255

의사학 제19권 제2호(통권 제37호) 2010년 12월 Korean J Med Hist 19 ː255-298 Dec. 2010 ⓒ대한의사학회 pISSN 1225-505X, eISSN 2093-5609

In the Margins : Writing on Medicine in After 1876

Sonja M. KIM＊

1. Introduction 2. Writing About Medicine in Korea Before 1945 3. Post-1945 US Interventions in Medicine and Public Health 4. Translating Knowledge, Cultural Encounters, and Technology Transfer 5. Korean Medicine in the Making 6. Emerging Fields

1. Introduction

In the United States, history of medicine as a subject of study has evolved from its origins as a minor concern in medical schools to a recognized field in its own right within the broader discipline of history. The increasing presence of historians instead of physicians in the writing of medical history corresponds with shifts in scholarship that reflect the application of insights in the humanities and social sciences. Currently, historians dominate the American Association for the History of Medicine, and several American universities offer humanities-oriented or interdisciplinary programs and degrees in the history of medicine at the undergraduate and/or graduate

* Assistant Professor, Dept of Asian and Asian American Studies, Binghamton University, SUNY, USA phone : 1-607-777-3861 / e-mail : [email protected]

제19권 제2호(통권 제37호) 255-298, 2010년 12월 │255 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins

level.1) Article database and book searches on history of medicine confirm that the field has expanded its purview—contextualization of disease and medical knowledge within the social, political, and cultural milieu from which they emerge and are used; inclusion of patients’ perspectives and embodied experiences; use of race, class, gender, and empire in understanding differentiated practices; and recognition of medicine as a political and negotiated space. What remains conspicuously limited, however, is historical scholarship on medicine in areas of the world outside of North America and Western Europe. For example, a search for articles on Asia in the Bulletin of the History of Medicine, the official journal of the American Association for the History of Medicine, results primarily in reviews of books and relatively few articles. As of this writing, there are a few book reviews and mention of books received related to Korea, but no articles that deal primarily with Korea in the Bulletin of the History of Medicine. It is evident that in American academia, medical histories of Asia are minor. The universalizing discourse of biomedicine that places the qualifier “Asian” to medical-related practices and knowledge in Asia’s past continues to peripheralize Asia in the mainstream field of history of medicine. Moreover, scholars who do write on Asia often do on topics insofar as they relate to American or European experiences—activities of foreign medical , medical or public health systems instituted in Asia by imperial powers, US military

1) Medicine is also critically addressed in the expanding field of Science, Technology, and Society (STS). Some campuses that offer programs and degrees in the history of medicine include: Emory University, Harvard University, Johns Hopkins University, Princeton University, UCLA, UCSF, UC Santa Barbara, University of Kansas University of Michigan, University of Minnesota, University of Pennsylvania, University of Washington, University of Wisconsin-Madison, and Yale University.

256│ 醫史學 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins medicine—or reflect “Asian” nature, as in what is touted as Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), Oriental Medicine, or other particularities perceived in Asian medicine. On the other hand, medicine, disease, and health practices have recently become increasingly common as subjects of study for American scholars in Asian studies.2) Medicine, for these scholars, is an effective lens through which to enhance understandings of societal transformations, translations of knowledge, technology transfer, modes of governmentality, construction of gender, nation- and empire-building, and urban space in Asia. Growing number of panels at the Annual Meetings of the Association for Asian Studies, for example, are devoted to medicine or related topics. In fact, in Asian studies, scholarship on medicine appears to outnumber that of science or technology. This is not to say that history of Asian science and technology is a neglected field. Some notable studies of science and technology in Asia include those by Francesca Bray, Benjamin Elman, Fa-ti Fan, Morris Low, Tessa Morris-Suzuki, and Nathan Sivin. It would perhaps not be off the mark to suggest that Nathan Sivin’s earlier pivotal studies of science and Chinese history paved the way for the recent surge in critical studies of medical history in Asia.3)

2) Some of these scholars include: Ruth Rogaski, Francesca Bray, Charlotte Furth, Angele Ki Che Leung, Yi-li Wu, Sabine Frühstück, Warwick Anderson, Larissa Heinrich, Ann Jannetta, and Susan Burns. Please refer to the following bibliography for some of the recent major publications on medicine in Asia and Asian America. 3) Nathan Sivin, Professor Emeritus of History and Sociology of Science at the University of Pennsylvania, is a prominent Sinologist in the areas of Chinese science, technology, medicine, and philosophy. He is considered by International Society for the History of East Asian Science, Technology, and Medicine as one of the “second generation” of scholars after giants in the field such as Joseph Needham. Among his students include Marta Hanson and Benjamin Elman, who are also prominent in the fields of Chinese history of science and medicine. Benjamin Elman, in turn, has taught and/or advised

제19권 제2호(통권 제37호) 255-298, 2010년 12월 │257 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins

Language skills account partially for why it is Asian studies scholars who take the initiative in producing English-language histories of medicine in Asia. These scholars in turn often reject the homogenizing narratives in mainstream historiography of medicine, challenging conventional binaries of traditional/modern, superstition/science, or East/West often prevalent in histories of Asia. In this way, Asian history of medicine is very much a post- colonial practice. Nevertheless, the history of medicine remains a limited part of Asian studies. Moreover, even within this subfield of Asian studies, histories of Korea are even fewer. In many ways, studies of medicine in post-1876 Korea is few and far in between.4) This is not to say that there are no English-language historical studies on Korean medicine. The majority of these, however, are written by scholars in Korea or are doctoral dissertations. This is due in part to the perceived lack of significance Korean medicine has in the larger fields within which it is subsumed. As discussed above, history of Korean medicine is trivial in the mainstream field of history of medicine. Korean studies is a smaller subfield of Asian studies at large. Histories of Korean science, technology, and medicine have often been slighted in favor of their counterparts in China or Japan.5) Moreover, medicine as a focus is

younger scholars in Korean studies of science, medicine, and technology such as John DiMoia, Min Suh Son, So Young Suh, and myself. There are too many works on Chinese history of science and medicine by Sivin to include. I have included only a few of his seminal pieces in the Supplementary Bibliography, along with a list of some of the recent important scholarship in the broader Asian history of science, technology, and medicine. 4) The year 1876 is used to mark the beginning of this historiographical survey as it is the year the Kanghwa Treaty was signed between the Chosŏn kingdom and Meiji Japan, thus signaling Korea’s entry into the open-port period, which catalyzed transformations conventionally understood as heralding Korea into modernity. Studies on medicine in Korea before this period are surveyed by So Young Suh in this issue. 5) Kim Yung-sik argues that close relations and intellectual exchanges between Korea

258│ 醫史學 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins overshadowed by other topics valued within Korean studies in the States.6) Finally, scholars who have written on medicine in post-1876 Korea tend to do so as it relates to foreign mission endeavors in Korea, American involvement in the Korean War (1950-53) or post-liberation south Korean rehabilitation. For these reasons, writing on medicine in Korea is very much in the margins. The goals here are first, to survey American scholarship of medicine in Korea during the modern period, and second, to suggest perspectives studies of Korean medicine may offer to the fields of Korean history, Asian studies, and history of medicine in general. A major problem in writing this article is defining what is meant by American scholarship. Do we include scholarship by those trained and who primarily teach and research in Korea but also publish in the English language and/or in US-based journals? What

and China in the past results in the “China-question,” which plagues Korean history of science, technology, and medicine. This shapes the historical inquiry to seek out Korean uniqueness or subsume Korean science, technology, or medicine as Chinese, thereby further marginalizing history of Korean medicine. One example of this is Korean (Oriental) Medicine, which is overlooked by scholars in their study of traditional medicine in Asia. (Y. Kim, 1998) 6) Some main concerns in US Korean studies include: civil society and democracy, intellectual history and historiography, social histories that address or counter nationalist historiography in Korea, nature of Japanese colonial rule, national division and the Korean War, economic development, and authoritarian politics on both sides of the border. See Kim Kyeong-il, “Over Contested Terrain: Currents and Issues of Korean Studies,” The Review of Korean Studies 6-2, 2003, pp. 151-190; Michael D. Shin, “Migungnae Hanggukhak kyebo [Geneology of US Korean Studies],” Yŏksa pip’yŏng [Critical studies of history] 59, 2002, pp. 76-98; John B. Duncan, “Migungnae Hanguk chŏn kŭndaesa yŏngu tonghyang [Research trends in US Historical Studies of Premodern Korea],” Yŏksa wa hyŏnsil [History and reality] 23, 1997, pp. 170-188; Henry Em, “Migungnae hanguk kŭnhyŏndaesa yŏngu tonghyang [Research trends in US Historical Studies of Modern Korea],” Yŏksa wa hyŏnsil [History and reality]23, 1997, pp. 189-202; and Leighanne Yuh, “The Historiography of Korea in the United States,” International Journal of Korean History 15-2, 2010, pp. 127-144.

제19권 제2호(통권 제37호) 255-298, 2010년 12월 │259 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins

about scholars trained in American universities, but who are now active in Asian academic settings? Or conversely, Asian scholars who fill faculty positions in the US? The increasingly transnational nature of academia makes it difficult to establish national labels on scholarship. For purposes of this essay, by American scholarship, I refer to that which emerges from academic activities, institutions, and publications produced in the United States. American scholars refer to those who primarily study, teach, and/or publish in the United States. I include some English-language publications produced by Korean scholars that are likely to be accessed or read in North America as they inform and shape the development of the field of Korean history of medicine in North America. I also include scholarship in the social sciences such as anthropology and Science, Technology and Society (STS) in recognition of the growing interdisciplinary nature of academia. I am unable to survey the whole field of writings on Korean medicine, but will highlight what I consider to be major trends in the field and include for further reference a more comprehensive bibliography of English-language sources.

