So Far From the Bamboo Grove: The Plot Thickens
Here's a tip: one way to annoy a blogger who blogs in support of intellectual freedom and expression is to threaten to threaten legal action when he publishes an opinion you don't agree with. (I'm not sure what legal action could possibly be taken. A repeal of the First Amendment perhaps? Good luck with that.)
That said, opinions are obviously running high on a recently challenged book, So Far From the Bamboo Grove, as evidenced by the comments to several recent posts. Supporters of the ban are arguing that the book, which is a memoir, is historically, factually inaccurate: that it misrepresents history in a fundamental way. Below, I'll let one of them speak for herself.
And, as always, if others disagree, we encourage them to chime in. Perhaps we can run another response.
To the Editor:
On Jan. 2, 2007, Dr. Perry Davis, the Superintendent of Dover-Sherborn Schools, overturned the Oct. 30, 2006 decision made by the Schools’ Book Review Committee not to use the book So Far From the Bamboo Grove written by Yoko Kawashima Watkins “as part of a grade 6 English Language Arts unit.” In rejecting the Committee’s conclusion, Dr. Davis cited the views of Carter Eckert, Yoon Se Young Professor of Korean History at Harvard, detailed in his December 16, 2006 Letter to the Editor of this newspaper. He identifies the problem this way: “[To] teach ‘So Far from the Bamboo Grove’ without providing historicization might be compared to teaching a sympathetic novel about the escape of a German official’s family from the Netherlands in 1945 without alluding to the nature of the Nazi occupation or the specter of Anne Frank.” He then recommends this correctve remedy: “There is no reason why Watkins’s book cannot be used in the schools. Introduced carefully and wisely, in conjunction, for example with Richard Kim’s classic Lost Names, an autobiographical novel about a young Korean boy living at the end of colonial rule in the 1940s, it can help students understand how perspectives vary according to personal and historical circumstances.” I disagree.
Mrs. Watkins’s book is being challenged by a group of parents who believes that requiring young children to read a book detailing the sufferings of the daughter of a convicted war criminal due to her father’s notoriety is morally repugnant. Here, they argue Mrs. Watkins’s family is more “Joseph Mengele-like” than simply a “German official’s family.” They also challenge the book’s racist and sexually graphic content. Several private schools have agreed with this view and have removed the book from their required curriculum. In support of keeping Mrs. Watkins’s book, Prof. Eckert touts a laudable goal: “Teaching should encourage students to think ‘outside the box’ of American ethnocentricity and highlight human commonalities across cultural and historical divides.” As a parent of school-aged children, I wholeheartedly agree with this view. However, this book has a fatal flaw that will not be resolved through reading another book, as Prof. Eckert recommends, that provides counterbalancing historical context: Large portions of her “personal narrative of survival” that supply the emotional force behind this book are fabricated.
In the second part of the book, Mrs. Watkins and her older sister are described as orphans without any adult guardian to soften the horrors of dealing with the aftermath of a war. Her mother dies inexplicably, and young readers are led to believe that her demise is contributed by the deaths of Mrs. Watkins’s grandparents and the destruction of their fine home in Aomori. In short, young readers are led to believe Mrs. Watkins and her sister are destitute orphans. A copy of Mrs. Watkins’s Family Registry, which Mrs. Watkins herself provided, says that her mother is alive and well when it was certified on Aug. 8, 1952 by the Mayor of Kigukuri-machi. In fact, her grandmother in Aomori is alive and well, too. This Registry also proves that Mrs. Watkins had not one, but two sisters. It also states that with respect to Mrs. Watkins, “[d]egree of relationship was misregistered as a fourth daughter and due to the permission of Ajigasawa District Court, the relationship was changed from Fourth Daughter to Third Daughter.”
Granted, this book is historical fiction. Mrs. Watkins, however, has claimed for over twenty years to the children that this book is her story, her autobiography. Indeed, Prof. Eckert finds the book “based on the author’s life . . . compelling as a narrative of survival,” because children “can experience [Mrs. Watkins’s] ordeal and triumph as their own.” We cheat our children when we allow them to identify with someone who would fabricate the death of one’s own mother and grandmother to create a fictitious account of suffering. As the debacle surrounding the book A Million Little Pieces written by James Frey demonstrates, people will not tolerate fabricated accounts of one’s life portrayed as autobiography.
I doubt that Prof. Eckert can recommend another “classic” book that he would have our children read to provide “context and balance” in dealing with a book that fabricates the
death of one’s own mother and grandmother.
Yours truly,
Anna Y. Park
Seoul, Korea
That said, opinions are obviously running high on a recently challenged book, So Far From the Bamboo Grove, as evidenced by the comments to several recent posts. Supporters of the ban are arguing that the book, which is a memoir, is historically, factually inaccurate: that it misrepresents history in a fundamental way. Below, I'll let one of them speak for herself.
And, as always, if others disagree, we encourage them to chime in. Perhaps we can run another response.
