Controversy over China's distortion of Hanbok

The controversy over China's distortion of hanbok refers to a series of moves to deliberately incorporate Hanbok, the traditional costume of the Korean people, into the "Chinese culture, Chinese traditional costume," and to give it a Chinese identity. It is an attempt by China to subjugate Korean culture.

A General Outline
The controversy over the distortion of hanbok in China has existed since the Northeast Project, and in the late 10s and early 20s, hanbok appeared incorrectly in historical evidence or was introduced as a type of Hanfu in various Chinese cultural media, including Chinese dramas.

Later, in early November 2020, the Chinese mobile game Shiningniki revised the hanbok costume, which was promoted as a Korean traditional costume, to a Chinese traditional costume, and expressed displeasure when Korean users protested.

China's reason for this is that after the Cultural Revolution and Tiananmen Gatecultures were wiped out

Swear black is white, Chinese culture, the current Korean culture to some low Chinese minority, netizens ' seondongi, say, 'Kimchi process'? A vulgar 中 few Internet users in Beijing reason to not done up to now see, well.

Ironically, sycophancy, which was hit hard by the juvenile life in the second half of the Joseon Dynasty between Ching Dynasty ' of wearing the framework of the compound completely replaced by a Chinese garment, such as multiple Ming Dynasty era had inherited by the Joseon Dynasty.'

somyeonghwa of mind-set is to spread.

In response, taxidermied mammals, such as Hong Dae-yong Silhak scholar, bukagui damheonseo, ironically, it is criticizing that their "The male outfits of the Qing Dynasty Manchurians been remodeled as women's doubles double men's doubles and of the Joseon Dynasty, while Ming doesn't look far different and multiple women is not the Chinese queue may foreign intruder and even closer than Ming Dynasty."

In Korean traditional dress is different from hanpu food also one of the foundation.

History

Prior to the 2010s
Although it has been drawing attention as a controversy on the Internet community since late October 2020, the attempt has been practically long. For example, since the 1990s, there has been a movement in China to incorporate Hanbok on a national basis in the name of Hanbok as a clothing for ethnic Koreans of China. In large part, it was a political move to strengthen the national system by incorporating the identity of ethnic Koreans, a minority in the Northeast region, into the continent and assimilating tradition and culture. In fact, many cases of Chinese dramas wearing hanbok have been rediscovered for many years now, and this phenomenon occurs mainly from historical dramas in the mid-2010s.

2010s: The increase in Chinese hanbok technicians due to Chinese hanbok.

2020: Strengthening China's Nationalism
Such a move to transfer hanbok, which had been attempted in the past, begins to emerge again in 2020 as U.S. pressure on China becomes visible and hegemonic policies such as one-on-one are on the verge of isolation. Beyond simple friction in the Internet community, Chinese broadcasting began to show that hanbok was worn or introduced as a culture of Chinese minorities, promoting it as a "Chinese clothing" extensively, and the Chinese government supported and aided it.

The cause of this situation is believed to be a backlash against the strengthening of China's nationalism and the fact that Chinese traditional dress is now known as Manchu costume, represented by its metamorphosis, as stated above. In Western media, many Chinese people at the time of Han, Dang, and Song also describe them as having had a change of pace, which many Chinese people are opposed to. However, if the Qing Dynasty claims to be a colonial history of foreign powers, it will directly admit the strengths of Tibet and Uyghur, and instead, China claims that hanbok is a traditional Chinese costume, highlighting that topknots are traditional Chinese men's hairstyles. On top of that, nationalism arose in China in the process of promoting the 70th anniversary of the Korean War, calling it the 70th anniversary of anti-U.S. aid, along with the U.S. pressure on China and the one-on-one isolation crisis.

The controversy over the Shining Nikki Hanbok incident and the distortion of Hanbok.
What intensified the controversy was a series of incidents in early November 2020 at the Chinese mobile game Shiningniki.

As the controversy over the distortion of Hanfu-Hanbok, which was consumed only in China or in the Korea-China Internet community, arose directly in Korea, the dispute over Hanfu began to intensify in Korea, meaning it was similar to China's Northeast Process.

Some assume that , most of its unique , its economic power only increased, insisting that the popular culture of neighboring countries belongs to them.

