{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.027257799671592774, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008866995073891626, 'mean_word_length': 5.007889546351085, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Politics and Policy in Traditional Korea (review)

In Politics and Policy in Traditional Korea James B. Palais has produced one of the most scholarly and important studies of Korean history to have appeared in English. It focuses on the period from 1864, when the father of the newly inaugurated King Kojong gained power in the government, until 1876, when Korea opened her doors to the outside world by signing her first modern treaty with Meiji Japan. This twelve-year period was one of the most important watersheds in Korean history, for it was during this time that traditional Korea made its last stand, confronting the Western world and newly rising Japan and trying desperately to put its tottering house in order. What Koreans did and did not do in this period profoundly affected the course of their modern history. The central figure of the study is Yi Ha-üng, better known as the Taewön'gun, the title given to the father of a reigning monarch. Undoubtedly the single most dynamic, charismatic, colorful, and controversial man in nineteenth-century Korea, scholars' characterizations of him have ranged from reactionary xénophobe to revolutionary reformer and forerunner ofmodernization. Palais denudes the myths and legends surrounding the Taewön'gun and gives an objective analysis and evaluation of his policies, concluding that he was neither a reactionary who rigidly adhered to Confucian principles nor a revolutionary who tried to overturn the traditional order. He was a pragmatic conservative who shared the basic Confucian ideals but was willing on occasion to violate accepted norms in favor of more pragmatic solutions that benefited the state at the expense of a small social elite. In the final analysis, the Taewön'gun "had no intention of destroying the aristocratic basis of the social order, and, in fact, helped to preserve it.... "(p. 285). This view is an interesting contrast to that of the late Ching Young Choe, who, in his study, The Rule of the Taewön'gun, 1864-1873, treats the Taewön'gun as an intellectual heir of the sirhak school, who consciously reflected the reform programs of sirhak scholars in his drastic reform policies and whose ultimate objective was to restore the vitality of the dynasty. Palais' study seeks "to reexamine previous interpretations of the nature and aims of the reform effort of the 1860s; to identify the major obstacles to reform in terms of some of the salient characteristics of the traditional order; and to emphasize the intimate relationship between socioeconomic interest, ideology, and politics on the eve of the modern era in Korea" (p. 2). To accomplish this, the author examined three broad areas: (1) the institutional reform aimed at restoring the power balance between the monarch and the central government, on one hand, and the yangban aristocracy, on the other; (2) the competition for resources—for control of land and population—between the central government and the aristocracy; and (3) the retirement of the Taewön'gun and politics under Kojong's rule.