How to Resist What is Yet to Come: A Critique of Reception Studies in the Age of Cynical Reason (original) (raw)
Related papers
Two Golden Ages of Korean Cinema
2015
The two books by Steven Chung and Young-a Park that I discuss in this essay signal the growth of Korean studies by simply beginning in medias res. That is, unlike many books that came before them, they offer no lengthy exposition to set things up, to declare and justify the need for the study at hand. These new books also reflect the recent scholarly trend of reaching beyond the established area studies or Korean studies models to present studies that are interdisciplinary and transnational in scope. Park’s Unexpected Alliances is a narrative at once of South Korea’s transition to a (truly) civil society, of its artistic struggle for independence and integrity, of the individual’s negotiations with the state, and of feminist awakenings in unlikely circumstances. Chung’s Split Screen Korea, which I will discuss first, is similarly expansive in scope. As he lays out in the beginning, the book follow[s] the trajectories that Shin Sang-ok took, the ways in which his work continued throu...
Vicarious Politics: Violence and the Colonial Period in Contemporary South Korean Film
Asia Pacific Journal, 2017
This article examines four recent South Korean action drama films dealing with the Japanese colonial period and the Korean nationalist resistance movement in particular – Chung Chiu’s Modern Boy (2008), Ch’ae Tong-hun’s Assassination (2015), Kim Chi-un’s The Age of Shadows (2016), and Hŏ Chin-ho’s The Last Princess (2016). It explores the ways in which these films valorize armed anti-colonial resistance through a spectacular form of violence detached from real everyday politics during the colonial period and which hermetically seals such past political involvement from any corresponding activity in the present. The result of this, the author argues, is the repression not only of the memory of mass political mobilization under Japanese rule, but of the 1980s-era minjung or “people’s” movement as well, having significant implications for how contemporary social movements may be imagined and represented. Keywords: Film, Korea, Violence, Imperial Japan, Proletarian, Colonialism, Capitalism, Cinematic Escapism
Locating contemporary South Korean cinema : between the universal and the particular
2013
The thesis analyses contemporary South Korean films from the late 1980s up to the present day. It asks whether Korean films have produced a new cinema, by critically examining the criteria by which Korean films are said to be new. Have Korean films really changed aesthetically? What are the limitations, and even pitfalls in contemporary Korean film aesthetics? If there appears to be a true radicalism in Korean films, under which conditions does it emerge? Which films convey its core features? To answer these questions, the study attempts to posit a universalising theory rather than making particular claims about Korean films. Where many other scholars have focused on the historical context of the film texts’ production and their reception, this thesis privileges the film texts themselves, by suggesting that whether those films are new or not will depend on a film text’s individual mode of address. To explore this problem further, this study draws on the concept of ‘concrete universa...
Spectres of insurrection in Bong Joon-ho’s cinema
Melted Reality. New proposals from the Fantastic Aesthetics, 2020
Bong Joon-ho’s political commitment is not just about political themes, plots and public stance. Apart from these obvious signs, we can wander along another trail, consisting of faint traces and half-erased footsteps, leading to a global picture of Korea and the world’s most recent history. Following up these traces, I will try to reveal the presence of spectral images of insurrection in Bong’s movies, i.e. images that bear the tormented memory of a political event in both content and form. My purpose is to understand how political images circulate from the historical unconscious to cinema and the new media. Moreover, these processes are more vivid in two of his fantastic movies: The Host (2006) and Snowpiercer (2013). I shall seize this unexpected convergence as an opportunity to discuss possible relationships between politics and the fantastic genre.
Journal of Science and Technology of the Arts, 2020
This paper problematizes the use of the concept of contemporary to describe a specific modus operandi of a group of directors and films that no longer identify with the characteristics of modern cinema. Using the symbolic date of 9/11 as an historical decisive moment, we take as an example of this cinema, Loong Boonmee raleuk chat, winner of 2010’s Palme D’Or at Cannes Film Festival. In analysing Apichatpong Weerasethakul’s film, we aim at proposing, as a metaphor, a different approach – a logic of the building – in order to describe the specific creative processes in contemporary cinema. In order to describe the Thai filmmaker’s method, we will recuperate Giorgio Agamben’s ideas about what it means to be contemporary, and also the ethical responsibility of cinema in helping to recover the lost gestures of humanity.
