The Asia-Pacific Journal | Japan Focus Volume 11 | Issue 24 | Number 2 | Jun 16, 2013

1

Cosmetic Surgery and Embodying the Moral Self in SouthKorean Popular Makeover Culture 韓国のイメージチェンジ文化における整形手術と道徳的主体の体現

Joanna Elfving-Hwang

You only have to spend a day in Seoul to realizethat appearances do matter in contemporarySouth Korean society. Advertisements forvarious cosmetic surgeries are conspicuouseverywhere—from taxis (fig. 1) to publictransport and underground stations (figs. 2 and3), all evidence that the industry is booming.

Figure 1. Cosmetic Surgery QR codeadvertisement at the back of a Seoul taxi(centre) (photo: author)

In their worldwide survey of cosmeticprocedures performed in 2011 by boardcertified cosmetic surgeons, the InternationalSociety for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery (ISAPS)placed Korea in seventh place in terms ofnumbers of surgical procedures. That said,

Korea’s 250,000 recorded surgeries were easilyoutstripped by US and Brazil which topped thelist with numbers close to the 1 million mark.1

Nevertheless, Korea tops the list in the numberof procedures per capita.2 (This is borne out bya more recent report based on the ISAPS’sfigures published in the Economist.)

Even so, the actual figures are likely muchhigher since a significant number of surgeriesgo unrecorded: not only is the cosmetic surgeryindustry badly regulated (Holliday & Elfving-Hwang, 2012) but the clinical data included inthe ISAPS’s figures only takes into accountsurgeries performed by accredited surgeonswho form a minority of medical or medical-related staff who perform surgeries. Manybeauty salons and ‘health clinics’ offer smallercosmetic procedures such as facial fillers (e.g.Botox® or Retylin®), blepharoplasty and moleremoval laser surgery, which are not recordedas surgical procedures and are thus notincluded in the statistics quoted above.

Whi le research concerned wi th therepresentation of cosmetic surgery in popularculture and media in the West tends toprioritize gender or neoliberal consumeristdesires as the main explanation for individualsubjects’ apparent non-resistance andmalleability to conform to popular beautydiscourses (see more on this in Holliday andElfving-Hwang, 2012), this essay focuses onSouth Korean popular discourses on cosmeticsurgery to show that there are additionalcategories, ideologies and even moralprinciples that go beyond simplistic notions of

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 2

2

the body as an investment for individual,personal gain in the context of neoliberalcapi ta l i s t soc iety . In part icu lar , incontemporary South Korean discourses ofbeauty, care of self and cosmetic surgeryincreasingly link notions of ‘correct’ or‘appropriate’ appearance with performingadequately in society as a social subject.

Figure 2.

These embodied ideas of performing one’ssocial status through appearance are certainlynot new to Korea. In many ways, contemporarypractices can be said to build on premodernChosŏn-era practice of displaying social statusthrough class-appropriate clothing anddecorum, and the ways in which they areinterpolated in neoliberal discourses of self-improvement and class mobility are evident inthe ways in which cosmopolitan subjectivity isembodied through cosmetic surgery as a signof a desired class, social or gendered identity(Holliday & Elfving-Hwang, 2012). In someways the engagement with surgical practicescan be seen as a ‘democratizing’ practice, andthe rate of uptake in quite complex surgeries,such as the chin and mandibular anglereduction surgery (‘V-line surgery’), alsosuggest something of the trivialization of

associated risks in popular discourses aboutcosmetic surgery in South Korea and focuseson the possibilities that it portends.

Figure 3 . Adver t i sement a t a Seou lunderground station, with before and afterimages of rhinoplasty (photo: author)

In this essay, I will analyze the narrativestructure of a popular cable televisionmakeover programme, Let Me In, so as tooutline the kinds of social and culturalnarratives the popular media (and possibly thecosmetic surgery industry) put forward tojustify performing potentially life-threateningsurgeries on otherwise healthy bodies. Througha narrative analysis of the reality TV show, Iwill illustrate how contemporary Koreansubjects are effectively interpellated into a setof moral discourses of self-discipline, and evenfilial piety, to justify the presumed necessity forradical corporeal changes. These discoursescoalesce to promote the practice not as aninstance of vanity, but as evidence of moralfibre and responsibility that one ‘owes’ not onlyto oneself, but also to one’s parents or childrenas an expression of filial piety or parental duty.Within this context, I argue that thesediscourses embedded in the narrative structureof programmes such as Let Me In can be read

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 2

3

as symptomatic of the ways in which globalbeauty discourses can effect potentially highlydisciplinary (in a Foucauldian sense) practicesin culturally localized ways.

Cosmetic Surgery and Middle ClassIdentity

In order to contextualise the narrativepresented in Let Me In, it is useful to drawattention to the fact that cosmetic surgery is,by and large, represented either positively orneutrally in South Korean popular culture andmedia (with some notable exceptions, mainlyinitiated by feminist activist groups). While thefactors involved in individual subjects electingto undergo cosmetic surgery vary and canrarely be pinned down to one specific reason(Holliday and Elfving-Hwang, 2012), theperceived necessity to display the markers ofkwit’i (cultured appearance) as a sign ofconsumer middle class identity, emerges as ahighly affective force encouraging individualsto perceive aesthetic surgical intervention as apractical and normative option for self-improvement. Within this context, it is tellingthat the physical evidence of surgicalenhancement (rather than hiding it) in itself isbecoming a marker of social status and wealth,further emphasizing the instrumental way inwhich cosmetic surgery is presented in popularmedia and makeover programmes inparticular.3 Given that the cosmetic surgeryindustry is promoting and actively selling apractice that performs potentially life-threatening surgeries (such as facialcontouring, or calf muscle thinning that canpotentially cripple the patient for life) on bodiesthat are not in any conceivable way ‘ill’ or‘diseased’, it should be a hard sell. This way ofthinking about cosmetic surgery is re-enforcedin advertising as well, where ‘minor’ surgeries,such as blepharoplasty (double eye-lid surgery),tend to carry similar health warnings as earpiercing which emphasize the importance ofproper hygiene and care of self afterprocedures, thus placing the burden of

responsibility for successful surgery on thepatient.4 Tellingly, while the Korean ConsumerAgency reports growing numbers of cases ofconsumer complaints filed against clinics (evenif the number of successful claims is stillrelatively small, around 70 per year), theKorean Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgeryplays down potential risks of surgery, andstresses the importance of choosing aregistered hospital (sŏnghyŏng woegwa ŭiwŏn)for procedures.5 The onus here is entirely onthe patient to do their research well and toaccept the responsibility for any mistakes madein selecting a surgeon. Rather than recognizingthat any surgical procedure carries very realrisks of side effects that range from (but arenot limited to) excessive scarring or lastingnumbness, heavy bleeding that requires bloodtransfusions, haematomas (blood clots),secondary infections or necrosis (tissue death)to life-threatening complications such as heartattacks or pulmonary embolism that can lead tostrokes,6 the emphasis is put on choosing one’ssurgeon carefully..

