The KOREAN Civilization: Things Every Civ Player Should Know

[Q Classic]

two new things:

music: different insturments are used, for one, especially the drums. often times a for of dance that was incorporated, which did not exist in china. korean opera, if it can be called that, is also quite different from chinese opera. first off, korean opera tended to speak of korean folk tales, using traditional korean instruments in the background; it is not often truly sung. chinese opera uses chinese instruments, and is more often sung.

p'ansori is one example of singing folktales using drums and the like; there is nothing really similar in china or japan; indeed, much of the japanese drum culture was imported from korea. anyway: p'ansori sings always of korean folktales. while it may have been influenced, that does not necessarily mean that it is derived; it is derived, in fact, from the indiginous korean peoples.

and as for literature.

unique korean oral literature dates as far back as the culture; for you to allege that because it was written, it is invalid, well, that is ludicrous.

how far back do the oldest iroqoui, hopi, navaho, or sioux written records go?

true, it maybe kinda hard to have written records when you have no written language; but if you have an oral tradition, with oral literature, does it not count?

how come it counts for the native americans, and not the koreans?

[Q Classic]

how much zulu literature has survived? mongol literature? hun literature? goth literature? khmer literature? polynesian literature?

and yet you insist on including them...

american literature hasn't withstood the test of time, either...

[S. Kroeze]

Re: LOL

Dear Sir Edgar,

Originally posted by siredgar
I'm familiar with your theory of the major civilizations (a complete joke, by the way), but I have to say that considering Japan one of them is entirely laughable.

Thank you for your very kind words, but you are giving me credit that is not due! As I posted before:
In A Study of History, Arnold Toynbee identified 21 major civilisations; only six of them exist in the contemporary world.
McNeill, the authority who more or less introduced the concept of civilization in historiography.....
Before continuing the debate, I think it would be useful to describe how the concept 'Civilisation' is used by historians:
"What do we mean when we talk about a civilisation?.....
(Source: S.P.Huntington; 'The clash of civilisations',1993)
...and I admit my knowledge about Korea is almost exclusively based on one panoramic historical study: 'East Asia, the great tradition' by E.O.Reischauer and J.F.Fairbank(1960).....

What the Japanese have done is borrowed heavily from its neighbors, re-naming cultural aspects, and successfully claiming them as their own. Just because you make modifications to Buddhism and call it "Shintoism" doesn't mean it's a new religion, my friend. Most Westerners have been fooled by this, but Chinese and Koreans know better. Even the term "Japanese civilization" brings a smirk here and there. I'm sure you are one of those people who believe the Japanese are a completely separate and distinct race. Do you also believe that they are all descendants of one "Sun-god" rising from the ocean?

I am not interested in the question whether the Japanese are a separate and distinct race. And of course I belief they are all the descendants of one "Sun-god" rising from the ocean, but I do not understand the relevance of it for the debate. Please explain!
When I am understanding you right it seems to me you are arguing against the idea of a "Japanese civilisation". Do you indeed? Will this help the idea that there never existed a Confucian of East Asian civilisation? As I said before:
Of course every list is open to debate.
McNeill .... recognizes even less: Mesopotamian, Egyptian, merging into Near Eastern, (3)Indian, Chinese, Japanese and (6)Western, which he only divides into Greek Orthodox and Latin Catholic.

For you to even SUGGEST placing Korea vis-a-vis China as equivalent to Bavaria vis-a-vis Germany on a cultural autonomy level demonstrates your absolute disqualification from this discussion. I cannot understand how you can imply that France, England, and Germany are far more deserving to called separate and distinct civilizations and Korea does not. That should be insulting to 70 million people, I would think!

To my knowledge I have made no remark about the magnitude of the cultural difference between Korea and China, nor between Germany and France, nor Kent and Suffold or between Texel and Vlieland.
Could you please point out where I mentioned a French, English or German civilisation in my list? I am most sorry, but I cannot find it!
1. Sumerian/Babylonian
2. Egyptian
3. Indus/Dravidian
4. Chinese
5. Greek
6. Roman
7. Mayan/Meso-American
8. Inca/Andes
9. Byzantine/Orthodox
10. Latin/Catholic
11. Islamic/Near Eastern
12. Germanic/Protestant
13. Russian/Slav
14. Indian/Hindu
15. Japanese
16. Tibetan
17. South East Asian
18. sub-Saharan civilization??
Do you know how many people live in the USA? I cannot find an American civilisation either! Please help!

