Commentary — December 3, 2008, 7:21 pm

Talking with Suki Kim

Suki Kim’s article “A Really Big Show: The New York Philharmonic’s fantasia in North Korea” appears in the December Harper’s Magazine. Kim is the author of the novel The Interpreter and is currently in South Korea as a Fulbright Research Scholar. Jennifer Szalai catches up with her now that the issue is on newsstands.

From “A really big show: The New York Philharmonic’s fantasia in North Korea”:

While the South Korean reporters were calculating the cost of the show, the American correspondents had other concerns. “I’ve gotta get a shot like the one in a Michael Moore documentary with a palm pressed against the camera,” said a young CNN crewmember. A Fox anchor sat nearby; he kept pronouncing “Pyongyang” as “Piiaaang Yiiaaang,” as if the extra nasal delivery would make the name sound extra Korean. The celebrity anchors Christiane Amanpour and Bob Woodruff were said to have already arrived, which then got a few reporters talking about how Amanpour and Woodruff might have negotiated such exclusive access and whether there would be a Kim Jong Il sighting after all. For the reporters on the plane, Kim Jong Il had become the world’s biggest celebrity, and they were the paparazzi staking out the shot.

Seated away from the reporters was the P.R. legend Howard Rubenstein, whose gentle mien belied the luster of a client list that includes the Yankees and the Philharmonic. “I’m interested in how he”—Kim Jong Il—“keeps such tight control over his people,” said Rubenstein. “I guess it’s a professional curiosity.”(Rubenstein, contacted by a fact-checker, directed all inquiries to a spokesman, who denied that Rubenstein made this comment and emphasized that Rubenstein was on the tour not as a Philharmonic patron but in his capacity as the company’s publicist.) Next to him was Mrs. Rubenstein, an owner of New York’s Peter Luger Steakhouse, nodding with girlish diffidence. “It’s exciting. I’ve never even been to South Korea, and here I am going to the North.” Everyone was chatting incessantly, as though we were children on the most thrilling field trip ever: “Our provisions must be coming on a separate plane, since there’s no food over there”; “It sucks that we won’t get to keep the visa for a souvenir”; “I’m already going through BlackBerry withdrawal.” Soon, there was a barrage of questions. “Will there be an ATM?” “Will they charge for incoming calls too?” “Will we be able to walk around on our own?” The plane could have been heading for the moon.

Yet a hush of silence fell as the 4:00 p.m. arrival was announced over the PA system. Passengers paused mid-sentence. Their eyes widened. They held up their digital cameras. They turned their faces to the windows. For the few of us who had been to Pyongyang before, the place was still unfathomable. Six years had passed since my first visit, and here I was again beholding this land, the source of grief and longing for generations of Koreans.

You accompanied the New York Philharmonic in February when they traveled to Pyongyang, for what was being touted as a major advance in “cultural diplomacy.” Your article suggests that despite the high-minded sentiments presented by everyone involved, the event turned out to be little more than a public relations coup for both the North Korean regime and the New York Philharmonic. Nine months have now elapsed since your trip. What has happened in North Korea since then?

There’s a great deal going on. North Korea yet again agreed to dismantle its Yongbyon nuclear plant; the six-party nations claimed to have reached a disarmament-for-aid deal; and in Bush’s last hour the United States took the country off its “axis of evil” terrorism blacklist. Joint projects in Mount Kumgang and Kaesong continued to bring tourism and jobs to the cash-strapped North, and it was rumored that Kim Jong Il suffered a stroke, which then led the reclusive state to release a series of photos of Kim–which were then heavily scrutinized as to their provenance by the international experts.

Ben Rosen, a blogger for the Huffington Post also reporting on the New York Philharmonic’s tour, wrote a post over the summer suggesting that diplomatic progress in North Korea had something to do with the concert in Pyongyang: “We’re engaged in diplomacy, we’re talking to people who are not our friends, and we’re making headway.” What do you make of these claims?

The New York Philharmonic’s concert in Pyongyang was a symptom of diplomacy, not the cause. The North Korean regime, with support from U.S. officials, arranged a media event featuring Western classical music to show that they are talking to each other despite the five-year-long failure of the six-party talks. And much of what I mentioned above has already come undone–North Korea has gone back on its word on nuclear disarmament by barring sampling required for verification, as well as banning inspectors from sites outside Yongbyon. It’s also slowing down the dismantling, saying that it had not received promised energy aid in time. Operations at the resort at Mount Kumgang were suspended after a South Korean tourist was shot by a North Korean soldier, and Kaesong industrial complex faces an uncertain future since the North declared a border shutdown as a challenge to the South’s conservative government, led by Lee Myung Bak. Economists continue to predict famine as hunger-related deaths and malnutrition rise.

As for Kim Jong Il’s health rumor, it hardly matters as the Great Leader has always been more of an concept than a person. North Korea is left to an army of henchmen, none of whom seems likely to retire anytime soon. I can’t really see how any of these things might have anything to do with the New York Philharmonic’s February concert.

In your article, you mention that you went to Pyongyang six years ago. How did your experience differ this time around?

Last time I was struck by North Korea’s indoctrination of its own people, but this time, I saw them do it to outsiders. North Korea allowed the media a much-sought-after way to cover the reclusive country from the inside, and, in return, the media focused on an American orchestra bringing music to North Korean people. The usual talking points–famine, persecution, nuclearization–were put aside in their coverage. Barely any reports were made on the public execution of thirteen women attempting to flee just five days before we arrived. What I saw was North Korea pulling the wool over the eyes of the international press corps while the New York Philharmonic provided incidental music.

Do you think you’ll go back again?

