Fall/08 8150
Hyunkyoung Shin
Foucault, Butler and me as a Korean Feminist art educator
1. Introduction
Reading Foucault and Butler deepened not only my knowledge in postmodernism, feminism but also my inner sphere. I might have intuitively approached Foucault’s ideas of the self, identity, and power within my cognitive perspective. His conceptual frame of the power relationship between the subject/power and the other/powerless can be interpreted as a metaphor and implied to Euro white-male-centered culture/America in terms of the foreign power and Korean culture. He showed the power of the center, which is distant from my perspective. The relationship between the power and the powerless induced my awareness of the relationship between white males and Asian females. Under this condition, my knowledge was quite superficial; indeed, the notion of the Other is not the other from my point of view before I read Butler’s book Gender Trouble. It became my procedure to recognize the other in me.
My chaotic conceptual knowledge of culture, language and power elucidate the notions in terms of the identity. And the notion of otherness has embodied my way of thinking and extended to the politic and economic concern by Butler’s keen description.
My awareness of the self-identity as a Korean woman reminds me that my life has oppressed because of the Korean male-dominated and family-centered society. Therefore, I have lived by blaming the male-centered world, because the family centered system has forced Korean women to sacrifice for their family.
I was aware the Subject and the Other are produced by western dichotomy. Related to this issue, I have to summarize western culture’s social and educational problems and the relationship with Korea. Since the Industrial Revolution launched the beginning of Western culture, modern society has become materialistic. Its problem is materialization, fragmentization because of its dichotomy.
In traditional Asian ways of cognition, there was no such modern conceptual dichotomy. However, since Korean modernization has proceeded, people have lived by compiling their images constructed by a European perspective, which is a concept of otherness excluded from the center but our reality is that it already internalized into our naturalized knowledge.
These kinds of awareness integrate into my personal journey how I have constructed my inner demanding desire in Korean society and how it has caused my personal conflict in my everyday living, especially the relationship between my families. Related to this I have to draw out my personal and family stories. To raise it, I have to begin with a brief introduction of Korean history in socio-cultural contexts. In particular, Korea and Japan have constructed unhappy relations throughout our entire history. I cannot avoid mentioning those complex relationships.
2. A Brief Introduction of the Korean Socio-cultural History
In Japan, Toyotomi Hideyoshi opened to the west and built national strength by weapon power. He contributed to unifying the nation by invading Korea (1592- 1598, the Japanese Invasion of Korea), so he became a hero in Japan. Korea was in philosophical debate at that period. After the war, the Korean population was reduced in half, instead Japan’s population became larger than Korea for the first time and Korea declined in its strength and power, which were superior to that of Japan. Our nation's resources exhausted by years of warfare and most artisans were captured by Japan. Since then Japan tried to invade Korea and even occupied Korea for 36 years (1910~1945).
During the Japanese colonial period, they destroyed Korean culture, language, history and Korean living, and tried to disguise Korean history. In particular, they made Korean ancient history a myth, which was Japanese intention to liquidate Korean spirits. A funny example is that the Japanese drove big iron nails on the top of most mountains to destroy the Korean mountain spirits which Korean people believed in as their gods.
We have Korean written language, which King Sejong created (1446) according to the mouth’s shape of the Korean spoken language for consonants and by modeling the shape of the sky and earth for vowels. During the Japanese colonial period, they prohibited Korean language. Koreans had to change even their last names to Japanese names. It is natural that the traditional customs was totally destroyed under the name of modernization.
However, even after liberation, Korean tradition had to be discarded by the insiders of the Korean ruling class who had the power during the colonial period and the outsider Americans, indeed, Christian intervention in South Korea. Our modernization was enforced by Japan and America to control Korea, so Korean cultural values of the dominant classes have sustained their power in South Korea.
After liberation, most Korean intellectuals who exiled to resist Japan’s occupation of Korea returned, but they had to be divided into two ideals--communism and democracy, because the Soviet Union took over the northern part and America took over the southern part of Korea. Many of them chose North Korea but they were executed by the Kim government there.
However, the worst incident is Kim Gu’s assassination by American order (He was the leader of the Korea’s provisional government in Manchuria), because American government wanted a Korean leader to be sided on them. They set up Seungman Lee, who lived in America for 50 years, to be the Korean first president. However, the Soviet Union did not want America to intervene in Korea. This was the international situation, which caused the Korean War (1950~53).
After the Korean War, people were divided into two countries, especially men who lived in the northern area came down to seek the possibility of settling in South Korea, on the other hand, many intellectuals in the south went to the north following their beliefs, so their family parted and never met each other except one occasion through the TV program channel for people who are searching for their families within South Korea.
American culture has become more powerful and a symbol of better living that all Korean people strive for. In the midst of change, the American system legitimized Korean politics and education. The most serious problem is that we lost tradition, which was part of our identity. As a result, peoples’ ways of living has seriously deteriorated and they suffer more from being isolated than in the past and mental depression has become a serious problem in Korean modern society.
Before westernization, Korea was a community-based agricultural society. Most Koreans celebrated their agricultural rituals with gratitude toward nature through the entire year. 70% of Koreans were farmers, even though those populations have been reduced to 10% along with the social change and the Korean peoples’ way of living.
Besides the demolition of the agricultural society, tremendous problems have emerged due to centralization of the capital, Seoul. Korean farmers discarded their land and gathered to the city to follow their fantasy for the elegant city living as being shown by mass-media. Yet, the gap between the poor and the rich has increased seriously. Farmers fell into the poor class in the city and they lost their self-respect, which they kept as farmers for over 5000 years.
