Mark Peterson is associate professor of Korean, Asian and Near Eastern languages at Brigham Young University in Utah.
If Koreans are going in the direction I think they are going, they may find themselves recognizing the family head and the lineage association head, the jongson, in the person of a woman. This idea may seem so heretical that I’ll be kicked out of the country, but I think it’s going that way.
On a recent trip to Korea, I was afforded one of the great honors of my life when I was asked to visit with the head of the only nationwide Confucian organization to discuss my views on how to “save” Confucianism.
Last time I wrote about the surprising news report that one Korean company was requiring all employees to use English names in office communications. I’ve been thinking about that a little more.
By Mark PetersonNow I've seen everything! Korean Bigtech company Kakao has decided to implement a policy of using first names in office communications ― but not their real first names. They have all been directed to take on Western-style first names.If you haven't seen the news report, you might have to read my first paragraph again. Yes, it actually says a Korean company is adopting a first name policy, and the first names are not Korean first names, but adopted Western-style first names.I am not sure what underlies this policy, but it appears to be the old desire to break down traditional hierarchies and rigidities in Korea's office structure ― in the search for horizontality. We have seen previous attempts to break down structures such as the power of seniority, wherein the senior employees have ultimate say in decision-making even if a younger employee has better ideas. We've seen the adoption of “team” terminology and the use of the English word “team” in Korean. The leader of the team is the “team-jang.” And this includes the abandonment of t
By Mark PetersonOne of my editors at the Korea Times suggested I examine the recent summer hit, Barbie, and perhaps contrast it with Korean patriarchy.That was certainly an interesting idea, a challenge and a gauntlet, thrown down at my feet. So, I took the bait, and went to see the movie.First off, what about the movie? In short, I'd give it two stars ― not the five it has gotten at the international box office. The more intriguing question is why did the movie bomb in Korea? It has been a megahit everywhere in the world, but a major flop in Korea. Why? Is it indeed, a problem with “patriarchy?” And has Korean patriarchy militated against the movie?To examine the question, let's review the movie briefly. The opening scene was just awful. Whereas there were some funny scenes in the movie, thus two stars, but the opening scene should go down in the annals of cinematography as an example of failed humor, and bad taste. The opening scene depicted young girls from the beginning of time playing with dolls, baby dolls, in mimicry of motherhood, for little girls to look forward
By Mark PetersonOnce again, Korea is caught up in a battle over history ― not an argument with China or Japan ― we've seen those arguments ― but a battle between Korea's own historians.Well, technically it's between the establishment historians (what the non-establishment historians call the “pulpit” historians) and the non-establishment historians (what are also called pseudo-historians). The non-establishment historians like to call themselves the “jaeya” historians using the term that was used in the olden days for people out-of-power, non-office holders, or literally “in the fields.” What is the dispute that has raised its ugly head? It is the publication of the “Jeolla Thousand-year History” project. The project began in 2018, marking a thousand years since the term Jeolla was first used to designate the province of the southwest part of Korea. For the last five years, about 213 scholars from the area have written 13,559 pages in 34 volumes ― a massive effort covering multiple disciplines within what can broadly be called history.T
By Mark PetersonWith the loss of so-called “Korean age” that I've written about lately, I've started thinking about what else we've lost, and what we still have. Are some of these remaining cultural items on their way out, too? Are they still worth keeping? Or should some of them be next to throw out the window?To answer this question, I think of the set of cultural items tied up in a bundle that Koreans call “bu-gye sahoe” ― “patrilineal society.” Some refer to this bundle as “the patriarchy,” but sociologists look at these issues as part of what's called a patrilineal society. The first item in the bundle is inheritance. In a patrilineal society, inheritance is handed down through the male lines from father to eldest son. In a patrilineal society, males dominate in many other areas.Korea, from the late 17th century onward, developed into a completely perfected patrilineal organization with almost all social action dominated by the males ― for example, marriage was held at the groom's village, with brides coming from other villages and
By Mark PetersonI've been thinking more about the “Korean age,” “international age” issue. “Mannai” means “international age” in Korean. Another way to look at the two is to say “solar age” and “lunar age” or, more properly, one's age by the solar calendar and one's age by the lunar calendar. But I've been looking into the issue a little more, and I've found a couple of insights I'd like to share.I've been looking at what sorts of things are considered “whole” numbers, and what is considered fractional. In other words, things are numbered starting with the whole number “one,” and things are numbered starting with zero.I thought at one point that “Korean age” was based on a Chinese numeric system that did not have a zero. And that might be true, although at some point Chinese mathematics was influenced by Arabic numerals and the number zero made its appearance. But now I think it is more than that.I started by looking at Korean age as functioning like that of the reign years of
By Mark PetersonAs a “cultural columnist,” I suppose I need to respond to the news of June 28, the date when Korea abandoned “Korean age” and adopted, officially, the age system used in the rest of the world ― “man-u-ro.”The story has even appeared on American television news. It's international news.I just learned that President Yoon Suk Yeol campaigned on a promise to make the international standard the standard in Korea. No more dual-age reckoning.So, congratulations to all my Korean friends. In one fell swoop, you've all become one or two years younger.Many people are confused about how the system works, and why it's a one-year difference at times and a two-year difference at other times. That part is quite clear, actually ― it's a two-year difference until your birthday, and then a one-year difference after that. But that is all by the board now.Laws do not change culture, at least not immediately. How long will we still hear the response to the age question with the old Korean answer, or with the two options answer? I suppose the simple answe
By Mark PetersonConfucianism in Korea is in sharp decline. I would like to speak to the Confucian Association leaders at some point, and when I do, I would like to point out several ways to save Confucianism from an ultimate demise ― which it seems to be racing toward.I have been surprised to see the number of negative comments about Confucianism that show up in the comments to my YouTube videos. I had not realized how negatively many people in Korea view Confucianism. But there is hope on the horizon, the way I see it.First of all, Confucianism is one of the five great “religions” in the world. Now, as soon as I say that, there are those who shout out that Confucianism is not a religion. Okay, that's an oft-heard argument, but I think Confucianists make a mistake to insist it is not a religion. Let's play a word game: let's not say “religion”, but let's say “belief system” ― we'll change the label on the box. What goes in the box labeled “belief system”? In Communist states, they say only Communism fits in the box ― and “religion