Who was Park Chung-hee? 박정희는 누구였나?

[김우정]

한국생활을 오래한 서울여대의 데이비드 티저드교수의 박정희 대통령에 대한 칼럼입니다.
박정희 대통령에 대한 평가는 한국근대화의 아버지라는 평가와 독재자라는 평가로 극명하게 나뉩니다.
저는 5년전 미국에 가서 미국의 제3대 대통령 토마스제퍼슨의 저택을 방문한 적이 있습니다.
미국독립선언서를 기초자로서의 공로는 물론 흑인여성노예와 사생아를 낳는 등 과오도 제시했습니다.
우리도 박정희 대통령의 공은 공대로 과는 과대로 평가할 수는 없을까요?
 
Who was Park Chung-hee?
박정희는 누구였나?

By David A. Tizzard

David A. Tizzard has a doctorate in Korean Studies and lectures at Seoul Women's University and Hanyang University. He is a social-cultural commentator and musician who has lived in Korea for nearly two decades. He is also the host of the "Korea Deconstructed" podcast, which can be found online. He can be reached at datizzard@swu.ac.kr.
데이비드 티저는 한국학 박사 학위를 취득하고 서울여자대학교와 한양대학교에서 강의하고 있다. 그는 한국에서 20년 가까이 살아온 사회문화 평론가이자 음악가이다. 또한 온라인에서 볼 수 있는 '코리아 디스트럭티드' 팟캐스트의 진행자이기도 하다. 연락처는 datizzard@swu.ac.kr 이다.

Posted : 2024-09-21 13:49 Updated : 2024-09-21 16:23
Korea Times

Park Chung-hee, center with sunglasses, visits then U.S. President John F. Kennedy in Washington, D.C., U.S. Nov. 14, 1961. Courtesy of JFK Library 선글라스를 낀 가운데 있는 박정희가 1961년 11월 14일 미국 워싱턴 DC에서 존 F. 케네디 당시 미국 대통령을 방문하고 있다. JFK 도서관 제공

I’ve often made the argument that history in Korean society is one of the most dangerous topics to explore. One is obliged to consider sensitivity rather than facts, to be cognizant of the prevailing national mood, and to tread carefully around issues of colonization, culture, and important figures. The trepidation one feels is added to by the presence of national defamation laws which can see people sued for saying things about people, living or dead, that might affect their reputation in a negative manner, even if what is said is true. Consider that rather complex sentence one more time to make sure you understand it. You can get sued for defamation even if you are telling the truth.
나는 한국사회의 역사가 탐구하기 가장 위험한 주제 중 하나라는 주장을 자주 해왔다. 사실보다는 민감성을 고려하고, 지배적인 국가 분위기를 인식하고, 식민지화, 문화, 중요 인물에 대한 문제를 신중하게 헤쳐나갈 의무가 있다. 살아 있든 죽든 사람에 대한 말을 했다는 이유로 고소를 당하는 사람들이 사실이라고 해도 평판에 부정적인 영향을 미칠 수 있다는 국가 명예훼손법이 존재하기 때문에 느끼는 공포감은 더욱 커진다. 다소 복잡한 문장을 한 번 더 고려하여 이해하도록 하라. 진실을 말하더라도 명예훼손으로 고소당할 수 있다.

This week, I sat with various mixed groups of international and Korean students discussing the country’s modernization, steering them through the theories of Chang Kyung-sup, explaining the new village movement, highlighting the women in the factories, and making them aware of the conscious national drive to create a developed country in the eyes of the western world in time for the Seoul 88 Olympics. This last aspect is brought to life brilliantly by Lee Tae-woong’s KBS documentary “88/18.”
이번 주에는 유학생과 한국 학생들로 구성된 다양한 혼합 그룹과 함께 모여 나라의 근대화에 대해 이야기하고, 장경섭 선생의 이론을 조련하며, 새마을 운동을 설명하고, 공장안의 여성들을 조명하며, 서울 88올림픽에 맞춰 서구세계의 눈에 선진국을 만들려는 의식적인 국가적 추진력을 깨닫게 했다. 이 마지막 모습은 이태웅의 KBS 다큐멘터리 '88/18'을 통해 훌륭하게 살아난다.

