role in demystifying the cultural understanding that was taken for granted, and in broadening it.

By doing so, they will push people to see the need for social justice and equality.

Even though I agree that artists play a significant role as cultural workers, and that they can make strong impressions on people, they are not the only group to communicate and create meanings. In some ways, journalists and others in the news media have greater 301

power and influence than anyone else. In 5.2.2.2.1, I addressed the War Memorial as a continual meaning making place, and explored how it might remind people of who they are. An individual, E-Suck Kang, attempted to question the war mechanism that had infiltrated the society, and that was at the heart of giving Koreans an opportunity to reconsider who they are. Needless to say, in this case the news media serve as primary mediators between the cultural event and people. In this sense, I cannot help but look into how they transmit the performance to people. Above all, it is necessary to consider how the media name and describe him and his positions. E-Suck Kang calls himself a social activist in his online and offline arguments, and in his interview with Kookmin TV radio

(October 2, 2013). Indeed, numerous media outlets released articles about his performance: The Jungang, The Hankook, Etoday, Zum, The Korea Herald, Etoday, The

Sports Chosun, The Hankyoreh, The Seoul, TV Daily, YTN, and TV Daily. Yet except for The Korea Herald, all of the newspapers introduced him as an “independent movie director,” not as an activist—even though they were aware of his prior performance in

2008 (The Jungang, The Hankook, E-today, Zum, The Korea Herald, October 1, 2013).

Although his job substituted for who he is and what he was doing, they did not even state what kind of movies he directed before – except during the interview with Kookmin TV radio.

Interestingly, numerous newspapers ended their articles on him with a paragraph that focused on the ‘problematic’ or ‘weird’ behavior that he exhibited before. For example, The Hankook, Etoday, The Sports Chosun, The Hankyoreh, The Seoul, TV

Daily, and The Korea Herald rehashed his personal history, noting that he dropped out of a Mission high school due to his refusal to attend chapel services, that he dropped out of 302

the University, and that he was sentenced to eighteen months in jail for refusing to participate in South Korea’s mandatory conscription system. The journalists’ word choices and focuses on “nude” are designed to evoke negative emotions towards him.

Also, the enumerations of his previous behaviors, which seemingly have nothing to do with the performance, portray him as a criminal or a social misfit. Accordingly, the claim that he made was not to avoid being seen as an eccentric.

The other interesting facet of this case is found in the responses from viewers or on Twitter that several media outlets (E-today, The Sports Chosun, YTN, and TV Daily) mentioned. Indeed, the way the articles interject their values into the story is as interesting as how they name Kang and his performance. The Sports Chosun and YTN enumerated somewhat varied opinions that citizens had towards his performance, while

E-today and TV Daily focused on revealing negative opinions towards his behavior.

Either way, these articles are problematic, in that they did not clarify their citations. This would be an appropriate example to show how journalists’ assorted viewpoints create totally different evaluations of the performance, and how their viewpoints are transmitted to readers. Ideally, as cultural workers journalists should cover cultural events based on fact, even though it is impossible to get rid of subjective opinions, and should make a room to discuss the different opinions.

I have argued that the War Memorial should be included in the multiculturalism portion of the Fine Art textbook, and justified their inclusion from the perspective of multicultural art education. The discussion was based on the assumption that South

Korean society should be a community where people experience collaborative processes of making meaning of themselves and the world; South Koreanness. Art educators, as 303

mediators between the society and art, should be sensitive enough to have students both question the given knowledge and to build up transformative knowledge. To this end, a productive and feasible art educator should not be hesitant to unravel the meaning- making process in culture and education. The questions about whose voice is addressed in cultural representations, who determines it, and what it is for, will lead teachers and their students to perceive partiality of knowledge, and will help both of them to expand the scope of their teaching and learning. This process of interrogation will be a significant prerequisite for realizing community-based knowledge and developing identity transformation and empowerment.

6.4 Conclusion

Inside/outside the Fine Art textbook promotes the pedagogy of South Korean ethnicity construction through postcolonial multiculturalism, which disrupts the idea of multiculturalism. From the inside and the in-between side the Fine Art textbook viewpoint, postcolonial multiculturalism around the 1990s to the present is closely related to the ethnicity construction. The government is involved in narrating South Korean ethnicity in response to the neoliberal context where the competitive particular culture that deserves to engage and respond to both opportunity and crisis in the global economy are promoted. The top-down narrative affects both the image examples in the book, a national curriculum, and the entire process of the textbook production system.

From outside the Fine Art textbook, postcolonial multiculturalism is also closely related to postcolonialism of ethnicity construction. Political nationalist knowledge builders who were associated with the government(s) were involved in producing public discourses relevant to the War Memorial, and local government(s) administered and 304

hosted numerous multiculturalism events held in 2013. Both the range of texts reflect or indicate modern South Korean ethnicity. In particular, The War Memorial represents a

(de)reconstructed concept of South Korean ethnicity that has to do with a blood-based ethnicity and appeals to a modern ethnicity. The South Korean ethnicity construction in a form of ethnic-nationalism is influenced by a politico-economic context. From the political cultural viewpoint, the de(re)construction of South Korean ethnicity through the discourses relevant to the War Memorial were the efforts that the dominant knowledge builders in a political/nationalist position made, in order to establish the nation, to govern difference, or to sustain their political position. The mechanism of economic culture is infiltrated into the ethnicity construction through South Korean postcolonial multiculturalism, so that the history of South Korea surrounding blood-based singular ethnicity, as necessity, becomes a commodity of South Koreanness to attract local and global people.

305

in the book system Research Data ◦ The Pensive ◦ The Textbook ◦ The War Memorial Inquiry Bodhisattva Authorization System ◦ The Peace Clock Tower Topic ◦ The Thinker ◦ A national curriculum ◦ The former minister of Sub- National Defense Lee’s research speech question ◦ The War Memorial 1&2 mascot Mudori’s greeting ▪ Government(s) involving in the construction of the War □ Knowledge ▪ Government involving in the Memorial and builder(s) process of textbook production multiculturalism events/policies ▪ Inclusion of a traditional or transformed ▪ Inclusion of the Inclu- culture/arts in a modernized way of South idea of “not being sion/ Exclu- Korean ethnic arts vs. exclusion of what is different” vs. □ sion beyond the typical South Korean ethnic exclusion of those The arts or the idea of South Korean ethnicity who are different ■ way ▪ Unity out of How to diversity & is the man Poli- manage diversity age ▪ Encouragement of South Korean arts and ethnicity tics of in ways that con- diffe differ- diverse countries’ ethnic arts respectively renc ence respect difference struction and promote each related to es people’s heritage postcolonial Other- ▪ Othering diverse ethnic cultures and different South Korean multi- ing individuals’ cultures cultural- ▪ Reflecting politico- ism? economic culture as an attempt of postcolonialism: De(re)construction ▪ Emphasizing culture that is associated □ Politico- of ethnicity economic with nationalism and economic culture in through The War context a national curriculum Memorial + Encouraging multiculturalism as a cultural policy in a society Table 12. The result of the relationship between South Korean ethnicity construction and postcolonial multiculturalism in the study

The conflated form of postcolonial multiculturalism and postcolonialism disrupt 306

the idea of multiculturalism, diversity affirmation, because the content is covered by ethnic arts with particularity, which turns out creating “the other” by bordering. To be specific, the focus of inclusion is on traditional artworks or a transformed art style based on a South Korean particular ethnic culture/arts. Any artworks that are likely to cause confusion to the idea of ethnic cultural particularity or any contemporary hybrid cultures that blur peoples’ commonsense of what are South Korean culture/arts are excluded. In this sense, for instance, The War Memorial is excluded and the reason is inferred that the cultural representation has ambiguous characteristics in the categorization of South

Korean ethnicity. Diverse countries’ cultures/arts are emphasized as much as South

Korean arts are. However, bounded to the categorized essentialism −and nationalism− involved cultural representations excludes both “multicultural families’” and individuals’ diverse cultures that disrupt the categorized understanding of South Korean ethnic culture, which generates othering. The public discourses relevant to, for instance, The

War Memorial include the idea of “not being different.” South Koreanness, which is formed by the transformation of a cultural norm of blood-based ethnicity to a social norm of unity and accordingly whose meaning is conformity to the South Korean social norm of homogenous unity, is included. Rather than encouraging diversity, postcolonial multiculturalism, in some way, appears to discourage diversity.

In short, dominant knowledge builders in politico-economic and educational positions use the idea of South Korean singular ethnicity as a primary organizing factor in

“manag[ing] or control[ing] differences” for the purpose of consolidating the nation with the strategy of dividing and unifying, by which South Koreans feel a sense of nationhood and unification, and at the same time experience marginalization and difference that 307

disrupts multiculturalism.

It is recommended to include the War Memorial for the multicultural art education portion in the Fine Art textbook, thereby students are engaged in construing the practice of cultural identity construction and social structure in history. The monument is expected to help students to improve critical thinking and to direct students’ action by community based art.

The effort to form national identity in South Korea by virtue of postcolonial multiculturalism inside/outside the fine art textbook leaves the next researcher several inquiries about teaching/learning plan, such as the concern about how to engage students in considering whose interests have been involved in the textbook plan; why and how the idea of national culture continues through restoring past identities at both local and global levels; what roles the idea of ethnicity plays. Inside/outside a fine art textbook should be an open text where cultural workers as well as community people collaborate in making meaning of themselves and the world and live together in diversity.

308

References

1.1 Text- English Version

Abdi, A. A. (2008). Democratic development and prospects for citizenship education: Theoretical perspectives on sub-Saharan Africa. Interchange, 39(2), 151-166.

Abdi, A. A., Ellis, L., & Sizha, E. (2005). Democratic development and the role of citizenship education in sub-Saharan Africa with a case focus on Zambia. International education journal, 6(4), 454-466.

Adorno, T., & Horkheimer, M. (2007). The culture industry: enlightenment as mass deception. Cultural studies reader (pp. 31-41). S. During (Ed.) London, New York: Routledge.

Anderson, B. (1991). Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origins and Spread of Nationalism (2nd ed.). London: Verso.

Appadurai, A. (1996). Disjuncture and difference in the global cultural economy. Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization (pp. 27-47). A. Appadurai (Ed.) Minneapolis: University of Minn.

Appiah, K. A. (1990). Race. In F. Lentricchia & T. McLaughlin (Eds.), Critical Terms for Literary Study (pp. 274-287). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Appiah, K. A. (1991). Is the post-in postmodernism the post-in postcolonial? Critical Inquiry, 17(2), 336-357.

Appiah, K. A. (1994). Identity, authenticity, survival: multicultural societies and social reproduction. Multiculturalism:Examining the politics of recognition (pp. 149- 163). C. Taylor (Ed.) Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Apple, M. W., & Christian-Smith, L. K. (1991). The politics of the textbook. In M. W. Apple, & L. K. Christian-Smith (Eds.), The Politics of the Textbook (pp. 1-21). New York, London: Routledge.

