The Concept of Minjok; A Historical Reflection

I. Introduction

 According to the statistics of 2000 provided in the book of Gi-Wook Shin, Ethnic Nationalism in Korea, 93% of the people answered that they considered Koreans as ‘mono-blooded nation”. This coincides with the argument of Korean intellectual, Ho-Sang, Ahn, who was the first minister of education; “From the beginning of the history, Korean nation (Minjok) was and is homogeneous with several thousand years of history, sharing blood, region, language, culture and the historical destiny.”

 Although now, the amount of people who doubts the truth of the nationalism or the concept of Minjok is not ignorable, yet, majority of the people firmly believe in the solidarity of Minjok. Even those who do not believe in it still have emotional attachment to the nationalism, which can be represented by Red Devils of 20002 in World-Cup. The fact that the mascot of Red Devils is Chiwoo, who is an oriental legendary figure in history, shows that this kind of sports nationalism can be evolved into radical nationalism, because Chiwoo is argued by the radical nationalist historians to be the Korean king who conquered most of the territory of China.

Chiwoo

KMLA

 It should be noted that there is a high school which is named after the nationalistic historical perspective. KMLA is one of the most nationalistic schools in Korea, and it urges for the necessity of the education of the Korean traditions. Thus, students are very keen to the nationalistic point-of-view, and as a student of KMLA, I suppose that it is important to analyze the meaning and the origins of the Korean concept of Minjok.

II. The Origins of the Korean Nationalism

 Before the late 20^th Century, nationalism held dominions on the historical academia, and it was almost impossible to raise doubt on the concept of Minjok. From the 1990s, as the post- or anti-nationalistic historical philosophies (notably, Hobsbawm and Anderson) influx into the Korean academic world, some of the scholars, including Ji-hyeon, Lim, started viewing the origins and essentials of the Korean nationalism objectively.

 According to those researches, the history of the Korean nationalism is no longer than a century, because many historians suppose that the initiation of it was during the Japanese colonization era. There were many nationalist historians and activists who resisted against the Japanese colonial rules, such as Chae-Ho, Shin, Eun-sik, Park, Chang-Ho, Ahn, and In-Bo, Jeong. To beat up the colonial logics and pan-Asianism of the Japanese Empire, they exaggerated Korean ancient history and its people (In such perspective, they developed their specific historical perspectives, and it is evaluated to be pretty advanced. Ironically, the studies on historical philosophies are underdeveloped now) However, we should not view the incipient history of the Korean nationalism in such a simple way. It had to compete not only against the Imperialism and the Pan-Asianism, but also socialism, anarchism and universalism. In the context of the Korean independent movement, the competence between nationalism and socialism was quite notable. They didn’t only fight the Japanese but also against each other. Unfortunately, dispute, enmity and assassination were prevalent. Although after the separation of the country, the North and the South Korea followed opposite ideologies, it was the nationalism which took the champion belt, in both states.

Three Kingdoms...

...to be united

 How can we prove that there was no, or at least faint cognitions on nationalism? Many traditional historians who believe in the long and innate nationalism asserts that from the period of three kingdoms (삼국시대), Koreans had realization that they were sharing the blood, and the evidence is the unification of three states. It is true that the final victor Silla used the term Unification of three Korean (Han, 韓) countries (삼한일통), it should be doubt that whether that term based on nationalism. What really mattered in the period was survival, rather than desire for united nation, and all three countries carried out complicated diplomatic strategies not only with each other, but with Japan, China and even south-eastern Asian countries. The concept of the unification should be understood in the context of the legitimacy and the consolations (for the displaced), not in that of the nationalism. It is possible to admit that the separation between Chinese continent and Korean peninsula (Yalu river to Du-man river) appeared by the unification, but the nationalism, which requires a kind of direct emotional empathy and the sense of kinship within the imagined (and invisible) group had to wait longer for its emergence.

