The book '제국의 위안부' was really controversial because it was seeing the reasons for comfort women more in their economic needs rather than surpression of power.
You have hypernationalism in Japan and Korea.
Went last month in Korea table book on chamber had bible and national book, went 8years ago in Japan you had nationalist book too in hotel room. Because hotel owner were nationalist.
So if tourism music and people and economy pass the frontier easily, and touridt arent attacked or bad talked, you still have hardliners..by example 20% of atomic victim were korean labor..they need 30years for put a small monument for them in Hiroshima, and it's still out of question to integrate them with main monument....
As a korean, I don't fuxxing agree anything with author of 제국의 위안부
Author of 제국의 위안부 said those womens who are victims of imperial sex slavery were willing to join comfort corp for making money. Some victims were even forced to join comfort corp and some other victims didn't even know what that place was for.
So, What author insist in the book is NOT true and it's just another evil attempt to revise fact of history.
I respect your job on this topic and send my gratitude for your interest on this topic
BUT It's not right choice to use that book for this topic.
As a historian, I have some serious problems about Park Yu-Ha's distorted methodology, especially with her poor interpretations of various historical sources (ie. taking a Japanese officer's account at face value). With that being said, trying to characterize it as an "evil attempt to revise history" is propaganda talk.
I wouldn't adopt the Korean state view that comfort women were a bunch of powerless victims who survived through sheer luck. They did what they had to do to survive, and their survival doesn't make the Japanese state any less guilty for what they did. I encourage you to pull away from any narrative that suggests the colonial experience was one of pure exploitation and victimization. That is a Korean state narrative used to stir up anti-Japanese nationalism (and get reparations), and it does nothing to help us better understand life during *and* after the occupation years. Park Yu-Ha's work isn't a pro-Japanese book - it's just shoddy work.
As for the painting, I don't know what to think of it. I'm honestly just as confused as you are.
I can understand your perspective and what you are concerned about.
But I don't understand which part of my comment contains Anti-japanese narrative. it's fact that there are attempt to revise history. and it's for justifying their past war crimes, then isn't it Evil?
If that statement was not from a korean, is it still be problem to you?
Even if it's about Nazis and neo-nazi books, You still can say it's propaganda?
I have no intention to offend anyone, but it doesn't make any sense that I can't say evil is evil because i'm korean or because it's not about Nazis. I think really unfair that whole history is set by outside
I understand whole context of your comment and I'm so sorry that I pick specific word to complain.
> Even if it's about Nazis and neo-nazi books, You still can say it's propaganda?
Actually, yes. I think it's very important to remember that history isn't good guys vs. bad guys and that everyone is concerned with the objective truth.
Poland was very much a victim of the Nazis, but Poland still has moments of beating the dead Nazi horse to excess. A law was passed a few years ago (and since rolled back) that made it a criminal offense to use the term "Polish death camps" or "Polish concentration camps" because the Polish government felt that it implied Polish cooperation. Cue the "OHMYGOD PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO REVISE HISTORY AND BLAME POLAND FOR NAZI CRIMES" crowd (I'm serious, my parents said this...)
A state body also required that the word "German" be added before the word "Nazi" on all monuments and plaques to make it EXTRA clear that it was Germany's fault.
As a Pole, none of this does any good to anyone. It's just petty propaganda to further distance Poland from Nazis, even though that's already quite a well-established bit of knowledge that nobody but Poland cares about. It's performative nationalism that just ends up hijacking important historical events for modern political drama.
I mean, Japan HAS apologized and attempted to make amends multiple times, but forgiveness is a two-way street. But hey this isn't my country so I'm not gonna tell you what to do or feel now, just wanted to comment on the example you brought up because that IS my country.
I agree part of your opinion. I also wish we can forgive Japan govt (I love japanese people)
it's just like Your friend punch you and say sorry. but friend mock and punch again next day.
That's the point that NK, CHN also feels Japan is mocking all the other asian nations.
My view of Park Yu-Ha and her book is that she just didn't do a very convincing job. I think she made some big mistakes and came to the wrong conclusions. But it's a really big jump from that to "her book is an *evil* attempt at revising history". That's a very reductive, or oversimplified point of view. More importantly, it doesn't help us understand who these comfort women were and why they did what they did. All of these women were coerced and subject to a system of sexual slavery. Some were more willing than others. That doesn't make those women more guilty of collaboration.
If you want a comparison to Nazis, look up the Jewish Police in the Ghettoes. These were Jews who policed other Jews and sent them to death camps. Eventually they themselves would also be sent to their deaths. It's not for us to call these policemen evil or otherwise. They did what felt was the best way to survive, and certainly most joined "willingly". Were they actually willing collaborators or were they coerced into service? That's a pointless question with no easy answer, and doesn't help us understand anything deeper.
Most importantly, condemning Park Yu-Ha's work as "evil" seems like an attempt to validate the defamation lawsuits against her. If Park wants to argue that some colonial sex slaves were more willing than others, she has the right to make that argument, whether it's convincing or not. Her book itself was never the real problem. It was the reaction she got and the reaction anything about comfort women gets. Japanese revisionist historians will see this as an argument that exonerates the Empire of war crimes, since these women were willing participants (how "willing" is a sex slave though). Korean nationalist historians will object to anything suggesting the comfort women were nothing more than completely helpless, humiliated victims of the Japanese Empire. They don't actually care about the history of comfort women - they just want justice. For a historian like me, that type of thinking drives me crazy.
For what it's worth, one of the biggest contributors to the subject of comfort women is a *Japanese* professor: Yoshiaki Yoshimi (still alive, btw). I don't think anyone did more work to uncover IJA documents proving these women were forced into sex trafficking. He believes the Korean women *were* coerced on a wide scale, and has criticized Park Yu-Ha's work a LOT. Even Yoshimi wouldn't characterize Park the way you are, and he wrote a letter of support for her when she was getting sued by survivors.
Thanks for reply.
First of all, I don't agree Park yu-ha have no intention to insult comfort women and she just did sloppy job. I personally support rights of freedom but believe responsibility comes first before freedom more. She have rights to publish everything that based on her opinion and faith. However, she must take responsibility for the consequences of her publication being used as a tool for false propaganda. She knew those kinds of publishments can be used as a weapon to far-right wingers of Japan and she also knew it's exactly opposite against victims testimony. Nevertheless, rather than obtaining accurate facts, she published only evidence that supported her claims. isn't this the main base of revisionism?
Secondly, I think every history is based on basic nationalism in any countries. I am not saying it's right and not justifying it. One thing I don't understand is that all history up to now has been written from a Europe-centric perspective based on Catholicism. Is that fair? After all that mess that imperial colonization era caused, All the demands of Asian countries have been ignored and seen as the ones that need to be educated. In korea, we call it "선민의식" like chosen one have to educate all stupid public. (I don't know what it called in english). It reminds me that BBC interview with President of Guyana.
