1. Serendipity as the Blue Ocean of Local Culture Research

So far, in order to analyze Jeju culture, we have examined the theory of serendipity as 'I, Here, Now.' Although the concept of serendipity may seem unfamiliar, in that it reveals a hidden order out of chaos, serendipity can be analyzed through the framework of time, space, and the human, grounded in 'I, Here, Now.' Before analyzing Jeju culture, however, one more step must be taken: clarifying the significance of serendipity as a cultural theory and its significance as a research method for local culture.

A blue ocean can be described as a golden fishing ground in the sea not yet discovered, and serendipity is precisely such a blue ocean. Serendipity can become a blue ocean because it can further expand its creative character. Just as the humanities are in crisis in academia but flourishing in the market these days,[1] cultural theory too is in crisis in academia while becoming a blue ocean in the market. As is well known, cultural theory has been a major topic in the humanities and social sciences in academia since the collapse of Marxism. It is no exaggeration to say that postmodernism and post-structuralism as a whole are cultural theory. Yet, despite the proliferation of numerous theorists and theories, there has been no theory to unify them.

In order to find a unified cultural theory, efforts were also made to trace cultural theory back to its origins.[2] Although cultural theory became fashionable in the late 1980s, it in fact originated from Simmel, a contemporary of Weber active more than a hundred years earlier. Simmel's cultural theory is by no means inferior even to the cultural theories that emerged after the 1980s. In Simmel's time there was no structuralism debate, but two themes—understanding (Verstehen) and positivism—dominated the humanities and social sciences. This was the so-called emergence of Weber's 'interpretive sociology (Verstehende Soziologie),' and in response Simmel, through his cultural theory, gave birth to a discipline called 'formal sociology.' Culture is not something that can be known scientifically from a first-person viewpoint, as in positivism. Nor is it merely something knowable through the hermeneutic understanding between you and me, as in 'interpretive sociology'; rather, it is a third-person matter, like a form that transcends such understanding. Culture is a third-party phenomenon, like serendipity, that arises by chance in order to mediate the tensions and conflicts among various forces.

As befits a pioneer of cultural theory, Simmel discovered both the contingency of culture and its third-party element. However, Simmel's theory was transmitted only to figures such as Benjamin and was then forgotten, though it is now being reappraised. If Simmel's argument that culture is third-party in nature is combined with later theories, those later theories do not in fact contradict Simmel's theory. Yet to fuse the two theories, one further element embedded in Simmel's theory must be clarified. That element is precisely resonance (感應). Resonance is the mutual relation that operates within a circulating world so that empathy, common patterns, and symmetry can arise.

Simmel called his own cultural theory 'formal sociology,' but he did not clearly explain the grounds on which such a formal sociology becomes possible. Marx and the neoclassical economists regarded human greed or the movement of capital as the basis of culture, but despite his sophisticated theory, Simmel failed to clearly explain the driving force underlying his own theory, and for this reason his theory was difficult for later theorists to understand.

The driving force of cultural theory that Simmel failed to explain can, from today's perspective, be called resonance theory. If culture arises from the compromise of colliding forces, the reason such collisions occur is the power of resonance. Because the members of a society who share a culture are constantly resonating with one another, the emergence of a mediating culture is indispensable. Cultural theory, therefore, is neither a mere instrument of ideological rule as claimed by communists, nor a system of social integration as claimed by capitalists, but rather a 'product of empathy.'

If one were to name the great masters of cultural theory after Simmel, they would include Deleuze, Baudrillard, Bourdieu, Foucault, and Derrida, who developed postmodernism. Through their research, we have on the one hand come to recognize the importance of culture, but on the other hand confusion has also arisen. As is well known, Bourdieu emphasized institutions, Baudrillard emphasized consumption, and Deleuze emphasized desire. The difference among them lies in which part of the process of empathy each of them focused on. Just as the modes of empathy differ among Korea, China, and Japan, culture also appears differently depending on where one focuses one's attention. Resonance theory can unify these theories into one. Ultimately, if culture is the product of a contingent compromise brought about by resonance, then its true nature is revealed only when culture is illuminated from the aspect of contingency.

Cultural theory analyzed through serendipity begins with how each of the creativity theories mentioned in Chapter 2—the law of circulation, TRIZ, and structurology—views culture. Looking first at the law of circulation, culture is regarded as an element of the third, expansion stage, following the first stage of economy and the second stage of politics. The view of culture under the law of circulation can be represented as the figure below. This figure expresses, through Oh Gwang-gil's law of circulation, a summary of the common features found in the law of circulation, which is characteristic of analogical thinking. The culture seen by Oh Gwang-gil's law of circulation is the culture of the expansion stage. Culture has a strongly shared attribute. Culture clearly has its own character and role, distinct from politics, economy, and religion.

