Snowdrop Controversy

The Snowdrop Controversy: Debunked

by

By now, if you’ve heard of Snowdrop, you’ll almost certainly also have heard about the controversy surrounding it.

You may, in fact, have only heard about the controversy, and chosen to boycott the drama in a well-meaning show of solidarity. Or maybe you watched it and loved it and wondered what all the fuss was about. Personally, when I heard about the controversy, it made me more interested in Snowdrop, not less. Not because I enjoy conflict (I don’t), but because I wanted to understand what the issue was (maybe I’m an academic, maybe I’m weird, maybe they’re the same thing...)

As is the unfortunate nature of these things, language barriers are no match for the powers of disinformation. With that in mind, we’re here to try and set the record straight, at least in our own little corner of the great wide web. The goal of this post is to break down the Snowdrop controversy (설강화 논란) as comprehensively and succinctly as possible. If you know us at all by now, you know that we do comprehensive well and succinct far less well, but I’m going to give it my best shot!

Overview

How It All Started

The controversy surrounding Snowdrop is largely twofold. The first line of accusations began at an early stage in the production process with false rumours that the drama was being produced using Chinese investment capital. This occurred amidst an atmosphere of widespread anti-Chinese sentiment within South Korea. So, rumoured Chinese involvement — that’s the first one.

The second major set of criticisms began with the leaking of the series synopsis in March of 2021. It was at this point that rumours of, ‘a North Korean spy leading the democratization movement’ first began to spread. Another rumour claimed that the female protagonist was participating in the democratization movement whilst knowingly in love with a North Korean spy. In truth, the words ‘democratization movement’ (민주화 운동) appeared nowhere in the leaked synopsis. Here’s what it actually said:

1987 Seoul.
An era in which tear gas exploded like firecrackers.
A man covered in blood tumbles into a women’s university dormitory.
The female protagonist, convinced he’s a student activist fighting for the cause of the era,
hides him and treats his wounds even amidst strict surveillance and grave peril.
Never even dreaming that the man she’s fallen in love with somewhere along the way is an armed espionage agent.*

As the male protagonist, who survived hellish training to become a warrior equal to a hundred, has to complete the mission given to him by his homeland,
He is caught in the fate of having no choice but to aim a gun at the woman who saved him, at the first woman he’s ever come to love.
Though she’s someone he wants to save without fail, by any means, at all costs.

Through the ardent love of these two protagonists we want to show you.
Whether it’s truly good for us* to continue living this way...
Whether it’s truly okay for us to continue living forever as strangers, as enemies...

*n.b. The word being understood to mean ‘North Korean spy/agent’ here is ‘kancheop’ (간첩), which literally just means ‘espionage agent’ but is often used to refer to North Korean agents more specifically. The ‘us’ in the final lines refers to the Korean people, North and South. You can find the original Korean here.

So, the female protagonist mistakes the male protagonist for a student activist and so hides him and treats his wounds, falling in love with him whilst having no idea he’s actually a North Korean spy. The male protagonist, despite loving her back, ends up having no choice but to hold her at gunpoint for the sake of accomplishing his mission. Love across battle lines. Unity amidst division — that’s the premise.

Despite this, early drivers of the controversy began uploading posts to websites like TheQoo (a.k.a. “Murder Qoo”) featuring images of the synopsis with titles designed to spark outrage, accompanied by descriptions that weren’t representative of the synopsis’ actual content (e.g. a North Korean agent leading the democratization movement, etc.). Other netizens who saw the posts became predictably outraged and proceeded to spread the (dis)information without actually stopping to read the synopsis itself (classique). These falsehoods rapidly devolved into established ‘facts.’

Since this was all happening well before the drama began airing, there was little anyone could do to refute the claims without spoiling the plot. JTBC released a series of statements on March 26 (Eng.) and March 30, 2021 (Eng), attempting to set the record straight, to little effect. As one Korean fan described it to me:

“They (those spreading falsehoods) made use of the fact that no one could refute their claims since the drama hadn’t aired yet. Because there wasn’t anyone to object, the lies became truths, and they were able to frame the drama in such a light that, before a lot of people had ever even seen it, they already disdained it enough that they didn’t even care to confirm whether any of it was true.”

