Just like most people I was surprised by the South Korean Film Parasite which won Best Picture at this Academy Awards. For South Korea, this is a record-breaking success as well as the level of recognition worldwide.
I understood that Parasite discussed overreaching ideas but never at a level so profound. I started to look deeply at Parasite after viewing a fantastic video essay from Broey Deschanel called Why Parasite Should Terrify Us. The film is one of major social and cultural analysis that touches on issues that are ubiquitous amongst everyone. I felt it was necessary to elucidate and expand on some of the major ideas discussed within this video as well as present some ideas of my own.
Parasite perhaps may highlight a shift of recognition from a disproportionate American and Western-based category to a fully international category. This of course shows Director Bong-Joon-Ho’s skill in dialogue, oral and visual storytelling as well as presenting characters with ‘sketchy’ moral sentiments. All these styles and methods have made Parasite perhaps one of the most enthralling films of the decade. The film focuses on the very poor lower-class Kim family who utilise deception, their shrewdness, and manipulation to survive. This film presents the son of this family Ki -Woo who is given almost a divine opportunity to tutor the daughter of the very rich Park family. With the kindness and gullible nature of the Parks, the Kims are able to gain household jobs for themselves. This opportunity is not all how it all seems though.
To analyse the attitudes that are presented in the film, we have to look at the history of South Korea since the informal end of the Korean War in 1953. The period from 1953 to the late 1980s was exemplified by authoritarian rule by various civilian and military dictatorships. The American-educated autocratic ruler Syngman Rhee was replaced (not immediately) with the military dictatorship of General Park-Chung-Hee and from 1963 until his assasination in 1979. During this period, Korea saw immense export-led industrialisation and a massive suppression of democratic and worker rights. Only after 1988 did popular student-led democratic reform prove successful in the western democratisation of Korea. Now, what does this have to do with the film? Well, three lessons can be learned from this period of instability: dramatic increases in South Korea’s wealth, strict social ordering, and few worker rights. This represents the socio-political conditions that the Kim family is placed in — one of a history of mass inequality, elitism, and few worker rights.
Bong-Joon- Ho’s masterpiece black comedy is an analysis of class — that of widening class anxieties and tensions within modern Korean and global society. The title ‘Parasite’ may highlight how the Kim family is ‘parasitical’ towards the kindness, good-heartedness, and generosity of the rich Parks. I mean in one of the first scenes of the film the Kim’s basement flat is fumigated so to remove the ‘parasites’ living in it.
However, Boong is highlighting that it is the Parks and the upper-class who are ‘parasitical’ towards the work, labour, and freedom of the Kims and the lower-class. This places us in a conundrum - who are the real parasites in our modern capitalist society?
Now, this film places us in some confusion when answering this question, especially how it differs from Boong’s other works in how it analyses class relations. In the dystopian Snowpiercer (2013), the lower classes unite against a common enemy due to their shared oppression within a hierarchical totalitarian state. In the Host (2006), a lower-class family and a homeless man unite against an unimaginable monster. These films show imaginary conditions with something increasingly imaginary coming out of it: class solidarity. Parasite doesn’t show this. None of the characters present this. All of these characters have some form of false consciousness preventing this realisation. There is a complex ambiguity in this that we have to understand. There is no monster. There is no physical directly enforced segregation between classes. The lines and the lines between classes are much blurrier in this film. It is thus necessary to study the multi-faceted reasons for this false consciousness.
We seem to live in a period where people are indifferent to the real exploitation occurring across the world. This is what Jim McGuigan calls Cool Capitalism. Jim McGuigan tells us that neoliberal capitalism has departed from just economic ideology and it has integrated itself in the public conscience. Most notably it can be seen as indifference towards exploitation. Jim McGuigan uses Apple who has been integrated within Western culture with their products but we have become indifferent to their very real exploitation of workers across the world. This indifference and disaffection of consumers to the legitimate exploitation of others is what McGuigan labels as Cool Capitalism.
This can be seen throughout the film. In the 2nd Act, the former housekeeper’s husband Geun-Sae has perfected a daily routine to maintain his sanity by illuminating the staircase as Mr. Park walks upstairs. Mr Park is fairly indifferent and unknown to the source of this lighting. This reinforces the idea of Cool Capitalism, that the pleasure of one is maintained through the hard work and exploitation of someone (who are literally beneath them). This divide in conditions between the Parks and the Kims can be seen with the utmost indifference of the Parks towards the living conditions of the Kims. This is highlighted in the 3rd Act where a huge rainstorm displaces thousands of people in the city whilst the Parks are ignorant of this. In fact, Mrs. Park sees this as a “blessing-in-disguise”. Meanwhile, the Kims had their home flooded and were forced to evacuate in a city-shelter amongst hundreds of other people. The cool conditioning of capitalism can be viewed as the disaffection of consumers towards the scope and effect of climate change on people in the situation on the other side of the planet. This is similar to the overt exploitation of sweatshop workers within the manufacturing of technology and communication. With such an open and connected world, it is seemingly impossible to conceal the fact that commodities exploit sweatshop workers. However, we do not care as their workers live thousands of miles from consumers. This is just like the Parks who are indifferent to the poor because they live miles away.
This disaffection and indifference can also be seen with the Parks consistent shunning to the odour of the Kim family. This is seen with the constant nose-holding of both Mr. and Mrs. Park. The Parks’ constant shunning to the smell of Kims is actually a depiction of disgust for those they see as lesser than themselves. Even during the climax as Geun-Sae runs amok during the garden party, Mr. Park holds his nose in revulsion as he tries to escape the scene. This signals to the viewer that in the coolness of capitalism consumers separate themselves from some of capitalism’s most destructive effects. The smell is an unfortunate sign to the Parks that exploitation is close to them. The Parks voluntarily choose to be ignorant of this poverty and are even disgusted by the mere smell of it, as they do not want the fragile bubble protecting their glamorous lifestyle to burst.
