This article contains too many or overly lengthy quotations. Please help summarize the quotations. Consider transferring direct quotations to Wikiquote or excerpts to Wikisource. (December 2023)
Han
Hangul
한
Hanja
恨
Revised Romanizationhan
McCune–Reischauerhan
IPA[ha̠ːn]

Han (Korean: 한), or haan, is a concept of an emotion, variously described as some form of grief or resentment, among others, that is said to be an essential element of Korean identity by some, and a modern post-colonial identity by others.

The historicity of han in premodern Korea is disputed. A national culture of han did not exist in premodern Korea. The contemporary concept of han, that it is a national characteristic of the Korean people, is a modern phenomenon that originated during the Japanese occupation of Korea from Japanese colonial stereotypes and the characterization of Korean art and culture as "sorrowful" in Yanagi Sōetsu's theory of the "beauty of sorrow". The idea that han is a specifically Korean characteristic was adopted and popularized by Koreans in the 20th century.

Definitions and characteristics

Han is derived from the Chinese character 恨, which means resentment, hatred, or regret.

Definitions and characteristics of han are highly subjective. According to the Translation Journal, "Han is frequently translated as sorrow, spite, rancor, regret, resentment or grief, among many other attempts to explain a concept that has no English equivalent."[1] The novelist Pak Kyongni describes han as both sadness and hope.[2] The film director Im Kwon-Taek, many of whose films deal with han, says that Koreans have different interpretations of han.[3]

Joshua D. Pilzer defines han: "A complex emotional cluster often translated as 'resentful sorrow.' Thought by many to be essentially Korean, and by many others to be the product of modern, post-colonial efforts to create a 'Korean' essence."[4]

Essentialist view
Modern view

History

Premodern Korea

"Han" is not found in the first Korean–English dictionary, published by James S. Gale in 1897, and is rarely found in classical Korean literature.[10] According to Michael D. Shin: "In actuality, classical Korean literature is full of joy and satire and humor, stuff that you don't associate with han. Han is a very small and minor part of classical Korean literature."[10] According to Go Misuk, han in classical Korean literature was rare but suddenly became more prominent in the early 20th century.[14] Traditional Korean stories almost always have happy endings.[15] According to Kim Yol-kyu, Koreans used humor as one way to relieve pent-up han, which is why han is always accompanied by humor in folk music and pansori.[6] All surviving pansori epics have happy endings.[4] According to Minsoo Kang, "there is not a single piece of evidence that anyone prior to the 20th century thought that the word [han] held some special meaning for the Korean character".[13] A national culture of han did not exist in Korea.[10]

According to Michael D. Shin, a collective expression of han was observed by Western missionaries during the Great Pyongyang Revival of 1907. William Blair, a missionary, described the revival: "Then began a meeting the like of which I had never seen before, nor wish to see again unless in God's sight it is absolutely necessary. Every sin a human being can commit was publicly confessed that night." Lord William Cecil observed: "[The missionary] reached only the words "My Father" when with a rush a power from without seemed to take hold of the meeting. The Europeans described its manifestations as terrifying. Nearly everybody present was seized with the most poignant sense of mental anguish; before each one his own sins seemed to be rising in condemnation of his life." Shin calls what they observed a very raw form of han, and argues that the "awkward" and "terrifying" way in which it was expressed suggests that a culture of han did not exist at that time.[10] According to William Blair, it was an outpouring of the Holy Spirit.[16]

Colonial Korea

Yanagi Sōetsu was prompted to write about the "beauty of sorrow" by the March First Movement, in which approximately 2,000,000 Koreans participated in more than 1,500 demonstrations.

As a national phenomenon or specifically Korean characteristic, han did not exist in ancient Korea but was an idea anachronistically imposed on Koreans during the Japanese colonial period.[17]

— Korean Han and the Postcolonial Afterlives of "The Beauty of Sorrow"

The concept of han, as a national characteristic, originated from Yanagi Sōetsu's theory of the "beauty of sorrow" (悲哀の美) and Japanese colonial stereotypes of Korea and its people.[12][18][19][20][21] Following the March First Movement, an independence movement that ended with the death of about 7,000 Koreans at the hands of the Japanese police and military,[22] the Japanese art critic Yanagi Sōetsu wrote articles in 1919 and 1920, expressing sympathy for the Korean people and appreciation for Korean art.[23] In his 1920 article, Yanagi said: "The long, harsh and painful history of Korea is expressed in the hidden loneliness and sadness of their art. It always has a sad beauty and loneliness that brings you to tears. When I look at it, I can not control the emotion that fills my heart. Where else can I find such beauty of sadness."[24]