When the drama finally began airing in December 2021 and it became clear that there wasn’t any content denigrating the democratization movement, criticism refocused on accusations of the ‘romanticization of the Agency for National Security Planning (ANSP)’ and ‘historical distortion.’ As with the synopsis, these criticisms weren’t substantiated by the actual content of the drama, but by this point, casual critics were too stubborn to admit they were wrong, and those actively driving the controversy remained hell-bent on doing so. They accomplished this by taking select scenes and/or lines out of context and disseminating them with intentionally distorted ‘descriptions.’* As a result, a large majority of those criticizing that drama did so without ever having actually watched it, relying instead on the intentionally distorted information being circulated online.

*e.g. In EP01, there’s a scene in which Jisoo’s character Young Ro puts on an act. Anti-fans took this clip and spread it around the internet with the tagline ‘Jisoo Terrible Acting.’ But it isn’t that *Jisoo* can’t act but that her character *Young Ro* can’t act. Ironically, the fact that there’s a measurable difference between Jisoo acting and Jisoo acting as if she’s acting actually speaks to her skill at acting (And yes, I realize that’s a confusing sentence).

The following section offers a brief overview of some of the main criticisms aimed at Snowdrop and why they were considered to be so problematic.

Main Criticisms/Accusations

Quick note on history before we get down to things:

For those who aren’t already familiar, South Korea was under the control of a military dictatorship for most of the 1960s~80s. During these years, many who participated in the pro-democracy movement were imprisoned, tortured, and/or killed by the Agency for National Security Planning (1981-1999) and its predecessor, the Korean Central Intelligence Agency (1961-1981), the enforcer arms of the Chun Doo Hwan (1980-1987) and Park Chung Hee (1961-1979) regimes, respectively. On paper, the ANSP was South Korea’s preeminent intelligence organisation, charged with ‘the collection, compilation, and distribution of foreign and domestic information regarding public safety against communists and plots to overthrow the government.’ In practice, they carried out a brutal communist witch hunt against anyone who opposed the regime.

For a 30,000 ft overview of the recent history of the Korean Peninsula, check out this helpful post by Eulie.

Denigration of the Democratization Movement (민주화 운동 폄훼)

Note: While the term ‘democratization movement’ may refer to the fight for democracy in South Korea as a whole, there are also two more specific ‘movements’ it’s often used in reference to. Those are:
・The 5.18 Democracy Movement of May 18~27, 1980 (aka the Gwangju Uprising; the Gwangju Massacre)
・The 6.10 Democracy Movement of June 10~29, 1987 (aka the June Uprising; the June Struggle)

This particular set of criticisms accounts for the majority of the controversy that occurred prior to when Snowdrop actually began airing and often gets paired with accusations of the ‘romanticization of North Korean spies’ (북한 간첩 미화), due to the false claims that the male protagonist, Soo Ho, is a North Korean secret agent involved in/leading the democratization movement. Accusations along this line include:

① Criticisms having to do with the character set-up of the male protagonist

Despite the fact that there really have been numerous incidents of North Korean agents discovered in South Korea, critics claimed that this premise lent justification to the illegal torture conducted by the ANSP as part of the ‘public security’ investigations of the 1970s and 80s. In particular, given the fact that many student activists were framed as communist spies and tortured or killed, some claimed the premise that there really was a North Korean spy among them seemed to justify the ANSP’s investigation, imprisonment, and torture of student demonstrators under the pretext of ferreting out North Korean spies. Given that the discovery of North Korean operatives in South Korea is a historical fact, this seems like a bit of a stretch.

Another criticism that arose regarding the character has to do with his cover as a Korean residing overseas in Germany attending the University of Berlin, which some claimed recalled the 1967 East Berlin Affair (동백림 사건) and the 1969 European North Korean Spy Ring Fabrication Incident (유럽 간첩단 조작 사건). To briefly summarize the first incident, the South Korean Central Intelligence Agency announced in 1967 that 194 Koreans residing or studying abroad in Eastern Europe had entered the North Korean embassy in Berlin and were operating as spies. This lead to the framing of musician Yun Isang and painter Lee Ungno, as well as the torture and crippling of poet Chon Sang Byeong. If you’re like me, you’re probably asking yourself how any of this is relevant. Answer: it isn’t.

