Japans Legacy as Colonizer

In Robinson's article on the KBC, he notes that Japan didn't start to blacklist certain
nationalist songs until 1941 (67). Why the delay? Japan had started to assert hegemony
over Korean culture more than a decade previously. Was this delay indicative of the
Japanese not having complete control over Korea? Or, perhaps, were there benefits to
Japan for allowing the Korean programming to continue for so long with so little
regulation? Could the circumstances of 1941 (i.e. escalation of war) have caused this
shift? (Ryan Feng)
Park's article on the skilled workers of the Sunghori factory mentions how labor was
slow to form a cohesive faction after decolonization and is "still weak as an organized
force in Korean politics" (89). While Park argues that this is a result of the immature
state of industry in Korea, could it also be a long-term effect of colonization? Could the
culture under the Japanese of assimilation and loyalty (coupled with the sharp
crackdown on any labor unrest) have led to the current state of labor in Korea
today? (Ryan Feng)
How did Japanese imperial radio programming impact modern communications
broadcasting? Once Japanese censorship of radio (korean information coordinating
committee activities, etc) disappeared, how did the Korean press take radio into their
own hands? Does contemporary North Korea draw its propaganda techniques from
those of the Japanese pre-1945 (radio, TV, posters)? (Leah Sosland)
Reconstructing Colonialism
Both Robinson and Park present narratives that challenge the typical notion of
colonialism as an exclusively destructive force. Robinson explains how opportunities for
the consolidation of Korean culture ironically emerged from the Japanese attempt to
incorporate Koreans through radio technology and Park argues that positive industrial
growth came about as a result of Japanese involvement in Korea. How does the Korean
colonial experience compare to other historical examples? Is colonialism innately a
destructive phenomenon? (David Moon)

During Japanese colonial rule of the Korean peninsula, that Japan tried very hard to
remove the Korean language from the academic curriculum. However, many radio
broadcasts were in Korean and talked about the Korean language. In addition to this, it
is stated in the article that Korean music was played on some of the stations. Looking at
all of these different factors, can we put a label on the negative or positive effects of the
radio on South Korea? Can we label certain aspects of the radio as negative
consequences while the other aspects of the radio have positive consequences? Why is
it that there seems to have been less direct Japanese control over the radio at this
time? Lastly, is there any way that we can learn more information about the average
citizens feelings about the radio at this time? (Jisoo Kim)

Varying Emphasis on Education

It is cited a couple of times throughout Kims article that the South Korean government,
during the 1950s, did not pay much attention to academia or research within South
Korea. However, today, there seems to be a lot of stress put on research and education
today, with South Korea having one of the most competitive education systems in the
world. What events marked this transition between a government that had little interest
in education to a government that focused greatly on education? What caused these
changes in political focus? (Jisoo Kim)

Kim's article reveals a disconnect: why was it that despite the North Koreans' initial
embrace of science that South Korea's technological development surpassed that of the
North? Did Northern or Southern Korean ideology affect the creative process of either
Ree or Li? What is there to be learned from the North Koreans' embrace of juche, and
how can nations prevent national pride in innovative independence from hamstringing
positive scientific development? (David Moon)
North Koreas stance towards science has been in flux since the founding of the nation.
Under Soviet guidance, science and technology were emphasized and the goal was to
attract scientists from South Korea to the North. When Kim Il Sung took control, he
emphasized the ideology of Jurche and focused on science that would help him assert
his dominance (ex: vinalon production). How has the current North Korean leadership
emphasized scientific advancement (both for military and civilian purposes), and how
does that fit into the motivation of Kim Jong Un? (Alejandro Leeman)

In Kims article, it states that the American occupation authority in South Korea
showed indifference to promoting the growth of science and engineering. Thiscaused
many scientists to leave to North Korea and the United States in the late 1940s.
However, in modern times, South Korea consistently ranks at the top of all nations in
terms of science education. When did the transition towards the promotion of sciences
occur in South Korea, and why? (Brendan Massoud)