The choice is not up to me, as is the case with most things related to North Korea. I would certainly go again because I still do not fully understand the place, and I am fascinated by what I do not understand. But that’s different from being able to say I will go. North Korea makes the decisions.

Share
Single Page
undefined

More from Jennifer Szalai:

From the January 2017 issue

In The Shade

Zadie Smith and the limits of being oneself

From the February 2012 issue

The banality of avarice

Why the finance industry never had to lie

Get access to 167 years of
Harper’s for only $45.99

United States Canada

CATEGORIES

THE CURRENT ISSUE

February 2018

The Bodies in The Forest

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Minds of Others

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Modern Despots

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Before the Deluge

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Notes to Self

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Within Reach

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

view Table Content

FEATURED ON HARPERS.ORG

Article
The Minds of Others·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Progress is impossible without change,” George Bernard Shaw wrote in 1944, “and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything.” But progress through persuasion has never seemed harder to achieve. Political segregation has made many Americans inaccessible, even unimaginable, to those on the other side of the partisan divide. On the rare occasions when we do come face-to-face, it is not clear what we could say to change each other’s minds or reach a worthwhile compromise. Psychological research has shown that humans often fail to process facts that conflict with our preexisting worldviews. The stakes are simply too high: our self-worth and identity are entangled with our beliefs — and with those who share them. The weakness of logic as a tool of persuasion, combined with the urgency of the political moment, can be paralyzing.

Yet we know that people do change their minds. We are constantly molded by our environment and our culture, by the events of the world, by the gossip we hear and the books we read. In the essays that follow, seven writers explore the ways that persuasion operates in our lives, from the intimate to the far-reaching. Some consider the ethics and mechanics of persuasion itself — in religion, politics, and foreign policy — and others turn their attention to the channels through which it acts, such as music, protest, and technology. How, they ask, can we persuade others to join our cause or see things the way we do? And when it comes to our own openness to change, how do we decide when to compromise and when to resist?

Illustration (detail) by Lincoln Agnew
Article
Within Reach·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

On a balmy day last spring, Connor Chase sat on a red couch in the waiting room of a medical clinic in Columbus, Ohio, and watched the traffic on the street. His bleached-blond hair fell into his eyes as he scrolled through his phone to distract himself. Waiting to see Mimi Rivard, a nurse practitioner, was making Chase nervous: it would be the first time he would tell a medical professional that he was transgender.

By the time he arrived at the Equitas Health clinic, Chase was eighteen, and had long since come to dread doctors and hospitals. As a child, he’d had asthma, migraines, two surgeries for a tumor that had caused deafness in one ear, and gangrene from an infected bug bite. Doctors had always assumed he was a girl. After puberty, Chase said, he avoided looking in the mirror because his chest and hips “didn’t feel like my body.” He liked it when strangers saw him as male, but his voice was high-pitched, so he rarely spoke in public. Then, when Chase was fourteen, he watched a video on YouTube in which a twentysomething trans man described taking testosterone to lower his voice and appear more masculine. Suddenly, Chase had an explanation for how he felt — and what he wanted.

Illustration by Taylor Callery
Article
Before the Deluge·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

In the summer of 2016, when Congress installed a financial control board to address Puerto Rico’s crippling debt, I traveled to San Juan, the capital. The island owed some $120 billion, and Wall Street was demanding action. On the news, President Obama announced his appointments to the Junta de Supervisión y Administración Financiera. “The task ahead for Puerto Rico is not an easy one,” he said. “But I am confident Puerto Rico is up to the challenge of stabilizing the fiscal situation, restoring growth, and building a better future for all Puerto Ricans.” Among locals, however, the control board was widely viewed as a transparent effort to satisfy mainland creditors — just the latest tool of colonialist plundering that went back generations.

Photograph from Puerto Rico by Christopher Gregory
Article
Monumental Error·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

In 1899, the art critic Layton Crippen complained in the New York Times that private donors and committees had been permitted to run amok, erecting all across the city a large number of “painfully ugly monuments.” The very worst statues had been dumped in Central Park. “The sculptures go as far toward spoiling the Park as it is possible to spoil it,” he wrote. Even worse, he lamented, no organization had “power of removal” to correct the damage that was being done.

Illustration by Steve Brodner
Post
CamperForce·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

After losing their savings in the stock market crash of 2008, seniors Barb and Chuck find seasonal employment at Amazon fulfillment centers.

Chance that a Silicon Valley technology company started since 1995 was founded by Indian or Chinese immigrants:

1 in 3

A gay penguin couple in China’s Polar Land zoo were ostracized by other penguins and then placed in a separate enclosure after they made repeated attempts to steal the eggs of straight penguin couples and replace them with stones.

Trump’s former chief strategist, whom Trump said had “lost his mind,” issued a statement saying that Trump’s son did not commit treason; the US ambassador to the United Nations announced that “no one questions” Trump’s mental stability; and the director of the CIA said that Trump, who requested “killer graphics” in his intelligence briefings, is able to read.

Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!

HARPER’S FINEST

Report — From the June 2013 issue

How to Make Your Own AR-15

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

By

"Gun owners have long been the hypochondriacs of American politics. Over the past twenty years, the gun-rights movement has won just about every battle it has fought; states have passed at least a hundred laws loosening gun restrictions since President Obama took office. Yet the National Rifle Association has continued to insist that government confiscation of privately owned firearms is nigh. The NRA’s alarmism helped maintain an active membership, but the strategy was risky: sooner or later, gun guys might have realized that they’d been had. Then came the shootings at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, and at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, followed swiftly by the nightmare the NRA had been promising for decades: a dedicated push at every level of government for new gun laws. The gun-rights movement was now that most insufferable of species: a hypochondriac taken suddenly, seriously ill."

Subscribe Today