Newsletter

Park Hun

Professor, Department of Asian History, Seoul National University

Professor Park acquired his bachelor's and master's degree from the Department of Asian History at Seoul National University and his doctoral degree from the University of Tokyo. He taught Japanese studies at Kookmin University before coming to teach at Seoul National University's Department of Asian History. He has mainly been researching and writing papers on the inception of the Meiji Restoration, political reforms and the public sphere's formation in Meiji Japan, and Japanese perceptions of the outside world. Among his many research papers is "The Emergence of the ‘Political Culture of Confucian Literati’ in 19th-Century Japan: Rethinking the Meiji Restoration in the East Asian Context." He is the author of the book "How the Meiji Restoration was Possible" and co-author of "Modernization in the East and West."

Q

You must be busy since you're still in the middle of a semester, but could you please share anything about the research topics you've been interested in lately or activities you've recently been engaged in?

A

This past February, I was invited to give a lecture at a society researching public discussions at Ritsumeikan University in Kyoto, Japan. With those society members, I've since been searching for a new research topic related to public discussions and democracy in East Asia. And I'm almost done translating and annotating a book scheduled to come out by the end of this year titled "Amayogatari" (雨夜譚), an autobiography of Shibusawa Eiichi, a modern Japanese economic pioneer. Through "How the Meiji Restoration Was Possible" published in 2014, I was only able to touch upon the cause and background of the Meiji Restoration, but not the details of the developments leading to the restoration. So, I plan to write another book about the Meiji Restoration that covers the history between Perry's first visit to Japan in 1853 and the restoration of practical imperial rule in 1868.    

Q

Various events are being held in Japan to celebrate the Meiji Restoration's 150th anniversary this year. The occasion is also bringing your book "How the Meiji Restoration Was Possible" back into the spotlight, so could you please explain the message you wished to deliver through the book?

A

I wouldn't go as far as to say it's coming back into the spotlight, but there does seem to be a steady number of copies being sold. The book is essentially a product of what I studied for twenty years, so it wasn't intended to deliver any specific message. I did however try to take a level-headed approach toward Japanese history because I thought it was time for Koreans to let go of the animosity and sense of inferiority they've held against Japan and objectively study it now that Korea has grown strong enough to afford to do so.

What the book features is how each entity desperately struggles to cope with developments that unfold when a society runs into a crisis, which can actually rarely be witnessed throughout the two thousand years of Japanese history. That's why I believe the Meiji Restoration can offer lessons not only to Koreans, but to all mankind. Also, people tend to understand the Meiji Restoration as a unilateral process of Westernization, but I wanted to show that it was actually carried out in parallel with the process of East Asianization. So, it can be considered an attempt to see what happens by trying to understand the Meiji Restoration through the language of East Asia. I think that aspect of the book was what attracted the attention of Korean as well as Japanese scholars.

Q

The Meiji Restoration was a major historical incident for all East Asian countries. Japan succeeded in modernizing itself, but Korea became sacrificed by Japan's imperialistic invasions. Some even argue that if it weren't for the Meiji Restoration, Korea may not have had to suffer such invasions.

A

There are views regarding the Meiji Restoration as the starting point of Japanese imperialism or the beginning of Japan's annexation of Korea. However, the restoration occurred four to five decades prior to Japan's annexation of Korea, so it would be a teleological interpretation to draw a causal relationship between the two. Taking a teleological approach to examine the past can it make appear differently from what it really is, just to suit a presupposed purpose. Such an approach can make it easy to criticize a certain target but limit the range of findings that can be gathered from historical research. The greatest merit of studying history lies in being able to be unrestricted by current norms as we review historical events and learn about the diverse thoughts and actions of other people, and we shouldn't risk losing that merit. So, I think that at least academically, we should refrain from considering that Japan's imperialistic invasions and annexation of Korea was planned since the time when the Meiji Restoration occurred.

Q

For the past few years, you've helped jointly host the "Korea-China-Japan Young Historians' Seminar" with the University of Tokyo, Waseda University, and Fudan University. Could you please share what sort of progress has been made through the seminars?

A

The seminar was launched for two reasons: to bring together historians from the three countries who have been facing limitations in international exchange due to language barriers and to encourage exchange between young scholars around the age of forty. So far, Korea, China, and Japan each took turns to host three meetings. Out of the total of seventy papers presented so far, eight from each country will be selected and published as a collection of twenty-four papers in Japanese by the University of Tokyo and in Korean by Seoul National University. The meetings have been suspended due to financial reasons. I hope the Northeast Asian History Foundation will take an interest in the seminar in the future.

