The trouble with the whole controversy from my perspective is that those who started it don't believe that people…
If this was some kind of superhero show, the good and evil dichotomy would work to some degree although I think audiences do like their heroes a little flawed. There's a clarity about the heroes and the villains. But this show is political satire with multiple agendas and it's like trying to navigate the Spanish civil war. Soo-ho doesn't even know why he's really in South Korea, what the true purpose of his mission and he certainly doesn't know that his colleague is keeping tabs on him under orders to kill him if he doesn't follow the script. What's even more laughable is that after all the trouble he's taken, the professor has now been taken out. Gang-mu is none the wiser and while he's trying to do his thing, his bosses are hamstringing him. The show lampoons everyone and everything.
The trouble with the whole controversy from my perspective is that those who started it don't believe that people…
Often times the question "who are the good guys" is a hard one to answer and a good one to explore in a drama like this. Especially in times of war or social turmoil. As far as this show is concerned, there are sides and people who take orders from other people not knowing exactly why they're doing what they're doing.
"There is an argument that the people who actually experienced these injustice may be the worst POV to measure the evil of ANSP or not."
A case in point: When I was an undergraduate studying Nazism and fascism, I remember one of my lecturers saying that we had to be careful when reading accounts of Germany and the holocaust by Jewish historians after the fact. It's not that they would deliberately distort or exaggerate information but the reality is that they would be bringing their biases to the table. That was an important lesson in historiography. That's why there are hundreds of books about events leading to WW2 and there will continue to be different accounts written. Every writer is trying to make sense of events and they construct a narrative around them holding to a particular perspective.
I don't think anyone (including the drama) is saying that the ANSP weren't responsible for human rights abuses in their day (the record stands) but there's also the danger of people in the 21st century reading back and judging people in those days without consideration of what kinds of pressures individuals were under or what kind of beliefs were driving the actions of people committing atrocities. The implication is that we wouldn't do the same thing if we had been in that position. Well, I don't agree with that. Human beings don't always do evil things just because they are psychopaths or sociopaths. Money is a big driver. So is ambition. Job security. Ideology. Sometimes even in the name of protecting others and ourselves. If we demonize perpetrators we will delude ourselves into thinking that we are incapable of evil ourselves given the right triggers and circumstances.
We definitely need to have a much more sophisticated view of history not to justify atrocities committed but so that we don't make the same kind of mistakes by thinking we are much more enlightened than people in the past. The only reason why we believe that ANSP perpetrated human rights abuses is because we hold to certain universal ethical and moral standards. If we don't have those anything goes. Where do these values of right and wrong even come from? Because I am sure that there are people in ANSP who thought they were doing their patriotic duty.
In Snowdrop, the girls in the dormitory represent a kind of innocence that's lost as a result of the machinations of political leaders. That's the state many would like to be in perpetuity but that's unlikely to ever happen. I am like everyone else and want to root for the "good guys" but sometimes it's hard to tell stories where "good" and "evil" are so clearly delineated.
Up to Episode 32 I like practically everything about this show (yes, even the romances) although sometimes the pacing does come to a screeching halt for a bit of untimely angst. While I appreciate how the complex procedural elements unfold and play out, the real genius of the script is how the conspiracy becomes an instrument of distrust and suspicion. The conspiracy itself isn't that difficult to work out but what the conspiracy does to relationships is what makes this show much more sophisticated than most. It pits friends against friends although it also turns strangers into friends/lovers as well. The mole hunts and the subsequent revelations as to who the members of the Chunqiu Sect are is what really drives character development. It isn't just the fact that you can't trust anyone that puts you on edge but finding out that the person close to you isn't exactly what you thought is utterly devastating with far-reaching consequences. To come to the realisation that your relationship is based on lies that will be used against you and everything you believe to be right. This is what I believe makes this show better than your average crime drama.