Park Chung-hee
박정희

The foreign students all centered on one question: Who is this Park Chung-hee chap the professor keeps mentioning? During the break, they turned and asked their Korean classmates completely innocently about the man who ruled the country for nearly two decades with heavy-handed methods, dragging the people out of farms and into urbanized living spaces. They were greeted with uncomfortable silences and people looking furtively at their shoes. Few wanted to say anything.
외국인 유학생들은 모두 한 가지 질문에 집중했다: 교수님이 계속 말씀하시는 이 박정희씨는 누구일까? 쉬는 시간에 그들은 한국 반 친구들에게 20년 가까이 강압적인 방법으로 나라를 통치하며 사람들을 농장 밖으로 끌고 도시화된 생활공간으로 데려간 남자에 대해 완전히 순진하게 물었다. 그들은 불편한 침묵과 사람들의 시선을 받았다. 아무 말도 하고 싶지 않은 사람은 거의 없었다.

It is not easy for young people to have an opinion on Park Chung-hee in modern Korea, but this hesitancy is completely alien to their foreign counterparts who speak openly about their leaders past and present. Just as some western students might suddenly go quiet when faced with questions about trans issues, toilets, or pronouns, preferring to stay anonymous and out of the crosshairs of the progressives, so too do many Korean people prefer to stay silent on the issues of history. “Just agree with everyone else” is normally the name of the game.
현대 한국에서 젊은이들이 박정희에 대해 의견을 내기란 쉽지 않지만, 지도자의 과거와 현재에 대해 공개적으로 말하는 외국 학생들에게는 이러한 주저함이 완전히 이질적이다. 일부 서양 학생들이 트랜스젠더 문제, 화장실, 대명사에 대한 질문에 갑자기 침묵하고 진보주의자들의 시야에서 벗어나는 것을 선호하는 것처럼, 많은 한국인도 역사문제에 대해 침묵하는 것을 선호한다. "다른 사람들의 의견에 동의한다"는 일반적으로 게임의 이름이다.

It's certainly much more pleasant to have opinions on the glorious figures of the past (King Sejong the Great, Admiral Lee Sun-sin, Ahn Jung-geun) or the more despicable characters of recent years (Chun Doo-hwan, Kim Jong-il). When you are faced with someone like Park Chung-hee, however, things become a bit more complicated. And yet, despite that, two students this week took the plunge.
과거의 영광스러운 인물들(세종대왕, 이순신 장군, 안중근)이나 최근 몇 년 동안의 더 비열한 인물들(전두환, 김정일)에 대한 의견을 듣는 것은 확실히 훨씬 더 유쾌한 일이다. 하지만 박정희 같은 인물을 만나면 상황은 조금 더 복잡해진다. 그럼에도 불구하고 이번 주에 두 명의 학생이 그 주제에 빠졌다.

A woman speaks
여학생이 말하다

The first was a young adult at the Woman’s University. Towards the end of the class, and without prompting, she raised her hand to speak to the group. Eyes quickly glanced towards her. Korean students normally prefer using their nunchi and not asking questions. Better for everyone to finish early and the individual to ask something once the class is over. This student, however, was determined to say what was on her mind. To be honest, I wasn’t quite sure what to expect.
첫 번째는 여자 대학교의 한 학생이었다. 수업이 끝날 무렵, 그녀는 아무런 지시 없이 그룹과 이야기하기 위해 손을 들었다. 시선은 재빨리 그녀를 향해 쏠렸다. 한국학생들은 보통 질문하지 않고 눈치를 보는 것을 선호한다. 모두 일찍 끝내고 수업이 끝나면 개인이 무언가를 묻는 것이 좋다. 하지만 이 학생은 자신의 마음을 말하기로 결심했다. 솔직히 말해서 무엇을 기대해야 할지 잘 몰랐다.

“This will sound strange to some people in here because this is a woman’s university and we are not supposed to like him. However, I think Park Chung-hee did good things for our country and helped build Korea. I’m really not saying that I like his party. I don’t. And as women, we shouldn’t like his party. But I think Park Chung-hee was helpful to make Korea modern. Without him, we might still be poor. I think he was an important Korean person and people should know about him.”
"여기는 여자 대학이고 우리는 그를 좋아하지 않아야 하기 때문에 여기 있는 사람들 중 일부에게는 이상하게 들릴 것이다. 하지만 나는 박정희가 우리나라를 위해 좋은 일을 했고 한국을 건설하는 데 도움을 주었다고 생각한다. 그의 정당을 좋아한다고 말하는 것이 아니다. 나는 그렇지 않다. 그리고 여성으로서 우리는 그의 정당을 좋아하지 않아야 한다. 하지만 나는 박정희가 한국을 현대화하는 데 도움이 되었다고 생각한다. 그가 없었다면 우리는 여전히 가난했을지도 모른다. 그는 중요한 한국 사람이었고 사람들은 그에 대해 알아야 한다고 생각한다."

