In Korean society, if you snitch on others who violate certain laws and report them to the authorities, you will be given reward money. This has given rise to people who make money by constantly snooping around and taking photos of others committing offenses. Such behavior is wrong for many reasons and is an aspect of society that should be changed.

Firstly, it is shameful and disgraceful to spy on others and report them to the authorities for the sake of a reward. Of course, you should report a crime to the police if you witness one. But you should do it out of civil duty, not for money. In other countries, it is considered low and mean to snitch. Even in kindergarten, foreigners teach that being a snitch is not decent. On the contrary, in Korea, we courage this with money.

Secondly, encouraging people to pry on each other could create a distrustful and totalitarian society, such as the one depicted in George Orwell’s novel, “1984.” In the novel, a Big Brother is constantly watching others through a ruthless, ubiquitous surveillance system. In Korea, people are prying on each other, which is far scarier than having just one Big Brother. Therefore, quite a few people argue that the current system of encouraging snitches with money should be abolished because it is highly unethical and immoral.

Such a social atmosphere would eventually encourage slander as well. These days, people unscrupulously file complaints at Shinmoongo, the government’s website for grievances.

The deans of academic affairs at universities, too, disclose that every day they receive numerous emails criticizing professors from both students and fellow faculty members. They say that some indictments are true, but others frequently turn out to be groundless or vastly exaggerated. We should refrain from slandering others and teach our youngsters that doing so is bad and indecent. Life is too short to waste on criticizing others. 

Another thing we should change in Korean society is our rudeness, stubbornness and self-righteousness. Sometime ago, I attended a university lecture on the crisis of the humanities.

A renowned scholar told the audience that scholars of the humanities should change to cope with the upcoming crisis they face. That is, scholars of the humanities should get out of their ivory tower and mingle with people in the street by helping them to understand other cultures, ponder the question “What is a worthwhile life?” and alter their consciousness.

He argued that we should not stick to the age-old notion of pure literature or pure humanities in this age of hybrid cultures, multiculturalism and convergence. He urged that we embrace cultural and academic diversity. He also said the discipline of conventional humanities no longer fits our present reality, which has become amorphous and elusive. According to him, the conventional humanities have failed in that sense and needs to change. If they do, they will not only survive but also thrive.

During the question-and-answer session, a humanities professor got the microphone and vehemently denounced what the speaker had spoken passionately about for the past 1 1/2 hours. 

The rude professor said, “You are wrong. Contrary to what you said, the humanities are pure and hallowed, and thus cannot be contaminated by secular pop culture or any other academic disciplines. People do not know what Plato and Aristotle said about the humanities and try to degenerate the sacred humanities, making an excuse that we now live in an age of hybrid cultures or something.”

Upon hearing him, I was appalled by his offensive tone. In his rudeness, I saw the failure of the humanities education. A real humanist would not have been so discourteous and insolent. In the humanities, we learn to respect other opinions and viewpoints even if we have different opinions.

“Precisely because of an impudent person like you, we need to change the course of the humanities,” I silently said to myself, “Because of a narrow-minded person like you, people think they do not need the humanities at college. It is you, not the lecturer, who actually invites the crisis of the humanities.”     

There are other things we should change about society. For example, we should stop using others for our own selfish reasons, losing interest in them when they are no longer useful to us.

When we need help, we become desperate and cling to others. However, when our needs are fulfilled, we tend to forget the favors we received and turn our backs on those who helped us. In this aspect, we seriously lack loyalty. In Korea, loyalty seems to apply only to one’s own clan.

Finally, we should open our eyes to the unprecedented crisis surrounding the Korean Peninsula and be ready to cope with the complex web of international politics.

We cannot afford the luxury of internal brawls and factional skirmishes when the future of our nation is at stake. To survive all perils and make a better society, we should change.

By Kim Seong-kon

Kim Seong-kon is a professor emeritus of English at Seoul National University and president of the Literature Translation Institute of Korea. -- Ed.