Serk-Bae Suh, "Against the Chains of Utility: Sacrifice and Literature in 1970s and 1980s South Korea" (U Hawaii Press, 2025)

Summary

---

Podcast Summary

Podcast: New Books Network – New Books in Korean Studies
Episode: Serk-Bae Suh, "Against the Chains of Utility: Sacrifice and Literature in 1970s and 1980s South Korea" (U Hawaii Press, 2025)
Date: January 7, 2026
Host: Leslie Hickman
Guest: Dr. Serk-Bae Suh

---

Episode Overview

This episode explores Dr. Serk-Bae Suh’s new book Against the Chains of Utility: Sacrifice and Literature in 1970s and 1980s South Korea. Suh investigates how Korean literature in this period proposed anti-utilitarian visions of sacrifice, pushing back against the dominant developmentalist, utility-driven ethos of state and society. Drawing on literary critics and writers such as Kim Hyun, and theoretical perspectives from Georges Bataille, Suh argues that “uselessness” and anti-utilitarian sacrifice offer new ways to understand literature’s relationship to politics, society, and human connection in an era obsessed with productivity.

---

Dr. Suh’s Background and Inspirations

[02:00–06:24]

• Professional Context:
  Dr. Suh is a professor at the University of California, specializing in Korean literature, translation, sacrifice, colonialism, and nationalism.

• Motivation for the Book:
  Suh wanted to interrogate “what makes literature political” and rethink “the politics of literature” (04:00). Inspiration struck after hearing an Israeli military officer dismiss Derrida as “useless” for urban warfare tactics, sparking Suh’s interest in “uselessness as resistance” and motivating a return to Korean critic Kim Hyun’s defense of literary irrelevance (05:20).

  “Maybe this uselessness could be an avenue for registering the current state of the world.” — Serk-Bae Suh [05:13]

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Pure vs. Engaged Literature; Kim Hyun’s Critical Project

[06:31–13:29]

• Kim Hyun:
  A central figure in modern Korean literary criticism, Kim sought to reconcile or transcend the binary between so-called “pure” (apolitical/art-for-art’s-sake) literature and “engaged” (politicized) literature, ultimately “upholding uselessness as an essential element of literature” (12:00).

  • The binary traces back to colonial-era debates:

    • “Pure literature” as protected from politics;
    • “Engaged literature” addressing social and political issues.

  • Kim criticized both:

    • “Literature for literature’s sake” (pure);
    • “Subordination of literature to politics” (engaged).

    “[Kim] upheld the uselessness of literature… to rethink literature's relevance to society.” — Serk-Bae Suh [12:13]

• Georges Bataille:
  Bataille’s theories on sacrifice (as opposition to utility) deeply informed Suh’s reading of Korean literature.

  “His anti-utilitarian view of sacrifice was pivotal for my thinking of the issue of utility, literature, and anti-utilitarian sacrifice.” — Serk-Bae Suh [13:19]

---

2. The Ascendancy of Utility: Park Chung Hee and Developmentalism

[13:50–17:40]

• Park Chung Hee’s “Our Nation’s Path”:
  Park’s book articulates a vision wherein “the individual’s desire for economic success is aligned with the grand vision of national development” [15:25]. Sacrifice is framed as renunciation for collective gain: “working hard, saving, being useful” for the nation’s economic goals.

  “He demands Koreans enact this utilitarian sacrifice… to renounce immediate gratification… [for] economic development.” — Serk-Bae Suh [15:54]

• Critique:
  Kim Hyun and others saw this prioritization of development as impoverishing the depth of human life.

---

3. Sacrifice and Anti-Utilitarianism: The Dwarf

[17:40–30:27]

• Park’s Conventional Sacrifice vs. Literary Subversion:
  Park’s view echoes mainstream sacrificial logic—giving up something now for greater ends (16:50). By contrast, The Dwarf (Cho Se-hui) models anti-utilitarian “sacrifice” via a character, Sine, whose excessive, irrational violence cannot be justified instrumentally.

• Memorable Scene: Sine, in a burst of non-rational violence, attacks her neighbor’s attacker with knives—an act “not rational, it exceeds that rational justification” and shatters her isolating, utilitarian worldview.

  “She loses her grip on herself… she completely escapes from that world… It’s what Bataille calls the profane world.” — Serk-Bae Suh [24:21]

• Literature as Portal:
  This mythic violence signals a rare, accidental community between disparate individuals (Sine and the Dwarf)—a communion not based on calculation or similarity, but chance and radical empathic breach.

  “Shina’s act of excessive violence portends this possibility… of communion between completely different individuals…” — Serk-Bae Suh [29:55]

  • Quote:

    “Literature can have an impact… not by addressing thematically some social political issues… but through its aesthetic effect…” — Serk-Bae Suh [39:10]

---

4. The Trope of the "White Hand" (Paek-Su): Literature and Joblessness

[31:04–40:15]

• Definition & Literary History:
  “White hand” signifies joblessness or uselessness, often connoting parasitism (31:22), recurrent in 20th-century Korean literary debates—sometimes as target of scorn, sometimes as figure of radical alterity.

• Kim Hyun's Reframing:
  Instead of lamenting its uselessness, literature-as-white-hand possesses aesthetic, not utilitarian, social significance.

  • Critiques thematic relevance; elevates aesthetic impact and empathy.

