Now is the Era of Cultural Discourse Pressure Transcending Artistic Boundaries Threatens Freedom of Expression
[Era of Cultural Discourse]-10
The series of developments surrounding the recent film "Assassin(s)" is raising deep concerns as they exceed the level of healthy criticism and debate. It is not uncommon for cultural content dealing with historical events to take center stage in social controversy. Historical evaluation and interpretation can always be diverse, and the process of actively discussing them in the public sphere is an intellectual capacity that democratic society should possess.
Conservative civic groups held a rally near the residence of actor Yoo Hae-jin in Seongbuk-gu, Seoul on the 4th to condemn the film 'Assassin(s)'. Newsis
However, certain conservative groups, in opposition to the film's content, not only targeted the production company but also went to the actor's private residence to hold rallies, and have even announced pressure campaigns demanding contract cancellations from advertising brands. This far exceeds the line. It is not simply a matter of expressing opinions or criticizing the work, but a direct attempt to harm the livelihood and privacy of the creators and performers.
Political Circles' Opportunistic Attitudes Adding Fuel Instead of Resolving Conflict
The more serious problem is the attitude of the political sphere, which should mitigate social conflict and guide it toward rational discourse. As politicians are trapped in factional logic and fuel criticism, extreme-right forces join in, and the healthy public sphere is completely paralyzed. The reality that politicians who should mediate conflict and seek constructive directions instead opportunistically exploit and instigate public anger and factional confrontation demonstrates a serious absence of politics.
When politics uses cultural disputes as a tool for factional struggle, the damage comes back entirely to creators, the public, and the collapse of social trust.
Recurrence of Ideological Censorship from the Authoritarian Era and McCarthy-Era Hollywood
This behavior evokes the tragedy of the "Hollywood Blacklist" that swept 1950s America into McCarthyism's frenzy. At that time, the attempt to ideologically censor and socially ostracize artists by 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 when state power surveilled and pressured artists. Although the subject of pressure has changed from state authority to the exercise of force by specific groups backed by political incitement, the nature of threatening individuals' daily lives and tightening economic strings to censor ideology remains essentially identical.
Why Developed Democratic Countries Abroad Distinguish Between "Criticism of Works" and "Individual Pressure on Actors"
In advanced democratic countries abroad, controversial films dealing with historical events often create social repercussions. Even with director Oliver Stone's "JFK" dealing with the assassination of President Kennedy and Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ" raising religious controversy at their release, fierce criticism, debate, and boycott campaigns continued.
However, the arrows of criticism were always directed at "the message of the work" and "academic and cultural discourse in the public sphere." The manner of going to the door of the actor's individual home to exercise pressure or pressuring advertisers to threaten their livelihood is strictly rejected as a thoughtless action that destroys artistic autonomy.
The Irrational Practice of Burdening Actors with All Political Weight
Popular cultural art such as films and dramas are creative works that add fiction and imagination on the basis of historical facts to pose questions to society. If one dislikes the interpretation of a work, one should respond through lawful and rational means such as refusing to watch, logical refutation through criticism, or expressing opinions through social media.
An actor is merely an artist performing a given scenario, not the subject that solely bears the burden of all political and historical messages that a work carries. If the practice of condemning actors' choices according to political positions and subjecting them to disadvantages is tolerated, creators and actors will inevitably fall into severe self-censorship.
The Time for Recovery of the Public Sphere and Mature Civic Consciousness
The freedom of expression and creative freedom guaranteed by the Constitution are the roots that sustain our society's diversity. When dissatisfaction with artistic expression transforms into political incitement and the exercise of private force, our society's cultural capacity and democratic values are damaged.
Whatever form of creative work must be discussed and evaluated within the realm of expression. The political sphere must immediately cease fandom politics and conflict incitement, and excessive targeted pressure on creators and actors must likewise be restrained. The recovery of a mature public sphere is the only way to make our society healthy.