Our tradition collapsed along with Korea lost its power. This is not just the case of Korean farmers; indeed, the entire society is in crisis. For example, Dangun’s (he is a spiritual leader and national founder in ancient Korean history) statues were built at every elementary school in Korea to teach students about our history and tradition. However, Christians destroyed all of Danguns’ heads. This is a serious conflict between Korean Christians and Shamanism in Korea, but it is hard and complicated to disclose this issue in public because most of the ruling classes are Christians who believe there is only one God.
In spite of our histories being distorted by the Japanese, we have kept teaching such history in the Korean school. We have to not only recovered our traditional belief but also our spirits. Recently, some progressive scholars started recovering our history. Christians do not want to hear about what they did in Korea. I have learned how to keep silent in my family. Most of my families are Christians except me because I believe all things have spirits, but I respect their god. They do not want to hear me or even hate me when I tell them what I believe.
How can I raise my opinion, which would be controversial from each other’s point of view in public? How brave is Foucault to raise those issues? This would be the reason, which has made him admirable.
3. Foucault: double-marginalized culture, power and education in Korea
Foucault’s writing provides a significant discourse in the cultural marginalization of the power relationaship between gender, language and culture. Regarding this, I recalled a debate about the term ‘Orientalism’ in the Oriental Arts Association in Korea. I raised the notion of ‘Orientalism’, which was the way of seeing Asia from a western-centered perspective, and the concept has been constructed as an exotic, decorative object, and then became a womanly-objectified notion. It was typical characteristics of the gendered Asia, especially, Japanese image. However, it was hard to find a proper alternative to naming the notion, because it has already been constructed in the Korean language within the culture.
Beside the western perspective in the notion of the Orientalism, it cannot represent the three countries of East Asia, which are very different. Even though we share many similar cultural traditions, such as philosophy and materials, specifically the brush and ink on paper, a symbolic image of the three countries has not existed. According to a Korean Scholar, Shin, Younghoon the three countries’ typical characteristics is represented by the line of the roofs. The roof shape of the Chinese architecture is round and Japan’ is straight and Korea’ is not only round but also strait, which is a natural shape. His observation can be applied everywhere. The round shape shows Chinese’ significant dimensional character, the straight line shows Japanese’ artificial cleaness and the natural shape show a similarity with nature.
The problems of these social conditions have been reflected to the educational system. The modern language-centered and text-based education has emphasized students’ development of the brain’s left-hemisphere which plays a role of rational and logical way of thinking. Even though it has contributed to improving people’s literacy, uncritical acceptance and enforced westernization in Korea has enlarged marginalization of Korean Education.
Since human’s cognitive ways of thinking have been constructed by the modern educational system, Korean identity has been exempted from the center of the western culture, so students lost their identities. Moreover, the educational system has enforced the left-brain’s lateralization, which imposes Koreans to be competitive. Under this situation, Korean community-centered society changed into a family-centered society along with their cognitive change of egocentric individualism.
4. Butler: triple-marginalized ‘otherness’ of the Korean women
Reading Butler helped me understand ideas from modern to post-modern period, which were fragmented in me, and my way of thinking started seeing the gender issue and my reality. Reading even her title, “the Traffic in Women” immediately emerges into my personal conflicts and colleagues’ falsified notion as a form of naturalized knowledge. My eyes stopped at one of her points that women’s life are, “to show that the naturalized knowledge of gender operates as a preemptive and violent circumscription of reality. (p. XXIV)
How bright Butler’s integrative perspective, her critical gaze, and the concept of the cognitive awareness of ‘I’ were! Butler notes that the vacillation between the categories itself constitutes the experience of the body in question, “But how can an epistemic/ontological regime be brought into question? What best way to trouble the gender categories that support gender hierarchy and compulsory heterosexuality?...A thing takes on the characterization of ‘being’ and becomes mobilized by that ontological gesture only within a structure of signification that, as the Symbolic, is itself pre-ontological.”(p.59)
Butler points out “the law produces and then conceals the notion of ‘a subject before the law’ in order to invoke that discursive formation as a naturalized foundational premise that subsequently legitimates that law’s own regulatory hegemony.”(p. 3)
Korean husbands have had to work for outer matters because of the national dimension such as the Korean War following the colonial period. They have not learned how to take care of their families, so family matter has been Korean women’s job, indeed, most wives have attached to their children. It is natural Korean men lost their position in family matters; indeed, their social behavior is avoidance in the name of economic reconstruction after the Korean War.
The problem of attachment of Korean mothers and avoidance of Korean fathers evokes more serious problems, especially in education. In the case of the people who are living in Kangnam where the richest people are living, they send their children to study abroad, and soon their mothers follow them to take care of their children. Many waiting fathers, so-called wild goose fathers, left alone to earn money. In fact, their relationships exist as display couples. Sometimes many families migrate for their educational purpose along with the American dream. If they have money, the problem would be better. Most Korean migrants are living in Korean Christian communities with little choice, but the problem is they are living in their self-centered world. This situation is the same in Korea. We cannot solve our problematic situations by escaping/avoidance, because it is situated inside of us.
Their cathexis turns toward their husband or their children, but when they come to face the cathexis in their life, such as their life’s change of the case that their children grown up. According to Freud, their children repudiate the mother and adopt an ambivalent attitude toward father. (p.80) 40 % of the mid-life wives living in Kangnam are diagnosed with the melancholia according to a presentation of the Korean Psychoanalysis Association. Its ratio is the highest in the world. Its cause is their self-respect deficiency and competitive way of living. They have to live better than the others and their children have to study better than the other children. They have to fight endlessly with others for their family, but finally they become competitive within themselves.