 What about the resistance of Goryeo (고려) dynasty against Liao, Jin or Mongolian invades? The people of Goryeo even made an immortal heritage of the Tripitaka Koreana, which is consisted of 80,000 woodblocks. However, we should think whether the project was voluntary or by fiat. Most of those resistances against the foreign powers were done by the governments and the nobles. The conspicuous evidence is that there was no militia leader from the commoner who led the battle until the early 20^th Century. During the age of seven-year war against the Japanese invasion (Im-Jin-Ue-Ran, 임진왜란) in 16^th Century, all the militia leaders were nobles (Yang-Ban, 양반) or monks. In contrast, what did the lower classes people do? Those in Seoul threw all the documents including their slave certifications into fire and destroyed palaces, and the king fled to north. The people of Han-Gyeong province, who had long been discriminated, arrested two princes and handed them over to Japanese army. The class-conscious was much stronger than the nation-conscious.

 Other evidence is provided in the dissertation by the professor Tae-hoon, Lee (The Historical Process of the Development of the Concept of Minjok, and its Meaning). The author asserts that until 1910s, it was “country-citizens”(국민), not “nation” which used to indicate all Koreans, or to urge for the unity. Actually the word Minjok was invented by Japanese scholars in late 19^th Century. If there was a sense of unity of kinship, it was about the people inside the borderline, not the same blood.

III. Nationalism to Gain Power

             

 It was the Japanese colonial era, which ironically gave power to the Korean nationalism. As a counterpart of the rulers Japanese, the recognition of Koreans as a repressed and victim group emerged. The Korean War was another watershed for the nationalism, as well as decades-long dictatorship. The Korean War was a quite shocking incident for both countries firmly believed that they were same nation. The contradiction of two countries with the same nation began, and regardless of that, both countries boasted nationalism as much as they could.

 When we reflect the historical examples of the Nazi German or Fascist Italy, it was nationalism they tried to manipulate. The Japanese Empire was also the perfect example for the nationalism-centered country. The Empire urged all the Japanese to be united under the name of Ten-no (Heavenly Emperor), and to fight until death (玉砕), because Japanese are the sons of the sun-god. Although Korean authorities didn’t implement such mythological metaphor, they did grant Dan-gun as their national father. Every school had Dan-gun statue and other Korean historical figures as well as anti-communist ‘heroes’. Dictator Park Jeong-hee tried to revive the Korean economy and felt necessity to boast the Korean nationalities, and emphasized Korean traditions, which were carefully selected in taste of the dictator.

Distorted Korean ancient history

 The next dictator Jeon Du-hwan also maneuvered nationalism to harden his basis. The desire for democracy and the welfares were concealed by the nationalism. The democratic activists were often incriminated to be the traitor against the Minjok. Dictator Jeon distorted the Korean history without hesitation. According to the book of Han Hong-gu who is a professor of the Korean Anglican University, the military officers who got authority during the time of the dictator said, “Korean History textbook is like a national bible to instill national consciousness, national confidence and pride, so it is possible to include unproved historical facts if it is needed to educate citizens.”

The Korean military dictator, Park Jeong-hee (man in the right with sunglasses)

Another Korean dictator, Jeong Du-hwan. He was also from military.

 Thus, here we can conclude the dictatorship authorities played crucial roles to enable Korean nationalism gaining a great power. Korea experienced the modernization after its independence and the people felt anxiety of the dynamic changes, and that would be the important reason for Koreans to be attached to such a conservative ideology, nationalism. Nationalism is not about the logical ideology such as capitalism, socialism or anarchism, but rather a religious term, which require people to imagine an invisible group called nation. It was a Miranda method dictators used in manipulating the nationalism; touching the emotions of the people.

IV. And… the Present (21^st Century)

 In 2002, Korea surprised the world with gathering more than a million red-shirts wearing people into Gwang-Hwa-Mun Square. In addition the hatred crimes on foreigners are increasing, especially on South-east Asian people. There even is an internet café aiming the expulsion of every foreigner, and once, one of the public TV channels of Korea broadcasted the highly-biased program on foreigners’ crime. As mentioned above, still many people believe in mono-blooded nation.

