Talk:Dano (Korean festival)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a project to build and improve articles related to Korea. We invite you to join the project and contribute to the discussion.
	Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. Please help us expand this article.
	???	This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale.

	This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Buddhism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Buddhism. Please participate by editing the article Dano (Korean festival), or visit the project page for more details on the projects. Guidelines: Chinese Manual of Style - Naming conventions Indic Manual of Style - Naming conventions Japanese Manual of Style Korean Manual of Style - Naming conventions Tibetan Proposed naming conventions
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Article Grading: The article has not been rated for quality and/or importance yet. Please rate the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

No doubt, Dano festival is originally from China, not native. Fychao 03:42, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree. It's a shame that UNESCO recognizes Dano as strictly Korean.Erik-the-red

[edit] Wording

The current dispute on the page seems more semantic than anything else. Everybody agrees that the festival began in China, so we should be able to work something out, rather than just blindly reverting each other. There are significant grammatical problems with the version that James is trying to post, but if the thrust of his position is that the Chinese origin of the festival should be played up a bit, I think that's reasonable. It'd be nice to have a little bit of text describing the differences between Dano celebrations of the modern day and the celebrations of the past (when it was closer to the festivals of China), and the origin of those differences. Do either of you have any good sources for that? -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 16:35, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

The reason I don't agree with the edits done by James is clear redundancy like "The origin of the original festival originated from China". The same words are repeating in one passage. None say that Dano was originated in Korea. Besides, when adding a sentence, he didn't provide any explanation and reference before I pointed out. --Appletrees 16:48, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I propose: "The festival originated from China 2,500 years ago, Korean adaptation from the Chinese Dragon Boat Festival have unique features compare to the original Chinese festival. The similarities of the chinese and korean festival is, each celebrates the chinese poet Qu Yuan." The reason is that, 1: another reason is when i first read it, the impression is that it is telling me is strictly a korean festival. Simply, i was trying to clarify that it is not.2: Everyone agrees that it is a korean adaptation FROM the chinese Dragon Boat festival, it celebrates the chinese poet Qu Yuan (which the page did not clarify). Then what is wrong with my statement? [3: the sentence is clear, with an explaination stating it was originated from china (previously it lacked the information and therefore, i have provided an accurate information)

to conclude: my suggestion and edit is to make it easier for everybody who wants to know about as much of the festival concern. I do not see why my edit is in a way unaccurate or with malice. and yet appletrees, you have deleted my sentence "Korean adaptation from the Chinese Dragon Boat Festival have unique features compare to the original Chinese festival." too. You have not give an explanation. but rather, you have deleted with no grounds what so ever. James collins123 16:52, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

There are a few grammatical problems with that passage, and I believe that's the main basis of Appletrees's objection (though he/she can feel free to correct me if I'm wrong). If I clean it up a little, it could become: "The festival originated in China approximately 2,500 years ago as the Dragon Boat Festival, which celebrates the Chinese poet Qu Yuan. That aspect of Dano remains constant, but it has also developed other features which are unique to Korea." Would that be OK with the both of you? -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 18:24, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Also, looking at this from the outside, it seems clear to me that your edit is not intended to be malicious, and I don't think Appletrees believes that it is, either. It's just the kind of situation where it's easy for people to lose their temper, when they get caught up in the moment. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 18:24, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Hit bull, win steak's suggestion seems quite reasonable but some minor aspects should not be included in the article such as celebrating the Chinese dead poet. Korean people don't attribute Dano to his life at all because he suicided himself, whose action was not forgivable in Korea that strictly followed Confucianism and Buddhism. In addition, I've known that the origin of the festival is also mere assumption. In fact, Korea borrowed the superficial aspects of the Chinese dragon boating festival.

Dano is more like a sign of the beginning of the summer season in earnest and a wishful bliss for abundant harvests in coming autumn. Besides, there was no historical record on a boating competition held in Korea like the Chinese festival does. Koreans don't eat the same dish made with glutinous rice and red beans as Chinese eat on the day. Aside from the mentioned above, there are lots of different features between China and Korea regarding the festival.

In the middle of the edit wars, James repeatedly mentioned "Korean's adaptation", but the difference between "Koreans" and "Korea" is a striking contrast. "The Koreans" can be referred as Koreans in China (ex. some part of the Goguryeo territories are transferred to China), Koreans in Manchuria and Koreans in Korea. I wanted to avoid the ambiguousness. Nowadays, North Korea doesn't celebrate the traditional festival but South Korea does. And see this edit [1], James put "Chinese dragon boating festival" twice in the first introduction paragraph, which is regarded as a redundancy. Repeating "falls on the same day as Chinese...." is another example.

Besides, Dano became a Korean traditional festival long time ago and has distinctive characters from the Chinese festival. The excessive emphasis on the originality which James brings up doesn't help building the article in a constructive way. I mentioned it clearly in several times. To sum up, I generally agree with Hit bull, win steak's opinion. --Appletrees 20:00, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Your first reasoning that the Korean does not celebrate the dead Chinese poet is a POV. Both festivals celebrate the suicide poet and Confucianism and Buddhism is passed on to Korea from China. Both nations do not differ as significant as you suggest as Confucianism suggests loyalty to the sovereign which was the reason he died for. Dano and Dragon boa is a celebration for his loyalty and great work to the Chinese state.

I am aware of the different features of the Korean festival. But this does not make the festival unique. It is a Korean adoption of the Chinese dragon boat festival and it bares the same meaning. Give me a source that says Dano is not a celebration of the dead Chinese poet Qu Yuen or is not a Korean adoption of the dragon boat festival. Even the name of the festival bares similarities to the chinese festival (Dano, Duen Wu) (the korean Hanja and the chinese letters is exactly the same 端午), its on the same date and the celebrate the same story.