Q

You recently pointed out in a column that "the Korean society needs to further study and gain a deeper insight into Japan." What did you exactly mean by that?

A

Koreans are almost too interested in Japan, but don't study Japan as much. If you have that much interest in a subject, you would normally invest as much time into studying it, but in this case, there seems to be a huge gap between interest and effort. As the value of the English language continues to rise, the Japanese language has long become a peripheral language in Korea, turning Japan into a country merely encountered through novels or animation. Out of the many things about Japan that Koreans still lack an understanding of, the history of Japan is likely to be at the top of the list. It is becoming an aspect of Japan that has been growing more and more unfamiliar to Koreans precisely because they don't study it enough. What Koreans need to keep in mind is that it isn't their loud protesting voice that Japan fears, but the deep level of knowledge and insight into its history that some Koreans are equipped with.

Q

With the rise of neo-nationalism in Korea, China, and Japan, the three countries are currently immersed in producing exclusive, self-centered narratives of history. What should Korea and Japan do in order to overcome their unfortunate past and cooperate in building a future-oriented peaceful community in Northeast Asia?

A

Historical issues should not be politicized or popularized. Because they are issues that everyone thinks they understand but are in fact issues that require a great deal of expertise to be able to handle. They should have been discussed among a group of highly, professionally trained experts from both countries to reach a wise solution to then be carried out by reliable politicians. It's a pity that the issues failed to go through such a process so far.

Of course, Japan's attitude is primarily to blame. But in Korea, historical issues with Japan now seem to have become captives of politicians vying for more votes and media outlets struggling to raise their ratings. The less hope there seems to be for resolving the issues, politicians tend to gain more support while media outlets tend to experience a rise in their ratings in both Korea and Japan. Against a setting like this, who would sincerely try to resolve the issues? These only indicate that the two countries have entered into a very tricky situation where there is almost nothing left for scholars to contribute.

No matter how hard scholars investigate and research to deliver more accurate conclusions, as long as those conclusions don't fit into the purpose of politicians or the media, they never get acknowledged or accepted. Even when drafting policies related to historical issues, politicians and the media make decisions based on poll results or the opinions of a few close associates lacking expertise rather than turning to scholars for suggestions. Among those in Korea who currently have the authority to make decisions about policies toward Japan, few are either proficient in Japanese or have extensive experience in dealing with Japan and we should seriously consider what the consequences of that will be for Korea.

Q

It has not been at all easy for Korea and Japan to resolve conflicts arising from historical issues. What efforts do you believe should be made for their resolution and what role do you think the Northeast Asian History Foundation should play in that respect?

A

The place that has the most experts and information related to such issues in Korea is the Northeast Asian History Foundation. What the Foundation should do is to continue bringing in reliable experts well-versed in Korea's historical issues with Japan who can sincerely discuss and formulate resolutions. Resolutions derived from such a process may not be able to completely satisfy the public, but convincing the public is also part of the role the Foundation should play. That leaves the Foundation with a lot to deal with. Although it may not be able to be totally impervious to the influence of the government and national assembly, scholars at the Foundation should nevertheless undertake the task of searching for apt resolutions without being swayed by the public or political motives.

Q

Finally, could you please tell us what Japan is to Koreans and how you would like Koreans to view Japan?

A

Japan is important to Korea, much more than we imagine. Even if everyone around the world disregards Japan, Koreas should not, and even if they all admire Japan, there is no need for Koreans to do the same. That is the duality we Koreans tend to feel when it comes to Japan.

Some Koreans think Japan can be overlooked since their country's power has somewhat grown. However, Sin Suk-ju, a Joseon bureaucrat who was a leading authority on Japan at the time, once said something that seems to precisely sum up Korea's relationship with Japan for me. In his publication "Haedongjegukgi," a record of all lands in the eastern sea, Sin Suk-ju wrote that "we must not lose our friendship with Japan, but must also remain cautious of Japan." When it comes to dealing with China in the future, the outcome will turn out very differently depending on whether Korea manages to have Japan on its side. Korea is in a position that will require it to redefine its relations with China in the long run and to do so successfully, Japan's cooperation will be vital. I only hope that Japan will be able to show a more sincere attitude in reflecting upon its past wrongdoings and stop releasing any more contradictory statements that eat away at the apologies it has made so far.