Session 1 (July 9) - 1945-1994: Kim Il Sung

[Kimberly de Berzunza]

I have not studied much about the Korean War and I didn't really realize the 2 years of stalemate. What a terrible and meaningless tragedy. I can see how this would make the NKoreans especially hateful of the Americans. My great-uncle went MIA there in April of '52. I can't help but think how horrible they must have been to him, but also how many people/towns/bridges did he bomb? He was a fighter pilot.

The Robinson article gives a good answer to question #2: "The more serious scars, however, were psychological. Koreans have lived the last fifty years in a state of war... The war tore families apart and sent several million refugees from North to South... The war polarized politics." (p. 119) This seems clear as to how the war determined the divergent paths of the two Koreas.

I appreciate how "Beyond the Numbers" gives a more human look at the war.  These anecdotes support the point I made above in citing the Robinson article, that the scars are psychological.  How do people rebuild their lives after watching such devastation on their own land? This has been our world since the beginning of civilizations, but modern Americans do not have much context for this.  For us, this war was long ago and far away.

In terms of question #1, Kwon and Chung describe Kim Il Sung as a classic populist leader, making personal contacts in a way that made the average worker feel heard, seen, and valued. Obviously this bought him support. People want to feel valued, and are likely to reciprocate that feeling in any way they can. Kim Il Sung developed a persona, becoming a paternalistic caretaker of a new, “free” state. But then on top of that, he found a way to convert people’s hardships into something honorable, to connect their suffering to his. In another society people might have rebelled against their government when they were starving, but North Koreans have been taught that to confront hardship is to follow in their Leader’s footsteps- so this is part of the deification of Kim Il Sung.

The Lankov chapter really solidifies the ways in which Kim Il Sung was able to establish himself, although I would argue that here it is as the “Great Leader” and most wonderful person to have ever lived, rather than simply “communist monarch.” The descriptions of the level of propaganda and indoctrination are incredible and creepy. I could not help but think of Panem of “The Hunger Games” and the world of 1984. How do you get there? By telling the people what you want them to believe, daily for years and years, embedded in math problems and fables, painted on posters and murals, built into obligatory traditions, marked by giant statues, and through complete control of media and access to information.  I see many frightening parallels.

[Jane Hannon]

Like Kimberly, I found the Lankov chapter to be a most useful resource in solidifying my understanding of North Korea; I actually purchased the entire book in Kindle format. It lays things out in a very linear way and provides concrete, vivid details and thorough explanations that will prepare me to answer the types of questions my students asked. My greatest surprise from this reading and this session is that it is possible to know as much as we (or think we do) about North Korea when access to the society is so limited. I was really interested in the accounts of how people in North Korea import South Korean and Western popular culture through China using thumb drives.

[Deborah Whetstone]

That is a fantastic reference to help students understand!!  Due to movies like Hunger Games they seem to understand authoritarian regimes, but are still missing the link to help explain HOW it gets to that point.  Maybe reference the movie, then have them work in groups to come with how THEY think it might get to that point. OH!  I think I just got an idea for my Lesson Plan!!  Thank you! (and hopefully I didn't just take your idea - if so, just let me know! 🙂 )

I've struggled for years to try and help them undertsand how someone like Hitler takes over, with limited success.  I think this angle is incredibly important for students to realize!

[Juana Evink]

As I read the article by Kwong and  Chung, "North Korea's Partisan Family State," I was surprised to learn of the impressive economic and ploitican success that NK experienced right after the Korean War. The first deccade or so was pretty good for most Koreans, they loved their leader KIng II Sung, took extreme pride in the ir labour,  and national pride. It seems that North Korea staretd great, but a couple of decades later things started to decline. Today North Korea doens't seem to experiecne the same level of economic success they once did. Specially now duiring he pamdemic, I'm afraif things are not great in North Korea. 

[Juana Evink]

As I read the article by Kwong and  Chung, "North Korea's Partisan Family State," I was surprised to learn of the impressive economic and ploitican success that NK experienced right after the Korean War. The first deccade or so was pretty good for most Koreans, they loved their leader KIng II Sung, took extreme pride in the ir labour,  and national pride. It seems that North Korea staretd great, but a couple of decades later things started to decline. Today North Korea doens't seem to experiecne the same level of economic success they once did. Specially now duiring he pamdemic, I'm afraif things are not great in North Korea. 

[Author]

Posts