    “For him, literature can and should make an impact on society, not by addressing thematically… but aesthetically.” — Serk-Bae Suh [38:16]

---

5. Liminality: Park Sang Myung’s A Study of Death

[40:15–49:35]

• Novel’s Uniqueness:
  Written in exile, filled with scandalous and violent acts (41:00). Characters and events are pervasively liminal (“in between”): monks who are also prostitutes, betrayers who become successors.

• Literature’s Liminal Location:
  Mirroring Bataille’s sacred/profane threshold, literature becomes a space belonging in between, irreducible to social utility (46:44).

  “Literature is neither completely insulated from society nor completely subordinated… That liminal location… is related… to literature’s political relevance.” — Serk-Bae Suh [48:45]

---

6. Weakness as Power: Depictions of Jesus in Poetry

[49:35–56:23]

• Poetic Jesus:
  Poems from the era (Ko Jeong-hee, Jeong Ho-seung) portray Jesus as “weak, powerless, helpless”—defying instrumental logic ("one dies so many may live"), instead offering a figure of useless aesthetic presence.

• Poetry’s (Useless) Power:
  Poetry’s language is open, “expands our horizon,” allows us to encounter the irreducible other—its power is not pragmatic, but transformative for those willing to listen.

  “Poetry primes us to encounter other beings as the other with alterity… This is very immaterial… But it is still relevant.” — Serk-Bae Suh [54:31]

• Memorable Reference:
  Inspired by Corinthians 1:25:

  “The weakness of God is stronger than man's strength.” — [61:40]

---

7. Concluding Arguments: Uselessness, Autonomy, and Relevance

[57:20–61:49]

• Utility vs. Relevance:
  Suh draws an analogy with the Crucifixion—instrumentalized sacrifice (for redemption) vs. the weak, open promise of another world.
  Uselessness ensures critical distance and autonomy; autonomy is tied to sovereignty (58:23).
  This enables literature to act as “outcry of protest against the chains of utility” (60:38).

  “The uselessness of literature ensures its critical distance from society… this autonomy involves literature’s sovereignty… it is not subordinate to utility, but still relevant.” — Serk-Bae Suh [58:32]

• Contemporary Relevance:
  In a world reducing all value to monetary terms, the “powerless” but sovereign literature retains “redemptive force.”

---

8. Looking Ahead: Next Project

[61:59–64:17]

• New Research:
  Suh pursues accidental, chance-based encounters in literature, seeking ways to imagine community beyond pre-determined common grounds.

  “I want to offer some vision… of human association… occasioned by sheer chance.” — Serk-Bae Suh [64:10]

---

Notable Memorable Quotes

• “Maybe this uselessness could be an avenue for registering the current state of the world.” — Dr. Serk-Bae Suh [05:13]
• “Literature can and should make an impact on society, not by addressing thematically… but aesthetically.” — Dr. Serk-Bae Suh [39:10]
• “She completely escapes from that world… It’s what Bataille calls the profane world.” — Dr. Serk-Bae Suh [24:21]
• “Shina’s act of excessive violence portends this possibility… of communion between completely different individuals…” — Dr. Serk-Bae Suh [29:55]
• “The uselessness of literature ensures its critical distance from society… this autonomy involves literature’s sovereignty.” — Dr. Serk-Bae Suh [58:32]
• “The weakness of God is stronger than man's strength.” — Dr. Serk-Bae Suh referencing Corinthians [61:40]

---

Timestamps of Key Segments

• 02:00 – Dr. Suh’s personal and academic background
• 04:00 – Origin of his interest in the topic
• 06:31 – Pure vs. Engaged Literature; introduction of Kim Hyun
• 13:50 – Utility in Park Chung Hee’s ideology
• 17:40 – Notions of sacrifice in The Dwarf
• 31:04 – “White hand” trope and literature’s (useless) value
• 40:15 – Park Sang Myung’s A Study of Death and literary liminality
• 49:35 – Portrayals of Jesus and the theme of weakness in poetry
• 57:20 – Concluding reflections: autonomy and sovereign uselessness of literature
• 61:59 – Preview of Suh’s current research project

---

Takeaways for New Listeners

Dr. Serk-Bae Suh’s work challenges listeners to rethink what it means for literature—or art—to be “useful.” By tracing how Korean writers and critics invoked themes of uselessness, sacrifice, and sovereignty, he illuminates how acts and texts that refuse instrumental value can remain vital—offering a form of protest, solidarity, and human communion in a world obsessed with social and economic productivity.

In the host’s closing words:
“You might think your argument is more pessimistic—I found the book quite encouraging. Push back against everything having to have a use…” — Leslie Hickman [61:06]

---

Transcript

[A]

Hello, everybody.

[B]

This is Marshall Po. I'm the founder and editor of the New Books Network. And if you're listening to this, you know that the NBN is the largest academic podcast network in the world. We reach a worldwide audience of 2 million people. You may have a podcast or you may be thinking about starting a podcast. As you probably know, there are challenges basically of two kinds. One is technical. There are things you have to know in order to get your podcast produced and distributed. And the second is, and this is the biggest problem, you need to get an audience. Building an audience in podcasting is the hardest thing to do today. With this in mind, we at the NBM have started a service called NBN Productions. What we do is help you create a podcast, produce your podcast, distribute your podcast, and we host your podcast. Most importantly, what we do is we distribute your podcast to the NBN audience. We've done this many times with many academic podcasts and we would like to help you. If you would be interested in talking to us about how we can help you with your podcast, please contact us. Just go to the front page of the New Books Network and you will see a link to NBN Productions. Click that, fill out the form and we can talk. Welcome to the New Books Network.