Promotional cosmetic surgery marketingmaterial too typically points to the positivepsychological effects of successful surgery onthe recipient, and suggests that patients willfeel more positive about themselves when someaspect of their bodies that they are not satisfiedwith is ‘fixed’ to reflect particular normativebeauty ideals (Orbach, 2009; Blum, 2003;Davis, 2003), further emphasizing thetransformative narrative put forth both inadvertising and makeover programmes. 7

Reflecting this, the question for cultural andfeminist critics has revolved around whethercosmetic surgery is a constraining disciplinarydiscourse which produces docile bodies(Haiken, 1997; Bordo, 2003; Blood, 2005) or anempowering one. Both arguments are, from theoutset, compelling. On the one hand, surgerycan be perceived as an oppressive practice,implying that it is performed on individuals whoare unable to resist the compelling force of

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 2

4

prevailing beauty and health discourses. On theother hand, cosmetic surgery can be seen as aninherently empowering practice and, at least inpart, one in which individuals take action andare willing to risk their lives to guaranteeperceived success within their individualcircumstances, where certain appearances maybe considered as either a precursor or evidenceof social success (Bordo, 2003; Davies, 1995;Heyes, 2007b; Jones, 2008; Holliday andElfving-Hwang, 2012; Sanches Taylor, 2012). Incontemporary South Korea, the latter cannot bedismissed off-hand, particularly sinceappearance is not seen simply as a practical orpersonal issue but also, at least to an extent, amatter of social etiquette.8 For this reason, theaim is not necessarily to achieve beauty, but alook that is ‘right’ for a particular occupation orsocial position (see further on this in Hollidayand Elfving-Hwang, 2012).9 Reflecting thewider recognition of cosmetic surgery practicesas a matter of etiquette (yewi) and status, manypopular celebrities in South Korea quite openlyconfess to having had surgery – and evenendorse the services of a particular clinic thatprovided them with good service.10 Theseexamples suggest that cosmetic surgery isbecoming increasingly accepted as a way ofachieving an appropriate appearance, but thatis considered as a rational investment in one’sappearance that is informed by very practicalconsiderations (Holliday & Elfving-Hwang,2012). Consequently, in contemporary Koreansociety, the marketing of cosmetic surgery isdriven by the transformative promise of theprocess of ‘before-and-after’, as a source ofsocial capital and psychological well-being. Incontrast to Western discourses, however,cosmetic surgery is not typically represented asan attempt to create an appearance morecongruent to what is perceived as patients’‘true’ inner selves and ‘ inner beauty’(Featherstone, 2010: 195; see also Heyes,2006: 16).11 In this sense, cosmetic surgery inKorean popular narratives relates more to‘doing’ surgery for the sake of performing acertain social class or status (Sanchez Taylor,

2012; Jones, 2012), than it does to ‘becoming’more the image that one holds of one’s ‘innerself’ a result of having surgery .

Accordingly, the beauty industry in Koreamarkets a plethora of beauty treatments andpractices as a way of not only fixing flaws anderasing evidence of aging, but also to literallyembody the markers of middle c lassconsumerist success. Contemporary cosmeticsurgery advertising taps into the discourse ofconsumer identity, promising a celebrity lookthat signifies success to practically anyone whocan afford it – even if this necessitates turningto credit card companies to finance the desiredlook. Jung-ah Choi (2005) in her study of highschool students’ career aspirations in Koreaobserves that as ‘class becomes a fragilecategory in a consumer-led postindustrialeconomy’, class identity too emerges as aprocess rather than a predestined position.Choi notes that among the young people sheinterviewed, appearance is seen as essential forgaining employment in the customer-orientedwork place (which is perceived as attractive forits association with consumer capitalism), inparticular for students who do not considerthemselves to be academically exceptional.Choi’s research findings demonstrate thatstudents have internalized a discourse wherebyenhancing one’s appearance through surgery isunderstood to promote a meritocratic beliefthat success (and potentially evidence of socialstanding) depends on willingness to invest inbringing one’s appearance in line withprevailing (and often quite narrowly defined)beauty ideals.

Unsurprisingly, both the entertainmentindustry and the cosmetic surgery industry aretapping into this kind of globalized discourse inwhich bodies are seen and are represented asboth objects of investment and of individualconsumer desire. Yet an analysis of Koreanpopular media discourses reveals that ideas ofself-improvement are not simply grounded inWestern individualism. Quite the contrary, they

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 2

5

are also necessitated by the affective,intersubjective gaze of a social group (whetherit be the family or other group that the subjectidentifies with) which promotes a view that theindividual subject’s body is also representativeof the collective body of that group (Elfving-Hwang, 2010). In this sense, the cosmeticsurgery becomes a contemporary manifestationof yewi, which goes beyond and not simply autilitarian notion of gaining access to a socialgroup through imitating or assuming a certainlook – whether that be one of a kkotminam12 ora politician. Reflecting this, the narrative logicdeployed in popular media and in TV makeoverprogrammes assert that cosmetic surgery is notevidence of vanity, but quite the contrary,positive proof of willingness to invest in self inconsideration of others. Within this context,somatic subjectivity obtained throughengagement with surgery is seen as anexpression of moral self, rather than suggestinglack thereof (Heyes, 2007b). Yet this constantfocus on the moralizing, intersubjective gazealso creates a somatic system of disciplinarypower o f what Foucaul t re fers to as‘compulsory visibility’ (1991 [1975]: 187),heavily connected to ideas of legitimatemembership of a social group. In other words,Foucault maintains that through a process ofturning subjects into objects of ‘infiniteexamination’ in relation to how well theyconform to discursively created norms withingiven disciplinary regimes, the regime itself isconstantly refined, classified and fixed.Moreover, for each individual, success within agiven somatic regime depends on visibility, onhow well they fulfill the characteristics of, forexample, ‘a beautiful human being’ as laid outin a particular beauty discourse. It is withinthis context of intersubjective examination ofself and others that each individual isconstituted, as Foucault points out, ‘as effectand object of power’ (192).