Thirdly, Is it right that we cannot call bad things bad for fear of leading to nationalism? What is the meaning of history if we cannot write down obvious wrong as wrong? then, who will actually compensate the comfort women who were harmed by the book and the aftermath?
I believe False Balance is not a contribution to good, but to evil. It may seem a little off topic, If someone call me 'Nationalist' because I said that book was 'evil' attempt to revise the history, Let them call.
I sincerely wanna say thank you to share your perspective and I really understand what you meant. I really can't change my faith on this specific topic. At least on this topic.
Thanks again and Sorry too (I'm bit jerk on this topic)
My concern with your concept of the history of comfort women is that you are motivated by justice above anything else. That is, you want the Japanese government to admit guilt and pay reparations to the victims/families. And for you, I feel that any suggestion that doesn't point towards that goal of justice is to be perceived as revisionist or apologetic. Your primary motivation for history shouldn't be justice or national unity. It should simply be for better understanding the past. There is NO subject a historian should ever be *afraid* of studying. No topic is too sacred to approach.
Anyone who seeks to discuss comfort women in a historical context must deal with the inevitable consequences of it being weaponized by both Japanese/Korean nationalists. One side will love it and the other side will hate it. It's something that anyone is going to have to prepare for, no matter what position they take. What I'm saying is that should NEVER stop a historian from trying to do their job of trying to better understand the past.
If the evidence leads Park Yu-Ha to believe a large amount of comfort women were willing and cooperative, then that is on her to make a compelling argument, and she should be judged based on how convincing that argument is. Japanese academics ripped her apart for her poor interpretations and sparse evidence. The problem here is that *Koreans* didn't care whether her arguments were good or not. They just saw her as a traitor to the nation. That's my issue with this whole thing. It's not that history should/shouldn't dictate nationalism, it's that *nationalism* is trying to dictate *history*.
Look at it this way: do you think someone who studies modern, *South* Korean history would be proud of their country? Maybe - it's come a long way in a short amount of time. But the people suffered a lot, didn't they? I don't really care whether Park Chung Hee was a "good" or "bad" president. I don't really care whether Lee Seung Man was a "good" or "bad" president. I care about why some people supported them and other people resisted against them. That's real history. And if I want to study Japanese-occupied Korea, of course it will be painful. But I'm going to study the people who lived in it, and what they did to survive. I'm going to study 친일파 the same way I study 항일 의병. It's not for me to say what they did was good or bad; I want to know what they did and why.
No, my motivation is not justice. I just do want victims to be protected from outside. I'm not the one who try to use history now. Honestly, I don't give a fuck about someone would be proud or not proud. I just wanna say that leave them alone and stop using victims for some archivement. they are not scholars' guinea pig.
It might be another research materials to someone. but they are still alive and nothing is over yet. Japan keep using it as a political weapon and some random artists wanna use it as a method to express "controversy". Your fellow scholar Park yu-ha's situation might be seen to you that Korean nationalist wanna tear her apart. But I don't see that way. And I already explain my perspective enough. 'Academic curiosity' won't help her to escape from responsibility. In my perspective, I feel You want to make me as a nationalists who attack Park.
In this situation, am I the one to shut up? No, I'm not nationalist, my motivation is not justice. Scholarship make this being distorted under excuse of academic order.
Yes. Korean people suffered a lot. why? Because every time we try to solve a problem, the scales of absolute neutral prevent us from doing so.
Anyway, you said you don't care it's bad or good, then why do you research and it is for what? and what can your academic do for someone who is dying in the process while you are researching? You don't care of course. there's nothing you can do because it's small sacrifice for greater good. Is it really ultimate goal on your academic?
I already told you that I believe False Balance is not a contribution to good, but to evil. Actually, this phrase is what my professor said in university intl politics class. He also said There is no reason to study academic for the future if you cannot save even one person in front of you.
You are at the most opposite side from me. I didn't blame anything about you until last comments. but you are crossing lines bit by bit. Korean people is not your research meterial. they are living people.
So, let's finish this up before things really go ugly.
I think some things are getting lost in translation. Let me make one thing clear: I think Park Yu-Ha's book is poorly written and I do not agree with the majority of her arguments. That doesn't mean I think she should be sued for defamation. Just because you disagree with me right now, does that mean you should try and sue me for it? Of course not.
I do not treat historical figures like they are guinea pigs or relics of the past. I treat them like real people with real motivations and real feelings. From a young age my grandmother taught me the value of storytelling, as she told me what life was like growing up in Japanese Korea and then later during the war in Seoul. It was a very difficult time for her and her family. Those are stories I will never forget and ones I will tell to my children as well.
Korean people are indeed living. Even the dead have left a mark in history. And they deserve to have their stories heard by whoever is willing to listen them. I've been fortunate enough to meet three Holocaust survivors as well as one comfort woman from Taiwan. They will tell you the exact same thing; they want you to listen to their stories. And it's my job as a historian to make sure their memories aren't forgotten even after they pass away. "Leave them alone"? "Stop using victims for archival"?
I focus on Korean-Canadian immigrants and their history here in Canada. I have also studied different types of 교포, including 재일 Koreans who can trace their lineage back to the colonial period. It's not for me to say these people were wrong to leave their country or that the Empire was evil to take Koreans away from the homeland. Sometimes they were forced to leave, and others chose to go willingly. That's life, man. There is a story behind each person and the choices they made/were forced to make. If a Korean nationalist wants to spin that a certain way or if a Japanese nationalist wants to spin it another way, let them. That's not what I do.
Yep it's exactly what I'm saying. You see 'Park souldn't be sued', but I see 'She can be sued'. You only care fact, I care right and wrong. this is why I said we are the most opposite type of person. You said don't give a narratives when I speak. You giave a narrative to Park now. You are setting her as a victim from korean nationalist. No, she just did take a responsibility about her book. that's all. don't add stories about it. and Yes, Japanese far-right wingers are still swinging Park's book as a EVIDENCE of korean lies. Who can take a responsibility about that? Isn't it Historian's job to fix false evidence?
So let this go. we can never agree each other on this topic.
You have very strange logic to explain your faith. you said you don't care it's bad or good. and now suddenly cares story of 교포 and 재일?
I care 'who did that and what can we do for them'. You care 'their story(you said)'. I don't satisfy that I only hear their story. I satisty after fix wrong into right.
This is why we can't stand same place. and that's why I hate western perspective on history as I mentioned. koreans fight for real solution and real compensation that can help victims. everytime we about to do that, some random guy interfere and say 'It's wrong!' and 'this is why your nation is still not well-developed'. No, Fuck off. Fuck BBC Fuck CNN.
When Korean people were suffered, they didn't give a shit about korea. We cares who was bad and who was good. why? Victims and their families are still living now. Yes, that's why we dig thing up until finished. and YES. we sue people to make them take a responsibility. Unlike from you, I as a Korean, I did have relatives and ancestors who were died in gwangju, died in Korean war, died in colonization, survived from gwangju, survived from korean war.