 There are two things to be noted. First, Lim Ji-hyeon, whom I mentioned as a radical anti-nationalist, admits the existence of the nation, or the national consciousness, but urges for the open-minded nationalism. Second, already one tenth of the newly-married couples are Korean-foreigner (or foreign-born) spouses. The mythology of a sacred nation is collapsing much faster than we think, and it is time to make change in the nationalism.

* Postscript: The example of the North Korea

 Now, it is impossible to deny that the North Korea is a nationalistic state. It officially gave up the principle of socialism in 1990s already, and only the Jucheism (주체사상) is the ideology defines the North Korea. What is Jucheism? It is similar with self-determinism, but in extreme way. They say that Koreans were born with pure blood, and the South Koreans are contaminating it by having relations with the world. Their ideas are, interestingly, quite similar with Nazi ideologies. They believed in ethnocentrism, considering the Koreans to be the best nation in the world. One of the foreign travelers who visited Pyeong-yang, the capital of the North Korea asked the guide the reason he cannot see any disabled people. The guide’s answer was shocking; “The superior Korean genes don’t bare disabled!” They adopt strong eugenics in dealing with the disabled, which seems to be a return of the Nazi government. They enlarge the ancient Korean territory much larger than originally assumed. They assert to find the tomb of Dan-gun, and these remind us the Pan-Aryanism. Furthermore, the North Korea had been worshiped three Führer, and make a complete hierarchy under the name of the republic (DPRK) The extreme nationalism creates such cruel and illogical scenes.

To be a True Sovereign (1)

1. What matters?

"The Customers' exodus from the commodity market results in self-adjustment of the companies to the tastes of the customers, but in the case of the election market, the voters' exodus has meager influence on the change of the party, which is interpreted to be political enterprises."

-Choi, Jang-jip, "Democracy After the Democratization"

Which factor makes this difference? The answer is easy; the affect of the consumption upon entrepreneurs are quite crucial, and the companies are well 'aware' of that. In contrast, political parties are not (even though voters are mortal for their existence). Already, Korea finished the establishment of the political class, which was originally derived from the theory of Morris. Although Korea pursue the western political moderl, its previous authoritative/hierarchial political perspective still remains, and politicians view themselves as magistrates, not servants. In this case, those 'magistrates' enlarge their rights, but ignore duties. Thus, it is difficult to response simultaneously to the reactions of the voters, which results in the voters' abhorrence on politics, which again results in widening the crack between the voters and the political class; it is a vicious circle.

2. Democratic Remedies

There are two remedies to cure the symtom. These two should be coincided. First, the abolition of the political hierarchial concept between the voters and the political class. The political class should realize that they are not the noblemen, and the voters should feel more responsibility upon politics, rather than to be satisfied as a passive status. This method was suggested from long ago and it can be come true by the active political participation of the citizens.

Second therapy is quite harder; the voters themselves should destroy the frames and cross the frontier.

-To be Continued.

Man of La Mancha; to dream the impossible dream

 Musical is an amusing genre. It was not long ago when I began to be interested, and it was by the famous musical Les Miserables. Actually, there are notable differences between Les Miserables and Man of La Mancha. Les Miserables is consisted of music, mostly without common conversations, but for the case of the latter one, I suppose more than half of the musical is made of dialogue. Therefore, it became a chance to poder the identity of the genre called musical. The characters were having a common conversation at first, and after a while to find they were singing, I thought the similiarity of musical with reality.