Apple, M. W. (2004). Ideology and Curriculum (3rd ed.). New York, London: Routledge Falmer.

309

Armstrong, J. (1982). Nations Before Nationalism. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.

“A true Korean.” Korea. July. 2010. Korean Culture and information Service

Back, L., Keith, M., Khan, A., Shukra, K., & Solomos, J. (2002). The return of assimilation: race, multiculturalism and new labour, Sociological Research Online 7(2). Retrieved April 15, 2014, from http://www.socresonline.org.uk/7/2/back.html

Ballengee-Morris, C., & Stuhr, P. L. (2001). Multicultural art and visual cultural education in a changing world. Art Education, 54(4), 6-13.

Ballengee-Morris, C. (2002). Cultures for sale: perspectives on colonialism and self- determination and the relationship to authenticity and tourism. Studies in Art Education, 43(3), 232-245.

Ballengee-Morris, C., & Sanders III, J. H. (2009). Culture, identity, representation: the economic policies of heritage tourism. International Journal of Education through Art, 5(2+3), 129-142.

Banks, J. A. (1988a). Ethnicity, class, cognitive, and motivational styles: research and teaching implications. Journal of Negro Education, 57(4), 452-466.

Banks, J. A. (1988b). The lives and values of researchers: implications for educating citizens in a multicultural society. Educational researcher, 27(7), 4-17.

Banks, J. A. (1993). The canon debate, knowledge construction, and multicultural education. Educational Researcher, 22(5), 4-14.

Banks, C. A. M., & Banks, J. A. (1995). Equity pedagogy: an essential component of multicultural education. Theory into Practice, 34(3), 151-158.

Banks, J. A. (2008). An introduction to multicultural education (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education.

Bardeguez, C., & Kocur, Z. (1996). Chapter 7: American identity. In S. Cahan, & Z. Kocur (Eds.), Contemporary Art and Multicultural Education (pp. 233-251). New York: The New Museum of Contemporary Art.

Barker, C. (2004). The sage dictionary of cultural studies. SAGE Publications.

Barrett, T. (1998). Criticizing art understanding the contemporary (2nd Ed.). Mayfield.

Bastos, F. M. C., & Hutzel, K. (2004). The art in the market project: addressing racial 310

issues through community art. Journal of Cultural Research in Art Education, 22, 86-98.

Bauman, Z. (1998). Globalization: the Human Consequence. New York: Columbia University Press.

Bhabha, H. K. (1984). Of mimicry and man: the ambivalence of colonial discourse. Discipleship: a special issue on psychoanalysis (spring, 1984) October, 28, pp. 125-133). The MIT Press.

Bhabha, H. K. (1994). The other question: stereotype, discrimination and the discourse of colonialism. The Location of Culture (pp. 66-84). London, New York: Routledge.

Bhabha, H. K. (1995a). Dissemniation: time, narrative, and the margins of the modern nation. In B. Ashcroft, G. Griffith, & H. Tiffin (Eds.), Postcolonialism Studies Readers (pp. 176-177). London, New York: Routledge.

Bhabha, H, K. (1995b). Cultural diversity and cultural differences. In B. Ashcroft, G. Griffith, & H. Tiffin, (Eds.), Postcolonialism Studies Readers (pp. 206-209). London, New York: Routledge.

Blitz, B. (2009). Blood, birth, imagination: ethnic nationalism and South Korean popular culture (Unpublished master’s thesis). Bowling Green State University. Retrieved March 5, 2013.

Boscarino, M. (2011). Desiring Japan: transnational encounters and critical multiculturalism (Unpublished master’s thesis). Miami University. Retrieved November 13, 2013, from https://etd.ohiolink.edu/ap/10?110686346194689::NO:10:P10_ETD_SUBID:576 24

Boyd, C. S. (1955). Nationalism as a Sentiment that Binds Group of people to live as a separate and distinct. Nationalism: Myth and Reality (pp. 10-32). New York: Harcourt Brace.

Bressler, C. E. (2007). Ch. 10. Postcolonialism. Literary criticism: an introduction to theory and practice (pp. 197-209). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Breuilly, J. (1982). Nationalism and the State. NY: St. Martin’s Press.

Brueggemann, B. J., & Moddelmog, D. A. (2002). Coming-out pedagogy: Risking identity in language and literature classrooms. Pedagogy: Critical Approaches to Teaching Literature, Language, Composition, and Culture, 2(3), 311-335.

311

Brunner, D. D. (1998). Marketing Friendship: fraternity and the exaggeration of otherness. Review of Education, pedagogy, and cultural studies, 20(2), 155-172.

Buffington, M. L. (2007). Art to Bring About Change: The Work of Tyree Guyton. Art Education, 60(4), 25-32.

Bukh, A. (2007). Japan’s history textbooks debate: national identity in narratives of victimhood and victimization. Asian Survey, 47(5), 683-704.

Burns, L. D. (2005). Moving targets: a critical discourse analysis of literacy, ideology, and standards in English language arts teacher preparation guidelines (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Michigan State University. Retrieved March 5, 2013.

Cahan, S., & Kocur, Z. (1996a). Affirming diversity and humanizing education interview with Adelaide Sanford. In S. Cahan & Z. Kocur (Eds.), Contemporary art and multicultural education (pp. 5-17). New York: The New Museum of Contemporary Art.

Cahan, S., & Kocur, Z. (1996b). Artists’ works. In S. Cahan & Z. Kocur (Eds.), Contemporary art and multicultural education (pp. 47-104). New York: The New Museum of Contemporary Art.

Camase, G. (2009). The ideological construction of a second reality: a critical analysis of a Romanian EFL textbook (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Toronto. Retrieved March 10, 2011.

Cameron, D. (2001). Ch. 9. Hidden agendas? Critical Discourse Analysis. Working with spoken discourse (pp. 123-142). Thousand Oaks, London: SAGE.

Chachange, C. S. L. (1998-2001). Nation building and ethnicity: Towards a Re- conceptualization of democracy in Africa. UTAFITI (New Series) Special issue, 4, 151-178.

Chalmers, G. (2005). Visual culture education in the 1960s. Art Education, Sep, 6-11.

Chanady, A. (1995). From difference to exclusion: multiculturalism and postcolonialism, International journal of politics, culture, and society, 8(3), 419-437.

Chatterjee, P. (1993). The Nation and Its Fragments: Colonial and Postcolonial Histories. NJ: Princeton University Press.

Chatterjee, P. (1996). Whose Imagined Community? Mapping the Nation (pp. 214-225). G. Balakrishnan (Ed.) London: Verso.

312

Chilisa, B. (2005). Educational research within postcolonial Africa: a critique of HIV/AIDS research in Botswana. International journal of qualitative studies in education, 18(6), 659-684.

Chilisa, B. (2012). Postcolonial indigenous research paradigms. Indigenous Research Methodologies (pp. 97-128). Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore: SAGE.

Choi, M. Y. (2007). The history of Korean school music education. Research Studies in Music Education, 33, 89-104.

CNN Wire Staff. (1998, February 25). Opposition boycott shadows South Korea’s new president. Kim Dae-jung promises democracy, market economy-CNN.com. CNN. Retrieved January 28, 2014, from http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9802/24/s.korea.wrap/index.html

Conard, C. (2008). Where is the public in public art? A case study of millennium park (Unpublished master’s thesis). The Ohio State University. Retrieved March 7, 2013, https://etd.ohiolink.edu/ap/10?0::NO:10:P10_ETD_SUBID:66367

Congdon, K., & Blandy, D. (2005). What? Clotheslines and Popbeads Aren’t Trashy Anymore?: Teaching About Kitsch. Studies in Art Education, 46(3), 197-208.

Connor, W. (1994). Ethnonationalism: The Quest for Understanding. Princeton: Princeton University.

Crossley, M. & Murby, M. (1994). Textbook provision and the quality of the school curriculum in developing countries: issues and policy options. Comparative education, 30(2), pp. 99-114.

Dant, T. (1999). Material culture in the social world. Buckingham: Open university press.

Darts, D. (2006). Art education for a change: Contemporary issues and the visual arts. Art Education, 59(5), 6-12.

Darts, D., Tavin, K., Sweeny, R. W., & Derby, J. (2008). Scopic regime change: The war of terror, visualculture, and art education. Studies in Art Education, 49(3), 200– 217.

Davis, K. (2008). Intersectionality as buzzword: A sociology of science perspective on what makes a feminist theory successful. Feminist Theory, SAGE publications : Log Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, 9(1), 67-85.

De Landa, M. (2006). A new philosophy of society: assemblage theory and social complexity. London ; New York: Continuum. 313

Desai, D. (2000). Imagining difference: The politics of representation in multicultural art education. Studies in Art Education, 41(2), 114-129.

Desai, D. (2003). Multicultural Art Education and the Heterosexual Imagination: A question of culture. Studies in Art Education, 44(2), 147-161.

Desai, D. (2005). Places to go: challenges to multicultural art education in a global economy. Studies in Art Education, 46(4), 293-308.

Deutsch, K. (1953). Nationalism and Social Communication (2nd Ed.). Cambridge: MIT Press.

Deutsche, R. (1992). Art and public space: Questions of democracy. Social Text, 33, 34- 53.

Dirks, N. B. (1992). Introduction: colonialism and culture. [Introduction]. In N. B. Dirks (Ed.), Colonialism and culture (pp. 1-25). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Duncan, J. (1989). The power of place in Kandy, Sri Lanka, 1780-1980. In J. Agnew & J. Duncan (Eds.), The Power of Place: Bringing Together Geographical and Social Imaginations (pp. 185-200). London: Routlege.

Edensor, T. (2002). National identity, popular culture and everyday life. UK, NY: Berg. Oxford.

Ehrlich, S. (2001). ‘My shirt came off. . . I gather that I took it off.’ The accused’s grammar of non-agency. Representing Rape: Language and Sexual Consent (pp. 36-61). London, New York: Routledge.

Eisenhauer, J. (2007). Just looking and staring back: challenging ableism through disability performance art. Studies in Art Education, 49(1), 7-22.

Eisenhauer, J. (2008). A visual culture of stigma: critically examining representations of mental illness. Art Education, 61(5), 13-18.

Fairclough, N. (1992). Intertextuality. Discourse and social change (pp. 101-136). Policy Press.

Fairclough, N. (1993). Critical discourse analysis and the marketization of public discourse: the universities. Discourse and Society, 4(2), 133-168. London, Newbury Park, New Delhi: SAGE Social Science Collections.

Fanon, F. (1968). Concerning violence. the wretched of the earth (C. Farrington, Trans., 314

pp. 35-106). New York: Grove Press.

Filicko, T. (1992). What do we need to know about culture? Unpublished manuscript. Retrieved October 4, 2007, from http://arted.osu.edu/publications/pdf_files/paper5.pdf

Foucault, M. (1979). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison (A. Sheridan, Trans). New York: Vintage.

Freedman, K. (2003). The importance of students’ artistic production to teaching visual culture. Art education, 56(2), 38-43.

