KevinToronto

To be honest, it does not matter whether the character prevented or participated. The fact is that Palestine was used. From what I can see, the webtoon was first published in 2021, and then in English in 2022. The writer and producers should have changed things, based on the current situation.

It all depends on what your understanding of propaganda is. In reality, propaganda does not have to always be the in-your-face "advertising. It can very subtle, like the proverbial slow drip of water.

The issue that made people upset is the use of airstrikes against Palestine and its population. The fact is that what the World has recognised as ethnic cleansing and genocide is used as a "throw-away" fact in the background of a character. If you scroll down, you will see that at least one commentator is Palestinian, with direct and personal connections with Palestine.

Interestingly, that profile appears to have blocked me. Thus, I cannot see their comment in this thread when I am logged in (although I can when not logged in). Note that the name is now Meow Meow Meow.

Let's be very clear, what is happening in East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and Gaza is ethnic cleansing and genocide, as defined by international law. Deliberately targeting civilians (especially women and children), medical personnel, and hospitals are war crimes.

In their comment earlier today, Travellerr0 explained why reference to Palestine is so painful and personal to them. I do not have that personal connection, but I found the reference in the show completely unnecessary. The writer and/or producers could/should have changed the text.

Finally, I note with interest that the profile that has been front and centre in promoting the position of "prevention" rather than "participated/intervened" (The_Evil_Within) was created today; June 28. 2026. Whereas, uri_chil joined on June 13, 2020, Travellerr0 joined on June 25, 2023, and I joined on January 30, 2022.

Thank you for the clarification. I understand that it is fiction. However, the subject of Palestine is an extremely sensitive one. As they clearly wrote, it is extremely personal for Travellerr0 .

As I noted in my reply to them, I have friends and neighbours who are Iranian. They are desperate to hear from the families and friends in Iran. I am certain that they would not be very happy if their situation is used as a throw-away line in the background story of a secondary character in a TV show that is unrelated to the events in the Middle East.

I re-watched the episode to see if I had missed something. You are correct that the Palestine comment (plus the elimination of a radical militant group and decimating a Pakistan terrorist group) is about Park Jin-Cheol.

However, the sub-titles that I see (apparently from the Netflix feed) say "three airstrike operations against Palestine". There is no sign of "prevented".

To be honest, it makes no difference because it would impossible for a South Korean soldier to prevent Israeli airstrikes; even the U.S.A. is powerless to stop them. Alternatively, why would a lowly South Korean soldier be involved in attacks on Palestine?

Why? As far as I have seen so far, the comments have been about whether reference to Palestine is appropriate or not. So far, no one has resorted to personal attacks or insults.

"Our suffering should never be used as a tool to serve anyone's political agenda or to add depth to a fictional character. Stories inspired by real tragedies carry a responsibility to treat those experiences with care and respect."

I am truly sorry that the tragedy being inflicted on you and your fellow Palestinians, starting with the Nakba, is so abused for both political and entertainment purposes.

Politicians are, by their very nature, opportunistic creatures whose moral compass only points in the direction of their success.

Entertainment, on the other hand, should and must do better. In this case, I assume the background stories for Agent Kim are to show that he is more than just a South Korean agent who fought against North Korea. Is this necessary? Absolutely not.

Sadly, it will never stop. Too many people see only the headlines. They do not even read the stories beneath them, let alone try to understand the personal tragedies behind the news. Two of my neighbours are Iranian. I have seen them gathered around their TVs to watch Iranian television to find out what is happening. I have heard the relief in their voices as they tell me that they have spoken to their relatives and friends back in Iran. You can guarantee that there is entertainment being written that will exploit the suffering of the Iranian people.

I came to this series (both seasons) only recently, and fortunately had not read the comments on here. I can understand why some are disappointed with the ending. My reaction was "I cannot believe that they (the writers) did that". However, given the case that provoked the situation and the personal histories of the two leads, it was the correct ending.

There is a cartoon where two people are standing either side of a number drawn on the floor. One person say "I see 6" and the other say "I see 9". Everyone's perspective in life is unique. The success of a marriage/relationship is built on the people involved understanding and accepting the other's perspective.

The ending shows two people who want to be together but who have discovered their different perspectives. I hope that there is a third season where the differences are explored. I am not going to say whether the differences are overcome or not.

Totally agree that the evidence of financial obligations is so absent as to be non-existent. And, you are spot on with the "way too logical" observation.