2. Writing About Medicine in Korea Before 1945

One of the earliest English-language studies of the history of Korean medicine was “The History of Korean Medicine,” written by Newton H. Bowman, a physician at Severance Union Medical College.7) In

7) Severance is the medical hospital and school that succeeded Chejungwŏn, which was established by American missionary Horace Allen, chartered by the Chosŏn court, and is the predecessor of the hospital and medical school affiliated with today in , Korea. Newton H. Bowman’s original 1915 article was re-edited and re-printed in 1966. (Bowman, 1915; Bowman, 1966)

260│ 醫史學 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins this article, Bowman’s main interests lie in what medical missionaries of that time write in their mission reports, journals, and personal writings as the unfamiliar and native-namely herbal medicine (or materia medica, C. bencao, K. ponch’o, 本草) and acupuncture. Bowman narrates the roots of Korean medical practice and knowledge (since ancient times) in China, and describes in the detail texts of Chinese materia medica that he deems important in Korea’s past medical practices. He provides for his readers some examples of prescriptions for particular ailments, such as summer dyspepsia or the common cold. He then jumps to 19th century Korean medical texts such as Pangyak happ’yŏn (方藥合編) as texts that sought to include local (i.e. Korean) materia medica and practices.8) Finally, he discusses acupuncture, which he sees as later developing in Korea as moxibustion, and its associated medical texts, including Hŏ Chun’s Tongŭi pogam, which he admits is well-accepted by native practitioners as a “reliable source of information for both medicine and acupuncture.” (Bowman, 1915: 21) He describes the channels that runs through this notion of the body and provides “anatomical charts” for reference.9) While on the surface, Bowman presents his study as empirical and is thus similar to other articles in the Transactions of the Korea Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society that aimed to introduce surveys of science and

8) Pangyak happ’yŏn is considered a seminal medical text among contemporary practitioners of the time and even today for its compilation of effective prescriptions and indexing of botanicals that allowed users to facilely locate medicinal properties and relevant information on specific material medica. 9) Bowman does not use the term moxibustion, but his description of the “application of heat with…modifiers…[such as]…mugwort…employed in two forms, the poultice and the fire ball..,for various ailments” suggests he is referring to moxibustion. This practice has often been described by foreign medical missionaries of this period as native medicine. (Bowman, 1915: 16)

제19권 제2호(통권 제37호) 255-298, 2010년 12월 │261 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins

technology in Korea’s past to foreign audiences, the overarching narrative of Korea’s lack in science/modernity, or at best a curious object of study when compared to the West, informs his history. He observes that medical texts had been revised with European anatomical books, but practitioners in Korea did not accept those innovations. Moreover, the medical licensing regulations instituted in 1913 by the Japanese colonial authorities that effectively created the category of “Ŭisaeng,” (醫生) thereby tacitly allowing native medical practices, were implemented to place “practitioners under government supervision and prevent[…] the perpetuation of the practice of native medicine in Korea,” not in recognition of, or to legitimate, native practices.10) Bowman’s survey was not intended to further research or innovations in the international medical community. He writes, “…the knowledge gained by this study will not, of necessity, give to us in the 20th century of intellectual environment greater energy of thought.” Rather, he merely sought to provide “a better understanding of the life story of Oriental medicine and its history in Korea.” (Bowman, 1915: 22) Medicine as practiced in Korea is depicted in this early genre of missionary writings as unscientific and superstitious at best, barbaric and torturous at worst. Native practices, they write, were conducted by “sorcerers,” herbalists, ignorant women, even swindlers who take advantage of suffering Koreans. One observer writes regarding acupuncture, “What suffering it causes. What early deaths it claims for its victims! How can

10) Ŭ isaeng (醫生) refers to a category of medical specialists instituted by the Japanese colonial government that initially gave certain Hanŭi practitioners a temporary or geographically-limited medical license to practice. Literally translated as “student doctor” or “student of medicine,” the parameters of the category shifted over time, but for the most part it functioned to differentiate Hanŭi practitioners from “ŭisa,” or physicians trained in biomedicine, who met established standards and thus recognized as doctors by the colonial government. For English-language discussion, see Suh, 2006.

262│ 醫史學 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins men be so bound up in superstition and ignorance!” (Null, 1904) Western medicine via missionaries then is an effective means to improve conditions, secure trust, and encourage conversions among the Korean population. As such, it brings “light” to the natives and is generally popularly received.11) Of course, it is important to note that not all missionary descriptions of Korea’s medical traditions are negative, and that the majority of their writing about medicine in Korea is primarily recorded in annual reports to their mission stations and mission boards back home, in journals aimed at the missionary or foreign community, and in personal communications (letters, memoirs).12) Their narratives, on the whole, strategically stress the absence of, or problems in, Korean native health care to secure support and legitimate their activities. As William B. Scranton, physician in Seoul, once writes, “Medical work, is in my judgment, the best means we have or have had, humanly speaking, for plowing up prejudices and opening a custom- ridding country.” (Scranton, 1903) Whether these reports accurately assess the reception and practices of medicine among Koreans during this period, however, remain questionable.

11) Null continues to write, “Foreign medicine and surgery is very popular. At Taiku men walk for 125 miles to see the physician…The past year there has been a broad awakening in this province.” 12) These journals include: Korean Repository, Korea Mission Field, Missionary Review of the World, China Medical Journal (initially the China Medical Missionary Journal), and Heathen Woman’s Friend. Foreign missionary physicians serving in Korea also published in the China Medical Journal. Moreover, in my research, I observe that some missionaries did view favorably certain practices or customs, such as keeping the sick or invalid on heated bedding, the diet of post-partum mothers, and the wearing of white clothes. For missionary , white clothing ensures health as dark cloth requires harmful dyes and retains tobacco fumes and pathogens more readily than white. This differs from Japanese colonialist narratives which evaluate Korea’s white clothing as unhygienic on various levels. For more on Japanese colonialist narratives regarding sanitary conditions in colonial Korea, see Henry, 2005. Positive assessments of Korean health-related customs and practices, however, are few among missionaries.

제19권 제2호(통권 제37호) 255-298, 2010년 12월 │263 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins

Nevertheless, this juxtaposition of Western, modern, scientific mission medicine against old customs demanding change informs much of the English-language scholarship in the history of medicine in Korea. Scholars, without critically assessing the missionary archives upon which their scholarship is heavily based, continue the narrative of Korea’s sub- standard civilized or scientific practices in medicine and presents foreign missionaries as heralding “modern” medicine in Korea. Horace Allen, by performing a surgical miracle on Min Yong Ik in the bloody aftermath of the 1884 coup, gains the favor of King Kojong and secures permission to start Chejungwŏn, the hospital portrayed as one of the first Western hospitals in Korea and the predecessor to today’s Severance Hospital in Seoul.13) In this fashion, foreign missionaries bring what is deemed as modern medicine to Korea. This is similar to the historiographical concerns in Korean scholarship on medicine which center around the question of agency or route of Western medicine in Korea—the Japanese, foreign missionaries, or Koreans themselves.14) Moreover, after years of persecution of Christianity in Chosŏn, missionaries promote medicine as the route of entry and acceptance of . On one hand, medicine opens doors in Korea previously closed to missionaries. On the other, medicine allows missionaries themselves to fulfill what they perceived as their religious calling or the social gospel.

13) The hospital established in the Japanese settlement in Pusan is often narrated by Korean medical historians as the first Western-style hospital. Horace Allen recounts in detail the wounds of Min and other victims of the 1884 events in his diary. ’s Diary, ed. Kim Won-mo (Seoul, Korea: Dankook University Press, 1991), pp. 407-416. 14) See Park Yunjae’s description of modern Korean medical historiography in “Hanguk kŭndae ŭihaksa yŏngu ŭi sŏnggwa wa chŏnmang [The trend and prospect of studies in the modern history of medicine in Korea],” Ŭisahak [Korean Journal of Medical History] 19-1, 2010, pp. 45-68.

264│ 醫史學 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins

Contemporary scholars trained in seminary institutions in particular take interest in missionary contributions to medical care in Korea. Missionaries institute a nursing system and nursing education, train women physicians, and start successful sanitoriums for Hansen’s disease and tuberculosis. These researchers comb missionary archives to recount the missionary involvement in the development and establishment of medical institutions, provision of medical education and care, increasing reach to patients, types of medical cases, etc. In the history of both medicine and the Christian church in Korea, then, Horace Allen’s care of Min Yong Ik is declared pivotal, and missionary contributions to the “modernization” of medicine in Korea are plenty.15)

3. Post-1945 US Interventions in Medicine and Public Health

The majority of studies on medicine in Korea by American scholars are written only after the 1980s. This reflects in part the relatively young history of Korean studies in the US, and its connections with area studies as it emerged in the US in the context of the Cold War.16) Given American involvement in the Korean peninsula after 1945 to protect American security interests, it is not surprising that US activities in after the second world war have interested American scholars in Korean

15) Scholarship that posits these narratives include L. Paik, 1970; Campbell, 1954; G. Lee, 1989; Han, 1997; A. Son, 1998; A. Son, 1999. While Han and Son focus primarily on the emergence of a dual medical system in contemporary Korea and not medical missions per se, they adopt the oppositional frameworks of Western medicine = modern medicine vs. native practices = tradition, and that of modern medicine coming to Korea through Japanese or missionary physicians. 16) See Bruce Cumings, “Boundary Displacement: Area Studies and International Studies during and after the Cold War,” Bulletin of Concerned Asian Scholars 29, 1997 for an overview of Area Studies in the US.