Freedman, K. & Stuhr, P. L. (2004). Curriculum change for the 21st century: visual culture in art education. In E. W. Eisner & M. D. Day (Eds.), Handbook of research and policy in art education (pp. 815-828). NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Freire, P. (2007). Pedagogy of the oppressed. 30th anniversary edition, New York, London: Continuum.

Freire, P., & Macedo, D. (2002). Ideology matters. Rowman & Littlefield Pub Inc.

Garoian, C. R. (2001). Children performing the art of identity. In Y. Gaudelius & P. Speirs (Eds.), Contemporary issues in art education for elementary educators (pp. 119-129). Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall.

Gellner, E. (1983). Nations and nationalism. Oxford: Blackwell.

Gilpin, R. (1981). World Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gilroy, P. (1993). The Black Atlantic: Modernity and double consciousness. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Giroux, H. A. (1992). Series foreword: education, pedagogy, and the politics of cultural work. [Forward]. Cultural Pedagogy: Art/Education/Politics (pp. Vii-xi). New York: Bergin & Garvey.

Giroux, H. (1997). Insurgent multiculturalism and the promise of pedagogy. Pedagogy and the Politics of Hope: Theory, Culture, and Schooling (pp. 234-253). Boulder: Westview Press.

Giroux, H. A. (2008a). Ch. 4. Neoliberalism as public pedagogy. Against the terror of neoliberalism: politics beyond the age of greed (pp. 112-129). Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers.

315

Giroux, H. A. (2008b). Ch. 6. Against neoliberal common sense: rethinking cultural politics and public pedagogy in dark times. Against the terror of neoliberalism: politics beyond the age of greed (pp. 147-180). Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers.

Goh, D. P. S. (2008). From colonial pluralism to postcolonial multiculturalism: race, state formation and the question of cultural diversity in Malaysia and Singapore. Sociology Compass, 2(1), 232-252.

Gollnick, D. M., & Chinn, P. C. (2009). Multicultural education in a pluralistic society (8th ed.). NJ: Pearson Merrill Upper Saddle River.

Goodman, S. (1996). Chapter 2: Media education: culture and community in the classroom. In S. Cahan & Z. Kocur (Eds.), Contemporary art and multicultural education (pp. 18-23). New York: The New Museum of Contemporary Art.

Gordon, A., & Newfield, C. (Eds.). (1996). Mapping multiculturalism. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Green, R. (1996). Chapter 5: The texture of memory: historical process and contemporary art. In S. Cahan & Z. Kocur (Eds.), Contemporary art and multicultural education (pp. 39-44). New York: The New Museum of Contemporary Art.

Griffiths, G. (1996). The post-colonial project: critical approaches and problems. In B King (Ed.), New national and post-colonial literatures: An introduction (pp. 164- 177). New York: Clarendon Press.

Grillo, R. D. (1998). Pluralism and the Politics of Difference: State, Culture, and Ethnicity in Comparative Perspective. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Gude, O. (2008). Commentary aesthetics making meaning. Studies in Art Education, 50(1), 98-103.

Guilbault, J. (2011). The question of multiculturalism in the arts in the postcolonial nation-state of Trinidad and Tobago. Music & Politics, 5(1), 1-21.

Gunew, S. (2004). Haunted Nations: The Colonial Dimensions of Multiculturalisms. London: Routledge.

Gupta, A., & Ferguson, J. (1997). Beyond "culture": space, identity, and the politics of difference. In A. Gupta & J. Ferguson (Eds.), Culture, power, place: explorations in critical anthropology (pp. 33-51). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Hall, S. (1981). The Determinations of News Photographs. Working papers in Cultural Studies, 3, Centre for Cultural Studies, University of Birmingham. 316

Hall, S. (1992). The question of cultural identity. In S. Hall, D. Held & T. McGrew (Eds.), Modernity and its futures (pp. 273-316). Cambridge: Polity Press.

Hall, S. (1996). When was the post-colonial? Thinking at the limit. I. Chambers & L. Curti (Eds.), The post-colonial question: Common Skies, Divided Horizons (pp. 242-260). London, New York: Routledge.

Hall, S. (1997). Cultural identity and diaspora. In K. Woodward (Ed.), Identity and Difference (pp. 51-58). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.

Hall, S. (2000). Conclusion: the multi-cultural question. Un/settled multiculturalisms: Diasporas, Entanglements, Transruptions (pp. 209-241). B. Hesse (Ed.) New York: St. Martin’s Press.

Harewood, T. O. (2002). Struggling to find black counternarratives: multiculturalism, black entertainment television & the promise of ‘star power’ (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Miami University. Retrieved February 20, 2013, from http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etd/view?acc_num=miami1020349622

Hiebert, D. (2000). Immigration. In R.J. Johnston, D. Gregory, G. Pratt and M. Watts (eds.) The Dictionary of Human Geography 4th Edition. Oxford, UK: Blackwell: 373-375.

Hobsbawn, E., & Ranger, T. (1983). The Invention of tradition. NY: Cambridge University Press.

Hooks, B. (1994). Engaged Pedagogy. Teaching to transgress (pp. 13-22). New York: Routledge.

Hutchinson, J. (1994). Modern nationalism. London: Fontana.

Hwang, K. M. (2004). Beyond birth: social status in the emergence of modern Korea. Cambridge: Harvard University Asia Center.

Jackson, P. (2000). Multiculturalism. In R.J. Johnston, D. Gregory, G. Pratt and M. Watts (eds.) The Dictionary of Human Geography 4th Edition. Oxford, UK: Blackwell: 528.

Jameson, F. (1984). Postmodernism, or the cultural logic of late capitalism. New Left Review, 146, 53-92.

Jerdee, D. L. (2010). Messages of nationalism in Mexican and U.S. textbooks: implications for the national identity of transnational students (Unpublished master’s thesis). Loyola University Chicago. Retrieved November 11, 2013, from 317

http://ecommons.luc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1503&context=luc_theses

Johnson, K. (2013, November 7). A mysterious realm of exquisite objects, ‘Silla: Korea’s golden kingdom,’ at the Metropolitan Museum. [Review of the Art]. The New York Times. Retrieved November 20, 2013, from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/08/arts/design/silla-koreas-golden-kingdom-at- the-metropolitan-museum.html?_r=0

Kean, K. H. (2006). A historical and social perspective of Korean art education (Unpublished master’s thesis). Georgia State University. Retrieved November 15, 2013, http://scholarworks.gsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1005&context=art_desig n_theses

Kedourie, E. (1994). Nationalism (4th ed.). MA: Blackwell.

Keifer-Boyd, K., Amburgy, P. M., & Knight, W. B. (2007). Unpacking privilege: Memory, culture, gender, race, and power in visual culture. Art Education, 60(3), 19-24.

Kellner, D. (2002). Theorizing Globalization. Sociological Theory, 20(3), 285-305.

Keys. K. (2008). Contemporary visual culture jamming: redefining collage as collective, communal, & urban. Art Education, 61(2), 98-101.

Kim, H. J. (2004). National Identity in Korean Curriculum. Canadian Social Studies, 38(3), 74-89.

Koh, S. S. (2010). National identity and young children: a comparative study of 4th and 5th grades in Singapore and the United States (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Michigan State University. Retrieved April 4, 2013, http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/78918/serenek_1.pdf?seq uence=1

Koopmans, R., & Statham, P. (Eds.). (2001). Challenging Immigration and Ethnic Relations Politics: Comparative European Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kumashiro, K. (2002). Chapter 2: Theories and practices of antioppressive education. Troubling Education: Queer Activism and Antioppressive Education (pp. 31-71). New York: Routledge Falmer.

Kundnani, A. (2002). The death of multiculturalism. Race and Class, 43(4), 67-72.

318

Kymlicka, W. (1989). Liberalism, Community, and Culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kymlicka, W. (1998). Multicultural Citizenship. In Shafir, G. (ed.) The Citizenship Debates: A Reader. Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press, pp. 167-188.

Kymlicka, W. (2001). Politics in the Vernacular: Nationalism, Multiculturalism, and Citizenship. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kymlicka, W. (2004). Justice and security in the accommodation of minority nationalism. In: S. May, T. Modood & J. Squires (Eds.). Ethnicity, Nationalism and Minority Rights. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Lanier, V. (1969). The teaching of art as social revolution. The Phi Delta Kappan, 50(6), 314-319.

Lather, P. (1986). Research as praxis. Harvard Educational Review, 56(3), 41-60.

Lee, J. S. (1990). Jacques Lacan. Amherst: The University of Massachusetts Press.

Lippard, L. R. (1998). All over the place. The Lure of the local: Senses of place in a multicentered society (pp. 4-20). The New Press.

Longhurst, R. (2001). Corporeographies. Bodies: Exploring Fluid Boundaries, Critical Geographies, 11(11), 9-32.

Lowe, L. (1996). Imagining Los Angeles in the production of multiculturalism. Immigrant Acts: on Asian American Cultural Politics (pp. 84-96). Durham: Duke University Press.

Luke, A. (2002). Beyond science and ideology critique: Developments in critical discourse analysis. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 96-110.

Macedo, D. (2007). Introduction to the anniversary edition. [Introduction]. Pedagogy of the Oppressed (30th anniversary ed., pp. 11-28). New York, London: Continuum.

Madison, D. S. (2005). Performance ethnography. Critical ethnography: method, ethics, and performance (pp. 149-180). Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi: SAGE.

Malkki, L. H. (1997). National Geographic: The Rooting of Peoples and the Territorialization of National Identity among Scholars and Refugees. A. Gupta & J. Ferguson (Eds.), Culture, Power, Place: Explorations in Critical Anthropology (pp. 53-74). Durham & London: Duke University Press.

Mayo, C. (2007). Teaching against homophobia without teaching the subject. In S. 319

Springgay & D. Freedman (Eds.), Curriculum and the Cultural Body (pp. 163- 174). New York: Peter Lang Publishing.

McClintock, A. (1992). The angel of progress. Social Text, 31/32, 84-98.

McGowan, T., & Kunkle, S. (2004). Lacan and contemporary film. New York: Other Press.

McGrew, A. (1992). A global society? In S. Hall, D. Held & T. McGrew (Eds.), Modernity and its futures (pp. 61-102). UK: Polity Press.

McIntosh, P. (1988). White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack. New York Model for Better Programs. Retrieved March 17, 2013, from http://www.nymbp.org/reference/WhitePrivilege.pdf

McLaren, P. (1988). Foreword: Critical theory and the meaning of hope. [Forward]. Teachers as intellectuals toward a critical pedagogy of learning (pp. ix-xxii). Massachusetts: Bergin & Garvey Publishers.

Miller, D. (1995). On Nationality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ministry of Education & Human Resources Development. (2002). Fine Art for Fifth Graders. Seoul: Korea Institute of Curriculum & Evaluation.

Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology. (2008). Proclamation of the Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development: #2008-3 (Feb. 26, 2008) The school curriculum of the Republic of Korea - General Guidelines.

