top of page

Written to Griffis:

Korea in the Second Person

The physical distance between Griffis and his “hermit nation” is further overcome through the scholar’s second-person engagement with Korea — that is, through his correspondences with missionaries in Korea, Korean political figures, and other individuals that have a more direct involvement with Korean affairs. Here, Korea becomes a “you” space, as it is thoroughly contemplated, processed, and described to Griffis from the perspectives of his acquaintances, according to certain inquiries and needs expressed by Griffis. 

The kind of information flowing into this layer of space is different from the previous, in that Griffis is its exclusive recipient, and that exchanges of this sort can involve very specific sets of expectations and assumptions. For instance, some correspondences directly respond to, revise, or endorse Griffis’s opinions or inquiries held about Korea. In a letter written on September 26th, 1892, missionary Homer B. Hulbert states the following in response to Griffis’s advocacy on the Christianization of Korea:

“I know that you are interested in whatever pertains to the advancement of Christian civilization both in that country[Korea] and Japan. It is true that those two races differ widely in many points but it is equally true that a Christian education is as necessary to one as to the other. […] I arrived at one or two definite conclusions. The first was that we can never expect Korea and Koreans to carry on any extended system of education on the English basis as has been so largely done in Japan.” (Hulbert)

 

Hulbert acknowledges Griffis’s proposition regarding the matter of missionary activity, and presents his own opinion on Christian education in Korea, based on his “six years of work in Korea” (Hulbert). 

In other moments, the correspondences respond to Griffis’s requests for information pertaining to his academic work. In the same letter, Hulbert discusses the prevalence of Hangul over Chinese characters in Korea, and points out the opportunity for “a very influential piece of work” tracing the literary traditions of the Korean people.(Hulbert). In a follow-up letter on November 16th, 1892, Hulbert states that he has been reminded by a note from Griffis that he should have searched through his “Korean notes” for “great literary lights in Korea” (Hulbert). He then summarizes the legacies of “Say Jong and Choe Chi Won,” enumerating their intellectual achievements: “He[Say Jong] superintended the making of an alphabet and published the Hoon Min Chong Eumin which the principles of the new alphabet were set forth” (Hulbert). “This[Choe Chi Won] is the man to whom educated Koreans look up as being their greatest scholar and literary genius” (Hulbert). Correspondences were thus an important avenue through which Griffis requested information and opinions, and the descriptions of Korea in this context took on a more personalized, need-specific nature.

 

 

 

The writer and recipient may also share certain values, and they may project these ideas onto their representations of Korea in their correspondences. For instance, a letter from the Christian missionary H. G. Underwood written on July 14th, 1900 reflects a Christian, modernizing perspective: 

 

“While, politically there has been no progress, in other ways [however] there [have] been advances. Railroads are coming in, mainly however for the benefit of foreign investors and the greatest advances that we[in Korea] find is the work of the gospel, here and here mainly appears the hope of Korea.” (Underwood)

 

The recipient of this letter is an American Orientalist who also defines “advances” in terms of modernization and Christianization — thus the common values of Underwood and Griffis allow for an imagination of Korea as the destined object of evangelism, westernization, and industrialization. Shared perspectives between Griffis and his correspondents were likely conducive to an opinionated presentation of Korea in these correspondences.

The “you” space allowed Griffis to see Korea through the eyes of certain individuals, and by means of one-on-one interactions that allowed him to seek out more specific nuggets of Korea-related information. Noting the traces of personal opinions, shared values, scholarly requests, and other “you-and-I” transactions in the correspondences is important, because these are the elements that distinguish Griffis’s correspondents from the books or pamphlets that he consulted in the third-person space. Second-person engagement with Korea allowed Griffis to form more personalized relations with the distant East Asian nation. 

William Elliot Griffis Collection

William Elliot Griffis Collection

William Elliot Griffis Collection

William Elliot Griffis Collection

bottom of page