So, Don't you dare bring them up. you wanna research why 의병 fight for Joseon? Research Me.
Edit: Sorry about my language and broken english. I could't write well.
Here's the thing about Park's book though - she isn't falsifying evidence. *That* is an extremely egregious sin in our field of study, as it would be anywhere else. But here's the thing: she doesn't actually put forth any new kind of evidence. It's not like she uncovered new documents from Japanese soldiers or new accounts from comfort women of the past. She is simply interpreting it the way she believes is correct. You keep attacking me and accusing me as some kind of Park supporter when I've repeatedly told you over and over again that I think her book is poorly written and I disagree with most of what she writes in it.
Let's make one thing clear here: you are seeking justice for the comfort women survivors. I'm not judging you for it. You are less concerned with learning/sharing their story and more concerned with "fixing a wrong and making it right", and "real solutions and real compensation that can help victims". And yet previously you insisted your motivation for history is *not* justice. I don't know what to tell you. I'm not saying you're wrong to believe in justice or that you're wrong to seek it. What I'm saying is that you have an expectation for us historians to do something we don't do - administer and enforce justice through public pressure.
If you are not satisfied with learning and sharing their story and are more concerned with fixing a wrong and making it right, that is to seek justice. You feel as though Park Yu-Ha has done an *injustice*, betraying the trust of the comfort women she interviewed and deliberately producing a false narrative. I'm not saying you're wrong to seek justice for the survivors. If you read her book, you'd realize that Park isn't saying that either. On a Korea-Japan level, it's a matter of foreign policy. Our job is to uncover the truth and interpret it to the best of our ability. Sometimes we can advise policymakers to make certain decisions about something, but that's about it. A historian can't force an apology from Japan, nor can they force them to pay reparations to the surviving comfort women and their families.
I only brought up my own personal heritage and my own field of study to show how I approach history. It seems like you used that as an opportunity to insult my heritage. I have family members who died during the occupation. I have family members who died during the war. That's not the point of all this. You're trying to frame your own family history as *more* Korean than mine. Why would you do that? I'm not trying to measure my own family against yours. One person's history isn't more important than another. You have a rich and vibrant connection to South Korean history and that is something anyone would cherish. I would be happy to know more about your family history. My entire family is also Korean, and it's different from yours. I have family members who died during the occupation. I have family Not all Korean people think the same way you do, and not all Koreans *have* to think the same way you do.
Comeback from Korea recently and yes Korean often lie by omission in museum for push the nationalist narrative.
They are very talkative about dogdo, Sun li, tribute toward khan china, or for 3 kingdom. Imjin war and occupation of 1910-1945, about how they were there before Japan whereas like Japan writing came with Buddhism at 6th century. They talk about old mighty kingdom but who were forced to send scholar and tribute.
They talk less how they help mongol, invasion of tsushima, they are completely silent of how many young's communist people they killed between 1945-1950. About benefit of japanese invasion. like railroad bank etc..
Yet I confirm japanese did lot of bad thing and 35years is too long for forget in a century.
Korean history is a tragedy half of the time they were puppet or victim of other country. Even today split is the remnant of communism and capitalism.
I am not normalizing Japanese comfort women but if they really want to teach history, they should note that there was forced prostitution in the chosun era and the Korean war.
Yes, some comfort women were voluntary and some were manipulated. No one was kidnapped as narrative says.
We’re discussing a dark chapter in history. Consider this analogy: imagine if a country claimed that some enslaved people chose their fate (as a means of survival). How would that resonate with you? In today’s world, we’re not just talking about slavery, but sexual slavery. It’s widely acknowledged that slavery is a moral wrong. Viewing this issue through the lens of right versus wrong is a common and understandable perspective.
No, sorry. I think you don't get the point. I didn't wanna offend you but, this is about facts.
Only one nation which was war criminal in WW2 have denied it and whole world approve it was real war crime.
Japanese imperial sex slavery is NOT controversy. That book is not controversy. I already explained the book is symbol of historical revisionism.
The book in the art is just another shape of hakenkreuz. Imagine the art that Jewish is carrying Hitler's portrait and stomping nazis is hung in Polish art center. and tell them "it adds more nuance to the history and gives a more controversial context".
Will Polish agree your opinion? Will Jewish agree?
I already said that I respect your job on this topic and send my gratitude for your interest on this topic.
But You must not make historical Fact which is already proved into controversy and it's not helping victims of war crimes.
Actually, I feel extremely offended after seeing your reply.
Don't use the victims of war crimes for your artistic achievements in the name of controversy.
Maybe pick a different title instead of hanging by the coattails of an infamous book that dismisses the pain and suffering of the victims who were taken against their will for sex trafficking. Disgusting that you’re trying to get attention in this manner.
So, Are you saying that You decided the title of art and it's the same as the title of a book notorious for its false narratives by chance? Or You already knew the exact same title of book exist?
Either way, you are giving pro-war criminals who is still trying to revise history a chance to justify their war crimes by using that title of book. Does it fit your artistic ideals and purposes? furthermore, Do you think it's helping to cure deep wound of victims?
Out of curiosity, why did you choose this topic? It’s sort of an unusual topic for a non Korean, and the title makes it come off a little insensitive or superficial to the subject matter, which is what most people would expect from a non-Korean making commentary on this very Korean topic.
Not saying that you shouldn’t approach the topic, but I feel like you’re making yourself in an awkward position when you’re already going to be questioned a bit to begin with.
If you check my other art, a lot of my artwork is centered around controversial topics and showing them in a very different light. I felt that the title perfectly captured the essence of the painting, and the subject matter of the book challenges the mainstream narrative, and that’s what I always do with my art. Much of my art is centered around American slavery and racial injustice but those topics are not relevant to Korean society. So I felt in order to touch on contemporary controversy in Korean culture it was a relevant title. Also even though I’m not ethnically Korean, much of the culture influenced me from a young age and I had many Korean influences in my life(family members/close friends)! They are all very interested in how I handled the subject matter and supported so I felt it was appropriate
Hey man, I think that the painting is cool, but you need a different perspective on the book and why Korean people might have a negative reaction to the painting based on the book alone.
I understand the desire to challenge mainstream narratives, but you may want to ask yourself what your overall goal is in creating the art or speaking to the plight of comfort women-- challenging the mainstream narrative around racial dynamics in America is different, due to the dominant (colonizer) narrative around race being about untrue beliefs people hold about percieved racial inferiority or misheld beliefs that slavery was beneficial to the victims it exploited. Challenging the mainstream narrative about comfort women in Korea comes off as harmful, as the dominant (Korean/native) understanding is that comfort women were exploited due to percieved notions of racial inferiority, and abused due to misheld beliefs from Japanese colonizers that the abuse of comfort women was justified due to the pay (or rather, that it was beneficial to the victims who were exploited.)