 This musical adopts an conspicuous method of story-within-a-story. Miguel de Servantes is a tex-collector, and he believed the national law confirming the equality of every countrymen, and attatched a sequester label on the door of a church. He was arrested of blesphamy and was waiting for inquistion inside a jail, where he met other prisoners, and he was again accused to the court of the prisoners. There, he was accused of being an idealist, being inflexible, and being an awful writer, so he was almost sentenced to be guilty. Right then, he suggests the prisoners to participate his play, named "Don Quixote". as a story within, Don Quixote is almost parallel with the plot of Don Quixote that we know well, except for a portion of details. The world is corrupted as ever, people make fun of Don Quixote as ever, and Don quixote, as ever, runs toward the unreachable ideal.

http://www.mnsu.edu/theatre/season/past/archive/m/manoflamancha.html

 However, hear him now! We are bewildered. Who is right and who is wrong? Who is insane and who is sane? As Quixote said, "In a mad world, those who try to live straightly with sanity are crazy." Did you tell me to face the reality by itself? The Lord of La Mancha again says; "Reality is the foe of the truth!"

 Indeed. Who can guarantee the sanity if the world is insane? People running toward the ideal should take the responsibility. "To dream the impossible dream. To fight the unbeatable foe. To bear with unbearable sorrow. To right the unrightable wrong. To reach the unreachable star." Those are our quests, our rights and our dreams. We have unreachable stars in our mind and it'll lead a revolution.

http://taproottheatre.org/?attachment_id=1715

 See, the result of the Lord of La Mancha. He was defeated by knight of the mirror. Really? Was it knight of the mirror, who actually defeated Don Quixote? He was defeated by humself. The conceptual 'I' and the real 'I' are inevitably different, and the mirror is a medium to connect those two. Don Quixote was only defeated by the mad old man Alsonzo Quixana. He is a representative of the French revolutionaries, of the luddites, of Marx, of George Orwell, of Salvador Allende, of Che Guevara. He may also be the representative of ourselves. Escaped from the routine life, we float in the world of imagination. If we were Don Quixote, we already have put one of our legs on the saddle of Rosinante. Knight of the mirror didn't forced the lord the reality. He merely gaved Don Quixote, the right to choose, and Don Quixote decided, actually Servantes decided to return Don Quixote home.

 What moved me to tears was the next scene. As a loser, he rapidly grew old and is close to his death. However, encouraged by the fade reminiscence, he wake up from his bed and sing... to pass away right after. The tears were not for his ideal, but for the pity to the lord and such cruel ideal.

 Simultaneous to Don Quixote's death, the jail door is opened, and Servantes is going to attend the inquisition, which may lead him to death. Then, the prisoners sing "To live with your heart striving upward. To a far, unattainable sky!"

 Servantes walks confidently, in contrast to our walk, reluctant to leave the theater.

"Vamos, Sancho!"

Nacirema, a Delightful Academic Trick

 Once, I've heard a story of a man called Allen Sokal. He was a physicist, who was against the anti-intellectual movement throughout the post-modernism scholars. He was curious about whether the editors of such post-modernistic magazines would allow 'any' dissertation that fits their taste and seems to make sense. He submitted an academic article titled "Transgressing the Boundaries: Toward a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity", which was about interpreting quantum gravity in the perspective of humanities, or in another word; rubbish. A magazine Social Text published his paper, and on the same day, Sokal submitted an explanation to another magazine Franca Lingua that his paper was a trick to bewilder post-modernists.

 Actually, it is hilarious to see others being deceived, but what if that is my case? I have quite much interest on American Indians and cultural relativism, so at first sight, I wrote a reflection based on cultural relativism, though wondering why their habitat was so wide; from Canada to Caribbean Sea.

 I was another post-modernist, and was totally faked. Though it was amusing to find how each 'ritual' correspond with our life. We usually say outsiders' cultures 'strange'. When we say we should admit them and talk about 'relativism', there is a condition that the object is exotic, and under the condition, we are apt to think that "to be same is to be comfortable". Psychologically, it is true. Mr. Menard said our essays were hilarious and for I am sure that mine was not an exception, I can not stop myself from making a gesture below.

actually, what 'I' just 'wrote' was.

 It would be interesting to think about an Asian primitive tribe Naerok, and what would we see? The exclusive, tradition-maintaining people, or the people with opened and flexible mind?