제19권 제2호(통권 제37호) 255-298, 2010년 12월 │265 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins

studies and related fields such as military history, economics, and American foreign relations. Relevant to our discussion here are the researchers who have turned their attention to medical innovations and practices during the Korean War (1950-53), as well as to American “guidance” in re-building south Korea’s public health and medical infrastructure. The American public’s image of Korea is generally filtered through the long-running TV series M*A*S*H (1972-1983), which comedically portrays the loves and trials of an American MASH (Mobile Army Surgical Hospital) unit during the Korean War, loosely based on memoirs of MASH surgeons. In terms of military medical history, the Korean War is significant for various reasons. While MASH was formed in the immediate aftermath of WWII, it was not until the Korean War that MASH was put to the test and proved their value. Placed near the battlefront, MASH was to care for and stabilize the condition of the seriously wounded so they may survive the transport to military hospitals in the rear for further treatment. MASH units were able to navigate the poor roads in mountainous Korea in ways that other mobile units did not. Helicopters were used for the first time as additional support to the medics in transporting the injured. The Korean War also shaped American medicine by the enactment of the “Doctor Draft Law” in September of 1950, which brought physicians into the military until the 1970s. While large-scale use of antibiotics had become available towards the end of WWII, the improved statistics in casualty from wounds during the Korean War is largely attributed to innovative techniques and experiments in arterial repair, neurosurgery, combat psychiatry, blood transfusions, and kidney machines.17)

17) For more on American military medicine during the Korean War, see Cowdrey, 1985; Cowdrey, 1987; Apel and Apel, 1998; Greenwood and Berry, 2005.

266│ 醫史學 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins

These histories, however, trace primarily developments in medical support to the US military, its ramifications for surgical and emergency medical care in the States, and the care of UN troops, discussing Korea only insofar as it is the geographic site of their work (“the field”) and the challenges that the Korean context posed for US medics (mountainous terrain, guerrilla warfare, rampant epidemics, etc.).18) There is little discussion of interactions between US military medical support and Koreans (except as patients who received US military medical care), or of the US military occupation’s activities in public health and medical services in south Korea since the end of the Pacific War. This is unfortunate as Crawford F. Sams, the Chief of the Public Health and Welfare Section of the General Headquarters of the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers (SCAP) in Japan (1945-51) and the Advisor for Health and Welfare to the US Army Forces in south Korea (1945-48), penned a riveting memoir of his experiences in occupied Japan and the Korean War. (Sams, 1998) Sams’ Medic devotes the majority of its pages to the US interventions in public health and medicine he led in Japan, with limited discussion of Korea. Here, Sams presents public health and welfare as arenas that could potentially succeed in promoting American political goals of democratization and thwart Communist threats in post-1945 Japan and Korea. While he does not critically address the interventions the United

18) While not an American scholar, Ian Van Der Waag also approaches history of medicine during the Korean War in terms of what insights it provides for medical practice/systems in other countries. He seeks to explain why the rate of sexually transmitted diseases were so low among South African troops relative to other troops who joined the UN forces in the Korean War. (Van Der Waag, 2001) Van Der Waag concludes that the South African government and military’s conscious and pro-active measures to prevent inter-racial sexual relations among its troops refract South African racial politics in its military medicine.

제19권 제2호(통권 제37호) 255-298, 2010년 12월 │267 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins

States pursued in the post-1945 reconstruction and rehabilitation of Japan and south Korea, his record of the constant negotiations he faced and problems posed by mass movement of populations which could trigger epidemics of drastic proportions in his attempts to secure first and foremost the health and safety of American occupying troops, leaves for scholars a rich archive for future studies. Sams’ main concerns in his account of Korea are the expeditions and dangers the US military faced (he lost his son-in-law in the Korean War) to explain the attitudes of individual American soldiers, US military strategies, and his objectives as the point-charge of health and welfare organizations in south Korea. He spends considerable time recounting one intelligence mission he initiated to confirm reports of a bubonic plague outbreak in . The bubonic plague, for various epidemiological and medical reasons, would have been devastating to the US troops. Sams concludes after a dangerous expedition that the epidemic was hemorrhagic smallpox, just as destructive to its victims, but preventable with immunization in ways the bubonic plague was not.19) This incident, according to Sams, angered the north Koreans who knew of the mission and failed in their attempts to capture Sams. They responded to the ensuing international media reports of Sams’ mission with accusations that Sams was not on a fact-finding mission but actually involved in the conscious, purposeful deployment of biological warfare (by spreading pathogens to create disease epidemics) against the north Korean enemy. Sams asserts that given the desparate

19) Immunization from bubonic plague vaccinations was very limited in duration at the time, and production of the vaccines on a large scale would have been “a tremendous program.” Hence, the US military did not routinely vaccinate its troops or Korean civilians for the bubonic plague. Sams, p. 247.

268│ 醫史學 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins health conditions in north Korea at the time, a UN victory would have been likely, and he is critical of the decision to abandon plans for the advance northward. In this sense, he does acknowledge the potential impact disease have on military operations, but refutes allegations that the US military engaged in germ warfare during the Korean War. The fact remains, however, whether real or not, accusations by the Chinese and north Korean governments that the US used biological weapons held implications in their respective public health and nationalist campaigns with their civilian populations.20) Other sites of American intervention in public health in postwar south Korea include the education and training of medical professionals, and the national family planning programs as promoted by the Park Chung-hee regime in the 1960s and 1970s to reduce south Korea’s birth rate as part of state planning for economic development. Gil Soo Han, for example, presents medical systems and education as being modeled on the US. Korean students were sent to America to study medicine and to return to Korea with the skills they learned. (Han, 1997: 102) Sang-Dawn Lee’s study of 1960s south Korea presents the vast amounts of American financial support, Korea’s involvement in the Vietnam War, presence of US troops south of the De-militarized Zone, and import of American material and cultural goods (movies, goods, food, etc.) as undeniably shaping south Korean society. Among Lee’s examples includes birth control, which in the American context is understood as liberating for women. According to Lee, Americans “introduced modern contraceptive methods to Korea” and the “popular move toward family planning.” (S.

20) For an analysis of the Chinese patriotic campaigns against the alleged US germ warfare during the Korean War, see Rogaski, 2004.

제19권 제2호(통권 제37호) 255-298, 2010년 12월 │269 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins

Lee, 2002: 106) Key figures in the national family planning programs were Koreans who studied abroad in the States. American missionaries in their health clinics actively introduced contraceptive methods to their clients. Aid from international organizations such as the Planned Parenthood Federation funded most of the operating expenses of Korean family planning organizations and programs. In this framework, the US acts in the role of Big Brother, guiding the Little Brother south Korea towards modernity.

4. Translating Knowledge, Cultural Encounters, and Technology Transfer

What the aforementioned discussion presents is an over-riding research interest in foreign (i.e. American) transfer of medical and health-related knowledge and practices to Korea. Operating within the framework of modernization theory or American security interests, the scholarship surveyed thus far portrays a one-way transfer from the sender (US) to the host (Korea) or even an uncontested transplantation of American medicine in Korea. American agenda in the post-1945 interventions in public health and medicine are not questioned (value of what constitutes as American or modern medicine is an a priori assumption), and narratives that not even a bare skeleton of a functioning public health and medical system existed in Korea at the end of Japanese colonial rule explains contemporary medical history in Korea to be one, disconnected from its past, and two, attributed in large part, to the United States. Some scholars informed by critical scholarship in the field of STS and post-colonial studies have begun to re-assess the transfer of knowledge and

270│ 醫史學 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins technology within historical and culturally specific moments. This resonates with recent initiatives in Korean studies that critically address emerging subjectivities (such as the New Woman, Colonial or Imperial Subject, Korean Nation) and historical processes (Japanese colonization of Korea, industrialization, democratization, etc.) as resulting from mutual exchange, selective appropriation, innovation, and non-equivalent translations.21) For example, in post-colonial scholarship, it is not only the peripheries that are shaped by the colonial experience, but also the metropoles that are transformed through their imperial projects and imaginations.22) In relation to the above discussions of post-1945 US interventions, the scholarship of John DiMoia offers refreshing assessments of US-south Korean relations in public health and medicine.23) For example, in his

21) Hyaeweol Choi, for example, in her study of foreign Protestant missionaries in early 20th century Korea argues that Korean modern womanhood emerged out of negotiations between missionaries and their converts in their encounters. Missionaries may have brought pre-conceived notions of Victorian womanhood, but their ideas on Korean womanhood were also shaped by their personal experiences in their Korean mission assignments, their mission agenda, Korean gender politics, and reactions from Koreans. See Hyaeweol Choi, Gender and Mission Encounters in Korea: New Women, Old Ways (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2009). 22) For a critique of modern Japanese historiography that is island- or metropole-centered, see Andre Schmid, “Colonialism and the ‘Korea Problem’ in the Historiography of Modern Japan,” Journal of Asian Studies 59-4, 2000, pp. 951-976. 23) DiMoia’s scholarship includes studies of science and technology, but for purposes of this review, only those specifically related to medicine and public health will be addressed. His scholarship also resonates with studies that interrogates the nature of US interventions in other areas during postwar south Korea, such as Bruce Cumings’ pivotal work, The Origins of the Korean War (2 vols.) (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1981, 1990); Gregg Brazinsky, Nation Building in South Korea: Koreans, Americans, and the Making of a Democracy (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2007); Katherine Moon, Sex Among Allies: Military Prostitution in US-Korea Relations (New York: Columbia University Press, 1997); and Wol-San Liem, “Telling the ‘Truth’ to Koreans: U.S. Cultural Policy in South Korea During the Early Cold War, 1947-1967” (PhD diss, New York University, 2010).

