i am just here for the rants

1. Do you like ramyeon? But with the male characters lol

2. Fake boyfriend but ML came clean to FL’s parent on the same episode

3. FL’s parent badmouthing/not approving of the ML, which he overheard - DuSik confronted HyeJin’s dad and was understanding of why he said that PLUS THE DAD APOLOGIZED (I can’t remember recent kdramas with the parent instantly apologizing to the FL/ML)

4. Stepmoms - Hye Jin’s was actually cool

5. Fake drunk piggy backride to escape socializing

6. FL and ML childhood connection - they met as kids, in HS too and a theory that even when they were in college/as adults (or every 7 years)

7. Main character with trauma - seeks professional help

8. Main characters insulting each other but owns up to their mistake and apologize right away

9. Nosy villagers - who will actually support the fake boyfriend situation for the 30% discount

You make me want to breathe water, 20th of September 2021.

Arrrrggg I refuse to theorize for this show, but I can read quickly. So, theorists of Homcha, I read the story What Men Live By written by Leo Tolstoy (i.e., the main story in the book Dusik opens in Ep. 6). Here are my thoughts on it:

Summary:

The story follows a poor shoemaker, Simon, who rescues a man naked and out in the cold, Michael. Michael is not forthcoming about himself, but in spite of doubts about him, Simon and his wife bring him into their lives and teach Michael how to make a living for himself crafting shoes with Simon. He lives with the couple and their family for several years. Michael smiles only three times in the story, each discussed – once, when Simon’s wife offers him food, second, when a nobleman asks him to make him sturdy boots, and third, when he meets a woman with two daughters she adopted.

At the end of the story, it’s revealed that Michael is a fallen angel, punished by God. God ordered Michael to live as a man and find the answers to three questions. Each time Michael smiled in the story, he found one answer. Here’s the questions and each of their answers:

1. What dwells in a man? – The answer, Michael realizes, is love. He realizes this when Simon’s wife feels pity for him and feeds him, even though she is poor and worries about the next meal for her family.

2. What is not given to a man? – The answer is “knowledge of his own needs.” In the story, a nobleman spent his last day ordering sturdy boots that he wanted to last for a year, but he died before that day was over. The noble had no idea he was planning for a future that didn’t exist for him. Michael realizes that humans aren’t given knowledge of their future – and what they actually need for it.

3. What men live by? - This one is less spelled out, but basically, what men live by is love for other people, not their self-interest. Michael realizes the answer when he sees two girls who were adopted by a woman. Michael actually knew the girls from their birth, because as an angel he was tasked with taking their mother’s soul to heaven. Even though the mother of the girls begged Michael to spare her life because children “can’t live” without their parents, Michael realizes at the end of the story that the mother was wrong. They could live as orphans just fine, because other people stepped in to love and care for the girls. This leads him to realize people don’t live just for themselves, but for love.

I think it’s a lovely story that gets to the heart of Homcha, which is that self-isolation is bad, even if society is hard to manage and can be restrictive. Society and connection is what makes us human. We are weak without other people, but can shore up each other’s deficiencies and our lack of knowledge of the future together. The story spells it out towards the end. Michael summarizes:

“I understood that God does not wish men to live apart, and therefore he does not reveal to them what each one needs for himself; but he wishes them to live united, and therefore reveals to each of them what is necessary for all.”

Now, that’s the bare-bones summary of the story. But I feel like I can't ignore that Dusik put a picture of a family inside the book, too. How could this story tie to Dusik, his trauma, and his emotional isolation from others?

I am going to let myself theorize a tad. Sorry!

*** Pure Clowning Below ***

Dusik might be like Michael. He might feel like the fallen angel – someone that is still looking for forgiveness and is trying to live a good life to earn it. That’s why he learns a bunch of crafts (like Michael, who picked up skills quickly in the story), why he reads avidly and with a philosophical bent, trying to get at the core of something deep about life, why he helps the villagers for little money, building and supporting their community, and also why he doesn’t foster a relationship with Hyejin. He’s borderline ascetic with his personal life – possibly because he thinks he deserves it. Because he thinks he’s owed some punishment.

it’s there, isn’t it? or at least something like it, drifting beneath them like an undercurrent, a slipstream.

it’s how du-sik always notices when hye-jin enters or leaves a room. it’s how hye-jin knows he’s about to cry from a look. it’s how they sit at dinner, close, sleeves brushing, but not quite touching. it’s how hye-jin is half-turned to him in every scene, how du-sik is so aware of her anytime she’s near. it’s how she notices he’s hurt, how she notices he’s sick, how she turns to watch him walk away. it’s how he sees mi-seon at the set and then immediately looks around for hye-jin. oh, you’re going for drinks, for lunch? let me join you. never mind that i said i didn’t want to, that was before i knew you would be there.

it’s how their interactions must be casual, otherwise they have to give it weight, give it meaning. i’m going to call you a rhino when you bump into me, because otherwise i’ll have to think about how it felt to have you close. i’m going to bicker and laugh at you while our hands touch, otherwise i’ll have to look at you and i can’t do that. it’s the way the camera doesn’t linger every time they touch but only when it matters, only when they can no longer pretend that it doesn’t. your hands on my face; you leaning in to kiss me; you holding me while i cry, when i’m frightened.

it’s how they linger here, in this halfway place between love and indifference. when i nearly kiss you, i’m going to hit my head and call myself crazy. when i stare at you in the store, i’m going to shake my head and tell myself to get a grip. i’m going to call this anything other than what it is. this is not love; it’s just kindness or attention, and i don’t care that they all mean the same thing. just don’t make me call it love.

it’s how i can’t even fit it all in here, because otherwise i’d be talking about every second they look at each other. because isn’t that what love is? not something bright and blinding, but a constant, steady attention?