Through a collection of nine essays written by academics, the book tries to explore, analyze and highlight Korean melodrama, arguably the most dominant genre in the country’s cinema.

Buy This

In the first essay, Kathleen McHugh analyzes the concept of nationalist cinema, makes a comparison with the American melodrama and examines the position of women in both countries’ movies, while highlighting a connection with Mexican cinema. The medium for these comments is “Madame Freedom”, which McHugh analyzes quite thoroughly, making a number of very interesting observations, particularly focusing on the mambo-dancing scene. The comments are quite interesting as much as the connections made, with McHugh using her lack of deep knowledge about Korean cinema as a source of unique observations. At the same time, however, this ignorance (as per the writer’s words) has made her focus a bit too much on other countries’ movies, while the comment about the significance of how women look at each other in the film is a bit far-fetched.

In the second essay, Nancy Abelmann uses a rather unique and very intriguing approach to speak about Korean melodrama: she presents her comments on the interviews she took from two Korean women over several years, and through their lives and that of the people around them highlights the connection of melodrama with real life, in essence presenting its roots. The interviews are juxtaposed with the analysis of “Pak Sobang”, with Abelmann showing, through specific scenes, how real life applies and is connected to the genre.

In the third part, An Jin-soo deals with the roots of Korean melodrama, tracing them to the Japanese shimpa, while highlighting the connection between the genre and Christianity, extending the concept to its penetration in Korean society. Furthermore, using films like “The Houseguest and my Mother” and “Until the End of my Life”, An makes a number of comments regarding the place of women and the different classes in Korean society. The comments and the analysis are excellent in this part, and An truly introduces aspects of both film and society that are original. On the other hand, the writing style is utterly academic, meaning complex and filled with lengthy notes that are placed in the end of the article, making its reading quite difficult, although this is justified in a way, since this essay is meant to be studied and not just read.

In the fourth, Cho Eun-sun analyzes “Stray Bullet”, presenting through the movie, the ways masculinity was established in Korean society and how the war stripped these ways from men. Both the analysis and the comments are well presented, but the essay “suffers” from the same issues as the previous one, with the notes being even lengthier, in essence taking almost the same space as the main text.

In the fifth, Hye Seung Chung presents the origins of Korean melodrama, and the influence of foreign cinema on the Korean cinephilia and the local cinema in general. Also quite interesting is the comparison between censorship practices, with all the aforementioned topics being presented through the comparison of “Waterloo Bridge” and “Aimless Bullet”. The analysis and the comparison are quite thorough, and the resulting comments informative, but I felt that the essay includes too much information about foreign movies, to the expense of the Korean ones. At the same time, the influence foreign cinema had in the shaping of the Korean is understandable and justifies this tactic, to a point at least.

In one of the easiest to read parts, David Scott Diffrient deals with war melodramas, particularly focusing on the analysis of “Red Muffler” through a rather multi-leveled examination of its themes, comments and semiotics, particularly regarding the symbolism of the actual Red Muffler. Once more, the analysis is excellent, but the notes are too lengthy and the references to American films too intense.

In the seventh, Kim So-young deals with the “woman’s film”, examining the concept from as many perspectives as possible, through the analysis of “The Housemaid”, “The Widow” and “Madame Freedom”. Furthermore, the essay deals with the presentation of comfort women in Korean cinema, through the analysis and comparison of “Murmuring” and “Habitual Sadness” and subsequently, the differences of documentaries and fiction films on the particular matter. This essay is well-written, the points are well-communicated and the analysis excellent, in one of the best essays in the book

In the eighth, Kim Kyung-hyun makes the connection between the two Golden Ages of Korean cinema, by analyzing and comparing “The Housemaid” with “Happy End”. At the same time, the essay focuses on the presentation and the differences of masculinity and femininity in the two films, in a rather intriguing text that also, however, is “tormented” by the many and quite lengthy notes.

Lee Kee-hyeung focuses on TV melodrama and particularly Morae Sigye and the concept of the social melodrama. Through the analysis of the series, Lee presents how contemporary history is presented through the melodrama, particularly focusing on the Gwangju Uprising. At the same time, and through personal experience, Lee highlights the differences between the way Koreans and foreigners perceive film. This part is quite original and informative, as much as well written.

The book shows its age, as it was written at a time when the Korean Film Archive had not yet made available all these films that are offered for free now. This issue resulted in the writers dealing with the same film repeatedly, while probably the lack of material and access to it, particularly from the non-Korean writers, has led them to focus too much on Hollywood and films from other countries. Furthermore, the extensive use of notes on the end of each essay and the occasionally “too academic” approach (in lack of a better term) makes a number of essays quite difficult to read. Lastly, the naming is of the previously used style, which can be a bit confusing, at least when compared with the type that is somewhat established now.

On the other hand, the analyses are thorough and interesting, and the amount of information the book offers extensive. Furthermore, a number of texts are truly unique, in both presentation and context (I would say about half), and are the ones that make the book a worthy read.