제19권 제2호(통권 제37호) 255-298, 2010년 12월 │271 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins

analysis of medical technology transfer through medical education and the DeWall Helix Bubble Oxygenator that aimed to transform Korea’s cardio- surgical possibilities and hospital culture, DiMoia suggests that transfer of technology did not remain merely in the form of material machines or tools brought to Korea from the US, but that technology was also embodied in the very hands, minds, and skills of Korean surgeons. Moreover, American visions of “guiding” Koreans to democracy through medical technology transfer were tempered and challenged by the very recipients of that transfer. The local situation in Korean hospitals and universities, Korean epidemiological demographics, and the material problems with the oxygenator itself complicated the nature of transfer itself. DiMoia thus urges a reconsideration of these US interventions as not “technology transfer” of a “fixed object…from point A to point B,” but rather as “translations” that “had to interact with the existing system of health in south Korea.” (DiMoia, 2009: 219) In addition, DiMoia’s study of National Family Planning programs of the 1960s suggests that the emergence and formation of the female family planner were informed by already existing social networks and gender dynamics. (DiMoia, 2008) My work similarly understands translation as a process of active renegotiation, one in which political and cultural values associated with new medical knowledge and practices are contingent. Medicine in this sense is a “contested space, embedded in its socio-historical milieu, one which recognizes multiple social identities and positions in health-seeking behavior as actors draw from both local and global perspectives.” (S. Kim, 2006: 300) What is also important to ask when looking at these “translations” is what exactly is being translated? How do the interests, situations, and experiences of the carrier (the one allegedly ‘bringing’ the knowledge or

272│ 醫史學 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins technology to be transferred) shape the content to be translated? Finally, how does the host environment inform the application or transformation of ideas into action? New ideas had to negotiate with and were informed by existing traditions and practices. This framework allows for a re-reading of foreign missionary medical interventions in Korea. As discussed earlier, in American scholarship, studies of medical missionaries in Korea are usually conducted in the fields of theological studies.24) However, by asking why missionaries chose to prioritize certain medical projects over others—such as the dispensary, infant welfare clinic, or curative instead of preventive medicine—and the place of medicine in their larger mission endeavor—as opposed to the empirical nature of their work (i.e. the number of patients seen, financial amount of receipts and expenses, number of hospitals and dispensaries, etc.)—new insights emerge. For example, opiates were prescribed on occasion, not necessarily because the patient’s case warranted their therapeutic value but in response to patients’ demands for immediate and visible signs of “efficacy.” Missionary visions of one, the Christian family that values the child, and two, Christian—as opposed to secular, modern, and possibly materialist (the model perceived as being offered by the Japanese authorities)—medical practitioners, shaped the ways missionaries pursued medical care for and education of Koreans. These in turn were mediated by their patients and students. Moreover, medical texts written by missionaries were framed to demonstrate the presence of, and even evoke

24) Two prime examples are Katherine Ahn, Awakening the Hermit Kingdom: Pioneer American Women Missionaries in Korea (Pasadena, CA: William Carey Library, 2009) and Shim, 2006.

제19권 제2호(통권 제37호) 255-298, 2010년 12월 │273 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins

the fear of, God.25) Yi-li Wu notes that Benjamin Hobson’s “translations” of anatomical texts reflects missionary agenda, thereby exaggerating the size and significance of a woman’s uterus, the womb, that is not present in European anatomical texts of that time.26) By better assessing both the content of the translation and the negotiations involved in translating, we are better able to understand transformations in medicine.

5. Korean Medicine in the Making27)

Paralleling a growing interest in taking Hanŭi (韓醫), or Korean Medicine, as object of historical inquiry in Korea, American scholars are increasingly investigating Hanŭi.28) These scholars attempt to explain its

25) One example is J. H. Wells, Wisaeng [Introduction to Hygiene], 2nd edition (Seoul: Korean Religious Tract Society, 1907). Its contents reflect what was then prevalent in American sanitary science, with its emphasis on cleanliness, temperance, exercise, and food. All things were created by God, and thus demanded gratitude. In fact, when God created mankind, there was no disease or death, so it was sin (not germs) which brings about human affliction. 26) Yi-li Wu, “God’s Uterus: Benjamin Hobson and Missionary ‘Midwifery’ in 19th Century China,” Conference paper prepared for the “Disunity of Chinese Science,” University of Chicago, May 10-11, 2002. 27) The phrase “medicine in the making” is taken from Eun Jeong Ma’s study of the evolution of Hanŭi in post-1948 south Korea, which is discussed later in this section. (Ma, 2008) 28) How to translate Hanŭi into English has been of debate. Literally, it means “Korean medicine.” However, scholars have used a variety of terms such as “traditional Korean medicine,” “Oriental medicine,” “East Asian medicine,” “Korean medicine,” “complementary and alternative medicine (CAM),” “folk medicine,” and “traditional medicine.” The choice of terminology reflects the methodological approach with which, or theoretical framework from which, scholars understand Hanŭi. For example So Young Suh, who I discuss below, uses “traditional medicine” (in Korea, China, Asia, etc.) as opposed to “traditional Korean medicine” in rejection of attempts to place national labels on medical traditions. I will retain the Korean Romanization of Hanŭi to encompass this range of scholarship. Moreover, Hanŭi has recently been an important area of focus for Korean historians of medicine in Korea. One excellent volume that examines various transformations, functions, and issues of Hanŭi during the colonial period is Hanŭi,

274│ 醫史學 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins enduring existence, modernization, transformations, and popularity both during the Japanese colonial period and afterwards into the contemporary present. This is one area of research that benefits much from the theoretical frameworks and concerns of STS. They are sympathetic to recent trends in the growing literature on “Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM),” which place medicine in its local context to address the authority, influence, and negotiations of new knowledge and practices. In this way, what is labeled as Chinese or Korean Medicine is not static or unchanging, but is in constant flux, medical tradition being in many ways an invention. (Scheid, 2002) Moreover, social actors or networks of interests shape the contours of the discourse and practices surrounding Chinese or Korean medicine. Boundaries are established and re-established at historical moments. Conventional studies of Hanŭi endeavor to explain the development of a dual system of medicine in south Korea.29) While biomedical models and practices dominate the Korean medical system, Hanŭi with its colleges, practitioners, institutions, and claims on different knowledge of the body and illness is officially recognized by the state and the national medical insurance system. How has Hanŭi been able to survive despite attempts at its eradication by Japanese colonial authorities and post-liberation governments?30) Operating from “modernization theory” that presuppose

singminjirŭl alta: singminsi sigi Hanŭihak ŭi kŭndaehwa yŏngu [The modernization of Korean traditional medicine during the colonial period], ed. Institute of History of Medicine, Yonsei University (Seoul: AKANET, 2008). 29) Such studies include Han, 1997 and S. Hong, 1989. 30) In terms of early research on Hanŭi, scholars conclude that proven medical efficacy, economic factors (inexpensive and accessible), cultural familiarity, fewer side effects, professional rivalries, and rise of nationalism accounts for its persistence despite the dominance of Western medicine. For an account of Hanŭi as therapeutic medicine, see Chung-Hwan Byun, “Oriental Medicine as Therapeutic Medicine.” Korea Journal 28-11, 1998, pp. 23-26.

제19권 제2호(통권 제37호) 255-298, 2010년 12월 │275 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins

biomedicine as the new and modern, while Hanŭi is the old and tradition, these research question whether Hanŭi is modern and if so, to what extent. Standardization, professionalization, establishment of institutions, and incorporation of “scientific methods and technologies for research, education, and health” are often cited as evidence of Hanŭi’s modernity. (S. Hong, 1989: 57) Hong Seung-pyo takes into account the social, economic, political, or cultural factors that predispose Korean to accept or reject the new in his understanding of “modernization” of “traditional medicine.” Nationalist sentiments that encourage the re-examination of past traditions and cultures also help account for the recent revivalism of Hanŭi. As Don Baker summarizes, Koreans see [Hanŭi ] as a legacy of their traditional culture worth preserving.31) Annette Son’s study of Hanŭi tackles head-on the question why south Korea has a dual system of medical that allowed not only the preservation but also the revival of Hanŭi despite the hegemony possessed by biomedicine in medical practices. (A. Son, 1999) Son answers that it was the efforts by Hanŭi practitioners to “modernize” Hanŭi that won their profession legitimacy, popularity, and official recognition. On one level, Son adopts some of the assumptions of modernization theory paradigm described above. On another, she begins to shift attention to the activities in “boundary-work,” the demarcation of borders within which Hanŭi is defined, understood, and practiced.32) These kinds of inquiry are gaining

31) A sense of nationalism to explain in part the preservation of Hanŭi is suggested by S. Hong, 1989 and Baker, 2003. Don Baker provides a general overview of Hanŭi throughout its history, and is surveyed by So Young Suh in this issue. 32) Boundary-work is a theoretical framework prevalent in American STS studies. For more discussion of boundary-work especially in relations to Hanŭihak, see the introduction of Ma, 2008.