Mitchell, D. (1995). There's No Such Thing as Culture: Towards a Reconceptualization of the Idea of Culture in Geography. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 20(1), 102-116.

Mitchell, K. (2004). Geographies of Identity: Multiculturalism Unplugged.Progress in Human Geography, 28(5), 641-651. 399.

Mitchell, S. A., & Black, M. J. (1995). Psychologies of identity and self: Erik Erikson and Heinz Kohut. Freud and Beyond: a history of modern psychoanalytic theory (pp. 139-169). New York: Basic Books, A Member of The Perseus Books Group.

Mitchell, T. (2002). Heritage and violence. Rule of Experts: Egypt, Techno-Politics, Modernity (pp. 179-205). T. Mitchell (Ed.) Berkeley: University of California Press.

Mitchell, W. J. T. (1992). The violence of public art: do the right thing. In W. J. T. Mitchell (Ed.), Art and the public sphere (pp. 29-47). Chicago, Illinois: 320

University of Chicago Press.

Mohanty, C. T. (1994). On Race and Voice: challenges for Liberal Education in the 1990s. In H. Giroux & P. McLaren (Eds.), Between Borders: Pedagogy and the Politics of Cultural Studies (pp. 145-166). New York: Routledge.

Moniga, P. (Ed.). (1996). Contemporary postcolonial theory. London: Arnold.

Mudimbe, V. Y. (1994). The idea of Africa. London: James Curry.

Nájera-Ramírez, O. (1994). Engendering nationalism: identity, discourse, and the Mexican charro. Anthropological Quarterly, 67(1), 1-14.

Neperud, R. W., & Stuhr, P. L. (1987). A critical analysis of cultural maintenance in a changing society. JMCRAE, 5(1), 117-130.

Neperud, R. W., & Stuhr, P. L. (1993). Cross-cultural valuing of Wisconsin Indian art by Indians and non-Indians. Studies in art education, 34(4), 244-253.

Newfield, C., & Gordon, A.F. (eds) (1996). Mapping multiculturalism. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, pp.1-18

Ogden, P. (2000). Assimilation. In: R. J. Johnston, D. Gregory, G. Pratt & M. Watts (Eds.), The Dictionary of Human Geography (pp. 41). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

Ozkirimli, U. (2000). Theories of Nationalism (pp. 64-65). London: Macmillan.

Papastergiadis, N. (2005). Hybridity and Ambivalence: places and flows in contemporary art and culture. Theory, Culture & Society, 22(4), 39-64.

Parekh, B. (1999). Balancing unity and diversity in multicultural society. In: D. Avnon and A. De-Shalit (eds.) Liberalism and its practice London; New York: Routledge, pp. 106-124.

Parekh, B. (2000). Rethinking Multiculturalism: Cultural Diversity and Political Theory. Houndmills and London: MacMillan Press. Pecoud,

Park, J. A. (2009). Critical perspectives on colonization of the art curriculum in Korea. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 28(2), 183-193.

Renan, E. (1990). What is a nation? Narrating the nation. In H. Bhabha (Ed.), Nation and narration (pp 8-22). London & New York: Routledge.

Renan, E. (1996). What is a nation? Nationalism in Europe, 1815 to the Present (pp. 57- 58). S. Woolf (Ed.) London: Routledge. 321

Rhoades, M. (2009). Shaking + quaking + breaking the boughs: deconstructing family with digital visual culture media. Visual Culture and Gender, 4, 46-57.

Rifkin, J. (2000). A postmodern stage. The age of access (pp. 186-217). New York: Jeremy P. Tarcher/Putnam.

Rizvi, F. (2004). Debating globalization and education after September 11. Comparative Education, 40(2), 157-171.

Rizvi, F., & Lingard, B. (2006). Edward Said and the cultural politics of education. Discourse: Studies in the cultural politics of education, 27(3), 293-308.

Said, E. (1978). Introduction. [Introduction]. In Orientalism (pp. 1-30). Vintage Books.

Saussure, F. (1966). General Principles of Linguistics. Ferdinand de Saussure, Course in general linguistics (W. Baskin, Trans., pp. 65-70). New York: Philosophical Library.

Schiffrin, D. (1994). Definitions of Discourse. Approaches to Discourse (pp. 20-43). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.

Sewell, W. H. J. (1999). The concept(s) of culture. In V. E. Bonnell, L. A. Hunt & R. Biernacki (Eds.), Beyond the Cultural Turn: New Directions in the Study of Society and Culture (pp. 35-61). Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press.

Shaull, R. (2007). Foreword. [Foreword]. In Pedagogy of the oppressed (30th anniversary ed., pp. 29-34). New York, London: Continuum.

Shimony, T. T. (2003). The pantheon of national hero prototypes in educational texts understanding curriculum as a narrative of national heroism. Jewish History, 17, 309-332.

Shin, G. W. (2006). Ethnic Nationalism in Korea: Genealogy, Politics, and Legacy. Stanford University Press.

Sleeter, C. E., & Grant, C. A. (1991). Race, class, gender, and disability in current textbooks. In M. W. Apple & L. K. Christian-Smith (Eds.), The Politics of the Textbook (pp. 78-110). New York, London: Routledge.

Sleeter, C. E., & Grant, C. A. (2009). Making Choices for Multicultural Education: Five approaches to race, class, and gender (6th ed). New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Smith, A. D. (1986). The Ethnic Origins of Nations. Oxford: Blackwell.

322

Smith, A. D. (1993). The Ethnic Sources of Nationalism. Survival, 35(1), 48-62.

Smith-Crocco, M. S. (2005). Teaching shabanu: The challenges of using world literature in the us social studies classroom. Curriculum studies, 37(5), 561-582.

Solin, A. (2004). Intertextuality as mediation: on the analysis of intertextual relations in public discourse. Text, 24(2), 267-296.

Stalker, D., & Glymour, C. (1982). The malignant object: thoughts on public sculpture. The Public Interest, 66, 3-36.

Stein, S. J. (2004). Policy as cultural construct. The culture of education policy (pp. 1-25). New York: Teachers College Columbia University.

Stuhr, P. L., Petrovich-Mwaniki, L., & Wasson, R. F. (1992). Curriculum guidelines for the multicultural art classroom. Art Education, 45(1), 16-24.

Stuhr, P. L. (1994). Multicultural art education and social reconstruction. Studies in art education, 35(3), 171-178.

Stuhr, P. L. (1995). Chapter 9. Social reconstructionist multicultural art curriculum design: using the Powwow as an example. In R. W. Neperud (Ed.), Context Content and Community in Art Education beyond Postmodernism (pp. 193-221). New York & London: Teachers College Press.

Stuhr, P. L. (1999a). Bookreview Chalmers, G. (1996) Celebrating pluralism: art, education, and cultural diversity. Studies in art education, 40(2), 180-191.

Stuhr, P. L. (1999b). Response to Brian Allison’s article “Art, Culture, Language, and Education.” Journal of multicultural and cross-cultural research in art education, 18(1), 14-15.

Stuhr, P. L. (2003). A tale of why social and cultural content is often excluded from art education – and why it should not be. Studies in Art Education, 44(4), 301-314.

Sturken, M., & Cartwright, L. (2001). Practices of looking: An Introduction to Visual Culture. New York: Oxford University Press.

Su, Y. (2007). Ideological representations of Taiwan’s history: an analysis of elementary social studies textbooks, 1978-1995. Curriculum Inquiry, 37(3), 205-237.

Taras, R. C., & Ganguly, R. (2006). Understanding Ethnic Conflict: The international dimension. New York: Pearson Longman.

Taylor, C. (1994). The Politics of Recognition. Multiculturalism: Examining the Politics 323

of Recognition (pp. 25-73). A. Gutmann (Ed.). Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Tempelman, S. (1999). Constructions of Cultural Identity: Multiculturalism and Exclusion. Political Studies XLVII, pp. 17-31.

The Korea herald Wire Staff. (2013, October 1). Activist stages nude protest against war. The Korea herald. Retrieved January 7, 2014, from http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20131001000884

Thompson, K. (1992). Social pluralism and post-modernity. In S. Hall, D. Held & T. McGrew (Eds.), Modernity and its futures (pp. 221-255). Cambridge: Polity.

Tickly, L. (2004). Education and the new imperialism. Comparative education, 40(2), 173-198.

Tiffin, H. (1996). Plato’s cave: educational and critical practices. In B. King (Ed.), New national and post-colonial literatures: An introduction (pp. 143-163). New York: Clarendon Press.

Tormey, R. (2006). The construction of national identity through primary school history: the Irish case. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 27(3), 311-324.

Trend, D. (1992a). Chapter 1. Culture and pedagogy: Theories of oppositional practice. Cultural Pedagogy: Art/Education/Politics (pp. 9-30). New York: Bergin & Garvey.

Trend, D. (1992b). Chapter 5. New discursive spaces: Reinventing the public sphere. Cultural Pedagogy: Art/Education/Politics (pp. 105-144). New York: Bergin & Garvey.

Turker, A. T. (2008). Nationalism and modernization a comparative case study of Scots and Kurds (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Cincinnati. Retrieved May 5, 2013, from https://etd.ohiolink.edu/ap/10?0::NO:10:P10_ETD_SUBID:82137

Turner-Vorbeck, T., & Marsh, M. M. (2007). Hegemonies and “transgressions” of family: Tales of pride and prejudice. Other Kinds of Families: Embracing Diversity in Schools (pp. 7-28). New York: Teachers College Press.

UNESCO. (2002). UNESCO universal declaration on cultural diversity. Retrieved July 24, 2012, from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001271/127162e.pdf

UNESCO. (2005). Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions 2005. Retrieved July 24, 2012, from 324

http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php- URL_ID=31038&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html

Uitermark, J., Rossi, U., & van Houtum, H. (2005). Reinventing multiculturalism: urban citizenship and the negotiation of ethnic diversity in Amsterdam. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 29(3), 622-640. van Dijk, T. A. (1993). Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse and Society, 4(2), 249-283.

Vertovec, S. (1996). Multiculturalism, culturalism and public incorporation. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 19(1), 49-69.

Wasson, R. F., Stuhr, P. L., & Petrovich-Mwaniki, L. (1990). Teaching art in the multicultural classroom: Six position statements. Studies in Art Education, 31(4), 234-246.

Watson, I. (2010). Multiculturalism in South Korea: A critical assessment. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 40(2), 337-346.

Weninger, M., & Williams, M. (2005). Cultural Representations of Minorities in Hungarian Textbooks. Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 13(2), 159-180.

Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (2009). Chapter 1. Critical discourse analysis: History, agenda, theory, and methodology. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Ed.), Method of Critical Discourse Analysis (pp. 1-32). SAGE Publications.

Wright, G. (1991). The Politics of Design in French Colonial Urbanism. The University of Chicago press.

Ya-Chen, S. (2007). Ideological Representations of Taiwan‘s History: An Analysis of Elementary Social Studies Textbooks, 1978 - 1995. Curriculum Inquiry, 37(3), 205–237.