The characterization of Korea as sad and stagnant was common in Imperial Japan;[25][26] Japanese historiography of Korea was centered on the idea that Korea was stagnant.[26] To justify the colonization of Korea, the Japanese propagated an image of Koreans as an inferior, uncivilized people, who were incapable of being independent and prone to being invaded and oppressed.[27] The Japanese viewed Korea's "sorrow" as being because of "a national history of unremitting disaster".[26] Yanagi's views of Korea mirrored those of contemporary Japanese colonial politics.[28] Yanagi said that Korean history was characterized by instability, invasion, and subservience;[29] the "sadness" of Korean history was said to be manifested in Korean art, which, according to Yanagi, embodied the "beauty of sorrow".[30] Yanagi contributed to the naturalization of Japanese colonialism in Korea.[31]

The last Korean emperor, Sunjong, was directly associated with han. Following his death in 1926, an article said that his "life of han" ended in sadness. The Dong-a Ilbo wrote: "The anger, bitterness, and sorrow built up inside us have become mixed together, and it could be said that the passing of the Yunghui Emperor [Sunjong] has touched the hearts of the Joseon people and released their pent-up sadness." Han became political because Sunjong's death symbolized the end of Korean history.[10]

Yanagi Sōetsu was an influential figure in colonial Korea, and was accepted as a true friend by contemporary Koreans; he sought to preserve the traditional art of Korea, held fund-raising lectures and concerts for humanitarian aid, and spoke out in defense of Korean people and cultural heritage.[20][32][33][34][35] Moderate Korean nationalists, who had a non-confrontational approach toward Japanese authority, supported Yanagi, and the Dong-a Ilbo actively promoted and sponsored him.[36] Yanagi was admired by prominent figures in the fields of history, art, and media, who had a profound influence on the formation of modern Korean concepts of traditional art, aesthetics, and history.[37] The concept of han, based on the "beauty of sorrow", was propagated by Korean scholars and writers, continuing Yanagi's legacy,[18][21] and gradually spread to the entire education system.[38] According to Jeong Il-seong, the passage of modern Korean history, going from the Japanese occupation to independence to national division to civil war to military dictatorship, influenced figures in art and culture to adopt the concept of han.[19]

South Korea

Ethnic nationalism’s processes took the colonial origin of "the beauty of sorrow" and produced han as an ethnonational, biologistic badge of Korean uniqueness.[39]

— Korean Han and the Postcolonial Afterlives of "The Beauty of Sorrow"

Sandra So Hee Chi Kim's article on han says that "the term han itself emerged as a significant ideological concept during the 1970s" and "[s]ome contend that it was during the Park Chung Hee regime that the idea of han transformed from a personal sense of sorrow and resentment to a broader, national experience of unrelenting suffering and injustice".[17] Han was used politically to promote "Korean uniqueness" and ethnic-national solidarity through a sense of "shared suffering".[40] Han acquired a biologistic aspect,[39] as seen in descriptions of han by the poet Ko Un, "We Koreans were born from the womb of Han and brought up in the womb of Han",[41] and the film critic Ahn Byung-Sup, "Han is an inherent characteristic of the Korean character ... It becomes part of the blood and breath of a person".[1] Korean theologians anachronistically argued that han was a national sentiment in premodern Korea.[42]

During the authoritarian regime of Park Chung Hee, the idea of han, and thus resentment and suffering, as a national characteristic of the Korean people may have been an ideological state apparatus to indoctrinate the working class into accepting the hardships of rapid industrialization and economic inequality;[43] the idea of sadness being an inherent Korean trait had served a similar purpose during the Japanese occupation to naturalize the suffering of the colonized Koreans.[44] Sunghee Choi, an art education scholar, said that her inculcation of han in education started as early as elementary school.[45] According to Minsoo Kang, han has declined significantly since the late 1990s.[13]

Criticism

Yanagi Sōetsu viewed the "whiteness" of Joseon white porcelain, among other aspects of Korean culture, as the color of sadness. Yanagi later revised his view: Joseon white porcelain emanates from an "instinctive faith in nature", not sadness.[46] Citing historical examples, Kim Talsu argues that, from a Korean perspective, white is the color of humor and dynamism.[47]

