http://www.dazeddigital.com/artsandculture/article/23066/1/i-watched-the-interview-with-a-north-korean-defector
Lucy Edwards, Dazed, 5 January 2015.

Joo Il Kim and Lucy Edwards after watching The Interview (photo: Lucy Edwards)

By the end of 2014, everybody in the world had said their piece on the controversial James Franco and Seth Rogen film The Interview. Is it offensive? Should it be banned? Is America committing an “act of war” just by making a movie that about assassinating North Korean leader Kim Jong-un? Typically, the only people left out of the conversation were actual North Koreans.

I teach English to North Korean defectors living in New Malden, a suburb of southwest London. Two of them were planning to watch the film anyway, so I asked if I could join them. We meet at the offices of Free NK newspaper, described on its English website as “a newspaper of hope and democracy with the goal of liberating the people of North Korea suffering in distress”. My student Kim Joo-il founded the newspaper after escaping from North Korea in 2005.

Joo-il joined the army as a teenager. As the famine of the 1990s and 2000s took its toll, soldiers deserted their units to try and escape starvation. Joo-il’s job as captain was to track them down. Most North Koreans are not allowed to travel. This, combined with a lifetime of government propaganda, means that they are unaware of the situation outside their hometowns. While Joo-il was travelling around North Korea in search of deserters, he realised that people were starving everywhere. Every train station had piles of bodies lying around.

He knew something was wrong. But what really triggered his decision to escape was a trip home. To welcome him back, his sister gave him a meal of rice, meaning that her own family had to go without. A few days later, Joo Il’s starving niece stumbled across some raw corn and ate it. It swelled up in her stomach and killed her. She was four years old.

In 2005 Joo-il was sent to Hamgyong province, near the Chinese border. He knew this was his one opportunity to escape. He waited for a cloudy night and crept past border guards to swim across the Yalu river, arriving in China four hours later. Joo-il went to Vietnam, Cambodia and Thailand before being granted asylum in the UK, and finally settling in New Malden. His family in North Korea are constantly watched by the government.

Joo-il tells me through Seonju, our South Korean translator: “I don’t really want to watch this film. But after all the media attention and the hacking incident, I wondered what the controversy was about.” His friend, another defector who works at the Korean supermarket next door, doesn’t turn up at the last minute.

This was probably a wise decision.

Joo-il, Seonju and I proceed to sit through all 112 minutes of The Interview in awkward silence. As the only Westerner in the room, I am painfully aware of the lazy Asian jokes, stereotypes and cardboard North Korean characters. Constant crude sex jokes, combined with the high-ranking female Korean official’s inexplicable horniness for Seth Rogen made for a distinct “watching Masters of Sex with your grandparents” vibe.

The only laugh comes from Seonju, when Seth Rogen falls out a window. Though that might have been a cough. When Kim Jong-un is finally blown up in a much-discussed helicoptor scene, I look over and see Joo-il yawning. I’m pretty sure that two women and a 41-year-old North Korean defector were not the target audience for this film.

“By making a film about the assassination of Kim Jong Un, I think Sony Pictures deliberately set out to create a media storm,” Joo-il says afterwards. “With this subject matter, it could be an effective film, but I’m disappointed. Maybe Sony paid the North Korean government to create a scandal.”

Joo-il is also unconcerned by Sony Pictures Entertainment’s decision to cancel the release in cinemas. “Sony Pictures Entertainment is a private company,” he explains. “They can do what they want. Whether they choose to release it or not, it’s OK it’s not an important point.”

So does he see The Interview having any positive impact for the people of North Korea? “It cannot help us to understand North Korean people,” he tells me. “Not in a serious way. And it will not have any impact on spurring western governments or the UN to take action either against the North Korean government or for the North Korean people.”

Thrown in with the smutty one-liners and “Frosty Nixon” (Frost/Nixon, geddit?) gags, there’s a running joke that Kim Jong-un is scared people will think he’s gay because he likes Katy Perry and cocktails. According to Joo-il, nothing about the film would chime with ordinary people in North Korea.

“North Korea is a closed society,” Joo-il explains. “Our culture is influenced by Confucian values of reverence and respect. The crude sexual content would get an adverse reaction. Most North Korean people wouldn’t even understand the concept of homosexuality.”