For many TV series and films (regardless of country of origin), the intent is entertainment, and a certain level of escape from life's realities. I think all of us have to "suspend our disbelief" and just enjoy the show.

It might seem unrealistic, but it is not beyond the realm of possibility. There are many, many people who live to the very limit of their financial capability.

A few years ago, I knew a founding partner of a law firm, who was taking home the equivalent of $1,000,000 a year. However, he needed that money to maintain his lifestyle which included a multi-million dollar house in the city, a weekend country "estate", and a separate hobby farm. All three properties had very large mortgages. Plus, he had three children and an ex-wife who got alimony.

As for putting equity into a firm as a partner, that is true. However, many lawyers who become partners (like the woman I lived with) take out a loan to pay for it, and only pay the interest. Banks are very happy to loan to partners in law firms because they know that the annual "draw" (partners do not get a salary) will cover the interest. If a partner leaves the firm, the principle goes to the bank, or is transferred to the new law firm.

It is possible that law firms in Korea operate on a different model to those in Canada, where I am, or the U.S., so what I wrote above might not apply.

I am a little perplexed after watching episode 8. How is it that Yang Do Gyeong says so confidently that I Rang can see ghosts? It seems to me to be a bit of large leap to connect
(a) taking on 3 cases of three dead people;
(b) swearing like one dead person, acting like another, and finding the body of the third; and
(c) having a former shaman's house as an office,
to be able to categorically state that he can see ghosts.

Even with a front row centre seat, it has taken Na Hyeon longer to get to that conclusion.

I still think that the Chairman of Taebaek Law Firm had something to do with case against I Rang's father. However, is there a connection between the family and the shaman?

I understand your position. The only "reason" for this that I can put forward is that strong/extreme emptions are involved and the ghosts are drawn in regardless of the wishes of either side.

I am going to put this as a spoiler, as these are mere speculations. To be honest, I hope I am wrong about them because the creative team have decided not to follow with tried and tested "trope" route.

(1) I Rang 's connection to the ghosts is not just because of the incense; it is also because his father is connected to one the charms on the wall.
(2) Na Hyeon will also resolve the guilt of her friend's death/sacrifice through I Rang. (was there something more to the death?)
(3) I Rang's father's corruption will be linked to the law firm's Chairman. Resolving that case and rehabilitating his father's name will be the I Rang's final case of the series.
(4) The series end like The Master's Sun and Delivery Man and I Rang will continue to be able to see ghosts.

The above being said, I am enjoying the show so far.

Does anyone have any greater information about the song sent by I Rang to Na Hyeon at the end of episode 4? The subs appear to give give the title as Beautiful Flower. However, I cannot find it either in any search, or on Youtube or Spotify.

Totally agree. It took a move from the London to Hong Kong in my mid-20s for me to start learning how to cook properly.

One final bit of Kevin "parenting wisdom": children help their parents learn how to do parenting. The good parents listen and learn; bad parents are deaf and do not learn.

The critical phrase there is "tons of patience". From personal experience, the patience to understand a toddler while keeping your sanity, and the home relatively neat, is built up by learning to look after a newborn.

I have lost count of the number of characters in dramas who are portrayed as being incapable of cooking, so that is not unusual. Personally, I feel the reason for the overall inability to cope is meant to be a result of
-- the trauma of losing her sister (her only family and especially after arguing with her);
-- having to look after her nephew (initially) alone; and
-- not knowing where her life was going.

Clearly, this is a "redemption arc" type of comedy/love story, so starting at the bottom seems to be the obvious thing.

Rest assured I understand what you are talking about, and I do not disagree that there may be "propaganda"-like talking points in the show. However, I would ask whether the Chinese entertainment industry is unique in doing this. Personally, I think that people could analyse most entertainment from any country and find what they would consider propaganda.

Having said that, your first example of "communist propaganda" was the photovoltaic industry, so I provided international documentation showing that the Chinese PV (and wind power) industry and deployment is far larger than anywhere else in the world.

As for your second example , "China being suppressed", I would point to this morning's pronouncement by the U.S. president that he will impose 100% tariffs on all Canadian goods if the proposed Canada - China trade agreement goes through. This is just days after he stated that the deal was a good thing. You cannot blame the Chinese (and Canadians, in this case) from feeling "suppressed".

Please do not let one particular perspective deter you from watching a programme that is a very pleasant love story that shows a gentle progression rather than the usual instantaneous love at first meeting trope. Are there frustrating parts? Yes. However, overall it is a good show.