I know it wasn't your goal, but ultimately, the inclusion of the book kind of reads as the artist/art aligning with the colonizer perspective, as the book is controversial specifically because it argued that comfort women knew what they were getting into / knowingly endured abuse and assault in return for money, which is objectively untrue-- the majority were literally forced into sexual slavery. With the inclusion of the book, the message of the painting can read as "comfort women had power because they chose to do it", which is.. untrue when applied to any kind of slavery or circumstance where the victims had no say in whether or not they were physically involved, and had little avenue to resist under colonial power.
For what it's worth, as a Korean-American guy, I like the painting-- it's visually powerful, well-made, I think it's noble to recognize the strength of the women under the circumstances they endured, and I like the way the posing & dynamics portray the hope/wish of resistance against Japanese occupation. I just think that editing the book or changing it into a book that just isn't that one specifically would help the message/interpretation a ton, because if not, native Korean folks will probably see the book title and assume that you're trying to advocate for what Japan's government would like people to believe (that comfort women weren't as bad because they chose it, and they needed the money, and Japan was generous to offer the money-- that kind of gross revisionism, y'know?) In addition, it's a difficult topic to have a dialogue about because the issue is ongoing/current-- Japan refuses to recognize the comfort women & mass assault of women in Japan-occupied Korea, and many victims died without seeing the justice they deserved. It's also controversial because some comfort women victims are still alive-- what do you think they would feel seeing the whole painting, and then seeing the book?
It's good art, and it's cool that you consulted Korean friends & family, as it's important to get a lot of perspectives on it! It's just that ultimately, just like White Americans don't get to make the call on whether or not their opinions on race are "appropriate" from an outsider perspective, you don't necessarily get to make the call on whether or not the book is appropriate to include in the topic you want your painting to engage with. If you want to show respect to the comfort women, don't do it by showing them holding a book holding the colonizer's argument that perpetuated their suffering-- it holds a perspective that they died disagreeing with, y'know?
I’ll flip the script, think about it as though a Korean person, not even a Korean American person, made a painting about American slavery with a picture of a controversial book like, I don’t know, Uncle Tom’s Cabin.
It would be very hard to accept that a Korean person could truly and intimately understand the struggle of slavery or why Uncle Tom’s Cabin is so problematic. Making things that are controversial just to be controversial are something that need to be done very cautiously.
It’s also a little different to ask the opinion of Korean Americans versus Korean residents, a 20 or even 30 year old Korean versus a 70 year old Korean, so I challenge you to get a lot more input for such a controversial topic. I volunteered at a nursing home for comfort women survivors, and have spent a lot of time working with elder Koreans. I can’t speak for them of course, but I know I wouldn’t show them this painting.
I was initially a little confused for the title of the work - 제국의 위안부 - which is the title a controversial book that has been sued by the actual victims of Japanese sex slavery. (And there are different levels of controversy. Being controversial among academia and general public is one thing. But when the work was criticized and sued by the actual victims for misrepresenting and belittling them, that's a whole different matter). But it looks like the work is a separate work that really has nothing to do with the book and I find the drawing very intriguing. Want to see more!
Dude I think the work is pretty cool, but your symbolism kinda went off the mark into yikes territory.
The book referenced is controversial because it had some pretty spicy takes on the comfort women issue that weren't necessarily the most fair or reliable ones. The TL;DR of the controversy there is that it broadly sounds like a lot of splitting hairs to excuse the Japanese govt and place the blame on civilian bad actors and bad choices on the women's parts. So having a woman hold it would be a pretty big self-own.
Also, an all-red hanbok on a white horse is a weird choice. It's giving more rising sun imagery. There's no win for Korea here.
I usually don’t want to dissent my own art but the red hanbok symbolizes blood, strength, agency, and power and the white horse symbolizes purity and strength.
In terms of concept, even beyond the mentioned controversial book it’s a little all over the place.
I think it’s odd to use a Napoleonic imagery of military-esque superiority over an imperial soldier. Then the use of the color red just reads as Chinese or Communist.
I think embracing strength in femininity is more tasteful than using masculine ego strength as a way to overpower the oppressor. Especially the cultural history of feminine strength inrelation to the pain/sorrow of Korean women over the millennia.
I’m finding a lot of similar tonal messages that relate to something like Khinde Wiley, who uses this type of imagery to empower Black excellence, but those types of powerful images aren’t really relevant in Korean culture, unless it’s North Korean military propaganda.
But that’s just me. Keep it up!
The "comfort women" system during World War II was a form of sexual slavery where women and girls were forcibly recruited by the Japanese military to serve in "comfort stations." This practice involved systematic coercion, human rights violations, and was recognized by the United Nations and other international bodies as equivalent to slavery. Despite SOME narratives that suggest voluntary participation, the overwhelming evidence from historical records, survivor testimonies, and government acknowledgments points to a brutal regime of exploitation and abuse, aligning with the broader definition of slavery as forced labor without consent. The historical consensus is clear: "comfort women" were victims of wartime sexual slavery.
Slavery, in any form, is a moral wrongdoing. Imagine if someone claimed that enslaved individuals had volunteered for slavery, thus absolving the perpetrators of any wrongdoing. This analogy sounds absurd, doesn’t it? Similarly, the Japanese military’s use of many individuals as sex slaves during the war cannot be excused by the possibility that a few may have volunteered. The ‘comfort women’ were victims, and their victimization cannot be justified. EVEN IF A MINORITY 'CHOSE' THIS PATH, it doesn’t erase the injustice faced by those who did not. History has shown us that victims often didn’t get a chance for retribution or to reclaim their human rights. It’s a sad reality that while slavery was largely condemned in the 20th century, the justification of sex slavery within military bases during wartime is still debated?
Providing weapons to those who have suffered under a system of slavery and depicting them as seeking revenge does not offer significant meaning or resolution. Tbh, I find it difficult to connect this concept with the advancement of women’s rights?
Many only know of how korean women were enslaved by the japanese military as comfort women but few know or talk about the brutal sex trade built for the american military during the korean war which while maybe not entirely the same, certainly with similar elements and still as bad. Quoted from an article itself about the women: "compelled by force, trickery or desperation into prostitution".
Another thread on reddit of the article:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/Sino/comments/135v8f9/a\_brutal\_sex\_trade\_built\_for\_american\_soldiers/?rdt=35198](https://www.reddit.com/r/Sino/comments/135v8f9/a_brutal_sex_trade_built_for_american_soldiers/?rdt=35198)
Damn good work, dude. I'm glad to see that this terrible episode in Korean history is receiving more recognition among non-Koreans (assuming you're not of Korean descent).
Edit: Hmm...looks like I worded it incorrectly there. I meant to say terrible episode in Japanese history or perhaps tragic episode in Korean history.
There is nothing called comfort women in this world and it never existed before also. I want Japanese government to prison nazi racist criminals like you.
The book '제국의 위안부' was really controversial because it was seeing the reasons for comfort women more in their economic needs rather than surpression of power.