In Kim's article, the phenomenon of the scientific community gradually depleting from
1945-1950 would not be one expected by observing the scientific emphasis in modern
South Korea. Rather, by observing North Korea and its focus on the development of its
nuclear industry and WMDs, the perennial emphasis on science is noted. What ideology
of the North Korean regime places such focus on scientific advancement? Is it the
influence of the USSR that has perpetually been imprinted on NK society? (Jaehyun
Lee)
In Dong-Won Kim's writing, it talks about how Japan sent 100 Koreans to American to
study. Were they not afraid that they would stay in America and not come back since
this was a time when Korea were in rule of Korea? (Aaron Shampklin)
The writing also talks about the splitting of Korea along the 38th parallel and how
America helped establish Seoul National University. Since America had involvement in
this university did it include American teachings or was it specifically Korean as if it was
an Korean established school? (Aaron Shampklin)
Radio as Medium of Resistance
Michael Robinson argues that "Korean radio created a counter-hegemonic niche in and
of itself" and that while it "could not directly resist Japanese rule, it could and did serve a
positive function of maintaining and creating Korean cultural traditions" (63). If it weren't
for the Korean radio, do you think that Korea would have been able to challenge
Japanese thought as well as it did (through methods such as stressing the importance
of Korean vernacular or education in general)? Could written works alone have had the
same effect on the public as the radio had had? (Nam Hyun Kim)
Using Robinson's case study on the impact of the KBC and radio broadcasting in Korea
under Japanese Colonialism, we are able to apply and question the influence of
radio/mass media communication on a repressed society. Parallel to how Japan used
the radio to promulgate propaganda and nationalist ideas, the North Korean regime
utilizes the radio in such a fashion as well. However, if the radio is utilized for counter-
regime purposes, will this facilitate the possibility of a civilian uprising in North Korea?
(Jaehyun Lee)
The use of radio in colonial Korea was partly to assert dominance of Japanese culture
and language throughout the peninsula, and further assimilate Korea into the vision of
Imperial Japan. Additionally, radio stimulated a revival of traditional music genres and
created the struggle to elevate Korean as a language that could be used in the
modern sphere alongside Japanese. Apart from its destructive and subordinating
effects, to what extent was the Japanese implementation of radio positive, serving to
unify Korean identity and establish Korean language and culture? (Alejandro Leeman)
Korean-Japanese Identity
Robinson reveals how the goal of instilling Japanese values in colonial Korea through
radio had the opposite effect, cultivating a modern national identity among Koreans. The
popularity of the KBC sparked new genres of music, inspired participation in the arts,
and helped to legitimize vernacular Korean in spite of Japans assimilation efforts. To
what extent did each of the following cause the formation of Korean identity: resistance
against Japanese colonial assimilation, modernization and technology, or a preexisting
sense of nationalistic unity from the Choson period? (Jacob Licht)
The Onoda Cement Factory instilled a rigid hierarchical system that delineated between
white-collar positions held by Japanese skilled workers and blue-collar positions for
local Koreans. One feature of this structure ensured that the Japanese administration
could train young Korean workers to speak the Japanese language and follow
Japanese industrial customs. Why were younger Koreans easier to control for Japanese
companies? (Jacob Licht)
While Korean workers tried to emulate their Japanese counterparts, becoming more
and more invested in their work and production, the Japanese never acknowledged
them as legitimate colleagues. However, in academia, Li and Ree were very much
incorporated into their Japanese teams. Why was this difference present between the
manual laborers and the academic researchers? (Dennis Lin)
The Robinson piece discusses the broadcasting of the Korean language as a way of
proving its equality with Japanese. He states that commentators on the radio were
attempting to place Korean on a par with Japanese in articulating abstract thought.
Ultimately, these efforts helped to fight back against Japanese subjugation. On this, to
what extent is a countrys own language crucial to its national identity? Is it possible to
have a nationalist movement without a unifying language? (Brendan Massoud)

Li and Ree worked very closely with their Japanese colleagues during their time in
university. However, they ignored any politics during their research, despite having
some semblance of a Korean Japanese identity (having spent an abundance of time in
both places). What was the effect of their work/collaboration on other Koreans and
Japanese? Did the shared pursuit of academic research ever create a larger sense of
community between the two nations during the colonial occupation? (Dennis Lin)
The Intersections of Ideology and Knowledge
Kim's article repeatedly iterates how both Li and Ree refrained from becoming politically
involved in order to maintain the integrity of their scientific work. Ree's maxim,
"knowledge for its own sake," sums this up rather succinctly. According to Ree, applied
science came only after pure science. Did Li have any foresight into how his synthetic
fibers would impact the ideology of Juche? Does success of the South compared to the
failure of the North confirm Ree's idea of how pure ideological science should not be
bound up with ideology? (Leah Sosland)

It is interesting to see how scientific advancements can help bolster the support for an
ideology. In the case of Seung Ki Li's research, "to Kim Il Sung, a program for the mass
production of vinalon seemed to have excellent political, ideological, and economic
potential, and he made its development a national priority" (Dong Won Kim 82). While
the ideologies and nationalistic sentiments differ between North and South Korea, to
what extent is this endeavor (to reach scientific legitimacy in order to gain political
legitimacy, as two countries "competing" with each other") the same? Are
they incomparably different or are their approaches the same and their
intentions different? (Nam Hyun Kim)