In a recent Good Morning America interview, Seth Rogen said: “In the movie we go to great lengths to separate the regime that rules North Korea with the North Korean people themselves. And they are not bad; they are the victims of a horrible situation. Part of me thinks that they themselves would really enjoy the movie. Maybe. Who knows? I wonder if we’ll ever find out.”

“I myself am a defector,” Joo-ill says. “But when I watched this film, I felt insulted. I understand it’s a comedy, it’s not serious. But even though they are laughing, it demeans North Korean people.”

He adds that he has read reports that defectors in South Korea have sent copies of the movies to their relatives in North Korea via instant messaging – but after seeing the movie himself, Joo-il believes these reports are untrue. “I heard Americans know little about North Korea,” he says. “North Koreans are always portrayed as obedient robots. So with all the vulgar words, it’s like there is a subtext which demeans Korean people. In this movie it looks like we are too stupid to realise our government is bad.”

As for those plans to airdrop copies of the film over North Korea? “This idea would just be for show, there would be no positive effect.” And no, cultural differences aren’t what’s stopping Joo-il from enjoying The Interview. “Actually,” he says, “I have seen many American movies but this is the first time I’ve seen this kind of shit.”

Joo-il specifically singles out the moment where Franco’s character tells his new puppy, “We’re going to America, where they don’t eat dogs”. Here there is a moment of confusion as Seonju, our interpretor, had fallen asleep and missed this obviously riveting part of the movie. But were she awake, she tells me, she would also find this offensive. (She loves dogs.)

Punchlines about dog-eating Koreans isn’t satire – and it’s definitely not the kind of comedy that disarms a feared dictator. I ask Joo-il if North Korea could flip the tables on Sony and make a comedy about assassinating Obama could work in North Korea. He muses: “In North Korea all visual media; art, theatre and cinema comes from the central government. There is no cultural code whereby people could enjoy the assassination of Obama in the form of comedy. Maybe there could be a serious film, designed to arouse North Korean people’s rage.”

But maybe this won’t be necessary. As Joo-il puts it: “If they spread The Interview in North Korea, it will make people hate America much much more.”

https://news.vice.com/article/former-north-korean-poet-laureate-says-the-interview-is-as-explosive-as-a-real-bomb-being-dropped-on-kim-jong-un
By Katie Engelhart

“Who knows?” mused actor Seth Rogen last June while speaking with a Rolling Stone reporter about the eventual release of his film The Interview — a comedy in which North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un is assassinated by a pair of American journalists played by him and James Franco. “Maybe the tapes will make their way to North Korea and cause a fucking revolution.”

After North Korea condemned the film and hackers with suspected ties to Pyongyang breached Sony Entertainment servers and darkly invoked the 9/11 attack in a warning to moviegoers in the United States, talk of revolution in the Hermit Kingdom was eclipsed by concern that the film’s release might imperil Americans trying to see it.

Kim Jong-un Extends New Year’s Olive Branch, Offers to Hold Summit with South. Read More Here.

In the early weeks following the Sony hack, news networks around the world speculated about the likelihood of an assault on US soil in retaliation for the film. In the meantime, reception of The Interview — an otherwise run-of-the-mill low-brow buddy flick, which includes plenty of ass jokes and a scene in which Kim Jong-un shits his pants on live television — became an unlikely barometer of respect for freedom of expression in America.

Addressing the controversy on December 19th with a high-mindedness that belies the actual film’s inanity, President Barack Obama remarked: “We cannot have a society in which some dictator in some place can start imposing censorship in the United States.”

Leaked emails revealed that Sony executives had consulted Rand Corporation senior defense analyst Bruce Bennett about the film, which ends [spoiler alert!] with an artillery shell taking down Kim Jong-un’s helicopter and killing the Dear Leader. Bennett urged Sony to not soften the death scene on the grounds that it might inspire real-life Korean dissidents to plot a real-life assassination attempt on Kim.

“While toning down the ending may reduce the North Korean response, I believe that a story that talks about the removal of the Kim family regime and the creation of a new government by the North Korean people (well, at least the elites) will start some real thinking in South Korea and, I believe, in the North once the DVD leaks into the North (which it most certainly will),” Bennett wrote.

