Friday, January 8, 2010: 2:30 PM
Gregory A (Hyatt)
Anti-Americanism and the History “Textbook War” in Korea
Jinbin Park
In 2008, the Republic of Korea’s Ministry of Education ordered a textbook publisher to revise sections of the company’s modern history textbook. The sections under question included explanations of American and Soviet behavior during the Korean War, the consequences of the two superpowers’ actions on Korea’s development, and recent relations between Korea and the United States. What were the perceived problems in the textbook? Moreover, what were the causes for these differences in historical understanding?
Koreans are engaged in a contest over their nation’s modern history, particularly regarding the interventions of foreign nations. Some Koreans give a strong anti-colonial approach and argue that all episodes of foreign involvement, including America’s intervention in the 1950s, were oppressive and retarded Korea’s national development. Yet, others believe that foreign influence was politically and economically beneficial to Korea. The recent war over Korean modern history textbooks illustrates the importance of this broad political divergence to the study of history.
Textbook understandings of America’s involvement in Korean history are a political battleground. For ten years, progressive administrations argued that Japanese colonial rule and the intervention of United Nations forces in the 1950s were unnecessary. Others believed these views to be unduly anti-colonial, a misinterpretation of history for political purposes. These critics recommended textbook revision after a conservative political party took over the administration in 2008.
The new pro-American government dismissed the recent textbook as a wrongful understanding of American rule. This new group of people related to the new administration wanted to alter contents of textbook according to a softer view on America. In this paper, I investigate the differences between these two views and discuss how pro- and anti-American attitudes influence different interpretations of Korean history.
Jinbin Park
In 2008, the Republic of Korea’s Ministry of Education ordered a textbook publisher to revise sections of the company’s modern history textbook. The sections under question included explanations of American and Soviet behavior during the Korean War, the consequences of the two superpowers’ actions on Korea’s development, and recent relations between Korea and the United States. What were the perceived problems in the textbook? Moreover, what were the causes for these differences in historical understanding?
Koreans are engaged in a contest over their nation’s modern history, particularly regarding the interventions of foreign nations. Some Koreans give a strong anti-colonial approach and argue that all episodes of foreign involvement, including America’s intervention in the 1950s, were oppressive and retarded Korea’s national development. Yet, others believe that foreign influence was politically and economically beneficial to Korea. The recent war over Korean modern history textbooks illustrates the importance of this broad political divergence to the study of history.
Textbook understandings of America’s involvement in Korean history are a political battleground. For ten years, progressive administrations argued that Japanese colonial rule and the intervention of United Nations forces in the 1950s were unnecessary. Others believed these views to be unduly anti-colonial, a misinterpretation of history for political purposes. These critics recommended textbook revision after a conservative political party took over the administration in 2008.
The new pro-American government dismissed the recent textbook as a wrongful understanding of American rule. This new group of people related to the new administration wanted to alter contents of textbook according to a softer view on America. In this paper, I investigate the differences between these two views and discuss how pro- and anti-American attitudes influence different interpretations of Korean history.
See more of: American History through East Asian Lenses: Anti-Americanism, Exceptionalisms, and Abraham Lincoln
See more of: AHA Sessions
See more of: AHA Sessions
Previous Presentation
|
Next Presentation >>