This is Euro-centrism at its best...

Yes of course I am a bloody Eurocentrist! Didn't you recognise it immediately?!
Because arithmetics were never my forte- but is seems there are at least SIX / 6 ! European civilisations on a list of 18 civilisations!
And that scroundel of a McNeill did dare to list two / 2 ! European civilisations on a list of 7 civilisations!
McNeill recognizes even less: Mesopotamian, Egyptian, merging into Near Eastern, (3)Indian, Chinese, Japanese and (6)Western, which he only divides into Greek Orthodox and Latin Catholic.

Have you ever even been to Korea?

No I have not, but since I have met you, I have concluded that Koreans are the kindest, most intelligent, most highly educated, friendliest, best-mannered and most polite and self-effacing people that ever lived on this earth. Their knowledge is profound and miraculous, yet they never lose their temper. So I cannot wait to visit the country!

Do you even read what you lift from your books?

Of course not! All my verbatim quotes are completely randomly chosen. I would never seriously try to prove a point. And by the way, since most of my books are written by Europeans (and some Americans) who happen to be historianstoo -though I possess some works written by Indians, Chinese or Japanese but only in tranlation- I know for sure they do contain nothing but lies invented to enslave the racially and culturally 'pure' on this planet. This truth is so generally acknowledged that even trying would make me the laughingstock of humanity!

While much of Korean literature may have used Chinese writing, it was in the Korean language.

Since my source -the everlying, completely unreliable 'Encyclopaedia Britannica'- thinks otherwise, am I sure you are perfectly right!
knowledge of Chinese classical literature and mastery of its medium (known to the Koreans as hanmun)
....the great bulk of Korean literature in all branches of learning is written in Chinese.
...side by side with the Chinese tradition, there was a native literature that, with one significant exception, was transmitted only orally until the invention of the Korean phonetic script (onmun in Sino-Korean or hangul in Korean) in the 15th century.
The use of the idu script for literary purposes died out early in the Koryo period (935-1392), and no means for the recording of native literature were available until the invention of the hangul script in 1446.
Hanmun remained its principal vehicle, though there is also a considerable body of tales written in hangul...
....in the vast intellectual and social upheavals of modern times the Korean vernacular should replace Chinese as the medium of all written communication.

Are you saying that since Shakespearean plays are written in the Roman alphabet, it really belongs to the Romans?

Of course, though I have previously stated that
Yet the idea that the Roman civilisation ended somewhere between 400 and 800 AD is generally accepted.
To my knowledge -based on Eurocentric lies- Shakespeare lived a bit later, ~1600. I would classify Shakespeare as: Western, Protestant, English, in that order.
I guess you will argue there has never existed a Western civilisation, because
I'm familiar with your theory of the major civilizations (a complete joke, by the way),...
Or you consider western civilisation a minor civilisation only. But to my knowledge Shakespeare was not writing in Latin!

Anyhow, you are obviously biased because you seem to value the works of European writers more than Korean writers.

I am still hoping some of the geniuses posting in this thread will post a complete survey of all literature written by Koreans in their native language before 1500 AD. I have asked for it before, but until now I have been the only one trying to collect at least some -though doubtless unreliable- information.
I will immediately admit it is a waste of time to enlighten the ignorant anyway!

Just because YOU are more familiar with something, does not mean it is more culturally valuable. Please do not invalidate the cultural value of something you are obviously not familiar with.

Could you please point out and quote any disparaging remark I have made about any literature written by Koreans, whether written in Chinese (hanmun) or in their native Korean language (hangul)!
I cannot find any disparaging remark whatsoever! Or is it insulting to consider "The Tale of Genji" or the Divina commedia a masterpiece?

My impression is that you are suggesting that Korea is a break-away PROVINCE of China. Incredulous!

To my knowledge -but please correct me- parts of Korea were at some time a province of the Chinese empire. Why is it a problem to be conquered by such a magnificent civilisation? Or do you despise the Chinese as much as the Japanese?

I also question your logic when you go on and talk about literature for your argument and yet want to "separate the discussion about languages and writing systems" from all of this.

Personally I am not especially aroused by discussing writing systems. My point was that having the same or a completely different writing system cannot prove in any possible way whether two languages are related or not. I suppose you do not agree?

Pardon me?!!