② Claims that the premise appears to be lending credence to the theory that North Korea intervened in the 5.18 Democracy Movement*

Some critics claimed that the drama was depicting the Public Security State’s (i.e the Chun Doo Hwan regime’s) assertions throughout the 1980s that the 5.18 Democracy Movement was instigated by people receiving orders from North Korea as historical fact. Keep in mind, Snowdrop has nothing to do with the democratization movement. It centers on fictional events surrounding the 1987 presidential election. What’s more, this allegation is based on the fabrication that Soo Ho is somehow involved in the democracy movement as a North Korean spy (he’s not).

*n.b. The 5.18 Democracy Movement (오일팔 민주화 운동) is alternately known as 5.18 (오일팔), the Gwangju Democracy Movement (광주 민주화 운동), the Gwangju Uprising (광주 인민 봉기), The Gwangju Democratization Struggle (광주 민주화 항쟁), or the Gwangju Massacre.

③ Suspicions that the character ‘Eun Young Cho’ is based on a real person

The female protagonist, Eun Young Ro, was originally named ‘Young Cho,’ which is an unusual name. This led some to suspect it was taken from real-life student activist and democracy movement leader, Chun Young Cho, who resisted the Yushin Reforms of the Park Chung Hee regime during the 1970s. In addition, her husband, Jung Mun Hwa, was framed as a North Korean spy and tortured during the People’s Blue Federation Incident (민청학령 사건) in the early 1970s, dying of malnutrition at a young age. This was considered problematic in conjunction with the fact that the drama’s male lead is a North Korean spy.

④ Criticism of the inclusion of the protest song, ‘Oh Pine, Oh Pine, Oh Verdant Pine’ *

During a scene in which the male protagonist (a North Korean spy), flees pursuit by the ANSP, the music heard in the background is ‘Oh Pine, Oh Pine, Oh Verdant Pine.’ Critics claimed that it was disrespectful to score such a scene with a famous protest song. The thing is, the song wasn’t inserted as BGM to score the scene. It was being sung within the drama itself by the crowd of student protestors that Soo Ho and his ANSP pursuers ran through while they chased him.

*n.b. I watched the JTBC version (the version broadcast in Korea) which does include the song, but I’m told it actually doesn’t appear in the Disney+ (US) version, so if this is news to you, that may be why. For anyone curious, you can watch a clip of the JTBC version with the song included here.

Romanticization of the ANSP/Dictatorial Government (안기부/독재정권 미화)

This group of criticisms has to do with the alleged romanticization* of the New Military Group (신군부) and the Agency for National Security Planning (ANSP). Accusations along this line that appeared from before the drama began airing include:

① The second male lead is an ANSP Team Leader (and the ANSP is where student activists were tortured)

This is in reference to the character Lee Gang Mu, who is the ‘second male lead’ of Snowdrop in the literal sense that he’s the male deuteragonist. The assumption here was that he would share a loveline with Young Ro, who was being made out to be a student activist — another rumour which proved false. If this were in any way true, I would hope that people would also be concerned by the fact that they’re age 36 and 20, respectively. Fortunately for everyone, no such loveline exists.

② The second male lead is described as ‘straight as an arrow’ (‘대쪽같은 인물’)

To begin, the phrase ‘straight as an arrow’ (i.e. straightforward; single-minded), doesn’t actually appear in Gang Mu’s character profile, at least, not in those terms. The larger criticism, though, is that he’s portrayed positively when he should be a villain. Again, without giving too much away, Gang Mu may work for the ANSP, but he has his own motivations for doing so. In fact, what it does say in his profile is that he was, ‘disillusioned when he saw that the ANSP didn’t catch spies but rather ‘made’ them (referring, of course, the to way the ANSP framed dissenters as communist spies to suppress opposition and fill quotas). Gang Mu has his own character arc in the drama that’s worth keeping an eye on. In many ways, he acts as a foil for Soo Ho.

