Wonderful comment!I do agree that historical dramas should be allowed to use the creative license. Btw, I think…
I haven't seen Moon Lovers so I couldn't comment on that. I think playing around with history can sometimes be interesting. For example, The Man in the High Castle postulates what America might look like if the Axis Powers had won WW2. Other times, anachronisms are used for comic effect, like in Disney's Hercules, Aladdin, Monty Python etc. Obviously, the tone of the piece is important. If a historical drama is being presented as a straight historical drama, then it would be expected to be reasonably historically accurate.
When I say that governments have influence over the media, I don't only mean censorship. In China particularly, historical narrative is tightly controlled. There is only one version of events, whereas historians from the rest of the world are constantly reassessing and debating with each other about the past. An example is the figure of Richard III, whose caricature as an evil man is now understood to have been a creation of Tudor propaganda (including Shakespeare's play). China is invested in promoting the idea that the country can only be governed by a strong authoritarian centralised power. Thus, any rebel factions in dramas are almost always presented as one-dimensional villains. Both Korea and China are deeply proud of their history so anything that might challenge that is shut down fast.
As for history being seen through the lens of the present, that relates to my comments above. We all have an idea of what history should look like, influenced by what we are taught in school and shown in the media. But history as we learn it is only one version of the past. People living in Tudor times were taught that Richard III was evil so they expected to see an evil character in Shakespeare's play. If he had been presented as a sympathetic character, they would have been outraged. This is the "lens" that I was referring to. Unless people are deeply interested in history and have read up on the different nuanced interpretations and perspectives, most people have a fairly simplistic idea of the past. Historical fiction is also sometimes seen as critique or commentary on contemporary social and political issues, as in the case of Wolf Hall, Mad Men, The Underground Railroad and many others. So all these factors are why I don't believe historical fiction can ever be viewed "in a bubble".
Historical dramas are one of my favourite genres because I'm interested in history and watching them brings the past to life in a way that nonfiction historical narratives cannot. Far from anachronistically imposing modern values on what I watch, I am interested in understanding how people thought and behaved back then, even if it doesn't always "sit right". For me, the charm of historical dramas is that the past is almost like a foreign country.
Having said that, I'm not a stickler for total historical accuracy. I think in general there should be some creative license in fiction to tell a good story. If people only want "facts" they can watch documentaries. And I sometimes enjoy a different spin being put on what we think we know. In any case, there's no single version of history since mainstream history is usually written by the powerful and victorious (but that's a whole other discussion).
As another commenter mentioned, these dramas are being produced in our current time and as such will contain contemporary biases. Governments also have varying degrees of influence over the media. It's something to bear in mind while watching not only historical dramas but all drama genres. The audience also expects to be presented with what they think history should look like. History is always being seen through the lens of the present to some extent.
Historical Chinese dramas seem to have many more fantasy elements in line with China's long history of wuxia fiction. Korean historical dramas focus more on real people or events, although there are more and more fantasy fusion sageuks. Speaking from a k-drama perspective, what strikes me as funny is that international watchers seem to avoid sageuks because they dwell on politics and there's not enough fluff, whereas Korean drama watchers will criticise sageuks for being too silly and taking liberties with "established" history. In other words, what domestic viewers are looking for in historical dramas seems to be very different from what most international viewers want.
Lastly, in answer to the question, I think I find it most difficult to relate to the religiosity and/or superstition of people in the past and the degree of influence it had on all aspects of their lives.
Really liked the first episode. Production quality is fantastic and the child actors were great. Emotional lines were set up very well. Looking forward to tomorrow!
Interesting comments from the director today at the press conference.