Yanagi Sōetsu's theory of the "beauty of sorrow" has received criticism in both Korea and, more recently, Japan.[47][48] It has been described as prejudiced, imperialistic, orientalist, sentimentalist, colonialist, and under-theorized.[37][49][50] Yanagi's interpretation of Korean history and art has been disputed.[21][37] The "beauty of sorrow" was criticized by Koreans as early as 1922.[47] In 1974, the poet Choe Harim published an influential article that established the "aesthetics of colonialism" and accused Yanagi's theory of imperialism, colonialism, sentimentalism, and a "superficial interpretation of Korean history".[47] Choe criticized Yanagi's view, that Korean art has a "beauty of sorrow" because Korea has long suffered at the hands of foreign countries, as being in accordance with Japanese colonial policies, which, he said, were intended to instill a sense of defeat and shame in Koreans about Korean history.[51]

Mark Peterson disagrees with the view that Korea experienced many invasions, a view that he says is a 20th-century phenomenon that was advocated during the Japanese colonial period, and argues that Korea experienced very few invasions and had long periods of peace and stability.[52] Peterson also disagrees with the Japanese colonial view of Korea as stagnant, inefficient, and corrupt.[53] John Duncan calls the idea that Korea experienced constant invasions or that Korea has a "history of suffering" (수난의 역사) a myth, and argues that premodern Korean history is characterized by very long periods of peace.[54] According to David C. Kang, the dominant narrative depicting Korean history as "one of almost incessant foreign incursions" is a meme that emerged in the 20th century.[55] Minsoo Kang calls the idea of a Korean character shaped by foreign invasions a modern myth that is still circulating today.[13]

The history of han is as problematic as that of 'hysteria', which begs the question of why anyone aware of its past would want to persist in its use, even through a redefinition that rejects its imperialist, racist, ethnonationalist and sexist legacy. Ever since Japanese propagandists invented the notion of Koreans as a people defined by their essential sorrow, so many people have attached so many disparate meanings to it that it has become a confused mishmash of ideas, in the same way that 'hysteria' became a meaningless term signifying any person, usually a woman, who displays extreme emotional behaviour.[13]

— Minsoo Kang

Mari Nakami says that Yanagi did not profess to be an expert or intend for his theory to be an "objective observation" or a "scientifically approached scholarly study", but rather "an expression of the human heart".[56] Furthermore, Nakami argues that the "beauty of sorrow" was not the only perspective Yanagi had of Korean art: He expressed admiration and praise for Korean art, such as the Seokguram,[57] and believed that most Japanese national art was Korean in origin or an imitation of Korean art.[58] Yanagi gradually changed his theory of Korean art from the "beauty of sorrow" to the "beauty of health", the "beauty of naturalness", and the "beauty of unity".[25][59]

Despite receiving criticism for his theory, Yanagi Sōetsu has oft been praised for his humanism and preservation of traditional Korean art. In 1984, he was posthumously awarded the Bogwan Order of Cultural Merit, the first to be awarded to a non-Korean.[60]

Proverbs

According to Kim Yol-kyu, han is expressed in Korean proverbs about womanhood and poverty:[6]

In popular culture

Han, as a theme, is expressed in contemporary pansori.[44] In the late 20th century, the sorrowful "Western style" of pansori overtook the vigorous "Eastern style" of pansori, and pansori began being called the "sound of han".[4] All surviving pansori epics end happily, but contemporary pansori focuses on the trials and tribulations of the characters, commonly without reaching the happy ending because of the contemporary popularity of excerpt performances.[4] The history of pansori in the late 20th century, including the recent canonization of han, has led to great concern in the pansori community.[4]

In American media, han has been referenced in Anthony Bourdain: Parts Unknown, "Koreatown, Los Angeles", and The West Wing, "Han".

In the Marvel Comic Book story New York State of Mind, written by Maurene Goo, with art from Lynne Yoshi and part of Marvel's Voices: Identity (Vol.1#1; released on August 25, 2021) Korean heroes Brawn and Silk discuss the concept of "han": Silk describes her interpretation as “...its like collective grief and resentment we carry because of oppression”. While fighting the villain Scarecrow (who laments at feeling invisible because his crimes didn't attract the attention of the Avengers), Silk and Brawn enumerate a number of indignities regularly experienced by Asian Americans. The fight concludes with Brawn delivering a knockout punch while saying: "We're Korean. We're born angry!" [63]

In the Korean American community

Korean American scholar Elaine H. Kim has written on han in relation to the 1992 Los Angeles riots in her 1993 essay "Home Is Where The Han Is".[64]

Korean American scholar and poet Seo-Young Chu coined the term "postmemory han" in her 2008 essay "Science Fiction and Postmemory Han in Contemporary Korean American Literature," published in MELUS.