Yongbing, L. (2005). Discourse, Cultural Knowledge and Ideology: a Critical Analysis of Chinese Language Textbooks. Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 13(2), 233-264.

Young, I. M. (2000). Inclusion and Democracy. New York: Oxford University Press.

Young, R. (2001). Postcolonialism: an historical introduction. Blackwell Publishers.

Zizek, S. (1989). The sublime object of ideology. New York: VERSO.

1.2 Text- Korean Version

325

Ahn, D. S., Yang, Y. J., Park, S. Y., Lee, S. D., Cho, J. H., Yoon, Y. H. … Park, S. J. (2008). Guideline for the elementary education national curriculum (V) Physical education, Music, Fine arts, Foreign language (English). Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology (The Revised National Curriculum in 2007)

안동선, 양윤정, 박소영, 이성도 조중현, 윤양희, 황연주, 박수자 (2008). 초등학교교육과정해설(V) 체육, 음악, 미술, 외국어(영어), 교육과학기술부 (07 개정미술해설서)

Ahn, H. R. (2011). The current status of multicultural art education and its alternative approach: listening to the other through contemporary art. Art Education Research Review, 25(3), 1-26. 안혜리. (2011). 다문화미술교육의 현황과 대안: 동시대 미술을 통해 타자의 목소리 듣기. 미술교육논총, 25(3), 1-26.

Bae, J. H. (1997, May 22). Discomfort for the editor for misunderstanding the real meaning of the War Memorial. The Kyunghyang. Retrieved January 11, 2013, from http://newslibrary.naver.com/viewer/index.nhn?articleId=1997052200329114004 &editNo=45&printCount=1&publishDate=1997-05- 22&officeId=00032&pageNo=14&printNo=16111&publishType=00010 배정환 (1997. 05. 22). 편집자에게 용산전쟁기념관 참뜻 오해 유감. 경향신문. 검색 2013, 1. 11.

Bhan, B. H. (1992, June 25). War Memorial revealing the Yongsan old Army Headquarters. The Dong-A. Retrieved September 25, 2013, from http://newslibrary.naver.com/viewer/index.nhn?articleId=1992062500209220001 &editNo=2&printCount=1&publishDate=1992-06- 25&officeId=00020&pageNo=20&printNo=21864&publishType=00020 반병희 (1992, 06, 25). 용산 옛 육본 자리 모습 드러내는 전쟁기념관. 동아일보. 검색 2013, 9. 25.

Cha, Y. K. (2012). The reality of South Korean multicultural education. Multicultural art education symposium (pp. 9-24). Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism & Korea Arts & Culture Education Service. 차윤경(2012). 한국다문화교육의 실제. 다문화교육심포지엄 (pp. 9-24). 문화체육관광부 & 한국문화예술교육진흥원.

Cho, S. W. (2013, October 1). ‘Kookmin TV’ Radio Interview with Mr. Kang. The Kookmin TV News. Retrieved January 7, 2014, from http://news.kukmin.tv/news/articleView.html?idxno=1390 조상운(2013. 10. 01). ‘국민 TV’ 라디오 인터뷰. 국민 TV 뉴스. 검색 2014. 1. 7.

Choi, K. M. (2006, Dec. 01). 1st national curriculum. The National Archives 최광만 (2006, Dec. 01). 제 1 차 교육과정, 국가기록원나라기록,

326

Chung, M. J. (2005). Korean Art Represented in the United States in the 1950s. Korean Modern & Contemporary Art History, 14, 7-41. 정무정 (2005). 1950 년대 미국에 소개된 한국미술. 근현대미술사학 , 14, 7-41.

Critical Plateaux. (2002, Septempber 19). Sansudaein’s journal [Web log post]. Retrieved March 1, 2013, from http://cafe.daum.net/9876/2tur/55?docid=DUr2tur5520020919141840 비평고원. (2002, 9. 19.). 쌍수대인의 노트 [웹자료]. 검색 2013, 3. 1.

Determined not to change its original plan/usage – newslibrary.naver.com. (n.d.). The Kyunghyang (1993, June 18). Retrieved January 19, 2013, from http://newslibrary.naver.com/viewer/index.nhn?articleId=1993061800329102013 &editNo=15&printCount=1&publishDate=1993-06- 18&officeId=00032&pageNo=2&printNo=14788&publishType=00010 전쟁기념관 전용않기로 – 네이버뉴스라이브러리. (날짜 불분명). 경향신문 (1993, 06. 18). 검색 2013, 1. 19.

Difficult to replace the blue print of the War Memorial – newslibrary.naver.com. (n.d.). The Dong-A (1993, June 18). Retrieved January 19, 2013, from http://newslibrary.naver.com/viewer/index.nhn?articleId=1993061800209104011 &editNo=40&printCount=1&publishDate=1993-06- 18&officeId=00020&pageNo=4&printNo=22204&publishType=00010 전쟁기념관 설계변경 어렵다. 박물관 전용 백지화 – 네이버뉴스라이브러리. (날짜 불분명). 동아일보 (1993, 06. 18). 검색 2013, 1. 19.

Gim, C. C. (2011). Textbook Policy in Korea: Current issues and future directions. International Textbook Symposium 2011, Trends and prospects of textbook policies – Textbook policy, Textbook development, and Textbook application (pp. 90-102). Korea Textbook Research Foundation, 김재춘 (2011). 한국의 교과서 정책: 정책 현안과 발전 방향. 국제 교과서 심포지엄 2011, 교과서 정책의 동향과 전망 – 교과서정책, 교과서 개발, 교과서 활용 (pp. 90-102). 한국교과서연구재단.

Gim, C. C. (2012). The purpose of the approved textbook. Textbook Research, 67, 13-16. 김재춘 (2012). 인정도서 정책 도입의 취지: 의미와 과제, 교과서연구, 67 호, 13-16.

Han, K. K., & Han, K. S. (2007). The ideal and real multicultural society in South Korea: Theorizing South Korean multiculturalism. Korean Sociological Association, 7(7), 67-110. 한경구 & 한건수. (2007). 2 장 한국적 다문화 사회의 이상과 현실: 순혈주의와 문명론적 차별을 넘어. 한국적”다문화주의”의 이론화. 한국사회학회, 67-110.

Han, Y. H. (2007). Chapter 2. Postcolonialism and ‘Korean’ textbook. Korean Textbook and National Ideology (pp. 201-224). Seoul: Kulnurim. 한영현 (2007). 2. 탈식민주의와 ‘국어’교과서. 국어교과서와 국가이데올로기 (pp. 201-224). 서울: 글누림.

327

Hong, E. M. (2009). An Investigational Study and Inspection Analysis on the Degree of Knowledge of Pre-service Teachers and Present Teachers on the Multicultural Fine Arts Education (Unpublished master’s thesis). Hanyang University. Retrieved March 6, 2013, from http://dl.nanet.go.kr/SearchDetailList.do 홍은미 (2009). 다문화 미술교육에 관한 예비·현직 미술교사의 인식도 조사 및 실태분석 (석사학위논문). 한양대학교. 검색 2013. 3. 5.

Hong, W. P. (2008). Study on the development of South Korean multicultural education: Going beyond the United States’ debate on multiculturalism. The Journal of Educational Principles, 13(2), 89-113. 홍원표. (2008). 한국적 다문화 교육의 발전 방안 탐색: 미국 논의의 수용을 넘어서. 교육원리연구, 13(2), 89- 113.

Hong, W. P. (2009). Geographic borders, cultural imaginations, and school curriculum: Asia in two American social studies classrooms. Study of Anthropology of Education, 12(1), 145-172. 홍원표. (2009). 지리적 경계와 문화적 상상력, 그리고 학교 교육과정: 미국 사회과 수업의 ‘아시아’를 중심으로. 교육인류학연구, 12(1), 145-172.

Hong, W. P. (2010). Postcolonialism and curriculum studies: Looking for an epidemiological foundation of school curriculum in a multicultural society. The Journal of Curriculum Studies, 28(1), 47-65. 홍원표. (2010). 탈식민주의와 교육과정 연구: 다문화 시대의 새로운 인식론적 기반을 찾아서. 교육과정연구, 28(1), 47-65.

How to expand usage of the War Memorial: Debate/discuss on whether to move the war memorial to the national gallery – newslibrary.naver.com. (n.d.). The Kyunghyang (1993, June 15). Retrieved January 19, 2013, from http://newslibrary.naver.com/viewer/index.nhn?articleId=1993061500329102012 &editNo=15&printCount=1&publishDate=1993-06- 15&officeId=00032&pageNo=2&printNo=14785&publishType=00010 전쟁기념관 용도 확대 국립박물관 이전 검토– 네이버뉴스라이브러리. (날짜 불분명). 경향신문 (1993, 06. 15) 검색 2013, 1. 19.

Hwang, H. W. (2007). A study on social studies teachers’ perceptions of multicultural education (Unpublished master’s thesis). Seoul University. Retrieved March 5, 2013, from http://s-space.snu.ac.kr/handle/10371/42683 황혜원 (2007). 중등 사회과 교사들의 다문화교육에 대한 인식 연구 (석사학위논문) 서울대학교. 검색 2013. 3. 5.

Jager, S. M. (1997, May 19). A Critical review on the War Memorial. The Kyunghyang. Retrieved April 10, 2014, fromhttp://newslibrary.naver.com/viewer/index.nhn?articleId=199705190032911 8010&editNo=45&printCount=1&publishDate=1997-05- 328

19&officeId=00032&pageNo=18&printNo=16108&publishType=00010 쉴라 야거. (1997, 5. 19). 전쟁기념관에 대한 비판적 고찰. 경향신문. 검색 2014, 4. 10.

Jang, J. H. (1997, October 10). Why need a structural change? Change or die. The Maeil Economy. Retrieved January 29, 2014, from http://newslibrary.naver.com/viewer/index.nhn?articleId=1997101000099153001 &editNo=15&printCount=1&publishDate=1997-10- 10&officeId=00009&pageNo=53&printNo=9879&publishType=00010 장종회(1997. 10. 10) 구조조정 왜 필요한가? 변하지 않으면 죽는다. 매일경제. 검색 2014, 1. 29.

Joo, J. K. (2006). Analysis of Values in High School English Textbooks: The Multicultural Perspective (Unpublished master’s thesis). Korea University. Retrieved May 8, 2013, http://dl.nanet.go.kr/SearchDetailList.do 주종균 (2006). 세계시민양성을 위한 고등학교 영어교과서의 가치관 분석: 중심과 주변의 관계에 따른 다문화주의 관점에서 (석사학위논문). 고려대학교 교육대학원: 영어교육전공. 검색 2013, 5. 8.

Jung, Y. H. (2009). Multicultural phenomenon in South Korea. Hyundai Economy Research Institute. Retrieved July 27, 2012, from http://www.kmobile.co.kr 정유훈. (2009). 국내 다문화현상의 특징과 시사점, 현대 경제 연구원. 검색 2012, 6. 27.