The trouble with the whole controversy from my perspective is that those who started it don't believe that people…
Human beings are complex creatures and the motivations from which they do things cover a whole gamut. People make calculations, weigh up risks and benefits or allow their emotions to win the day. To say that history is being distorted because they depict individuals as multifaceted shows not only a lack of understanding of human behaviour but an ignorance of how history is examined. I think that comes from our impulse to attribute blame and "other" people when we try and make sense of the senselessness of evil. War and social unrest are very complex phenomenon as well. People get dragged into making all kinds of decisions that they wouldn't ordinarily make under very oppressive circumstances. That's why very few people do the right thing under pressure. People like Bonhoeffer, Niemoller and Franz Jagerstatter are the exception not the rule.
The trouble with the whole controversy from my perspective is that those who started it don't believe that people…
For me (as someone who has an education background) the lack of critical thinking in this entire situation has been lamentable. The entire debate has almost been entirely driven by emotions and trying to guilt others into making a particular choice because a group of people with a paucity of evidence say we have to. But this is a sign of the times that we're living in. There have been far too many instances of this in recent days and this kind of trial by social media is gradually becoming accepted practice. It's dangerous. As a rule I stay away from social media because of the tendency for things to degenerate on those platforms.
While the ANSP as an organization was guilty of gross human rights abuses, it is also made up of individuals who were also members of someone's family. During the day they would torture people to confess and when they left the office they went home and had dinner with family. This is also the case with gangsters and any kind of show depicting them. These were violent people who were engaged in criminal activities but they have people they love and care about. All the good gangster movies highlight these contradictions. Even Hitler's inner circle consisted of men who loved their families. The most interesting villains in any drama are the ones who are multidimensional. This is what Hannah Arendt called the "banality of evil".
Just think of Ha-na, who is a complete nutjob as far as I'm concerned and has been from the beginning. But there's no doubting that she is in love with Gang-mu. I'm sure he loves her too but he probably put the job ahead of her. He scoured Europe to find Taedong River 1. He prioritized his obsession over the woman he supposedly loved and it looked like it almost destroyed him.
This is what good storytelling does -- offer a kind of balanced perspective. I am critical of aspects of Snowdrop but this writer knows that caricatures don't make for compelling storytelling even in satire.
I think South Korea is ashamed of this part of their history. Prior to Snowdrop, I had no idea about this dark…
From my experience of K dramas, Koreans are fairly honest about their history -- probably more so than most Asian countries. They don't often back down in highlighting the corruption among the political class or law enforcement or aspects of their checkered history.
I come from India and we also share a very bitter history with one particular neighbor and movies based on espionage…
The trouble with the whole controversy from my perspective is that those who started it don't believe that people can think for themselves even on the level that you're talking about. I certainly haven't come away from the show thinking that the ANSP or the regime were upstanding individuals who put the welfare of the citizenry first. No one not even Blind Freddy would think that. The show doesn't make any claim to being a work of history or even being remotely serious about history by the look of things in Episode 5. The show is a farce in the original sense of the word. Nobody needs to be Korean to know this. The tone is obvious.
I don't think this is about people on the internet thinking that they're caretakers of history. Whatever the original intent was, it's evolved (or devolved) into something like a political agenda or virtue signalling.
Doing a bit of catch up. Quite a lot of catching up to do actually. Huang Xuan is really good here and I really like him in this. His scene with the casino owner was powerful stuff. I generally like how the women are incorporated into the story. They perceive themselves as individuals with agency. Compared to the popular K historical dramas I've been watching, this one is sheer class.
4 
The show lampoons everyone and everything.
"There is an argument that the people who actually experienced these injustice may be the worst POV to measure the evil of ANSP or not."
A case in point:
When I was an undergraduate studying Nazism and fascism, I remember one of my lecturers saying that we had to be careful when reading accounts of Germany and the holocaust by Jewish historians after the fact. It's not that they would deliberately distort or exaggerate information but the reality is that they would be bringing their biases to the table. That was an important lesson in historiography. That's why there are hundreds of books about events leading to WW2 and there will continue to be different accounts written. Every writer is trying to make sense of events and they construct a narrative around them holding to a particular perspective.