In the midst of this friction with the outside world, nationalism became stronger than ever, and as part of the Hanfu revival movement, China encouraged the wearing and improvement of traditional Chinese clothes. , Korea's culture grew significantly and became more influential.[4] In China, controversy and misunderstanding arose.

Such controversies and misunderstandings occur in Chinese broadcasting, dramas, illustrations, games, and Chinese communities, not in certain cultural media, individuals, or communities, and disputes over mutual culture, especially Hanfu and Hanbok, gradually begin to arise.

Later, the Chinese version of Shiningniki reintroduced the controversial dress as a traditional Chinese dress, which prompted protests from South Korea, and the media and political circles to call it the "Hanbok Northeast Fair."

In particular, Korea began to emphasize anti-U.S. aid and anti-U.S.ism, experiencing a series of incidents with China, which strengthened nationalism, or recognizing that the export of Korean mobile games was blocked by the law.

Details

The emergence of hanbok from other countries' media should be culturally pleasing, but some hanboks that appear in Chinese media after 2020 have different nuances. Beyond the emergence of "Korean Hanbok" in Chinese media, the concept of "Hanbok as part of China's culture" emerged.

In addition to introducing the culture of other countries, there are several aspects of Chinese media that introduce Korean culture and Hanbok as a traditional Chinese culture.

The view is that Hanbok in Joseon was influenced by Hanfu in China (or because Joseon was a cultural subject of China), and therefore Hanbok is one of the types of Hanfu.

There is a similar part between Hanfu in China and Hanbok in Korea, and this is evidence that Hanbok is part of Hanfu.

Hanbok in Joseon is also a traditional costume of the Chinese people, and Hanbok is also a traditional costume of China. On the contrary, it is also the view that Korea attempts to invade culture.

There is an element similar to Korean hanbok in Hanfu, China, which the Korean side claims to be hanbok and tries to steal.

Hanbok was influenced by Hanpu, which is a view of distorting these influences and trying to deny historical facts.

The view is that the interpretation of Chinese classical styles is claimed to be hanbok.

Through this perspective, the Chinese community and Chinese media began to feature hanbok in traditional Chinese clothing and further spread it to other countries, sparking controversy between Korea and China.

Refutation

The arguments of the Chinese community and cultural circles have been refuted by the Korean community and cultural circles. Although there are some points of view and points of view that are correct, [9] there are errors or historical errors in the logic aspect that extends them to evidence, that is, the conclusion that "Hanbok is Hanpoo."

First, it was affected but not unilateral and interactive.
First of all, Hanbok and Hanfu have different roots. Hanbok is a commonplace of Western-Northern mounted peoples, including skitties.It is based on a robe with a coat and pants type, and Hanpu is the top and bottom of the southern clans.It is based on a coat and skirt. Thus, Hanbok had pants from the beginning, but Hanfu was a style in which both men and women wore skirts. Nevertheless, the two countries' doubles are gradually becoming more similar because they have been exchanging large and small influences with each other, such as employing elements of neighboring countries' doubles over time.

Jungwon and the Korean Peninsula have long been interacting with each other, and in this process, they have developed by exchanging cultures, culture, and economy. In this process, doubles also influenced each other. In short, Hanfu of Wonmyeong University is also mentioned in the Hanfu document, but it was greatly influenced by Hanbok in the late Goryeo Dynasty and early Joseon Dynasty due to the popularity of Goryeo during the Mongol subjugation period. In other words, Hanfu of the Ming Dynasty did not cross over and became Hanbok, but changed Hanfu to the way it was during the Ming Dynasty. Of course, many of the commercial and cultural powers of the time, China's culture and clothing, were imported to the Korean Peninsula, and almost all East Asian countries, including the Korean Peninsula, adopted royal and aristocratic clothing. There are also doubles such as danryeong and goryongpo, which were maintained by the royal family, and these doubles became traditional and established in Joseon. However, the exchange process between the two countries, which can be identified through the librarian, is based on mutual relations, as is the case worldwide.