Yes, I will pardon you, though -being only some ignorant European- I am used to be treated in a rather different manner.

Please do not venture to debate on something you do not
understand, sir.

I wouldn't dare!

Therefore, to your question, "Is Korean culture sufficiently different from Chinese and Japanese culture to be considered an autonomous Civilisation?" all I can say is that I pity your complete and utter ignorance.

Your post would become even more convincing than it is now, when you would give at least one argument -however small or insignificant- and could give just one -just one- reliable source proving the cultural autonomy of the Korean civilisation. I might consider to replace the Japanese civilisation -which you have most convincingly proved never to have existed- by the Korean civilisation.

To me, your thinking is based on falsifications and outdated information. Why don't you go measure skulls for intelligence levels?

As I said before:
Geneticists study genetics, historians and anthropologists study cultures and linguists study languages.
Being only a most simple historian, I wouldn't dare to intrude on matters of race, 'purity' and intelligence.

Take off your horseblinds, please sir, before you run over someone with your hooves.

I suppose this witty remark was your own invention?
I hope you have thoroughly enjoyed insulting me in every possible way! My pleasure!

Sir Edgar

Yours truly,

S.Kroeze

PS: What a pity you didn't comment my remarks about the Indian civilisation and its constituent parts. I had hoped you could have enlightened me in this realm too. Or is the very idea of an Indian civilisation also some imperialistic lie?

[Q Classic]

you know, s. kroeze... are you reading any of my posts? or do you have me ignored?

i've been posting those sources...

at least, i think i have.

because when i scroll up, i see my posts...

now, both of you: siredgar and s. kroeze... let's kinda... cool down, eh?

[Q Classic]

just because parts of a culture were at one point conquered does not mean that the entire nation was subjugated. otherwise, you'd also have to say that most of europe was a breakaway nation part of the roman empire, the holy roman empire, muslim empire, what have you.

at no point was korea completely dominated/conquered by china.

======

also, about the languages: what more can you ask for? go look on any linguistics site... china is in sino-tibetan. korean and japanese are alternately in their own group or part of the ural-altaic group. and korean and japanese aren't even that related; korean also arose before japanese, seeing as korea's been around a little longer.

======

the great bulk of Korean literature in all branches of learning is written in Chinese.

it was written in korean syntax. this, friend, is different from chinese, it's somewhere else on this thread.

you could say that most of japanese was written in chinese, too, because they use the chinese characters...

but one doesn't. why? because it was written in japanese syntax.

[Q Classic]

No I have not, but since I have met you, I have concluded that Koreans are the kindest, most intelligent, most highly educated, friendliest, best-mannered and most polite and self-effacing people that ever lived on this earth. Their knowledge is profound and miraculous, yet they never lose their temper. So I cannot wait to visit the country!

this, i'm sorry, but this is out of line.

sarcasm does not become you, and for you to insult an entire people based on your opinion of one person is irresponsible, and, well, disgusting.

it would be me tantamount to assuming all Germans are arrogant, belligerent, cruel, opinionated, savagely efficient, and harsh based just on my high school german teacher, or that all Americans are the loudest, fattest, stupidest, most ignorant, careless, dirty, arrogant, and inane people in the world based on britney spears fans.

don't insult me because you don't like him.

[S. Kroeze]

Originally posted by yin26
So clearly the solution is to just block several countries together and put a big tag over it: "Asia" "Europe" Like that. Just big blobs on the map. That would be both politically correct and highly educational!

When that is the way you would summarize my posts, I have to conclude you are not a careful reader at all, which disappoints me truly! I had expected more!

Basically I don't care which 'civilisations' are in the expansion pack. By including the Americans they have ruined the original 16 Major civilisations already beyond repair!
To console you, I would prefer a thousand times having a Korean civilisation to an American civilisation.

What interests me, are the large-scale developments of civilisations and cultures over huge periods of time. To give you one example:
Rhine and Danube were once the frontier between the Roman sedentary civilisation and Germanic migrating 'barbarians'. After the Fall of the Empire this boundary disappears, being replaced by Western Christianity (Charlemagne), containing both Italy, France, England and Germany.
Yet more than thousand years later, after Martin Luther, this ancient and forgotten boundary is suddenly reestablished when Europe is divided into Protestant and Roman-Catholic.
And surprise: The boundary follows almost exactly the Rhine and Danube-frontier!