Does the Sony hack signal a new form of conflict? Read more here.

On New Year’s Eve, South Korean activist Park Sang-hak vowed to float balloons carrying 100,000 DVD and USB copies of The Interview across the border into North Korea. “North Korea’s absolute leadership will crumble if the idolization of leader Kim breaks down,” he remarked to the Associated Press. The balloon launches could begin as early as late January, depending on weather conditions and wind direction.

Might The Interview really find an audience in North Korea? If so, to what effect?

VICE News discussed this with Jang Jin-sung, a former state-appointed North Korean poet laureate who is today one of the country’s most prominent defectors. Before escaping to South Korea by way of China a decade ago, Jang worked in Pyongyang as an expert in psychological warfare, crafting pro-regime propaganda campaigns and writing epic poetry that promoted the cult of personality surrounding Kim Jong-un’s father, the late Kim Jong-il. He is one of a few escapees to have experienced life in the elder Kim’s inner posse.

Jang published the book Dear Leader: Poet, Spy, Escapee — A Look Inside North Korea last spring, and is the editor-in-chief of New Focus International, a website that reports on North Korea.

VICE NEWS: Have you seen the movie?
Jang Jin-sung: Yes, I’ve watched it. It was scary.

Why?
From the North Korean’s point of view, it’s as explosive as if a real bomb were dropped on Kim Jong-un. It’s a cultural bomb. And it has nothing to do with the story or the presentation or the acting — or really with the movie itself. It’s just the notion that Kim Jong-un can be assassinated in a film. It’s so shocking. It’s beyond-the-pale blasphemous.

Will the film make its way into North Korea?
There are a lot of reports saying that people inside have watched it or are keen to get their hands on it — that prices have gone up and that sort of thing. There are even reports that North Korean authorities really want to clamp down on it, and that they’re hunting for people who spread it. But as far as I know — and as far as my sources are concerned — there isn’t evidence for any of it. I haven’t been able to confirm those reports.

Actually, logic-wise, if people were watching it, North Korean officials wouldn’t declare that they are hunting for it, as reports suggest. That would undermine everything, because it would indicate that the movie is a big deal and make people want to watch it more. Ordinary North Koreans will probably hear about it and see it. But it has literally just been released. Things don’t move that fast in North Korea.

Security analyst Richard Bennett of the Rand Corporation suggested that North Korean elites will also watch the film. Do you think that’s right?
Yes, the elites too. This movie is more powerful than a nuclear weapon, in the North Korean context. It’s more scary to the regime. It’s bigger, because North Korea enforces its legitimacy by insisting that its leader is infallibly awesome and someone to be revered, to be worshiped. The narrative of the ruling Kim is used to control the people. And if you take that away, that psychological pillar of control, the regime loses its basis of enforcement.

There’s a scene in the movie where the journalist character asks Kim Jong-un, “Is it true that you don’t use the toilet? That you don’t poo? That you don’t have an asshole?” Kim says, “I do.” Within North Korea, to have a conversation like that, it just breaks all the taboos.

Do you believe that the film will encourage a real change of thinking in North Korea?
It’s not like people will change their minds, or be inspired to change their minds. Because it’s not that people really believe all this propaganda about Kim Jong-un, that he’s a God, and need someone to tell them otherwise or show them another way of thinking. North Koreans are people, and they aren’t stupid.

In the North Korean system, you have to praise Kim and sing hymns about him and take it seriously, even if you think it’s only a shit narrative. That’s the block, you see? It’s not that people are brainwashed and think he’s God. These are things that people know, but that they don’t dare to challenge. Where the movie is really powerful is that it comes from the outside, and does the exact opposite. That’s where the magic is.

Optimists hope that the film will inspire real-life assassination attempts on Kim Jong-un. Is that conceivable?
I’m not predicting that, but it’s not an impossible notion. Right now, no one respects the Kim cult out of loyalty or belief or genuine love. People only respect Kim out of fear. And that’s where The Interview comes in. If people stop being afraid, the regime can’t sustain the system. So I don’t think The Interview will really inspire people to suddenly rise up, but it might help people to fear the system less. The movie could show that them that they are allowed to not take Kim seriously. The movie offers an alternative that North Koreans aren’t even given the leeway to think about. It offers an alternative imagination.