I don't think anyone (including the drama) is saying that the ANSP weren't responsible for human rights abuses in their day (the record stands) but there's also the danger of people in the 21st century reading back and judging people in those days without consideration of what kinds of pressures individuals were under or what kind of beliefs were driving the actions of people committing atrocities. The implication is that we wouldn't do the same thing if we had been in that position. Well, I don't agree with that. Human beings don't always do evil things just because they are psychopaths or sociopaths. Money is a big driver. So is ambition. Job security. Ideology. Sometimes even in the name of protecting others and ourselves. If we demonize perpetrators we will delude ourselves into thinking that we are incapable of evil ourselves given the right triggers and circumstances.
We definitely need to have a much more sophisticated view of history not to justify atrocities committed but so that we don't make the same kind of mistakes by thinking we are much more enlightened than people in the past. The only reason why we believe that ANSP perpetrated human rights abuses is because we hold to certain universal ethical and moral standards. If we don't have those anything goes. Where do these values of right and wrong even come from? Because I am sure that there are people in ANSP who thought they were doing their patriotic duty.
In Snowdrop, the girls in the dormitory represent a kind of innocence that's lost as a result of the machinations of political leaders. That's the state many would like to be in perpetuity but that's unlikely to ever happen. I am like everyone else and want to root for the "good guys" but sometimes it's hard to tell stories where "good" and "evil" are so clearly delineated.
I like practically everything about this show (yes, even the romances) although sometimes the pacing does come to a screeching halt for a bit of untimely angst. While I appreciate how the complex procedural elements unfold and play out, the real genius of the script is how the conspiracy becomes an instrument of distrust and suspicion. The conspiracy itself isn't that difficult to work out but what the conspiracy does to relationships is what makes this show much more sophisticated than most. It pits friends against friends although it also turns strangers into friends/lovers as well. The mole hunts and the subsequent revelations as to who the members of the Chunqiu Sect are is what really drives character development. It isn't just the fact that you can't trust anyone that puts you on edge but finding out that the person close to you isn't exactly what you thought is utterly devastating with far-reaching consequences. To come to the realisation that your relationship is based on lies that will be used against you and everything you believe to be right. This is what I believe makes this show better than your average crime drama.
War and social unrest are very complex phenomenon as well. People get dragged into making all kinds of decisions that they wouldn't ordinarily make under very oppressive circumstances. That's why very few people do the right thing under pressure. People like Bonhoeffer, Niemoller and Franz Jagerstatter are the exception not the rule.
While the ANSP as an organization was guilty of gross human rights abuses, it is also made up of individuals who were also members of someone's family. During the day they would torture people to confess and when they left the office they went home and had dinner with family. This is also the case with gangsters and any kind of show depicting them. These were violent people who were engaged in criminal activities but they have people they love and care about. All the good gangster movies highlight these contradictions. Even Hitler's inner circle consisted of men who loved their families. The most interesting villains in any drama are the ones who are multidimensional. This is what Hannah Arendt called the "banality of evil".
Just think of Ha-na, who is a complete nutjob as far as I'm concerned and has been from the beginning. But there's no doubting that she is in love with Gang-mu. I'm sure he loves her too but he probably put the job ahead of her. He scoured Europe to find Taedong River 1. He prioritized his obsession over the woman he supposedly loved and it looked like it almost destroyed him.
This is what good storytelling does -- offer a kind of balanced perspective. I am critical of aspects of Snowdrop but this writer knows that caricatures don't make for compelling storytelling even in satire.
I don't think this is about people on the internet thinking that they're caretakers of history. Whatever the original intent was, it's evolved (or devolved) into something like a political agenda or virtue signalling.
Logic and evidence don't apply.
I generally like how the women are incorporated into the story. They perceive themselves as individuals with agency. Compared to the popular K historical dramas I've been watching, this one is sheer class.