After the drama began airing, more specific criticisms were added to this, including things like:

  • ‘The fact that the ANSP managed to capture an actual North Korean spy (Park Geum Cheol) is in itself romanticizing the ANSP.’
    • ㅋㅋㅋ Okay, this one’s just funny. I get that what they mean is that the fact of them capturing an actual spy would seem to justify their communist witch hunt (I’m not sure it does), but it just sounds like they’re complaining that portraying them as even remotely competent is a lie.
  • ‘In EP03, the character Lee Gang Mu has a line saying, “Were you also following the principle of submission to our superiors’ orders when you rounded up random people without any evidence and made them out to be spies?” Depicting the ANSP as having people like Lee Gang Mu among its ranks is romanticizing the ANSP.’
    • Setting aside what I’ve already said on the character above, I think it would actually be less realistic to portray them as a monolith of evil. There’s something important to be said about evil as the result of the complacency of regular everyday people (I’m thinking of Dong Jae here).

*n.b. What I’ve translated as ‘romanticization’ here and above is the word ‘mihwa’ (미화), which is more literally ‘beautification,’ but can be understood to mean ‘romanticization,’ ‘sanitization,’ or ‘glorification.’

Distortion of History (역사 왜곡)

This last category is in many ways a ‘catch-all’ category for any other criticism aimed at the drama, big and small. The term first appeared in conjunction with accusations that the drama was ‘distorting’ the events of 5.18 (see above) and glorifying the military government, but turned to more specific grievances once the drama began airing and this was proved false. These included things such as:

  • ‘It’s unrealistic that Hall Director Pi would be able to bar the ANSP from searching the dorm without a warrant. In reality, they would have just ignored her and used force/violence. It’s a historical distortion to portray them as reasonable investigators.’
    • I can see where this may be true, but I can also see where it’s necessary in service of the plot. It’s not that they’re being intentionally portrayed as ‘reasonable’ so much as that it’s necessary narratively that they be delayed in order to buy the protagonists time (even if it seems somewhat unlikely).
  • ‘During the protest in EP01, the riot police shoot the tear gas into the air over the protestors’ heads when they should have fired directly into the crowd.’
    • Technically they were meant to fire 45 degrees over the crowd’s heads, as portrayed in the drama (more on that here). But yes, in reality, they often shot into the crowd. That said, doing so would have posed a significant risk to the actors, so this strikes me as more than a little unreasonable.
  • ‘It’s a historical distortion that the economic brain of the minority party (Han Yi Seop) would have met with a North Korean spy.’
    • (The entire plot is fictional)

My greatest problem with these criticisms is that they appear not to distinguish between ‘distortion’ and ‘fiction.’ The drama is historical fiction, as it has claimed to be from the very beginning. So pointing to elements of the drama that diverge from historic reality or require the viewer to suspend disbelief and calling them ‘distortion’ strikes me as intentionally missing the point. I’ll return to this below, but a third-party investigation into the drama ruled that no such distortion had occurred.

Additional Criticisms

Character Names

① ‘Soo Ho’s surname ‘Im’ (임) is an intentional allusion to a real-life student democracy activist, Im Jong Seok.’

Actually, the surname was selected in service of a play on words. As we’ve explained elsewhere, Soo Ho’s name (守護) means ‘protection’ or ‘guardian,’ and while his last name, ‘Im,’ is written with the character for ‘grove’ (林), Young Ro interprets it as the ‘im’ from ‘imja,’ an antiquated term for one’s love. So his name sounds like ‘protecting his love’ or ‘protector of his love.’ The last name ‘Im’ was selected for this reason. This also feels like a bit of a stretch, considering that ‘Im’ is the 10th most common last name in South Korea, and the first names aren’t even remotely similar.

② ‘Young Ro’s original character name, ‘Eun Young Cho’ (은영초), is a reference to real-life student democracy activist Chun Young Cho.’

Though the production company (JTBC) claims there was no relation, they ended up changing the character’s name to Young Ro at a late stage in order to appease critics. This involved a great deal of effort, as the first couple of episodes had already been filmed using this name and so had to later be dubbed over using post-synchronization recording.