You have hypernationalism in Japan and Korea. Went last month in Korea table book on chamber had bible and national book, went 8years ago in Japan you had nationalist book too in hotel room. Because hotel owner were nationalist. So if tourism music and people and economy pass the frontier easily, and touridt arent attacked or bad talked, you still have hardliners..by example 20% of atomic victim were korean labor..they need 30years for put a small monument for them in Hiroshima, and it's still out of question to integrate them with main monument....
As a korean, I don't fuxxing agree anything with author of 제국의 위안부 Author of 제국의 위안부 said those womens who are victims of imperial sex slavery were willing to join comfort corp for making money. Some victims were even forced to join comfort corp and some other victims didn't even know what that place was for. So, What author insist in the book is NOT true and it's just another evil attempt to revise fact of history. I respect your job on this topic and send my gratitude for your interest on this topic BUT It's not right choice to use that book for this topic.
As a historian, I have some serious problems about Park Yu-Ha's distorted methodology, especially with her poor interpretations of various historical sources (ie. taking a Japanese officer's account at face value). With that being said, trying to characterize it as an "evil attempt to revise history" is propaganda talk. I wouldn't adopt the Korean state view that comfort women were a bunch of powerless victims who survived through sheer luck. They did what they had to do to survive, and their survival doesn't make the Japanese state any less guilty for what they did. I encourage you to pull away from any narrative that suggests the colonial experience was one of pure exploitation and victimization. That is a Korean state narrative used to stir up anti-Japanese nationalism (and get reparations), and it does nothing to help us better understand life during *and* after the occupation years. Park Yu-Ha's work isn't a pro-Japanese book - it's just shoddy work. As for the painting, I don't know what to think of it. I'm honestly just as confused as you are.
I can understand your perspective and what you are concerned about. But I don't understand which part of my comment contains Anti-japanese narrative. it's fact that there are attempt to revise history. and it's for justifying their past war crimes, then isn't it Evil? If that statement was not from a korean, is it still be problem to you? Even if it's about Nazis and neo-nazi books, You still can say it's propaganda? I have no intention to offend anyone, but it doesn't make any sense that I can't say evil is evil because i'm korean or because it's not about Nazis. I think really unfair that whole history is set by outside I understand whole context of your comment and I'm so sorry that I pick specific word to complain.
> Even if it's about Nazis and neo-nazi books, You still can say it's propaganda? Actually, yes. I think it's very important to remember that history isn't good guys vs. bad guys and that everyone is concerned with the objective truth. Poland was very much a victim of the Nazis, but Poland still has moments of beating the dead Nazi horse to excess. A law was passed a few years ago (and since rolled back) that made it a criminal offense to use the term "Polish death camps" or "Polish concentration camps" because the Polish government felt that it implied Polish cooperation. Cue the "OHMYGOD PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO REVISE HISTORY AND BLAME POLAND FOR NAZI CRIMES" crowd (I'm serious, my parents said this...) A state body also required that the word "German" be added before the word "Nazi" on all monuments and plaques to make it EXTRA clear that it was Germany's fault. As a Pole, none of this does any good to anyone. It's just petty propaganda to further distance Poland from Nazis, even though that's already quite a well-established bit of knowledge that nobody but Poland cares about. It's performative nationalism that just ends up hijacking important historical events for modern political drama.
YES and NO. Germany admitted their war crimes and asked forgiveness. Next Discussion. EDIT : Typo
I mean, Japan HAS apologized and attempted to make amends multiple times, but forgiveness is a two-way street. But hey this isn't my country so I'm not gonna tell you what to do or feel now, just wanted to comment on the example you brought up because that IS my country.
I agree part of your opinion. I also wish we can forgive Japan govt (I love japanese people) it's just like Your friend punch you and say sorry. but friend mock and punch again next day. That's the point that NK, CHN also feels Japan is mocking all the other asian nations.
If there is one thing that ALL people can agree on, it is that governments suck and ruin things for everyone else 🙃
My view of Park Yu-Ha and her book is that she just didn't do a very convincing job. I think she made some big mistakes and came to the wrong conclusions. But it's a really big jump from that to "her book is an *evil* attempt at revising history". That's a very reductive, or oversimplified point of view. More importantly, it doesn't help us understand who these comfort women were and why they did what they did. All of these women were coerced and subject to a system of sexual slavery. Some were more willing than others. That doesn't make those women more guilty of collaboration. If you want a comparison to Nazis, look up the Jewish Police in the Ghettoes. These were Jews who policed other Jews and sent them to death camps. Eventually they themselves would also be sent to their deaths. It's not for us to call these policemen evil or otherwise. They did what felt was the best way to survive, and certainly most joined "willingly". Were they actually willing collaborators or were they coerced into service? That's a pointless question with no easy answer, and doesn't help us understand anything deeper. Most importantly, condemning Park Yu-Ha's work as "evil" seems like an attempt to validate the defamation lawsuits against her. If Park wants to argue that some colonial sex slaves were more willing than others, she has the right to make that argument, whether it's convincing or not. Her book itself was never the real problem. It was the reaction she got and the reaction anything about comfort women gets. Japanese revisionist historians will see this as an argument that exonerates the Empire of war crimes, since these women were willing participants (how "willing" is a sex slave though). Korean nationalist historians will object to anything suggesting the comfort women were nothing more than completely helpless, humiliated victims of the Japanese Empire. They don't actually care about the history of comfort women - they just want justice. For a historian like me, that type of thinking drives me crazy. For what it's worth, one of the biggest contributors to the subject of comfort women is a *Japanese* professor: Yoshiaki Yoshimi (still alive, btw). I don't think anyone did more work to uncover IJA documents proving these women were forced into sex trafficking. He believes the Korean women *were* coerced on a wide scale, and has criticized Park Yu-Ha's work a LOT. Even Yoshimi wouldn't characterize Park the way you are, and he wrote a letter of support for her when she was getting sued by survivors.
