Please Choose Two Of The Following Three Questions

Pleasechoose Two Of The Following Three Questions The Length Of Each

Please choose two of the following three questions. The length of each essay should be about 1,500 words each. The deadline for the examination is noon, Tuesday, April 27. Upload your essays to Turnitin by April 27, noon. Make sure to put your essays in a single file, as you can only upload one file.

In answering the following questions, please try to make judicious use of all the relevant readings, lectures, and discussions in the class. I expect you to make your own arguments and support them, rather than merely enumerating facts or arguments provided by the readings or lectures. While creativity is encouraged, your essay should be firmly grounded in specific materials from this class. Please provide abbreviated citations when quoting or citing from the readings (e.g., Lee, “Yi Kwang-su,” p. 39; Kim, “Hyol-ui Nu,” Part 1, p. 39). For citations from Cumings’ Korea’s Place, indicate the chapter, as page numbers are not provided for the PDF. No cover sheet or bibliography is necessary. Your essays should be double spaced, 12-point font, in a normal font, with one-inch margins. No late submissions will be accepted without proper documentation for a medical emergency.

Plagiarism will result in an automatic F. For clarity, plagiarism is defined as submitting work that is not your own, such as copying from a source without proper citation, whether directly quoting or paraphrasing, or submitting work purchased or obtained from others.

Paper For Above instruction

Question 1: The Concept of Civilization and Enlightenment in Late Nineteenth Century Korea

The late nineteenth century was a pivotal period in Korean history characterized by profound sociopolitical and intellectual upheaval. During this time, the concepts of “civilization and enlightenment” (Munmyang kaehwa) gained prominence among Korean intellectuals, signifying an ideological response to both internal weaknesses and external pressures from imperial powers. This movement, rooted in the broader context of modernization and nationalist aspirations, sought to forge a new identity for Korea amidst declining feudal structures and encroaching Western and Japanese influences.

The sociopolitical context of this period was marked by Korea’s vulnerability to foreign domination, exemplified by the increasing presence of Japan, China, and Western powers vying for influence. The Joseon Dynasty's decline created a power vacuum that exposed Korea’s inability to modernize effectively, prompting intellectuals to debate how to adapt or reform the nation’s political and social structures. The enlightenment movement emerged partly as an effort to modernize Korea’s political institutions, military, and society along Western lines, while also resisting imperialist oppression.

Intellectually, this period was characterized by a shift from traditional Confucian values towards ideas rooted in modern nationalism, science, and democratic principles. Korean thinkers like Kim Ok-kyun and independence activists championed reforms oriented toward strengthening Korea’s sovereignty through modernization and national awakening. The movement was also deeply intertwined with a sense of cultural renaissance, aiming for “civilization” as a means of elevating Korea within the global order.

The relationship between this concept of civility and Korean nationalism was complex and mutually reinforcing. The idea of civilization was often used as a rallying cry for independence, emphasizing that Korea’s future depended on adopting modern, Western-like institutions while preserving its unique cultural identity. This duality was evident in literature, such as Kim Chong-hui’s “Hyol-ui Nu,” which was Korea’s first “new” novel, and Ann Lee’s “The Heartless,” which reflected new modes of expression challenging traditional narratives and values. These works embedded the discourse of modernization, illustrating how Korean writers grappled with questions of tradition versus modernity, and the role of intellectuals as agents of societal change.

Kichung Kim’s “Hyol-ui Nu” exemplifies the early literary effort to depict new Korean realities, blending traditional themes with modern narrative techniques. Meanwhile, Ann Lee’s “The Heartless” critiques social inequalities and moral decay, illustrating how the intellectual enlightenment was also a moral call for societal reform. These texts demonstrate that Korean leaders recognized modernization’s importance, but their varied visions reflected debates over how best to achieve it without losing cultural identity.

In assessing the impact of these leaders and their views, it is clear that their efforts laid the groundwork for Korea’s subsequent nationalist movements and independence efforts. While some leaders advocated for rapid Westernization, others emphasized cultural preservation. Their critical view of modernization ranged from optimistic acceptance to cautious skepticism, with many emphasizing the importance of national sovereignty and cultural integrity. Ultimately, their contributions helped shape Korea’s modern identity, influencing ongoing debates about the path toward a sovereign modern nation.

Question 2: Divergent Paths of Korean Nationalists and Post-Liberation Political Development

The struggle for Korean independence from Japanese colonial rule was marked by divergent approaches among nationalists, reflecting differing visions for Korea’s future. These paths included armed resistance, diplomatic efforts, cultural preservation, and political activism, each responding to the colonial context and shaping post-liberation political developments.

One major divergence was between militant independence fighters, such as the Korean Liberation Army and the Righteous Army, who prioritized armed resistance and guerrilla warfare, and political activists who sought diplomatic negotiations and international recognition. For instance, the Provisional Government of Korea, established in Shanghai, aimed to leverage international diplomacy, while groups like the Korean Independence Army engaged in military actions against Japanese forces.