Kim, A. Y. (2009). Interpretation of a worldview in middle school textbooks from the post-colonialist perspective (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Pusan University. Retrieved May 9, 2013, http://dl.nanet.go.kr/SearchDetailList.do 김아영. (2009). 중학교 교과서에 내재된 세계관의 탈식민주의적 해석 (박사학위논문). 부산대학교 대학원: 교육학전공. 검색 2013, 5. 9.

Kim, A. Y. (2010). An analysis of World Geography textbooks from the post-colonialist perspective. The Journal of Curriculum Studies, 28(3), 167-191. 김아영. (2010). 세계지리 교과서의 탈식민주의적 분석. 교육과정연구, 28 (3), 167-191.

Kim, B. K. (1999, April 7). Internet Talk with the new president of ADB. The Maeil Economy. 김봉국(1999, 4.7.). 지오다다오 신임 ADB 총재 인터넷 대담. 매일경제.

Kim, H. G. (2007). The official memory of Korean War and the War Memorial. Korean Communication and Information Studies, 40, 192-220. 김형곤 (2007). 한국전쟁의 공식기억과 전쟁기념관. 한국언론정보학보, 40, 192-220.

Kim, H. J. (2013, October 1). “Against the military parade in the street,” Kang, E-Suck, nude protest. The Hankyoreh. Retrieved January 7, 2014, from http://themen.hani.co.kr/arti/politics/defense/605340.html 김효진 (2013.10.1). “국군시가행진반대” 강의석씨 알몸시위. 한겨례신문. 검색 2014. 1. 7.

Kim, H. K. (2010). Multicultural Art Education through Integrative Curriculum Approach. 329

Art Education Research Review, 24(2), 449~467. 김혜경(2010). 통합교과를 통한 다문화 미술교육 방안.미술교육논총. 24(2), 449~467.

Kim, H. K. (2011). A good fine art textbook from teachers’ viewpoints. Textbook Research, 63, 28-32. 김혜경 (2011). 교사가 보는 좋은 미술교과서. 교과서연구, 63, 28-32.

Kim, I. C. (2008). A study on the content in the fine art elementary and middle school textbooks. The Journal of Curriculum and Evaluation, 11(2), 231-250. 김인창(2008). 초․중등학교 미술교과서 내용구성에 관한 연구. 교육과정평가연구, 11(2), 231-250.

Kim, J. H. (2002, February). Pil-yun Ahn’s public art, the Peace Clock Tower, for the next generation. SPACE. Retrieved March 12, 2013, from http://artsonline.knaa.or.kr/jwork/boardClientView.do?boardID=12ec15dbe9d9& boardCD=12d12175e368&boardRef=0&boardDepth=1&searchField=&searchW ord=&mode=&returnUrl=&menuId=&category=P0000254, 2011-03-17//031113 김정후 (2002). 안필연 공공미술 평화의 시계탑, 후세를 위하여, SPACE. 검색 2013, 3. 12.

Kim, S. A. (2012). The value and role of visual culture in multicultural education. Multicultural art education symposium (pp. 25-36). Ministry of Culture, Sports, and Tourism & Korea Arts & Culture Education Service. 김선아(2012). 다문화교육에서 문화예술의 가치와 역할. 다문화교육 심포지엄 (pp. 25-36). 문화체육관광부 & 한국문화예술교육진흥원.

Kim, S. M. (2009). Symbolic boundaries of Koreans: comparison with 23 OECD countries (Unpublished master’s thesis). Seoul University. Retrieved March 12, 2013, from http://s-space.snu.ac.kr/handle/10371/22054 김선민 (2009). 한국인의 외국인에 대한 구별짓기: 상징적 경계 이론을 통한 비교분석 (석사학위논문) 서울대학교. 검색 2013.3. 12.

Kim, S. M. (2011). A study on policy to promote developing a creative knowledge-based textbook. International Textbook Symposium 2011, Trends and prospects of textbook policies– Textbook policy, Textbook development, and Textbook application (pp. 110-115). Korea Textbook Research Foundation. 김송미 (2011). 지식 기반의 창의적인 교과서 개발을 위한 정책 비전 모색. 국제교과서심포지엄 2011, 교과서 정책의 동향과 전망 – 교과서정책, 교과서 개발, 교과서 활용 (pp. 110-115). 한국교과서연구재단

Kim, T. W. (2010, January). The history of GDP changes in South Korean through photos. Chosun Monthly, Retrieved February 1, 2013, from https://monthly.chosun.com/client/news/viw.asp?nNewsNumb=201001100082&ctcd=&cpage=1 김태원 (2010, 1 월). 화보로 보는 한국의 1 인당 GDP 변천사. 월간조선. 검색 2014, 2. 1.

330

Kim, W. H. (1998, June 25). Change the name of the War Memorial. The Hankyoreh. Retrieved January 7, 2014, from http://newslibrary.naver.com/viewer/index.nhn?articleId=1998062500289106003 &editNo=6&printCount=1&publishDate=1998-06- 25&officeId=00028&pageNo=6&printNo=3228&publishType=00010 김우현 (1998. 06. 25). 전쟁기념관 이름 바꿔야. 한겨레신문. 검색 2014. 1. 7.

Kim, Y. J. (2011). The role of publisher for good textbooks. International Textbook Symposium 2011, Trends and prospects of textbook policies – Textbook policy, Textbook development, and Textbook application (pp. 162 – 178). 김영진 (2011). 좋은 교과서 편찬을 위한 발행사의 역할. 국제교과서심포지엄 2011, 교과서 정책의 동향과 전망 – 교과서정책, 교과서 개발, 교과서 활용 (pp. 162 – 178).

Koh, Y. M. (2004). Enlarging the Government Approval System and maintaining profit making in the TB industry. Textbook research, 12(43), 36-39. 고영목 (2004). 검정제의 전면 확대와 발행사의 수익성 보장. 교과서연구, 12(43), 36-39.

Korea Authorized and Approved Textbook Home Page. (n.d.). Korea Authorized and Approved Textbook. Retrieved August 12, 2013, from http://www.ktbook.com/info/info_02.asp 사단법인 한국검인정교과서 홈페이지. (날짜 불분명). 사단법인한국검인정교과서. 검색 2013, 4. 12.

Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation Home Page. (n.d.). Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation. Retrieved May 7, 2013, from http://www.kice.re.kr/board.do?boardConfigNo=60&menuNo=296#none 한국교육과정평가원 홈페이지. (날짜 불분명). 한국교육과정평가원. 검색 2013, 3. 7.

Lee, H. W. (2008). Image, Text and Myth: On Auguste Rodin’s Reception in East Asia. Korean Modern & Contemporary Art History, 19, 50-68. 이혜원 (2008). 이미지, 텍스트, 그리고 신화: 동아시아의 로댕 수용과정에 대하여, 한국근현대미술사학, 19, 50-68.

Lee, H. Y. (2004). Establishing open and fair textbook publication system. Textbook Research, 12(43), 15-18. 이혜영 (2004). 개방적이고 공정한 교과서 발행 제도 확립. 교과서 연구, 12(43), 15-18.

Lee, J. Y. (2013, October 1). Kang E-Suck, Nude performance on Veterans Day. . . ‘Celebrating war, like celebrating marriage.’ The O My News. Retrieved January 7, 2014, from http://m.ohmynews.com/NWS_Web/Mobile/at_pg.aspx?CNTN_CD=A00019115 23 이주영 (2013. 10. 01). 강의석, ‘국군의 날’ 누드 시위. . . ‘결혼 기념하듯 전쟁기념.” 오마이뉴스. 검색 2014. 1. 7.

331

Lee, K. E. (2011, August 18). Reviewing War Memorial exhibition, The Peace Clock Tower. The Kukbang. Retrieved March 11, 2013, from http://kookbang.dema.mil.kr/kookbangWeb/m/view.do?ntt_writ_date=20110818 &parent_no=6&bbs_id=BBSMSTR_000000000125 이경은 (2011, 08.18). 전쟁기념관 전시물 다시보기-평화의 시계탑, 국방일보. 검색 2013, 03. 11.

Lee, K. S. (2008). Exploring guidelines for multicultural education in South Korea based on French multicultural education. Educational Study and Practice, 72, 61-76. 이경수. (2008). 우리나라 다문화교육의 방향성 모색 – 프랑스 다문화 교육의 현황에 비추어. 교육연구와 실천, 72, 61-76.

Lee, K. S., Lyu, J. M., Park, J. S., Choi, M. K., Sung, N. K., Kwan, J. B., . . . Kim, H. J. (2011). Fine Art for Fifth- and Sixth-Graders. Seoul: Chunjae Education. 이규선, 류재만, 박지숙, 최미경, 성낙경 권준범, …김해진 (2011). 초등학교 미술 5-6. 서울: 천재교육.

Lee, M. B., Park, G. B., Shin, D. K., Shin, H. S., Sim, J. H., Lee, G. H., & Jung, Y. S. (2009). Proclamation of the Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development:# 2007-79 [Seperate volum 13] Fine Arts curriculum. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology, Korea. 이문복, 박기범, 신동광, 신항수, 심재호, 이근호, & 정양순, (2009). 개정 영어과 교육과정 후속지원 연구 위탁과제 보고서 2007 년 개정 교육과정 영문판 개발연구 -자연과학 및 예체능 계열. 교육과학기술부.

Lee, S. K. (1994, June 10). War Memorial name belligerent, unreasonable. The Kyunghyang. Retrieved January 7, 2014, from http://newslibrary.naver.com/viewer/index.nhn?articleId=1994061000329116010 &editNo=15&printCount=1&publishDate=1994-06- 10&officeId=00032&pageNo=16&printNo=15109&publishType=00010 이성걸 (1994, 06. 10). 전쟁기념관 명칭 호전적 어불성설. 경향신문. 검색 2014. 1. 7.

Lee, S. Y. (2012, February 27). The Statue of Brothers in the War Memorial built on the basis of the battle of Woonju. The Woonju Today. Retrieved January 7, 2014, from http://news459.ndsoftnews.com/news/articleView.html?idxno=69063 이상용 (2012, 2. 27). 서울전쟁기념관 ‘형제의 상’ 원주 치악재 전투 소재로 건립, 원주투데이. 검색 2014. 1. 7.

Ministry of Security and Public Administration Home Page. (n.d.). Ministry of Public Administration and Security. Retrieved February 10, 2009, from http://mopas.korea.kr/ 안전행정부 홈페이지. (날짜 불분명). 안전행정부 홈페이지. 검색 2009, 2. 10.

Mok, S. J. (2012, January 4). Cultural Imperialism. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n132Q6imhMg 목수정 (2012, 1. 4.). 문화제국주의 [웹자료]. 검색 2013, 2. 1. 332

Moon, H. (1995, April 14). How about Chunyumkwan? The Hankyoreh. Retrieved January 7, 2013, from http://newslibrary.naver.com/viewer/index.nhn?articleId=1995041400289110005 &editNo=5&printCount=1&publishDate=1995-04- 14&officeId=00028&pageNo=10&printNo=2203&publishType=00010 문혁 (1995, 04. 14). 전쟁기념관 명칭 추념관, 전시관으로. 한겨레신문. 검색 2013. 1. 7.