According to her, Freud’s melancholia is how one’s love becomes the other, again becomes part of the ego through the permanent internalization of the other’s attributes (p.78). The morning status is analyzed to the ‘internalizing strategy of melancholia’ gender foundation.
Kangnam women’s fetish desire turning toward the outside are like puppets to be visible in terms of Faucault’s Panopticon. Such women’s way of living is a comic masquerade in Lacan‘s theory of the language between the centered notion of the power and powerless. Irigray remarks in such a vein that “the masquerade… is what women do… in order to participate in man’s desire, but at the cost of giving up their own.”(p.64)
Butler cites Lacan: “it is for what she is not that she expects to be desired as well as loved. But she finds the signifier of her own desire in the body of the one to whom she addresses her demand for love. Certainly we should not forget that the organ invested with this signifying function takes on the value of a fetish. (p. 84)
I am lamenting for me and my colleagues by facing Butler’s inevitable reality of our inverted and falsified causality of the ‘self’. Self-respect is different from one’s narcissistic egoism. The problem of human’s subjectivity which is an essential element of identity is human’s ego-centrism, and it is supposed to be controversial from each other’s perspective because everybody is ego-centric. Therefore, humans are supposed to face their conflicts between not only the inside of themselves but also each other.
This is the notion of the other in my own inner self which is internalized by others. Butler’s bright gaze is conversant with how the Other (female) becomes self-defeated by the subject/male. Their falsified identity for men-centered desire has been constructed by their suppressed unconsciousness, which has been inherited several generations from mother to mother in Korean male-centered tradition. They reiterate the structure attachment and being hurt again. As a result, their emotional immatureness has kept reinforcing in women’s life.
Those unsolved problems transcend to the next generation, indeed in the name of the parental caring. There has been little role model within the Korean family-centered structure within a new clear family. Therefore, growing up is a matter of how to overcome people’s self-centered condition, so an assignment remained. For my further study I would like to focus on Foucault’s caring of the self. For the final paper I would like to focus on culture, education and me as a Korean feminist artist and art educator through my visual discourse focused on my works. Because education is my art works as an extended notion to share my procedure how I came to face my conflict and then overcome in terms of the otherness and identity, and I believe the Visual literacy, the way of seeing, is the way to induce change.
2008년 11월 23일 일요일
2008년 10월 15일 수요일
globalization
The overall context of Bauman’s book delivers meaningful perception almost like many layers of an allegory. He diagnosed the modern problems of globalization and keenly criticized, especially the ideology of symmetrical differentiation in the first part, Time and Class. His way of viewing the problems reached a deeper level of understanding humans’ habits and culture through his holistic perspective. I agree with his discourse on the human consequence of polarization of the privileged/rich and unprivileged/poor has increased.
His insightful vision connects the concepts of ‘near’ to a psychological realm of anxiety-prone hesitation. “The idea of the ‘near’, on the other hand, stands for the unproblematic; painlessly acquired habits will do, and since they are habits they feel weightless and call for no effort, giving no occasion to anxiety- prone hesitation” (P. 14). Peoples’ settled habits make them not understand far beyond their boundary.
In the chapter, on New Speed and New Polarization, he states, “Some can now move out of the locality-any locality- at will. Others watch helplessly the sole locality they inhabit moving away from under their feet” (p.18). The new elite are isolated from physical space as ideologists are ungrounded or Christians find the truth from heaven, so symmetrical differentiation is impossible extension.
He continues “In Margand Werheim’s analogy between cyberspace and the Christian conception of heaven’…….while early Christian promulgated heaven as a realm in which the human society would be freed from the frailities and falling of the fresh, so today’s champions of cyberspace halt it as a place where the self will be freed from the limitations of physical embodiment”(p. 19). According to Bauman, it is a natural limit of human sight, hearing and memorizing capacity, but the problem is that those habits follow not their isolation, but others’.
Related to this concept of humans’ limitation, the theme of my final thesis is how to teach a way of seeing in order for people to understand their self-centered point of view. “One can safely anticipate that the strategy of symmetrical differentiation would always be preferred to the complementary alternative…. and above all the exterritoriality of the new elite and the forced territoriality of the rest” (p.23). There is no equality in Globalization. Those with the Power enforce the ideology of globalization of the poor in order to sustain their power.
His critical perspective of globalization makes me understand not only Korean peasants’ situation- their desire to leave their place--as an example of their loss because of what Bauman calls enforced immobility but also their contradictory habits--the farmers’ burden regarding their work--which were beyond my understanding. However, the farmers’ lack of Internet use follows their loss of power/richness and identity, ironically because they see/hear about its freedom through media, which seems like an egalitarian tool. They have enforced into double-surrounded walls in terms of ‘culture’ and ‘community’.
For Korean farmers, culture, especially English culture, is power. In this situation globalization is a hegemonic game, so it is like another type of Christian crusade of the Middle Age.
Nils Christie’s allegory of Moses’ pyramidal justice and the water well’s egalitarian justice defines the problem of loss of traditional community role well. The Industrial Revolution launched the beginning of the Western culture for modern society. Even though it has ensured peoples’ modern living is more convenient, Korea lost the traditional role of community and large family system, which had connected peoples’ living with each other and sustained their secure lives. As a result, we suffer more from being isolated than in the past (Cornish, 1991), the society has become materialistic and fragmented, and mental oppression has been serious in our modern society.
