Archival Documentation, Historical Perception, and the No Gun Ri Massacre in the Korean War
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
RECORDS AND THE UNDERSTANDING OF VIOLENT EVENTS: ARCHIVAL DOCUMENTATION, HISTORICAL PERCEPTION, AND THE NO GUN RI MASSACRE IN THE KOREAN WAR by Donghee Sinn B.A., Chung-Ang University, 1993 M.A., Chung-Ang University, 1996 Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The Department of Library and Information Science School of Information Sciences in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Pittsburgh 2007 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH DEPARTMENT OF LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SCIENCE SCHOOL OF INFORMATION SCIENCES This dissertation was presented by Donghee Sinn It was defended on July 9, 2007 and approved by Richard J. Cox, Ph.D., DLIS, Advisor Karen F. Gracy, Ph.D., DLIS Ellen G. Detlefsen, Ph.D., DLIS Jeannette A. Bastian, Ph.D., Simmons College Dissertation Director: Richard J. Cox, Ph.D., Advisor ii Copyright © by Donghee Sinn 2007 iii RECORDS AND THE UNDERSTANDING OF VIOLENT EVENTS: ARCHIVAL DOCUMENTATION, HISTORICAL PERCEPTION, AND THE NO GUN RI MASSACRE IN THE KOREAN WAR Donghee Sinn, PhD University of Pittsburgh, 2007 The archival community has long shown an interest in documenting history, and it has been assumed that archival materials are one of the major sources of historical research. However, little is known about how much impact archival holdings actually have on historical research, what role they play in building public knowledge about a historical event and how they contribute to the process of recording history. The case of the No Gun Ri incident provides a good example of how archival materials play a role in historical discussions and a good opportunity to look at archival contributions. This dissertation examines how archival materials were discovered and used in the process of identifying the controversies raised in No Gun Ri research by examining the earliest to the most recent publications, their authors’ patterns of conducting their research and their perceptions on using archives. In doing so, a content analysis of No Gun Ri publications was employed and interviews with No Gun Ri researchers were conducted for this study. In No Gun Ri research, archival documents were essential source materials for details about the incident and a major player in stimulating heated controversies and discussions and, consequently, provided the impetus for further publications by No Gun Ri researchers. Archival documents were especially critical for specific details of the incident as well as a good source for background and circumstantial information. General record keeping situations - such as missing documents - also provided a circumstantial context of the incident. However, No Gun Ri researchers agreed that oral history was the most valuable and influential evidence for their major ideas and used archival documents to provide hard facts about the details of oral history. There are some unique research patterns of No Gun Ri researchers identified in this study which are different from typical assumptions of archivists. Archival programs should have an accurate understanding about how their holdings are iv used (or not used) and why; consequently, this study regarding the use of archival materials in the evolution of the discussion of the No Gun Ri massacre will provide the fundamental information within an empirical framework. v TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE...................................................................................................................................... ix TRANSLITERATION FOR KOREAN NAMES OF PERSONS AND PLACES....................... xi 1.0 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 STATEMENT OF PROBLEMS.................................................................................... 1 1.2 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY............................................................................... 8 1.3 TERMINOLOGY ........................................................................................................ 10 1.4 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS ................................ 11 1.5 STRUCTURE AND OUTLINE .................................................................................. 12 1.6 LIMITATIONS............................................................................................................ 14 2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW..................................................................................................... 16 2.1 PUBLIC MEMORY, WAR HISTORY, AND ARCHIVES ....................................... 17 2.2 DOCUMENTS AS EVIDENCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY IN LEGAL AND ARCHIVAL ASPECTS ....................................................................................................... 34 2.3 USER STUDIES IN ARCHIVES................................................................................ 47 3.0 METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................... 55 3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN ................................................................................................. 55 3.2 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND............................................................................. 56 3.2.1 Grounded Theory Approach ......................................................................... 56 3.2.2 Applicability to this Research....................................................................... 58 3.3 DATA COLLECTION AND CONTENT ANALYSIS .............................................. 60 3.3.1 Data Set of Historical Description: Contents of Research............................ 60 3.3.2 Data Set of User Perception: Interview of Researchers................................ 62 3.4 DATA ANALYSIS PROCESS AND TECHNIQUE.................................................. 64 3.4.1 Publication Analysis ..................................................................................... 64 vi 3.4.2 Interviews...................................................................................................... 66 4.0 NO GUN RI MASSACRE: HISTORICAL SKETCH ......................................................... 68 5.0 NO GUN RI INCIDENT: ARCHIVAL DOCUMENTATION............................................ 87 5.1 BEFORE SEPTEMBER 29, 1999: BEGINNING OF THE EARLY DISCUSSIONS90 5.2 SEPTEMBER 29, 1999 TO MAY 11, 2000: AP STORY’S PREDOMINANCE ...... 98 5.3 MAY 11, 2000 TO JANUARY 12, 2001: VERACITY DISCUSSIONS CONCERNING NEWS SOURCES................................................................................... 120 5.4 AFTER JANUARY 11, 2001: GOVERNMENTS’ INVESTIGATION REPORTS 139 6.0 THE NO GUN RI INCIDENT: HISTORICAL PERCEPTION......................................... 171 6.1 RESEARCH PROCESS IN TERMS OF USING ARCHIVES................................. 172 6.2 IDENTIFYING, LOCATING, AND SEARCHING ARCHIVES ............................ 180 6.3 CREDIBILITY OF SOURCE MATERIALS............................................................ 186 6.4 RESEARCHERS’ PERCEPTION OF USING ARCHIVES..................................... 195 7.0 IMPLICATIONS AND DISCUSSIONS ........................................................................... 201 7.1 FINDINGS OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS.............................................................. 202 7.2 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY AND FURTHER RESEARCH DIRECTION ... 214 7.3 CONCLUSION.......................................................................................................... 218 APPENDIX A ............................................................................................................................ 222 APPENDIX B ............................................................................................................................. 256 APPENDIX C ............................................................................................................................. 269 BIBLIOGRAPHY....................................................................................................................... 272 vii LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Timeframes for Analysis ................................................................................................ 88 Table 2. The Number of Publications before Septermber 29, 1999 ............................................. 90 Table 3. No Gun Ri Discussions in the First Period ..................................................................... 97 Table 4. The Number of Publications from September 29, 1999 to May 10, 2000...................... 99 Table 5. Discussions on the Background of No Gun Ri in the Second Period ........................... 105 Table 6. Discussions of Refugee Problems and Policies in the Second Period.......................... 107 Table 7. Discussions on the Evolution of the No Gun Ri in the Second Period ......................... 111 Table 8. Discussions on the No Gun Ri Research in the Second Period .................................... 116 Table 9. Most Used Archival and Secondary Materials in the Second Period........................... 118 Table 10. The Number of Publications from May 11, 2000 to January 12, 2001 ...................... 121 Table 11. Discussions on the Background of No Gun Ri in the Third Period ............................ 124 Table 12. Discussions on the Evolution of the No Gun Ri in the Third Period.......................... 128 Table 13. Discussions of Refugee Problems and Policies in the Third Period........................... 130 Table 14. Discussions on the No Gun Ri Research in the Third Period ....................................