To the Editor:
On Jan. 2, 2007, Dr. Perry Davis, the Superintendent of Dover-Sherborn Schools, overturned the Oct. 30, 2006 decision made by the Schools’ Book Review Committee not to use the book So Far From the Bamboo Grove written by Yoko Kawashima Watkins “as part of a grade 6 English Language Arts unit.” In rejecting the Committee’s conclusion, Dr. Davis cited the views of Carter Eckert, Yoon Se Young Professor of Korean History at Harvard, detailed in his December 16, 2006 Letter to the Editor of this newspaper. He identifies the problem this way: “[To] teach ‘So Far from the Bamboo Grove’ without providing historicization might be compared to teaching a sympathetic novel about the escape of a German official’s family from the Netherlands in 1945 without alluding to the nature of the Nazi occupation or the specter of Anne Frank.” He then recommends this correctve remedy: “There is no reason why Watkins’s book cannot be used in the schools. Introduced carefully and wisely, in conjunction, for example with Richard Kim’s classic Lost Names, an autobiographical novel about a young Korean boy living at the end of colonial rule in the 1940s, it can help students understand how perspectives vary according to personal and historical circumstances.” I disagree.
Mrs. Watkins’s book is being challenged by a group of parents who believes that requiring young children to read a book detailing the sufferings of the daughter of a convicted war criminal due to her father’s notoriety is morally repugnant. Here, they argue Mrs. Watkins’s family is more “Joseph Mengele-like” than simply a “German official’s family.” They also challenge the book’s racist and sexually graphic content. Several private schools have agreed with this view and have removed the book from their required curriculum. In support of keeping Mrs. Watkins’s book, Prof. Eckert touts a laudable goal: “Teaching should encourage students to think ‘outside the box’ of American ethnocentricity and highlight human commonalities across cultural and historical divides.” As a parent of school-aged children, I wholeheartedly agree with this view. However, this book has a fatal flaw that will not be resolved through reading another book, as Prof. Eckert recommends, that provides counterbalancing historical context: Large portions of her “personal narrative of survival” that supply the emotional force behind this book are fabricated.
In the second part of the book, Mrs. Watkins and her older sister are described as orphans without any adult guardian to soften the horrors of dealing with the aftermath of a war. Her mother dies inexplicably, and young readers are led to believe that her demise is contributed by the deaths of Mrs. Watkins’s grandparents and the destruction of their fine home in Aomori. In short, young readers are led to believe Mrs. Watkins and her sister are destitute orphans. A copy of Mrs. Watkins’s Family Registry, which Mrs. Watkins herself provided, says that her mother is alive and well when it was certified on Aug. 8, 1952 by the Mayor of Kigukuri-machi. In fact, her grandmother in Aomori is alive and well, too. This Registry also proves that Mrs. Watkins had not one, but two sisters. It also states that with respect to Mrs. Watkins, “[d]egree of relationship was misregistered as a fourth daughter and due to the permission of Ajigasawa District Court, the relationship was changed from Fourth Daughter to Third Daughter.”
Granted, this book is historical fiction. Mrs. Watkins, however, has claimed for over twenty years to the children that this book is her story, her autobiography. Indeed, Prof. Eckert finds the book “based on the author’s life . . . compelling as a narrative of survival,” because children “can experience [Mrs. Watkins’s] ordeal and triumph as their own.” We cheat our children when we allow them to identify with someone who would fabricate the death of one’s own mother and grandmother to create a fictitious account of suffering. As the debacle surrounding the book A Million Little Pieces written by James Frey demonstrates, people will not tolerate fabricated accounts of one’s life portrayed as autobiography.
I doubt that Prof. Eckert can recommend another “classic” book that he would have our children read to provide “context and balance” in dealing with a book that fabricates the
death of one’s own mother and grandmother.
Yours truly,
Anna Y. Park
Seoul, Korea
posted by Brent Hartinger at 7:32 PM
7 Comments:
I'm confused...since when did it become "just" to to punish children for a father's crime? Why are the children to be held responsible for actions they did not commit? Where is the logic in that. The child narrator isn't committing any crime other than that of being born into what some would consider the wrong family, a bad family. Are you seriously suggesting that having the wrong parents--having the wrong genes should condemn you? make you guilty of crimes that you did not commit?
I honestly believe that children should not be punished by the crimes of their father, but this is way beyond that.
Not only she fabricated the whole orphan saga, she may be the one who cause suffering to Korean people in that time. I do have few Japanese friend I like, but I hate Japanese people and the government. Not because of who they are, but fact that they do not show remorse for what they done and what they are thinking.
Even till this days, the Korean Japanese all over Japan are still being bullied over by Japanese people, not to mention radiation patients who are Korean decendents from the Nuclear bombartment from 1945 is not being treated same as their counterparts Japanese patient. I honestly abhore at the intention of this writer who lie and insists that she is telling the truth.
Some Korean ultra-nationalists and most Korean news media have been spreading fabricated information that the author is or could be the daughter of a war criminal, without any evidence.
They know already that they could not find any clue to support their insistance, but they never apologized. And the author never asked their apologies. Please be honest, before calling other a liar. They say only liars dig other's back. Calling other a liar cannot prove that you are honest.
One thing that bothers me is the allegation that Yoko Watkins father was involved in Unit 731. As far as I could find, there is NO DEFINITIVE EVIDENCE anywhere to back up this claim. If someone has an incontrovertible proof (not merely an appeal to emotion or a claim based on hearsay, but a link to site that puts forward some hard evidence !), please pipe up. You would be doing everyone a favor. In the meantime, an allegation is just an allegation.
The Bottom line is, the Japanese were responsible for the cruel deaths of Koreans throughout their regime, and Yoko tries to make it sound like the Koreans had no reason to retaliate. Yoko, in my opinion, is like the probable millions of other Japanese (including their PM Abe) who believe that Japan did not commit any crimes in its past 300 years...ignorant, and keeping in their minds that they are "superior"...
which we all know is bullshit
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Post a Comment
<< Home