I’ve lived on Jeju Island, South Korea, for seven years, but today was my first time walking the trail through the 1100 Wetland (1100고지 습지). Somehow, I’d never made time for it. ^^

A married couple I work with had come over from the mainland. After they finished their work and had lunch, I took them up to the wetland across from the 1100 Rest Area (1100고지 휴게소).

I went there hoping to show them a lovely part of Jeju, but it turned out to be a new experience for me, too.

As we walked, I kept wondering why I hadn’t come sooner. Living nearby doesn’t always mean you’ve really taken the time to enjoy a place.

Afterward, we stopped at the rest area for warm drinks and roasted sweet potatoes. A simple way to finish our little outing, but a lovely one.

Sometimes, showing someone around the place you call home helps you discover it all over again. That was how today felt for me. ^^

Is there a place near your home that took you years to finally visit?

Hello! I am trying to do some research on the disappearing or dying neighborhoods of Seoul.
I used to live near 이대역 in 2009 and 2010 and it was so busy with shopping and hanging out. When I went in 2023, I was surprised to see most of the stores closed and not much to do there. Same with 가로수길. Looking for places like this.

I'm looking for similar areas. I also used to frequent 보광동 and I know that place is demolished. I'm not looking for demolished places, but rather areas that still have some life to it but aren't as lively as before.

Any leads would be appreciated!! Thank you!

Anheungji Pond,

Aeryeonjeong Pavilion

in icheon city

https://n.news.naver.com/article/023/0004003756

Summary:

1. In its October issue of the *Fiscal Monitor*, released on the 14th, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) lowered its forecast for South Korea’s general government gross debt (D2) as a share of GDP from 54.4% to 46.1% in just six months.

2. This is relatively low compared with the G7 average of 123.6% and the advanced-economy average of 107.6%.

3. Major credit rating agencies have also expressed positive assessments of South Korea’s fiscal position.

4. Fitch, an international credit rating agency, expects South Korea’s fiscal performance under next year’s budget to improve significantly compared with its previous projections.

   > The fiscal balance, excluding social security funds, is projected to improve from a deficit of 3.9% of GDP in 2026 to a deficit of 0.1% in 2027.

   > The consolidated fiscal balance is projected to post a surplus of 1.9% of GDP.

5. In a report last month, Moody’s also offered a positive assessment of South Korea’s budget proposal for next year. It stated that “the key is whether investment in strategic industries translates into productivity gains and economic growth,” while noting that the budget “seeks to strike a balance between strengthening fiscal soundness and expanding future growth engines.”

Today, I would like to share something about a social issue I have been deeply concerned with and spoken out about for several decades, quite apart from my academic research.

For many years, I have criticized South Korea's university admissions system for being excessively standardized and for requiring students to take examinations that often seem disconnected from their intended fields of study.

For example, humanities applicants in South Korea are required to solve extremely difficult mathematics problems. In fact, when engineering students at Harvard University were asked to solve some of these problems, they were unable to do so. Similarly, when native English speakers studying linguistics at the University of Cambridge were tested on English reading comprehension questions from South Korea's university entrance examination, they were unable to answer them correctly. These tests were recorded and are available on my YouTube channel(Harvard https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvkJb40La-0 Cambridge https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKyfym6dvig)

Of course, I do not regard these individual demonstrations as systematic evidence about the abilities of Harvard or Cambridge students. Rather, they illustrate a problem I have long been concerned about: the extraordinary difficulty of examinations that may have little relevance to what students actually intend to study.

I fully recognize the importance of maintaining academic standards and distinguishing between applicants according to their abilities. My objection is not to intellectual difficulty itself, but to the assumption that students pursuing fundamentally different disciplines should be evaluated through largely the same examinations.

This is why I have argued for decades that university admissions should be more closely tailored to students' intended fields of study, drawing inspiration from the more subject focused aspects of the British admissions system.

I have also tried to put this conviction into practice in my own life. I have never taken South Korea's national university entrance examination, the SAT. Instead, I have pursued my education through a different path, one that I have had to make for myself. I mention this not as a claim of intellectual superiority, but because this conviction has shaped my own educational choices.

Recently, I condensed much of what I have thought and experienced over the years into a short philosophical declaration, written in a deliberately provocative style.

Before sharing it, however, I would like to clarify one important point. My criticism is not directed at everyone who succeeds within the existing admissions system. I fully recognize that many intellectually outstanding and genuinely creative people have entered Korea's most prestigious universities. Nor do I believe that success in demanding examinations is without intellectual merit.

What I reject is the tendency to treat success within an established hierarchy as sufficient proof of intellectual greatness, without asking whether the individuals concerned have demonstrated originality, independence of thought, or the ability to question the standards by which they are judged.