The Road to Jail is Paved with Twitter

 As one of the Korean leftist professor Han, Hong-gu mentioned, if a law called [National Security Acts] was enacted, it would contain the materials related to social welfare and protections on lower classes. However, the law in Korea, which translated into 국가보안법, makes a big contrast. It was enacted in the age of dictatorship and still remains under the name of national defense. It regulates the spread of certain ideology and ban anti-national movements, and if one infringe the law, the law can sentence up to death penalty, regardless of other related laws, even the constitution.

 A twentieth photographer Park, Jeong-geun was a common citizen (ah, actually, he had a disability) managing a tweeter account. Well, he was quite popular on tweeter, having more than a thousand followers. He was a tweeter buff, and unloaded more than 30 thousand tweet...until he was arrested by the name of the national security law.

A photographer, Park was suddenly arrested of threatening national security

 There is another account called U-ri-min-jok-kki-ri (only with our nation), which is run by North Korean government. It uploaded propaganda defending the North Korean systems and severely (or rather absurdly) criticizing South Korea and U.S.. Park retweeted some tweets by this account, and was caught by the public authority of South Korea. In addition, the police accused Park not only for this, but uploading pro-communist/North Korean tweets; the sum total of such 'seditious' tweets were more than a hundred, less than 0.5% out of his all tweets.

 Then, is he really a person with pro-North Korean opinion? You'd better doubt, 'cause he is a member of Socialist Party. In the Korean Socialist Party platform, they clearly state  that they are against the oppressive North Korean government. Some argues that Socialist Party would be the party criticize North Korea radically than any other party in south Korea. Furthermore, anyone can know if he or she reads the context of his tweets. He maintained his attitude of mockery and satire on North Korean authority and the dictators; "Let's eradicate Kim, Jeong-il, eradicate germs, eradicate cancer", "I sincerely mourn the passing of Kim, Jeong-il, the head of national defensive ministry, and will send  condolences with plutonium and uranium", "Preservative treatments on corps are the silliest acts ever.", "I'll give you a Yo-deok concentration camp voucher." (Yo-deok camp is infamous for its extremely inhumane treatments on political opponents), "Kim, Jeong-il car sex", and so on.

Park in prison.

Park, as a Photographer, made numerous
funny images with North Korean agitation posters.

In the image above, Park changed a machine gun into a bottle of alcohol.

 He had to go through a inquisition procedure and finally was sentenced an imprisonment of two years. International human rights organizations such as Amnesty are trying to save him from the abuse of the authority, but it seems to be quite difficult.

 Why is South Korea superior than the North? Not because South Korea is wealthier. We do not judge a country with its fortune. The real reason is that South Korea guarantees much more rights than Northern one. What threatens the national reputation is not the sarcastic retweets, but the law that ignores the fundamental rights stated on the constitution.

2nd Monthly TOEFL Essay; 21st century

2nd Monthly TOEFL Prompt; The 21st century has begun. What changes do you think this new century will bring? Use examples and details in your answer. 

 The 20th century was coined as the Age of Extremes by the famous modern historian Eric Hobsbawm. It was the age of dichotomy, the age of clashes and the age of the world turning upside down. It engendered many changes and development, as well as numerous victims. The 21st century is the initiation of the Third Millennium and many different figures are trying to predict and at the same time carve the new era, mostly to the good way; to embrace and go with the former victims. Thus, the changes of this new century are followings; the equality of the knowledge, tolerance on the diversity, and, ironically, integration.

 First of all, the equality of the knowledge would be one of the most foremost change in 21st century. The development of internet leads the wave of the equality and countless companies, universities and scholastic academies have established their archives on the internet.  Before the wave, the people in the distance place or relatively lower classes were hardly able to access to the high-quality sources, but the internet marked the watershed. Students in Korea now can access library catalogues of Cambridge, bloggers who are no more than common citizens are able to approach Wikileaks to analyze current affairs and people under repression use SNS to urge for cooperation. Confidences are opened and dictatorship based on mobocracy cannot stand anymore. The age of intellectual equality arrived and the equality is spreading to other parts of the society.

