• Journal of Ginseng Culture
• /
• v.1
• /
• pp.78-92
• /
• 2019

Among the Southeast Asian countries, Vietnam had the most cultural exchange with Korea. Through Confusion and Chinese character, which were the common measure for two countries, Korea and Vietnam could communicate and share a sentiment with each other. Two countries showed an enormous interest in each other, and hence they could keep good relationship without official diplomatic relations. During the early 19th century, Korean Ginseng had gained tremendous popularity in Vietnam. Vietnamese believed the stamina of Minh Mang, who had 142 sons and daughters, originated from ginseng. Minh Mang bestowed ginseng on old courtiers for their contribution, which made them more loyal to the king. This tradition was inherited to the future generations, and soldiers who fought with Thai, Cambodia and France also received ginseng for their contribution. In other words, ginseng was the very important key for enforcement of patriotism. Due to the tradition, Korean ginseng has been considered as the premium ginseng in Vietnam. It is presumed that ginseng flew into Vietnam through 4 routes; 1) as an imperial gift from Chinese emperor, 2) by the Vietnamese ambassadors who went to Beijing for a tribute, 3) through private trade and 4) from Ryukyu or Japan, which were the hub of international trade. From 15th to 18th century, ambassadors from Chosun and Vietnam actively interacted in Beijing. Through their interchange, Vietnamese royal family could learn about the value of ginseng. The fact that there were many Shilhak scholars among the ambassadors from Joseon, such as Seo Geojeong and Seo Hosu who had profound knowledge of ginseng proves the theory. It is also possible that reputation of ginseng was already established in Vietnam during Silla period. Ko Byung, an bureaucrat from Tang Dynasty who ruled Vietnam for 10 years in middle 9th century and a friend of Choi Chiwon, might have delivered the knowledge of ginseng to the upper class in Vietnam. This hypothesis, however, should be proven by literatures. Hence, further research about the trace of Korean ginseng in Vietnamese history and literary works still remains to be done.

• Journal of Popular Narrative
• /
• v.25 no.1
• /
• pp.393-425
• /
• 2019

This paper focuses on Alain Resnais's representative works (1955), (1959), and (1963), and analyzes how he implements a representation of memory though cinematic apparatus. These three films deal with horrific memories that seem impossible to reproduce aesthetically such as the Holocaust, the Hiroshima Atomic Bomb, World War II, and the war in Algeria. The reappearance of events that stripped humans of even their minimum dignity can naturally be associated with ethical issues. These events can never be reproduced because they cannot be explained in the human language. It is also impossible to reproduce in a way that doesn't invade other peoples' sufferings, nor displays the pain of others as spectacles. Alain Resnais was a director who realized that if factual representation was not possible from the beginning, truthfulness would have to be approached through cinematic form. Therefore, he tries to overcome these problems through cinematic forms. First, he shifts to action films to avoid the obscenity of documentary. shows the records of camps captured by German forces in the past, while shows the pain of others in a fictional form of representation. Next, he describes how the trauma affects the identity of the main character through a flashback in , but also shows a main character who is experiencing trauma without a flashback in Flashbacks have the effect of showing the effects of trauma on the main character, but at the same time they involve the obscenity of enjoying the suffering of others. Nonetheless, the absence of flashbacks highlights the impossibility of representation. This is because it is not silent in the impossibility of representation but is constantly approaching. The attitude that repeatedly circles around impossibility is an ethical form that maximizes the impossibility of representation. In conclusion, this is the ethics of representation that Alain Resnais showed in his films.