That is a demonstration of the powerful forces guarding humanity and civilisations! That is interesting and worth discussing!
Comparing Hinduism versus Buddhism or Confucianism versus Taoism, those are subjects I would have liked to discuss.
But it is probably no accident I studied history, Sanskrit and Greek, though I earn my money in a different way.

Please read what I write before you comment; that is basically all I ask!
And when it doesn't interest you, do not comment it!

[siredgar]

I absolutely agree, Marquis.

Originally posted by Marquis de Sodaq
Is this argument STILL going on!? I think I last read this about seven pages ago, and it appears that absolutely no progress has been made. In both parts, some Dutch posters refuse to acknowledge Korea as a separate civ "worthy" of inclusion in the game. What gives? Can the euros not accept that their idea that Korea is "China, continued" is due only to ignorance of Korean history and misinformation learned in school?

To say that Korea isn't worthy because they borrowed too much from the Chinese is akin to saying the Dutch are just Germans with a bit more engineering experience! (ja, trouwens, ik weet heel goed dat NLers op de tenen getrapt voelen als ze Duitsers worden genoemd) What civ hasn't borrowed significant elements from neighboring civs?

Are european civs not worthy because they owe their entire treasure of knowledge to the Romans, Greeks, and Arabs? It would be the same argument.

Let it rest, people!

I absolutely agree and I don't understand why this debate is still going on.

It frustrates me to see people trying to discredit the Korean civilization because of its influence by China while they ignore what the English and French borrowed from Rome and Greece.

I believe it is Cocteau who once said, "Les Francais sont les Italiens de mauvaises humeurs."

Translation: "The French are Italians in bad moods."

So, does that mean the French are really Italians? No, but they have borrowed much from them. That is what exchanging ideas between civilizations is all about.

China was both "Greece and Rome" to Korea because of its longevity and rich culture. Whatever the Koreans did with that knowledge and invented on their own is theirs.

[S. Kroeze]

Originally posted by Q Cubed
you know, s. kroeze... are you reading any of my posts? or do you have me ignored?

i've been posting those sources...

at least, i think i have.

because when i scroll up, i see my posts...

now, both of you: siredgar and s. kroeze... let's kinda... cool down, eh?

I tried all three links. Thank you for providing them!
They are all interesting, but I couldn't find more information about Korean literature, I am sorry to say. I have really tried!

By now I have posted two lists:
- one contains 18 Major civilisations; this list is of my own making
- the other list is copied from the game 'A History of the World' and contains -I have said it before- the dominant political powers of history. And of course this list is open to debate, as always!

Civilisations are not necessarily identical to political powers. When you would truly have read my first post, you would know I consider Huns, Goths and Mongols as barbarians. For the record: I do not consider the Koreas to be barbarians!
Please do not confuse these two lists!

[S. Kroeze]

Originally posted by Q Cubed

sarcasm does not become you, and for you to insult an entire people based on your opinion of one person is irresponsible, and, well, disgusting.

it would be me tantamount to assuming all Germans are arrogant, belligerent, cruel, opinionated, savagely efficient, and harsh based just on my high school german teacher, or that all Americans are the loudest, fattest, stupidest, most ignorant, careless, dirty, arrogant, and inane people in the world based on britney spears fans.

don't insult me because you don't like him.

Dear Q Cubed,

To a certain degree, I agree. Yet I didn't say that Koreans are arrogant, belligerent, cruel, opinionated, and harsh; or ignorant, loud, careless, dirty and inane.
I said: Koreans are the kindest, most intelligent, most highly educated, friendliest, best-mannered and most polite and self-effacing people that ever lived on this earth. Their knowledge is profound and miraculous, yet they never lose their temper.

That you think this is ironic -or even sarcastic- is just your interpretation!
I really do respect your often intelligent contributions, though I still think you should read a bit more carefully!

Sincere regards,

S.Kroeze

[Q Classic]

ah, i misread those lists.

anyway:

http://violet.berkeley.edu/~korea/legends.html

http://www.eldritchpress.org/kim/cloud9.html

http://www.kois.go.kr/

http://www.kois.go.kr/directory/List.asp?Category_id=a004

http://www.hawaii.edu/asiaref/korea/internet.htm

[Q Classic]

you may not have intended that comment that way, s. kroeze...

but when it's alongside nothing but lots and lots of sarcastic remarks without a major break, it will be interpreted in the same exact manner as those sarcastic remarks.