[A]

Hello everyone, and welcome back to New Books in Korean Studies, a podcast channel on the New Books Network. My name is Leslie Hickman. I'm one of the channel's hosts. Today we'll be talking to Dr. Seok Bae SEO about his new book, against the Chains of Sacrifice in literature in 1970s and 1980s South Korea. The book was published in 2025 by the University of Hawaii Press and it examines the anti utilitarian visions outlined in various Korean works from the 70s and 80s. Visions that range from the idea of sacrifice as an escape from instrumental rationality to the view of literature as a deviation from the mundane world. This examination tasks us with rethinking literature's relationship to society during formative years in South Korean history. Dr. Suh, thank you for joining us on the podcast.

[C]

Thank you very much for having me. It's my pleasure to be with you and your audience.

[A]

Great. So before we get into the meat of your book, would you first tell us a bit more about yourself and how you came to write the book?

[C]

Yes. So my name is Seok B. My name is Seok bae. So I'm a little bit nervous, I guess. I have been teaching at the University of California for 20 years and I have written about Korean literature with focus. With a focus on such Subjects as translation, sacrifice, colonialism and nationalism.

[A]

So how did you become interested in this topic in this particular book?

[C]

Yes. So I was interested in the issue of the relationship between literature and politics. So I embarked the research project which led to the publication of this book to answer such questions as what makes literature political? And what do we mean by politics when we say the politics of literature? So that's one of the main intention I had when I was writing this book. One of the inspiration actually came from outside of Korean literature and literary studies. So it came from my experience of attending a talk given on UCI, the University of California Alban campus by a scholar based in Britain. The talk was about the Israeli's control over space in Palestine. And then in the talk the speaker actually showed a brief clip from his interview with a high ranking Israeli officer, military officer. And then officer was talking about using post structuralism to come up with urban warfare tactics. It's kind of fascinating topic. So the officer was a big fan of such thinkers as Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari and so on. And he kind of talked, explained how their rhizomic thinking was helpful for coming up with developing urban warfare tactics and so on. And what captured my attention most was his response to the interviewer's inquiry about other thinkers. So the interviewer raised a question about how about Derridao, what's derivedao was also useful. And then the military officers, high ranking military, Israeli military officers. And so was categorically no, he is useless. And that's the moment actually, you know, it's kind of epiphany for me. So that led me to rethink this unquestioned privileging of utility and effectiveness and practicality, especially when it comes to intellectual engagement with, with society. So I can't think maybe this uselessness could be an avenue for registering the current state of the world. So these two ways of inspiration, I mean, so one, my interest in the relationship between politics and literature and also my interest or my awakening to the possibility of uselessness as resistance led me to rediscover. Korean literary critic Kim Hyun probably will have another opportunity to talk about him quite a bit, but and his writings in 1970s, 1980s because he upheld uselessness as essential element of literature and how literature could be relevant to society. So that's it. Wow.

[A]

Yeah, thank you. That's really funny. And the Derrida was just useless.

[C]

I know. Yes, yes.

[A]

So going back to Kim Hyun, he's this literary critic who plays a really big role in this conversation. You mentioned about Pure literature versus Engaged literature. Can you talk a bit more about him, introduce him a bit more and some of the other thinkers who inform your argument?

[C]

Yes. So Kim Yeon was born on the island of Jindo. It's off the southwestern coast of the Korean peninsula, and he grew up in nearby port city Mokpo. And he went to Seoul National University to study French literature. And he became a professor of French literature at the same university. But he is better known as a literary critic of modern Korean literature than a scholar of French literature. Despite his untimely death in 1990, he is still regarded as one of the most important influential literary critics in South Korea. Not only but for his writings, literary criticism, but also for the publishing house and journal he co founded, the Literature and Intellect. And so in his journal he spotlighted some of the seminal, I mean the literary text that he deemed really important in South Korean literature. And also his publishing house published released very important works such as, as a matter of fact, actually some of the this prominent adopt some of the main texts I engaged in my book were initially published by his publishing house. So Jose Dwarf also parks a study of that. Both actually were initially published by Kim Hyun's Literature and Intellect. But for me, actually it's one of the most important contributions he made to the South Korean literature literary criticism had to do with his conscientious effort to overcome this fault line between pure literature and engaged literature, as you suggested in your question. So pure literature and English literature, these two are the kind of main the schism, I guess these two kind of ran very deeply in modern Korean literary criticism. And that schism could be traced back to actually the colonial period when this leftist proletarian disruption movement arose. And some the more conservative elements of the Korean literature during the colonial period kind of felt threatened by this new movement. So actually they advocated so called pure literature. I mean, the term itself was coined a little bit later. But actually that kind of tendencies against this more politically conscious Vitoria already emerged during the colonial period. So these people who felt threatened by the rise of proletarian literature, they called for literature which should be insulated from political influence. And later this approach came to be called pure literature. And in contrast English literature. Maybe the term or that concept is easier to understand because the term itself came from the west of French literary establishment. So engaged literature basically refers to this approach to literature which tends to emphasize the importance of literature's engagement with the society by addressing social, economic and political issues. But one thing we should keep in mind, actually, if you read a piece of literature. It's very hard to actually to put your finger on it, to categorize this is pure literature, and this is engaged literature. But at least that's the kind of one main perspective or prevalent perspective held by many literary critics in 1960s, 70s, and even up to the earlier part of 1980s. That's how they evaluated a literary work. So that's pure and literature and engaged literature. And Kim Yun was one of the few literary critics who tried to overcome this schism between pure literature and English literature. And then he criticized the extremities of this schism, the literature for literature's sake on the part of pure literature, and then subordination of literature to politics on the part of engaged literature. And instead he upheld again the uselessness of literature, not merely to argue for the literature's dissociation from society, but to rethink literature's relevance to society. So for me, I think that's probably most important aspects of Kim Yun's contributions to modern Korean literary criticism and. Oh, sure. And can I share my thoughts on another inspiration figures for my book? Yeah, that's this French guy named Georges Barthai. I probably butchered his name because I don't speak French anyhow. So he was a 20th century French intellectual thinker working on such subjects as eroticism, transgression, mysticism, and first of all, sacrifice. And his anti utilitarian view of sacrifice was pivotal for my thinking of the issue of utility, literature and anti utilitarian sacrifice. So I would say that Kim Yeon and Bataille, probably two most prominent inspirational figures for my writing of the book.