276│ 醫史學 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins ground in Korean STS scholarship on Hanŭi .33) Korean scholars ask: What is Hanŭi ? Who defines it? How has this shifted over time? What implications do we gain about Korean and international medical community at the particular historical moments when boundaries are drawn? What processes are entailed? For example, how Hanŭi is presented, what questions and subjects form medical research, and what aspects of Hanŭi are validated, are shaped in part by the desires of Korean Hanŭi researchers who want to publish for a global medical community, and by the protocols in laboratory research demanded by that very same global medical community. (J. Kim, 2007) Moreover, the kinds of practitioners who are recognized as legitimate “physicians” under the rubric Hanŭi come through contested process of professionalization.34) Two recent studies in particular address boundary-work in their analysis of Hanŭi and its relations to articulations of a Korean national identity at particular historical moments. For So Young Suh, ways in which “traditional medicine was nationalized and biomedicine [were] accommodated” before 1945 suggest the negotiations between the local and universal and process by which “Eastern medicine” (東醫) becomes “Korean medicine” from the sixteenth to the twentieth century.35) This process reveals the politics of identity not only for the contemporary present but also in the premodern past, as Korean physicians, pharmacists, and intellectuals assert “their

33) Some of the prominent Korean scholars who publish in the English-language on these issues include Byong-Hee Cho, Dong-won Shin, and Jongyoung Kim. 34) Lay herbalists and acupuncturists, for example, were pushed out of the field of professional Hanŭi. See Byong-Hee Cho, “Two Paths for Alternative Medicine: Professionalization of Oriental Medicine and the Growth of Lay Acupuncturists in Korea,” Korea Journal 49-3, 2009. 35) See Suh, 2006: 1. Suh also traces shifts in terminology of medicine from “Eastern medicine” (東醫) to “Chinese medicine (漢醫)” and then to “Korean medicine (韓醫).”

제19권 제2호(통권 제37호) 255-298, 2010년 12월 │277 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins

own cultural, regional, and national identities” by constructing a “Korean medicine” within the universals of Sino-classical medicine and biomedicine depicted as coming from the West. Suh addresses how Korean materia medica, local botanicals or “indigenous” herbal medicine, were understood and incorporated into a larger corpus of Sino-classical medical texts. (Suh, 2008) In a way, Suh’s work is about locating Korean agency in a field of transnational universals (“expressing ‘Koreanness’ within medical discourse as a culturally elaborated tool at the margins.” Suh, 2006: 31). But it is also about addressing the very fluid nature of medical tradition, in other words, its very constructed-ness. Suh, therefore, interrogates conventional Korean medical historiography, which narrates the study of “local botanicals” as a nationalist task. Suh carries her investigation from the Chosŏn kingdom to Korea’s period of open ports (1876~1910), and then throughout the Japanese colonial period. She traces the interests and activities of not only the state (both Korean and the colonial government), but also of pharmacists, drug sellers, and individual practitioners and researchers, whether they be Korean with biomedical training, Korean with Hanŭi training, or Japanese biomedical physicians. How did their various efforts seek to define or place attributes on the Korean racial body? How did Hanŭi practitioners seek to gain legitimacy for their craft in an increasingly hostile medical system? Differences or Other-ing Hanŭi from a universal category of “medicine” were not merely performed by the agency of the colonial state (in regulating medical licensing, standardizing medical education, establishing a medical system), but also by the rhetorical strategies Hanŭi practitioners employed to present themselves as “realizing a Confucian art of governing,” and to authenticate Hanŭi as tradition. Suh also analyzes the

278│ 醫史學 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins marketing of pharmaceuticals (“patent medicines”) that deploy the same claims on Korean traditions in their marketing strategies. Eun Jeong Ma picks up where Suh’s work leaves off in post-1948 south Korea. Ma understands medicine as a flexible category, contours of which often emerge from “interprofessional and intraprofessional struggles.” (Ma, 2010) As such, medicine is very much “in the making” and reflects the socio-economic and political climate in which players (government ministries, herbalists, acupuncturists, Hanŭi physicians, pharmacists, biomedical physicians, Korean population through their demands, etc.) define, regulate, legitimate, restrict, or reject Hanŭi. Through close investigation of four major controversies (herbal medicine cabinet, herbal medicine, national medical insurance, and CT) between what are perceived as Western Medicine (WM) and Oriental Medicine (OM), Ma analyzes the evolution of south Korea’s dual medical system that recognizes both WM and OM as legitimate and incommensurable systems.36) OM was “reinvented” as Korea’s national cultural heritage, that which is authentically Korean. Its history of suppression under Japanese colonial rule is likened to the historical memory of Korea’s subjugation to Japan (WM as metonym for the colonial government). As such, boundary-work for OM is intimately intertwined with post-liberation Korean politics. Ma’s analysis of the herbal medical cabinet is instructive in highlighting the complexities involved in demarcating boundaries between OM and WM.

36) Ma uses “Oriental Medicine” in English to refer to what has been demarcated as Hanŭi tradition. Ma argues that OM supporters switch tactics on their claims about incommensurability or non-translatability between OM and WM during the CT controversy, as OM practitioners sought the right to use the CT and other medical technologies in their practice. I use the terms OM and WM here as these are the terms used by Ma.

제19권 제2호(통권 제37호) 255-298, 2010년 12월 │279 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins

The medical cabinet refers to the physical structure of drawers, traditionally used “to categorize, organize, store,” and protect from fluctuations in temperature, humidity, and handling, the components or ingredients used in concocting medicine as prescribed by the OM practitioner. Who are allowed or restricted from using the cabinets, where the cabinets can be displayed, what form and shape the cabinets should take, how the ingredients should be labeled (with Latin names or original and familiar Sino-Korean terms)—questions like these are contested by not only physicians but also pharmacists of both traditions (OM and WM). What emerged in the end is a medicine cabinet that is mass-produced and in a “standardized form.” However, ambiguities in regulatory language allow its use in “multiple social worlds, those of Oriental physicians, herbalists, herbal dealers, and Western-style pharmacists,” thus further affirming the plastic nature of medicine.

6. Emerging Fields

Other areas that have begun to explore medicine in Korea, which may not first come to mind to conventional historians of medicine, include diaspora/immigration studies and linguistics. For instance, linguists in discourse analysis ask questions such as, “What do the structures of syntax and language, and vocabulary utilized in the doctor-patient relationship in Korean clinical settings reveal?”37) Analyzing what words one says, the way it is said, the context in which certain phrases are said, may indicate

37) Discourse analysis is viewed differently to linguists than to historians who understand discourse more in terms of rhetorical strategies and genealogy than in terms of language and syntax. (Y. Park, 2009)

280│ 醫史學 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins social hierarchies and other dynamics in the clinical setting that may be overlooked. In Asian American studies, scholars investigate medicine and health in Chinese- and Japanese-American communities in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, especially in terms of “citizenship” or “citizen-subject.” Nayan Shah, for example, argues that Chinese-Americans’ adoption or demonstration of specific standards of proper domesticity, sexuality, and sanitary behavior afforded them “belonging” in American society. (Shah, 2001) Impressions of Chinese bodies and disease were often informed by travelers to, as well as epidemiology of, China. The inability to demonstrate absence of disease or good hygiene among Chinese-Americans often resulted in their systematic exclusion, as quarantines on San Francisco’s Chinatown and the temporary confinement of arriving immigrants and deportations from Angel Island attest. Gil Soo Han asserts that the medical choices of Korean diasporic communities in Australia are “affected by Korean cultural practices, their social location in Australia and other economic factors in Australia and Korea.” (Han, 2000: 18) What about the Korean diaspora in other parts of the world?38) In today’s increasingly mobile and transnational world, we witness movements of medical knowledge, health care practices, and understandings of the body from Korea with Korean migrations. These, in turn, are mediated by the local situations of immigrants their host countries. Similar to concerns surrounding issues of governmentality under Japanese colonial rule prevalent among Korean historians of medicine,

38) Scholarship on Korean American communities and medicine are often addressed in fields such as social welfare, public health, and sociology. One example is Jung Kim Miller, “Use of Traditional Korean Health Care by Korean Immigrants to the United States,” Sociology and Social Research 75, 1990, pp.38-48.

제19권 제2호(통권 제37호) 255-298, 2010년 12월 │281 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins

recent English-language scholarship on Korean medicine interrogates the colonial nature of the public health and medical system ushered by Japanese authorities.39) What inequalities existed in access to, or care in, medicine between Korean and Japanese residents? What compromises did colonial authorities make in implementing a system overwhelmingly in favor of biomedicine? How did shifting medical and public health policies place Korean bodies under surveillance? What material realities shaped those choices? Hoe-eun Kim argues that the analytical lens of “colonial modernity” which recognizes colonial violence involved in the larger global process of transforming “modern medical science” in Korea, held other ramifications such as “broad medicalization of society,” and post- colonial legacies of the dual medical system, overbearing nature of healer- patient relationship, emphasis of clinical medicine over medical research, hierarchy based on schooling, high reputation of public medical schools, and the marginalization of other disciplines. (H. Kim, 2009: 117) Modes of governmentality, or in crude terms control of Korean subjects, were partially availed to their colonial rulers by public health and medicine. Jin-kyung Park coins the term “corporeal colonialism” in reference to the ways “Japanese colonial medicine established the colonized female body…and subjected… [it] to intense biomedical classification, policing, and discipline.” (J. Park, 2008: 5) This colonialism operated on the logic to increase the procreative abilities of Korean women. Todd Henry focuses on Japanese ethnographies of Korea, the activities/reports of the Seoul Sanitary Association, and newspapers targeting the Japanese residents in Korea population to interrogate the place of hygiene in Japanese colonial

39) Some examples include studies by Todd Henry, Jin-kyung Park, So Young Suh, Theodore Jun Yoo, and myself.