He questions at the end of his book, “If the concentration camps serves as laboratories of a totalitarian society, where the limits of human submission and serfdom were explored, and if the Panopticon-style work houses served as the laboratories of industrial society, where the limits of routinization of human action were experimented with-the Pelican Bay prison is a laboratory of the ‘globalized’ (or ‘planetary’, in Alberto Meluccic terms) society, where the techniques of space-confinement of the rejects and the waste of globalization are tested and their limits are explored” (p.113).
He has criticized the problems of power, however, his question remains, “The question is all the more ethically worrying for the fact that ‘those we punish to a large extent are poor and highly stigmatized people in need of assistance rather than punishment” (p.114, cited from Matiesen, Prison on Trial, p. 70).
I admire his thoughtful commitment about those who are powerless, and it is true that they need help. However, ultimately it is not a matter of being “in need of assistance’, but a matter of the privileged peoples’ understanding about how powerless as they are. Without it, his idea will create another hierarchical discernment as well.
Understanding these modern problems helps me clarify the Korean situation that we are going through, but my educational concern emerges into a question: How do I convey my understanding to others whose way of seeing/thinking already solidified? What and how can we teach for peoples’ change/transformation from fetishistic to voyeuristic look (by Bauman’s term)/critical gaze.
His insightful vision connects the concepts of ‘near’ to a psychological realm of anxiety-prone hesitation. “The idea of the ‘near’, on the other hand, stands for the unproblematic; painlessly acquired habits will do, and since they are habits they feel weightless and call for no effort, giving no occasion to anxiety- prone hesitation” (P. 14). Peoples’ settled habits make them not understand far beyond their boundary.
In the chapter, on New Speed and New Polarization, he states, “Some can now move out of the locality-any locality- at will. Others watch helplessly the sole locality they inhabit moving away from under their feet” (p.18). The new elite are isolated from physical space as ideologists are ungrounded or Christians find the truth from heaven, so symmetrical differentiation is impossible extension.
He continues “In Margand Werheim’s analogy between cyberspace and the Christian conception of heaven’…….while early Christian promulgated heaven as a realm in which the human society would be freed from the frailities and falling of the fresh, so today’s champions of cyberspace halt it as a place where the self will be freed from the limitations of physical embodiment”(p. 19). According to Bauman, it is a natural limit of human sight, hearing and memorizing capacity, but the problem is that those habits follow not their isolation, but others’.
Related to this concept of humans’ limitation, the theme of my final thesis is how to teach a way of seeing in order for people to understand their self-centered point of view. “One can safely anticipate that the strategy of symmetrical differentiation would always be preferred to the complementary alternative…. and above all the exterritoriality of the new elite and the forced territoriality of the rest” (p.23). There is no equality in Globalization. Those with the Power enforce the ideology of globalization of the poor in order to sustain their power.
His critical perspective of globalization makes me understand not only Korean peasants’ situation- their desire to leave their place--as an example of their loss because of what Bauman calls enforced immobility but also their contradictory habits--the farmers’ burden regarding their work--which were beyond my understanding. However, the farmers’ lack of Internet use follows their loss of power/richness and identity, ironically because they see/hear about its freedom through media, which seems like an egalitarian tool. They have enforced into double-surrounded walls in terms of ‘culture’ and ‘community’.
For Korean farmers, culture, especially English culture, is power. In this situation globalization is a hegemonic game, so it is like another type of Christian crusade of the Middle Age.
Nils Christie’s allegory of Moses’ pyramidal justice and the water well’s egalitarian justice defines the problem of loss of traditional community role well. The Industrial Revolution launched the beginning of the Western culture for modern society. Even though it has ensured peoples’ modern living is more convenient, Korea lost the traditional role of community and large family system, which had connected peoples’ living with each other and sustained their secure lives. As a result, we suffer more from being isolated than in the past (Cornish, 1991), the society has become materialistic and fragmented, and mental oppression has been serious in our modern society.
He questions at the end of his book, “If the concentration camps serves as laboratories of a totalitarian society, where the limits of human submission and serfdom were explored, and if the Panopticon-style work houses served as the laboratories of industrial society, where the limits of routinization of human action were experimented with-the Pelican Bay prison is a laboratory of the ‘globalized’ (or ‘planetary’, in Alberto Meluccic terms) society, where the techniques of space-confinement of the rejects and the waste of globalization are tested and their limits are explored” (p.113).
He has criticized the problems of power, however, his question remains, “The question is all the more ethically worrying for the fact that ‘those we punish to a large extent are poor and highly stigmatized people in need of assistance rather than punishment” (p.114, cited from Matiesen, Prison on Trial, p. 70).
I admire his thoughtful commitment about those who are powerless, and it is true that they need help. However, ultimately it is not a matter of being “in need of assistance’, but a matter of the privileged peoples’ understanding about how powerless as they are. Without it, his idea will create another hierarchical discernment as well.
Understanding these modern problems helps me clarify the Korean situation that we are going through, but my educational concern emerges into a question: How do I convey my understanding to others whose way of seeing/thinking already solidified? What and how can we teach for peoples’ change/transformation from fetishistic to voyeuristic look (by Bauman’s term)/critical gaze.
2008년 10월 14일 화요일
culture, language and education
The role of visual education as identity and critical gaze: art as deconstruction and reconstruction
Since one’s cognition is constructed by the modern educational system, people’s way of seeing has been distorted by the European white-male-centered point of view, which is English culture; as a result, others’ identities have been exempted from the center. Indeed, we have lived constructing by seeing through others’ eyes, not seeing with our own eyes. For this reason, we have to deconstruct our notion that we have constructed by now (Derrida, 2000, Foucault, M; 1994). In particular, language in English culture is power. That is, western culture is power over others, so the other cultures are powerless.