TV Narratives of Transformation

While a significant literature on makeover

programmes sees this moral stance as relatedto the individual, Let Me In quite intentionallydraws not only on contemporary discourses ofbeauty, health and fitness, but also on Neo-Confucian ethical principles of filial piety.While I am not suggesting that cosmeticsurgery is in any way l inked to Neo-Confucianism per se (especially given that theprinciple of sinch'ebalbu (body, hair, and skin)prohibited any alteration of the body andbecause care-of-self and preserving the bodywere seen as important expressions of filialpiety), an analysis of this programme reveals acontradictory logic in which surgery ispresented as evidence of filial piety. Therelation between individual bodies and theconstant reminder of having to visually displayand perform a certain appropriate appearanceis a useful reminder of the level of how theconstruction of self-subjectivity is informed byconsiderations of compulsory visibility and howsuccess relies on how individuals positionthemselves within these beauty regimes both asobjects and effects of disciplinary power.

Let Me In, which was first aired on commercialcable network StoryOn in December 2011,follows the well-established format of Westernversions of this type of heavily edited TV‘reality’ show. In its narrative structure andvisual effects, it draws heavily on popularWestern makeover shows such as ExtremeMakeover (ABC, 2002-2007) and The Swan(Fox, 2004) in the US, and Ten Years Younger(Channel 4, 2004-present) in the UK.Sponsored by a major cosmetic surgery clinicbased in Seoul, it was advertised as a‘responsible’ makeover reality TV programmethat aimed to ‘help’ contestants by offeringthem free surgery and makeovers.13 Reflectingthis presumably egalitarian ethos, the surgeryhopefuls are typically selected from workingclass backgrounds14 and thus are unable tobear the considerable financial cost that majorsurgeries and enrolling in fitness and healthprogrammes entail.15 Aside from providing theprogramme makers with a platform that will

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 2

6

invariably yield positive results to thecontestant, it also makes visually compellingviewing. Overplaying of the contestants’ visualmarkers of relative poverty means that theoutcome of the process of pyǒnsin – the visuallymarked metamorphosis of the participant’sbody – makes for all the more dramaticviewing, emphasizing physical appearance as avehicle for complete psychological, physicaland, ultimately, social change.16

Each episode opens with a section in which thesurgery hopefuls seek to convince theprogramme hosts – the actress Hwang ShinHye and a number of celebrity makeover artistsand medical and beauty specialists (who are atthis point concealed from view behind a screen)– of their need to be transformed into a ‘mi-in’(literally: a beautiful person) (Fig. 4). As thecamera moves from the sympathetic faces ofthe presenters to reveal only the back of thecontestant, the contestant is invited to explainwhy she should be selected for a makeover.17 Atthis point the camera angle is used effectivelyto exaggerate the presumed physical‘hideousness’ of the candidate by initiallyhiding, and then very slowly revealing the full‘monstrosity’ the presumably offensive facialfeature, which in the majority of cases is asevere cross-bite or a prominent, squarejawline, occasionally accentuated by thecontestant’s overweight condition. Thecontestants are then invited to explain howtheir appearance affects their everyday lives.

In most cases the audience is introduced towomen who struggle with being overweightand feel isolated and disadvantaged in a societyin which ostensibly ‘everyone else’ appearsslender and beautiful.18 The contestants arealso invariably given a derogatory ‘nickname’that describes the source of their distress, suchas k’ŭn pawi ǒlgul (‘the large stone face’;Season 1, Episode 3), p’ŭrangk’ensyut’ain ŭltalm’ŭn kŭnyŏ (‘the girl who looks likeFrankenstein’; Season 2, Episode 2), kwemul yŏ(‘the monster woman’; Season 1, Episode 7),

and utji mot hanŭn yŏja (‘the woman whocannot laugh’; Season 2, Episode 8). While thisTV genre frequently utilizes direct cruelty toemphasize the necessity for surgery(Featherstone, 2012), the programme takesthis to the extreme in order to position thecontestants within the ‘cosmetic underclass’(miyong hawui kyegŭp) of those who areconsidered unable to succeed because of theirappearance and lack of means to fix theirperceived flaws.19

Figure 4. "She wants to go in and live a normallife like that but..." (A still from Episode 3,Season 1)

The contestants’ initial plea for surgical help isfollowed by a montage of a backgroundnarrative in which audiences are invited towitness the difficulties that contestants facebecause of their appearance. In the majority ofepisodes this involves scenes in which thecontestant lives in self-imposed isolation or isbullied by others.20 In one of the earlierepisodes (Ep. 3, Season 1), for example, thecameras follow a young student who isoverweight, and who has become a socialrecluse because of insecurities about her faceor weight. Scenes in which the candidate isshown to stand outside a university classroomwithout the courage to go in and partake inseminars are utilised to emphasize the realdistress that her appearance causes her (Fig.4). Back in the studio, the contestants’ self-

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 2

7

narratives emphasize that they are not vain,but simply unable to function in society ‘likeother people’ because of their presumablyoffending appearance. The contestants declarethat

’I wish to live like other people’,‘not to become beautiful, just to benormal’ (Ep. 3, Season 1);

‘Compared to normal people, myface is huge’ (Ep. 13, Season 2)

‘Just for once, I’d like to live like ahuman being’ (Episode 13, Season2)

Rather than questioning the logic behind thiscultural over-determination of the gaze thatalmost invariably seems to relegate thecontestants to a persona non grata, both themedical experts and presenters subject thecontestant to an examination of her physicalappearance that affirms her position within anaesthetic underclass, so that the medicaldiscussion about surgery becomes ‘aninstrument that combines hierarchicalobservation and normalizing judgment.’(Heyes, 2007b: 30) Tellingly, no reference ismade in this context to the potential healthrisks associated with being overweight so thatall consultations and discussions remain at thelevel of beauty aesthetics. As the contestants’bodies are examined against accepted beautynorms, they are interpellated within semi-scientific discourses that produce uncontested‘truths’ about somatic-aesthetic normativity vis-à-vis their bodies. These ‘truths’ in turn areused, in the narrative of the programme, toclassify and pathologise the contestants’presumably non-standard appearance as alegitimate index of social exclusion.

Family members are also given a narrativefunction in the structure of the programme toreinforce and legitimate the discourse of

exclusion based on appearance. Thecontestants’ parents are shown to apologize totheir children for passing on ‘faulty’ genes totheir daughters (‘pumo-rŭl jal mot manassǒ’),and also for lacking the funds to ‘fix’ these‘faults’ through surgery (again enforcing theidea of the existence of a ‘cosmetic underclass’of those who cannot afford to fix their flaws).Within this context, appearance is constructedas the key source of domestic discord, fueledboth by the contestants’ lack of self-disciplineto diet or self-confidence to function properly intheir everyday lives and parents’ guilt aboutnot being able to do anything to put it right.(Fig. 5).