Is there any way that Kim Jong-un himself will watch the film?
I suppose that he might want to watch it, out of curiosity. But to go back to your point about assassination, why would the elites want to kill Kim Jong-un? He’s not the one keeping them subservient. It’s the cult system. If Kim Jong-un is not there, then it will be his sister or his brother or someone else. Unless the system changes, nothing changes. The elites know that killing Kim Jong-un won’t do any good.

The film itself is pretty stupid. What do you make of that?
It doesn’t matter how dirty or low-brow it is, as long as it targets that system of cult worship.

Did you like it?
The Interview is quite low-brow and dirty-humored. It wasn’t the best film ever. It was quite a bad film, actually, quite silly and stupid. But conversely, if the same movie had been made better — more serious and more crafted — it might have actually made things worse in North Korea, because it might have made North Korea look more powerful. But it’s just a toilet humor movie. And the fact that North Korea feels it’s inappropriate to make, it just undermines the cult even further. That’s cool! [Laughs]

Do you think the film controversy has contributed meaningfully to international discourse about North Korea?
If The Interview leads people to perceive North Korea as more respectable or more formidable, then it’s really disappointing. And if leads people to say, “Oh, we can’t laugh at other countries anymore,” then it loses its point. I’ve thought about this, and I’m startled that this cultural product has become such a political issue in the free world. In the free world, by definition, you have freedom in arts and cultural expression. I’m surprised that people in the free world were opposed to the film.

http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/news/latest-news/?view=Speech&id=838187482
CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY

Thank you Warwick for that introduction. I would also like to thank Baroness Perry, who is the reason we are able to meet here in Parliament.

It is a great pleasure to speak to you this evening, so soon after my visit to South Korea. It was a real thrill to set foot in Korea for the first time, and to do so as we prepare to mark 130 years of diplomatic relations.

The bonds between our two countries are longstanding–something I was reminded of recently when I heard of the Korean War Veterans Association’s campaign to commission a war memorial here in Britain, which I am sure everyone in this room would support.

Over the past few decades the Republic of Korea has transformed itself. You have become the world’s twelfth-largest economy and a member of the G20; the first nation to transition from aid recipient to membership of the OECD Donors Assistance Committee.

You are an economic miracle, a thriving democracy and a growing voice for good in the world today.

It is these characteristics that make it so important for Britain to build a strategic partnership with Korea – one in which we work together, across the board, to achieve our common goals.

We are, of course, watching the build-up to the Presidential elections with interest. It seems it will be a close contest. But regardless of who wins on 19 December, we look forward to continuing our close relationship with the new Korean government.

In the next few minutes I want to explain what we have done over the past year to consolidate and build our strategic partnership, but also to consider what more we need to do.

A new chapter in relations

The last twelve months have seen an unprecedented stepping up of co-operation between the United Kingdom and Korea.

We have deployed more diplomatic staff in Seoul, and British Ministers are visiting more frequently.

The Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg, visited Korea in March, with Jeremy Browne following two months later. The then-Defence Minister Peter Luff was in Seoul in June; Energy and Climate Change Minister Greg Barker in October; and Lord Howell, the Foreign Secretary’s personal adviser on energy and resource security, just last week. Korea was the first Asian country that I visited as a Foreign and Commonwealth Office Minister.

And we have hosted several high-profile Korean visitors here in London, including Trade Minister Bark, Deputy Minister for Political Affairs Kim Kyou-hyun, your Six Party Talks representative Lim Sung Nam, and senior politicians Sohn Hak-kyu and KIM Moon Soo.

These expanded contacts have helped us to drive forward our relationship like never before.

The Host-to-Host agreement we signed in March is increasing commercial co-operation ahead of the 2014 Asian Games in Incheon, the 2015 World Student Games in Gwangju, and the Pyeongchang Winter Olympics in 2018. British company Populous designed the main stadium for the Asian Games, and others such as Colt are plugged into the Incheon supply chain. The success of the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games has left us well-placed to share our experience and to win contracts.

On defence, we announced in March that Korean Daewoo Ship and Maritime Engineering would build four new tankers for the Royal Navy, a deal worth £460 million. Shortly afterwards Korea announced that Rolls Royce would supply engines for the next generation of Korean frigates, worth $120 million. We hope to continue to expand this relationship.