In particular, Korean culture has faced crisis. Korean cultural values of the dominent classes, which sided with Japan have sustained their power in South Korea because of American intervention after liberation from the Japanese colony (1910~1945). In addition, after the Korean War (1950~53) American culture has become more powerful, so it came to be a symbol of a better living that all of Korean culture and people strive for.
The problem is that we lost our tradition, which was a part of our identity during the turmoil of westernization in the name of modernization. In this situation, globalization is a hegemonic game. Western culture’s dichotomy has brought more problems that are serious to art education. Learning art strongly affects students’ cognition without noticing it, because the process is so connected to cognitive perception.
Modern art has been separated from their lives. No doubt, this problem caused problems while I ran the “self-expression through art” program. Its object is to recognize our way of seeing which was distorted by the Euro-white male centered point of view. Through the process of reinterpreting art works, participants deconstruct their previous knowledge and way of thinking, and then they reconstruct their own eyes. This process is a kind of spiritual journey to see themselves, as well as things as they are and to get out from their self-centeredness.
However, people who were accustomed to conventional education tended to reject or ignore the new art basics (New Art Basics of the Iowa University), especially women who were living in the Kangnam area where the richest people live in Korea (they fear that the unconscious mind would be revealed through self-expression). This is related to the common presumption that the role of art has been firmly constructed historically and socially. Who constructed art to be difficult and special? After questioning, we can reconstruct our way of seeing and notion of art (Sturken, M. & Cartwright, L.; 2001, Rogoff, I.; 1998, Duncum, P.; 2001, Freedman, K.; 2003).
After their self-awareness that their views are self-centered and it is others’ way of seeing, they can reconstruct their own way of seeing--identity. It seems to be impossible to recover Korean people’s own way of seeing because their way of seeing has already solidified.
Identity and critical gaze (Perkins, 1994, Tavin, K, & Hausman, J., 2004) has become more important in our multicultural society and these two points are very important for educational reform. What do we have to teach for change? We have to teach the way of seeing and critical gaze, then an individual is able to see the self. This is the reason that self-expressive visual education can play a role.
Since one’s cognition is constructed by the modern educational system, people’s way of seeing has been distorted by the European white-male-centered point of view, which is English culture; as a result, others’ identities have been exempted from the center. Indeed, we have lived constructing by seeing through others’ eyes, not seeing with our own eyes. For this reason, we have to deconstruct our notion that we have constructed by now (Derrida, 2000, Foucault, M; 1994). In particular, language in English culture is power. That is, western culture is power over others, so the other cultures are powerless.
In particular, Korean culture has faced crisis. Korean cultural values of the dominent classes, which sided with Japan have sustained their power in South Korea because of American intervention after liberation from the Japanese colony (1910~1945). In addition, after the Korean War (1950~53) American culture has become more powerful, so it came to be a symbol of a better living that all of Korean culture and people strive for.
The problem is that we lost our tradition, which was a part of our identity during the turmoil of westernization in the name of modernization. In this situation, globalization is a hegemonic game. Western culture’s dichotomy has brought more problems that are serious to art education. Learning art strongly affects students’ cognition without noticing it, because the process is so connected to cognitive perception.
Modern art has been separated from their lives. No doubt, this problem caused problems while I ran the “self-expression through art” program. Its object is to recognize our way of seeing which was distorted by the Euro-white male centered point of view. Through the process of reinterpreting art works, participants deconstruct their previous knowledge and way of thinking, and then they reconstruct their own eyes. This process is a kind of spiritual journey to see themselves, as well as things as they are and to get out from their self-centeredness.
However, people who were accustomed to conventional education tended to reject or ignore the new art basics (New Art Basics of the Iowa University), especially women who were living in the Kangnam area where the richest people live in Korea (they fear that the unconscious mind would be revealed through self-expression). This is related to the common presumption that the role of art has been firmly constructed historically and socially. Who constructed art to be difficult and special? After questioning, we can reconstruct our way of seeing and notion of art (Sturken, M. & Cartwright, L.; 2001, Rogoff, I.; 1998, Duncum, P.; 2001, Freedman, K.; 2003).
After their self-awareness that their views are self-centered and it is others’ way of seeing, they can reconstruct their own way of seeing--identity. It seems to be impossible to recover Korean people’s own way of seeing because their way of seeing has already solidified.
Identity and critical gaze (Perkins, 1994, Tavin, K, & Hausman, J., 2004) has become more important in our multicultural society and these two points are very important for educational reform. What do we have to teach for change? We have to teach the way of seeing and critical gaze, then an individual is able to see the self. This is the reason that self-expressive visual education can play a role.
2008년 9월 24일 수요일
5. my thought on Bauman and Korean education
Frankly speaking, I was not able to complete Bauman’s two books. Because I got them the last Monday and it was boring to keep reading due to my physical condition of my right ankle’s pain. Besides, I felt Bauman’s idea has pointed out in Globalization was not up to date and he focused on critique of economical problems, which are external phenomena. He mentioned at the introduction of the Globalization piece that he tried to question of our times. I agree to it, but we, educators, should have criteria to solve the problems. I hope he evoked something at the end of his books. So I wrote this focusing my thought of internal issues in consuming life and globalization.
I think, if one is not living with his/her own eyes/perspectives, life would be consuming. Everybody has one’s own eyes but I mean it in terms of psychological realm of one’s identity.
It is easy and clear to say borrowing two visual materials of the catholic angels. The image of the white female angel is a western people’s image which is the icon of others’ eyes(culture) in my eastern point of view. Korean catholic love this icon and believe as a symbol of their ideal idol. This is the power of western culture. They are merely sacrifice of the culture’s power. The formidable is that it has already become their belief/life, hopefully, a part of their life.
