Historical Overview of English Learning in South Korea: The U.S. Military Government, Korean War, and Post-War Reconstruction Period

2021 ◽  
pp. 63-107
Author(s):  
Tae-Young Kim
Author(s):  
Sueyoung Park-Primiano

This chapter, by S. Park-Primiano, examines the use of noncommercial films by the U.S. military to facilitate its diverse roles during its occupation of South Korea in the aftermath of World War II. Used by the American Military Government in Korea, educational films aided the U.S. military's efforts to Americanize the Korean population and combat Communism. Films were also used to inform and rally support for its policy in Korea from American military and civilian personnel at home as well as abroad. For this purpose, the U.S. military sought cooperation from and enlisted the assistance of Korean filmmakers in the production of films about Korean culture and history that challenge any straightforward interpretation of Americanization or a unidirectional influence. Moreover, such conflicting efforts had a long-lasting effect in South Korea. It was a practice that was continued by the succeeding information apparatus of the U.S. State Department and the United Nations during the Korean War and beyond to further expose the need for a closer examination of U.S. control of the Korean cultural imaginary.


Author(s):  
Ryan Cook

Trained as a filmmaker during the Korean War, Kim Soo-yong debuted in 1958 amid the South Korean film industry’s postwar recovery and became one of the representative Korean filmmakers of the 1960s. Under the film policies of Park Chung-hee’s military government, the film industry suffered from censorship and quotas. The literary film emerged as an important genre signifying quality and artistic merit. Kim’s 1965 Kaenmaŭl [Seaside Village] marked him as a leading director of literary adaptations, which account for half his prolific oeuvre of over one hundred films. Kim also worked in popular genres, including comedy, melodrama, youth films, and anti-communist films, but is remembered for films that display realist, non-paternalistic perspectives on postwar society. His 1963 film Hyŏlmaek [Kinship] depicted the generational divide among North Korean defectors living in poverty on the fringes of society in the industrializing South. Seaside Village provocatively took on the sexuality of widows in a fishing community and contained lesbian innuendos. Several of his films also demonstrated a formal modernism. The 1967 An’gae [Mist], regarded as one of his highest achievements, employs experimental montage and a temporally complex flashback structure. In later years, he has been credited with helping ease film censorship in South Korea.


Author(s):  
James I. Matray

On June 25, 1950, North Korea’s invasion of South Korea ignited a conventional war that had origins dating from at least the end of World War II. In April 1945, President Harry S. Truman abandoned a trusteeship plan for postwar Korea in favor of seeking unilateral U.S. occupation of the peninsula after an atomic attack forced Japan’s prompt surrender. Soviet entry into the Pacific war led to a last minute agreement dividing Korea at the 38th parallel into zones of occupation. Two Koreas emerged after Soviet-American negotiations failed to agree on a plan to end the division. Kim Il Sung in the north and Syngman Rhee in the south both were determined to reunite Korea, instigating major military clashes at the parallel in the summer of 1949. Moscow and Washington opposed their clients’ invasion plans until April 1950 when Kim persuaded Soviet Premier Joseph Stalin that with mass support in South Korea, he would achieve a quick victory. At first, Truman hoped that South Korea could defend itself with more military equipment and U.S. air support. Commitment of U.S. ground forces came after General Douglas MacArthur, U.S. occupation commander in Japan, visited the front and advised that the South Koreans could not halt the advance. Overconfident U.S. soldiers would sustain defeat as well, retreating to the Pusan Perimeter, a rectangular area in the southeast corner of the peninsula. On September 15, MacArthur staged a risky amphibious landing at Inchon behind enemy lines that sent Communist forces fleeing back into North Korea. The People’s Republic of China viewed the U.S. offensive for reunification that followed as a threat to its security and prestige. In late November, Chinese “volunteers” attacked in mass. After a chaotic retreat, U.S. forces counterattacked in February 1951 and moved the line of battle just north of the parallel. After two Chinese offensives failed, negotiations to end the war began in July 1951, but stalemated in May 1952 over the issue of repatriation of prisoners of war. Peace came because of Stalin’s death in March 1953, rather than President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s veiled threat to stage nuclear strikes against China. Scholars have disagreed about many issues surrounding the Korean War, but the most important debate continues to center on whether the conflict had international or domestic origins. Initially, historians relied mainly on U.S. government publications to write accounts that ignored events prior to North Korea’s attack, endorsing an orthodox interpretation assigning blame to the Soviet Union and applauding the U.S. response. Declassification of U.S. government documents and presidential papers during the 1970s led to the publication of studies assigning considerable responsibility to the United States for helping to create a kind of war in Korea before June 1950. Moreover, left revisionist writers labeled the conflict a classic civil war. Release of Chinese and Soviet sources after 1989 established that Stalin and Chinese leader Mao Zedong approved the North Korean invasion, prompting right revisionist scholars to reassert key orthodox arguments. This essay describes how and why recent access to Communist documents has not settled the disagreements among historians about the causes, course, and consequences of the Korean War.