[A]

Yeah, I remember reading a lot about Bataille in your book. And his idea that sacrifice is a radical criticism of utility, which is a direct quote from your book, was very appealing.

[C]

And I definitely, probably will have a chance to talk more about his idea of sacrifice later in more detail, I guess.

[A]

Yeah, sure. In chapter one, you write that utility became a crucial element in South Korean society during the development era, and explore how utility appears in Park Chung Hee's book Our Nation's Path. Can you speak about how Park's book reflects the development attitude fostered during his authoritarian regime?

[C]

Sure. So, as you know, Park Chung Hee led a military coup in 1961 to overthrow the democratically elected government of the Second Republic. And then he is military frontal to South Korea until 1963, when he retired from the military. He went for president, won the election, became the fifth president of South Korea. So in 1962, merely a year after his coup, he published this book called Our Nation's Path, in which he presents military frontage plan for economic development. And two years after he was elected President, Park Chung Hee, also Park Chung Hee released a revised version of the book and in which he presents more detailed, more substantial vision of his for the future of South Korea. So basically, in that book, especially the second edition, he promises to lift up South Korea from its current state of poverty and misery. And then the book aligns. I think that's the kind of genius of his. What his this promise, what makes this his promise convincing, is he aligns this individual's desire for economic success with his grand vision of economic development of South Korea. So he demands South Korea. He demands South Koreans should enact this utilitarian sacrifice by working hard, saving as much as possible, and spending little and above all, being useful for the economic development of their nation. So basically, he's demanding Koreans to renounce the immediate gratification of desires to achieve the goal he says is the ultimate end of the sacrifice, which is economic development. So in the book, he absolutely prioritizes economic development and from the perspective of people like Kim Hyun, that the most pernicious aspects of Park Jong in developmental ideology was to reduce the significance of human life to material success, and by doing so, it impoverished the possibility of human life.

[A]

So moving on to my next question, you also explore different definitions of sacrifice, including those offered by Park Chung Hee and characters in a novel called the Dwarf. Literal name like a little ball launched by a dwarf. Can you explain how sacrifice is regarded or represented differently by all these individuals?

[C]

So, yes, Bach's view of sacrifice. So Bach's idea of sacrifice, I think, is in line with his conventional idea, common sense understanding of sacrifice. So it's kind of basically renounced. Basically, it's about renouncing something valuable to achieve something more valuable. Right? That's Buck. So for Buck, the economic development is absolutely prioritized over other dimensions of our life. So for him, anything getting in the way to achieve that goal, which is economic development, should be sacrificed. So you can see this parallels between his idea of sacrifice and our common sensical understanding of sacrifice. For example, it's the religious martyrdom. Then we think that a believer sacrificed his or her precious life because the goal of holding on to his or her faith is even more precious than their own life. So they sacrifice, they renounce their life for upholding their faith, and so on. So in contrast, in opposition to this commonsensical understanding of sacrifice, in which Park's idea of sacrifice is also in line, I Highlight or I locate this one event of anti trian sacrifice in Cho Sei Duo. By the way, the original Korean titleisto our Linguang is a little bowl launched by Duo. But I'm just follow this English the title of English translation that Tuop. So in the story I locate an event of anti utilitarian sacrifice and that is this character named Shine's excessive violence. So Hina is a middle class housewife in her 40s, married with two teenage children, and she lives a very monotonous, very routinized, very boring life, managing the family's budget with her husband's single income and trying to understand her reserved husband and worrying about the future of her children and so on. But her accidental encounter with the Duo, the character, the central character of the novel, snaps her out of her routinized, very monotonous life into an event of anti utility and sacrifice that was excessive violence. So in the second chapter of the story named titled Nightblade, the dwarf is paddling forces in Sine's neighborhood. Chinese neighborhood suffers water shortage and then Duob is making a pitch to people in the neighborhood by saying actually he knows how to install the faucets in a certain way so they can get water easily, more easily from the pipeline and so on. But nobody actually buys into his speech because he's shabby appearance and particularly his handicapped body, I think makes his speech very less convincing to the people in the neighborhood. So she now feels very sorry for him. So she asks Tuap to install a faucet for her. And once Tuop finishes the installation, a man is breaking into Shine's yard and starts senselessly attacking the dwarf. And then the man turns out to be from the neighborhood hardware store that sells Far system pumps as their main items for sale. So obviously the man sees the dwarf as a competitor who is encroaching upon the market he claims to monopolize. And that brutal assault on Twap sparks a moment of anti uterine sacrifice. So in order to protect Dwarf from the attack, the Shine is covering Dwarf with her body, but she's being shoved away by the attacker. And then I guess she snaps. So she rushes into the kitchen and comes back with two knives and she starts relentlessly jabbing at the attacker and so much so violently that actually she curses or slashes the attacker in one of his forearms, but she doesn't stop. She's really trying to kill the dwarf. So obviously her act of violence exceeds a kind of rational justification.