My mother, sister and brother’ family except me are catholic. I am wondering that it is impossible to say this point to them. There is one Korean catholic church in Minnesota. The architecture of the church (even Korean) is same as the western church. There is a little difference to build a church according to a financial situation. Here again, the economical condition has launched which I wanted to ignore. I have to admit that Bauman’s critical view centered in economic is inevitable situation of our materialized world.
What we can learn from the trial and error of the past? It is to know the next step and not to repeat the trial and error. It is important to be aware of what the problems are? We have to extract the essence of the society from the critical viewpoint and learn not to the past trial and error is essential component for our times.
It is a matter how to teach the way of seeing, starts seeing through critical gaze in cultural contexts and then one’s eyes, which are able to see hidden meaning of our modern material world. My concern in education is how to teach spirituality in our fast changing society. And also we, Korean lost out spirituality in turmoil of modernization because of our uncritical acceptance of American educational system.
I think, if one is not living with his/her own eyes/perspectives, life would be consuming. Everybody has one’s own eyes but I mean it in terms of psychological realm of one’s identity.
It is easy and clear to say borrowing two visual materials of the catholic angels. The image of the white female angel is a western people’s image which is the icon of others’ eyes(culture) in my eastern point of view. Korean catholic love this icon and believe as a symbol of their ideal idol. This is the power of western culture. They are merely sacrifice of the culture’s power. The formidable is that it has already become their belief/life, hopefully, a part of their life.
My mother, sister and brother’ family except me are catholic. I am wondering that it is impossible to say this point to them. There is one Korean catholic church in Minnesota. The architecture of the church (even Korean) is same as the western church. There is a little difference to build a church according to a financial situation. Here again, the economical condition has launched which I wanted to ignore. I have to admit that Bauman’s critical view centered in economic is inevitable situation of our materialized world.
What we can learn from the trial and error of the past? It is to know the next step and not to repeat the trial and error. It is important to be aware of what the problems are? We have to extract the essence of the society from the critical viewpoint and learn not to the past trial and error is essential component for our times.
It is a matter how to teach the way of seeing, starts seeing through critical gaze in cultural contexts and then one’s eyes, which are able to see hidden meaning of our modern material world. My concern in education is how to teach spirituality in our fast changing society. And also we, Korean lost out spirituality in turmoil of modernization because of our uncritical acceptance of American educational system.
2008년 9월 17일 수요일
4. feminist theory by Maricarmen Martinez
Maricarmen Martinez
Firestone's and Wilson's views on the Oppression of Women
Firestone claims that reproductive biology causes the oppression of Women. She uses several premises to support this claim, among them, Marilyn Frye's definition of oppression and Marx's method for the elimination of oppression. The definition of oppression that Firestone takes from Frye is: oppression is a socio-political system designed to purposely confine, shape, manipulate or reduce a particular class or caste of people solely on arbitrary grounds and for the advantage, of another class. The oppressive system uses barriers to confine the oppressed class or caste. These barriers take the form of norms, laws, procedures, and societal practices which prevent the oppressed class or caste to develop its full potential and achieve freedom. Thus, practices or behaviors such as rape and domestic abuse, as well as social norms that guide motherhood, serve as barriers against women. These barriers which are built into the system, are not immediately perceived but a closer look at the organization of society might reveal their existence. For Firestone, as well as for Frye, a woman in an oppressive society is somehow like a bird in a cage. If someone sees a birdcage he or she wonders why the bird does not fly away. This is so because, the wires that make up the cage cannot be seen from a distance. However, a step back will soon show that the wires interconnect and intersect. The same is true for women. It is therefore, necessary to pay close attention in order to see the patterns of confinement that society devises for women. Since Firestone shares with Marx the premise that every form of oppression is unjust, as well as his method of finding the cause of oppression to eradicate it, she goes on to find the cause of the barriers that confine women.
Firestone examines the different barriers that confine women such as all forms of sexual aggression as well as the limitations associated with menstruation, child bearing. She claims that the common denominator of these barriers is that they are caused by reproductive biology. Firestone argues that women are physically weakened by their reproductive biology and that the male dominated society arbitrarily takes advantage of this fact, and even makes that weakness more drastic. Thus, men used the weakness of women, which results from their reproductive biology to create a sexual division of labor. This allowed men to be explorers of their environment and confined women to domestic chores and raising the children. Thus, female reproductive biology causes the unequal distribution of power in the biological family. Furthermore, the reproductive biology of women also causes that they are psychologically weakened. Men created a society defined in terms of gender roles that prescribe that women should behave as "passive" females or act" feminine" and that they should "dominate' by men. This society also encourages heterosexuality as the sexual practice that guarantees that women should remain confined by their reproductive biology and which allows men to continue to control the reproductive biology of the women.
Once Firestone shows that reproductive biology causes the oppression of women, she moves on to say that the endorsement and use of reproductive biology as an institution is politically dangerous. Reproductive biology causes oppression and every form of oppression is unjust. Therefore, Firestone proposes to eliminate reproductive biology and that women should take control of their reproductive biology. Human beings are not controlled or obliged by their biology. Historically, we have used technology to liberate ourselves from the threats of nature and also for our freedom and well being. We can and should use technology to liberate us from the confinement brought upon us by nature. The oppression of women will cease if we eliminate reproductive biology and substitute it by artificial reproduction. With the elimination of reproductive biology, the sex/gender system and the institution of heterosexuality will collapse.