The central place of the family in this part ofthe programme reveals an interesting gap inexisting research on cosmetic surgery in theWest, suggesting that in Korea an individual’sdesire to have cosmetic surgery cannot beunderstood simply as an attempt to overcome aconflict between the ‘outer self’ and anidealized image of a ‘true inner self’ (see forexample Heyes, 2007a). The way in whichsurgery is presented as external to self, yet atleast in part justified as a somatic sign of filialduty to one’s parents through a process of‘correcting’ inherited flaws through medicaltechnology, appears to both contradict the Neo-Confucian idea of sinch’ebalbu whilesimultaneously reaffirming its principlethrough the almost filial act of improving thegenetic material inherited from one’sancestors. This emphasis on the interplaybetween the desirability of a ‘surgical rebirth’as a way for an individual to succeed

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 2

8

Figure 5 “Why don’t we just die together?” (Astill from Episode 3, Season 1)

in modern society and the implied imperativefor parents to ensure that their children canchoose to do so certainly suggests an additionaldimension to somatic subjectivities within thepopular narratives of cosmetic surgerypractices in Korea to those seen in the Westernversion of the genre where such suggestions ofparental guilt are much less of an issue.

Dissecting Beauty

The somatic subjectivity that is expressed interms of acceptable appearance and not simplythrough conventional beauty, is reinforced inthe following part of the programme where themedical specialists (takdŏsŭ, ‘the Doctors’)discuss both the limits of surgical interventionand whether the patient will psychologicallybenefit from the proposed surgery. As thecontestants’ appearance is pathologised andmedicalised through labeling the body part thatcauses them concern as a deformity, the‘necessity’ of medical (surgical) intervention isestablished. The panel consists of cosmeticsurgeons, psychologists, a dental surgeon and adermatologist, who proceed to debate whetherto operate on a contestant. While they offerostensibly value-free and judgment-freeopinions (‘the clinical perspective’), the focus oftheir deliberations is emphatically not onwhether the patient ‘needs’ surgery (after all,she is not medically ill), but on whether she willbe a good (enough) patient to ensure a

desirable outcome. At this narrative juncture,the audiences – both in the studio and at home– are drawn into judgment-making about theextent to which each contestant compares withthe normative somatic-aesthetic standards putforward in the programme. On one hand the,audience is being educated to deploy acosmetic gaze in assessing the contestant’s‘worthiness’ to be operated on (as well as toundoubtedly reflect on one’s own ‘worthiness’),based on her material and physical need(judged visually), and psychological need(demonstrated social ill-effects of her currentappearance). Effectively then, the audienceslearn to assess the surgery hopefuls (andthemselves) from the surgeon’s perspective,which focuses on what kinds of patients make‘good’ candidates for surgery.

The logic used by cosmetic surgeons inassessing patients in this programme dictatesthat everyone is a potential candidate forsurgery and thus ‘deserves’ it (if they have themeans to pay for it). It also suggests that thereare good patients (who have reasonableexpectations; can take pain and havewillpower) and bad patients (who are likely tobe unhappy with the results; who expect tohave it ‘easy’ or have no willpower to stick withthe after care and fitness regime required of agood patient, or even worse, who sue thesurgeon).21 This logic also shifts the onus forsuccess to the patient, as it is for thecontestants to prove that they are both worththe proposed makeover by not on lydemonstrating a ‘need’ for surgery, but alsofaith in the positive outcome of the surgery.Thus the burden of responsibility for definingsuccessful outcomes is effectively shifted to thepatient through managing their expectations.This gives the surgeons a power mandate thatany other kind of medical professional can onlydream of.

The final decision is revealed with the fullvisual drama where the dark ‘consultationroom’ divides into two: the thick screen

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 2

9

separating the two studios is literally tornasunder and the successful contestant isphysically ‘let in’ (in an intentional reference tothe title of the programme) as she physicallymoves into the brightly lit back studio wherethe delighted studio audience and the panel ofprofessionals are waiting to begin the businessof grafting the body of the contestant intosomething more acceptable. The visualvocabulary in these scenes (in particular inSeason 1), which draws the viewer to make asymbolic connection to Roman Catholiciconography on the last judgement, purgatoryand heaven,22 clearly emphasises the powerinvested in medical intervention: the contestantis literally transported from the purgatory ofpre-operative self to the biomedical technologyheaven of surgical knowledge and expertise(Fig. 6).

Figure 6. The backstage opens to a brightly litback studio (Episode 3, Season 1)

What follows is a short section in which thesurgeons inform the patient of what kind ofsurgery she is to receive (Fig. 8). (The absolutemandate given to the surgeons in thisprogramme is again quite breath-taking, and inmany ways emphasises the impression that theprogramme is very much about cultivatingperfect patients who submit to the surgeons’moral and scientific mandate in recommendingsurgeries most ‘beneficial’ to them).

Yet for the viewing audiences this moment is

presented as evidence of surgery as egalitarianpractice, because it presumably rescues thecontestant from social exclusion. This principleis constantly reinforced in the narrative, and asthe successful contestants begin an intensivethree-month fitness, diet, surgery and beautytreatment regime away from their families andin confinement, the editing of the programmeensures that audiences are constantlyreminded that the moral responsibility fortransformation (pyŏnsin) rests solely on thecontestants. The surgeons, dermatologists,fitness trainers and programme presentersfunction simply as ‘sovereign experts’ (Bordo,2003: 26), and scenes of actual surgeries andthe physical pain associated with the recoveryperiod are minimized, as are scenes in whichcontestants are styled for the final show.Scenes where the contestants go throughphysical discomfort as part of their fitness anddieting regime function as constant remindersof the necessity to cultivate a desirable mentalattitude toward the process of transformation(pyŏnsin), and underpin the ‘progressionistnarrative’ (Heyes, 2007a: 72) that positionssurgery as a means to achieve ‘normalization’.The process itself is inherently panoptic, andsubject to constant surveillance of theapproving or chastising gaze of the TVcameras, which witness any slip in self-discipline, training the contestants to expectand perform for the cosmetic gaze of the realand imagined audiences.

