• East European & Balkan Studies
• /
• v.35
• /
• pp.153-186
• /
• 2013

Literature has been special for the Polish who suffered from the numerous invasions from surrounding countries for her geographical location at the center of Europe. In the late 18th century at a time when Poland was divided and ruled by Russia, Prussia and Austria, literature played an important role in uniting Poland. During the 2nd world war in which Poland was occupied by the Soviet Union and by Germany, and during the Cold War period under socialism system(1948~1989), the Polish literature was in the front to keep unique national culture with overseas migration community at the center. The Polish Diaspora literature from 19th century up to now has naturally embodied national sufferings from foreign powers in their literary tradition linked to the problem of 'migration'. In addition, they belong to other cultural sphere, but keep their own unique identity, which is similar to Korean Diaspora literature to a great degree. This study has two stages. In the first stage, it figures out the formation and trend of the Polish Diaspora literature followed by their meaning in the history of Polish literature. In the second stage, specific texts (two dramas) are analyzed before and after system transition in 1989. * Before system transition: S. Mrożek, Emigranci (1974), * After system transition: J. Głowacki, Antygona w Nowym Yorku (1992) Mrożek and Głowacki had themselves migration experiences with high achievement and recognition in literature not only in Poland but also in the world. In their works, hardships as 'strangers' in foreign countries, emotional wandering and agony, nostalgia to lost home land and exploration of identity were described vividly. By comparing the 2 literature texts, this study attempts to trace the change of Diaspora consciousness which Polish migrants experienced in foreign countries with different political system like socialism and capitalism.

• (The) Research of the performance art and culture
• /
• no.37
• /
• pp.249-293
• /
• 2018

The Musical Theatre was a popular art genre that originated from the western musical tradition represented by the European opera. In the twentieth century, it bloomed around Broadway in the United States. It is also one of the commercial arts which is popularly loved by the public in the field of performing arts all over the world at present. Due to the nature of this genre, the development of dramas and the expression of characters use music, not words or gestures, as the main medium. And the style of music reacts sensitively to the taste of the public, not to a particular class. When Japan colonized Korea, the empire strongly believed modernization equaled westernization and Japan was the one who could awaken Korean. The Japanese colonial music education was intended to bring cooperation and obedience to Japan by forcibly injecting Japanese ideology and culture into Joseon people. The music education of colonialism with the textbook of the "Songs for public education(보통교육 창가집)" compiled by the Japanese government was a sparkstone for the conversion of the Korean musical identity to Japanese and Western music. In addition to the capitalistic economical mechanism for establishing a South Korean government friendly with the United States during the Cold War after liberation, and the rush of American Pop culture represented by 'the show stage in 8th US Arm' and 'movies' which are to be the influence of invisible 'new cultural imperialism', our traditional music was confined to the meaning of 'Korean music', meaning 'past music'. In Korea, after the liberation, the musical was introduced by the influx of American popular culture. In accordance with the cultural policy of Park Jeong-hee regime, which aimed to spread the 'healthy culture' through the modernization of traditional arts, 'The Yegreen(예그린악단)' was founded. However, the plan to create a contemporary performing art based on Korean national arts showed the possibility of success in 1966 with the success of , but soon after, they have been destined to fall into an institution that has lost their ability to operate on their own due to the suspension of the sponsorship of the regime. Due to the cultural imperialist strategy of the influence of Japanese imperialism's colonial music education and influx of American popular culture after liberation, in the early days of Korean musicals, our traditional aesthetic style brought about the situation of the 1960 's, which did not become an independent ethnic art through the exchange and expansion with Western music. This is the background of the western licensed musicals led by the Korean musical market in the 21st century as well as the main cause of musical creation based on western music.