'Asked about the difference between “The Red Sleeve” and the previous epic historical drama “Yi San,” also based on King Jeongjo, the PD said, “That was an epic sageuk. When I saw that drama as a young assistant PD, I thought that it felt very much like a traditional historical drama. Our drama is more focused on the emotions between people. We focus on the political and romance parts.' (source: soompi)
As someone who have read the novel itself, I am kinda curious until where they will pull off this drama. AND whether…
I have read comments by readers of the novel on the teasers released so far and it seems that there's quite a bit of difference already. Also, the novel is written from Deok-im's POV, whereas this drama will expand a lot more on Yi San's internal motivations so hopefully he will be more sympathetic to the viewers.
by "dated" do you mean technically, like the production or outdated ideas and notions?
People mostly seem to be put off by the wire work in the fight scenes, sound effects and other production choices which are of the time. There's some use of tropes that were prevalent in the early-mid 2000s, e.g. birth secrets.
I don't watch C-dramas but this was a great compilation of examples. One of the reasons I tend to avoid romance dramas is because they are so often problematic.
Young Deok-im: Lee Seol-a (I think this may be her debut?)
Young Deok-ro: Choi Jung-hoo
When I say that governments have influence over the media, I don't only mean censorship. In China particularly, historical narrative is tightly controlled. There is only one version of events, whereas historians from the rest of the world are constantly reassessing and debating with each other about the past. An example is the figure of Richard III, whose caricature as an evil man is now understood to have been a creation of Tudor propaganda (including Shakespeare's play). China is invested in promoting the idea that the country can only be governed by a strong authoritarian centralised power. Thus, any rebel factions in dramas are almost always presented as one-dimensional villains. Both Korea and China are deeply proud of their history so anything that might challenge that is shut down fast.
As for history being seen through the lens of the present, that relates to my comments above. We all have an idea of what history should look like, influenced by what we are taught in school and shown in the media. But history as we learn it is only one version of the past. People living in Tudor times were taught that Richard III was evil so they expected to see an evil character in Shakespeare's play. If he had been presented as a sympathetic character, they would have been outraged. This is the "lens" that I was referring to. Unless people are deeply interested in history and have read up on the different nuanced interpretations and perspectives, most people have a fairly simplistic idea of the past. Historical fiction is also sometimes seen as critique or commentary on contemporary social and political issues, as in the case of Wolf Hall, Mad Men, The Underground Railroad and many others. So all these factors are why I don't believe historical fiction can ever be viewed "in a bubble".
Having said that, I'm not a stickler for total historical accuracy. I think in general there should be some creative license in fiction to tell a good story. If people only want "facts" they can watch documentaries. And I sometimes enjoy a different spin being put on what we think we know. In any case, there's no single version of history since mainstream history is usually written by the powerful and victorious (but that's a whole other discussion).
As another commenter mentioned, these dramas are being produced in our current time and as such will contain contemporary biases. Governments also have varying degrees of influence over the media. It's something to bear in mind while watching not only historical dramas but all drama genres. The audience also expects to be presented with what they think history should look like. History is always being seen through the lens of the present to some extent.
Historical Chinese dramas seem to have many more fantasy elements in line with China's long history of wuxia fiction. Korean historical dramas focus more on real people or events, although there are more and more fantasy fusion sageuks. Speaking from a k-drama perspective, what strikes me as funny is that international watchers seem to avoid sageuks because they dwell on politics and there's not enough fluff, whereas Korean drama watchers will criticise sageuks for being too silly and taking liberties with "established" history. In other words, what domestic viewers are looking for in historical dramas seems to be very different from what most international viewers want.
Lastly, in answer to the question, I think I find it most difficult to relate to the religiosity and/or superstition of people in the past and the degree of influence it had on all aspects of their lives.
Edit: looks like Viki is doing subs almost simultaneously. Episode 1 up now subbed.
'Asked about the difference between “The Red Sleeve” and the previous epic historical drama “Yi San,” also based on King Jeongjo, the PD said, “That was an epic sageuk. When I saw that drama as a young assistant PD, I thought that it felt very much like a traditional historical drama. Our drama is more focused on the emotions between people. We focus on the political and romance parts.'
(source: soompi)