In June we launched our joint Youth Mobility Scheme, an initiative which in 2013 will enable up to 1000 young people from Korea to live and work in the UK for up to two years. It grants the same rights to British young people, an opportunity I sincerely hope many will take advantage of.

And during my visit, I met some new North Korean settlers benefitting from our ‘English for the Future’ programme, which is helping to develop the English language skills they need to compete in today’s jobs market.

But I believe we can do more.

Scope to do more on security

Working together to tackle pressing international problems should be a high priority.

This month’s inaugural UK-Korea Strategic Dialogue, which I was pleased to attend the opening of, provided an excellent vehicle to begin this. It was also very timely, as Korea prepares to take its seat on the UN Security Council next year.

Central to our discussions were Security Council priorities such as the Middle East Peace Process, Syria, Iran and, of course, North Korea – on which I believe Britain can offer a valuable insight, given our presence in Pyongyang. Over the next year, I will be taking a personal interest in ensuring that the UK works closely with Korea to progress our common concerns.

However, to have a truly strategic relationship we need to look beyond these immediate priorities to the issues that will affect us in the longer-term.

Climate change is perhaps the most important of these. By spending two percent of GDP on green growth every year for the past four years; by putting in place domestically-binding emissions targets; and by becoming the first Asian country to pass emissions trading legislation, Korea is showing strong regional leadership

Add to this your winning bid to host the Green Climate Fund, and the successful launch of Global Green Growth Institute, and it is clear that you are not just regional leaders on climate change – you are global leaders. New Song Do will be an excellent location for the Green Climate Fund, and I am delighted that Britain will take on the role of Vice President of the Global Green Growth Institute Assembly.

But there are other issues to focus on too. I strongly believe that South Korea can be a powerful voice on human rights, for example – in its neighbourhood and beyond.

We have a shared commitment to international peacekeeping, having both contributed to efforts in Afghanistan, Lebanon, Haiti and the Horn of Africa. The Korean National Assembly’s recent decision to deploy a contingent of military engineers to South Sudan is welcome. I hope that Korea will continue to expand its efforts in this area.

The UK and Korea are active international donors, so we have a shared interest in ensuring that aid is used effectively. Korea is uniquely placed, given its own experience of development, to play a key role in the dialogue between developing and donor countries to help us achieve this.

We should also work more closely on cyber security. It will not be easy to find an international consensus on rules of the road to guide future behaviour in cyberspace, and to combat the worst abuses of it. But the active engagement of countries like yours will help to take us a step closer. We are looking forward to the cyber conference in Korea next year.

Closer partners for prosperity

On the prosperity agenda, too, we have much to gain from closer co-operation.

I returned from Korea last month fascinated by the sheer dynamism of its economy. I am keen to make more British companies excited by the opportunities this dynamism creates – especially new exporters and SMEs.

With that in mind, I am pleased that next February, UK Trade and Investment will run a week-long series of events across Britain, ‘Opportunity Korea’, aiming to do just that. British companies are already coming on board and I am personally keen to play a part in ensuring its success.

Nevertheless, we need your help to spread the message that Korea is a place with opportunities worth exploring. I would encourage businesses here today with experience of Korea to get involved.

The EU-Korea Free Trade Agreement could also provide a significant boost to our commercial relationship. Of course, it needs to be implemented in a way that does not harm business, but if we get it right it could add £49 billion to EU Korea bilateral trade over the next 20 years.

A common understanding

As we work more together, our countries are also developing a greater common understanding. That is important because, like any relationship, you work best together when you know each other.

At the start of this year, our Embassy in Seoul commissioned a survey of Korean views of the UK. There were some hugely positive messages to come out of this – not least that participants between the ages of 18 and 30 identified Britain as their favourite overseas country. The enthusiasm for the UK – a genuine warmth I felt when I visited – was clear to see.

Unsurprisingly, the survey also brought out traditional themes. People identified Britain as a “nation of gentlemen” – with grand architecture, a Royal Family and dreary weather. English football’s Premier League also made an appearance, as did Harry Potter.

However, the stereotype extended into slightly more unhelpful territory. That behind our castle walls, we Brits are technophobes lacking in creativity and ideas.