282│ 醫史學 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins discourse in the early colonial period. Henry argues that the overwhelmingly negative image of Korea’s sanitary conditions legitimated colonial projects to “sanitize the capital city and reform hygienic habits of its residents.” (Henry, 2005: 641) This is a narrative familiar to Korean historians of medicine. Henry expands his analysis, however, by investigating not only resistance from Korean subjects to these interventions, but also the anxieties within the Japanese resident community itself with reports of quantified data that suggested that the Japanese population, and not the Koreans, were the source of, or unable to effectively manage, contagious disease. Moreover, what links do we see between these interventions and post-liberation public health services? Jane Kim’s forthcoming scholarship on Hansen’s disease during the colonial and post-liberated periods points to how modes of governmentality did not end in 1945, but took shapes and forms under the US military occupation.40) Two emerging areas of study in American scholarship on medicine in Korea are gender and the history of illness. William Johnston’s pioneering work on tuberculosis in Japan reflects the “cultural turn” in American historical studies and, for our purposes here, in East Asian scholarship on history of medicine as he examines the intersections between culture and illness (in this case, tuberculosis) in modern Japan. Likewise other scholars interrogate the intimate relations between Korean society and illness, particularly in the fields of anthropology and communication studies. Roy Grinker’s comparative study of autism in the United States, India, South Africa, and south Korea is a highly personal and instructive account of how illness is not a universal set of symptoms, etiology, and treatment.

40) Jane Kim is currently a doctoral student at UCLA.

제19권 제2호(통권 제37호) 255-298, 2010년 12월 │283 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins

(Grinker, 2007) How autism is viewed, (mis)- understood, diagnosed, and treated reflects larger medical and cultural processes in their respective societies. For example, while blaming mothers for the rise of autism in their children may seem anachronistic in the States, it is readily accepted and instituted in the diagnostic and treatment processes in south Korea. That gender as an analytical framework provides new insights in histories of disease in Korea is made more evident in other recent scholarship. June J.H. Lee analyzes the “Adults’ Disease” or “illnesses of modernization” in contemporary south Korean society. (J. Lee, 2002) Lee’s study forces observers to ask whether men and women have different bodily experiences. If so, are they the result of different epidemiological patterns? Or, perhaps they reflect social anxieties regarding gender stemming from losses in male job security during a time of economic restructuring and global competition after the 1997 Asian economic recession (commonly referred to the IMF Crisis in Korea). Theodore Jun Yoo, whose earlier works on gender in colonial Korea touches on the competing discursive forces that shaped women’s sexuality, reproduction, and health, has embarked on new research in gender and madness (including hwabyŏng and hysteria) in modern Korea. A focus on illness in Korea also allows researchers to address how notions of a Korean race are buttressed by shifting medical knowledge. So Young Suh and other Korean scholars have written extensively on the claim strategically deployed by Hanŭi practitioners that their medical knowledge and interventions are better suited for Koreans because there is a racialized and different Korean body. Included among these rhetorics is the assertion that biomedicine does not effectively address or treat specific illnesses, such as atopic allergies or chronic muscular pains. Additionally, Korean

284│ 醫史學 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins physicians trained in biomedicine, engaged in bio-metrics and pursued research projects that countered Japanese physicians’ assertion of racial differences between the Japanese and Korean bodies. (Suh, 2006) Jin- kyung Park’s analysis of Kudo Takeshiro’s gynecological survey of Korean female inmates in colonial Korea presents the conscious effort of a Japanese biomedical physician to demarcate a specifically Korean criminality (wives killing their husbands) and pathologizes Korean marriage customs and the conjugal space. My work on “puinbyŏng” (“women’s disease,” literally “wives’ disease”) in colonial Korea suggests that the overriding concerns to protect women’s fertility (from various sectors, not just the colonial state) shaped gynecological practices and knowledge, some of the implications we continue to see in contemporary reproductive politics. (S. Kim, 2008a) As gender studies is a major concern in Korean studies in general, it is not surprising that scholars are turning to medicine to better illuminate gender in Korean history. For example, reproductive politics suggest the means and process by which notions of womanhood, masculinity, and the proper Korean family has evolved. Who, how, and why one can seek control over childbearing reveals fissures and defining moments in gender politics. Feminist scholars have highlighted that women are usually incorporated into the Korean nation, and that their education, work, and rights are justified or demanded, by their roles as mothers and wives. These in turn construct gender in modern Korea with contributions from medical knowledge and practices. Park Chung-hee regime’s National Family Planning initiatives, for example, created new networks and profession of family planners, altered conceptions of children and family, and mobilized larger populations of

제19권 제2호(통권 제37호) 255-298, 2010년 12월 │285 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins

women for state projects.41) This relates to an exciting new area of research in both Korea and the US regarding studies on medicine in Korea. In today’s global world, technology (in the conventional sense) cannot be separated from medicine, necessitating nuanced approaches to understanding the nexus among medical research and practices, technology, and socio-economic-political contexts.42) For example, the 2008 “beef riots” which on the surface is a response to FTA agreements between the US and south Korea, can be read as an exercise in popular democracy. On another hand, it reflects health concerns in south Korea. Integral to the narrative resisting the allowance of importation of US beef are medical research that discusses the potential and real harm of beef and what safety precautions are needed to protect the health of Koreans. Moreover, the use of the internet in mobilizing demonstrators demonstrates how technologies must be included in studies of health and medicine. Young-Gyung Paik’s work on bio-technology and reproductive medicine is another fine example of the increasing connectivity among medicine, technology, and Korean society. (Paik, 2009a) Paik argues that current anxieties surrounding a perceived sense of a national de-population crisis brought about by reports of low birth rates in south Korea, fuel state efforts to subsidize IVF infertility techniques for childless married couples, and discourage passage of adequate regulations regarding bioethics, ova donation, and surrogacy. These, in turn, place

41) Studies by Theodore Jun Yoo, Jin-kyung Park, and myself explore the place of medicine and health, especially through reproductive politics, in constructions of gender. For post- 1960 national family planning programs, see Seungsook Moon, Militarized Modernity and Gendered Citizenship in South Korea (Durham: Duke University Press, 2005) and John DiMoia, 2008. 42) John DiMoia’s study of the oxygenator as mentioned earlier is one example of scholarship that addresses this nexus. (DiMoia, 2009)

286│ 醫史學 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins undue pressure on women to undergo invasive medical procedures and overshadow discussion of male infertility. US studies of histories of Korean medicine remain relatively sparse. The preceding discussion, however, projects a promising outlook in studies of medicine in Korea. As Korean studies expand in the US and the increasing transnational nature of scholarship promotes intellectual exchange, issues in Korean science, medicine, and technology will continue to inspire future research. Recent scholarship highlight that we can no longer clearly delineate between histories of science, technology, or medicine. It is evident that historians of Korea (or other scholars of Korean society and culture) will benefit from historical studies of medicine. Medicine affects the very embodied experiences Koreans have in their daily life. How one lives, dies, care for selves and others in times of illness, and think about their lives and bodies are not restricted to the realm of the personal, but are connected to larger historical and political processes. Medicine also places a material face on those big ideas such as modernity, democracy, socialism, Christianity, imperialism, and feminism. Moreover, comparative studies can only further enhance Korean studies, East Asian studies, and history of medicine in general. Similar movements or issues related to medicine and health can be seen in China, Taiwan, Japan, South and Southeast Asia. That one can envision shared Asian experiences in science, technology and medicine is the premise upon which East Asian Science Technology Societies, an International Journal began. Some scholars, however, question whether Asia’s common past in terms of Japanese imperialism or post-1945 Cold War politics is sufficient to talk about an East Asian science, technology, or medicine. Nevertheless, acknowledging and taking into account the movement of medical-related

제19권 제2호(통권 제37호) 255-298, 2010년 12월 │287 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins

ideas, technologies, peoples, and practices back and forth across national borders will allow scholars to link Korea’s medical experience with larger global processes. English-language material on Korea’s colonial medical experience, for example, broadens our understandings of Japanese imperial medical projects by making connections between Taiwan, Korea, Manchuria, and even China. Re-assessing American medical-related interventions in Korea sheds new light on American culture, politics, and medicine. As more scholars of Korean health and medicine publish their research, and take positions in universities and research institutions, the field of history of medicine in Korea may no longer remain in the margins.

투고일 2010. 11. 8. 심사일 2010. 11. 16. 게재확정일 2010. 12. 6.

Selected Bibliography

Apel, Jr., Otto F. and Pat Apel, MASH: an Army Surgeon in Korea (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 1998). Baker, Don, “Oriental Medicine in Korea,” In Medicine Across Cultures: History and Practice of Medicine in Non-Western Cultures, edited by H. Selin (Great Britain: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2003). Bowman, Newton H, “The History of Korean Medicine,” Transactions of the Korea Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 6, 1915. Bowman, Newton H, “The History of Ancient Korean Medicine,” Yonsei Medical Journal 7, 1966. Brazinsky, Gregg, Nation Building in South Korea: Koreans, Americans, and the Making of a Democracy (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2007). Byun, Chung-Hwan, “Oriental Medicine as Therapeutic Medicine,” Korea Journal 28-

