Thinking about my courses and its learning centered around the question, “What does it mean to be a global citizen?”, I thought it was worthwhile to look into current issues and where life narratives comes into play in contextualizing these issues. I would like to bring up a personally familiar issue (due to my Japanese background) regarding the Korean “comfort women”. “Comfort women” are, as defined by this BBC news article, a “Elderly women once forced to work in Japan’s military brothels” during the Second World War. (However, I feel as though the term is politically incorrect as what they experienced was far from “comfort”. As of now, I will refer to them as “victims” of human trafficking.)

The political dilemma here is the fact that the Japanese government and the Korean government have taken polarized views on the issue. The Japanese government claim the fact that there are not enough evidence for a forceful trafficking of the women. The Korean government claims to be that in fact, “victims” were forcefully abducted and that the Japanese government must be accountable. Whether which claim is valid, the two sides have a rigid opinionated view and will not back down for it will result in their global inferior position politically.
Although, I will not take a side on this issue in regards to the truthfulness of the account, it is interesting to see Korean government’s adoption of the testimonial life narratives of the claimed “victims” who are still alive today.

“But we were dragged there and it was hell,” she said. “It is not a place for a human being to live. It was a slaughterhouse where so many young girls died.” – Ok Sun Lee

This is one of many of the accounts (other accounts are found here.) made by former “victim” of human trafficking at a community college in New York. I repeat. A community college in NEW YORK. Not only are these traumatic life narratives used for direct debate between Korea and Japan, they have become a global messenger of the event. In the political spectrum, however, this not only victimize Korea and brings about a sympathetic view towards them but effectively vilifies Japan.

As discussed thoroughly in Shaffer and Smith’s article, “Conjunctions: Life Narratives in the Field of Human Rights”, a particular question of, to what extent can one individual’s story represent the story of the collective’s experience? comes up. To this inquiry, however, it must be emphasized that it not necessarily the life narrative’s objective to publicize for the bigger issue at hand. Instead, it is the marketing strategies of these life narratives that reaches consumers in a way that the audience find the desire to link this personal account of an event to the larger cause. Particularly in the case of the “victims”, they are asking for the recognition of such horrific events and violations of human rights. But by the Korean government’s effort into commodifying it as a narrative of a collective and the current political tension between the two countries, they have built a “soft weapon” (as mentioned by Gillian Whitlock in her article, “Introduction: Words Made Flesh”) to vilify Japan and to question her accountability. It is very obvious to recognize the marketing strategies taken by Korean political lobbyists. For example, they have built a statue of a “victim” built in Los Angeles. Yes, in Los Angeles. In what ways, other than oblivious political intentions, can this act be observed through? If this was a statement for human rights, why Los Angeles?

-Statue of Comfort Women at Glendale, CA (Photo taken from ChosunMedia)

We all understand the implicit issue of a violation of human trafficking. However, to what extent can we over advertise the event so that it becomes another evidence for a larger cause? And how can we, as consumers realize this underlying process to market life narratives? As many new forms of life narratives have come into existence and the more easily they are transported, often going under modification, it is important for the audience to be aware of the underlying implication of acts of autobiographies. And sometimes, it is often good to come back to the basics, like in this case, the recognition of a severe human rights violation, and not to simply regard it as political evidence.