Now is the Culture(文話) Age Pressure Beyond Artistic Boundaries Threatens Freedom of Expression

[Now is the Culture(文話) Age]-10

Recent developments surrounding the film "Assassin(s)" have gone far beyond the level of healthy criticism and debate, raising serious concerns. It is not uncommon for cultural content dealing with historical events to become the center of social controversy. Historical evaluation and interpretation can always be diverse, and the process of actively discussing this in the public sphere is also an intellectual capacity that democratic society must possess.

Conservative civic groups held an assembly near the residence of actor Yoo Hae-jin in Seongbuk-gu, Seoul on the 4th, condemning the film "Assassin(s)". Newsis

However, when certain conservative groups have opposed the film's content and held assemblies not only at the production company but also in front of the lead actor's private residence, and have even announced pressure campaigns demanding contract termination from advertising brands, they have crossed a clear line. This is not merely expressing opinions or criticizing a work, but an act intended to directly damage the livelihood and privacy of creators and actors.

The Political Sphere's Opportunistic Attitude of Pouring Oil Instead of Resolving Conflict

An even more serious problem is the attitude of the political sphere, which should mitigate social conflict and lead toward rational discourse. The political sphere, trapped in factional logic, fuels criticism, and as far-right forces join in, the healthy public forum becomes completely paralyzed. The reality in which politicians who should mediate conflicts and seek developmental solutions instead opportunistically exploit and encourage public anger and factional confrontation shows a serious absence of politics.

When politics makes cultural controversy a tool of factional warfare, the damage returns intact to creators, the public, and the collapse of social trust.

A Reenactment of Ideological Censorship During Dictatorship and Hollywood McCarthyism

This behavior reminds us of the tragedy of the "Hollywood blacklist" that swept America in the 1950s into McCarthyism's fury. At that time, attempts to ideologically censor and socially bury artists based on specific political standards left an indelible stain on the development of popular culture and democratic values.

Moreover, it is no different from the dark legacy of the past authoritarian regime era when state power surveilled and pressured artists. Although the subject of pressure has changed from state authority to the exercise of power by specific groups backed by political incitement, the essential nature of threatening individuals' daily lives and tightening economic screws to censor ideology is fundamentally identical.

Why Advanced Democracies Overseas Distinguish Between "Criticizing Works" and "Pressuring Individual Actors"

In advanced democratic countries abroad, controversial films dealing with historical events often cause social ripples. When Oliver Stone's JFK, which dealt with President Kennedy's assassination, or Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ, which sparked religious controversy, were released, fierce criticism, debate, and boycott movements followed.

However, the arrows of criticism were always directed at "the work's message" and "academic and cultural discussions in the public forum." Going to the private residence of an individual actor to exercise pressure or pressuring advertisers to threaten livelihood is strictly rejected as an insensible act that destroys artists' autonomy.

An Irrational Practice of Burdening Actors with All Political Responsibility

Popular cultural arts such as films and dramas are creative works that add fiction and imagination to historical facts and pose questions to society. If you disagree with the interpretation of a work, you should respond through legitimate and rational means such as refusing to watch, logical rebuttal through criticism, or expressing opinions through social media.

Actors are merely artists performing a given script and are not the subjects who bear the burden of all the work's political and historical messages alone. If the practice of condemning actors' choices based on political positions and imposing disadvantages is tolerated, future creators and actors will have no choice but to fall into severe self-censorship.

The Time for Recovery of Public Discourse and Mature Civic Consciousness

The freedom of expression and freedom of creation guaranteed by the Constitution are the roots that maintain diversity in our society. When dissatisfaction with artistic expression transforms into forms of political incitement and exercise of private power, the cultural capacity and democratic values of our society are damaged.

Regardless of the form of creative work, it should be discussed and evaluated within the realm of expression. The political sphere must immediately cease fandom politics and conflict-mongering, and excessive targeted pressure against creators and actors should also be refrained from. The recovery of a mature public forum is the only path to making our society healthy.