The term yadam 野談, not used elsewhere in East Asia, refers to short stories collected and often edited by the literati of late Chosŏn. They are amusing to read, but studying them requires strenuous research, inevitably involving the daunting task of collating numerous manuscripts spread around here and there. Si Nae Park has undertaken this meticulous work. She advances an argument for a new Korean vernacularization of Literary Sinitic by using as a case study the Tongp'ae naksong (Repeatedly Recited Stories of the East, hereafter Recited Stories), a yadam collection compiled by No Myŏnghŭm (1713–75).
The Korean Vernacular Story consists of four chapters, an introduction, and a coda. The first two chapters situate No Myŏnghŭm in the fabric of the cultural epicenter of contemporary Chosŏn—that is, the capital city Seoul. Chapter 1, “The Compiler,” draws on historical sources to reconstruct No's life, with attention to his relocation to Seoul and sustained ties with the privileged Hong family. Chapter 2, “The Narrative World,” investigates how No curated themes and subject matter to carve out the dynamic world of metropolitan society. Park's approach is richly detailed and sophisticated, yet in my opinion, No's birth and youth in Ch’ŏngju are equally noteworthy. This provincial city is distant but not that far away from the capital, and men of letters there had created a remarkable scholarly culture, especially after the eminent scholar-official Song Siyŏl (1607–89) retired to Hwayang-dong in Ch’ŏngju around 1666. Since No was born and lived in this provincial city until he was almost thirty-four (1747), he would have brought with him an outsider's perspective and a literary capacity for capturing all the floating and flourishing lives in Seoul.
The next two chapters deserve more attention in terms of their originality and argumentation. Chapter 3, “The Language,” explores vernacular elements—mainly diction and style—in the Recited Stories. No attempted to create verisimilitude and reveal socially stratified language practice through idu and other colloquial expressions sprinkled throughout the text. In addition, classical idioms are often appropriated; some original meanings or allusions are effaced as a means for smooth storytelling, while some others would have been read as puns by the educated reader, as suggested by David Lurie (p. 259n40). Park helps expand our understanding of No's conceit of oral circulation and other literary devices employed in the text. Chapter 4, “The Text in Motion,” engages a wealth of source materials to investigate the reception of the Recited Stories, grouping the manuscripts into three modes of circulation—copies, variant editions, and Korean renditions. Park brings due attention to the scribal publishing culture at that time, weighing in on “the dynamic interplays between fixity of a published text and fluidity of a manuscript book” (p. 170).
Overall, Park's historical linguistic analysis of the Recited Stories as a vernacularized variant of Literary Sinitic is successful. Yet I would draw attention to the fact that the language of the text is heterogeneous in essence, and thus, as a complement, it would have been worthwhile if Park had looked deeper into its origins, such as miscellaneous essays (biji 筆記) and literary fiction (wenyan xiaoshuo 文言小說). Their influence on the text is not fully incorporated into her discussion, though their significance is already attested by her own citation and documentation: Hong Chigyŏng (1782–1842) moves beyond the fiction/nonfiction distinctions to associate the text with miscellaneous essays as well as vernacular fiction in his postface to the Recited Stories (p. 184); one variant manuscript includes Im Che's (1549–87) literary fiction Record of the Castle of Sorrow 愁城誌 (p. 197).
Park demonstrates a thorough knowledge of both Korean and Western scholarship, but there are minor errors in the treatment of primary sources. Incorrect Chinese characters are occasionally found, for example in Appendix A: 以腹爲笥 (p. 225), 聘意匠尚標致, 可以歐喝場屋 (p. 225), and 歉於口腹[而不歉]於志” (p. 226, reviewer's emendations in bold). Some translations should be reconsidered. The second phrase, for one example, is to be understood as “with his fine craftsmanship and lofty style, he could have dominated the exam venue.”
My quibbles are supplementary to Park's argument, and they should not detract from her contribution to the field of yadam, which has remained little explored in Western scholarship. Recently, scholars have attempted diverse approaches toward premodern Korean texts that move beyond political and moral interpretations, and in this vein, Park's research into No's linguistic-literary experimentation opens a new path for understanding the multilayered diglossia in Chosŏn literature. It also helps us reflect on issues in Korea today, such as Seoul-centrism, social mobility, and wealth and status. I feel that this, the first monographic work on yadam in a Western language, will appeal not only to specialists of premodern Korea, but to a wide range of readers as well.