[thinkingamer]

"Speculating about literature that might have been is in my opinion a complete waste of time! About 95% -or perhaps even more- of all Ancient Greek literature has not survived the ages. Yet what remains is enough to be sure that the Ancient Greek literature was among the most inspired, diverse and highest quality of all literatury inheritance, comparably only to the English, Chinese and Sanskrit literatures.
Neither do I buy the argument that because the books were destroyed a text cannot survive. The writings of Homer were composed around 800BC. The most ancient copy of the text we possess today is not even half that age!"

-S.Kroeze


S. Kroeze: again u r showing that u don't know much about Korean history: Many of the ancient Japanese Written records (the ones before 1000 AD) managed to survive. Why? Because they were hardly attacked by any country.

I did not speculate about Korean Literature, and I only stated that many Korean Literature has been lost. And if u call The Japanese's Kojiki a great Literature why not the "Korean records of ancient matters" would not be important?

All your argument about, Korean records not able to survive is different in this case. The Romans learned carefully everything they could about Greeks, and later the Medieval Catholic Church did a great Job preserving the Ancient Greek/Roman Literature. But in case of Korea is very different; there was no one that could preserve them. Actually the opposite happened: Chinese Attacking frequently (and during its golden age!)for almost thousand years, Frequent north barbarians and Japanese sea pirate raids, Attacks from Mongols in 13 cent., Attack from Japan in late 16 cent(stealing books, art Masterpieces (where is the most Famous Choson dynasty's painting today? yes its in Japan) and even artists, shipbuilders, and sholars. And When Japanese anexed Korea they did their best to take Korean art, hide our history, kill our culture.
Wow 95% of the Greek Literature is gone? then at least 99% of the Three Kingdoms Period's written records is gone.

[siredgar]

Let me take you to school now.

KROEZE:
When I am understanding you right it seems to me you are arguing against the idea of a "Japanese civilisation". Do you indeed?[/color]

EDGAR:
I am not arguing against a "Japanese civilization", but for someone to say that it is one of the major civilizations of the world is laughable. If you put Korean civilization up there, too, then it would be acceptable. However, placing Japan as one of the major civilizations of the world (equivalent to all of Western Europe or China) and not Korea would be equivalent to calling England one of the major civilizations and not France. Both are worthy civilizations, but one is older and passed along a lot more to the other.

Until the 5th century, Japan had no real writing system and relied on Korea for its cultural beginnings. At that time, one of the Three Kingdoms fell in Korea and a large group of their aristocrats and artisans fled to Japan. Far more advanced and highly respected, it is believed that they formed the basis of Japan's monarchy and cultural activity. From what I understand, the Japanese were so behind that for a long time the Koreans agreed to trade with them primarily to reduce barbarian raids by the "dwarf pirate islands" as the Chinese called them. However, they were learning many new miltary techniques during their feudal wars.

When the Japanese finally invaded Korea at the end of the 16th century, Korea had already eclipsed its enlightenment period from the 15th century. The Japanese burned down many of the palaces and temples and took with them thousands of Korean artisans. Many of these artisans helped propel forward what we now know of as modern Japanese art and literature.

Since then Japan has emerged as a significant civilization and its eager acceptance of Western technology assisted it in moving forward rapidly. Meanwhile, Korea stagnated under a succession of child kings and weak leaders. Therefore, while the Korean civilization's height came during the 15th century, Japan's was during the 20th century (more noticeable to Westerners).

Conclusion: These are both important civilizations and one is not significantly greater than the other.

KROEZE:
To my knowledge I have made no remark about the magnitude of the cultural difference between Korea and China, nor between Germany and France, nor Kent and Suffold or between Texel and Vlieland.
Do you know how many people live in the USA? I cannot find an American civilisation either! Please help![/color]

EDGAR:
Mr. Kroeze, please look back at your first post to me. Unfortunately, you reacted to my response to Trifna's statement, not yours:

Trifna--"Yin, can you say that Koreans are THAT MUCH culturally different from Chinese? As different French are from Germans or Americans from English? Or is it more that Koreans are like Singaporeans or many around there and are against China for some reasons but do have a culture that is quite similar? For exemple, all these French lords were battling against themselves, but they didn't had that much cultural difference. At least, they could be put in the French culture."

However, your point about Kent IMPLIES that you consider Korea equivalent to a mere feudal state.