A conservative such as Edward Wilson would criticize Firestone's argument by showing that the differences based on reproductive biology are not oppressive, but necessary. Wilson defends this claim by using an "efficiency argument". This type of arguments states that society should encourage and enhance all that is useful and beneficial to it. For Wilson, the biological or natural differences of men and women as well as the institutions based on them should be encouraged, since what is at stake is the natural order of evolution. This order is useful and efficient at preserving the human species and producing a rich and diverse variety of human beings. Therefore, encouraging and enhancing the sexual differences should preserve this order, even if this implies sacrificing individuals that would rather be doing other things than those determined by their sex.
Firestone has a way to avoid the criticism from Wilson by restating that the proposal is guided by the ethical principle: "Every form of oppression is unjust". As human beings we should enhance and foster any practice that help us eliminate oppression. Our commitment is with other human beings and not with nature. Firestone could also argue that the fact that the differences between men and women are necessary does not prevent them from being oppressive, just as the undeniable fact that is necessary to die does not make death less sad, and some could say unfair.
Wilson could argue back that in order us to be committed to each other qua human beings rather than mere biological species; we have to exist as a species. This implies that we are not going to develop practices such as artificial reproduction that could endanger our life in the Planet. Yet, Firestone could argue that artificial reproduction is functionally equivalent to natural reproduction. What are artificial are the means of reproduction and not the result of reproduction. People and not robots are the results of artificial reproduction. A technology designed to liberate women from reproduction is still reproduction. An artificial reproduction that will wipe out a species is a contradiction in terms. As for diversity, people will continue to be as diverse as the DNA allows them to be. Again, Firestone does not talk about the result of the reproduction, which is always going to be people, but of eliminating natural reproduction as the ONLY way of propagating the species.
Firestone's and Wilson's views on the Oppression of Women
Firestone claims that reproductive biology causes the oppression of Women. She uses several premises to support this claim, among them, Marilyn Frye's definition of oppression and Marx's method for the elimination of oppression. The definition of oppression that Firestone takes from Frye is: oppression is a socio-political system designed to purposely confine, shape, manipulate or reduce a particular class or caste of people solely on arbitrary grounds and for the advantage, of another class. The oppressive system uses barriers to confine the oppressed class or caste. These barriers take the form of norms, laws, procedures, and societal practices which prevent the oppressed class or caste to develop its full potential and achieve freedom. Thus, practices or behaviors such as rape and domestic abuse, as well as social norms that guide motherhood, serve as barriers against women. These barriers which are built into the system, are not immediately perceived but a closer look at the organization of society might reveal their existence. For Firestone, as well as for Frye, a woman in an oppressive society is somehow like a bird in a cage. If someone sees a birdcage he or she wonders why the bird does not fly away. This is so because, the wires that make up the cage cannot be seen from a distance. However, a step back will soon show that the wires interconnect and intersect. The same is true for women. It is therefore, necessary to pay close attention in order to see the patterns of confinement that society devises for women. Since Firestone shares with Marx the premise that every form of oppression is unjust, as well as his method of finding the cause of oppression to eradicate it, she goes on to find the cause of the barriers that confine women.
Firestone examines the different barriers that confine women such as all forms of sexual aggression as well as the limitations associated with menstruation, child bearing. She claims that the common denominator of these barriers is that they are caused by reproductive biology. Firestone argues that women are physically weakened by their reproductive biology and that the male dominated society arbitrarily takes advantage of this fact, and even makes that weakness more drastic. Thus, men used the weakness of women, which results from their reproductive biology to create a sexual division of labor. This allowed men to be explorers of their environment and confined women to domestic chores and raising the children. Thus, female reproductive biology causes the unequal distribution of power in the biological family. Furthermore, the reproductive biology of women also causes that they are psychologically weakened. Men created a society defined in terms of gender roles that prescribe that women should behave as "passive" females or act" feminine" and that they should "dominate' by men. This society also encourages heterosexuality as the sexual practice that guarantees that women should remain confined by their reproductive biology and which allows men to continue to control the reproductive biology of the women.
Once Firestone shows that reproductive biology causes the oppression of women, she moves on to say that the endorsement and use of reproductive biology as an institution is politically dangerous. Reproductive biology causes oppression and every form of oppression is unjust. Therefore, Firestone proposes to eliminate reproductive biology and that women should take control of their reproductive biology. Human beings are not controlled or obliged by their biology. Historically, we have used technology to liberate ourselves from the threats of nature and also for our freedom and well being. We can and should use technology to liberate us from the confinement brought upon us by nature. The oppression of women will cease if we eliminate reproductive biology and substitute it by artificial reproduction. With the elimination of reproductive biology, the sex/gender system and the institution of heterosexuality will collapse.
A conservative such as Edward Wilson would criticize Firestone's argument by showing that the differences based on reproductive biology are not oppressive, but necessary. Wilson defends this claim by using an "efficiency argument". This type of arguments states that society should encourage and enhance all that is useful and beneficial to it. For Wilson, the biological or natural differences of men and women as well as the institutions based on them should be encouraged, since what is at stake is the natural order of evolution. This order is useful and efficient at preserving the human species and producing a rich and diverse variety of human beings. Therefore, encouraging and enhancing the sexual differences should preserve this order, even if this implies sacrificing individuals that would rather be doing other things than those determined by their sex.
Firestone has a way to avoid the criticism from Wilson by restating that the proposal is guided by the ethical principle: "Every form of oppression is unjust". As human beings we should enhance and foster any practice that help us eliminate oppression. Our commitment is with other human beings and not with nature. Firestone could also argue that the fact that the differences between men and women are necessary does not prevent them from being oppressive, just as the undeniable fact that is necessary to die does not make death less sad, and some could say unfair.