[A]

And I remember you made a distinction between the original Korean where she.

[C]

Oh, yes, yeah.

[A]

And the translation, where. I think the translation was something akin to she thought she had to save him.

[C]

Right? Right, Right.

[A]

Yeah, yeah. He was poor on that.

[C]

So in the original Korean, it says she has to save Duo, so she runs to the kitchen and brings two knives and so on. But in the translation, the translator translates that paragraph a sentence, I guess, as she thinks she needs to save. So I think it's the translator. I think that's kind of very.

[A]

It's very common, justifiable.

[C]

I think it's translation. Because her act of violence is so out of nationality, right? So at least I think the translator tried to give some rationale to her act. Right? The whole violence must aim has some kind of intentional aim, right? Or the end in which, or to which it serves as means. But for me, actually, Sheena completely loses herself. She loses her grip on herself. So she just burst out of her world in which she is dictated by this instrumental nationality to moderate desires, moderate extremes, experience. In order to be more successful or more prosperous to survive in this world, she completely escapes from that world. Actually, it's what Bataille calls the profane world. Profane world. In profane world, we are dictated again by instrumentality or instrumental rationality, rather. Our subjectivity is kind of imbued with instrumental rationality that orders us to avoid any reckless actions in order to be. In order to survive, to prosper, to succeed. And then, in contrast to the propane world, Bataille marks out a very contrasting dimension of human life, and he calls it sacred. In the sacred world, we are sovereignly soaring over all those mundane concerns. We are not subordinate to the utility for survival and prosperity and success anymore. We don't care about it anymore. We just kind of let go of ourselves, ceasing to calculate utility for the maximization of chance for success, prosperity and survival. So for Bodai, the sacrifice refers to what points to this pathway from the profane world to a sacred world. And I see that dimension or that mode of sacrifice in Shina's excessive violence, right? Because obviously her violence, her act of violence is triggered by the attacker senseless assault on Dwarf. But it is not clear actually whether her excessive violence intends to save or rescue Dwarf or not. Because if that is the main reason why she burst into this excessive violence, then she didn't need to relentlessly stab at the man. She could just hold out the two knives to threaten the guy into backing off. I think that's more rational choice. But she risks everything which makes up her life, her safety and her family's future and her relationship with her husband. Right. Because I mean her excessive violence could have resulted in really disastrous. Right. Incident in which she might get hurt or she might actually kill the man and then, then that would lead to arrest, imprisonment and loss of touch with her family and so on. So the hope bursts of excessive violence. It's not rational. It exceeds that rational justification. I think that kind of makes this violence very close to what Patai terms this, the anti utilitarian sacrifice. So it, the shine's excessive violence doesn't have any end to which it serves as myth, but it creates an impact or it creates an impact or effect of shattering Shenan's world in which she nests in isolation with others than her family and herself. So for me, I think this excess Xine's act of excessive violence kind of portends this possibility of communion between completely different individuals such as Xine and Duob. These two individuals are very different. Bigender bi class Shina is middle class. Duo is underprivileged working class and also Duop has handicapped Xine dozen. There's so many different differences between these two individuals, but Xine is kind of this first outburst of finance actually leads us to see this possibility. Maybe it's a very weak possibility, but it's still a possibility of communion. What a relationship in which one doesn't care about his or her safety and her success and so on and to form this communion between different individuals.

[A]

I remember reading the term accidental community.

[C]

Oh yes.

[A]

Yeah, that really, I underlined that. Great. Yeah. Sine's story was really. That was a really interesting one in your book. Definitely memorable.

[C]

I think so, but seems like actually not many people share my enthusiasm of framing it as anti utilitarian sacrifice. But I'm happy to know that actually you think it's a memorable moment of utility and sacrifice.

[A]

Yes, I do. So my next question is about chapter two where you explore the term white hands. Baek Su, what does this mean? And what was the discourse surrounding white hands in the 70s and 80s? And what is literature's relationship to white hands?

