Cultural Nationalism in Colonial Korea, 1920-1925 (review)

BOOK REVIEWS197 of further enlightenment efforts in the "Patriotic Enlightenment Campaign" of Pak Ün-sik and others in the next decade. Third, the question of indigenous roots of enlightenment thought must be pursued with attention to the influence not only of Western sociopolitical thought, but also of Chinese and Japanese enlightenment figures on their Korean counterparts. Stimulated in part by Chandra's own research aims (p. 1), I am suggesting a much wider research agenda than can be adequately pursued within any one monograph. In providing this valuable introduction, Chandra may nudge the scholarly community to take greater notice of ideologies and sociopolitical movements in Korea at the turn of the century. Dennis McNamara Georgetown University Cultural Nationalism in Colonial Korea, 1920-1925, by Michael Edson Robinson. Korean Studies of the Henry M. Jackson School of International Studies. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1988. ? + 217 p. Bibliography, index. $25. With the publication of this work, Michael E. Robinson has established himself as a first-rate interpreter of modern Korean nationalism. Although the focus of his book is only on a five year period in the 1920s, it is cogently and lucidly connected to events over the preceding five decades, helping the reader grasp the full contextual significance of the themes under discussion. And while the author's references to post-1925 developments do not go beyond the late 1920s, the issues he raises have been endemic to Korean politics ever since, and so the reader cannot but feel stimulated to think about the entire Korean experience with modern nationalism. Why then did the author pick the years 1920-1925 for concentrated inquiry? He offers quite logical and convincing reasons for doing so. Questions revolving around Korean national consciousness—what it means to be a nation, and what its political, economic, social, and cultural components are—had acquired by the 1920s a sharpness and poignancy that they had not had before. Japan had snuffed out Korean independence in 1910, and despite the celebrated March 1, 1919, uprising, was firmly in control of Korea's destiny. Concerned Korean minds were more than ever becoming troubled by the stark possibility that Koreans might have to live under permanent Japanese imperial rule. If so, what should be the response of Koreans? Should they resign themselves to the prospect and salvage what they could of their dignity and well-being by working "within the system," or should they keep hope alive against all odds, fight Japanese imperialism valiantly, try to recover national independence, and build a new kind of nation-state that would be strong, prosperous, and progressive? Inevitably such questions raised other questions: What were the strengths and weaknesses of Koreans as a people? What role did language, history, mythology, personal and social values, world views, and political systems play in shaping a 198BOOK REVIEWS nation's destiny? What was worth preserving, what was to be safely discarded, and what was to be altered or adapted to new needs? What could Koreans learn from the historical experiences and contemporary situations of other countries— Eastern and Western, the strong and successful, and the weak and subjugated? These and other ramifications of what was essentially a Social Darwinian concern constituted the main themes of discussion among patriotic Koreans. They examined them with passion as well as thoughtfulness, through numerous social and cultural forums, especially the new newspapers and magazines that emerged during the early 1920s. To be sure none of the debates were new. AU of them in one way or another had figured in the platforms of such reformist groups as the Enlightenment Party of the 1880s, the Independence Club of the late 1890s, and the numerous splinter organizations of the first two decades of the twentieth century. Robinson in fact takes due cognizance of them and offers a skillful summary of the groundwork done by them for the new intellectuals of the 1920s. Yet as his narrative amply shows, several evolving factors injected fresh urgency, new insights, and more sophistication into familiar issues and, naturally, some of the solutions were new as well. The relatively less repressive, more tolerant "cultural" policy of the Japanese colonial government in Korea, designed to cultivate world public opinion...