288│ 醫史學 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins

-11, 1988. Campbell, Dorothy, “Educational and Medical Work of Protestant Missionaries in Korea, 1910-1940,” MA thesis, University of California, Berkeley, 1954. Cha, Sungman, “Korean Heritage in Medicine, a Glimpse of History,” Yonsei Medical Journal 19-1. 1978. Cho, Byong-Hee, “The State and Physicians in South Korea, 1910-1985,” PhD diss., University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1998. Cho, Byong-Hee, “Doctors on Strike: Conflict of Interests in Medical Policy Reform,” Korea Journal 2, 2001. Cho, Byong-Hee, “The Politics of Herbal Drugs in Korea,” Social Science and Medicine 51, 2000. Cho, Byong-Hee, “Two Paths for Alternative Medicine: Professionalization of Oriental Medicine and the Growth of Lay Acupuncturists in Korea,” Korea Journal 49-3, 2009. Cho, Hyo-Je, “Traditional Medicine, Professional Monopoly and Structural Interests: a Korean Case,” Social Science and Medicine 50, 2000. Choi, Hyaeweol, Gender and Mission Encounters in Korea: New Women, Old Ways (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2009). Cowdrey, Albert E, “MASH vs M*A*S*H: the Mobile Army Surgical Hospital,” The Medical Heritage 1-1, 1985. Cowdrey, Albert E, United States Army in the Korean War: The Medics’ War (Washington, D.C.: Center for Military History, 1987). DiMoia, John, “Hanmi hyŏpch’o (Korean–American Cooperation) and the Origins of South Korean State Science (1945-1975),” PhD diss., Princeton University, 2007. DiMoia, John, “알맞게 낳아서 훌륭하게 기르자!” (Let’s Have the Proper Number of Children and Raise Them Well!): Family Planning and Nation-building in South Korea, 1961-1968,” EASTS 2-3 2008. DiMoia, John, “From Minnesota to Seoul?: The DeWall Helix Bubble Oxygenator and Technology Transfer in Open-Heart Surgery, 1955-1965,” Comparative Technology Transfer and Society 7-2, 2009. DiMoia, John, “Making Death ‘Modern’: Transforming the Body, Medical Practice, and Public Health at Seoul National University Hospital, 1975-1977,” In Death, Burial, and the Afterlife in Korea, Eds. Michael Pettid and C. Horlyck (Forthcoming).

제19권 제2호(통권 제37호) 255-298, 2010년 12월 │289 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins

Duncan, William H., MD, “Reflections on the War in Korea, Part I.” Delaware Medical Journal 72-6, 2000. Fresh Achievments in Korean Medicine (Pyongyang, DRPK: Foreign Languages Publishing House, 1963). Grinker, Roy Richard, Unstrange Minds: Remapping the World of Autism (New York: Basic Books, 2007). Han, Gil Soo, “The Rise of Western Medicine and Revival of Traditional Medicine in Korea: a Brief History,” Korean Studies 21, 1997. Han, Gil Soo, Health and Medicine under Capitalism: Korean Immigrants in Australia (Madison, NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 2000). Henry, Todd A, “Sanitizing Empire: Japanese Articulations of Korean Otherness and the Construction of Early Colonial Seoul, 1905-1919.” The Journal of Asian Studies 64, no. 3 (2005): 639-675. Hong, Mun-Hwa, “Chronological Studies on Korean Pharmacy.” Korea Journal 2, no. 12 (Dec 1962): 13-15. Hong, Seung-pyo, “Traditional Korean Medicine in the Modernization Process: Institutional and Attitudinal Changes.” PhD diss., Iowa State University, 1989. Jefferys, W. Hamilton and James L. Maxwell, The Diseases of China: Including Formosa and Korea. 1911. Jeon, Y.P & G.S. Lee, “Governance and Interest Politics: Controversy Over Herbal Medicines and the Revision of Pharmaceutical Law.” Journal of Social Science Research 6, no. 2 (1999): 27-347. Kim, Du-Chong, “Middle Eastern and Western Influence on Development of Korean Medicine.” Korea Journal 2, no. 12 (Dec 1962): 5-7. Kim, Hoi-eun, “Medicine and Colonial Modernity in Korea: a Sketch.” In Transaction in Medicine and Heteronomous Modernization: Germany, Japan, Korea, and Taiwan, edited by Shizu Sakai, Tatsuo Sakai, Christian Oberländer, and Yasutaka Ichinokawa, 107-118. Tokyo, Japan: The University of Tokyo Center for Philosophy, 2009. Kim, Jongyoung, “The Scientific Construction of Korean Medicine in a Global Age.” Social Studies of Science 37, no. 6 (December 2007): 855-880. Kim, Kwang-Il, “Traditional Concept of Disease in Korea.” Korea Journal 13, no. 1 (1973): 12-18.

290│ 醫史學 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins

Kim, Kwang-Il, “Culture and Mental Illness in Korea.” Korea Journal 14, no. 2 (1974): 4-8. Kim, Sonja M, “The Search for Health: Translating Wisaeng and Medicine During the Taehan Empire.” In Reform and Modernity in the Taehan Empire, edited by Kim Dong-no, John B. Duncan, and Kim Do-hyung. Seoul: Jimoondang, 2006. Kim, Sonja M, “Contesting Bodies: Managing Population, Birthing, and Medicine in Korea, 1876-1945.” PhD diss., University of California Los Angeles, 2008a. Kim, Sonja M, “ ‘Limiting Birth’: Birth Control in Colonial Korea.” In East Asian Science, Technology, and Society: an International Journal 2, no. 3 (2008b): 335-359. Kim, S.Y., “A Comparative Study on the Conflict of Interest Groups and the Government’s Role: a Comparison between the Division of Labor between Physicians and Pharmacists and the Conflict Between Pharmacists and Oriental Physicians.” The Journal of Korea Political Science 28, no. 1 (1997): 375-402. Kim, Yong-Kwan, “Growth of Dental Science in Korea.” Korea Journal 2, no. 12 (Dec 1962): 18-19. Kim, Yung Sik, “Problems and Possibilities in the History of Science in Korea,” Osiris 13 (1998): 48-79. Lee, Chong-Ryun, “Chronological Study on Modern Medical Education.” Korea Journal 2, no. 12 (Dec 1962): 10-12. Lee, Grant S, “The Growth of Medicine and Protestantism under Persecution: the Korean Experience.” Korea Journal 29, no. 1 (Jan 1989): 36-51. Lee, June J. H., (Lee, Jung-Hye). “A Quest for Health in Korea: Food and Body in Illness Narratives of Modernization.” PhD diss., University of Hawai’i, 1998. Lee, June J. H., “Discourses of Illness, Meanings of Modernity: a Gendered Construction of Sŏnginbyŏng.” In Under Construction: The Gendering of Modernity, Class, and Consumption in the Republic of Korea. Ed. Laurel Kendall, 55-78. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2002. Lee, Myong-Sop, “Background and Contemporary Place of Traditional Medicine.” Korea Journal 12, no. 2 (Feb 1972): 26-35. Lee, Sang-Dawn, Big Brother, Little Brother: The American Influence on Korean Culture in the Lyndon B. Johnson Years (Lanham, MA: Lexington Books, 2002). Lee, S.I et. al., “Knowledge of, Attitudes Toward, and Experience of Complementary and Alternative Medicine in Western Medicine- and Oriental Medicine-Trained

제19권 제2호(통권 제37호) 255-298, 2010년 12월 │291 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins

Physicians in Korea,” American Journal of Public Health 92-12, 2002. Lee, Yung-Chun, “Diary of a Rural Physician.” Korea Journal 3-2, 1963. Lee, Yung-Taik, “History of Korean Medicine,” Korea Journal 10-2, 1970. Leem, So Yeon and Jin Hee Park, “Rethinking Women and their Bodies in the Age of Biotechnology: Feminist Commentaries on the Hwang Affair,” EASTS 2-1, 2008. Liu, Shiyung, “The Ripples of Rivalry: the Spread of Modern Medicine from Japan to its Colonies.” EASTS 2-1, 2008. Ma, Eun Jeong, “Medicine in the Making in Post-colonial Korea (1948-2006),” PhD diss., Cornell University, 2008. Ma, Eun Jeong, “The Medicine Cabinet: Korean Medicine under Dispute,” EASTS 4-3 2010. MacDonald, Laura, “Minister of the Gospel and Doctor of Medicine: the Canadian Presbyterian Medical Mission to Korea, 1898-1923,” MA thesis, Queen’s University. 2000. Miller, Jung Kim, “Health Beliefs and Health Utilization Patterns among Korean Immigrants in Southern California,” PhD diss., University of Southern California, 1988. Miller, Jung Kim, “Use of Traditional Korean Health Care by Korean Immigrants to the United States,” Sociology and Social Research 75, 1990. Min Byong-Kun, “Cultural Influences in Mental Disorders among Koreans,” Korea Journal 10-9, 1970. Moon, Seungsook, Militarized Modernity and Gendered Citizenship in South Korea (Duke University Press, 2005). No, Chŏng-U, “Chinese Medicine in Korea (1),” Korea Journal 11-2, 1971. No, Chŏng-U, “Chinese Medicine in Korea (2),” Korea Journal 11-3, 1971. Null, Marian M, “The Korean Ch’im, or Needle,” Assembly Herald Nov 1904. Paik, L. George, The History of Protestant Missions in Korea, 1832-1910 (Seoul, Korea: Yonsei University Press, 1970). Paik, Young-Gyung, “The Discourse of National Population Crisis and Its Framing of Bioethical Issues in Contemporary South Korea,” Korea Journal 49-3, 2009a. Paik, Young-Gyung, “Technologies of ‘the Korean Family’: Population Crisis and the Politics of Reproduction in Contemporary South Korea,” PhD diss., Johns Hopkins University, 2009b.