[Figure III.1] The Circulation of Politics–Economy–Culture–Religion[3] [Figure III.2] Changes in the Law of Circulation

In the law of circulation, culture is the main issue that operates after starting from the economy and passing through politics. Korea, having achieved economic democratization and then political democratization, is now at the stage of gathering its will toward cultural democratization. Whereas the law of circulation shows the macroscopic weight that culture occupies within the overall circulation, TRIZ allows us to see the principle by which culture operates microscopically.

Compared with the law of circulation, TRIZ views culture as a process of problem-solving. Culture is the concentration of all problem-solving, and problem-solving is the resolution of contradiction. An example of culture as problem-solving is as follows.

`[Figure III.3] TRIZ Problem-Solving and Culture [4]

As shown in the figure above, once a method of resolving the contradiction is decided, it becomes a culture of non-smoking. The process of deciding on the method may seem accidental, but a TRIZ-like law is in fact applied. The circulation of time and space discovered in the law of circulation appears in TRIZ as the separation of time and space. To resolve the contradictory situation between citizens' freedom to smoke and public health, a separation of time and space is required. Accordingly, a smoking-restriction law should be made so that spaces for non-smoking and spaces for smoking are separated, and times when smoking is permitted and times when it is not are likewise separated. Structurology examines the culture analyzed by TRIZ from an even more multifaceted angle.

[Figure III.4] The Position of Culture in Structurology[5]

Looking at the figure above, the further one descends from top to bottom, the more universal it becomes. Since culture corresponds to meaning in terms of the law of circulation, culture in structurology likewise corresponds to meaning. Culture, situated at the intermediate stage between value and fact, is the entity that realizes principle and concept, and is thus in fact the most pivotal entity.

The cultural theory of serendipity integrates all three of these perspectives. Since each theory has its own individual merits, serendipity emerges only when the three are viewed together in an integrated way. This is why grafting serendipity onto each local culture is necessary for local culture research today.

The twenty-first century is the era of locality humanities and locality culture. Locality means regional characteristics, or the individuality possessed by each region. What determines the rise and fall of a nation lies in how distinctively it differentiates the character of its culture, and it is no exaggeration to say that Korea's future depends on how it differentiates the locality of Korean culture by the universal standards of the world.

The region is the place where the future of Korean culture is most acutely tested. For local culture, the survival of the region depends on cultural differentiation. Local cultural projects, once sluggish, are now gaining momentum for rapid growth thanks to the China boom. Korea is now facing a new opportunity to develop the locality of local culture into a global tourism resource.

Existing research on local culture has been polarized, concentrated on the uniqueness of local culture. In the end, the uniqueness of local culture is evaluated ambivalently. In reality, the uniqueness of local culture has failed to find a consistent explanatory framework and is thus regarded as somewhat mystical or undervalued. Such ambivalent evaluations only confuse readers and fail to specify what the growth engine of the cultural industry actually is. The locality of local culture must now be sought not in the uniqueness of local culture but in its universality.

The universality of local culture, like serendipity, avoids statistical methods and instead employs a deductive method. What distinguishes serendipity's method from conventional deductive methods is that, whereas the conventional deductive method excluded contingency, serendipity's deductive method includes contingency. The universality of local culture begins with the law of circulation, which asserts that locality exists within logic itself. In the past, only the logic of the center was put forward as logic, but as the law of circulation shows, numerous logics are logically possible. Developing a logic suited to 'I, Here, Now' and having its value recognized is the most important task in regional research.

The flow of local culture research can be understood through the history of the transformation of regional studies. As is well known, previous regional studies were conducted mainly from a sociological rather than a cultural perspective. Extracting territorially bound data about a region—its transportation, industry, tourism, and the like—was regarded as the main task of regional studies. As a result of the development of regional studies, many regions in Korea have come to possess abundant ethnographic data.

The reason sociological research was needed in regional studies is that, at the time regional studies were developing, Korean society was characterized by the stage of industrialization. Regions were interpreted as starting points of the industrial revolution, and sociological information capable of fostering manufacturing industries in each region was therefore important.

That the subject matter of regional studies has today shifted from society to culture is related to Korea's industrial stage shifting toward the service industry. What is now required of regions is environment and new cultural experience. Cultural diversity, which cannot be seen in cities, has become a precious tourism resource in the regions, and each local government has proudly presented its own distinctive local culture.

Because culture, by its nature, does not end with merely being viewed, it has continuity; however, turning culture into a sustainable tourism product requires accurate comparative knowledge of culture. Only by demonstrating what the differentiating cultural elements are and how they are more valuable can local culture gain competitiveness.

Furthermore, for local culture, the proof of identity was the issue raised first, but for cultural identity to be clarified, cultural theory had to wait until it was established as resonance theory. Once serendipity is established as resonance theory, new value can continuously be conferred upon local culture. Once culture is re-established as resonance, each local culture will be reilluminated as a culture that mediates resonance—that is, as a distinctive form of empathy—and this reillumination of culture will be able to contribute to tourism commercialization by linking to the strengths of each culture.