[C]

Yeah, so the white hand literally means jobless. The figuratively means it's jobless people while unemployed people parasitic economically parasitic on others favor. Actually I'm not sure about the exact etymological origin of the term, but it literally means white hands. So it seems to me the hands of this jobless people liching up others labor white because they are not weathered by long hours of labor. So that's white hands and there's the white hand the trope is kind of as a trope, the White tents. From the inception, the modern Korean literature has wounded with this figure of white hand. So for example, particularly, I guess the Kim Ki Jin's 1924 poem, the Lamentation of White Hands actually exemplifies this prevalence of white hand figures in modern Korean literature. So Kim Ki Jin was one of the pioneers of again the proletarian literature in 1920s. And he wrote this poem entitled the Lamentations of White Lands. White Hands, I'm saying the Lamentation of White Hands. And then in the poem, the poem denounces this leftist intellectuals or armchair revolutionaries who talk much but act little to bring about a revolution in colonial Korea. And the poem does denounces these people by calling them white hands. Interestingly, Park Jong is another book, the country, the Revolution and I also includes a poem in which the trope of clean hand, clean hand of a teenage girl, young girl, kind of stands for the lesser class who evade hard work but benefit from others labor. I think this peculiar use of this trope had much to do with Kim Ki Jin's involvement in the writing of the book. So it is said. Actually the book the country, the revelation I supposedly written by Park Jong Hee, was ghostwritten under the supervision of Kim Ki Jin. So Kim Ki jin, in the 1930s, he decanted, he renounced his leftist leftism. And then he collaborated with Japanese colonial authorities. And then when Park Jonghee launched a coup and succeeded in it in 1961, he also supported Park Jong, his military junta and later his government. So it is he is believed to have been supervised the writing of the book. And as I already explained, Kim Gi Jin's invocation of the White Hand and there are similar kind of use of the trope appears in Park Chung Hee's the Country, the Revolution and AI. But even more interesting actually this the same trope, the White Hand, also a figure in quite a number of literary works in 1970s, 1980s, ranging from Bang SEO Kyung's Dainty Hands, Samson Mokso to Bang Nhu's crave hand in 1987, I believe. So in the book, I kind of focus my examination of this trope, white 10 in Bang Nuhes as a kind of antithesis to Kim Hyun's invocation of the same trope, white 10. So in contrast to this very usual invocation of the trope that stands for the leader class or the elite class who don't work hard but nevertheless benefit from others labor. So usually the right hand as a trope in this booth, Park Jong, his developmental discourse, as well as some of these literary texts in 1970s, 1980s, the White Hand is in stark contrast with the love heart in the hands of the working class. That's how this rhetoric works. So in contrast with this very usual use of this trope, Kim Yon invokes the same trope to offer his view of anti utilitarian view of his view of anti. No, his anti utilitarian view of literature. Especially in his discussion of the Korean state of South Korean literature in 1970s. For example, in the eight part essay entitled the Vocals of Korean Literature he serialized in his journal the Literature and Intellect, he states, instead of lamenting his failure to become a rough fan, the White Hand should think about what it can do as a white Hand. And I think, especially in the context, I think Kim Yeon means by White hand, the literature itself. So Kim Yon actually is with this trope. Actually, Kim Yun doesn't argue for literature's dissociation from society, but as I mentioned, I think he wants to offer his view about how literature can be relevant to society. For him, literature can and should make an impact on society, not by addressing thematically some social political issues such as poverty, disparity in society, or discrimination about the women or the division of the Korean nation, and so on. Rather, he believes literature can have an impact on society aesthetically. So he argues, could work of literature heightens its reader's sensibility to others when it matches its content and form. Aptly, it affects some aesthetic experience within the readers. So readers can empathize with their heightened sensibility, can empathize with others whose sentiments they cannot readily approach. Furthermore, Kim Yun argues, when one can appreciate the beauty of a good piece of literature, and then they might fonder over the conditions of society in which some people cannot appreciate or cannot experience same aesthetic beauty in literature. So that's the way how literature can be relevant to society. So in contrast to many proponents of engaged literature who advocates literature's thematic engagement with society, Kim Yun argues literature can be relevant only through its aesthetic effect, by matching its form polycity with its content.

[A]

So for next question, we move on to chapter three, where you explore fiction by Park Sang Young. Do you tell us more about the novel he wrote, a study of Death and how this text. I was interested kind of in how this text reflects liminality and also the liminality of literature. Can you talk more about that?

[C]

