{"title":"Pop City: Korean Popular Culture and the Selling of Place by Youjeong Oh (review)","authors":"So-Rim Lee","doi":"10.1215/07311613-7686694","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"were they more readily able to communicate directly with other neighboring groups like the Manchu, Jurchen, Khitan, Han, and Mongolian peoples, all groups that were either present in Northeast China or had some degree of socioeconomic interactions with the Koguryŏ people? I am sure that historians, political scientists, historical archaeologists, and historical linguists, to name but a few disciplines, would certainly have further questions. There is a great deal to like about the Xu text (much of which is noted above). If there was one weakness to note it would be that the paucity of figures and tables makes it a bit more difficult to follow the author’s line of thinking. Figures and tables, even in a text focused on ancient history, that would provide maps, diagrams of different relationships between different groups, and basic data (biographical information, regime changes, etc.) about some of the more important figures and events described would help break up the text a bit, while presenting essential information. Indeed, even some portraits of some of the key figures in the Koguryŏ debate would help the reader follow the dense, informative data that is presented. Visual reconstructions of Tan’gun and how these different entities interpreted the Tan’gun creation myth would have been particularly useful. Reconstructing Ancient Korean History would be best used as a supplementary text for an upper-division/graduate-level East Asian history course or as one of the primary texts for a course focused on Koguryŏ history (e.g., ancient Korean history). It should find its way to the bookshelf of every historian who specializes in ancient East Asian history and all university libraries that provide such coverage. This text would probably not be very appealing to the general Korean studies readership, though I do not see that as the intended audience for the book. The text is a valuable addition to the literature on ancient Korean history and how ancient history has been and could be used to promote particular nationalistic agendas.","PeriodicalId":43322,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Korean Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Korean Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/07311613-7686694","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ASIAN STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
were they more readily able to communicate directly with other neighboring groups like the Manchu, Jurchen, Khitan, Han, and Mongolian peoples, all groups that were either present in Northeast China or had some degree of socioeconomic interactions with the Koguryŏ people? I am sure that historians, political scientists, historical archaeologists, and historical linguists, to name but a few disciplines, would certainly have further questions. There is a great deal to like about the Xu text (much of which is noted above). If there was one weakness to note it would be that the paucity of figures and tables makes it a bit more difficult to follow the author’s line of thinking. Figures and tables, even in a text focused on ancient history, that would provide maps, diagrams of different relationships between different groups, and basic data (biographical information, regime changes, etc.) about some of the more important figures and events described would help break up the text a bit, while presenting essential information. Indeed, even some portraits of some of the key figures in the Koguryŏ debate would help the reader follow the dense, informative data that is presented. Visual reconstructions of Tan’gun and how these different entities interpreted the Tan’gun creation myth would have been particularly useful. Reconstructing Ancient Korean History would be best used as a supplementary text for an upper-division/graduate-level East Asian history course or as one of the primary texts for a course focused on Koguryŏ history (e.g., ancient Korean history). It should find its way to the bookshelf of every historian who specializes in ancient East Asian history and all university libraries that provide such coverage. This text would probably not be very appealing to the general Korean studies readership, though I do not see that as the intended audience for the book. The text is a valuable addition to the literature on ancient Korean history and how ancient history has been and could be used to promote particular nationalistic agendas.