Korea Since 1850 (review)

BOOK REVIEWS207 (20 percent); (2) Sino-Korean and general foreign relations (11 percent); (3) contemporary mores (20 percent); (4) portraits (10 percent); (5) institutions , the author's ancestors, and his own biography (39 percent). Lee's preface and introduction do not tell us much about the world of Ö Sukkwön's P'aegwan chapki in that he has chosen to concentrate on stylistic and intrinsic issues. Not only does Lee's erudite and rarefied vocabulary stand in the way of easy comprehension—some of his words do not appear even in Webster's Third New International or the Random House Unabridged —but much of what he has to say relates to other literary traditions or addresses the interests of literary critics in other fields. One suspects that Lee believes his audience to be neither his fellow Koreanists nor students of Korean studies but, rather, colleagues in comparative literature, Chinese and Japanese literatures, classics, and the like. Furthermore, his vision quite excludes the work of contemporary Korean scholars, whether as resource or audience (save his gratuitous gibe [p. ix] that Korean literary historians do not know what ? 'aegwan means). The introduction raises many an interesting point but is generally more an inventory of items that interest Peter Lee than a systematic and integrated study meant to illuminate and contextualize the content of P'aegwan chapki and so to enlighten others who work in the Korean field. He does admit, "Our inadequacy as readers stems from our unfamiliarity both with the society and culture that framed Ö's vision of the world and with the assumptions he expects us to share." This problem is raised but then ignored. In his treatment, Lee isolates P 'aegwan chapki from its world and dissects it as if it were some specimen brought into the laboratory from an undefined field environment. There is a whole world revealed in Ö Sukkwön's collection that goes begging for appreciation in the introductory matter of this book. Perhaps that is meant to be the reader's task. Marshall R. Pihl University of Hawai'i at Mänoa Korea Since 1850, by Stewart Lone and Gavan McCormack. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1993. 226 pp. $49.95 cloth, $16.95 paper. With all the publishing activity on Korea in recent years, the field still awaits a good, single volume history of modern Korea. Korea Since 1850 could have filled the gap as a single, unifying text for courses and a solid, accessible treatment of Korea's complex twentieth-century history for general readers. Unfortunately , its serious flaws will hinder its use in such a capacity. The volume is divided into five chapters: The Yi Dynasty, Colonial 208KOREAN STUDIES, VOL. 19 Korea 1910-1945, The Korean War, The Republic of Korea [ROK], and North Korea—the DPRK. A preface and introduction, a suggested reading list, a bibliography, and an index round out the volume. Footnotes accompany each chapter as a further support to the narrative, but in my opinion they are a waste of space and do little for the prospective readership of this book. What is good about the volume is that it provides in one place a generally coherent narrative of modern Korean history that is weighted to the postWorld War II era. It also writes against the grain of the South Korean/U.S. Cold War narrative, providing a refreshingly critical line on U.S. involvement in the peninsula after 1945. Its chapters on the ROK and DPRK also provide lively anecdotal information that are missing in most texts. This provides interest and color, but in some cases detracts from the seriousness and authority of the volume. In its preface, the authors posit that they wish to "reject mythology, whether of Korean or other origin" (p. x), and they have strived to dive beneath the waves of polemics that muddle the writing of Korea's modern history. In the end, however, the narrative contains enough thematic incoherence , interpretive mistakes, and textual unevenness to negate its significance as a serious teaching text, or as an innovative "retelling" of Korea's experience in modern times. Thematically, the text claims to ground itself on the twin pillars of nationalism and imperialism...