OnlineBookClub.org

This story is written about the Korean struggle against Japan for independence. The author has made Japan a complete villain with the details of the corrupted nature of Japanese soldiers and officials. Is it justifiable? Is it appropriate for a fiction to drive the readers against a country?

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

The novel elaborates on the Koreans' perspective regarding the Japanese occupation. In other words, the vilification is expected and justifiable. As for me, the novel did not turn me against Japan. It practically made me curious to read more on the state of international affairs at the time of the story. Besides, the Koreans are not portrayed all in white either. The author often emphasizes the flaws and weaknesses of Korean society.

From the side of the person struggling under the corrupted Japanese officials tyranny it would seem justified.

Wrong actions are wrong no matter how one puts it, but this is about what happened in the past.

As a bystander, who's learning about it now, what I could do is learn about what happened in Japan to cause this and how this could be prevented.


The book does give me strong emotions but I don't think I would hold onto them long enough to forever hate on Japan.

The author is telling the side of Korea, we know this going in, and to expect the story to illuminate both sides is not necessary. You can expect that it will be the perspective of the one telling the story. I do not believe that the author is trying to be divisive, so much as to tell a story. This story did not make me see either side as a villain, it gave me a greater appreciation of the struggles that people during that time lived through. It seems to me that you couldn't win no matter which side you were on. It reminds me to what we are facing here, masks or no masks, you can't win no matter which side you are on. You just do the best that you can do and tell your perspective and your side of the story, hoping that it might make a difference to someone, someday.

Dee_Robert wrote: ↑02 Jan 2021, 03:16 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

That is true. The author, being born in korea, might have heard stories that favour Korea in that struggle. And also we cannot expect the author to not have any affiliation to her native land. So, that might have been the reason for the book to be biased towards Korea

cristinaro wrote: ↑02 Jan 2021, 06:10 The novel elaborates on the Koreans' perspective regarding the Japanese occupation. In other words, the vilification is expected and justifiable. As for me, the novel did not turn me against Japan. It practically made me curious to read more on the state of international affairs at the time of the story. Besides, the Koreans are not portrayed all in white either. The author often emphasizes the flaws and weaknesses of Korean society.

The author has shown the inadequacies of Korea as well. Yet he has vilified Japan and its soldiers, and some of the actions of Japanese soldiers and officials that are described in this story can turn the reader against Japan. Those things might have been true, but the author could have taken a lighter approach

I think so.

The Japanese did act as aggressors throughout much of their history, and not just the Koreans but the Chinese as well have historically had solid reasons to be "against" them. To portray Korean characters' views of the imperialistic Japanese otherwise than Bradley did would, in my opinion, make the characters not only less realistic but also less relatable.

If a novel were written, for example, from the perspective of a German citizen in the 1920s-30s, it would be reasonable for the novel as a whole to take an anti-Allies stance: for the protagonists to hate the rest of the world, to feel downtrodden and put-upon, and to therefore harbor anger and resentment, which leads to engaging in dehumanizing thought patterns. To write such a character otherwise - as in, "I'm sure the English/French/etc are good people, really; they defeated us fair and square in an honest, well-fought war, and I'm okay with that, even though I can't afford to feed my children right now" - would be inauthentic to the views of the people at the time.

Consider Americans' stance against Japan in WWII, wherein millions of Japanese American citizens were rounded up and locked in concentration camps while Japanese soldiers' body parts were hacked off and kept as "souvenirs". And that was a result of one bombing, not even a country-wide occupation. I can only imagine how much hatred the latter would have engendered. Hate like that doesn't leave much room to see your enemies as humans at all, let alone somewhat decent humans.

In any case, I don't see most readers turning against Japan based on the novel's (admittedly biased) perspective. If that were the case, then novels about English history should be banned worldwide, as the English were at one time or another conquerors and occupiers of just about everywhere.

This is just a novel, the author siding with Korea is okay as the author his coming from Korea so he understands the country better, and I don't think just a mare fiction novel can change one's view on Japan.

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.

Phelicia Gloria wrote: ↑04 Jan 2021, 02:15 This is just a novel, the author siding with Korea is okay as the author his coming from Korea so he understands the country better, and I don't think just a mare fiction novel can change one's view on Japan.

If we look at the history, there are many occasions that books have been banned because they had the potential to turn human minds. So this one can't
be merely ignored as just a novel.

Yes, I agree that the author being Korean, it is fair for her to take the side of Korea. Yet, she could have given a less villainous picture to Japan to be more fair

I think this is just the author's point of view. I am sure there are books out there that are from Japan's point of view. Everyone is entitled to their own point of view.

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 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.

Sou Hi wrote: ↑04 Jan 2021, 20:38 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