292│ 醫史學 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins

Park, Jin-kyung, “Corporeal Colonialism: Medicine, Reproduction, and Race in Colonial Korea,” PhD diss., University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2008. Park, Yujong, “Analyzing Medical Discourse: The Organization of Doctor-Patient Interaction in Korean Primary Care Settings,” PhD diss., University of California, Los Angeles, 2009. Park, Yunjae, “Anti-Cholera Measures by the Japanese Colonial Government and the Reaction of Koreans in the Early 1920s,” The Review of Korean Studies 8-4, 2005. Park, Yunjae, “Medical Policies Toward Indigenous Medicine in Colonial Korea and India,” Korea Journal 46-1, 2006. Park, Yunjae, “The 1927 ‘Emetine Injection Incident’ in Colonial Korea and the Intervention.” Korea Journal 50-1, 2010. Sams, Crawford F., Medic : the Mission of an American Military Doctor in Occupied Japan and Wartorn Korea, Edited, with an introduction and notes, by Zabelle Zakarian (Armonk, New York: M.E. Sharpe, 1998). Scranton, William B, “Medical Work, Seoul,” Annual Report of the Board of Foreign Missions of the Methodist Episcopal Church (1893). Shim, Gunshik, “Healing Body, Mind, and Soul: a History of Methodist Medical Missions in Korea, 1885-1940,” PhD diss, Drew University, 2006. Shin, Dongwon, “Western Medicine, Korean Government, and Imperialism in Late Nineteenth-century Korea: The Cases of the Choson Government Hospital and Smallpox Vaccination.” Historia scientiarum : International Journal of the History of Science Society of Japan 13-3, 2004. Shin, Dongwon, “Nationalistic Acceptance of Sasang Medicine.” The Review of Korean Studies 9-2, 2006. Shin, Dongwon, “How Four Different Political Systems Have Shaped the Modernization of Traditional Korean Medicine Between 1900 and 1960,” Historia scientiarum: International Journal of the History of Science Society of Japan 17-3, 2008. Shin, Dongwon, “Hygiene, Medicine, and Modernity in Korea, 1876-1010.” EASTS 3, 2009. Sich, Dorothea, “Some Aspects of Traditional Medicine and Illness Behavior in Korea.” Korea Journal 18-3, 1978. Sihn, Kyu-hwan, “Unexpected Success: the Spread of Manchurian Plague and the Response

제19권 제2호(통권 제37호) 255-298, 2010년 12월 │293 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins

of Japanese Colonial Rule in Korea, 1910-1911,” Korea Journal 49-2, 2009. Son, Annette H., “Modernisation of the System of Traditional Korean Medicine (1876- 1990),” Health Policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands) 44-3, 1998. Son, Annette H., “Modernization of Medical Care in Korea (1876-1990).” Social Science & Medicine 49, 1999. Son, Min Suh, “Enlightenment and Electrification: The Introduction of Electric Light, Telegraph and Streetcars in Late Nineteenth Century Korea,” In Reform and Modernity in the Taehan Empire, edited by Kim Dong-no, John B. Duncan, and Kim Do-hyung (Seoul, Korea: Jimoondang, 2006). Suh, So Young, “Herbs of Our Kingdoms: Layers of the ‘Local’ in the Materia Medica of Early Chosŏn Korea.” Asian Medicine 4, 2008. Suh, So Young, “Korean Medicine between the Local and the Universal: 1600-1945.” PhD diss., University of California, Los Angeles, 2006. Van Der Waag, Ian, “War, Sex, and Politics: the South African Medical Section in Korea, 1950-53.” Historia 46, 2001. Yeo, In-Sok, “A History of Public Health in Korea,” In Public Health in Asia and the Pacific: Historical and Comparative Perspectives, edited by Milton J. Lewis and Kerrie L. MacPherson, 73-86. (New York: Routledge, 2008). Yoo, Theodore Jun, The Politics of Gender in Colonial Korea: Education, Labor, and Health, 1910-1945 (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2008).

Supplementary Readings

Asian Medicine and Globalization, Ed. Joseph S. Alter. (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2005). Anderson, Warwick, Colonial Pathologies: American Tropical Medicine, Race, and Hygiene in the Philippines (Durham: Duke University Press, 2006). Arnold, David, Colonizing the Body: State Medicine and Epidemic Disease in Nineteenth- Century India. (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1993). Bray, Francesca, Technology and Gender: Fabrics of Power in Late Imperial China (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1997). Building a Modern Japan: Science, Technology, and Medicine in the Meiji Era and Beyond. Ed. Morris Low (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005).

294│ 醫史學 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins

Burns, Susan, “Marketing Health and the Modern Body: Patent Medicine Advertisements in Meiji-Taisho Japan,” In Looking Modern: East Asian Visual Culture from the Treaty Ports to World War II, Ed. Hans Thomsen and Jennifer Purtle (New York: Paragon Publishers, 2009). Cochran, Sherman, Chinese Medicine Men: Consumer Culture in China and Southeast Asia (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2006). Croizier, Ralph, Traditional Medicine in Modern China: Science, Nationalism, and the Tensions of Cultural Change (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1968). Croizier, Ralph, “The Ideology of Medical Revivalism in Modern China,” In Asian Medical Systems: a Comparative Study, edited by Charles M. Leslie (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1976). Elman, Benjamin, A Cultural History of Modern Science in China, (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2006). Elman, Benjamin, On Their Own Terms: Science in China, 1550-1900 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2005). “Empires of Hygiene,” Special issue of Positions: East Asia Cultures Critique, Edited by Marta Hanson and Judith Farquhar, 6.3 (Winter 1998). Fadiman, Ann, The Spirit Catches You and You Fall Down (New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 1997). Fan, Fa-ti, British Naturalists in Qing China: Science, Empire and Cultural Encounters (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2004). Frühstück, Sabine. Colonizing Sex: Sexology and Social Control in Modern Japan (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2003). Furth, Charlotte, Flourishing Yin: Gender in China’s Medical History, 960-1665 (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1999). Hanson, Marta, Speaking of Epidemics in Chinese Medicine: Disease and the Geographic Imagination in Late Imperial China. (New York: Routledge, 2011). Health and Hygiene in Chinese East Asia: Policies and Publics in the Long Twentieth Century, Ed. Angela Ki-Che Leung and Charlotte Furth (Durham: Duke University Press, Forthcoming in 2010). Heinrich, Larissa N. The Afterlife of Images: Translating the Pathological Body between China and the West (Durham: Duke University Press, 2008). Jannetta, Ann, The Vaccinators: Smallpox, Medical Knowledge, and the ‘Opening’ of

제19권 제2호(통권 제37호) 255-298, 2010년 12월 │295 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins

Japan (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2007). Johnston, William, The Modern Epidemic: a History of Tuberculosis in Japan (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1995). Kuriyama, Shigehisa, The Expressiveness of the Body and the Divergence of Greek and Chinese Medicine (New York: Zone Books, 1999). Lei, Sean Hsiang-lin Lei, “Habituating Individuality: The Framing of Tuberculosis and Its Material Solutions in Republican China,” Bulletin of the History of Medicine 84-2, 2010. Lock, Margaret, East Asian Medicine in Urban Japan: Varieties of Medical Experience (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1980). Lock, Margaret, “The Organization and Practice of East Asian Medicine in Japan: Continuity and Change,” Social Science and Medicine 14, 1980 Morris-Suzuki, The Technological Transformation of Japan: From the Seventeenth to the Twenty-first Century (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993). Ohnuki-Tierney, Emiko, Illness and Culture in Contemporary Japan. Cambridge (England: Cambridge University Press, 1984). Rogaski, Ruth, Hygienic Modernity: Meanings of Health and Disease in Treaty-Port China (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2004). Scheid, Volker, Chinese Medicine in Contemporary China: Plurality and Synthesis. Raleigh (NC: Duke University Press, 2002). Scheid, Volker, Currents of Tradition in Chinese Medicine. Seattle (WA: Eastland Press, 2007). Science and Medicine in Twentieth-Century China: Research and Education, Ed. John Z. Bowers, William J. Hess, & Nathan Sivin, Science, Medicine, and Technology in East Asia, 3 (Ann Arbor: Center for Chinese Studies, University of Michigan, 1989). Shah, Nayan, Contagious Divides: Epidemics and Race in San Francisco’s Chinatown (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2001). Sivin, Nathan, Medicine, Philosophy and Religion in Ancient China: Researches and Reflections. (Variorum 1995). Smith, Susan L., Japanese American Midwives: Culture, Community, and Health Politics, 1880-1950 (Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois Press, 2009). Wu, Yi-li, Reproducing Women: Medicine, Metaphor, and Childbirth in Late Imperial China (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2010).

296│ 醫史學 Sonja M. KIM : In the Margins

-Abstract-

In the Margins: Writing on Medicine in Korea After 1876

Sonja M. KIM*

The goals of this article are to survey American scholarship of medicine in Korea during the modern period and to suggest perspectives such studies offer to the fields of Korean history, Asian studies, and “mainstream” history of medicine. Until recently, the history of medicine in modern Korea has been peripheralized in the larger fields within which it is subsumed for various reasons. Earlier researchers tended to operate from “Orientalist” frameworks or were informed by “modernization theory,” and thus have focused generally on American interventions in Korean public health and medicine (through missionaries, the US military, and other aid organizations) or that which has been conventionally perceived as “traditional” medicine. Critical scholarship in fields of STS and post-colonial studies, however, have recently inspired new research that reassess polemic issues such as technology transfer, translation of knowledge, cultural encounters, governmentality, processes involved in the revitalization of Hanŭi, construction of gender, and nexus among medicine, science, and technology. As such the field as expanded beyond Korean history to include anthropology, sociology, STS, and linguistics. Moreover, given the transnational nature of academia and possibilities for productive comparative research, Korean history of medicine may soon no longer remain in the margins.

* Assistant Professor, Dept of Asian and Asian American Studies, Binghamton University, SUNY, USA phone : 1-607-777-3861 / e-mail : [email protected]

제19권 제2호(통권 제37호) 255-298, 2010년 12월 │297