What's interesting is that the Danyeong, which China influenced as a government uniform to neighboring countries, was also improved and spread in China, not originally from China, but from the West. In ancient times, men also wore skirts, but in the 3rd century B.C., Hanfu was forced to wear pants, despite strong opposition from the surrounding area, but China denied the trend that Hanfu had been influenced by the surrounding culture. Naturally, Chinese doubles scholars claim that Hanfu of the Southern world and Hanfu of the Northern world are distinguished from Hanfu, but the reality is that scholars are finding it difficult to speak out as Hanfu-oriented nationalism grows in China.

The logic also overestimates the impact. Influenced by Hanfu, the country's doubles and culture cannot all be Hanfu's doubles. It is also described in many Japanese records, such as the Japanese Clerk and the Sangsang Rakgi, that the ancient Japanese doubles were strongly influenced by the Baekje's. However, kimono is not called hanbok. This overlooks the traditional culture and lifestyle of each culture and country. Rather, this logic proves that Hanbok and Hanfu in Joseon were separate, and that there was a point of contact to read each other's culture in each other's doubles, meaning that each country had a separate culture. In other words, the culture did not occupy each country, but the culture was introduced, and ultimately harmonized with, foundation, and coexisted with the native culture and characteristics that existed in each country.

In a similar case in China, Neo-Confucianism, one of the philosophical ideas of China, was strongly influenced by Buddhism, which is the home of India and Nepal, so Chinese Neo-Confucianism cannot be called Indian/Nepalian Buddhism.

What's interesting is that the Danyeong, which China influenced as a government uniform to neighboring countries, was also improved and spread in China, not originally from China, but from the West. In ancient times, men also wore skirts, but in the 3rd century B.C., Hanfu was forced to wear pants, despite strong opposition from the surrounding area, but China denied the trend that Hanfu had been influenced by the surrounding culture. Naturally, Chinese doubles scholars claim that Hanfu of the Southern world and Hanfu of the Northern world are distinguished from Hanfu, but the reality is that scholars are finding it difficult to speak out as Hanfu-oriented nationalism grows in China.

The logic also overestimates the impact. Influenced by Hanfu, the country's doubles and culture cannot all be Hanfu's doubles. It is also described in many Japanese records, such as the Japanese Clerk and the Sangsang Rakgi, that the ancient Japanese doubles were strongly influenced by the Baekje's. However, kimono is not called hanbok. This overlooks the traditional culture and lifestyle of each culture and country.[11] Rather, this logic proves that Hanbok and Hanfu in Joseon were separate, and that there was a point of contact to read each other's culture in each other's doubles, meaning that each country had a separate culture. In other words, the culture did not occupy each country, but the culture was introduced, and ultimately harmonized with, foundation, and coexisted with the native culture and characteristics that existed in each country.

In a similar case in China, Neo-Confucianism, one of the philosophical ideas of China, was strongly influenced by Buddhism, which is the home of India and Nepal, so Chinese Neo-Confucianism cannot be called Indian/Nepalian Buddhism.

Secondly, the traditional clothes of the Joseon people do not represent the entire hanbok, as the Chinese community claims.
Hanbok, the traditional costume of the Joseon people, and Hanbok, the traditional costume of Korea belong to the same class, but there are stark historical and cultural differences. As one of the branches of Hanbok culture, Hanbok, a traditional Korean costume, exists, and the station cannot be established. However, the traditional Korean costume Hanbok, which appears in various media outlets, shows a blind spot that it shares the entire Hanbok culture rather than reflecting the Korean clothing culture. This is because the history of the Joseon people is short enough to be 150 years or less, and the region of origin is very diverse.

In summary, Korean hanbok is just a cross-section shared with Korea and China, and it cannot be a complete set. Therefore, it is wrong to extend the interpretation of the Hanbok of the Korean people as one of the Chinese clothes, although it can be said that the traditional Hanbok of the Joseon people also exists in traditional Chinese clothes.

If Korean culture is recognized as a subclassification of Chinese culture by the presence of ethnic Koreans in China, it can be concluded that Chinese culture is also a subclassification of Korean culture, Southeast Asia, and the United States.

In addition, as the name "Chinese" suggests, they are descendants of Koreans whose roots split from Joseon, not China, and settled in Manchuria. Therefore, even though the ethnic Koreans are now part of the ethnic minority of China, their roots cannot be said to be the traditional clothing of the Korean Peninsula or the traditional clothing.