Jung Hae In Harper’s Bazaar Korea Interview

Another wave of criticisms came in response to an answer that Jung Hae In gave in an interview featured in the December 2021 issue of Harper’s Bazaar Korea. When asked whether he had done any additional research into the historical background of the drama, he responded that while he, “was born in 1988 and so never directly experienced the events of 1987,” he hadn’t, because he believed that, “the right answers all lie in the script.”

Some netizens interpreted this to mean that he approached the project without knowing anything about the period and historic elements, and began attacking him, criticizing his awareness of history. As you can probably tell by now, I’m the type inclined to do the background research (occupational hazard). Objectively, though, Snowdrop is set against the backdrop of a fictional retelling of the 1987 presidential election, and the central conflict, characters, and space within which the drama unfolds are all entirely fictional as well. From the standpoint of an actor, it strikes me as within reason that any answers to how to act within such a context would be found primarily in the script.

Fiction & Fact

Fiction: Im Soo Ho is a North Korean spy who is leading/organizing the South Korean pro-democracy movement.
Fact: Im Soo Ho is a North Korean spy whom Eun Young Ro mistakes for a student activist. Soo Ho is never shown to participate in any sort of pro-democracy activity, nor does he ever claim to be a student protestor. The salient point is that Young Ro hides him because she believes this to be the reason he’s on the run from the ANSP.

Fiction: The ANSP are portrayed as heroes.
Fact: The ANSP is consistently portrayed as ruthless and corrupt. In addition to the actions taken by the various ANSP-affiliated characters (who are all a mixture of incompetent and contemptible), several of the main and supporting characters explicitly call out the ANSP’s tyranny at various points throughout the drama.

Lee Gang Mu: Surrender? You think if I get you to surrender right now they’ll accept it out there? They’re bastards who play games with the citizens’ lives to maintain their own power. ~ EP09

Im Soo Ho: Oi, ANSP Team Leader. The ANSP, who frame anyone who stands up to the government’s tyranny as a North Korean spy. The dogs of the government who trample on their blameless compatriots in the name of establishing security state. That’s the ANSP, right? Who are you to criticize anyone when you’ve been glutting yourself off the salary they give you?
Lee Gang Mu: When it comes down to it, they’re both the same, whether it’s the North Korean government that deceived Zainichi Koreans with the buksong* event, trampling on the lives of countless Koreans overseas, or the South Korean government that made a ‘public safety’ state. ~ EP09

Yeo Jeong Min: They’re people who’ll do even worse than this. My older cousin who participated in a union strike at a factory was dragged off to a re-education camp and died there. ~ EP11

Hall Director Pi: In order to win the election, the lives of some thirty people? The ANSP finds them laughable. ~ EP11

Female student: Hey, Eun Young Ro, listen well: my brother, who weighed 78kg (172lbs), was dragged off like a dog by the ANSP and became 50kg (110lbs) in just one month. He nearly surrendered but he held out at the time. In the end, though, he went mad! ~ EP11

*’Buksong‘ (북송), written with the characters for ‘north’ (북・北) and ‘send’ (송・送), refers to a ‘repatriation’ campaign by the North Korean government aimed at Koreans living in Japan.

Fiction: The North Koreans are romanticized (literally, ‘mi-hwa’ (미화), meaning ‘beautification’).
Fact: Well, if you mean Soo Ho, then I’m afraid I can’t argue. He is very pretty. But the North Korean leadership — chiefly Lim Ji Rok and Choi Soo Ryeon — are as bad, if not worse, than the ANSP/South Korean leadership. Without giving away any spoilers, calling them ‘soulless’ isn’t much of a stretch.

Fiction: Snowdrop is about the pro-democratization movement and disrespects the movement.
Fact: The plot of Snowdrop has nothing to do with the 5.18 Democratization Movement of May 18~27, 1980 (aka the Gwangju Uprising; the Gwangju Massacre), nor the 6.10 Democratic Movement of June 10~29, 1987 (aka the June Uprising; the June Struggle). The main historical backdrop for Snowdrop is not the pro-democratization movement, but rather the 1987 presidential election.