The observations about what is expected of women and their political allegiances at university was just as interesting to me as someone having the courage to speak about Park. She was saying the quiet parts out loud. After the class was over, most of the foreign students rushed to that young woman and asked for her Insta ID. They had finally found someone willing to say something. The other Korean students noticed this. “So that’s how you make foreign friends?”, their reactions screamed into the void.
대학에서 여성에게 기대되는 것과 정치적 충성심에 대한 관찰은 용기 있는 사람만큼이나 흥미로웠다. 그녀는 조용한 부분을 큰 소리로 말하고 있었다. 수업이 끝난 후 대부분의 외국인 학생들은 그 젊은 여성에게 달려가 인스타 아이디를 요청했다. 그들은 마침내 무언가를 말할 의향이 있는 사람을 찾았다. 다른 한국 학생들도 이 사실을 알아챘다. "그래서 그렇게 외국인 친구를 사귀는 것인가?" 그들의 반응은 공허함을 자아냈다.

And that is the key thing. It’s not about the particular opinion one holds. People disagree about everything, including whether it’s hot or not (it is), whether Suga did a bad thing (feels like a media distraction from bigger issues), or whether the popular Dubai chocolate is any good (not really). It’s not so much where you stand but that that you are willing to give voice to your opinion in the first place. Of course we run the danger of people opining on everything and anything despite not knowing much about what they say, but ignorance is the first step to knowledge and freedom is to be cherished. Korea is a free and open democracy whatever the tabloids of TikTok might tell you. And while people will argue night and day about Bang Si-hyuk’s appearance or the safety of electric cars, they suddenly go quiet on the man that ruled the country for 18 years?
그리고 그것이 핵심이다. 특정 의견에 대한 것이 아니다. 사람들은 뜨거운지, 그렇지 않은지, 슈가가 나쁜 짓을 했는지(더 큰 이슈로 인한 미디어의 방해처럼 느껴지는지), 인기 있는 두바이 초콜릿이 좋은 것인지(사실 그렇지 않은지) 등 모든 것에 대해 의견이 일치하지 않는다. 애초에 자신의 의견에 기꺼이 목소리를 내는 것은 입장이 아니라 자신의 의견에 기꺼이 목소리를 내는 것이다. 물론 우리는 사람들이 말하는 것에 대해 잘 알지 못함에도 불구하고 모든 것에 대해 의견을 제시하는 위험을 감수하지만, 무지는 지식과 자유를 위한 첫걸음이며 소중히 여기는 것이다. 한국은 틱톡의 타블로이드가 말해주듯 자유롭고 개방적인 민주주의 국가이다. 그리고 사람들은 방시혁의 외모나 전기 자동차의 안전성에 대해 밤낮으로 논쟁을 벌이지만 18년 동안 나라를 통치했던 사람에게 갑자기 침묵을 지키게 될까?

A man joins
남학생이 동조하다

The second student that was willing to say something about Park was a male student at Hanyang. The room was silent until I decided, in my normal fashion, to get the voices of youth involved. While students are given discussion time with each other, I also call on people during the lecture. I can’t help it. I was raised by Plato, not Confucius.
박씨에 대해 기꺼이 무언가를 말한 두 번째 학생은 한양대학교의 남학생이었다. 내가 평소처럼 청소년들의 목소리를 내기로 결정할 때까지 방은 조용했다. 학생들은 서로 토론할 시간이 주어지지만, 나는 강의 시간에 사람들을 초대하기도 한다. 어쩔 수 없다. 나는 공자가 아닌 플라톤의 손에 자랐다.

“What do you think of Park and his role in Korean history and modernization?”, I asked, fully aware I was perhaps unfairly putting this young gentleman on the spot in a room full of his peers and international colleagues. Again, the foreigners looked on keenly, the Korean people held their breath or coughed nervously.
"박씨와 한국 역사와 현대화에서 그의 역할에 대해 어떻게 생각하는가?" 나는 아마도 이 젊은 신사를 동료와 외국동료들로 가득찬 방에 부당하게 그 자리에 앉히고 있다는 것을 충분히 알고 있었기 때문에 물었다. 다시 한 번 외국인들은 숨을 죽이거나 신경질적으로 기침을 했다.

“Park Chung-hee was a dictator who did horrible things to the people of our country. He killed many citizens and stopped democracy many times. His policies were terrible and he only cared about his own power.”
"박정희는 우리나라 국민에게 끔찍한 일을 저지른 독재자였다. 그는 많은 시민을 죽이고 민주주의를 여러 번 중단했다. 그의 정책은 끔찍했고 그는 자신의 권력에만 관심이 있었다."