2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 97-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Inhan Kim

The conventional wisdom regarding land reform in South Korea implemented by the United States Army Military Government in Korea (USAMGIK) is that it was a partial and short-term palliative driven by the exigent Communist threat and the free-land program adopted in North Korea. This article offers a new interpretation of the motives, process, and impact of the land reform program under the U.S. military occupation, highlighting three points. First, the United States was serious about conducting a land-to-tiller program because of its desire to stop Communism and pave the way for democracy in South Korea. Both goals were important. Second, the partial reform in March 1948 is explained by volatile political circumstances in South Korea: strong Communist activity at the beginning of the occupation and the rise of intransigent conservatives at the end. Third, the U.S.-sponsored land reform catalyzed further reform by the new South Korean government by setting a precedent and establishing guidelines for land redistribution parcel sizes, prices, and payment schedules.


1997 ◽  
Vol 56 (2) ◽  
pp. 398-420 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nancy Abelmann

In examining post-war south korea, we cannot but be struck by the rapid decrease of farm work and the dizzying increases in urban production and petty-entrepreneurial work over the course of a single generation. It is remarkable, for example, that from the mid-1960s to the mid-1970s the farming population declined by almost 50 percent. Indeed, South Korea is an exemplar in the development industry and a popular example in the annals of development studies (Amsden 1989). Sociologists, however, have reached little consensus about the meaning of these structural transformations and the nature of their effects on individual and familial trajectories. In consideration of the reorganization of the labor market, even some of the most basic numbers are debated because analysts do not agree on how to characterize and classify post–Korean War jobs.


Author(s):  
Misa Kayama ◽  
Wendy Haight ◽  
May-Lee Ku ◽  
Minhae Cho ◽  
Hee Yun Lee

Stigmatization is part of the everyday lives of children with disabilities, their families, and their friends. Negative social encounters, even with perfect strangers, can dampen joyful occasions, add stress to challenging situations, and lead to social isolation. This book describes a program of research spanning a decade that seeks to understand disabilities in their developmental and cultural contexts. The authors are especially interested in understanding adults’ socialization practices that promise to reduce stigmatization in the next generation. Guided by developmental cultural psychology, including the concept of “universalism without uniformity,” the authors focus on the understandings and responses to disability and associated stigmatization of elementary-school educators practicing in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and the U.S. Educators from all four cultural groups expressed strikingly similar concerns about the impact of stigmatization on the emerging cultural self, both of children with disabilities and their typically developing peers. Educators also described culturally nuanced socialization goals and practices pertaining to inclusive education. In Japan, for instance, educators emphasized the importance of peer group belonging and strategies to support the participation of children with disabilities. In the U.S., educators placed relatively more emphasis on individual development and discussed strategies for the equitable treatment of children with disabilities. Educators in South Korea and Taiwan emphasized the cultivation of compassion in typically developing children. The understanding gained through examination of how diverse individuals address common challenges using cultural resources available in their everyday lives provides important lessons for strengthening theory, policy, and programs.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document