Figure 7. Consultation (Still from Episode 3,

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 2

10

Season 1)

Before and After: Rebirth through Surgery

The pivotal moment in the programme comes ofcourse when the contestant returns to thestudio after three of months of surgery,recovery, dieting, fitness training and styling –all of which is presented as evidence of herheroic battle to cultivate a strong will andattitude to bear the inevitable pain of thetransformation. Visual vocabulary throughoutthe programme is used to highlight thedramatic before and after images, and what isstriking about this particular programme is thatthere is never a suggestion in this narrativethat the pyŏnsin is about the surgicallyenhanced body being, as is suggested inWestern literature on the topic, ‘a site of truthreflecting the self within’ (Heyes, 2007b: 5)where the transformed body is presented as anoutcome of a process where the authentic andbeautiful self is externalized and made visible.Heyes notes that while ‘many cosmetic surgeryrecipients want to become (more) attractive,many (both qualitative research and popularrepresentations suggest) want to betterembody the kind of person they believethemselves, characterologically speaking, tobe.’ (Heyes, 2007a: 18). In Let Me In, there isvery little reference to any notion of any pre-existing ‘inner beauty’. Instead, contestants arequite literally presented as having been ‘bornagain’ (tasi t’aeŏnagi) into a new subjectivityembodied in the postoperative body. Within thisnarrative, then, cosmetic surgery is not simplyconceived as being a corrective practice, butconceptualized as the starting point of a newidentity altogether.23

Figure 8. The moment of 'rebirth' (A still fromEpisode 3, Season 1)

The visual vocabulary point is highly evocativeof an actual physical (and psychological)rebirth, particularly in Season 1. Eachcontestant emerges from a womb-like silopositioned at the back of the studio, from whichshe walks with confident gait to the brightly-litfront of the stage (Fig. 8). The camera lingerson the body of the contestant, almost revealingher face, only to rewind back again to show thetransformed body from a different angle. Thecontestant then steps onto a catwalk to revealwhat the host calls a ‘rebirth’ (tasi t’aeŏnagi) ofthe previously ‘hideous’ self into a mi-in (abeautiful person). The contestant is thenal lowed to see her newly s ty led andprofessionally made over look for the first timein the mirror as the audiences are given avoyeuristic once-over of her entire body inslow-motion. And again, the viewer is invited toa dialogic agreement with the programme hostsand studio audience, whose gasps of disbeliefare played on a loop to emphasize thepresumed sense of awe that we are invited towitness and participate in, through the shareddeployment of the cosmetic gaze which insistson the notion of subjectivity as essentiallycaptured within this somatic sign. The ‘beforeand after’ images of the contestants, displayedbehind the contestant in full view of the studioaudience and transposed next to the alteredimage of the contestant, are presented as visualproof of this possibility of a new subjectivity

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 2

11

(Fig. 9).

Figure 9. Before and after images of acontestant (Episode 1, Season 2)

Finally, the contestant is tearfully reunited withher parents (or occasionally a sister), and inthis scene we can see how the moralizingdiscourse of the process of the pyŏnsin takes itsfull effect (Fig. 10). The time away fromparents is presented as both a soberingexperience for the young contestant, and amoment of joy (and occasional bewilderment)to the parents who are shown as visibly proudof their children’s courage to withstand thepain associated with the period of recovery.This is intriguing, as the surgery here ispresented not only as a physical improvement,but a way to restore harmony within theparent/child relationship through somatic‘rebirth’. The previously offensive appearance(caused by lack of fortune) is projected as notonly v isua l ly d isp leas ing but a lso aphotographic reminder of the contestants’moral deficiency, whereas the process ofpyŏnsin comes to signify respect toward one’sparents, gained through hard work and pain, allof which are evidenced in the – often quitespectacular – after image of the pyŏnsin.24 Theparents’ approval and delight at the outcome ofthe surgery emphasises a much wider, sociallyaccepted idea that a non-standard appearance(as defined above) is a serious disadvantage inincreasingly competitive society and one that

parents have a responsibility to deal with muchas they invest in their children’s education. Thenarrative of Let Me In emphasises this filialdimension through scenes in which parentsrepeatedly thank their children for their hardwork (‘kosaeng-i manatta’), effectivelyreaffirming the process of cosmetic rebirth asan action that embodies filial piety throughacknowledging their children’s willingness tosubmit to physical pain as an act that erasesthe physical evidence of the parents’ inabilityto ensure their children’s future success.25

Figure 10. 'Reunion' with parents (Episode 3,Season 1)

Conclusion

As every episode ends in cheerful clapping andadmiring gasps from studio audiences whilecontestants and their families shed tears of joy,one might be tempted to ask what exactly is theharm in assisting underprivileged members ofsociety to function more effectively in society –even if it all is produced for the purpose ofcommercial gain and presented in the form oflight entertainment. Certainly, the contestantsare shown to be overwhelmed by the results oftheir often quite spectacular transformation,and the surgeries are shown to have produceda makeover that leads the individualsconcerned to better opportunities in life thanthey would have had without the surgery. Yetthis idea of comprehensive rebirth of the selfthrough surgery is clearly problematic, even if

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 2

12

it appears to promise transcendence of birth,lineage, family background, nationality andsocial class. While advances in biomedicalsciences and surgical techniques seem to offeralmost unlimited possibilities for somatictransformation, the unproblematic way inwhich these narratives suggest that success islinked to a set of narrowly defined visualsignifiers should certainly be cause forconcern. As the narrative of pyŏnsin analyzedin this essay shows, beauty is not presented asvanity, but as a form of cultural citizenship andsocial capital (Edmonds, 2010). What is more,an uncomfortable contrast is made herebetween ‘performers’ and ‘non-performers’:performers being those who work on theirbodies, are employed or study, and are sociallyactive; whereas non-performers are those whoare overweight, do not look after theirappearance and are unemployed/withdrawnfrom education or socially reclusive. 26

In the context of discussing British teenagegirls’ cosmetic surgery, Jacqueline SanchezTaylor notes that while cosmetic surgery can beunderstood ‘as a strategic act on the part ofwomen who are rational, intelligent agents,’she also calls for the necessity to ‘remaincritical of the structural context in which thisform of consumption represents either the onlyor the best strategy through which to attaintheir goals.’ (2012: 460) Similarly, althoughmost of the contestants would undoubtedlyagree that they had benefited from taking partin the programme in one way or another (someof the contestants having even become minorinternet celebrities),27 the unproblematicpresentation of the process of pyŏnsin as a wayout of the ‘cosmetic underclass’ raisesquestions about the increasingly centralposition that appearance is perceived to occupyby many (and popular media in particular) as amarker of social capital and moral fibre incontemporary Korean society. I argue thatbecause the practice of cosmetic surgery inthese programmes is inherently connected tomuch wider discourses of acceptable

appearance (and often kwit’i rather thanbeauty), it represents evidence of morality, asopposed to a lack thereof. In the context ofcontemporary Korean society, cosmetic surgeryincreasingly signifies not only investment inself, but also the embodiment of moral will. Ascontestants in Let Me In become visuallyacceptable, yet not necessarily out-of-this-worldbeautiful, this signifies that within suchnarrowly defined and intensely panopticcosmetic culture, only those who are able toachieve and perform a certain standard ofnormative beauty are entitled to legitimatemembership in civil society. Moreover, in thissense artificial beauty is alarmingly shown toevidence a certain degree of ‘authenticity’ ofcharacter which those who have let themselvesand those around them down (by failing toachieve these standards) have not reached.