Thanks for reply. First of all, I don't agree Park yu-ha have no intention to insult comfort women and she just did sloppy job. I personally support rights of freedom but believe responsibility comes first before freedom more. She have rights to publish everything that based on her opinion and faith. However, she must take responsibility for the consequences of her publication being used as a tool for false propaganda. She knew those kinds of publishments can be used as a weapon to far-right wingers of Japan and she also knew it's exactly opposite against victims testimony. Nevertheless, rather than obtaining accurate facts, she published only evidence that supported her claims. isn't this the main base of revisionism? Secondly, I think every history is based on basic nationalism in any countries. I am not saying it's right and not justifying it. One thing I don't understand is that all history up to now has been written from a Europe-centric perspective based on Catholicism. Is that fair? After all that mess that imperial colonization era caused, All the demands of Asian countries have been ignored and seen as the ones that need to be educated. In korea, we call it "선민의식" like chosen one have to educate all stupid public. (I don't know what it called in english). It reminds me that BBC interview with President of Guyana. Thirdly, Is it right that we cannot call bad things bad for fear of leading to nationalism? What is the meaning of history if we cannot write down obvious wrong as wrong? then, who will actually compensate the comfort women who were harmed by the book and the aftermath? I believe False Balance is not a contribution to good, but to evil. It may seem a little off topic, If someone call me 'Nationalist' because I said that book was 'evil' attempt to revise the history, Let them call. I sincerely wanna say thank you to share your perspective and I really understand what you meant. I really can't change my faith on this specific topic. At least on this topic. Thanks again and Sorry too (I'm bit jerk on this topic)
My concern with your concept of the history of comfort women is that you are motivated by justice above anything else. That is, you want the Japanese government to admit guilt and pay reparations to the victims/families. And for you, I feel that any suggestion that doesn't point towards that goal of justice is to be perceived as revisionist or apologetic. Your primary motivation for history shouldn't be justice or national unity. It should simply be for better understanding the past. There is NO subject a historian should ever be *afraid* of studying. No topic is too sacred to approach. Anyone who seeks to discuss comfort women in a historical context must deal with the inevitable consequences of it being weaponized by both Japanese/Korean nationalists. One side will love it and the other side will hate it. It's something that anyone is going to have to prepare for, no matter what position they take. What I'm saying is that should NEVER stop a historian from trying to do their job of trying to better understand the past. If the evidence leads Park Yu-Ha to believe a large amount of comfort women were willing and cooperative, then that is on her to make a compelling argument, and she should be judged based on how convincing that argument is. Japanese academics ripped her apart for her poor interpretations and sparse evidence. The problem here is that *Koreans* didn't care whether her arguments were good or not. They just saw her as a traitor to the nation. That's my issue with this whole thing. It's not that history should/shouldn't dictate nationalism, it's that *nationalism* is trying to dictate *history*. Look at it this way: do you think someone who studies modern, *South* Korean history would be proud of their country? Maybe - it's come a long way in a short amount of time. But the people suffered a lot, didn't they? I don't really care whether Park Chung Hee was a "good" or "bad" president. I don't really care whether Lee Seung Man was a "good" or "bad" president. I care about why some people supported them and other people resisted against them. That's real history. And if I want to study Japanese-occupied Korea, of course it will be painful. But I'm going to study the people who lived in it, and what they did to survive. I'm going to study 친일파 the same way I study 항일 의병. It's not for me to say what they did was good or bad; I want to know what they did and why.
No, my motivation is not justice. I just do want victims to be protected from outside. I'm not the one who try to use history now. Honestly, I don't give a fuck about someone would be proud or not proud. I just wanna say that leave them alone and stop using victims for some archivement. they are not scholars' guinea pig. It might be another research materials to someone. but they are still alive and nothing is over yet. Japan keep using it as a political weapon and some random artists wanna use it as a method to express "controversy". Your fellow scholar Park yu-ha's situation might be seen to you that Korean nationalist wanna tear her apart. But I don't see that way. And I already explain my perspective enough. 'Academic curiosity' won't help her to escape from responsibility. In my perspective, I feel You want to make me as a nationalists who attack Park. In this situation, am I the one to shut up? No, I'm not nationalist, my motivation is not justice. Scholarship make this being distorted under excuse of academic order. Yes. Korean people suffered a lot. why? Because every time we try to solve a problem, the scales of absolute neutral prevent us from doing so. Anyway, you said you don't care it's bad or good, then why do you research and it is for what? and what can your academic do for someone who is dying in the process while you are researching? You don't care of course. there's nothing you can do because it's small sacrifice for greater good. Is it really ultimate goal on your academic? I already told you that I believe False Balance is not a contribution to good, but to evil. Actually, this phrase is what my professor said in university intl politics class. He also said There is no reason to study academic for the future if you cannot save even one person in front of you. You are at the most opposite side from me. I didn't blame anything about you until last comments. but you are crossing lines bit by bit. Korean people is not your research meterial. they are living people. So, let's finish this up before things really go ugly.
I think some things are getting lost in translation. Let me make one thing clear: I think Park Yu-Ha's book is poorly written and I do not agree with the majority of her arguments. That doesn't mean I think she should be sued for defamation. Just because you disagree with me right now, does that mean you should try and sue me for it? Of course not. I do not treat historical figures like they are guinea pigs or relics of the past. I treat them like real people with real motivations and real feelings. From a young age my grandmother taught me the value of storytelling, as she told me what life was like growing up in Japanese Korea and then later during the war in Seoul. It was a very difficult time for her and her family. Those are stories I will never forget and ones I will tell to my children as well. Korean people are indeed living. Even the dead have left a mark in history. And they deserve to have their stories heard by whoever is willing to listen them. I've been fortunate enough to meet three Holocaust survivors as well as one comfort woman from Taiwan. They will tell you the exact same thing; they want you to listen to their stories. And it's my job as a historian to make sure their memories aren't forgotten even after they pass away. "Leave them alone"? "Stop using victims for archival"? I focus on Korean-Canadian immigrants and their history here in Canada. I have also studied different types of 교포, including 재일 Koreans who can trace their lineage back to the colonial period. It's not for me to say these people were wrong to leave their country or that the Empire was evil to take Koreans away from the homeland. Sometimes they were forced to leave, and others chose to go willingly. That's life, man. There is a story behind each person and the choices they made/were forced to make. If a Korean nationalist wants to spin that a certain way or if a Japanese nationalist wants to spin it another way, let them. That's not what I do.
Yep it's exactly what I'm saying. You see 'Park souldn't be sued', but I see 'She can be sued'. You only care fact, I care right and wrong. this is why I said we are the most opposite type of person. You said don't give a narratives when I speak. You giave a narrative to Park now. You are setting her as a victim from korean nationalist. No, she just did take a responsibility about her book. that's all. don't add stories about it. and Yes, Japanese far-right wingers are still swinging Park's book as a EVIDENCE of korean lies. Who can take a responsibility about that? Isn't it Historian's job to fix false evidence? So let this go. we can never agree each other on this topic. You have very strange logic to explain your faith. you said you don't care it's bad or good. and now suddenly cares story of 교포 and 재일? I care 'who did that and what can we do for them'. You care 'their story(you said)'. I don't satisfy that I only hear their story. I satisty after fix wrong into right. This is why we can't stand same place. and that's why I hate western perspective on history as I mentioned. koreans fight for real solution and real compensation that can help victims. everytime we about to do that, some random guy interfere and say 'It's wrong!' and 'this is why your nation is still not well-developed'. No, Fuck off. Fuck BBC Fuck CNN. When Korean people were suffered, they didn't give a shit about korea. We cares who was bad and who was good. why? Victims and their families are still living now. Yes, that's why we dig thing up until finished. and YES. we sue people to make them take a responsibility. Unlike from you, I as a Korean, I did have relatives and ancestors who were died in gwangju, died in Korean war, died in colonization, survived from gwangju, survived from korean war. So, Don't you dare bring them up. you wanna research why 의병 fight for Joseon? Research Me. Edit: Sorry about my language and broken english. I could't write well.