Fiction: The protagonists’ names are taken from real-life student pro-democracy activists.
Fact: The protagonists’ names were chosen by the writer for entirely unrelated reasons. Yoo Hyun Mi gave Soo Ho the last name ‘Im’ because she wanted his name to sound like ‘protector of his love’ (see above). As for Young Ro, JTBC made a public statement officially denying any connection to activist Chun Young Cho. Even so, the production company made the decision to change the name at great effort and expense in an effort to appease public concerns.

Fiction: The title (Seolganghwa) is Chinese.
Fact: The word ‘seolganghwa’ (雪降花・‘snow-fall-flower’) is registered by the National Arboretum of Korea. In China, the snowdrop plant is called ‘seoljeokhwa’ (雪滴花・‘snow-droplet-flower’) or ‘seolhwayeon’ (雪花蓮・‘snow-flower-lotus’) (these are, of course, the Korean pronunciations of the hanja, not the Chinese ones). The meaning behind the title is explained in the series description.

Fiction: Snowdrop is financed by China.
Fact: It’s true that Chinese company Tencent invested 100 billion won in JTBC STUDIO on December 29, 2020. This was after funding for the series had been secured and filming had already begun, however. More to the point, Tencent’s investment is in the form of ‘convertible preferred stocks,’ which do not provide any accompanying voting rights. This means that Tencent cannot participate in the management of JTBC STUDIO, and so naturally had no input into Snowdrop.

Fiction: Snowdrop was produced by YG Entertainment (aka Jisoo’s talent agency).
Fact: Snowdrop was produced by DRAMAHOUSE and JTBC STUDIOS. It has no relation to YG Entertainment. This particular rumor stems from anti-fans who were angry that Jisoo had been cast in the lead role despite having no previous (substantial) acting experience. It should be noted that, while her acting received mixed reviews during the earlier episodes, by the end of the drama, the reception was distinctly positive, with media headlines praising how she’d ‘earned her place as an actress.’

Where We Are Now

Korea Communication Standards Commission Ruling (방심위 결과)

On December 19, 2021, following the broadcast of the first two episodes, a national petition was started to cancel the drama for all of the reasons covered above, gaining over 200,000 signatures in just one day. The Blue House responded by submitting the drama to the Korean Communications Standards Commission (KCSC) for an investigation into the allegations of ‘historical distortion.’

After carefully reviewing the drama, the KCSC released the results of its investigation on March 18, 2022. The KCSC ruled as follows:

After having debated over the civil complaint that the drama broadcasted content that distorted history by depicting, among other things, an inappropriate connection between the democratization movement and North Korean agents and damaged the value of the democratization movement, we at the Special Commission of Broadcast Advisory have ruled that:

Due to the fact that, among other things, it depicts the ANSP as unreasonable and laughable over the course of the entire drama, it is difficult to conclude that there was any intention to romanticize the ANSP or damage the value of the democratization movement. Due to the fact that, as dramas are creative works whose right to creative expression must be guaranteed to the greatest extent possible, while it is difficult to view it as a work that inspires public confidence in [its depiction of] history, even if its content which dramatized the period used as its background does not entirely correspond with historical fact, it is difficult to view this as a problem. Accordingly, it is difficult to conclude that content in which an ANSP agent adheres to the warrant requirements or cooperates with a Northern operative in order to protect human rights, or content which employed a protest song in a scene in which the male protagonist, who is a North Korean agent, flees, as overstepping the limits of freedom of expression in such a way as to damage the value of the democratization movement and injure the dignity and pride of the Korean people. We therefore inform you that a majority of commissioners agreed that it is impossible to consider the review regulations applicable.

See also: KCSC releases investigation results over Snowdrop “history distortion” controversy.

Legal Action

On April 8, 2022, JTBC announced that it was pursuing legal action against individuals who propagated false and damaging fabrications about Snowdrop and its stars with malicious intent on counts of slander and obstruction of business. A JTBC rep stated that:

“As we forewarned, we are currently pursuing legal action against relevant individuals for maliciously inciting negative public opinion against Snowdrop,” continuing, “From before the broadcast began, the broadcast company, the production companies, and the actors have continued to suffer extensive damages,” and explained that, “The legal suit is against the act of continuously disseminating falsehoods and baseless claims that differ entirely from the drama’s content.” He also stated that, “We pursued legal action in the hope that similar situations in which the majority of people involved suffer damages don’t continue to occur.”