What does it mean for a second-generation Korean American to grieve for an uncle who disappeared in North Korea long before she was born? What does it mean for a second-generation Korean American to feel personally degraded by the soldiers who raped thousands of comfort women during WWII? Why should their dehumanization affect her so viscerally? How can a second-generation Korean American feel wounded by the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ)—as though the wound were still raw, as though the 38th parallel cut her own body in half? Is it possible for her to feel homesick for the mountains of North Korea, an alien land where she has never been?[65] –Seo-Young Chu

According to Chu's 2008 essay, in many Korean American literary works (e.g., Dictee by Theresa Hak Kyung Cha, The Language of Blood by Jane Jeong Trenka, Notes from the Divided Country by Suji Kwock Kim, and Comfort Woman by Nora Okja Keller), Americans of Korean descent are sometimes portrayed as experiencing "Americanized" or second-generation han.[66] More recently, in her hybrid creative nonfiction poem "I, Discomfort Woman: A Fugue in F Minor," published in 2023 in The Margins/Asian American Writers' Workshop, Chu responds to criticism of han, writing: "Han I reclaim and redefine as my Korean American response to injustice" and "Hwabyung I reclaim and redefine as a cathartic way of experiencing political agency and creative power."[67]

According to Minsoo Kang, South Koreans and Korean Americans have different views toward han: South Koreans attach little importance to han, viewing it as a thing of the past, while Korean Americans attach great importance to han, viewing it as a way to build an identity.[13]

Hwabyeong

According to a study from 1994, based on personal interviews, exposure to han was deemed one of the main causes of hwabyeong.[68]

