Japan's Colonization of Korea: Discourse and Power (review)

Alexis Dudden starts with a promising premise that discourse—particularly that of international law—was as significant as politics, economics, and military power in enabling Japan's annexation of Korea. She sidesteps the issue of causality but "aims to confound the view that only military strength truly prevails in power politics" (p. 4).

After a short introduction, she focuses on the Hague Incident. The next chapter reviews how the new vocabulary of international law infused Meiji foreign policy. Chapter three looks at how this "vocabulary" was used in the colonization of Korea. Chapter four, "Voices of Dissent," describes the activities of Tarui Tōkichi, Kōtoku Shūsui, and Hŏ Wi. Chapter five outlines Gustave Boissonade's contributions to Japanese modern law, legal discourses mobilized during the buildup to 1910, and the "105 Persons Incident." The final chapter, "Coda: A Knowledgeable Empire," is composed of brief sections on Nitobe Inazō, Tōyō Kyōkai, and "Concluding Notes."

The section on the Hague Incident reminds us that the failure of Korean emissaries to gain entry into the official conference halls was not only due to politics, but also stemmed from larger issues of language and representation. This contrasts with some existing scholarship that overlooks the larger discourse of legality and civilization permeating the Hague conference. Chapter three's section on Durham Stevens is lively, making good use of quotations from the San Francisco Chronicle. The underused Hōritsu shinbun provides the basis for a brief discussion of two key figures in the construction of a "modern" legal regime in Korea, Ume Kenjirō and Kuratomi Yūzaburō. The occasional "theoretical" nods are welcome, although I would have preferred more extensive engagement with the relevant theories.

Unfortunately, the moments of solid scholarship are undermined by problems that range from technical issues to thin contextualization and loose argumentation. To start with the technical, the index is sparse, characterized by omissions of major figures. Several endnotes lead to underdeveloped observations about contemporary parallels. Other endnotes for crucial assertions contain citations without page numbers. Particularly frustrating is Dudden's repeated omission of page numbers in major works by two leading scholars of the "annexation," Moriyama Shigenori and Unno Fukuju. This is highly problematic when she hints at major disagreements but fails to provide specifics.

Transliteration errors are ubiquitous. Too many book and article titles (generally Korean ones) do not follow any standard system, while missing macrons and misplaced diphthongs are common. Several Korean names are fumbled. For example, among the authors, Yi Yŏnsuk is rendered as "Ri Yoonsuk" (from katakana at that), while Kim Kilsin is misread as "Kim Kosin." To cite one example among historical figures misidentified, the long-time editor of the Chōsen shinbun, Gondō Shirōsuke, becomes "Kendō Shirosuke." The most egregious errors are with names of several prominent Koreans for the entirety of the book: An Chunggŭn becomes "An Chŭnggun"; Yi Ŭn is transformed into "Yi Yun"; Song Pyŏngjun is rendered "Sŏng Bongjun"; and Yi Wi-jong is mistransliterated as "Yi Ŭi-jong." When she conflates Hayashi Tadasu (foreign minister) with Hayashi Gonsuke (not "Gonosuke"—minister plenipotentiary in Seoul), she amalgamates the different roles each played in the road to annexation (in fact, Hayashi Tadasu is never identified although he is the individual she means to be discussing in most instances). The fact that both Hayashis have published memoirs merely amplifies the magnitude of the error.

The technical issues are compounded by thin contextualization and research. Many books and articles listed in the bibliography are never cited. This is vexing when published works highly relevant to discussions in the text are listed but never used. Even books that should have been discussed as a part of the historiographic context, most notably Kim Key-hiuk's, are elided. Furthermore, numerous directly relevant secondary books and articles in Japanese and English (let alone Korean) are missing from the bibliography, while works...