You can find English coverage of this here.

While we’re on the topic, I should also mention that the claim made back in December 2021 that Jisoo had filed a lawsuit against someone for their malicious comments was itself a malicious falsehood by the person claiming to be sued. When fans with legal knowledge began pointing out that the documents pictured were fake, the post was immediately deleted.

From the Korean Fans

When I first decided to write this post, I started by reaching out to Korean fans, inviting them to share how they viewed the controversy and asking them what they would like to convey to people outside of Korea (you can find that post here). These are some of the comments I received in response:

  • Please tell them that they made a controversy for the sake of controversy. Even when it became clear that there was no reason for the basis of the controversy, there are a lot of cowardly people who tried to rationalize their hasty accusations made through illogical reasoning.
  • Basically, people cursed the drama out before it had even aired, and then even when it became clear that it was all untrue, they made up every kind of reason because they didn’t want to admit they were wrong. I think that’s the biggest thing.
  • If you’re talking about the controversy, the romanticization of the ANSP is the main oneㅠㅠ. The fact that it wasn’t true was all proven as the drama aired, but there are still a lot of people being stubborn *sigh*
  • Even so, when people in their right minds found out after the fact that it was all false propaganda they found it all ridiculous.

See also this impassioned deep-dive on Naver: [Notice] Rebuttal / The Appearance of a Real-life Arrowhead? Full Summary of all the Fabrications about Snowdrop.

  • How is your censorship different from the Chun Doo Hwan regime’s censorship of popular art? Are you advocating a dictatorship?
  • Just who is doing the ‘distorting’ here?

Final Thoughts

If you’re still skeptical, or you took nothing else away from the above, I hope that I’ve at least succeeded in convincing you to watch the drama and judge it for yourself.

As I see it, the Snowdrop controversy is the result of the malicious intent of the few and the possibly well-intentioned but also poorly-informed censorship of the many. We live in a digital world saturated with clickbait taglines designed to incite outrage and discourage fact-checking. There’s also just a lot of ‘noise,’ and it’s not always easy to tell what’s true and what’s fake, especially when you have to rely on translated sources.

One reason I think I found myself skeptical from the beginning is that I was familiar with the writer. The last drama I watched by Yoo Hyun Mi was Gaksital (2012), which was set during the Japanese occupation and centered around the story of a Zorro-esque folk hero’s fight for freedom from Japanese rule. By any measure, it was a drama that championed Korean identity and the Korean people’s right to self-determination. So it struck me as unlikely that the same writer would denigrate the democratization movement. If you go back and read the leaked synopsis, I think you can detect that same sentimentality towards the Korean identity in the final lines.

As we’ve already established, Snowdrop isn’t about the democratization movement. And though it’s set against the backdrop of the 1987 presidential election, it’s not really about that, either. Snowdrop employs the premise of fictional North-South collusion over the 1987 presidential election to tell the story of individuals from both sides of the 38th parallel overcoming that which divides them. What defines heroes and villains isn’t their initial allegiances, but rather who is willing to overcome those divisions and who is only interested in gaining or maintaining their own power. It’s a story of two corrupt governments and the young people whose lives they trample underfoot, and it’s a story, first and foremost, of two young people, who meet and fall in love against all odds, and the lengths to which they are willing to go for the sake of that love.

I’ll leave you with the words of one particularly well-spoken Korean fan I encountered:

Snowdrop is the story of people who were used and sacrificed by the tragedy of their time. A story of people who, even amidst that, struggled and held-out in order to live. And it’s a story of how, even in such tragic moments, people fall in love, form friendships, and come to understand one another, a story of people living as they have through any era, and it’s a story of our lives.

Happy watching! (bring tissues)

Image credit belongs to FNC Entertainment. All translations are our own.

Leave a Comment