I was impressed the young man knew something about the various constitutional amendments Park had enacted to ultimately make himself ruler for life. So I decided to follow up with a couple more questions. “Did he do anything good for the country or was his rule largely negative?” This was clearly not a question the chap wanted to answer. He ummed and ahhed for a while before talking about something unrelated that few of us could make out. My nunchi was working and I could see it was time to move on, so I thanked him for his courage.
나는 청년이 박씨가 궁극적으로 자신을 평생 통치자로 만들기 위해 제정한 다양한 헌법 개정안에 대해 무언가를 알고 있다는 사실에 깊은 인상을 받았다. 그래서 몇 가지 질문을 더 하기로 결정했다. "그는 국가를 위해 좋은 일을 했나, 아니면 그의 통치가 대체로 부정적이었나?" 이 질문은 분명히 이 청년이 대답하고 싶지 않은 질문이 아니었다. 그는 우리 중 몇 명이 이해할 수 없는 관련 없는 이야기를 하기 전에 잠시 웅얼거리고 아찔했다. 나의 누나가 일하고 있었고 이제 앞으로 나아갈 때가 되었다는 것을 알 수 있었기 때문에 나는 그의 용기에 감사했다.

The final irony
마지막 아이러니

The final question was sent to a group of Korean students sat at the front. “How do your grandparents feel about Park?” One immediately launched into a loud and rather humorous description of how every Chuseok they are subjected to odes to Park by their elderly relatives. The others chuckled and nodded their heads. They could agree on one thing: Many old people like Park Chung-hee. Not all of them, of course. Some were imprisoned or suffered brutal treatment. But of those in the class, there were a large number who would suggest that Park was generally viewed positively by the older generation.
마지막 질문은 맨 앞자리에 앉은 한국 학생들에게 보내졌다. "조부모님은 박씨에 대해 어떻게 생각하나?" 한 학생은 즉시 나이든 친척들로부터 매년 추석에 박씨를 찬양한다는 다소 유머러스한 묘사를 시작했다. 다른 학생들은 웃으며 고개를 끄덕였다. 그들은 한 가지에 동의할 수 있었다: 많은 노인들이 박정희씨를 좋아한다. 물론 그들 모두는 아니었다. 일부는 투옥되거나 잔인한 대우를 받았다. 하지만 반 학생들 중에는 박씨를 일반적으로 기성세대에게 긍정적으로 평가하는 사람들이 많았다.

And that is a wonderful irony. Many (though what percent I would not want to suggest here) who lived under Park Chung-hee think positively of him. In contrast, the young people who often know very little about his rule, his policies, or the surrounding history, and were born decades after his death, despise him.
그리고 그것은 멋진 아이러니이다. 박정희 정권에 살았던 많은 사람들(여기서는 몇 퍼센트를 제시하고 싶지 않지만)이 그를 긍정적으로 생각한다. 반면에 그의 통치나 정책, 주변 역사에 대해 거의 알지 못하고 그가 사망한 지 수십 년 후에 태어난 젊은이들은 그를 경멸한다.

I suggested that particular irony might be fun to talk about. And by the same extent, what might people of the future think about our policies and values today? Might they not look back and despise us like we do our elders?
나는 특정 아이러니에 대해 이야기하는 것이 재미있을 수 있다고 제안했다. 마찬가지로 미래의 사람들은 오늘날 우리의 정책과 가치에 대해 어떻게 생각할까? 우리가 어른들처럼 우리를 돌아보고 경멸하지 않을까?

And then it was time to leave class. Perhaps next time we’ll watch “The Man Standing Next,” read Carter Eckert’s book on Park, and then listen to my friend Steve Shields talk about his experiences working for him. Or maybe I’ll be a good professor and stop asking young people about the history of their country and talk about dramas, K-pop, and celebrities instead. That’s an easy way to stay out of trouble.
그리고 수업을 떠나야 할 때였다. 다음에는 '더 맨 스탠딩 넥스트'를 보고 카터 에커트의 박씨에 관한 책을 읽은 다음 제 친구 스티브 쉴즈가 그를 위해 일한 경험에 대해 이야기하는 것을 들을 수 있을 것이다. 아니면 좋은 교수가 되어 젊은이들에게 자국의 역사에 대해 묻지 않고 대신 드라마, 케이팝, 유명인에 대해 이야기할 수도 있다. 이것이 문제를 피하는 쉬운 방법이다.

#History역사 #Modernization근대화 #Dictator독재자 #ParkChung-hee박정희 #Opinion의견 #Koreanstudents한국학생들 #Controversy논란 #Democracy민주주의 #Generations세대들 #Irony아이러니