Multicultural Family Support Act. (n.d.). Information center for national law. Retrieved July 20, 2013, from http://www.law.go.kr/lsInfoP.do?lsiSeq=122609#0000 다문화가족지원법 (날짜 불분명). 국가법령정보센터. 검색 2013, 7. 20.

New site decided for the War Memorial on the current military head quarter. – newslibrary.naver.com. (n.d.). The Dong-A (1989, March 3). Retrieved November 11, 2013, from http://newslibrary.naver.com/viewer/index.nhn?articleId=1989030300209215001 &editNo=2&printCount=1&publishDate=1989-03- 03&officeId=00020&pageNo=15&printNo=20745&publishType=00020 육군본부이전 뒤 전쟁기념관 건립– 네이버뉴스라이브러리. (날짜 불분명). 동아일보 (1989, 03. 03). 검색 2013, 11. 11.

Park, G. Y. (2007, December 1). Criteria for immunity from military training [Web log post]. Retrieved April 12, 2013, from http://blog.naver.com/PostView.nhn?blogId=gygy87&logNo=100147804807 박기영 (2007, 12. 1). 2012 군대면제조건 [웹자료]. 검색 2013, 4. 12.

Park, H. K. (2011). Commitment to keep textbook. International Textbook Symposium 2011, Trends and prospects of textbook policies – Textbook policy, Textbook development, and Textbook application (pp. 104-108). Korea Textbook Research Research Foundation. 박홍기 (2011). 교과서는 약속이다. 국제 교과서 심포지엄 2011, 교과서 정책의 동향과 전망 – 교과서정책, 교과서 개발, 교과서 활용 (pp. 104-108). 한국교과서연구재단.

Park, J. Y. (2012). Application of the post-colonialist perspective to World Geography textbooks in middle school (Unpublished master’s thesis). Ewha Womans University. Retrieved March 18, 2013, 박지연. (2012). 중등 세계지리교육에서 탈식민주의 관점의 적용과 수업 재구성에 관한 연구 : 아프리카 단원을 사례로 (석사학위논문). 이화여자대학교 교육대학원: 지리교육전공. 검색 2013, 3. 18.

Park, K. H. (2009). A study on elementary school teachers’ perceptions of multicultural education (Unpublished master’s thesis). Seoul University. Retrieved April 1, 2013, http://s-space.snu.ac.kr/handle/10371/60563 박경희 (2009). 다문화 미술교육에 관한 초등교사의 인식연구 (석사학위논문). 서울대학교. 검색 2013. 4.1.

333

Park, S. H., & Sung, S. H. (2008). Research for the current multicultural educational policy and its implications in South Korea. Educational Study and Practice, 72, 19-61. 박성혁 &성상환 (2008). 우리나라 다문화교육정책 추진현황, 과제 및 성과분석 연구. 교육연구와 실천, 72, 19-61.

Park, S. H. (2013, November 16). Silla: Korea’s Golden Kimgdom. nyculture. Retrieved December 8, 2013, from http://www.nyculturebeat.com/?mid=Art&document_srl=2874600 박숙희 (2013, 11.16). 황금의 나라, 신라. 검색 2013, 12. 8.

Seo, Y. R. (2007). The Discourse on Art Movement in the 1920-30s’ and Artist’s Consciousness as ‘Jeonwee (avant-garde).’ Korean Modern & Contemporary Art History, 18, 24-38. 서유리 (2007). 전위의식과 한국의 미술운동 1920~30 년대를 중심으로. 근현대미술사학, 18, 24-38.

Seoul City Hall Wire Staff. (2013, May 27). Many multiculturalism events held for Globalization Day throughout Seoul. Seoul City Hall. Retrieved December 9, 2013, from http://woman.seoul.go.kr/archives/16639 서울시청. (2013, 5. 27). 세계인의 날 맞아 서울 곳곳 다양한 다문화행사 열려. 서울시청. 검색 2013, 12. 9.

Shim, Y. W. (1994, June 17). Instead of the name of the War Memorial, Memorial Affairs Sometimes sure. The Dong-A. Retrieved May 7, 2013, from http://newslibrary.naver.com/viewer/index.nhn?articleId=1994061700209119005 &editNo=45&printCount=1&publishDate=1994-06- 17&officeId=00020&pageNo=19&printNo=22544&publishType=00010 심영우 (1994, 06. 17). 전쟁기념관 명칭 대신 호국기념관 어떨는지. 동아일보. 검색 2013. 5. 7.

Shin, K. A. (2003). The impact of globalization on studies about South Korean multicultural art education (Unpublished master’s thesis). Seoul University. Retrieved March 1, 2013, from http://library.snu.ac.kr/search/DetailView.ax?sid=1&cid=0001079817 신경아 (2003). 한국 다문화 미술교육 연구에 세계화가 끼친 영향 (석사학위논문) 서울대학교. 검색 2013. 3. 1.

Special talk between Kandshi, the president of IMF, and Jhang, the owner of The Maeil Economy. (1998. 6. 29.). Special Talk between Kandshi, the president of IMF, and Jhang, the owner of The Maeil Economy. The Maeil Economy. Retrieved January 7, 2014, from http://newslibrary.naver.com/viewer/index.nhn?articleId=1998062900099107001 &editNo=15&printCount=1&publishDate=1998-06- 29&officeId=00009&pageNo=7&printNo=10099&publishType=00010 캉드쉬 imf 총재-장대환 본사사장 특별대담. (1998. 6. 29.). 캉드쉬 imf 총재-장대환 본사사장 특별대담. 매일경제. 검색 2014, 1. 29. 334

Statutes of the Republic of Korea Home Page. (n.d.). Statutes of the Republic of Korea. Retrieved March 19, 2013, from http://elaw.klri.re.kr/kor_service/lawTotalSearch.do#9 대한민국영문법령 홈페이지. (날짜 불분명). 대한민국영문법령. 검색 2013, 3.19.

The E-Today Wire Staff. (2013, October 1). ‘The Veterans Day ceremony,’ Kang, E-Suck, nude protest at the War Memorial. The E-Today. Retrieved January 7, 2014, from http://www.etoday.co.kr/news/section/newsview.php?idxno=798262 이투데이기자. (2013. 10.1). ‘국군의 날 행사’ 강의석, 전쟁기념관서 알몸 시위. 이투데이신문. 검색 2014, 1. 7.

The Jungang Wire Staff. (2013, October 1). Kang, E-Suck, “nude protest” at the War Memorial. The Jungang. Retrieved January 7, 2014, from http://article.joins.com/news/article/article.asp?total_id=12733599 중앙일보기자. (2013. 10. 01).강의석, 전쟁기념관서 “누드시위.” 중앙일보. 검색 2013, 1. 7.

The Seoul Wire Staff. (2013, October 1). Kang, E-Suck, Again ‘Anti-War’ protest preceding 2008… At 4pm, as well? The Seoul. Retrieved January 7, 2014, from http://www.seoul.co.kr/news/newsView.php?id=20131001500005 서울신문기자. (2013. 10. 01). 강의석, 2008 년 이어 또 ‘반전’알몸시위. . . 오후 4 시에도? 서울신문. 검색 2014. 1. 7.

The Sports Chosun Wire Staff. (2013, October 1). Kang, E-Suck, nude performance at the War Memorial as “Anti-War protest.” The Sports Chosun. Retrieved January 7, 2014, from http://sports.chosun.com/news/news.htm?id=201310020100007420000160&Ser viceDate=20131001 스포츠조선기자 (2013. 10. 1). 강의석, 전쟁기념관서 누드 퍼포먼스 “전쟁반대 비무장 시위.” 스포츠조선. 검색 2014. 1. 7.

The War Memorial built to the place of the Army Headquarters. – newslibrary.naver.com. (n.d.). The Kyunghyang (1989. July 5). Retrieved January 19, 2013, from http://newslibrary.naver.com/viewer/index.nhn?articleId=1989070500329214013 &editNo=3&printCount=1&publishDate=1989-07- 05&officeId=00032&pageNo=14&printNo=13469&publishType=00020 육군본부 자리에 전쟁기념과 건립 – newslibrary.naver.com. (날짜 불분명). 경향신문 (1989, 07. 05). 검색 2013, 1. 19.

The War Memorial of Korea, Seoul Architecture Award Winner selected. (1995, March 11). The War Memorial of Korea, Seoul Architecture Award Winner selected. The Dong-A. Retrieved March 18, 2013, from http://newslibrary.naver.com/viewer/index.nhn?articleId=1995031100209128003 &editNo=45&printCount=1&publishDate=1995-03- 335

11&officeId=00020&pageNo=28&printNo=22793&publishType=00010 서울시 건축상 수상작 용산 전쟁기념관 선정 (1995, 3. 11.). 서울시 건축상 수상작 용산 전쟁기념관 선정. 동아일보. 검색 2013, 3. 18.

The War Memorial on that site of the old grounds of the Military headquarters. By obtaining donations from the nation people. – newslibrary.naver.com. (n.d.). The Hankyoreh (1990, February 3). Retrieved January 19, 2013, from http://newslibrary.naver.com/viewer/index.nhn?articleId=1990020300289110009 &editNo=4&printCount=1&publishDate=1990-02- 03&officeId=00028&pageNo=10&printNo=532&publishType=00010 전쟁기념관, 기념탑 세운다. 옛 육군본부자리 국민성금 모아 – 네이버뉴스라이브러리. (날짜 불분명). 한겨레신문 (1990, 02. 03). 검색 2013, 1. 19.

Tong, H. J. (2013, October 1). Kang, E-Suck, “Nude protest” at the War Memorial at Veterans day commemoration. The Hankook. Retrieved January 7, 2014, from http://news.hankooki.com/lpage/society/201310/h2013100109313421950.htm 동효정 (2013.10.01). 강의석, 국군의 날 맞아 전쟁기념관서 “알몸시위.” 한국일보. 검색 2014, 1. 7.

TV Daily Wire Staff. (2013, October 1). Kang, E-Suck, Nude protest at the War Memorial. . .Bloggers’ responses: ‘cold.’ TV Daily. Retrieved January 7, 2014, from http://tvdaily.mk.co.kr/read.php3?aid=1380588155580555016 TV 이데일리기자. (2013. 10.01.). 강의석, 전쟁기념관서 1 인 누드 시위. . . 누리꾼 ‘싸늘.’ TV 이데일리. 검색 2014. 1. 7.

War Memorial is built by the award competition winners, Mr. Kwak and Mr. Lee. – newslibrary.naver.com. (n.d.). The Kyunghyang (1993, July 1). Retrieved January 19, 2013, from http://newslibrary.naver.com/viewer/index.nhn?articleId=1993070100329114001 &editNo=15&printCount=1&publishDate=1993-07- 01&officeId=00032&pageNo=14&printNo=14799&publishType=00010 전쟁기념관 현상공모를 통해 당선된 곽홍길, 이성관씨의 작품 – 네이버뉴스라이브러리. (날짜 불분명). 경향신문 (1993, 07. 01) 검색 2013, 1. 19.

