It’s hard to talk about this book without being political. Despite Park’s insistence that she feels no allegiance to either Republicans or Democrats, her book is political regardless. The very comparisons of various emergent aspects of American culture and social norms to North Korean rhetoric marks her book as something inherently political. The forward by right-wing intellectual Jordan Peterson also lends itself to this impression as well. (I never thought in the year 2023 I would be reading the words “the damned Chinese” as if I had been yanked back into some sort of 1840’s propaganda).
The prose is simple and digestible, a perfect way of allowing Park to connect with readers. Park’s opinions about America and the current state of American politics and culture seem heavily influenced by her upbringing. She went through unimaginable trauma and pain, and has come out through the fire full of fear. Educated fear, but fear nonetheless. Park is an American, and her opinions about our country and our politics should be taken as such. And so, by this logic, I feel no hesitancy when I say that Park is fear-mongering in the way that many Americans (from all walks of life and political beliefs) do. Because of her experiences with fascism and censorship, because of her experiences of the North Korean caste system, Park draws parallels (valid or otherwise) between these things and rhetoric in American politics. She claims that these parallels mean that America is headed down the same path as North Korea. I cannot say that the parallels do not exist, but I would hesitate to say that these parallels mean that the rights that Americans hold so dear (freedom of press, speech, religion) are soon to be lost. The fact that this book has been published despite dissent towards Park’s own opinions is a testament, in my opinion, that freedom of press is still very strong.
This book is, at its core, a philosophy novel. It is a call to action, and it is a demand to think. And for that alone I believe this book has merit. I was somewhat frustrated, perhaps, by the lack of definitive terms (Park uses the terms like “the Left” and “conservative” but does not define them in a consistent way) but I was willing to overlook these faults because I was interested in what Park has to say. And I believe that Park has some very interesting things to say. So, whether or not you find yourself agreeing or disagreeing with her thoughts and reflections, it is more important perhaps, to ask why. Why do you feel the way you do about the things she says (or doesn’t say)? Why do you agree or disagree? What is Park trying to say and why? Park seems to have asked herself a lot of whys, and this book is the culmination of those queries.
