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

[Memareas1]

While reading the book I also thought that I really need to expand my reading to get to know other countries' history. From the author´s last name I could not tell she was Korean, but it was crystal clear through the read. I must confess though that I felt uneasy. I know nothing about this conflict, but I know about the human kind and I don´t know of any pure and good country. History is much more complex than the good, the bad and the ugly. And in spite of the discomfort I felt while reading that the Japanese empire was so bad, I also felt it honest, refreshing, and to my delight, politically incorrect! I don´t like to incite any violence in this world but I really miss reading openness and opinion, specially in a historical novel. And for the record, I still love Japan, even if I am in my Korean period. Greetings.

[athurst123]

I think it is justifiable. The author is writing about the Korean perspective. I feel like if the book was written from the Japanese perspective, we may be asking the same question.

[AvidBibliophile]

I believe any author has free rein to take whichever side or viewpoint they desire. Solemn rituals, barbaric traditions, prominent disparities, and intricate preparations didn’t even compare to the treacherous acts that resulted in the fiery assassination of a queen, but even some of the Korean rituals and traditions discussed in this book could have easily been considered villainous, as well. All of the included historical mentions provided one unique perspective, and a culturally significant one at that, but I never felt that an entire country was unfairly represented. Even in cinema, the Japanese forces were not likable in Pearl Harbor, so I think this book just accurately represented one unpleasant side of the historical record.

[Katherine Smith]

I think that some of the villainization of Japan is justifiable considering the torturous conditions that they forced onto the Korean people during the Second World War. For some people, this is still fresh in their minds and since Japan has not acknowledged the full extent of their abuse against the Korean people it has become a sore spot for many Koreans. It is this abusive treatment by the Japanese that led to the rise of North Korea and the Kim dynasty. The United States is not against culpability either since we dropped two atomic bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima which killed or injured thousands of civilians.

[jamespotter]

I'm definitely biased as a Korean person myself, but Bradley's description is absolutely justified. Imagine if someone writing a novel that takes place in Nazi Germany wrote the Nazis as mild-mannered and gentle; it'd be ridiculous. This doesn't mean that we still hate Germany for what happened, or that all Germans are Nazis. It's simply doing justice to the horrifying history that must be told. Most people don't know about Japan's occupation of other countries, or the depth of how awful their occupations were. Books like these give insight into these moments so that it cannot be repeated, and so that the victims of history are acknowledged.

[Jennifer Aldo]

I believe it is justifiable. Even if the Japanese were all nice and didn't exploit the Koreans, they still deprived them of a very important factor, independence. The independence of Korea was something they wanted, as opposed to colonialism, But instead the Japanese government continued to oppress the movement, even killing innocent young protesters in a march. Not to mention the police brutality. I believe villainizing Japan was well deserved.

[Sushan Ekanayake]

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.

The reason for the author to take the side of Korea can be justified as it is her motherland. But the experiences of the Korean nation at the time of Japanese rule cannot be experienced by the author, since the events have taken place many years ago. So, her accounts are also based on notes and comments of other people. When that taken into consideration we have to think twice whether the bias is justified

[Sushan Ekanayake]

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.

I disagree. Writing from one perspective means it is biased. So, if the author has written the story from the Korean ppoint of view, then it is biased. It is true that the writers write what they know. But is just knowing enough when it comes to historical fiction?

[Honest-reviewer]

I think it is totally justifiable. Only the people who are in the shackles of a strong ruling country will know how hard it is to survive. Moreover, the author is talking about her own country. So her taking side of Korea makes sense.

[Sushan Ekanayake]

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.

I agree with the point that you mentioned regarding the ends that hunans can go if they are wrongly led. And that might have happened to the Japanese ssoldiers those days. But I don't think that was true regarding all the Japanese soldiers. Seemingly the author has been too biased when vilifying Japan

[Sushan Ekanayake]

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.

I am not sure about enslaving. Japan conquered Korea. They treated them bad. Yet, I don't know whether it can be taken as enslaving. A conqueror is always a villain in the eyes of the victims, and seemingly this is what happened in this fiction since it is the story from the side of Korea

[Sushan Ekanayake]

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.

This is a fiction. So the author cannot claim it as objective data. It is true that an author can make villains as well as heroes as his/her own wish. Yet I believe that an author should be careful when vilifying an entire country, even in fiction

[ciecheesemeister]

Absolutely, why shouldn't she? She was writing about historical events, not demonizing modern Japan. In the past, the Japanese government also committed atrocities against the Chinese as well. It would not be demonizing modern Japan to write about these events. The U.S. government committed atrocities against the people who were enslaved and against indigenous Americans. It is not demonizing modern Americans to reveal this truth. I don't think that the author was trying to demonize Japan as a country but to educate readers about the past struggles between Japan and Korea.

[car-mbz]

I think the author being Korean plays a huge role on how Japan is potrayed. Since the book is based on fiction, I think the author should have been non-partisan and told the story without taking sides.

[Serenity2010]

I think the author was giving the reader an overall description of Korea at the time based on the storyline. The story is fiction so if the author decided to put Embon in another time period of Korean history then the villain might be another country or another entity altogether so that the reader can have the accurate context of the character's journey. Accuracy in a historic fiction novel like this grounds the reader to the real world with accurate historic context. Japan's atrocities towards Korea of the time period made Japan the villain. However, that does not make Japan a bad country overall. The author was justified.