KROEZE:
Yes of course I am a bloody Eurocentrist! Didn't you recognise it immediately?!
Because arithmetics were never my forte- but is seems there are at least SIX / 6 ! European civilisations on a list of 18 civilisations!
And that scroundel of a McNeill did dare to list two / 2 ! European civilisations on a list of 7 civilisations!
McNeill recognizes even less: Mesopotamian, Egyptian, merging into Near Eastern, (3)Indian, Chinese, Japanese and (6)Western, which he only divides into Greek Orthodox and Latin Catholic.

EDGAR:
Calm down.

I was not referring to your list of civilizations as a reflection of your Euro-centric statements, but the suggestion that Korea is really a part of China and that there are only three major civilizations in Asia (China, Japan, and India) I believe is highly antiquated and Euro-centric. Anyhow, most Euro-centrics focus on Europe AND the "Orient" (what is now known as the Middle East), ignoring much of the rest of the world (with a few exceptions). Many recognize major works by the Chinese and Japanese, but not from other countries and instead place greater emphasis on minor European pieces. That is, they can discuss the significance of hundreds of European writers and artists, but only recognize a few non-Europeans as important.

KROEZE:
No I have not, but since I have met you, I have concluded that Koreans are the kindest, most intelligent, most highly educated, friendliest, best-mannered and most polite and self-effacing people that ever lived on this earth. Their knowledge is profound and miraculous, yet they never lose their temper. So I cannot wait to visit the country![/color]

EDGAR:
Sir, we have never met. We are simply exchanging a dialogue on-line. Your implication that I am Korean because I am knowledgeable about Korean civilization and support greater recognition of their culture and history is simplistic at best, racist at worst. It will not bode you well to imply that an entire group of people are unkind and unintelligent.

In fact, Koreans are known as very kind people, have the second highest average IQ in the world, have a higher rate of education than most other countries (their students consistently place 1st or 2nd at international science and mathematics competitions), are quite friendly, have more ritualized customs and manners than most other people, and yet are quite modest AND self-effacing.

Obviously, you can see that I live in New York and you must have assumed that I was a Korean living in the U.S.A. and thus disqualified me as an American. Thus, you, sir, are more likely a candidate to not consider Colin Powell a real American.

Nevertheless, I am a real American. However, I am sure that you would claim that since my civilization does not exist and I am really English.

Regardless, my indignation does not reflect a loss of control and you, sir, are really the one losing your temper (see below).

By the way, I have visited the Netherlands many times and I know that most Dutch people are very knowledgeable, well-traveled, open-minded, and courteous.

There are exceptions, however...

KROEZE:
Of course not! All my verbatim quotes are completely randomly chosen. I would never seriously try to prove a point. And by the way, since most of my books are written by Europeans (and some Americans) who happen to be historianstoo -though I possess some works written by Indians, Chinese or Japanese but only in tranlation- I know for sure they do contain nothing but lies invented to enslave the racially and culturally 'pure' on this planet. This truth is so generally acknowledged that even trying would make me the laughingstock of humanity![/color]

EDGAR:
Please control yourself.

KROEZE:
Since my source -the everlying, completely unreliable 'Encyclopaedia Britannica'- thinks otherwise, am I sure you are perfectly right!
knowledge of Chinese classical literature and mastery of its medium (known to the Koreans as hanmun)
....the great bulk of Korean literature in all branches of learning is written in Chinese.
...side by side with the Chinese tradition, there was a native literature that, with one significant exception, was transmitted only orally until the invention of the Korean phonetic script (onmun in Sino-Korean or hangul in Korean) in the 15th century.
The use of the idu script for literary purposes died out early in the Koryo period (935-1392), and no means for the recording of native literature were available until the invention of the hangul script in 1446.
Hanmun remained its principal vehicle, though there is also a considerable body of tales written in hangul...
....in the vast intellectual and social upheavals of modern times the Korean vernacular should replace Chinese as the medium of all written communication.

EDGAR:
The text of Korean literature was written in Chinese characters, but using Korean language. This is similar to English writers using the Roman alphabet to write in English.

Encyclopedia BRITANNICA is EURO-CENTRIC. I do not believe there is a demand on your part to study every non-European work written in its native language. Not at all. In fact, I applaud you for your curiousity in what is now a "small country" Korea. However, there are some things one will never have the time to read about or ability to understand and it must be understood so. I believe that Yin, even as a non-Korean, has acheived this to a certain extent and wants to spread knowledge. I do not think it is appreciated to utterly discredit another culture's civilization based on one's education.