• Journal of Popular Narrative
• /
• v.25 no.1
• /
• pp.349-392
• /
• 2019

In the 1960s of Korea, the normalization of diplomatic relations between Korea and Japan led to a sense of a vigorous anxiety and fear that "Japan will once again come to the Korean peninsula". As a reaction to this, the discourse on the criticism of 'Japanese Style' strongly emerged. If the prior discourse of criticism was to express the national antipathy toward the colonial remnants that had not yet been disposed of, the critical discourse of the 1960s was the wariness of the newly created 'Japanese Style' in popular culture, and to grasp it as a symptomatic phenomenon that 'evil-minded Japan' was revealed. Thus, this new logic of criticism of the 'Japanese Style' had a qualitative difference from the existing ones. It was accompanied by a willingness to inspect and censor the 'masses' that grew up as consumers of transnational 'mass culture' that flowed and chained in the geopolitical order under the Cold War system. Therefore, the topology of 'popular things=Japanese things=consuming things' reveals the paradox of moral demands that existed within Korean society in the 1960s. This was to solidify the divisive circulation structure that caused them to avoid direct contact with the other called 'Japan', but at the same time, get as close to it as ever. It is a repetitive obsession that pushes the other to another side through the moral segregation that strictly draws a line of demarcation between oneself and the other, but on the other hand is attracted to the object and pulls it back to its side. This paper intends to listen to the different voices that have arisen in the repetitive obsession to understand the significance of the dissonance that has been repeated in the contemporary era. This will be an examination of the paradoxical object of Japan that has been repeatedly asked to build the internal control principle of Korean society, or to hide the oppressive and violent side of the power, and that can neither be accepted nor destroyed completely as part of oneself.

• Maritime Security
• /
• v.5 no.1
• /
• pp.1-53
• /
• 2022

One manifestation of the contemporary era of renewed great power competition has been the deepening relationship between China and Russia. Their strengthening military ties, notwithstanding their lack of a formal defense alliance, have been especially striking. Since China and Russia deploy two of the world's most powerful navies, their growing maritime cooperation has been one of the most significant international security developments of recent years. The Sino-Russian naval exercises, involving varying platforms and locations, have built on years of high-level personnel exchanges, large Russian weapons sales to China, the Sino-Russia Treaty of Friendship, and other forms of cooperation. Though the joint Sino-Russian naval drills began soon after Beijing and Moscow ended their Cold War confrontation, these exercises have become much more important during the last decade, essentially becoming a core pillar of their expanding defense partnership. China and Russia now conduct more naval exercises in more places and with more types of weapons systems than ever before. In the future, Chinese and Russian maritime drills will likely encompass new locations, capabilities, and partners-including possibly the Arctic, hypersonic delivery systems, and novel African, Asian, and Middle East partners-as well as continue such recent innovations as conducting joint naval patrols and combined arms maritime drills. China and Russia pursue several objectives through their bilateral naval cooperation. The Treaty of Good-Neighborliness and Friendly Cooperation Between the People's Republic of China and the Russian Federation lacks a mutual defense clause, but does provide for consultations about common threats. The naval exercises, which rehearse non-traditional along with traditional missions (e.g., counter-piracy and humanitarian relief as well as with high-end warfighting), provide a means to enhance their response to such mutual challenges through coordinated military activities. Though the exercises may not realize substantial interoperability gains regarding combat capabilities, the drills do highlight to foreign audiences the Sino-Russian capacity to project coordinated naval power globally. This messaging is important given the reliance of China and Russia on the world's oceans for trade and the two countries' maritime territorial disputes with other countries. The exercises can also improve their national military capabilities as well as help them learn more about the tactics, techniques, and procedures of each other. The rising Chinese Navy especially benefits from working with the Russian armed forces, which have more experience conducting maritime missions, particularly in combat operations involving multiple combat arms, than the People's Liberation Army (PLA). On the negative side, these exercises, by enhancing their combat capabilities, may make Chinese and Russian policymakers more willing to employ military force or run escalatory risks in confrontations with other states. All these impacts are amplified in Northeast Asia, where the Chinese and Russian navies conduct most of their joint exercises. Northeast Asia has become an area of intensifying maritime confrontations involving China and Russia against the United States and Japan, with South Korea situated uneasily between them. The growing ties between the Chinese and Russian navies have complicated South Korean-U.S. military planning, diverted resources from concentrating against North Korea, and worsened the regional security environment. Naval planners in the United States, South Korea, and Japan will increasingly need to consider scenarios involving both the Chinese and Russian navies. For example, South Korean and U.S. policymakers need to prepare for situations in which coordinated Chinese and Russian military aggression overtaxes the Pentagon, obligating the South Korean Navy to rapidly backfill for any U.S.-allied security gaps that arise on the Korean Peninsula. Potentially reinforcing Chinese and Russian naval support to North Korea in a maritime confrontation with South Korea and its allies would present another serious challenge. Building on the commitment of Japan and South Korea to strengthen security ties, future exercises involving Japan, South Korea, and the United States should expand to consider these potential contingencies.