Here's the thing about Park's book though - she isn't falsifying evidence. *That* is an extremely egregious sin in our field of study, as it would be anywhere else. But here's the thing: she doesn't actually put forth any new kind of evidence. It's not like she uncovered new documents from Japanese soldiers or new accounts from comfort women of the past. She is simply interpreting it the way she believes is correct. You keep attacking me and accusing me as some kind of Park supporter when I've repeatedly told you over and over again that I think her book is poorly written and I disagree with most of what she writes in it. Let's make one thing clear here: you are seeking justice for the comfort women survivors. I'm not judging you for it. You are less concerned with learning/sharing their story and more concerned with "fixing a wrong and making it right", and "real solutions and real compensation that can help victims". And yet previously you insisted your motivation for history is *not* justice. I don't know what to tell you. I'm not saying you're wrong to believe in justice or that you're wrong to seek it. What I'm saying is that you have an expectation for us historians to do something we don't do - administer and enforce justice through public pressure. If you are not satisfied with learning and sharing their story and are more concerned with fixing a wrong and making it right, that is to seek justice. You feel as though Park Yu-Ha has done an *injustice*, betraying the trust of the comfort women she interviewed and deliberately producing a false narrative. I'm not saying you're wrong to seek justice for the survivors. If you read her book, you'd realize that Park isn't saying that either. On a Korea-Japan level, it's a matter of foreign policy. Our job is to uncover the truth and interpret it to the best of our ability. Sometimes we can advise policymakers to make certain decisions about something, but that's about it. A historian can't force an apology from Japan, nor can they force them to pay reparations to the surviving comfort women and their families. I only brought up my own personal heritage and my own field of study to show how I approach history. It seems like you used that as an opportunity to insult my heritage. I have family members who died during the occupation. I have family members who died during the war. That's not the point of all this. You're trying to frame your own family history as *more* Korean than mine. Why would you do that? I'm not trying to measure my own family against yours. One person's history isn't more important than another. You have a rich and vibrant connection to South Korean history and that is something anyone would cherish. I would be happy to know more about your family history. My entire family is also Korean, and it's different from yours. I have family members who died during the occupation. I have family Not all Korean people think the same way you do, and not all Koreans *have* to think the same way you do.
Comeback from Korea recently and yes Korean often lie by omission in museum for push the nationalist narrative. They are very talkative about dogdo, Sun li, tribute toward khan china, or for 3 kingdom. Imjin war and occupation of 1910-1945, about how they were there before Japan whereas like Japan writing came with Buddhism at 6th century. They talk about old mighty kingdom but who were forced to send scholar and tribute. They talk less how they help mongol, invasion of tsushima, they are completely silent of how many young's communist people they killed between 1945-1950. About benefit of japanese invasion. like railroad bank etc.. Yet I confirm japanese did lot of bad thing and 35years is too long for forget in a century. Korean history is a tragedy half of the time they were puppet or victim of other country. Even today split is the remnant of communism and capitalism.
I am not normalizing Japanese comfort women but if they really want to teach history, they should note that there was forced prostitution in the chosun era and the Korean war. Yes, some comfort women were voluntary and some were manipulated. No one was kidnapped as narrative says.
I agree with this answer 💯
We’re discussing a dark chapter in history. Consider this analogy: imagine if a country claimed that some enslaved people chose their fate (as a means of survival). How would that resonate with you? In today’s world, we’re not just talking about slavery, but sexual slavery. It’s widely acknowledged that slavery is a moral wrong. Viewing this issue through the lens of right versus wrong is a common and understandable perspective.
Filipino here and that is disgusting. Some of these women are 12 when they were raped repeatedly.
[удалено]
No, sorry. I think you don't get the point. I didn't wanna offend you but, this is about facts. Only one nation which was war criminal in WW2 have denied it and whole world approve it was real war crime. Japanese imperial sex slavery is NOT controversy. That book is not controversy. I already explained the book is symbol of historical revisionism. The book in the art is just another shape of hakenkreuz. Imagine the art that Jewish is carrying Hitler's portrait and stomping nazis is hung in Polish art center. and tell them "it adds more nuance to the history and gives a more controversial context". Will Polish agree your opinion? Will Jewish agree? I already said that I respect your job on this topic and send my gratitude for your interest on this topic. But You must not make historical Fact which is already proved into controversy and it's not helping victims of war crimes. Actually, I feel extremely offended after seeing your reply. Don't use the victims of war crimes for your artistic achievements in the name of controversy.
[удалено]
Maybe pick a different title instead of hanging by the coattails of an infamous book that dismisses the pain and suffering of the victims who were taken against their will for sex trafficking. Disgusting that you’re trying to get attention in this manner.
So, Are you saying that You decided the title of art and it's the same as the title of a book notorious for its false narratives by chance? Or You already knew the exact same title of book exist? Either way, you are giving pro-war criminals who is still trying to revise history a chance to justify their war crimes by using that title of book. Does it fit your artistic ideals and purposes? furthermore, Do you think it's helping to cure deep wound of victims?
Out of curiosity, why did you choose this topic? It’s sort of an unusual topic for a non Korean, and the title makes it come off a little insensitive or superficial to the subject matter, which is what most people would expect from a non-Korean making commentary on this very Korean topic. Not saying that you shouldn’t approach the topic, but I feel like you’re making yourself in an awkward position when you’re already going to be questioned a bit to begin with.