The growing wealth disparities and class divisions between the upper and lower-classes are maintained by what Italian socio-cultural theorist Antonio Gramsci called Cultural Hegemony. This is where the socio-political order culturally conditions and molds the population into a subordinate role. This ‘subordinate’ status is maintained through characters within the film. The Parks seem to foster a level of professionalism between their employees and themselves in a society with a recent history of few worker-rights (compared to other developed nations). Mr. Park, as the head of the household, demands a level of respect by his employees so to retain his position as this head of the household. The former housekeeper Moon Gwang conforms to this guideline set by Mr. Park and thus always seems to follow this level of professionalism. However, the Kims seem to be almost always at the point of trespassing this guideline. This is from Ki-Woo infatuation with the Park’s daughter to Ki Taek’s casual tone around Mrs. Park. This level of professionalism that was set is completely overstepped by Ki-Taek rebelling against this subordinate role as he becomes more conscious of this absurd world order. This cultural conditioning is present in the attitudes and behaviour that are taken up by the Kim family in the climax of the film. The Kims have a weird admiration towards the Park family which progressively increases throughout the film as they are conditioned into their subordinate roles. They gain multiple characteristics from their employers. The daughter Ki- Jung is seen to be most closely alike to the Parks and their class. Ki- Woo in fact comments that she appears to look “rich” as she lies in the Park’s bath.
This integration of these values come to manifest when Ki-Jung tells the local drunkard ‘to get a grip’ with it ending in the family pouring water on the drunkard. Through this scene, the Kims seem to gain the position of the oppressor with an autocratic and arrogant attitude. This is emblematic of a larger cultural problem in Korea that of Gapgil (갑; 甲). This is a common issue in the social ordering of Korean society and defines abusive employer-employee relationships within Korea. The Kims who are enamored by their false consciousness, integrate this oppressive value from the Parks through Cultural Hegemony.
Ki- Jung is seen to be the only family member who is shaped within this upper-class environment. For example, the distinction between horizontal and vertical representation in the film’s cinematography is different in the representation of rich characters in horizontal positions. The daughter Ki-Jung is presented in a horizontal position in the bath and on the sofa as the family discusses how they respect the Parks; Ki-Jung has molded herself into this wealthy environment.
Despite being the only member of the family to fully be molded in, she is also the only member of the Kims to be killed. This suggests that though the family is close to these riches, they seem to always be pushed back down into their original social class.
The effects of Cultural Hegemony are much more ingrained in Geun-Sue who bangs his head sadomasochistically paying reverence to Mr. Park who he thinks is his saviour. Through this system, the subordinate consciously ask for their subordination. Linked to false consciousness, this ‘desire for subordination’ and the ‘docility to oppression’ is maintained through Cultural Hegemony. In fact, the psychological repression of the Kims has molded them into servants of their own social repression. This is even more of a case for Geun-Sue who frequently tries to pay reverence to Mr. Park from photos of Mr. Park being hung in his basement to his aforementioned head-banging. They unconsciously accept their place as subordinates as employees within the socio-political order.
Again the Gapgil attitude that the Kims gain is reminiscent of how Cultural Hegemony crafts a perception that the hegemonic culture is one people must aspire to.
This has manifested in multiple forms from entertainment, media, music, fashion, the arts, food, and sport. This can be seen with the constant presentation of the nuclear family in sit-coms; the pursuit of eurocentric beauty; our infatuation with celebrities; and of course the admiration of American culture which is clearly depicted throughout the film.
The Kims purposefully change their appearance and attitude to fit into the mold of higher-class people. They revere and respect the Parks as they themselves seek to become them. This is clearly evident in the ending where Ki- Taek seeks to buy the previously owned Park house to free his father. This couple of seconds of temporary happiness immediately vanishes as this scene is merely just a read of a letter to his father. In fact, Ki-Taek remains in his previous basement-home with basically no chance to receive anything greater in life.
Boong is trying to highlight here that the universal “pull-up by your bootstraps” mentality when it comes to leaving your socio-economic class, can be falsified. Through cultural hegemony, those in power can indirectly solidify their position within this socioeconomic hierarchy.
This great fallacy of the social order is that all individuals start with equality of opportunity and therefore only need to put in a little bit of hard-work and willpower to reach the upper-echelons of society. The Kims try to work within the system by adjusting into their new subordinate position to reach that echelon. However, this really just boils down to false consciousness with the conflict between the lower-class characters in the film competing to keep their subordinate positions. Parasite highlights that ‘parasitism’ is not only seen with the poor to the rich rather also the rich to the poor. These jobs that the Kim family has are close to the wealthy but even their higher and more stable wages do not make them leave their class. Instead, the work and emotional exploitation of the Kims really just benefits the Parks.
In the final minutes of the film, we are presented with Ki-Taek left encapsulated in the bunker and Ki-Woo sitting in his basement-home. In fact, they don’t escape this hegemonic social order; they are trapped in it. Unlike Boong’s three previous international features, this ends in the bleakest position for the powerless in society. In Snowpiercer (2013), an oppressive system is changed and overthrown. In Okja (2015), an oppressive system is retained but the main characters are able to escape it. However, in Parasite it ends where the oppressive system is retained and the main characters remain trapped in it. In the last shot of the film, Ki-Woo shares a look with us. He appears saddened, tired but somehow optimistic about the future. However, we know something about this reality that he doesn’t.