 Also, the increase of the diversity should be noted. Under the dichotomous circumstance (the Cold War) of the late 20th century,the calls for the diversity and minority was often ignored. However, as the former system collapsed the demand for the diversity was realized as the drastic increase of religious, cultural, national and terrestrial conflicts. Not only clashes but also the rights of the minority groups extended such as homo-sexual, transgenders, feminists, immigrants, paupers and minority races. Not even a century before, it was normal to repress and even to commit homicide to these kinds of people, but the Volonté Générale of the 21st century doesn't allow such 'crimes'. The age of ideology passed and the age of the tolerance and the diversity is coming. Although we have a long way to go, and the upcoming age still coexists with terrorism, violence and prejudice, but the new century will bring a progress and that would be the tolerance on the diversity.

 The third one seems to be a contradictory change; the integration, or collaboration. The globalization had now become a irresistible tide, and quite a number of futurologist predicts that the boundary splitting countries to countries would soon disappear, or at least become meaningless. World economy will be united; such as ASEAN, OPEC, APEC and various free trade agreements, political powers are trying to consolidate; European continent already finished the task, and cultural mixture will be conducted; American adolescences dance Mal-chum by a Korean singer and Japaneses are used to English-derived terms. It might means the annihilation of minor cultures and languages. However, to think differently, the customs of tolerance which would be developed by the process of integration will permit the coexistence of the diverse identities in integrated system. 

 To sum up, the 21st century would be a quite different, progressing time, and it will engender a more complex and intriguing world.

Earthlings; distorted and deviated

Earthlings. The movie, or the documentary begins with the definition of the word "Earthling", one who inhabits of the earth. This movie is consist of five parts; Pets, Food, Entertainment, Clothes and Science. Without exception, in each part, the director shows terrible, or somehow disgusting scenes to show the cruelty of human-being. For examples, pets are mistreated, domestic animals are living in bad condition that we cannot even imagine, bulls in Spanish bullfighting are abused and weasels are skinned while they're alive. Science is no exception. Narrator criticizes the animal experiments as quasi-science, not that much apart from mere animal abuses.

 However, let us just put the scenes of cutting tails of piglets and such, and thing about the real aim of the movie. This movie is eager to convey the message that Nature, animals, and humankind are all earthlings and need to make connections, as we can quote from the end of the movie. However, is the movie really talks about "earthlings", all the inhabitants on the Earth? According to the movie, "there is no sexism, no racism or speciesism in the term earthling", but the movie doesn't share its film to plants, micro-organisms or even reptiles and amphibians. Even birds and fish simply shows their glimpse and what holds dominion on film is mammals, especially pets and domestic animals which are familiar to us. Let me ask, is there no speciesism on this film? Maybe the director would like to argue that creatures which 'feel pain' are quite different from those which don't. Is that a true implementation of the term "Earthlings"? Maybe mammalism, or at least vertebratism is the term that the director actually wanted to express. Then, there is hardly any difference between the propaganda on movie and that of Mrs. Brigitte Bardot?

 Also, to think rationally and logically, it would be the contribution of such cruel slaughters which enable humankind to enjoy meat with such low prices. Oh, this would be a more terrible result butchers brought in the perspective of vegetarians. It isn't difficult to be told from your father or grandparents that meat was only allowed on public holidays when they were young. For the majority of the people consume mixed diets, it is rather a blessing than curse to adopt this new kind of animal-herding method, although it seems cold-blooded. The system should be modified gradually, than making a revolution.

 What I felt the greatest inconvenience was neither the castration(it was horrible though, as a male), nor bullfighting but the narration analyzing the animal experimentation. Following is a quotation from the movie (1:13:44~1:14:26)

those who hope to find remedies for human ills by inflicting deliberate sufferings on animals commit two fundamental errors in understanding. The first is the assumption that results obtained on animals are applicable to mankind. The second concerns the inevitable fallacy of experimental science in respect to the field of organic life. Since animals react differently from human beings ... every new product or method tried out on animals must be tried out again on man ... through careful clinical tests, before it can be considered safe. This rule knows no exceptions.

