.jpg) |
Assistant managing editor
I usually don’t nitpick on somebody else’s opinion.
From my professional experience, I know that a rebuttal will often give an added lease on life to his or her opinion. More often than not, the wisest way of dealing with noisemakers is giving them time to cool down.
I believe that my job is opining, not writing critically about other professional columnists. The job of reacting is not mine but belongs to readers.
Last and least, I believe that it is part of my duty as the host to listen to foreign guests speak. After all, they are a minority in our country and giving them a chance to speak out and having their opinion reflected in a decision-making process is not just courteous but also helps Korea globalize.
Two other footnotes: the first is that “fisking” an opinion piece written by someone I know is not pleasant and the second is that by this point I am quite sure that the readers would wonder what on earth I am trying to say and feel like screaming out loud, “Get straight down to the business.”
Here is the business part of my column of the day. On Tuesdays at the same space where my column is placed, Andrew Salmon writes his Lack of Morning Calm columns. I often find his columns up tempo, entertaining and well-written.
But I found his piece for yesterday, titled “Jeju: global wonder?” rather odd.
Frankly, I first thought it was a result of a severe case of literary and logical indigestion.
He pointed out the unfairness of the voting system to select the world’s new seven natural wonders by the Swiss-based nonprofit organization, arguing that Jeju doesn’t have what minimums any other “wonders” have.
He cited a “nationalistic” tendency among Koreans to press further on his speculation that Koreans were organized to vote on the Internet and call up to register their support for Jeju, dredging up his personal experience. “So I ask, bluntly: How many non-Koreans voted for Jeju?” Salmon asked.
I wonder whether he is implying that the Korean vote should be discounted or made invalid so also-rans that he obviously has in mind would be included at Jeju’s expense.
Given a little leap in logic, his remarks can be construed with a tone of racism similar to that in the era of the pre-abolitionist United States where slaves counted to be less than a whole person.
The rules are the rules until they are rewritten. The New7Wonders selection relies on Internet and phone calls. If Koreans had been organized for the selection, it was conducted within the rules and should be taken as their collective expression to share the best they have with the rest of the world.
He also cited the Time magazine’s selection of Rain, the Korean pop singer, as the world’s most influential person in 2006, 2007 and 2011, arguing that it was a little shy of vote rigging.
In 2006, I may have agreed with Salmon, doubting whether Rain really deserved such a designation.
Seeing kudos k-pop artists receive around the world, I can’t agree with him. We have to believe what we see. Perhaps, Salmon may have to take the Time designation Rain received as the Nobel peace prize given to U.S. President Barack Obama for not what he has done but what he could do.
At a fundamental level, Salmon threw Koreans under the “nationalist” label.
Does he use the term comparatively?
If so, I would dispute it and argue that all peoples are more or less equally nationalistic.
Just because Brits believe curry is their representative food, it doesn’t mean that they are less nationalistic than Koreans. When it comes down to their national interest, we are bound to be nationalistic, although the way of expressing it may differ from one people to another.
Besides, if Koreans are a tad more nationalistic than others, we have to look at history to find a reason.
Korea has been invaded by bigger powers in the past with Japanese colonialists being the latest, ruling it as a colony for nearly 40 years.
It needs a little bit of historical verification but I understand that the pre-World War II Britain helped Japan to build its superb Zero fighters, among others, as part of their colonial power-to-colonial power assistance program.
What puzzles me most in Salmon’s piece is his assertion that Jeju is not awesome enough to make the final seven. First, all New Wonders don’t have to be a Grand Canyon or Iguazu Falls. Second, Salmon should have known that the beauty of Jeju doesn’t lie in single factors such as enormous cascades or a picturesque group of islands but in a combination of elements that other candidates individually offer plus the unique culture of its inhabitants. For his information, Jeju has already been designated to be a World Natural Heritage Site and UNESCO’s global geo-park.
Salmon sets those characteristics aside and asserts that the Wonders designation should be taken as a consolation gift for Jeju people who suffered from a massacre after Korea was liberated and was under the interim rule by Americans. He is versed enough about Korea to write books. Then, he should have known better than make such a crass remark about a wound that remains open for tens of thousands of people even six decades afterwards.
One thing I think Salmon’s piece is beneficial about is to give a chance for readers to take a step back and think about Jeju's beauty. I think that Salmon may have lived in Korea for so long that he starts to take things for granted. His column reminded me that I did.
![[INTERVIEW] Yoon Kye-sang enjoys returning to rom-com with 'Kiss Sixth Sense'](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/8f2478bc998d4f1487a60b6e2b68d91a.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