Third, the similarities that exist in Hanbok, traditional dress and in China when dealing with errors found that historical research.
For example, doubles does not match with the times down the road, recreate the compound of the Ming Dynasty some historical research over the error, there are similarities in their reinterpretation, and the traditional costume of often occur.China's Ming Dynasty in the investigation and the actual implementation of the data or not made as close to South Korea.

Of course, it has been a long time exchanges between Korea and China to the culture similarities from each other can't help having.However, these differences should be pointed out, and external global influence in culture media that must be part that should be reviewed.In addition, these historical errors hanpu I say, is one of the view of the part that should be reviewed across the country culturally and other countries, these revisions and edits are healthy will make the mutual cultural competency of the country oeryeo.

Meanwhile, the Hanbok is also ignored as a cultural and historical context in the process.Hanbok is a simple clothing that is not cultural and historical meanings to Korean traditional clothes, and this What it lacks in historical context in China's allegation with China's influence and subclasses often highlighted.

China, with extra round of protests in hanbok, misunderstanding, misunderstandings and mistaken for the category of being involved.South Korea's protests about the planning of the chinese-korean in china as traditional clothes Hanbok, accept or deny the Ming Dynasty style Hanbok that even accepting that the infringement.A mistake of these, misunderstanding, ascertain the actual error for the intellectual and to exacerbate confusion and controversy.

Of course, it is undeniable that China's influence on East Asia was significant, and it is also historically clear that Kimono of Japan influenced Tang, Ao Zai of Vietnam influenced Song and Qipao, and that Korean hanbok was especially influenced by Tang. However, it should stop at the claim that it had an "impact", and in terms of its origins, the influence of the Western-Northern nomadic people's favor on Hanfu during the Korean War, and the influence of Goryeo Yang on Hanfu through the Yuan Dynasty cannot be ignored. Claiming that culture of other countries is their culture based on intercultural influence is only an argument that causes displeasure to other countries.

The same goes for other cultures. In the case of traditional European clothing, after the fall of Western Rome, Gothic dress, then southern Europe → France, was once popular, and now wears suits originating from England, not claiming to be their own culture or doubles. Furthermore, with this logic, Chinese culture has also been influenced by Korea, so there is nothing to say about Chinese culture as part of Korean culture.

In view of these circumstances, cultural misunderstandings and misunderstandings on the Chinese side are more likely to strengthen the growing cultural opposition than to have a good influence on Korea, and are actually caused by worsening anti-China and anti-Korean sentiment rather than verifying and supplementing mutual logic.

Difference

Wear Hanbok and fundamental hanpu is differently shaped.Hanbok is a basis for a Chinese garment under jacket, pants on, but with a mandate. because China is for both boys and girls and Riverbed, i.e. the type to wear a coat and skirt on.China is the Warring States Period in the third century B.C. jomuryeong the pants of a Chinese garment at the Battle of the king's pants brought.Order of the development itself is something else.In ancient China right now is barbaric dress pants to King Muryeong was imported to China, and pants in the tribal costume of the royal family and officials and even Crown Prince in the face of fierce opposition from.Hyundai's Han Chinese who are argue that the Han, a Chinese garment, but it is just nonsense, of course.

Han Fu during the Ming period.
During this period, cultural exchanges between Joseon and Ming Dynasty were frequent, so similar cultural examples often appear. In conclusion, Ming dress, which is often claimed by the Chinese to be similar to Hanbok, was a Goryeo sheep handed down from Goryeo, and Goryeoyang was an exotic trend from the Yuan Dynasty, which existed before the Ming Dynasty.

The Hanjokists ignore the historical context that Goryeoyang was passed on from Yuan, and argue that Goryeoyang Hanfu was not influenced by Goryeo, but was influenced by the Tang Dynasty, but of course, it is inconsistent in terms of timing and common sense. Right now, Goryeoyang was trendy during the Ming Dynasty, but was gradually banned during the Hongqi Festival, saying that Goryeoyang Hanfu was not a Chinese custom, and if it was a unique cultural doubles of the Han people, there is no reason for the royal court to ban it as an edict.

