I traveled to South Korea this summer to access and acquire primary sources for my Master’s thesis. For the thesis, I planned to examine the culture of and social attitudes towards consumption in postwar (Korean War) South Korea. My plans for summer research included trips to the Rare Books Collection of Seoul National University, National Archives, and Korean Film Archive. During the summer, I was able to narrow my research topic down to a more tangible and specific form of consumption: the consumption of the typewriter in South Korea in the 1950’s.
In early June, I began my research with trips to Seoul National University to examine various popular magazines published in the 1950’s. I focused on articles that would allow me to gauge attitudes towards consumption, such as lists of popular goods and activities, reader surveys, editorials, and caricatures. While combing through different publications, I discovered that the figure of the typist was a main feature in the depiction of consumption in mass media. Because of their untraditional social role as young working women capable of buying what they desired, the typist was often the target of critiques of consumption.
The course of my research took a slight turn as I sought to more thoroughly examine not only what this group of young working women were consuming and how their behavior was perceived by others, but also what exactly enabled them to consume in the first place. The typist performed a specific type of labor that presupposed the availability of a certain product: typewriters. After reading secondary material about the history of typewriters by Kim Tae-ho, a South Korean historian of technology, I learned that the importation, distribution, and use of English and hangŭl typewriters began in earnest after the Korean War. I began to narrow my research focus down to the “consumption” of typewriters in this postwar period. How were these daily office machines–a very expensive and rare commodity and technology–“consumed” in Korean society? Does consumption have to be a form of economic transaction? Or can it also be expanded to the usage of a certain product in performing a specific type of labor?
To answer this question, I went to the National Archives nearly every day in July to acquire various primary sources. By the end of the summer, I amassed a collection of sources: patents for hangŭl typewriters, personnel files of typists in the South Korean bureaucracy and American organizations from 1954 to the early 1960’s, typewriting textbooks, importation data for typewriters, and even actual test papers of typist applicants who had to demonstrate their typing skills to be hired. I revisited the magazines and journals at Seoul National University’s library with this newfound focus on typewriters and typists. I also visited various museums, such as the National Hangǔl Museum and Letterpress Museum (Hwalpan Kongbang) in Paju. I also conducted oral interviews with former typists and office workers, who served as very rich sources of information and insight. I was unable to visit the Korean Film Archive and access missionary records from the Society of Jesus and Maryknoll Sisters because of time constraints, but I believe the collection of sources I have will be sufficient for now; I plan to visit these archives next summer.
Overall, this summer proved to be very productive in shaping not only my Master’s Thesis and approach to the idea of consumption, but more significantly my newfound research interests in technology and labor that I hope to further pursue in a doctoral program.