To conclude, the narrative logic that informsLet Me In and other programmes like it (andincreasingly in representations of cosmeticsurgery in popular culture in general) goes farbeyond simplistic notions of beauty andsubmitting to fitness and health regimes as apersonal choice. Moreover, while the pressureto achieve beauty and perfection is in manyways not so different from the way in whichcosmetic surgery is becoming acceptedpractice in many other post-industrialconsumer societies (such as the US andAustralia), the importance that family is shownto play in decisions to undergo surgerycertainly suggests an added pressure, and onethat is readily utilised by the cosmetic surgeryindustry and the media. All these intersectingdiscourses work to normalize narrowly defined,artificially enhanced beauty ideals which worktoward a somatically performed moral normwhich is shown to require surgical intervention.This suggests that we may soon have asituation in which patients routinely approachthe surgeon in order to perform adequately insociety, rather than wanting to undergosurgery in order to become somethingextraordinary. As Shildrick (2008) points out,

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 2

13

this in turn may also lead to intolerance ofother kinds of difference such as those linkedto disabilities and gender. If normativity is thenincreasingly measured not by the degree towhich the body has been surgically modified,but rather by how well it conforms to the visual(and moral) norms of the current makeoverculture, then perhaps we need to start thinkingabout cultural discourses of cosmetic surgeryas a sign of a much more profound shift inemerging epistemological discourses of the selfin relation to the other in contemporary Koreansociety.

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Prof Mark Selden, DrRumi Sakamoto and Dr Laura Dales for helpfulcomments on earlier drafts of this paper, whichis based on a presentation I gave at theAssociation of Asian Studies Conference inToronto in March 2012. I am grateful to theaudience and panel participants (Dr RoaldMaliangkay, Dr Stephen Epstein, Dr JohnFranklin and Sun-Ha Hong) for their feedback.I would also like to thank the enthusiasticgroup of MA students at Frankfurt GoetheUniversity who enrolled in my “Theories ofPower” course in Summer Semester 2012.Their insightful observations opened up somevery lively discussions on cosmetic cultures inKorea, and I hope that this paper answers atleast some of the thorny questions raised in ourseminars.

Jo Elfving-Hwang (PhD, Sheffield University)is an Associate Professor of Korean Studies atthe University of Western Australia. Previous toher current appointment she was JuniorProfessor of Korean Culture and Society andDirector of Korean Studies at FrankfurtUniversity (Germany), and has also worked atthe University of Sheffield, Leeds Universityand Sheffield Hallam University. Her currentresearch and teaching interests includecultural representations of cosmetic cultures inSouth Korea, masculinities in South Korean

popular culture, and South Korean culturaldiplomacy and models of overseas developmentin Africa. Recent publications include amonograph tit led Representations ofFemininity in Contemporary South KoreanW o m e n ' s L i t e r a t u r e(http://amzn.com/1906876029/?tag=theasipacjo0b-20) (Dorset: Brill/Global Oriental, 2010);'Gender, Globalization and Aesthetic Surgery inS o u t h K o r e a(http://www.academia.edu/726850/Gender_Globalization_and_Cosmetic_Surgey_in_South_Korea)' (with Ruth Holliday), Body and Society18(2) (2012): 58-81; and a book chapter ‘Cross-border representations in North and SouthKorean Cold War Literatures’, in Global ColdWar Literatures: Western, Eastern andP o s t c o l o n i a l P e r s p e c t i v e s(http://amzn.com/0415885418/?tag=theasipacjo0b-20), ed. Andrew Hammond (London andNew York: Routledge, 2011), 44-57. Email:joanna.elfving-hwang@uwa.edu.au

Recommended citation: Joanna Elfving-Hwang,"Cosmetic Surgery and Embodying the MoralSelf in South Korean Popular MakeoverCulture," The Asia-Pacific Journal, Vol. 11,Issue 24, No. 2, June 17, 2013.

REFERENCES

Bae Chŏng-hŭi, `“Ret mi in 2“ yŏt’a meik’ŭ obŏsyo-wa tarŭn iyu‘ [‘Let Me In 2‘ and theDifferent Rationale Compared to othr MakeoverShows], TV Daily, September 5, 2012. Availablea t :http://tvdaily.mk.co.kr/read.php3?aid=1346834901382499019 [last accessed 18.02.2013]

Bordo, Susan (2003). Unbearable Weight:Feminism, Western Culture and the Body(Berkeley and London: University of CaliforniaPress)

Blood, Sylvia (2005). Body Works: The SocialConstruction of Women’s Body Image (Hoveand New York: Routledge).

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 2

14

Blum, Virginia (2003). Flesh Wounds: TheCulture of Cosmetic Surgery (Berkeley andLondon: University of California Press).

Cho Ok-hŭi, ‘”Ret mi in” Hŏ Ye-ŭn panjŏnwoemo-e kŭkjang kwangek-dŭl kamt‘an’ [‘LetMe In’ Hŏ Yen-ŭn’s Transformation AmazesMovie-going Audiences], Hanguk Ilbo,F e b r u a r y 1 8 , 2 0 1 3 . A v a i l a b l e a t :http://sports.hankooki.com/lpage/life/201302/sp20130218143157109530.htm [accessed20.02.2013]

Choi Jung-ah (2005), ‘New Generations’ CareerAspirations and New Ways of Marginalizationin a Postindustrial Economy,’ British Journal ofSociology of Education 26(2): 269-283

Davis, Kathy (1995), Reshaping the FemaleBody: The Dilemma of Cosmetic Surgery(London: Routledge)

Davis, Kathy (2003), Dubious Equalities andEmbodied Differences: Cultural Studies onCosmetic Surgery (Lanham: Rowman andLittlefield)

Edmonds, Alexander (2010), Pretty Modern:Beauty, Sex, and Plastic Surgery in Brazil(Durham and London: Duke University Press)

Elliot, Anthony (2008), Making the Cut(London: Reaktion Books)

Epstein, Stephen J. and Joo, Rachael M. (2012),‘Multiple Exposures: Korean Bodies and theTransnational Imagination,‘ The Asia-PacificJournal 10(33) , No. 1 . Ava i lab le at :http://japanfocus.org/-Rachael_M_-Joo/3807

Featherstone, Mike (2010), ‘Body, Image andAffect in Consumer Culture’, Body & Society16(1): 193-221.

