" 84CD6F076EBF75325F380D8209373AE1 A DIALECTIC OF PRESENTATION AND REPRESENTATION OF AND FOR MINJUNG AND THE SUBALTERN

Ticker

6/recent/ticker-posts

A DIALECTIC OF PRESENTATION AND REPRESENTATION OF AND FOR MINJUNG AND THE SUBALTERN


                                            

             Kwon, Jinkwan


Many people in Korea say that minjung has disappeared or receded from the historical stage of 21st century Korea. It is said that the minjung is no longer an agent of historical change in Korea. The Minjung movement has receded, while the citizens' movement has emerged as a major player in social change and reform in Korean society over the past 20-plus years. However, due to the ever-increasing effects of global capitalism and neo-colonialism/imperialism, even the civil movement seems to be weakening in Korea today.

Before I continue, I would like to first explain the meaning of the term minjung. Minjung consists of two characters min (i.e. common people under ruling rulers) and jung (i.e. multitude). The term minjung gradually acquired a new meaning to denote politically conscious people from the lower class, such as the proletariat in the socialist movement, and played the role of one of the key discursive concepts for understanding Korean history and society.

As a long-time participant in the minjung theological movement, I encountered the term subaltern through my Indian friends and colleagues whose main interest was Dalit and tribal affairs. For my fellow Indians, the subaltern includes various lower classes and oppressed people such as Dalits, tribals, aborigines, adivasis and poor women. It instinctively occurs to me that the idea of ​​subaltern might be a good counterpart to minjung for dialogue, and that minjung and subaltern are the same in connotation. Both minjung and subaltern refer to various lower classes and oppressed peoples, although each, as a historically loaded term, has evolved differently in its situation. The concept of the subaltern has evolved and is discussed today in the context of India and its neighboring cultural regions. I think we minjung theologians can also learn from the concept of the subaltern because it has different implications for Korean minjung theologians. I am quite sure that the concept of minjung also shares some aspects of the subaltern. The subaltern refers to people who are more oppressed and alienated than anyone else "to the point of being deaf and not being." The subaltern may be analogous to the suffering servant of God depicted in Isaiah 53:3 ("He was despised and rejected by men; a man grief and familiar with sorrow; and as a man from whom men hide their faces, he was despised and we did not esteem him." and public arenas. "They are outside the mainstream. In society they are presented and exist, but they are considered non-existent ; they are not well represented because their voices are not heard by the mainstream elite classes. This is not always the case if layers are not mentioned by definition. They may be silenced by force and oppression, or they are mute by choice. But they have been a major force in the struggle against imperialist and colonial powers, as clearly reflected in Korean history.

At this point I would like to show how I use two terms in this essay, presentation (or self-presentation) and representation. Minjung present themselves as actors at a certain point in history. Sometimes in history they present their desires and interests. A frequent historical phenomenon in Korean history was the active presentation of their interests and aspirations. But they are mostly not considered normal members who belong to the structure of the situation; they are treated like nothing. However, when they encounter certain events, they become active speakers and make their presence known in society. In such historical events they appear as active and constitutive elements, even though they are mostly forced to remain mute and mute. As a result, minjung representation was lacking. Upper-class elites more often than not frustrated the minjung's participation and self-presentation in history. If we use the terms to describe the following situation, it lacks both self-expression and representation. Although they are present in society, in reality they are considered as nothing and non-existent. They—especially Dalit women—are considered subhuman, i.e., non-members of human society. I am interested here in showing how presentation and representation can become essential elements in analyzing the dynamics between the actors involved in the historical process of colonial and post-colonial Korea.

Indian-American Professor Spivak argues that the subaltern cannot speak for herself and thus needs some representation. I wonder if Spivak would end up perpetuating her subjugation. My answer is that representation for the minjung and the subaltern is necessary, but not enough to change the situation. I believe that the situation of the minjung and the subaltern cannot be changed by mere representations, but by the collective voice and collective participation and presentation of the minjung and the subaltern themselves. The minjung and the subaltern are commonly regarded as "nothing" in the situation of our society. They are, as the apostle Paul indicated, "lowly and despised in the world, even the things that are not in our society (1 Corinthians 1:28). ). normal members of society. Their chances of presentation in society therefore become. Null. A society that treats minjung and subordinate fairly will be encouraged to present their interests and aspirations in the public sphere of life, and there will be It can be said that such a just society would see to it that both the self-presentation and the representation of these alienated people are ensured.

So my argument is that the balance and dialectic between 'representation for' and 'presentation', the minjung and the subaltern must be maintained in order to achieve justice in society. I believe that good representation with responsibility and benevolent intentions is essential, and that good representatives must have loyalty and the courage to risk their own safety. But representation is still difficult and even negatively effective if it is made by uncritical and ignorant intellectuals and elites. The presentation of the subaltern and the minjung in the historical and social process of change is therefore necessary for a better future, which most radical and thoughtful thinkers agree on. Both representation and participation are essential in the interactive relationship between low and alienated groups and elite groups in society.

 

Post a Comment

0 Comments