Colonial Rule and Social Change in Korea, 1910-1945

1. Colonial Rule and Social Change in Korea: The Paradox of Colonial Control

1 Colonial Rule and Social Change in Korea: The Paradox of Colonial Control Yong chool HA Studies of Japanese colonial rule (1910–45) in Korea have long been preoccupied with the economic impact of both development and exploitation. Important as the economic issues may be, the debates have preempted equally important efforts to understand the nature of social changes that occurred during colonial rule. This chapter is an attempt to create a bridge between economic and social impacts in our understanding of Japanese colonial rule in Korea. It will be argued that in understanding colonial society it is essential to see the inherent contradictions created by the conflicting needs of colonial rule and the intersectoral imbalance or disequilibrium arbitrarily imposed by colonial control. It will be also argued that generalizations based on any single or monosectoral analysis, such as an economic study, are not adequate for understanding the colonial social whole. This chapter contends that a different conceptual and theoretical framework is needed that will reveal the complex social dynamics among different sectors under colonial control. In what follows I present a critical review of major arguments related to the impact of Japanese colonialism on Korea and propose an alternative framework for understanding this colonial society. Two cases of colonial social changes— school ties and family issues—are presented to illustrate the importance of the unintended social consequences and contradictions inherent in colonial rule, the reasons for which can be clarified only through an intersectoral approach. Studies of Japanese colonial rule in Korea have long been dominated by two diametrically opposed paradigms that may be described as orthodox and revisionist. Orthodox interpretation, well known for its nationalist coloration , focuses on political dependency and arbitrariness, social control and Yong Chool Ha 40 repression, and economic exploitation and the loss of cultural identity. The revisionist approach is largely concerned with positive economic change, modern sociocultural influences under Japanese rule, and cultural hegemony. Criticizing the orthodox interpretation as too nationalistic, the revisionists trace the colonial origins of Korean economic development and argue that colonial rule left legacies such as capital and infrastructure accumulation, as well as a strong state and its modern bureaucracy, all of which became instrumental in designing and implementing Korean economic development plans during the 1960s.1 Despite fundamental differences, the two approaches share common methodological and substantive assumptions. Both are monosectoral in their scope of analysis, with their focus primarily on economic issues. Each has also conducted a “war of case studies,” typical of monosectoral analysis, in which one case of exploitation is countered by another case of development. As such, both approaches lack a theoretical framework within which to understand the broader institutional and social consequences of colonial rule. The exploitation-centered orthodox approach rightly emphasizes the suffering imposed by discrimination and physical and psychological controls, but it is not clear what the enduring psychological, institutional, and social consequences of this suffering were. In fact, most such studies are limited only to the colonial period itself.2 Problems with the revisionist approach are equally serious. Revisionist research proceeds as if dealing with the economic sector is tantamount to dealing with the whole. It further applies Western sociological concepts and categories to characterize Korean colonial society and thereby fails to acknowledge the unique aspects of Korean colonial society. By linking the institutions of the colonial era to those in present-day Korea—a strong state, economic development, and the emergence of management styles— revisionists commit the error of “reverse teleology,” or reading history backwards .3 The studies cannot do justice to the complex nature of colonial institutions and societies as they actually existed because their interest in the colonial society of Korea is limited to explaining postcolonial economic development. It is not surprising, therefore, that revisionist studies have not paid attention to social institutions developed during the colonial era and how they have affected both society and subsequent patterns of economic development in Korea. Colonial Rule and Social Change 41 A more recent approach focuses on interactions among national, colonial, and modern arenas in colonial Korea. It criticizes the orthodox approach’s exclusive focus on nationalistic interpretations of colonial social changes. According to this view, colonial society was involved in a constant tug of war among the national, colonial, and modern arenas. It attempts to show how the Korean people, though limited by individual leverage, were not simply coerced but interacted on their own volition with the...