Foucault, Michel (1991), Discipline and Punish,trans. Alan Sheridan (London: Penguin Books;first published in 1975 under the title Surveilleret punir: Naissance de la prison)

Grazer, F.M. and de Jong, R.H. (2000), ‘Fataloutcomes from liposuction: census survey ofcosmetic surgeons,’ Plastic ReconstructiveSurgery 105(1): 436-46

Haiken, Elizabeth (1997), Venus Envy: AHistory of Cosmetic Surgery (Baltimore: JohnHopkins University Press)

Heyes, Cressida (2007a), ‘Cosmetic Surgeryand the Televisual Makeover’, Feminist MediaStudies 7(1): 17-32

Heyes, Cressida (2007b), Self-Transformations:Foucault, Ethics, and Normalized Bodies.Oxford: Oxford University Press

Holliday, Ruth and Elfving-Hwang, Joanna(2012), ‘Gender, Globalization and AestheticSurgery in South Korea’, Body & Society 18(2):58-81

Jones, Meredith (2008), Skintights: An Anatomyof Cosmetic Surgery (Oxford and New York:Berg)

Jones, Meredith (2012), ‘Cosmetic Surgery andthe Fashionable Face,‘ Fashion Theory: TheJournal of Dress, Body and Culture 16(2):192-210.

Morgan, Kathryn Pauly (2009),‘Women and theKnife: Cosmetic Surgery and the Colonizationof Women’s Bodies‘, in Cosmetic Surgery: AFeminist Primer, eds. Cressida J. Heyes andMeredith Jones (Aldershot, UK: Ashgate): pp.49-77

Orbach, Susan (2009), Bodies (New York:Picador)

Rhee Seung Chul, Dhong, Eun Sang and Yoon,Eul Sik (2009), ‘Photogrammetric FacialAnalysis of Attractive Korean Entertainers’,Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 33: 167-174

Sanchez Taylor, Jacqueline (2012), ‘FakeBreasts and Power: Gender, Class andCosmetic Surgery’, Women’s Studies

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 2

15

International Forum 35: 458-466

Shildrick, Margrit (2008), ‘Corporeal Cuts:Surgery and the Psycho-social Body’, Body andSociety, 14(1): 31-46

Sŏ, Chŏnghŭi (2008), Sŏnghyŏng sobi munhwa[Cosmetic Consumer Culture] (Seoul: Naehach’ulp’ansa)

Suissa, Amnon Jacob (2008), “Addiction toCosmetic Surgery: Representations andMedicalization of the Body,” InternationalJournal of Mental Health Addiction 6: 619–630

Wegenstein, Bernadette and Ruck, Nora(2011), ‘Physiognomy, Reality Television andthe Cosmetic Gaze’, Body & Society 17(4):27-55

NOTES

1 See ISAPS Global Statistics 2011, available at:l i n k(http://www.isaps.org/files/html-contents/ISAPS-Procedures-Study-Results-2011.pdf) (lastaccessed 15.2.2013)

2 S e e : l i n k(http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2012/04/daily-chart-13) (last accessed15.2.2013)

3 For discussion on this in the Western contextsee: Meredith Jones (2012), ‘Cosmetic Surgeryand the Fashionable Face’, Fashion Theory:The Journal of Dress, Body and Culture 16(2):192-210.

4 In a recent article published in AlterNet(alternet.com), one young female intervieweelikened cosmetic surgery to a simpleapplication of appearance-enhancing non-surgical cosmetics, such as lipstick orfoundation cream. While this opinion is by nomeans representative of the whole population,it is indicative of the way in which manycosmetic surgery recipients distance

themselves from the risks associated with anyi n v a s i v e s u r g i c a l p r o c e d u r e : l i n k(http://www.alternet.org/culture/koreas-pop-music-explosion-fueling-plastic-surgery-boom)(Last accessed January 7, 2013)

5 l i n k(http://www.ksaps.or.kr/bbs/addon.php?addon_id=bbb01)

6 See the Australasian Foundation for PlasticSurgery for a list of associated risks ford i f f e r e n t k i n d s o f s u r g e r i e s : l i n k(http://www.plasticsurgeryfoundation.org.au/pat ient- information/procedures/cosmetic-surgery/). While it is difficult to estimate anexact number of deaths per year that resultdirectly from aesthetic surgical procedures, aUS study compares the mortality rate forliposuction alone with traffic accident relateddeaths in the US (1 in 5000) (F.M. Grazer andR.H. de Jong (2000), ‘Fatal outcomes fromliposuction: census survey of cosmeticsurgeons,’ Plastic Reconstructive Surgery105(1): 436-46.

7 According to current medical law in SouthKorea, it is illegal to use‘ before and after‘images in advertising any medical servicesbecause they may be construed as misleading(See #5 in Kukka bŏmryŏng chŏngbo sent’ŏ:l i n k(http://www.law.go.kr/lsInfoP.do?lsiSeq=106850#0000). Enforcing this law, however, hasbeen fraught with difficulty, as the KoreanNational Council for Consumer Organization‘sefforts to clamp down on illegal practices inadvertising demonstrate (See for example:Korean National Council for ConsumerOrganizations report on the widespread use of‘before and after’ images in cosmetic surgeryi n d u s t r y : l i n k(http://www.consumer.or.kr/magazine/mz_view.html?num=126) (Last accessed 15.2.2013)

8 Laura Miller has discussed the relationbetween linking the necessity to engage in

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 2

16

everyday beauty work with ‘creating acceptableappearance’ and beauty as ‘an expression ofsocial manners’ in Japan. Within this context,she argues that ‘beauty therefore is not simplya personal issue but a problem of publicetiquette’ (Beauty Up, Berkeley and London:University of California Press, 2006: 100-102).

9 Even politicians in high-powered positionsmay find it difficult to evade such a compelling,subjectivising gaze: former President LeeMyung-bak (2007-2012) reportedly disappearedfrom the public eye for a week in 2012 torecover from the after effects of a major hairtransplant. Grand National Party chairmanHong Joon-pyo had his eyebrows tattooed in therun up to the April 2012 National Assemblyelections, reportedly because his naturaleyebrows were not considered ‘imposingenough’ for a serious political leader.