Manggeon
Although Joseon's mangan is narrow in width and only has a forehead, Ming's mangan is wide enough to reach the top of the head and has a three-dimensional shape.

According to the current entry in the English version of Wikipedia, Manggeon's English name is Wangjin (Chinese pronunciation) rather than Manggeon. However, according to NamuWiki's Manggeon category, Manggeon and Chinese Manggeon are very different in appearance and manufacturing method. Therefore, the English name of the Joseon-style mangan is Manggen, not Wanggin, and it is right that the English version of the mangan document should be made separately. In addition, Namuwiki's mangan documents show that Joseon was originally made with horseguns and was exported back to China, but Wikipedia documents describe China as if it had made a mangan with horseguns from the beginning. Kim Hong-do's painting is attached as a picture material.

Got - Traditional Korean Hat

Got

Got, what is called a peaked cap is an ancient one of the clothing has existed in Northeast Asia and, as well to use a peaked cap using the North South States Period, the Three Kingdoms Period was one of the country. China and is influenced by the Yuan, or monggolpung similar just got the form each other.

Got of the average Korean clothes of late Joseon period after the upper flat and cylindrical hats and brim from perfect but using the form of, godmother of the Ming Dynasty China, from that type is rimmed the more broad-minded on.

Possible problems
It is relatively fortunate if such content infringement ends simply for internal solidarity in China, but if such controversy and infringement spread externally, it could cause more problems.

As you can see from the example of the author, Hanbok can be a quarrel just by saying it belongs to Korea, and as a result, something that cannot be laughed about that Korea cannot claim to be its own.

In particular, from the perspective of foreigners, the boundary between Korea and China is disrupted. In the West, when discriminating against Asians, the term "Chinese" is the so-called Qingqiang Chong. For those who are not very interested in the situation in Asia, whether they are Koreans or Chinese, they are so-called Asians, just Hwang In, Asians, and Chinese. In other words, I do not know or care about the distinction between Koreans and Chinese. Even in the current situation, the distinction between China and Korea can be heard, "Chinese also wear Hanbok, don't you both share culture?" or the Chinese claim, "Korea is a traditional and cultural subject to Chinese claims.

This is a case that is often found abroad, and the Kebranley Museum in France also had a map showing Korea as part of China. # This was only corrected after continuous protests from NGOs such as Banck and the South Korean Foreign Ministry. # This is the case in museums, but for ordinary people who don't know much about East Asia, China's cultural infringement will not be significant.

In fact, these attempts are often targeted by various countries in the Chinese culture, with claims that Mongolia's Dell copied from Manchuria's culture, Japan's Kimono from Tang, and Vietnam's Ao Zai from Song.

In particular, China uses China Money as a weapon to subdue foreign companies, and people like Umao Dang come forward to shoot Korean celebrities' remarks, influencing overseas countries, making even non-Chinese sympathize or silence China. In the end, this difference in diplomatic and economic capabilities can make the Chineseization of Hanbok a fait accompli by silencing Koreans. It is clear that this stereotype will not be resolved as easily as Japan's colonial problem.

Of course, thanks to the global antipathy of Corona, the game industry's excessive entry into China, and the consistent attitude of insisting that not only Korean traditional culture but also Vietnamese and Japanese cultures are Chinese, foreign websites also laugh at it. Fortunately, they are not taking it seriously, contrary to Korea's concerns. It's just that it's hard for the parties.

The United States
2021 Korean-American a member of the House of Representatives on January 4, Marilyn seuteuringnaendeu in Korean clothes is (whose Korean name a philosopher of ancient China.) and took her oath of office.

A celebrity
Chinese writer claimed that (于正) "Use the Hanbok Ming Ming is subject to a consideration." she remembered, "swear black is that the traditional Korean clothing of the Joseon people there is no culture." friendship.

However, consideration is the name of a vassal state, goryeoyang customs that affect consideration of thousands of doubles, and has never been considering the opposite.

Given the history of Korean traditional dress, Hanbok is independent from the northern part of the Korean Peninsula based on a Chinese garment development of cultural products can be seen as there is no reason to support the claim.

Share0

Tweet0

Share0