Although I'm not that well-versed in science, I can confirm that is wrong. According to the well-established pharmaceutical process, clinical experimentation must be followed after the animal experiment. Pharmacologists are not fools. They are fully aware of the fact that humankind has different organs than animals. The experimentation on animals is to assure that certain medicine doesn't contain component on creatures. In this context, Clasude Bernard, the "prince of vivisection" and the "father of psychology" mentioned; "experiments on animals ... are entirely conclusive for the toxicology and hygiene of man...the effects of these substances are the same on man as on animals, save for differences in degree"

 However, it is said that all the chemical process that are done inside human body are done inside the banana just alike. Apes share the DNA with us with the difference less than 5%. Definitely, the results obtained on animals are applicable to mankind, although not 100%. No pharmacologist overlook the process of human try-out. The process depicted on the screen is completely distorted and it is the result of either total ignorance or deliberate lie... or both.

 What is really problematic is this; as we have already seen, the documentary tries to depend greatly on emotional and visual appeal, and it is hardly possible to find any reliable table or statistics that would show the general tendency and the prevalence of those "cruel" treatments on animals. We should only believe the notification that those on the movie are not the particular cases.

 It is agreeable that we need to take certain actions; there indeed are some farms with extremely bad condition and mistreatment, the environmental pollution does exist, and we should co-exist with earthlings. However, facing such distortion, fabrication, cherry-picking and agitation, I felt rebelliousness rather than the seriousness on the urgent situation. Absolutely, it is a good movie in propagating its message, but quite uncomfortable, not only because of its contents, but also its contention.

Personal Narrative:Teaching, Harsh but Worthy

 Teaching is a quite difficult task, no matter what you teach. Many people overlook the harshness of making others learn, and I was one of those people. Going through nine and a half years of education, I'd thought that I could teach much better than the teachers. That was the reason I applied to GLPS, the camp which is held in my school every twice a year. I was very confident, because I considered teaching as an easy affair. Furthermore, the subject I teach was history, which is my favorite.

 On a Sunday of July, students shuffled in, and I was enormously excited by the expectation. I was busy planning the schedule, and contents I was going to teach. On Tuesday, the first lecture began.

 I thought I taught quite well on that day. I explained the term Middle Ages, which was the era students were designated to learn, and several important keywords related to the Medieval, such as knighthood, feudalism, Catholics, and Pope. I was satisfied, regardless of the confused eyes of the young students, when the oldest one was only fourteen.

 What I was planned to achieve was to make students write a term paper in a couple of weeks. Thus, my co-teacher and I instructed them the method of researching and writing. For we have only two weeks, which means we had to finish papers in 8 classes, I had to teach as much as I could in an hour. My tongue twisted eagerly, my hand couldn't follow my words, and students did not ask any question. I was delighted, for I thought they'd gotten everything.

 Thus, I was greatly shocked when one of the co-employees of the camp told me that the students thought my lectures were difficult and my explanation was inadequate. From then on, I was able to focus on my students' behavior. I was shocked again. My students couldn't get the chance to ask question, because my words were to fast and difficult for them. They were embarrassed and confused, and they couldn't write anything on their notebooks, and this phenomenon was followed by poor-quality assignments they submitted. I tried to be different, but it was too late, and only a half of week was left.

 At the end, the frustration occurred by the thought of being a poor teacher. However, another turnabout happened. When I announced the students the farewell and apologizing with mentioning the critics of my teaching, the students denied, and gave me a big applaud. One of the student told me to stay longer in the camp, and another said that she will come again for the winter camp. I tried not to show my emotion but I was both sad and happy. During the camp, when the teaching was too harsh, I wondered why some people are so eager to be teachers. I could get that on the very last day. Teaching did not only give a teacher exhaustion and depression but also the sympathy and memories with the students. 

