The
Series (vols. 1 & 2) : 7 (of 10)
Vol. 2 continues the saga of Unamjung, Korea's premier
restaurant and the presumed (though fictional) heir to the
Royal Chef's kitchen. The descendent of the royal chef
himself is Sung Chan who was adopted into the Unamjung
family at a young age, though its owner and head chef kept
Sung Chan's real lineage a secret in hopes that destiny
would reveal the truth in its good time. But that truth
leaked early, causing distress for everyone concerned.
The basic thrust of the drama right through to the final
episode, all against the background of more than you could
ever want to know about cooking and Korean cuisine in
particular, is the resolution of the break between Sung
Chan, his brother and his adoptive father. In Vol. 1
(episodes 1-12), a series of cooking contests served to
determine the winner who would direct Unamjung's future. In
Vol. 2 (episodes 13-24) Chef Oh's natural (and older) son,
Bong Joo, continues his obsessive resolve to expand his
father's business to the rest of the world, though it means
(as it usually does) cutting back on quality.
For his part, Sung Chan continues his exploration of the
secrets of Korean cooking throughout Korea's cities, harbors
and countryside. From time to time this brings him in
confrontation with his brother, who does not take kindly to
Sung Chan's charming influence on his fiancée, Joo Hee,
whose story is expanded in these later episodes. The same is
true for Sung Chan's primary love interest, the ditzy, but
well-meaning reporter Jin Soo. Actually I should say that
Jin Soo is our love interest, since it takes nearly the
entire series for Sung Chan to finally admit to what
everyone else seems to be clear about. The young apprentice,
Shin Gaek, also makes a strong showing in the early episodes
of Vol. 2, bringing to the story some of the most compelling
drama in the entire series.
I'd like to use this opportunity to risk several
generalizations about the genre of Korean TV dramas of which
The Grand Chef is a prime example: On the one hand, there is
a compulsive avoidance of the conditional: No one ever says:
"I'll try" or "I'll do what I can." They say: "I promise" or
"Trust me." When things don't work out – as they invariably
don't since they make promises that aren't in their power to
keep – there is great loss of face and disruption of
relationship. The rest of the drama is driven by attempts to
regain favor by more promises that continue to fail to bring
about atonement and instead result in more grief or death of
the innocent. The series ends when the writers run out of
ideas or the producers run out of money, at which time, the
protagonist(s) admit the error of their ways and all is
forgiven.
The Christian ethic of how to live one's life is confirmed,
but it makes for exceedingly unsubtle drama. I don't mind
that we can anticipate how things will come out in the end –
I'm a sucker for a classic Hollywood melodrama – what I find
difficult is that I've had to put up with some pretty bad
behavior by one person or another for the length of the
drama – in this case, some 22 hours – before forgiveness is
offered and apologies are expressed. A person can live a
sinful life or treat others that love them with the grossest
disrespect, but in the end, all is forgiven. All's right
with the world. The story often does not offer a rational
explanation for why there should be a rapprochement – it
simply happens. Loose ends may or may not be tied up, but
forgiveness occurs only because the "guilty" party is now at
the end of his rope and there is no way to go but up – or
death – or both (see also my review of
The Snow Queen.)
On the other hand, there is an equally devoted avoidance of
the expression of positive feeling – especially by young
women and men in general. As in most Korean melodramas of
this type, this give way to what passes for comedy: a great
many hesitations, testing of
the waters and misunderstandings. It has a certain charm, to
be sure. Apparently, Koreans can't get enough of this
because matters don't usually get clarified until at or near
the end. It's one thing to do this in a two-hour movie, but
a 24-hour long series may be more than your average
Westerner can take. Be warned.
Finally, there is the subservience of narrative consistency
to emotional resolution. As happened in Palace, a more solid
series in my opinion, the producers were more concerned with
sorting out the emotional drama between Crown Prince Lee
Shin and Hyo Rin, his new bride, than with the legal
difficulties created by Prince Lee Yool resulting from his
act of arson. In fact, his criminal act was completely
forgotten at the end. Likewise, in The Grand Chef, a
big part of the dramatic crisis in the final episodes was
created by a bogus investigation into the financial records
of Unamjung and all its worldwide offices. This put the
restaurant's entire business operation on hold until . . .
well, until the final cookoff challenge, after which the
problem with the records magically disappeared. Once all was
resolved or forgiven between the principal parties, the
thorny problem of a legal investigation, no matter how it
was contrived to start with, vanished like the butter in a
baked potato.
The Psychology of Betrayal and Rage [SPOILER ALERT:]
My one difficulty with The Grand Chef in particular is with
the psychology of the character of Bong Joo and his
relationship to his father on the one hand and his adopted
brother on the other. It is only natural for there to be
jealousies between siblings, potentially more so between
adopted siblings. And I can well imagine in a culture where
respect for one's parents and ancestors is as powerful as it
is here that when Bong Joo learns that it is his brother,
and not himself, who is the true heir to the lineage of
royal chef, and that his father has always known this and
has essentially lied about this until the boys were into
their adult years, that Bong Joo would redirect his
animosities and feelings of betrayal from his father (where
they rationally belong) to his brother, who is entirely
innocent.
While the father is aware of all the grief he has caused and
feels an understandable, overwhelming guilt for his "crime,"
Bong Joo never comes to appreciate this fact. Once his
father dies – in effect, as a direct result of Bong Joo's
abreaction to his father's favor of Sung Chan – it is as if
Bong Joo's natural repository for his rage has died with him
and he is able to allow himself to accept and "forgive" his
brother (even though his brother had done nothing that
demands forgiveness. Bong Joo appears relieved and
determined to live his life from this point in a more
healthy relationship to Sung Chan, to his one-time fiancée,
and to Unamjung itself. Everything is as his father would
have wanted.
So what's my problem? It is that the psychological portrait
that I have painted, assuming it has validity, is not
supported by the narrative. We, the audience, are more in
touch with Bong Joo's conflicts than the writers. In
flashbacks, we see that the relationship between the
brothers is solid and that while Bong Joo readily admits to
anger with his father for having lied about who was who and
what was what, he never makes the connection between his
rage at Sung Chan and his father's betrayal. He never comes
to understand why his father chose the path that he did and,
for that matter, never does Sung Chan. It doesn't seem to
interest him. Once his father dies, Bong Joo's rage
dissipates, as if the only concern of the filmmakers was the
excuse for their characters to emote the broadest possible
range of feeling rather than to understand how they got
there. They rage, they endure and suffer, they accept. But
they understand very little. Perhaps I am seeking to impose
an Occidental ethic on what is still an Oriental culture.
But I am not convinced. It's not that I demand or expect an
analytical post-mortem, merely a minimal level of
self-awareness. Other Korean dramas (Alone
in Love,
Dae Jang Geum, The King and I) manage to speak at
length and insightfully about what makes people tick. It
strikes me as wrong-headed to avoid it so categorically when
the opportunity presents itself.
-
Leonard Norwitz