The author has taken the side of Korea. Is it justifiable?

[isag7889]

It is the matter of perspective. Here the author has tried to show Korea's struggle for independence against Japan. It is natural that the author vilified the actions of the Japanese soldiers but has also tried portray the shortcomings of Korea. It is justified as we are talking about only one. If we see through the Japanese side then maybe there was something more than just conquering Korea like why they did so.

[Books Rule]

The author is a Korean woman, using a Korean woman as her narrator. In the case of the author, she's writing what she knows, which writers often get told to do. Even when they're writing fiction. In the case of the narrator, it stands to reason that she favors her homeland and sees the Japanese as invaders. In any case, why should either the author or the narrator need to justify their allegiance to their homeland? In an essay or other nonfiction we might expect such. But in fiction the author is allowed to invent as she pleases. She is not even obligated to keep her historical places, events or characters accurate. Whether or not she does, will simply determine whether her work is labeled fiction or historical fiction.

[Book Lover Jack]

I had the same reservations then realised that:
1. The author is Korean and so might have a bias towards the depiction of her people
2. It is a perspective, not meant to be a factual account
3. It is fiction. If she was asked to give a true historical account I'm sure she would be more objective

[Sou Hi]

Hm, first off, nobody writes to praise their enemy and shame their own nation. To some extent, the author is bound to view her country as the victim. Secondly, while being historical, this book is also fictitious. Some details will be modified to suit the plot. (For example, the Joseon dynasty is supposed to end in 1910, two years prior to the book's story.)

Besides, I think the author has pointed out some of Korea's mistakes. As Embon and his friends said, the Koreans were old-fashioned and closed-minded, and the youngsters thought that monarchism was no longer needed. Ironically, in a way, Korea had to thank their foe. Being annexed by Japan offered a golden chance to Korea's young generations: to fall or to rise. We all know the result of that choice: South Korea is now a powerful nation, and despite their closing in, North Korea also employs modern techniques and devices in their daily lives.

So, personally, I think the book is pretty fair about the history aspect.

Any author is biased when it comes to his/her own nation. And it is not unusual to see the enemy as a dangerous devil. Yet, this is not terrorism what we are speaking of. It is a war between two countries, or lets say its a rebellious stand against a country. In that context, the author can elaborate the courageous fight that they had, yet, since the events are already happened and the two countries are in peace today, I think that portraying Japan in an extreme villainous picture is unnecessary

I'm afraid they are not in peace at all. They may look like they are getting along, for economic and political objectives, but many conflicts have been occurring between them. To this day, South Korea is the country with the second most negative feelings for Japan in the world (and of course, there must be a historical reason for this resentment). Besides, the Japan-South Korea trade dispute happened just a few years ago (in 2019, to be exact), where Koreans boycotted Japanese products. I think this dispute is not resolved yet. It looks like the Koreans can't forgive Japan because they haven't received appropriate apologies.

[ReaderAisha2020]

To be honest, I was curious when reading the novel, about the Japanese perspective, especially since I knew nothing about the occupation or culture of Japan. However, the author is Korean, and so I think it is natural to write from the Korean perspective. Perhaps if a Japanese person wrote it they would write from theirs

[lavkathleen]

Japan invading Korea is a historical fact. Of course it's justifiable. And it didn't drive me not just against one country—it drove me further against their destructive ideals: imperialism.

[Daisy Deeh]

Since the author came from korea , to me it was obvious that he sides with his homeland futhermore it is his homeland, we don't expect him to side japan.

[63tty]

I personally don't feel driven to hate any country. If that is how it was, then we can't really change the past. Maybe it's just facts, and it all depends on how the current situation is. Things have changed now. I don't know their history, it is all just speculation.

[Ahbed Nadir]

I feel that the author wrote from his own perspective based on what he had experienced and as such I can't really judge as there are always two sides to a coin. The author's view helped to add a feel of authenticity to the book as he was speaking on what he had researched or observed personally. The author is coming from Korea so it would be expected that he would be on their side.

[Atieno Magero]

I don't think that the story is biased. The author wrote this book from the Koreans perspective. The author wrote from their perspective and if you think about it writers write about what they know.

[Nikolas Farmakis]

Yes, I think it is justifiable, as books are supposed to shed light on people's perspectives and experiences. I think that given the brutality of the Japanese soldiers during that era, the author does well to point out their atrocities, giving the reader a warning about where humans can be led if they are not careful.

[Nqobile Mashinini Tshabalala]

Well, anybody who enslaves another is a villain in my eyes and I am glad the author told the story from the Korean's perspective. Their side of the story needs to be known.

[María Andrea Fernández Sepúlveda]

Ah, I thought so too at first. But then I realised. Its a story, a perspective. The author is entitled to tell it the way it was experienced. Sure, we could do without all that division in writings more and more. But for authenticity purposes, I think our authors work is justifiable

Exactly. Of course, every war has two sides. And this is the Korean one. I think it's perfectly justifiable to write it from a certain perspective as long as the author doesn't claim it's an objective perspective, which she doesn't.

[Sushan Ekanayake]

Historical fiction is a field of writing where you have to take a stance, in my opinion. The author has tried her best to show us the shortcomings of Korean society, but at the end of the day she is writing about the Korean struggle for freedom against the Japanese and this naturally makes her vilify the Japanese slightly, even if this is not an accurate representation.

I appreciate your honest reply. Yes, the author has taken a side. With that, the details might have been manipulated and may not be the accurate as well. If a balanced fiction was created, atleast the history would have been portrayed correctly

[Sushan Ekanayake]

I thought about the same issue while reading the book. maybe because I am a European and am not very well versed with Asian history, I was surprised to read about this conflict. Also, this is the first time I see Japan in a negative light in a novel, which was a sign that I should diversify my reading more.

Well, according to history, Japan has not been a saint when it comes to world affairs. Several conflicts have been initiated by them. Still, it is not good to vilify a country in a fiction. It is okay to portray the actual historical facts. But here I think the author has gone a bit out of the line