London 2012 started to challenge these perceptions, showing what today’s Britain is really like: diverse, open, connected, creative, dynamic. I know that message was not lost on our Korean friends.

And shortly after the international spotlight had been fixed on the UK, it shifted quickly East – to Korea, to Seoul, and, ultimately, to Gangnam.

I am talking, of course, about K-pop sensation ‘Psy’, whose “Gangnam Style” has taken the world, and Britain, by storm.

People across the globe – from members of our Royal Family to the UN Secretary General – have been embracing the rapper’s equestrian dance moves. You will be relieved to hear that I will not be inflicting my own rendition upon you this evening.

But being serious for a moment, I think that Psy’s music has given the world, and people here in Britain, a glimpse of the dynamism and vibrancy of modern Korea. It has shown a nation of colour, creativity and confidence.

And so I would like to end today by saying that I see Psy’s success as representing just one small fragment of today’s Global Korea.

You are already a world leader in the business world, with companies like Hyundai, Kia, LG and Samsung, household names. As “Gangnam Style” has demonstrated, your music is global too.

But it should not stop there, and I don’t think it will. With your membership of the G20, your forthcoming role on the UN Security Council and your leadership on issues like climate change – you are becoming a truly global nation in the political sphere.

As you look to the years ahead, I hope you will view Britain as one of your closest partners. I am sure that the Anglo-Korean Society will help to ensure that you do.

Francesca Cho in her studio

London based artist Francesca Cho has studied and worked in London for the past seventeen years. I was curious at how an artist who has lived in London for such a long time would think about her self-identity and how her works would deal with Korean identity in London.

Why did you use Korean letters in your works?

Francesca Cho: Hangul #5

In the beginning, it was purely an expression of my emotional feeling without any involvement or motivation of the political situation in Korea. As a student far away from home I have had to cope with great loneliness and isolation although I came to the UK to fulfill my dreams and ambitions. I therefore needed a lot of support from ‘home’; it was the meaning of the Korean epic poem ‘Songs of the Dragons Flying to Heaven’ (The deep-rooted tree is not swayed by the wind. The deep-sprung well is not dried by the drought.) The poem was the first work written in Korean after King Sejong the Great invented the Korean written language in the fifteenth century.

A few years ago I thought about what my country meant to me and also about the division of Korea after painful experiences of emotional turmoil because of a couple of national art events where political issues were involved.

I am Korean and Korea includes both the north and the south. However, a Korean born in the south cannot see the north or meet North Koreans so the image of people in North Korea is vague. After thinking about my identity as a Korean in London the realization that the war between South and North Korea had not yet ended was a complete shock to me. It was a painful moment for me and I started creating the painting ‘The tragedy of fratricidal war’ in Korea with ash.

Francesca Cho: North and South #5

But, you were born after the Korean War so you never experienced it.

Of course, the ceasefire was 58 years ago, but we Koreans are influenced directly or indirectly by the unfinished war between the two Koreas.

Francesca Cho: Work in progress

After living in England for seventeen years, do you feel you have a little bit English?

Even though I have lived here for seventeen years, I am still a foreigner to English people. Sometimes, I surprise myself because I think I react like an English person but many people do not see me in the same way. I do not mind where I belong; I may not be either English or Korean. Now I can see what represents Korean identity more clearly from the outside and speak up about what I want to say.

In my work, I use the ash of my burnt belongings; for example to create the white in the silhouettes of Great Britain and Korea (see above). The paintings are ongoing. Now I am Korean and maybe a little English as well. I want to create my own identity with these images.

Francesca Cho: Untitled

The meaning of war in Francesca’s works is expanded to include the ‘invisible war’ between people.

War is everywhere. Almost everyday we hear on the news that a soldier or a civilian has died in a conflict. When a soldier sacrifices his life for his country, he cannot come back to life. Even though people mourn him and put beautiful roses on his coffin, the death of one person cannot be compensated. The rose petals in my works represent the mortality of life and the pain of ‘invisible war’. If there were no longer any wars neither lives nor roses would be sacrificed.

Not only guns can kill, words too, spoken without thought, can become an ‘invisible gun’.The ash from my burnt belongings contain my memories in this ‘invisible war’. I add ash to most of my paintings. This will fertilize the dying heart after the war and help it to recover.