Wilson could argue back that in order us to be committed to each other qua human beings rather than mere biological species; we have to exist as a species. This implies that we are not going to develop practices such as artificial reproduction that could endanger our life in the Planet. Yet, Firestone could argue that artificial reproduction is functionally equivalent to natural reproduction. What are artificial are the means of reproduction and not the result of reproduction. People and not robots are the results of artificial reproduction. A technology designed to liberate women from reproduction is still reproduction. An artificial reproduction that will wipe out a species is a contradiction in terms. As for diversity, people will continue to be as diverse as the DNA allows them to be. Again, Firestone does not talk about the result of the reproduction, which is always going to be people, but of eliminating natural reproduction as the ONLY way of propagating the species.
2008년 9월 15일 월요일
3. Hidden Korea
Culture
Korean Culture:
Three Mrs. Kims dressed in traditional hanboks
Like all agricultural societies, Korean life has always centered on tightly knit families. Large families have been prized and over many centuries families intermarried within the regions of Korea to form large clans. Family names reflect this. A dozen family names predominate, especially Kim, Park, Lee, Kang, and Cho. But Kims from the city of Pusan in the south are not the Kims from Seoul and all the Kims know exactly which group they belong to. Custom forbids people marrying within their own clan, no matter how distant the cousin might be. In order to know who is who, families and clan keep detailed genealogical records that might go back many hundreds of years. Even in today's westernized Korea many people can still recite the glorious history of their clans and take pride in them.
.
Couple on their way to Ch'usok ceremony
Confucian Ideas:
Already male centered, Korean society became highly patriarchal when the Confucian system was imported from China and made the official state belief system in about 1390 A.D. Order and authority are the hallmarks of Confucian thought. Fathers are responsible for their families and must be both obeyed and revered by everyone. Even ancestral fathers are honored. The custom is called filiopiety and even today elements of it remain among Koreans. Traditionally, older people are accorded honor. For instance, at dinner the eldest person sits first and eats and drinks before anyone else can begin. Anyone older must always be addressed with honorifics, even among acquaintances. No one would think of calling an older person by their first name, much less a grandfather or grandmother. Bowing to them is the really traditional way of greeting. Hard work, obedience to family, protection of the family, and proper decorum among family members are very much Korean values, even in the modern world.
.
Mrs. Kim teaches her grand-daughter the art of cooking
Women and Village Life:
Today, women are in every occupation, from government officials to business persons and professors. In traditional Korean society, women had set roles. They were expected to stay at home, to raise their children, keep house and prepare meals. In farming villages they also worked in the fields. When women married they came to live in their husbands' houses, but always kept their own family names. Once in their husbands' homes, they became part of the extended families. Not only were they to obey the eldest males in the family and their husbands, but to take commands from the eldest woman. As in many traditional societies, the oldest women within the household, a grandmother, for instance, had great power over the rest of the women and children. And, more than one son would think twice about disregarding the wishes of a powerful grandmother.
The idea of cooperation based on a system of authority worked in the old villages. Villagers often banded together to help one another in times of need and for important events. If a member might need help in a harvest or perhaps house repairs all the rest would gather to help. When a village needed a new well or a bridge, for example, everyone pitched in to build them. For important occasions such as funerals, weddings, or major birthday party (usually when a man reached the age of 60), villagers often pooled their moneys to make a grand party. That sense of solidarity with one's neighbors and even one's nation still flows through Korean life today.
For more information on this subject:
http://iml.jou.ufl.edu/projects/STUDENTS/Hwang/home.htm http://www.joins.com/kwin/index.html
this is the PBS online video. the title is Hidden Korea. i have chosen Korean culture, confucian ideas, and women and village life amongst several subject .
2008년 9월 12일 금요일
2. orientalism and turning it back
The title of my work is “Orientalism and Turning It Back”. I am trying to say with my work. I expressed my cultural notion in viewing the term ‘Orientalism’ which is a view-point which is watching us -me- from western-centered thought and language. I started rethinking the word and writing down my thoughts as they have pop out from my mind, then drawing as what my thought means into images and texts on my pictorial space.
I wrote my Korean translation on the drawing.
Orientalism: Knowledge about orient. Orient is far. A thing which is far looks small from western point of views. The orient looks small, so it is small with them that means orientalism. No. it is not small from my eyes, rather the western looks small. The glass of Orientalism is not truth, it looks only small by the western eyes.
The following is the paired drawing ‘And Turning It Back’: A thing which is far far from my point of view looks small. The western which is far should look small. But why does the western look big and a thing which is far look bigger?
Behind the transparent screen on the drawing I wrote.
Why do I look me small, but I sometimes look me big. Who am I?
No. No. No. … Why I cannot see mine and I can see better the thing which is far. It was due to the glasses of education which I have learned and constructed make me small even though it is close but look larger rather the western which is far.
I wrote my Korean translation on the drawing.
Orientalism: Knowledge about orient. Orient is far. A thing which is far looks small from western point of views. The orient looks small, so it is small with them that means orientalism. No. it is not small from my eyes, rather the western looks small. The glass of Orientalism is not truth, it looks only small by the western eyes.
The following is the paired drawing ‘And Turning It Back’: A thing which is far far from my point of view looks small. The western which is far should look small. But why does the western look big and a thing which is far look bigger?
Behind the transparent screen on the drawing I wrote.
Why do I look me small, but I sometimes look me big. Who am I?
No. No. No. … Why I cannot see mine and I can see better the thing which is far. It was due to the glasses of education which I have learned and constructed make me small even though it is close but look larger rather the western which is far.
피드 구독하기:
글 (Atom)