OnlineBookClub.org

Though the book is centered on Korean independence struggle, it portrays the historical political connections and various interactions between America, Russia, Japan, China and Korea. So, what do you think of this book? Is it a historical fiction or a political satire?

I didn't get the sense that it was intended to be satire. Are there certain aspects that you felt the author was trying to make fun of or be comedic about?

I didn't see it as being comedic. It seemed to me that the book brought extremely important topics to the fore. The interwoven nature of the story and the political presence of these countries really told an important story

I think the book is both a piece of historical fiction and a form of political satire. There are many instances when the author alludes to the absurd and ridiculous nature of certain scenes or characters. For example, I can think of King Gojong's behavior during his private birthday party, Embon's accidental arrest with the revolutionaries when he was actually planning to go skiing and then returning home, the dilapidated nature of the buildings of the provisional Korean government set in Shanghai, etc.

While it lends itself to historical fiction, I can see instances of satire. There is no reason it can't be both, but if you had to pick just one genre, it is definitely more historical fiction than political satire.

MrsCatInTheHat wrote: ↑01 Jan 2021, 16:00 I didn't get the sense that it was intended to be satire. Are there certain aspects that you felt the author was trying to make fun of or be comedic about?

I won't say it was intended to be a comedy. But whatever the situations that are related to politics has some ridiculous nature underneath them. You may consider The Korean king's behaviours, then the ironical arrest of Embon, etc. They are not exact jokes, yet they have a sense of humour, as per my opinion

Dee_Robert wrote: ↑02 Jan 2021, 03:01 I didn't see it as being comedic. It seemed to me that the book brought extremely important topics to the fore. The interwoven nature of the story and the political presence of these countries really told an important story

Agreed. The content covered important content in the political grounds of that era. And at the same time look at the unnecessary political plots and interventions that took place in this story, and to what they led ultimately. I find them quite ironical as well as humorous

cd20 wrote: ↑02 Jan 2021, 19:01 While it lends itself to historical fiction, I can see instances of satire. There is no reason it can't be both, but if you had to pick just one genre, it is definitely more historical fiction than political satire.

Yes, it is truly a historical fiction. But beneath that, the author has included occasions that the imaginative and thoughtful reader can see the irony as well as the ridiculous nature. The acts of the Korean King, the political gamblings are few examples

This book can be categorized as both, as there are some element of satire in it, though it's majorly historical fiction. I would therefore categories as historical fiction if I was to choose one.

Phelicia Gloria wrote: ↑04 Jan 2021, 02:28 This book can be categorized as both, as there are some element of satire in it, though it's majorly historical fiction. I would therefore categories as historical fiction if I was to choose one.

It is a historical fiction since it is set up in the known history in a known situation. Yet, it is about how the politics have been working in the past, not for the betterment of people, but for the gain of the rulers and the superior parties. So, I see this more as a political satire

I didn't feel as though this was intended as political satire, but reading some of these responses has made me rethink my reading of the book. I do feel like the king was intended to be a satirical character, but later, after Embon talks to his father, it is clear that the king did a lot for his country. I think the king tried to save Korea, but was dealt a rather rough hand. Embon expounds on this after his meeting with his father and I think this made me believe the book was intended as historical fiction and not a political satire. I found the book to be very somber and sobering.

I think this book was not intended to be satire. However, it definitely has some ingredients that could be interpreted as such. I am not familiar with the authors background, but I think in some cultures describing political and/or historical events often appears to outsiders as it was satire even if it is not. I don’t really know if this is the case. However, I would categorize this book under historical fiction and I think the author has done a good job with that. As far as I can say, the historical events seem accurately written.

I don't think the book falls into the political satire category. I'd say it's more of historical fiction because it's centered around actual historical events but the story and characters are fictitious.

I think it is mainly historical fiction, as it shows historical details of Korea during its war for independence from Japan, while the author tries to display elements of Korean culture through his book in order to inform the reader about Korean history.

This book contains a lot of political stuffs but not satirical in my opinion. But it does have a lot of history to be tagged a historical fiction.