박유하 재판 결과 보도한 뉴욕 타임즈 기사를 읽고 몇가지 소감

역사(history) 2016. 1. 15. 01:53
반응형

박유하의 <제국의 위안부>를 읽고, 그리고 최근 벌어진 박유하의 피소 기사를 듣고 드는 생각은 다음과 같다. 첫번째 박유하 <제국의 위안부> 책과 그의 활동에 대해서 평가하자면, 박유하는 폐암 수술하는데 수술칼을 들고 온 게 아니라 한-일 화해를 위해 부엌 식칼을 들고 온 셈이다. 순수하고 진정성 어린 한-일 화해에 대한 간절한 염원은 박유하의 부엌식칼 때문에 오히려 수술 와중에 '감염' 증세가 더해서 환자 자체 건강이 더 위태롭게 되었다. 



역사 문제는 역사 교수만이 법률 문제는 법대 교수나 법조인들만 해결할 수 있는 건 절대 아니다. 그럼에도 불구하고 일본문학 전공자인 박유하가 역사적 사료를 검증하고 역사적 방법론까지 검토하는데, 그 <제국의 위안부>는 별로 성공하지 못했다. 


박유하 <제국의 위안부> 사건을 전환점으로 삼아서, 성노예 여성들의 해당 10여개국 역사가들이 보다 더 체계적으로 전체적인 사료 검증을 할 수 있도록 중국, 일본, 한국, 북한, 대만, 필리핀, 동티모르, 말레이시아 등의 공조가 필요하다. 


박유하 한 개인을 비난하고, 방법론과 실증의 깊이가 뛰어나지 않는 <제국의 위안부>를 비판한다고 해서, 현재 성노예 착취 및 강제동원 문제를 해결할 수 없다. 

 

뉴욕 타임즈 조상훈 한국담당 기자의 아래 글은 한국 언론에서 다룬 내용과 큰 차이가 없다. 


한국 법원은 전쟁 성노예 희생자 9명 여성들에게 박유하가 각각 1천만원씩( 8262 달러)를 보상하라고 판결을 내렸다. 박유하는 이에 대해 항소하겠다고 말했다. 이러한 양자 사이의 법률 공방에 대해 한국의 일부 지식인들은 박유하의 피소에 대해 학문의 자유를 훼손할 우려가 있다는 성명을 발표했다. 



또한 그들은 예민한 역사적 주제를 다룰 때 한국에서 널리 통용되는 '전통적인 지혜(conventional wisdom)'에 도전하는 것이 얼마나 힘든가를 박유하 <제국의 위안부> 책 논란이 보여줬다고 말했다. 



뉴욕 타임즈 기사에서 말한 '전통적인 지혜'에 도전한다는 말을 김규항과 장정일, 김철 교수가 썼는지는 잘 모르겠지만, 아마도 널리 퍼져 있는 '역사 인식'이나 일본 군대가 운영한 전쟁 성노예에 대한 한국인들의 믿음 체계를 지시하는 말로 들린다. 그런데 그게 '지혜'라는 영어 단어를 꼭 채택했어야 했는지 모르겠다. 



박유하가 <제국의 위안부>에서 내내 주장하고 있듯이, 전쟁 성노예가 실은 '개인적인 매춘부'였다고 보는 것이 '창조적인' '획기적인' '전통적인 지식'을 해체하는 진정한 포스트모더니즘 역사관이고, 민족주의와 냉전적 사고를 극복하는 '화해'의 길인가? 여전히 부엌칼일 뿐이다. 



  

.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/14/world/asia/south-korea-park-yu-ha-verdict.html?_r=0

.


Photo



Park Yu-ha, a professor of Japanese literature at Sejong University, in Seoul, South Korea.CreditJean Chung for The New York Times

SEOUL, SoutKorea — A South Korean court ordered a university professor on Wednesday to pay 10 million won, or $8,262, to each of nine women who had filed suit claiming that the scholar had defamed them in her book about Japan’s World War II-era military brothels.



Since Park Yu-ha, a professor of Japanese literature at Sejong University in Seoul, published “Comfort Women of the Empire” in 2013, she has faced a series of civil and criminal complaints from the nine South Korean women, who say they were forced to serve at the brothels during the war.



In ruling on a civil lawsuit on Wednesday, the Eastern District Court in Seoul said that Ms. Park must pay reparations because she had defamed the women with “false,” “exaggerated” or “distorted” content in her book.



Ms. Park said she would appeal.

Many intellectuals in South Korea and Japan have condemned the legal maneuvers against Ms. Park as violations of freedom of scholarship. They have also warned that her troubles illustrate how dangerous it could be to challenge conventional wisdom in South Korea about historically delicate issues.



Continue reading the main story

Japan’s Apologies for World War II

In her book, Ms. Park called for a more comprehensive view of the women in the brothels, euphemistically referred to by the Japanese as “comfort women.” 





They have been widely described in official South Korean history as young women forced or lured into sexual slavery. Ms. Park argues that such a picture was only partly true.



Ms. Park also wrote that there was no evidence that the Japanese government was officially involved in, and therefore legally responsible for, forcibly recruiting the women from Korea, then a colony of Japan.



She said that Korean collaborators, as well as private Japanese recruiters, were mainly responsible for taking Korean women, sometimes using coercion, into the “comfort stations,” where she said life included both rape and prostitution, and the women developed a “comradelike relationship” with Japanese soldiers.


Ms. Park’s critics in South Korea, including historians and former sex slaves, accuse her of selectively choosing historical data to parrot a view that many Japanese take on the issue. They call her a “pro-Japanese apologist.”


In February, another court ruling ordered that her book be redacted in 34 sections for what it called defamatory content. Aside from the civil lawsuit decided on Wednesday, Ms. Park also faces a separate criminal trial, after prosecutors indicted her last November on a charge of defaming the women.



The comfort women issue has been one of the most emotional disputes between South Korea and Japan, both important allies of the United States. Historians say that at least tens of thousands of women, many of them Korean, were in the brothels from the early 1930s until 1945. A total of 238 women have come forward in South Korea, but only 46 are still living, most of them in their 80s and 90s.


Of those 46, Lee Ok-seon, who is 88, and eight others sued Ms. Park. They were closely tied to an advocacy group and have often joined weekly protests in front of the Japanese Embassy in Seoul.


South Korea says that Japan bears legal responsibility for using coercion in recruiting the women and in running the brothels — a view shared by the Seoul court in its ruling on Wednesday.


Tokyo says that the issue was settled once and for all in a 1965 treaty restoring diplomatic ties. Some right-wing politicians in Japan have also angered Koreans by calling the women nothing but prostitutes.


Last month, the South Korean and Japanese governments announced what they called a “final and irreversible” settlement. In the deal, Japan expressed responsibility and made a new apology to the women, promising an $8.3 million fund to help provide old-age care.


But some of the women have since rejected the deal because they said it failed to specify Japan’s “legal” responsibility or provide official reparations.




반응형
Trackbacks 0 : Comments 0

Write a comment