KROEZE:
Of course, though I have previously stated that
Yet the idea that the Roman civilisation ended somewhere between 400 and 800 AD is generally accepted.
To my knowledge -based on Eurocentric lies- Shakespeare lived a bit later, ~1600. I would classify Shakespeare as: Western, Protestant, English, in that order.
I guess you will argue there has never existed a Western civilisation, because
I'm familiar with your theory of the major civilizations (a complete joke, by the way),...
Or you consider western civilisation a minor civilisation only. But to my knowledge Shakespeare was not writing in Latin![/color]

EDGAR:
It is your own logic implying that there should not be separate English, French, and German civilizations and instead a Japanese one. When I asked you, "Are you saying that since Shakespearean plays are written in the Roman alphabet, it really belongs to the Romans?", I was being facetious.

KROEZE:
I am still hoping some of the geniuses posting in this thread will post a complete survey of all literature written by Koreans in their native language before 1500 AD. I have asked for it before, but until now I have been the only one trying to collect at least some -though doubtless unreliable- information.
I will immediately admit it is a waste of time to enlighten the ignorant anyway![/color]

EDGAR:
Literature:
In the early 1600s, Ho Kyun's poetic "Tale of Chunhyang" championed the humanity of commoners and outcasts in aristocratic Korea. It used short stanzas called shijo to spawn an entire art form based on poetic literature. It is not before 1500 AD, but I believe that most major works of Western literature appeared during the 18th and 19th century, no? Please remind me why 1500 AD is a significant benchmark anyhow. Thank you.

Philosophy:
During the 14th century, a famous Buddhist monk who called himself Muhak, that is, "no knowledge" once wrote that all his work was conditioned by his own ignorance (similar ideas that Jean-Paul Sartre had nearly 500 years later). He continued to produce many works based on what Westerners later called "existentialism". The Choson period also spurned the rise of Silhak, or "Realism".

The other posters here are far more knowledgeable than I am of Korean literature. I claim some knowledge and want to make a contribution to this discussion. But I think that some of the remarks you have made make you, sir... seem quite ignorant of the subject matter, for lack of a better term.

KROEZE:
Korean literature after1900 was profoundly influenced by western ideas and literary forms. It was inevitable that in the vast intellectual and social upheavals of modern times the Korean vernacular should replace Chinese as the medium of all written communication.'
(source: 'Encyclopaedia Britannica', article 'Korean literature')

So it seems to me that before the 20th century the Chinese literature and language were most dominant.
[/color]

EDGAR:
From the Embassy of Japan's Web site:

http://www.japan-emb.org.sg/JapanAccess/bungaku.htm

The written literature of Japan forms one of the richest of Oriental traditions. It has received foreign influences since its beginning in the 8th century. Before the middle of the 19th century, the source of influence was the culture of China. After the middle of the 19th century, the impact of modern Western culture became predominant.

Sound familiar? So, why does Korean literature get discredited for doing the same? Think about this please, my friend. A moment to reflect.

KROEZE:
Could you please point out and quote any disparaging remark I have made about any literature written by Koreans, whether written in Chinese (hanmun) or in their native Korean language (hangul)!
I cannot find any disparaging remark whatsoever! Or is it insulting to consider "The Tale of Genji" or the Divina commedia a masterpiece?

EDGAR:
Mr. Kroeze, you seem to make statements and then distance yourself from them. For your reminder, you have basically discounted all of Korean literature because it was written in Chinese characters. You also imply that the entrance of Western ideas during the 20th century was so significant. Let me remind you, the 20th century is probably the most painful in Korean history and the literary works produced during this period are not nearly as important as those produced during Korea's hey-day (most important Korean artifacts and books "disappeared" during the Japanese invasions, some re-appearing as "Japanese" in museums and private collections).

KROEZE:
To my knowledge -but please correct me- parts of Korea were at some time a province of the Chinese empire. Why is it a problem to be conquered by such a magnificent civilisation? Or do you despise the Chinese as much as the Japanese?[/color]

EDGAR:
Yes and large parts of "China" were controlled by Korean kingdoms such as Koguryo. But let me ask you, because parts of Korea were ruled by the Chinese does that mean because parts of France were controlled by the English, France is really a part of England?