Right. So Park Sang Myung and his text Study of Death is very unique, probably singularly unique. Novel in modern Korean literature. So there are some kind of interesting PI story about his writing this novel. So Park Sam Hyun actually emigrated to Canada in 1969. So it is said he was writing the novel while working as a janitor at a hospital morgue in Vancouver, Canada. So actually he daily actually encountered many deaths and somehow I think that motivated him to write this novel. And initially the novel actually didn't receive much attention from the general reading public, and only a very few number of critics actually noticed its significance. There are many reasons why just casual readers cannot relate to the novel easily. First of all, his language is often convoluted and infused with figures of speeches. And actually he even invents his own dialects. Actually for one character, like the Candlelight Monk, one of the important characters in the novel. And also, I mean, the novel makes numerous allusions to a wide range of texts and thoughts and traditions, including the canons of the many different sects of Buddhism, the Bible, the medieval alchemy, the Jungian psychology and the niches, Das Pokjarathra and so on. So it makes a laborious task for casual reader to read through the entire novel. The novels presents a really kind of very strange or totally unfamiliar world. And in this world, our commonsensical understanding of humanity of the world is challenged. And it has much to do with this ambience of liminality infused into the novel. So this, for example, the characters, such as the. So the main character. Let me just give you a very brief synopsis of the novel. I think the storyline of the novel itself is pretty simple. It's like traces the last 40 days of Mandicon. By the way, his name is not given, but many critics believe he is modeled after the sixth patriarch of Chan Buddhism, Henung. I don't know the original Chinese pronunciation of name, the patriarch's name, but it's Hanung in Korea anyhow. But in novel itself, actually his name is not given, so I just call him the Mandicun or man character. So for example, this character, this Mandican's lover in the novel, she is the first person actually the Mandican encounters in the main location of the narrative, which is Yuri. And she is a nun, but at the same time she is also prostitute. So she's being both, but she also can be seen being neither of them. So it's somehow, I mean, not somehow, but the signification of her or this character is some in between being a nun and being a prostitute. Another character I already mentioned, this one, the Candlelight Monk, he feels jealous of the main character and he takes the main character to his execution, his sacrificial death. But on their journey to the main character death, the Candlelight Monk served loyally the main character and eventually succeeds the main character as the next patriarch of Yuri. So again, you can see this. So the Candlelight Monk can be seen as the Judas Iscariot and then Peter at the same time, but neither of them. So again, it's another instance of liminality manifested by the characters. As a matter of fact, actually, you know, this novel actually is full of very scandalous acts of violence and debauchery. So, for example, the main character kills three monks. And actually the reason for these models actually completely understandable to a certain degree, unless you have some knowledge about these legends of Buddhism or the stories related to the succession of leadership in Chan Buddhism and so on. Also, he copulates with anyone who arouses him. So all these very scandalous acts of violence, debauchery, The novel itself is kind of, again, this is littered with this scandalous acts. But also the novels suggest this scandalous acts can be read figuratively, as main characters endeavors to illustrate his cosmology and his yearning for enlightenment. Again, it is the reader's call to decide between two ways of interpretation. One is rhetorical interpretation, and another one is figurative interpretations. Thus, the significations of this candlestick X also located this somewhere in between literal leading and figurative leading. That's how the liminality is infused into the novel. And because of this ambience of liminality, our common understanding of humanity and universe is challenged. That's how this, the novel, is infused with liminality. And I delay this prevalence of liminality in the novel to the location of literature in the profane world. So for me, the literature is located between what Bataille calls the profane and what he terms the sacred. So literature, again as the aunt is on a venue. For Bataille, the literature is a venue in which anti treatment sacrifice transpires. So in the novel, our imagination is boundless. We are not subordinate to the social interdicts that cutest the extreme possibility of experience. But nevertheless, literature is inseparably connected to society. So literature is neither completely insulated from society nor completely subordinated to society or undesumed under society. That liminal location of literature I see, somehow is related, I believe, not somehow, but this linear location of literature is manifested or embodied, this novel a study of that. So for me, that's the political relevance of literature. The literature can be. This literature can be viewed as the kind of this novel can be viewed as political intervention in society by embodying this liminality. Liminality is derived from its deviation from our commonsensical or rational or even scientific understanding of the universe and humanity.

[A]

So moving on in chapter four, this was a really intriguing chapter for me, where you write about Jesus, the central figure in Christianity and different poetry. So his poets depict Jesus differently from a commonly held view that interprets Jesus's death according to the logic of exchange. One dying, many. So can you tell us more about how Jesus is described in these poems from this period and how they connect to the theme of utility?

[C]

Right, so in that chapter, you could say, I mean six poems, three poems. I mean, two poems by Gojongi and Cham Jung is a Pale Body, and then three poems by Chong Ho Sung, Seoul Jesus, Autumn Diary and Poet Jesus. So one kind of the commonality these poems share is this very weak, powerless, helpless image of Jesus. So, for example, Gojong's poems features him as a victim of this unjust world. Chang Zhong's pale body superimposes the lacerated body of Jesus upon that of a victim of sexual violence. Jon Ho Sung's soul Jesus. In the poem, Jesus figures as again, hapless but conscientious conscious person who cannot do much to help those in need except for commiserating with them. And actually, another really interesting image of Jesus actually comes up in one of the poems by Chong, which is Autumn Diary. In the poem, Jesus figures as the memory of a poor woman's deceased husband who lived a barren life. So again, as I mentioned, the prevalent image of this hapless, powerless, we can call him useless figure of Jesus in this poem. So I kind of relate that image to the uselessness and relevance of literature by reading Chung's poem Poet Jesus. So in the poem Poet Jesus, Jesus figures not as the Messiah who will save us, will lead him, but who will deliver us from evil, but a man of poetry whose wisdom expands our horizon. So in my discussion of poem, I kind of try to explain how poetry can have this capacity, this power. So for me, it has a lot to do with poetry's poetic language, its language, right? So the meaning in poetry, or meaning of words in poetry exceeds or even transcends the usual parameters of meaning. So for example, in the poem Poet Jesus, the way the poet invokes this word is different from our common sensical understanding of. So in our common understanding of the word, poet means the people who write poetry. But in this poem, Jesus actually doesn't Write poem. But he's more like poetry itself. He consoles people, he comforts people, he lightens up the way for the people who are suffering and so on. So it's more like a good piece of poetry from which people have this inspiration for hanging top right, enduring this difficulty at the moment and so on. And so the poem kind of broadens these parameters of the meaning of the word poet. That's how poetry draws on language, right? So it unless its poetic language, unless us to this possibilities of new meanings of words. So in a way it awakens us to the limitations and limits of our understanding of the world circumscribed by our commerce understanding of language. So the poetic language imprudence or poetic language expense broadens our perspective on the world, our presence in the world and our relationships with each other and so on. I believe that actually potential again the poetry's power to be relevant to forming some non repressive association between individuals. So we can. So poetry, the words primes us to encounter other beings as the other means the other beings coming to us as with this alterity, I guess alterity means inerasiable difference from. So it's the other beings in irasurable difference from what we think or understand who and what or who we think or understand they are. That's the alternative for me. So poetry primes us to encounter others as the other with utility. That's kind of the power of poetry. But as you can see, this is very immaterial. It's intangible in our world of utility in which we are again dictated by these concerns for success or practical success and so on. So in the sense poetry is powerless when measured according to the metric of practical utility. But it is still relevant, especially if a person opens himself or herself by attuning them with a text. So to welcoming this aesthetic experience gifted.