The distinction I draw between intellectual aristocrats and plebeians in the following piece is therefore entirely metaphorical. It concerns one's intellectual attitude toward established values, not one's social class, family background, or university affiliation.

*

Behold the idol that Korean society has enthroned upon its highest pedestal!

Before it, the people bowed their heads. Parents commanded their children to ascend to its heights, and the children sacrificed their youth upon its altar. They turned night into day, suppressed their curiosity, and abandoned even the questions they themselves longed to ask. All for the sake of passing through a single gate!

At last, the gate opened. The people rejoiced. A great mind had been born!

But I ask:

What has he created? What has he questioned? What question has he dared to ask that no one before him had ever asked?

Has he not proven just one thing: that he can obey the rules laid down by others more perfectly than anyone else?

And yet the people placed a crown upon his head. The crown bestowed upon him as a reward for obedience they called the nobility of the spirit.

Oh, what strange aristocrats!

Those who believe themselves to stand at the summit of all values, yet cannot create values of their own! Those who believe themselves to possess the loftiest of minds merely because they have climbed a ladder built by others faster than anyone else!

I call them plebeians.

Not because they are poor. Not because they are of humble birth. But because their spirits forever look upward toward heights determined by others.

The true aristocrat of the spirit is not the one who climbs the ladder fastest. He is the one who asks whether the place to which the ladder leads is worth ascending at all. And if need be, he shatters the ladder itself and forges his own path.

Certainly, noble spirits may also dwell beneath those crowns. But it is not the crown that makes their spirits noble.

보라, 한국 사회가 가장 높은 곳에 세워 놓은 우상을!

사람들은 그 앞에서 머리를 숙였다. 부모는 자식에게 그곳에 오르라고 명령했고, 자식은 자신의 젊음을 제물로 바쳤다. 밤을 낮으로 바꾸고, 호기심을 억누르고, 스스로 묻고 싶은 질문마저 버렸다. 오직 하나의 문을 통과하기 위하여!

마침내 문이 열렸다. 사람들은 환호했다. 위대한 정신이 탄생했다고!

그러나 나는 묻는다.

그는 무엇을 창조했는가? 무엇을 의심했는가? 누구도 묻지 않았던 어떤 질문을 던졌는가?

그가 증명한 것은 단 하나, 남이 정해 놓은 규칙에 누구보다 훌륭하게 복종할 수 있다는 사실이 아닌가!

그런데도 사람들은 그에게 왕관을 씌웠다. 복종의 대가로 받은 왕관을 정신의 고귀함이라 불렀다.

오, 얼마나 기묘한 귀족들인가!

스스로 가치를 창조하지 못하면서 가치의 정상에 서 있다고 믿는 자들! 남이 만든 사다리를 가장 빨리 올라갔다는 이유로 자신이 가장 높은 정신의 소유자라고 믿는 자들!

나는 그들을 천민이라 부른다.

가난해서가 아니다. 출신이 비천해서도 아니다. 그들의 정신이 언제나 남이 정한 높이를 올려다보기 때문이다.

진정한 정신의 귀족은 사다리를 가장 빨리 오르는 자가 아니다. 사다리가 향하는 곳이 과연 오를 만한 곳인지를 묻는 자다. 필요하다면 사다리 자체를 부수고 자신의 길을 만드는 자다.

물론 그 왕관 아래에도 고귀한 정신은 있을 것이다. 그러나 그 정신을 고귀하게 만드는 것은 왕관이 아니다.

I recently watched Na Hong-jin's new film, Hope. Having absolutely loved The Wailing and his earlier work, I went in with high expectations, but it turned out to be a massive disappointment. One thing that really stood out to me was the excessive use of profanity. It made me realize how much recent Korean media seems to rely on swearing and how it devalues the curse words. While curse words have always been present in older Korean films, it never felt as excessive or constant as it does now. It feels cheap and really dilutes the lines that relies on curses to give it impact. I can't say that I'm a fan of the direction Korean medias are heading.

What do you guys think?

Do Koreans ever call themselves 고려인 or 조선인?

At Hot spring park in icheon city

Ginkgo trees in icheon middle school.

HELLO! I’m Korean-American and I really want to learn more about the history of my family. (Would love to go as far back as possible.) I’m researching my father’s side of the family and learned that he belonged to the Yeonan Kim clan, 연안 김씨, but I still do not know his specific branch, 파.

The official Yeonan Kim Central Clan Association has an online genealogy, but access is restricted to special members. I tried creating an account, but the registration form asks for information like my branch name, 파명, and clan generation number, 세, which I don’t have.

How can I find this info? Do i need to contact them? They don’t seem to have an email, only a Korean number. Is there a reliable way to contact the Yeonan Kim association from overseas, especially by email?

Has anyone successfully done this from overseas? How did you contact the association and were they able to help?