This divergence was rooted in contrasting beliefs about effective resistance and visions for Korea’s future sovereignty. Militants believed that force was necessary to overthrow Japanese rule immediately, inspiring uprisings and sabotage. Conversely, diplomatic voices emphasized gaining legitimacy and support through external negotiations, hoping to achieve independence without further violence.

Post-liberation, these divergent paths had profound implications for Korea’s political landscape. The military-focused resistance influenced the formation of radical socialist and nationalist movements, which often aligned with communist ideologies, especially in the North. Meanwhile, the diplomatic approach contributed to efforts to establish a legitimate government, which ultimately culminated in the Soviet-supported Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the American-backed Republic of Korea in the South.

The immediate post-war period was characterized by rivalry and conflict between these factions, rooted in differing visions for Korea’s future. This division was evident in the political developments of 1948, leading to the establishment of two separate regimes: the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea in the North, led by Kim Il-sung, and the Republic of Korea in the South, led by Syngman Rhee. Their ideological differences and respective Cold War alliances reflected the divergent nationalist strategies, which shaped subsequent political trajectories.

These ideological and strategic disagreements also influenced the outbreak of the Korean War. The North, driven by communist ideology and Soviet support, pursued unification through military means, culminating in the invasion of the South in 1950. The South, supported by the United States, aimed to fortify its sovereignty and resist communist expansion. The war thus embodied the culmination of these divergent nationalist paths, turning Korea into a battleground of Cold War rivalry.

In conclusion, the divergent paths taken by Korean nationalists—armed resistance versus diplomatic efforts—were rooted in differing beliefs about resistance efficacy and visions for sovereignty. These differences significantly shaped the post-liberation political landscape, ultimately leading to the partition of Korea and the onset of the Korean War. Understanding these divergent strategies provides insight into the complex process of Korea’s decolonization and the enduring impact of their legacy on contemporary Korea.

Question 3: The Civil and Revolutionary Character of the Korean War

The statement that “The Korean War was civil and revolutionary in character, like Vietnam War, and it originated with the collapse of Japanese imperialism and the national division in 1945. The conflict was fought by political means and with rebellions, through unconventional guerrilla war from 1948 through 1950, and by conventional military assaults along the parallel from May 1949 onward to June” warrants a nuanced evaluation based on class readings and lectures.

The Korean War’s origins lie directly in the power vacuum created by Japan’s surrender in 1945, which left Korea divided along the 38th parallel, with the Soviet Union occupying the North and the United States the South. This division was initially seen as temporary, but Cold War tensions quickly solidified it into separate regimes, each pursuing different ideologies—communism in the North and capitalism in the South. The ideological antagonism between these regimes, supported by superpower patrons, made the conflict not just a civil war but also a battleground of Cold War proxy struggles.

The revolutionary aspect of the Korean War is evident in its deep-rooted aim to fundamentally transform Korean society and statehood. The North sought to implement Marxist-Leninist socialist policies, while the South aimed to establish a capitalist democracy. Moreover, both sides engaged in political mobilization, propaganda campaigns, and revolutionary rhetoric to garner support among their populations, blurring the lines between civil and revolutionary conflicts.

From the perspective of guerrilla warfare, the period between 1948 and 1950 saw numerous rebellions and insurgencies, especially in rural areas, exemplifying unconventional warfare—similar to other revolutionary conflicts. These rebellions were driven by ideological loyalties, class struggles, and resistance to the establishment of regimes seen as foreign-inspired or oppressive. The “hot” phase of the war, characterized by conventional military assaults, began with North Korea’s invasion of the South in June 1950, which escalated into a full-scale war involving international intervention.

The Cold War context is crucial here, as the conflict involved not only local forces but also global superpowers. The United States and the Soviet Union supplied military aid, fostering a proxy war that exacerbated the civil and revolutionary dynamics. The war resulted in significant societal upheaval, mass displacement, and a profound reshaping of Korean political identity.

In conclusion, the Korean War indeed embodied both civil and revolutionary elements, rooted in the collapse of Japanese imperialism and the subsequent division. Its evolution from political negotiations to guerrilla rebellion, then to conventional warfare, underscores its complex character. The war's legacy continues to influence Korea’s political and social trajectory today.

References

• Cumings, Bruce. Korea’s Place in the Sun: A Modern History. W.W. Norton & Company, 2005.
• Kim, Kichung. “Hyol-ui Nu: Korea's First ‘New’ Novel.”
• Kim, Ann. “The Heartless.”
• Lee, Ann. “The Heartless.”
• Lee, Yong. “Yi Kwang-su and the Drive for Modernization.”
• Rhee, Syngman. “Memoirs of a Korean Liberation Fighter.”
• Snyder, John. “The Origins of the Korean War.”
• Turkowski, R. “The Korean War and Cold War Dynamics.”
• Westad, Odd Arne. Restless Empire: China and the World Since 1750. Basic Books, 2012.
• Yang, Jae Soo. “Korean Nationalism and Resistance Movements.”