[Column] Days devoid of discourse

Kim Seon Ju, former editorial writer for the Hankyoreh

Elias Canetti was one of the great intellectuals of the 20th century, known for his study of the relationship between crowds and power, and the strength and responsibilities of words and language. He lamented the outbreak of World War II, saying, "If I were really a writer, I would have been able to prevent the war."

"Words in our society, words exchanged all too irresponsibly, become words that mislead the masses and make war inevitable. A real poet, or at least a poet who values language, needs to be determined to be responsible for all that can be ascertained through language," he said.

I have always believed that everyone who writes needs to have the same approach. Someone once said that a poet is someone who cries first and stops crying last. The same goes for others who live on words and writing, such as intellectuals and journalists. Otherwise they cannot call themselves true poets, journalists, and intellectuals. A true press organization, therefore, is one that has the ability to prevent war, the greatest calamity known to man. These days, however, the Korean and global media, poets, intellectuals, and others in professions that place a special importance on language have stopped trying to achieve all that is possible with language.

Jin Jung-gwon recently declared that he will cease to publish writings of a public nature. That is most unfortunate for the whole of society, because it means the disappearance of another form of discourse. There have been times when I have not agreed with him, but he has always asked questions on issues about which the discourse needs to be developed further. He has opened up new directions on the horizons of thought. There are others in our society who, while not saying they will stop writing completely, say they will no longer cover current events and issues. A lot of this writing has stopped already. I don't think there has ever been a time in Korea when "public writing" has been so difficult. Even during the military dictatorships it wasn't so hard, even though those governments sought to gag the mouth and stop the pen. The kind of public writing sustained by ostensible silence and meaning placed between the lines is gradually disappearing.

Why does one write and why does one read? For the sake of communication. Is it not all about finding agreement with something someone else has written, to understand things you did not know after having read the ideas of others? And does that not form a discourse for society as a whole, and by doing so advance individuals and society? Nowadays, writing in our society is nothing but an exercise in grouping people into opposing camps. It is about monologue. Each side holds its ears and doesn't listen. It's nothing but cheering for your own group. It is linguistic violence that requires no communication. It makes those who truly write burn with shame. All the writing you see is writing intended only to make lines of division clearer still. There is no real discourse.

They say that people stopped scribbling graffiti in public toilets when the internet appeared. The internet is a place where you relieve yourself. Today in a comment section somewhere you'll say one thing, and tomorrow you'll say something different. The news media, however, is supposed to write about history, about what happens. But even media outlets are full of words they aren't taking responsibility for, words that incite war. That has led some people to give up writing for fear of having their sincerity questioned.

When I was young I remember being deeply touched by the way the world's intellectuals spoke in unison about what was happening in Algeria, in Vietnam, and in Chile. It is horrifying that we have such a lack of communication in an era when the population is so educated and communication should be so easy because of the internet. If there had been a genuine news media, the war in Iraq and the war in Lebanon would never have happened. What use is one's knowledge if it is not put to use for the world we live in today, and is instead relegated to a being merely part of the everlasting cycle of labor? It makes this era devoid of discourse all the more desperately unfortunate.