See also

References

Citations

  1. ^ a b Bannon, David (2008-01-03). "Unique Korean Cultural Concepts in Interpersonal Relations". Translation Journal 12(1). Retrieved 2010-04-10.
  2. ^ Kim 2017, p. 256.
  3. ^ Im 1997, p. 85.
  4. ^ a b c d e f Pilzer 2016, p. 171.
  5. ^ Shim 2004, p. 216.
  6. ^ a b c d e f Kim, Yol-kyu (1996). 한(恨). Encyclopedia of Korean Culture (in Korean). Academy of Korean Studies. Retrieved 4 July 2020.
  7. ^ Yoo 1988, p. 221.
  8. ^ Huer, Jon (22 March 2009). "Psychology of Korean Han". The Korea Times. Retrieved 1 July 2020.
  9. ^ Glionna, John M. (5 January 2011). "A complex feeling tugs at Koreans". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved 1 July 2020.
  10. ^ a b c d e f Shin, Michael D. "A Brief History of Han". The Korea Society. Retrieved 20 May 2020.
  11. ^ Kim 2017, p. 274.
  12. ^ a b Kim 2017, p. 257.
  13. ^ a b c d e f Kang, Minsoo (18 March 2022). "The problem with 'han' 한 恨". Aeon. Aeon Media Group. Archived from the original on 18 March 2022.
  14. ^ Shin, Michael (2018). Korean National Identity under Japanese Colonial Rule: Yi Gwangsu and the March First Movement of 1919. Routledge. ISBN 978-1-134-83064-0. Retrieved 4 July 2020.
  15. ^ Chong, Byong-Wuk; Lee, Peter H.; Kwon, Du-Hwan. "Korean literature". Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved 7 July 2020.
  16. ^ Lee 2009, p. 28.
  17. ^ a b Kim 2017, p. 258.
  18. ^ a b 이진숙. 위대한 미술책: 곰브리치에서 에코까지 세상을 바꾼 미술 명저 62 (in Korean). 민음사. ISBN 978-89-374-8890-0. Retrieved 27 September 2018.
  19. ^ a b 강준만 (2008). 한국 근대사 산책 8 : 만주사변에서 신사참배까지 (in Korean). 인물과사상사. ISBN 978-89-5906-339-0. Retrieved 27 September 2018.
  20. ^ a b 이문영 (28 September 2007). 야나기 무네요시의 두얼굴/정일성 지음. Seoul Shinmun (in Korean). Seoul Shinmun. Retrieved 27 September 2018.
  21. ^ a b c 조선 예술에 미치다 (무색미학으로 본 한국인의 미의식). 문학동네 (in Korean). Munhakdongne Publishing Group. Archived from the original on 27 September 2018. Retrieved 20 May 2020.
  22. ^ "March First Movement". Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved 20 May 2020.
  23. ^ Kikuchi 2004, p. 126.
  24. ^ Kikuchi 2004, p. 131.
  25. ^ a b Kikuchi 2004, p. 137.
  26. ^ a b c Brandt 2007, p. 31.
  27. ^ Kikuchi 2004, p. 125.
  28. ^ Kikuchi 2004, p. 140.
  29. ^ Brandt 2007, p. 30.
  30. ^ Oguma 2014, p. 111.
  31. ^ Brandt 2007, p. 32.
  32. ^ Kikuchi 2004, p. 129.
  33. ^ Kikuchi 2004, pp. 138–139.
  34. ^ Nakami 2011, pp. 104–105.
  35. ^ Ch'ŏe 2008, pp. 551–553.
  36. ^ Brandt 2007, p. 25.
  37. ^ a b c 한승동 (28 September 2007). 야나기는 진정 조선예술을 사랑했을까. The Hankyoreh (in Korean). The Hankyoreh. Retrieved 28 September 2018.
  38. ^ Kim 2017, p. 262.
  39. ^ a b Kim 2017, p. 266.
  40. ^ Kim 2017, pp. 266–267.
  41. ^ Yoo 1988, p. 222.
  42. ^ Moon 2013, p. 422.
  43. ^ Killick 2003, p. 59.
  44. ^ a b Kim 2017, p. 261.
  45. ^ Choi 2014, p. 292.
  46. ^ Lee 2011, p. 73.
  47. ^ a b c d Kikuchi 2004, p. 138.
  48. ^ Brandt 2007, p. 9.
  49. ^ Oguma 2014, p. 114.
  50. ^ Kikuchi 2004, pp. 134–140.
  51. ^ Moon, So-young. "Yanagi exhibit navigates critic's controversies". Korea JoongAng Daily. Retrieved 25 June 2020.
  52. ^ Peterson, Mark (22 March 2020). "Misconception about invasions". The Korea Times. Retrieved 25 May 2020.
  53. ^ Peterson, Mark (23 February 2020). "Longest dynasties". The Korea Times. Retrieved 25 May 2020.
  54. ^ Duncan, John. "Myths and Truths about Premodern Korea". USC Korean Studies Institute. USC Dana and David Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences. Archived from the original on 2021-12-22. Retrieved 30 May 2020.
  55. ^ Kang 2017, pp. 81–82.
  56. ^ Nakami 2011, pp. 97–98.
  57. ^ Nakami 2011, p. 91.
  58. ^ Nakami 2011, pp. 93–94.
  59. ^ Nakami 2011, p. 92.
  60. ^ 야나기 무네요시 전. 디자인정글 (in Korean). Design Jungle. Retrieved 29 September 2018.
  61. ^ 여자가 한을 품으면 오뉴월에도 서리가 내린다. Naver English-Korean Dictionary (in Korean). Retrieved 4 July 2020.
  62. ^ 똥구멍이 찢어지게 가난하다. Naver English-Korean Dictionary (in Korean). Retrieved 8 July 2020.
  63. ^ Marvel Voices:Identity, Issue #1 August 25, 2021
  64. ^ Kim, Elaine H. (1993). "Home Is Where the Han Is: A Korean American Perspective on the Los Angeles Upheavals". Social Justice. 20 (1/2 (51-52)): 1–21. ISSN 1043-1578. JSTOR 29766728.
  65. ^ Chu, Seo-Young (2008). "Science Fiction and Postmemory Han in Contemporary Korean American Literature". MELUS. 33 (4): 97–121. doi:10.1093/melus/33.4.97.
  66. ^ Chu, Seo-Young (1 December 2008). "Science Fiction and Postmemory Han in Contemporary Korean American Literature". MELUS: Multi-Ethnic Literature of the United States. 33 (4): 97–121. doi:10.1093/melus/33.4.97.
  67. ^ "I, Discomfort Woman: A Fugue in F Minor". Asian American Writers' Workshop. 2023-02-21. Retrieved 2023-12-07.
  68. ^ Rhi 2004, p. 22.

Sources

Categories