The Korean Custom I'd like to Spread

 Custom is a peculiar way of living which is pursued by a specific group with certain identity, and it is considered that longer the history of the group is, more customs the group has. Korea is said to have a history of 5,000 years, so it is not a contradiction to have a lot of special customs. The custom I'd like to recommend for foreigners is boisterous dinning tradition. Family members gather around every dinner to have meal with others, and they arrange all the food on the table, unlike Western culture which bring food in order. There are various advantages for this custom.

 First of all, family can confirm and reassure their fraternity. Each of the family member would have his or her private affair to deal and work to do, but they gather for the dinner table. They talk about the trivial issues covering their day life and eat, laugh, and enjoy together. Also, they share the same pot of soup and side dish. This seems to be awkward and rather dirty, but this is another way of showing their intimacy. It is true that there is a possibility of infection, but confirming their kinship is much more important for them.

 Not only this, but also this custom helps getting rid of stress. Recent studies insist that getting together with others, especially close people is one of the best way to release stress and revitalize the routine life. That is the reason Koreans have so many get-together events. Korea is famous for its long and harsh work, so friends, family, colleagues or business partners gather and emit everything they have in their mind. This is how they live.

 It is normally indicated that modern world doesn't have fraternity, or Jeong, because of its competitive, specialized and individualized characteristics. Korean customs of dining would be one of the remedies for solidarity of the modern people. 

The Very First Post

 To start my first post with dully decorated banal self-introduction, my name is Hansol Jeong who is now a frosh of KMLA.

 However, this time, to deviate from the common-style of TOEFL writing that we are going to confront for over hundreds and hundreds of times, I am going to make a different post; which is sincere and out-of-format. Actually, my name and affiliation do not represent any of my identity, do they?

  So, let's talk about my identity. Although I have already mentioned that the affiliation might not be such an important factor in building one's identity, the school KMLA did play a significant role in the formation of my identity, for it was the space I spent my whole days. I have changed a lot struggling a half-of-the-year in this school, and was able to set my identity through comparison with friends.

 Frankly speaking, although I met so many talented students in this school, I was able to gain self-esteem, not only the depression. Before entering the school, I suffered from inferiority complex and the students in my age from other regions with their geniuses were felt to be formidable monsters. However, actually competing (and joining) those visualized monsters were such a intriguing experiences. They were quite friendly and nice, and it was not impossible to study with them. I felt the wider world with diversity and got my self-esteem.

 I was greatly interested in Western History and the school allowed us some place to develop our aptitudes. I have never taken such an interesting class which is comparable to those classes I've taken in the school. Also, I found interest in writing papers on the basis of research done by myself. I strengthened my dream to be a scholar.

 What preoccupied me was the problem with my math ability. Unfortunately, my math grade was far lower than the average and now I'm striving to raise my math ability, although it is quite harsh. In contrast, I "believed" that my English ability was at least above the average. I had little difficulty in reading scholastic books in English as well as writing and speaking. (but the listening was an exception) However, taking the English lecture of Mr.Moon, I was greatly frustrated, because I'd never got grade over 4.5 from 5.0 for my essays throughout the whole semester.

 I was shocked and even bought an essays collections from a senior. I was able to categorized my problem in writing essays in following order.

 First, I didn't follow the structure Mr.Moon had instructed us. For example, I got 0.5 point cut because I wrote introduction for two paragraphs and wrote the thesis statement in the end of the second paragraph.

 Second, I made numerous minute grammatical errors, whether they were misspelling, inappropriate usage of the articles('a' or 'the'), or the wrong usage of the verbs. I didn't get any grammatical lecture until now, and I suppose that led me into the trouble.

 Last but not least was the absence of revision. I tended to write essays in accordance with improvised ideas or opinions, mostly without elaborated outlines. As a result, after writing an essay, I was too tired to recheck it, or sometimes was scared of revising it, for it was written without planning, and even if I could think of better thesis or find errors while revising it, I thought it would be impossible to fix it. This surely is a bad habit, and because of this, I've made so many ridiculous mistakes. I think this definitely is a most urgent problem is my writing style.

 Thus, my agenda for the new semester in essay writing is to overcome these problems and develop my ability to express my opinions more properly.