10 For example, actress Shin Eun-kyun signedan advertising contract in 2011 with a cosmeticsurgery clinic that carried out mandibularangle reduction (jawline) surgery for her(Chosŏn Ilbo , November 2, 2011: l ink(http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2011/11/02/2011110201050.html)).

11 Heyes points out that a number of populardiscourses that relate to the care of self‘assiduously cultivate the notion that there isan inner authenticity to which each individualmust be loyal.’ (2006: 16)

12 Literally ‘flower-like beautiful man’, which isa term used to describe a generation of‘metrosexual’ young men (generally in theirlate teens and twenties) who take significantinterest in personal grooming, fashion andappearance in general. The beauty and fashionpractices the kkonminam engage in resemblevery closely those that the aimei nanren (lovebeauty men) in China and Taiwan and bishōnen(beautiful young men) in Japan practice,suggesting a pan-Asian ‘transnational bodyaesthetics’ discussed in Miller, 2006: 5).

13 ‘Makeovers to Be Normal, Not Beautiful’,K o r e a T i m e s , l i n k(http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/culture/2013/01/201_99387.html). See previews ofS e a s o n 1 h e r e : l i n k(http://video.interest.me/VOD/VODView/201107051010/249437/16631), and Season 2 here:l i n k(http://letbeauty2.interest.me/Index/2/Contents/View)

14 One episode in Season 2 also features twocontestants from outside South Korea: anethnic Korean from China, and a North Koreanrefugee, both of whom expressed a desire tosucceed in South Korea, yet felt unable to do sobecause of their ‘non-normative’ appearance.The episode is titled ‘Foreigners who find itdifficult to adjust to life in Korea because oftheir appearance’ (Woemo ttaemun-e hangug-echŏngj’ak hagi himdŭn ibang indŭl). In fact, theChinese contestant felt she was unable tosucceed as a pop-singer because of herappearance rather than simply havingdifficulties in functioning in everydaysituations, as was the case with many othercontestants featured in this programme. Seeoutline of the episode at Let Me In website: link(http://www.interest.me/content/origin/191490)

15 The kinds of full-body makeovers that thecontestants undergo (rhinoplasty, jawreshaping, breast augmentation, cosmeticdentistry treatment, liposuction, appointmentswith personal trainers and dermatologists) canb e e x p e c t e d t o c o s t b e t w e e nUS$40,000-45,000. The most expensivemakeover in Season 2 (episode 10) was worthUS$80,000.

16 In the run-up to Season 2, the programmemakers emphasized that the programme wasnot simply about beauty through cosmeticsurgery, but about holistic treatment ofcontestants who had an ‘appearance complex’so that they could ‘go out and live in society’.Bae Chŏng-hŭi, ‘“Ret mi in 2”yŏt’a meik’ŭ obŏ

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 2

17

syo-wa tarŭn iyu’, TV Daily, September 5, 2012.A v a i l a b l e a t : l i n k(http://tvdaily.mk.co.kr/read.php3?aid=1346834901382499019) [last accessed 18.02.2013]17 Although the cosmetic surgery industry inKorea increasingly serves men as well aswomen (see further on this in Holliday andElfving-Hwang, 2012), the fact that most of thecontestants in this programme are women(with the exception of one male-to-femaletransgender woman) indicates that at least inpublic, the visual spectacle of men engagingwith surgery may be, at least for the timebeing, considered as too much of a ‘femininepractice’ to attract big enough audiences.

18 In South Korea, ideal feminine beauty tendsto be very narrowly defined, and cosmeticsurgery operations aim to achieve facialfeatures that are as symmetrical and balancedas possible: an ideal beautiful face has ‘shorterlower face, larger eyes, smaller lips, and amore slender and oval shaped mandibular softtissue contour [jawline].’ (Seung Chul Rhee et.al. (2009), ‘Photogrammetric Facial Analysis ofAttractive Korean Entertainers’, AestheticPlastic Surgery 33: 167-174 (167). This beautyideal that seeks uniformity is perhaps bestillustrated in the recent discussion about near-identical looks of the contestants in the MissK o r e a 2 0 1 3 b e a u t y p a g e a n t : l i n k(http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2314647/Has-plastic-surgery-20-Korean-beauty-pageant-contestants-look-Pictures-contest-hopefuls-goes-viral.html).

19 Sŏ Chŏnghŭi, Sŏnghyŏng sobi munhwa(Seoul: Naeha ch’ulp’ansa, 2008), p. 20.

20 These scenes can occasionally be quitestartling. For example, in Episode 7 (Season 1),the contestant is shown being shunned by herown son because of her overweight. While thescene is obviously staged in this occasion, it isused to highlight the il l -effects of thecontestant’s appearance, but without anyreference to disapproving the clearly

inappropriate behaviour of her son.

21 See Heyes (2009), pp. 73-7.

22 Open-access examples of such can be foundf o r e x a m p l e a t : l i n k(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Fra_Angelico_0 0 9 . j p g ) a n d l i n k(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Backer_Last_Judgment.jpg)

23 This message is also reinforced in the firstwords that appear on the screen at thebeginning of Episode 1 of Season 1: ‘When yourappearance changes, your life changes’(woemoga pakkwi-myŏn insaeng-i pakkwinta)

24 In some ways this represents a discoursewhich is in line with both older discourses ofinterpersonal gaze as a way of gainingaffirmation of one’s identity within a givensocial context, whilst suggesting fragmentationof any reliable dogma about the self beyondnotions of somatic subjectivity.

25 In some episodes this aspect is somewhatplayed down where contestants have either lostcontact with their parents (Season 2, episode13) or they disapprove of surgery for non-aesthetic reasons, as in the case of atransgender contestant whose motherdisapproves of her decision (Season 2, episode3)

26 See Amnon Jacob Suissa, “Addiction toCosmetic Surgery: Representations andMedicalization of the Body,” InternationalJournal of Mental Health Addiction 6 (2008):619–630 (p. 623)

27 Hanguk ilbo recently reported that Hŏ Ye-ŭn,who appeared in Episode 6 (Season 2), has alsobenefited financially from her transformation,as she recent ly featured in a c inemaadvertisement for the clinic that performed hers u r g e r y : l i n k(http://sports.hankooki.com/lpage/life/201302/sp20130218143157109530.htm) (accessed

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 2

18

20.02.2013).