After the Second World War, government-level public information agencies in the U.S., such as the U.S. Information Service (USIS), resided in allied nations, such as South Korea, to engage in long-term propaganda activities. This study focuses on the negotiation of identity of South Korean filmmakers and audiences in making and consuming cultural films, devoting particular attention to the role of the American ‘foreign’ authorities. The idea of cultural film (Kulturfilm), which had been imported by the Japanese colonial rulers and was succeeded by the U.S. and ROK public information agencies, created a useful foundation for South Koreans’ perception of the Self in this context. It was a vaguely defined category of films mainly distributed by governmental-level agencies for educational and propaganda purposes. The category of cultural film included public information documentaries, occasional newsmagazine films, ethnographic films, and educational feature films. Cultural films were not only a means of publicizing governmental policies, but also a window through which to learn about the world with an ethnographic element. Under the name of cultural film, U.S. public information agencies imported American-made documentary films which depicted the American way of life and produced ‘localized films’ dealing with local issues by hiring Korean filmmakers. For Koreans who were situated in the postcolonial state formation, the new conditions fostered through the emergence of the Cold War system were crucial to their identity formation. They were citizens of a newly built state, but their nation was divided between the Cold War Power blocs which defined South Koreans as citizens of the “Free World.” Cultural films created an interesting foundation for South Koreans’ perception of the Self in this context. As a window to learn the world, cultural films of U.S. public information agencies made a condition for the Self/Other opposition, as conventional ethnographic films usually did. However, in the geopolitical and historical particularity of South Korea, those cultural films created a unique type of spectatorship that mediated the perceptions of the Self and the Other in an intricate web of different ethnographic gazes. Imported documentaries showed the American life as an idealized model of civilization, but there is little probability that Koreans fully identified themselves with Americans in these films. (Re)presentations of idealized American urban life were rather a means of entertainment to see the exotic Other. At the same time, locally made cultural films depicted South Koreans who constructed their lives and rehabilitated from social and personal damages. Despite the aim to facilitate self-recognition of Korean audiences as citizens of the “Free World,” such films also presented the complexity in identification since their self-recognition was organized by the foreign agencies like USIS-Korea. Thus, it is highly probable that the reception of those films was a process of intense negotiation to define the Self and the Other. This outcome was partly an inevitable consequence of the localization project of U.S. public information activities; however, use of local manpower was not the only cause of such an uneven screen. The appearance of translated and modified ‘ideal citizens’ in P‘aldogangsan (1967), one of the representative films of NFPC also made under the profound impact of USIS, and an enthusiastic response from the Korean public to that film show how an original project on the cultural cold war could be transformed into a vernacular one in the more local context. In the case of Korean filmmakers who were affiliated with U.S. public information agencies, the negotiation of identity appears more clearly. They were hired by the U.S. governmental agencies and served as messengers of the “Free World” screen, but, at the same time, they recognized themselves as builders of the nation. Further, they also regarded themselves as individual artists who did not merely deliver rhetoric of their hirers but also expressed their own artistic sensibility. These contested self-identities led the filmmakers to adopt certain compromising positions. As one can see in the distinction between the routes of the two symbolic documentarists, Robert Flaherty and John Grierson, government-sponsored documentary filmmaking would drive filmmakers to a crossroads between romanticism facilitating humanist impulse and enlightenment seeking social engineering. Similar inner conflict of USIS- and UNKRA-affiliated filmmakers was joined together with the geopolitical conditions of South Korea and concluded with unique auteurism in film making. The routes of these alumni of the American film training camps indicate several different choices in the intense negotiations on identity: leaving the camp and devoting oneself to auteurism in filmmaking; leaving the camp and keeping auteurist impulse in mind, but giving it up in commercial filmmaking with deep skepticism; and remaining in the camp with auteurism in cultural film making. They also show double-sidedness of those Korean filmmakers who did receive benefits from U.S.-led agencies, as the successor and criticizer of the Western culture. They constantly had to seek compromises between the Griersonian missions and artistic self-realization and between nation-building and “Free World” bloc building, in an all too “expert” system created by a hegemonic foreign agency.