Kim,+Seo+HyunBDSEM22011

 Welcome to Seohyun's Wiki Page! 

__**Sino-Japanese War/Baseball** __ 1. How are the Chinese soldiers portrayed in these prints? The Japanese soldiers? In the woodblock printings, the Chinese are always defeated by the Japanese, and most of them are portrayed to be dead. They are always frowning because of their lack of good technology and because of their losses against the Japanese. In contrast, the Japanese soldiers are always victorious and triumphant. They are solemn and determined; they are never injured or killed in the printings.

2. Look at the weapons used by each side, are they different? How? Does this tell us anything about Japanese technological advancement? By looking at the images, i can see that the Japanese soldiers' weapons are much more developed and advanced than those of the Chinese soldiers. The Chinese soldiers often don't have any weapons or have weapons such as simple swords and arrows. On the other hand, the Japanese soldiers have weans such as bombs, guns, and advanced swords that give them advantage in the war. This tells about the Japanese technological advancement because they had adopted a lot of western technologies into their military, and were much more advanced in terms of technology than the Chinese

3. Why do sports often become symbolic battlegrounds between nations? Sports often become symbolic battleground between nations because sports set up situations in which different nations have to compete with each other. Also, because there are certain sports that require direct contact between players, the sports can be more aggressive. //Why does this matter to a people? What do they find so gratifying in the experience of witnessing their team beat another in the arena of sport?//

4. Is imperialism/colonialism simply about militarily and politically controlling another nation, or is it also about proving one’s self-perceived cultural superiority over another? I think imperialism is not only about military, political control over another nation, but also about proving one's self-perceived cultural superiority over another. This is because for example, the European nations often referred to the ideas of the "White Man's Burden", which was the responsibility of the Europeans to civilized the underdeveloped countries by controlling them. I think imperialism emphasized a country's superior culture over the culture of another region.

__**5/8/11 Russo-Japanese War** __

1. Do artistic renditions or photographs depict the heroics of war better? I think the artistic renditions depict the heroics of war better. During the Russo-Japanese war, both Japan and Russia wanted to make their people think that their own country is winning the war by drawing propagandistic poster and images. In those images, the heros of war were depicted to be more courageous and admirable than they actually were. On the other hand, the photographs of the war showed the more realistic side of the war by portraying the horrors of war and how everyone was suffering because of the war.

2. Do artistic renditions or photographs depict the horrors of war better? <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 24px;">I think the photographs depict the horrors of war better. As I've said above, the artistic renditions are highly propagandistic for the two countries involved in the Russo-Japanese war, so they glorify the nations and emphasize their heros. However, the photographs realistically depict the actual situations and conditions of war, and how the war was horrific for many people.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 24px;">3. How does the medium affect the message? Can we say that "The medium is the message?" <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 24px;">The medium affects the message because there are different uses for each kind of medium, and different uses often affect the meanings of the messages. I agree that "the medium is the message" because even if two mediums are related to the same topic, they would be portraying different sides of the same event because they are just created and used for different purposes. For example, although the photographs and artistic renditions are all about the Russo-Japanese War, the photographs demonstrate the horrors of the war while the artistic renditions show the heros and glories of the war.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 24px;">4. Why is 1905 such a turning point in Japanese and World history? How might history have been different had Japan lost the Russo-Japanese War? <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 24px;">1905 is a turning point in Japanese and World history because it was an event that made countries around the world, especially Western Europe, realize that an Asian country could become so powerful and influential to defeat an European country. Also, this war was the starting point of the increase in Japanese power and sphere of influence over the world. If Japan had lost the Russo-Japanese War, Russia instead of Japan would have risen as a world power and become industrialized like Western European countries. Meanwhile, not only Japan but the entire Asia would have stayed inferior to the European countries, and mainly be exploited and ruled by the Europeans without any chance to rise as a global power.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 24px;">**__5/10/11 Gabo Reform Edicts and The Charter Oath__** <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%; line-height: 24px;">﻿1. How are these documents alike? Be specific in showing exactly how they are similar. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; line-height: 24px;">The two documents are alike in that they both encourage equality among the different social classes and mass education for the development of the two countries. For example, the Gabo Reform Edits says that <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; line-height: normal;">the hierarchical society, the sinbun class system, is to be abolished; similarly, in the Charter Oath, all classes are requested to unite for the administration of the state. Moreover, both documents suggest education of not only wealthy, high-class people but also other common people so that there can be more advancement in the countries.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%; line-height: normal;">2. How are these documents different? Be specific in showing how exactly they are different. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%; line-height: normal;"> <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%; line-height: normal;">Overall, the Gabo Reform Edicts and the Charter Oath are different in that the Gabo Reform Edicts was trying to state the sovereignty of Korea and centralize the state by giving most power to the king himself, while the Charter Oath of Meiji Japan gave many rights to the citizens so that they can actually participate in the administrative processes of the government. For example, the Gabo Reform Edicts claimed the sovereignty of Korea and the king's monopolization of government control. In contrast, the Charter Oath gave rights to all classes to carry out administration affairs and to hold assemblies.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%; line-height: normal;">3. What ultimately, is their purpose? <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%; line-height: normal;">The purposes of the two documents are to state their support for a more egalitarian society in Korea and Japan. This is shown when they state the end to privileges that had been given to the yangban class in Korea and the daimyo in Japan.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%; line-height: normal;">4. These were very lofty goals for both people to try to achieve. To what degree do you feel the Koreans and the Japanese were able to achieve their objectives. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%; line-height: normal;"> <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%; line-height: normal;">I think the Koreans and the Japanese could achieve their goals to the extent that they satisfied their citizens and prevented any uprisings of the population. Before these documents were published, there was no sign of the government to move toward modernization or supporting of a more just, fair society in the two countries. However, by these documents, the two countries didn't necessarily achieve completely egalitarian societies right away, but moved toward those and prevented the feeling of discontent by their people.