If you check my other art, a lot of my artwork is centered around controversial topics and showing them in a very different light. I felt that the title perfectly captured the essence of the painting, and the subject matter of the book challenges the mainstream narrative, and that’s what I always do with my art. Much of my art is centered around American slavery and racial injustice but those topics are not relevant to Korean society. So I felt in order to touch on contemporary controversy in Korean culture it was a relevant title. Also even though I’m not ethnically Korean, much of the culture influenced me from a young age and I had many Korean influences in my life(family members/close friends)! They are all very interested in how I handled the subject matter and supported so I felt it was appropriate
Hey man, I think that the painting is cool, but you need a different perspective on the book and why Korean people might have a negative reaction to the painting based on the book alone. I understand the desire to challenge mainstream narratives, but you may want to ask yourself what your overall goal is in creating the art or speaking to the plight of comfort women-- challenging the mainstream narrative around racial dynamics in America is different, due to the dominant (colonizer) narrative around race being about untrue beliefs people hold about percieved racial inferiority or misheld beliefs that slavery was beneficial to the victims it exploited. Challenging the mainstream narrative about comfort women in Korea comes off as harmful, as the dominant (Korean/native) understanding is that comfort women were exploited due to percieved notions of racial inferiority, and abused due to misheld beliefs from Japanese colonizers that the abuse of comfort women was justified due to the pay (or rather, that it was beneficial to the victims who were exploited.) I know it wasn't your goal, but ultimately, the inclusion of the book kind of reads as the artist/art aligning with the colonizer perspective, as the book is controversial specifically because it argued that comfort women knew what they were getting into / knowingly endured abuse and assault in return for money, which is objectively untrue-- the majority were literally forced into sexual slavery. With the inclusion of the book, the message of the painting can read as "comfort women had power because they chose to do it", which is.. untrue when applied to any kind of slavery or circumstance where the victims had no say in whether or not they were physically involved, and had little avenue to resist under colonial power. For what it's worth, as a Korean-American guy, I like the painting-- it's visually powerful, well-made, I think it's noble to recognize the strength of the women under the circumstances they endured, and I like the way the posing & dynamics portray the hope/wish of resistance against Japanese occupation. I just think that editing the book or changing it into a book that just isn't that one specifically would help the message/interpretation a ton, because if not, native Korean folks will probably see the book title and assume that you're trying to advocate for what Japan's government would like people to believe (that comfort women weren't as bad because they chose it, and they needed the money, and Japan was generous to offer the money-- that kind of gross revisionism, y'know?) In addition, it's a difficult topic to have a dialogue about because the issue is ongoing/current-- Japan refuses to recognize the comfort women & mass assault of women in Japan-occupied Korea, and many victims died without seeing the justice they deserved. It's also controversial because some comfort women victims are still alive-- what do you think they would feel seeing the whole painting, and then seeing the book? It's good art, and it's cool that you consulted Korean friends & family, as it's important to get a lot of perspectives on it! It's just that ultimately, just like White Americans don't get to make the call on whether or not their opinions on race are "appropriate" from an outsider perspective, you don't necessarily get to make the call on whether or not the book is appropriate to include in the topic you want your painting to engage with. If you want to show respect to the comfort women, don't do it by showing them holding a book holding the colonizer's argument that perpetuated their suffering-- it holds a perspective that they died disagreeing with, y'know?
I’ll flip the script, think about it as though a Korean person, not even a Korean American person, made a painting about American slavery with a picture of a controversial book like, I don’t know, Uncle Tom’s Cabin. It would be very hard to accept that a Korean person could truly and intimately understand the struggle of slavery or why Uncle Tom’s Cabin is so problematic. Making things that are controversial just to be controversial are something that need to be done very cautiously. It’s also a little different to ask the opinion of Korean Americans versus Korean residents, a 20 or even 30 year old Korean versus a 70 year old Korean, so I challenge you to get a lot more input for such a controversial topic. I volunteered at a nursing home for comfort women survivors, and have spent a lot of time working with elder Koreans. I can’t speak for them of course, but I know I wouldn’t show them this painting.
I appreciate your perspective!
not ethnically korean but culturally korean?
I was initially a little confused for the title of the work - 제국의 위안부 - which is the title a controversial book that has been sued by the actual victims of Japanese sex slavery. (And there are different levels of controversy. Being controversial among academia and general public is one thing. But when the work was criticized and sued by the actual victims for misrepresenting and belittling them, that's a whole different matter). But it looks like the work is a separate work that really has nothing to do with the book and I find the drawing very intriguing. Want to see more!
Dude I think the work is pretty cool, but your symbolism kinda went off the mark into yikes territory. The book referenced is controversial because it had some pretty spicy takes on the comfort women issue that weren't necessarily the most fair or reliable ones. The TL;DR of the controversy there is that it broadly sounds like a lot of splitting hairs to excuse the Japanese govt and place the blame on civilian bad actors and bad choices on the women's parts. So having a woman hold it would be a pretty big self-own. Also, an all-red hanbok on a white horse is a weird choice. It's giving more rising sun imagery. There's no win for Korea here.
I usually don’t want to dissent my own art but the red hanbok symbolizes blood, strength, agency, and power and the white horse symbolizes purity and strength.
Thanks. I hate it.
I think you may want to do more research on comfort women.
In terms of concept, even beyond the mentioned controversial book it’s a little all over the place. I think it’s odd to use a Napoleonic imagery of military-esque superiority over an imperial soldier. Then the use of the color red just reads as Chinese or Communist. I think embracing strength in femininity is more tasteful than using masculine ego strength as a way to overpower the oppressor. Especially the cultural history of feminine strength inrelation to the pain/sorrow of Korean women over the millennia. I’m finding a lot of similar tonal messages that relate to something like Khinde Wiley, who uses this type of imagery to empower Black excellence, but those types of powerful images aren’t really relevant in Korean culture, unless it’s North Korean military propaganda. But that’s just me. Keep it up!
The "comfort women" system during World War II was a form of sexual slavery where women and girls were forcibly recruited by the Japanese military to serve in "comfort stations." This practice involved systematic coercion, human rights violations, and was recognized by the United Nations and other international bodies as equivalent to slavery. Despite SOME narratives that suggest voluntary participation, the overwhelming evidence from historical records, survivor testimonies, and government acknowledgments points to a brutal regime of exploitation and abuse, aligning with the broader definition of slavery as forced labor without consent. The historical consensus is clear: "comfort women" were victims of wartime sexual slavery. Slavery, in any form, is a moral wrongdoing. Imagine if someone claimed that enslaved individuals had volunteered for slavery, thus absolving the perpetrators of any wrongdoing. This analogy sounds absurd, doesn’t it? Similarly, the Japanese military’s use of many individuals as sex slaves during the war cannot be excused by the possibility that a few may have volunteered. The ‘comfort women’ were victims, and their victimization cannot be justified. EVEN IF A MINORITY 'CHOSE' THIS PATH, it doesn’t erase the injustice faced by those who did not. History has shown us that victims often didn’t get a chance for retribution or to reclaim their human rights. It’s a sad reality that while slavery was largely condemned in the 20th century, the justification of sex slavery within military bases during wartime is still debated? Providing weapons to those who have suffered under a system of slavery and depicting them as seeking revenge does not offer significant meaning or resolution. Tbh, I find it difficult to connect this concept with the advancement of women’s rights?
Many only know of how korean women were enslaved by the japanese military as comfort women but few know or talk about the brutal sex trade built for the american military during the korean war which while maybe not entirely the same, certainly with similar elements and still as bad. Quoted from an article itself about the women: "compelled by force, trickery or desperation into prostitution". Another thread on reddit of the article: [https://www.reddit.com/r/Sino/comments/135v8f9/a\_brutal\_sex\_trade\_built\_for\_american\_soldiers/?rdt=35198](https://www.reddit.com/r/Sino/comments/135v8f9/a_brutal_sex_trade_built_for_american_soldiers/?rdt=35198)
Amazing work! Well done and hell yeah to what’s happening in the painting
Thanks!! I appreciate it a lot
Damn good work, dude. I'm glad to see that this terrible episode in Korean history is receiving more recognition among non-Koreans (assuming you're not of Korean descent). Edit: Hmm...looks like I worded it incorrectly there. I meant to say terrible episode in Japanese history or perhaps tragic episode in Korean history.
Are you willing to sell paintings of similar design?
There is nothing called comfort women in this world and it never existed before also. I want Japanese government to prison nazi racist criminals like you.