[A]

By poetry, like Kim Hyun said, the aesthetic experience of literature.

[C]

Yes, yes. So yes. Basically my interpretation or my kind of explanation of this very powerless power of poetry, it's inspired by Kim Yeon as well as Batay, as you see. But also interestingly, actually one inspiration I got for making this argument comes from the Bible, I think that is the first episode to the Corinthians 125. It says the power powerless of God is power. No powerless of God is stronger than the man's power or something like that, I think. So I tried to kind of, you know, explain this paradox of powerlessness, but it's still relevant and it's powerful. So I kind of, you know, I think that's also very inspirational for me.

[A]

Yeah, I'll have to look that up later. All right, so I don't want to keep you too long though. So let's move on to our last question. You conclude the book by arguing that literature can be relevant and simultaneously anti utilitarian. Now, you already kind of talked about this, but how can literature in the context of South Korea and elsewhere, so including your readers, be both useless and meaningful? And what is the relevance of this discussion for today's readers?

[C]

Oh, that's great. Because a good segue from actually my previous introduction of this Bible, because I think an analogy with the Crucifixion may illustrate the distinction between relevance and usefulness. So if we see the crucifixion as an event of sacrifice that will definitely bring about the reconciliation between God and man, then we will end up reducing the significance of the crucifixion to an instrument for human redemption. But ultimately we can see the crucifixion as a sign of a weak promise of redemption. So this realization is helplessly dependent, reliant on one's faith. Put differently, cross fiction, as a weak promise of redemption, is evocative of one's spiritual yearning for an exit from this imperfect world. So can be viewed as a murmur in protest of the current state of the world. But similarly, this vigorous insistence on uselessness, on the uselessness of literature, gestures toward the rejection of these instrumentalizations. So the uselessness of literature ensures its critical distance from society. And this critical distance of society entails literature's autonomy, means literature is not swayed by any external concerns beyond this realm. And this autonomy, literature in turn involves literature sovereignty. Even though it is not subordinate to external utility, it is still relevant. Why it can be still relevant to society well beyond this is relevant. So as you see, uselessness, autonomy and sovereignty of literature is all interconnected and it's in my argument. So why this is important for rethinking the literature role in society, because I think this vigorous anti utilitarian view of literature pertains more than ever to rethinking the political relevance of literature in contemporary world, where the value of everything is reduced or boils down to ultimately to its pecuniary value. I have a very pessimistic view of the world, I guess, but. So literature can what the usefulness of literature can lead it shine as an outcry of protest against the chains of utility. I think that kind of sums up the main argument of the book.

[A]

So you might think your argument is more pessimistic I found the book quite encouraging. Push back against the everything having to have a use and that there's always some uprightness.

[C]

Right, exactly. So I mean, the powerless number of research, even though the ritual is powerless, but it still retains some redemptive force or power capacity. I think that's why I brought up this Bible passage. The powerless of God is stronger than man's strength. I think.

[A]

Yeah, I think I looked it up. It was the weakness of God is more powerful than.

[C]

Oh, weakness of God. Yes. Yeah. Weakness of God is stronger than man's strength. Yes, than you.

[A]

All right, great. So thank you so much. Before we head out, do you have anything that you're working on now that you might want to share about that we can look forward to?

[C]

Okay. So very briefly, currently I just embarked on the next research project that I hope will lead to the publication of my third monograph. It explores the ways in which literature captures accidental encounters between segregated individuals. As you mentioned. Actually, I already kind of engaged with this issue of communal dipping with in the book against the Chains of Utility. But this very deepening schism running through the contemporary society over many political, social, cultural issues ranging from. Gender equity to genocide, actually has pushed them into engaging more substantially with this issue of being with others. I think so many people feel now very pessimistic about the possibility of coexistence or cohabitations with incompatible others. Both the politics, especially in the United States as well as South Korea, especially in the wake of the failed set of coup by the previous president, actually kind of exemplifies how deepening the schism is running through the contemporary society. So that has led me to this issue while engaging more substantially with this issue of community. So basically, in this research projects, I celebrate works that illustrate the significance of chance in experiencing different modes of association with others than a bond predetermined by common ground. So against this commonsensical understanding of community, which is a human association based on commonness. What common ground? I want to offer some vision of different way of thinking about human association which is occasioned by sheer chance. I guess that's my next project. What is current project? I guess.

[A]

Interesting. Maybe I'll be able to read that. I'm looking forward to reading that one in the future. Yeah.

[C]

Yes, yes. I'm looking forward to sharing my next book with you and my readers.

[A]

Great. We look forward to seeing it. Thank you. This has been Dr. Seok Bae SEO on his new book against the Chains of Utility, Sacrifice and literature in 1970s and 1980s South Korean literature. Thanks again for joining us, and take care.

[C]

Thank you.