Korea was not always "conquered" by China. It has a longer history of independence than most European countries. It's apparent that your understanding of Korea seems mostly based on post 17th century history, during it's decline and subsequent foreign intervention. I recommend a book I read in University, it is concise and good for those who want to get an overall picture of Korea:

"Korea's Place in the Sun: A Modern History", by Bruce Cumings

While it glosses over much of Korea's ancient history (and even its cultural height around the 15th century), it is a good resource for those that want a taste, but not a bite of Korean history.

No, I do not despise Japan and have visited the country many times. I know many Japanese people and have great admiration for their acheivements. In fact, I dine at Japanese restaurants more often than anywhere else. Indeed, I also own quite a few Japanese artifacts in my house and I am an admirer of their aesthetic talents.

What I am arguing is that Japan's emergence as a true civilization is considered relatively new compared to China and Korea. To discount Korean civilization as a part of China's and look so much up to Japan's I suspect is based on an education focused on recent history. I am simply asking you to stretch your viewpoint beyond that horizon.

KROEZE:
Personally I am not especially aroused by discussing writing systems. My point was that having the same or a completely different writing system cannot prove in any possible way whether two languages are related or not. I suppose you do not agree?[/color]

EDGAR:
No, I do not agree. Writing systems are important. The invention of the alphabet is significant, isn't it? The creation of hangul is significant. It is considered by linguists as one of the most phonetically accurate alphabets in the world. It is possible to learn to read and write within a day. By the way, Korean grammar is structured entirely different from Chinese, it is similar to Japanese instead. Also, Korean and Japanese do not use tones like Chinese does.

KROEZE:
Yes, I will pardon you, though -being only some ignorant European- I am used to be treated in a rather different manner.[/color]

EDGAR:
Likewise.

Not all Europeans are ignorant.

KROEZE:
I wouldn't dare![/color]

EDGAR:
Please don't.


KROEZE:
Your post would become even more convincing than it is now, when you would give at least one argument -however small or insignificant- and could give just one -just one- reliable source proving the cultural autonomy of the Korean civilisation. I might consider to replace the Japanese civilisation -which you have most convincingly proved never to have existed- by the Korean civilisation.

EDGAR:
I don't advocate replacing the Japanese civilization with the Korean one and I have never said that it never existed. You've completely misunderstood. What I am saying is that the Korean civilization is distinct enough from the Chinese civilization and it deserves recognition.



KROEZE:
As I said before:
Geneticists study genetics, historians and anthropologists study cultures and linguists study languages.
Being only a most simple historian, I wouldn't dare to intrude on matters of race, 'purity' and intelligence.

EDGAR:
Yes, you have dared to intrude on matters of race, purity, and intelligence (see sarcastic comment about Koreans you made earlier).

Without a doubt, race is an important factor in civilization.


KROEZE:
I suppose this witty remark was your own invention?
I hope you have thoroughly enjoyed insulting me in every possible way! My pleasure![/color]

EDGAR:
You truly lack a good sense of logic. I would blame it on English not being a first language(?), but your command is quite good overall. However, you seem to consistently misunderstand what I have said, while others have. You also seem to make statements and then say that you meant otherwise (see discussion with Q Cubed).

Please stop implying things and then back-tracking. Stop the long quote-lifting. Make statements. If you find that you were mistaken or change your mind, say so.

***I understand when one is conflicted with what he has learned to be true to possibly not be such, but challenging the mind and admitting ignorance is the first step to opening a book of greater knowledge.***

I will be the first to say, "Overall, I am ignorant."

KROEZE:
Yours truly,

S.Kroeze

PS: What a pity you didn't comment my remarks about the Indian civilisation and its constituent parts. I had hoped you could have enlightened me in this realm too. Or is the very idea of an Indian civilisation also some imperialistic lie? [/QUOTE]

EDGAR:
I didn't want to digress from the discussion too much. Perhaps another time?

Whew! That took a long time. Please respond using mostly your own words next time, the massive lifting of quotes takes too much space. Thanks!

Kisses and hugs,

Sir Edgar

[Drake Tungsten]

Sir Edgar, you might want to do some more research before you threaten to take anyone to school. Your knowledge of ancient Japanese history is atrocious. Anyone who thinks Shinto is a modified form of Buddhism has some serious studying to do. Sadly, you aren't the only uninformed one in this discussion. Please, end this pointless rambling before my head explodes.