War Memorial of Korea Home Page. (n.d.). The War Memorial. Retrieved February 6, 2013, from https://www.warmemo.or.kr/eng/main/main.jsp 전쟁기념관 홈페이지. (날짜 불분명). 전쟁기념관. 검색 2013, 2. 6.

War Memorial urged vaporization – newslibrary.naver.com. (n.d.). The Hankyoreh (1993. July 10). Retrieved January 18, 2013, from http://newslibrary.naver.com/viewer/index.nhn?articleId=1993071000289115011 &editNo=5&printCount=1&publishDate=1993-07- 10&officeId=00028&pageNo=15&printNo=1613&publishType=00010 전쟁기념관 백지화 촉구– 네이버뉴스라이브러리. (날짜 불분명). 한겨례신문 (1993, 07. 10) 검색 2013, 1. 18. 336

Yang, G. M. (1993, July 1). Preview the War Memorial. The Kyunghyang. Retrieved January 8, 2013, from http://newslibrary.naver.com/viewer/index.nhn?articleId=1993070100329114001 &editNo=15&printCount=1&publishDate=1993-07- 01&officeId=00032&pageNo=14&printNo=14799&publishType=00010 양권모 (1993, 07. 01). 미리보는 전쟁기념관. 경향신문. 검색 20.13. 1. 8.

Yoo, H. J. (2009). The educational value of third-world literature: Suggestions for a postcolonial textbook (Unpublished master’s thesis). KyungHee University. Retrieved March 16, 2013, 유호정. (2009). 제 3 세계 문학과 그 교육적 가치 : 탈식민지주의 교과서의 제안 (석사학위논문), 경희대학교 교육대학원 : 국어교육 전공. 검색 2013, 3. 16.

Yoo, K. S., Park, Y. B., Lee, H. C., & Sul, D. H. (2011). Evaluation and improvement plans for Employment License System. Ministry of Employment & Labor. 유길상, 박영범, 이해춘, 설동훈 (2011). 고용허가제 시행평가 및 제도개선방안, 고용노동부.

Yoo, S. H. (2009, September 15). Does liberalization of textbook prices give free public education negative impact? The Hankyoreh. Retrieved January 15, 2014, from http://www.hani.co.kr/popups/print.hani?ksn=376878 유선희 (2009, 9. 15). ‘교과서값 자율화’ 무상교육에 불똥 튀나? 한겨례신문. 검색 2014, 1. 15.

YTN Wire Staff. (2013, October 1). ‘Nude protest’ Kang, E-Suck causing debate with “South Korea, imitating North Korean military parade.” YTN. Retrieved January 7, 2014, from http://www.ytn.co.kr/_ln/0106_201310011113368653 YTN 기자. (2013. 10.01.). ‘누드시위’강의석 “한국, 북 군사퍼레이드를 따라 해”논란. YTN. 검색 2014. 1. 7.

2. Figure

Bengiveno, N. (n.d.). The Pensive Bodhisattva [Photograph]. In The New York Times. Retrieved January 2, 2014, from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/08/arts/design/silla-koreas-golden-kingdom-at- the-metropolitan-museum.html?_r=0

Global Village Met by a Festival [Photograph]. In K. S. Lee, J. M. Lyu, J. S. Park, M. K. Choi, N. K. Sung, J. B. Kwan, . . . H. J. Kim, , Fine Art for Fifth- and Sixth- Graders (pp. 108-109). Seoul: Chunjae Education, 2011.

Inside and Outside of The War Memorial (n.d.). In Google. Retrieved March 2, 2013, from https://www.google.com/search?q=%EC%A0%84%EC%9F%81%EA%B8%B0%EB%85 %90%EA%B4%80+%EC%9D%B4%EB%AF%B8%EC%A7%80&tbm=isch&tb o=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=hvh-U5-

337

bF4OuyASlg4KIBg&ved=0CCUQsAQ&biw=956&bih=468#facrc=_&imgdii=V limCNOCmR27zM%3A%3BDW_rmE93ihIikM%3BVlimCNOCmR27zM%3A&i mgrc=VlimCNOCmR27zM%253A%3BM649FPJKpQ1Y_M%3Bhttp%253A%25 2F%252Fcfile23.uf.tistory.com%252Fimage%252F183B32564D3ABAD44544B 1%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fredtop.tistory.com%252F305%3B750%3B500 https://www.google.com/search?q=%EC%A0%84%EC%9F%81%EA%B8%B0%EB%85 %90%EA%B4%80+%EB%88%88%EB%AC%BC%EB%B0%A9%EC%9A%B8 +%EC%9D%B4%EB%AF%B8%EC%A7%80&biw=927&bih=468&tbm=isch& imgil=2jaDgmhu12DnuM%253A%253Bhttps%253A%252F%252Fencrypted- tbn3.gstatic.com%252Fimages%253Fq%253Dtbn%253AANd9GcStZ3CqG7xbJ8 fmb- LBAL8TI4QMPOMedxj6qUZcTidT1bQfpcJkfw%253B743%253B557%253BvpX 10Odglpw7uM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fblog.naver.com%25252F PostView.nhn%25253FblogId%2525253Dluckycmw%25252526logNo%2525253 D60157313978%25252526parentCategoryNo%2525253D6%25252526viewDate %2525253D%25252526currentPage%2525253D1%25252526listtype%2525253 D0%25252526from%2525253DpostList&source=iu&usg=__YYXpKh69hhgQNo BZCT_Jutv1yKY%3D&sa=X&ei=Pv1- U86kAeqO8gHduIHADQ&ved=0CCgQ9QEwAA#facrc=_&imgrc=2jaDgmhu12 DnuM%253A%3BvpX10Odglpw7uM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fpostfiles10.n aver.net%252F20120306_233%252Fluckycmw_1330993143024xL5NB_JPEG% 252FIMG_5852- 1.jpg%253Ftype%253Dw2%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fblog.naver.com%252F PostView.nhn%253FblogId%253Dluckycmw%2526logNo%253D60157313978% 2526parentCategoryNo%253D6%2526viewDate%253D%2526currentPage%25 3D1%2526listtype%253D0%2526from%253DpostList%3B743%3B557 https://www.google.com/search?q=%EC%A0%84%EC%9F%81%EA%B8%B0%EB%85 %90%EA%B4%80+%EC%9D%B4%EB%AF%B8%EC%A7%80&tbm=isch&tb o=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=afN- U6HUHpC3yASAxoCgBQ&ved=0CCUQsAQ&biw=923&bih=468#facrc=_&im gdii=_&imgrc=lQMdhwfwdxn5bM%253A%3BE6kgrDGEksORQM%3Bhttp%25 3A%252F%252Fpds19.egloos.com%252Fpds%252F201009%252F30%252F16 %252Fe0057116_4ca48740118c5.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fblog.naver.c om%252FPostView.nhn%253FblogId%253Dfinaless%2526logNo%253D601273 58761%2526parentCategoryNo%253D%2526categoryNo%253D13%2526view Date%253D%2526isShowPopularPosts%253Dtrue%2526from%253Dsearch%3 B1632%3B918 https://www.google.com/search?q=%EC%A0%84%EC%9F%81%EA%B8%B0%EB%85 %90%EA%B4%80+%EB%82%B4%EB%B6%80+%EC%9D%B4%EB%AF%B 8%EC%A7%80&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=PPp- U9CbDcnI8gH4qYDwAw&ved=0CCUQsAQ&biw=956&bih=468#facrc=_&im gdii=_&imgrc=KpMEISe8vhq2FM%253A%3BaHP0RjKstdAaSM%3Bhttp%253 A%252F%252Fcphoto.asiae.co.kr%252Flistimglink%252F6%252F2011060610 592354378_1.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.asiae.co.kr%252Fnews%2 52Fview.htm%253Fidxno%253D2011060610592354378%3B450%3B318 338

Nam, Y. L. (2013). Outer Cover of the Fine Art Textbook [Photograph].

Opening Ceremony at The Masterpieces of Korean Art exhibition at the Metropolitan Museum of Art (February 7, 1958). (n.d.). [Photograph]. In M. J. Chung, Korean Art Represented in the United States in the 1950s. Korean Modern & Contemporary Art History, 14, p. 8.

The Peace Clock Tower (n.d.). In Orion Castle’s blog. Retrieved May 15, 2014, from http://m.blog.daum.net/ojy4116/8753585

The Peace Clock Tower with Cherry Blossom. (n.d.). In The Kookbang. Retrieved March 15, 2013, from http://kookbang.dema.mil.kr/kookbangWeb/m/view.do?ntt_writ_date=20110818 &parent_no=6&bbs_id=BBSMSTR_000000000125

The Pensive Bodhisattva and The Thinker in the Fine Art textbook [Photograph]. In K. S. Lee, J. M. Lyu, J. S. Park, M. K. Choi, N. K. Sung, J. B. Kwan, . . . H. J. Kim, , Fine Art for Fifth- and Sixth-Graders (p. 28). Seoul: Chunjae Education, 2011.

The War Memorial’s Symmetrical View (n.d.). In Google. Retrieved March 15, 2013, from https://www.google.com/search?q=%EC%A0%84%EC%9F%81%EA%B8%B0 %EB%85%90%EA%B4%80+%EC%9D%B4%EB%AF%B8%EC%A7%80&tb m=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=afN- U6HUHpC3yASAxoCgBQ&ved=0CCUQsAQ&biw=923&bih=468#facrc=_&i mgrc=njddKZHXSB8b1M%253A%3BBt0iUiY91jDVgM%3Bhttp%253A%252 F%252Filoveseoul.co.kr%252Fwp- content%252Fuploads%252F2013%252F12%252F%2525EC%2525A0%252584 %2525EC%25259F%252581%2525EA%2525B8%2525B0%2525EB%252585 %252590%2525EA%2525B4%252580- %2525EC%2525A0%252584%2525EA%2525B2%2525BD.jpg%3Bhttp%253A %252F%252Filoveseoul.co.kr%252F%253Fp%253D645%3B3008%3B2000

The process of textbook authorization. (n. d.). Korea Authorized and Approved Textbook, Korea, n. d., Retrieved August 12, 2013, from http://www.ktbook.com/info/info_02_7.asp

The process of textbook authorization in South Korea. (n.d.). Korea Authorized and Approved Textbook, Korea, n. d., Retrieved October 20, 2013, from http://www.ktbook.com/info/info_02_6.asp

3. Table

Gim, C. C. (2012). The purpose of the approved textbook. Textbook Research, 67, 13-16. 339

Yoo, K. S., Park, Y. B., Lee, H. C., & Sul, D. H. (2011). Evaluation and improvement plans for Employment License System. Ministry of Employment & Labor.

340