As with the grammatical mistake you point out. I have not made a mistake because IT IS A KOREAN ADOPTION of the festival; the article states “the festival falls on the same date as the dragon boat festival…” does not mean it derives from the dragon boat festival. It simply means it falls on the same date. Therefore, it does not bare the same meaning and your point of deleting my phrase becomes invalid. As with the usage of Korea and Koreans, It is a fact that ancient Koreans (regardless in the north or south celebrated the festival, so it is right to say Koreans celebrated the festival. What you can say is that in North Korea and South Korea has a contrast with the ancient time. However, you have to have facts backing that up.

some information in the article is not clear enough. There are children, young people and well as old people trying to learn and there is nothing wrong with putting the article as clear and informative as possible. This is to give a reference to all kinda of people, whether it is highly educated or not. We can not give an assumption of them knowing the exact meaning. We got to indicated to them what it exactly mean. Therefore, ambiguity should be a zero tolerance in wiki.

I have no problem with :Hit bull, win steak's modifcation of the new phrase. however, i think it can be clearer (mention the korean adaptation), the clearer the better the information provided for generations to come. We both agree is a Korean adaptation then there is nothing wrong with stating clearly that it is a Korean adaptation. As with :Hit bull, win steak's phrase, I agree to the change, however it shall be “Korean Dano festival adopted the Chinese Dragon Boat festival. The Dragon boat festival originated in China approximately 2,500 years ago, both festivals celebrate the Chinese poet Qu Yuan. That aspect of Dano remains constant, but it has also developed other features which are unique to Korea."

How is this? I am fine with the phrase "The festival originated in China approximately 2,500 years ago as the Dragon Boat Festival, which celebrates the Chinese poet Qu Yuan. That aspect of Dano remains constant, but it has also developed other features which are unique to Korea." :Hit bull, win steak suggested. This statement have not been misleading and factually accurate.if :Hit bull, win steak rejects my suggestion to my phrase, then i am happy to stay on the changes you mention previously in the discussion.James collins123 09:13, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

It seems that there's a point of disagreement about Qu Yuan's continuing involvement with the festival. I'm going to try and do a little bit of research here to see what I can find in source material. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 13:16, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your concern. I trust you with your just involvement. James collins123 13:27, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I found a Korea source saying it was the chinese poet who killed himself: (the sources uses korean pronunciation)

"Dano is the 5th day of the 5th lunar month, and is also called the Suri day or the Chunjungjul. The origin of Dano is said to go back to ancient China during the days of King Hwe and the Cho Dynasty. A subject named Gulwon, after falling into the traps of the treacherous, commits suicide at Myuklasu to demonstrate his faithfulness. This took place on the 5th day of the 5th lunar month. Since then, memorial services for Gulwon have taken place every year. This custom conveyed to Korea to become Dano." [2] James collins123 15:54, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Therefore, from the evidence above, tt is right to phrase “Korean Dano festival adopted the Chinese Dragon Boat festival. The Dragon boat festival originated in China approximately 2,500 years ago, both festivals celebrate the Chinese poet Qu Yuan. That aspect of Dano remains constant, but it has also developed other features which are unique to Korea." James collins123 15:55, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The discussion continues

Sorry for keeping you waiting, but I was very busy in life and distracted for other things. Well, from my point of view, you have your own POV that is far from NPOV. I read your all lengthy wordings and check the links, but you still fail to provide a source to verify your claim: Dano, the Korean festival celebrates for the dead poet. The brief description regarding the origin of the festival in the source only say how the festival originated in China and "conveyed" to Korea. That means that only the transmission of the festival from China to Korea. And I counld't find any source that Koreans have Dano to revere for him on the day. I only found that the origin is one of the existing assumptions and not a settled fact. Wiki should avoid "ambiguousness", because this is not a blog, but an encyclopedia.

I bet most of Koreans have never heard of his name and the assumption that is not my POV. Dano was considered one of the important festivals in past times, and settled down to Koreans' life, so that Koreans learn what is Dano and why ancestors regarded Dano so important from schools but never heard of the assumption.

Nowadays, except some cities or regions like Gangneung, the festival could've been almost disappeared after the Japanese occupation, so Korea has revived Dano in the relatively recent decades. In addition, the transmission of Buddhism and Confucianism from China to Korea is clear fact, but Koreans have strictly kept and practiced the religion and ethic rules in daily life. Even Joseon Dynasty has been termed a "Confucian state." [3]. China lost some native traditions and ethic rules so as to adopt the socialism and communism.

Jongmyo jereak is another example to compare the difference between Korean and China. The music and ceremony was strongly influenced by China, but Koreans adapted it with their own way and keeps the settled tradition unlike China. Furthermore, in seowons (Confucian study school) serve a ceremony to honor Confucius along with prominent Korean and Chinese ancient scholars. The assumption related to the poet is for Chinese, not for Korean. If Dano celebrates him, there should be at least one ritual existing anywhere, but that isn't true. Gangreung Dano je designated as a UNESCO intangible cultural property is to worship for local divines not the poet.

The annual Gangneung Danoje Festival takes place in the town of Gangneung and its surroundings, situated east of the Taebaek Mountain Range on the Korean peninsula.The festival includes a shamanistic ritual on the Daegwallyeong Ridge, which pays tribute to the mountain deity and male and female tutelary deities. unesco.org

Several other rituals held on Dano festival are to worship or honor local divines such as Daegwanryeong Guksa Seonghwang (대관령국사성황) or Muhojang (문호장). [4] The suicided poet's loyalty is not a slight concern of Korean people. And you're the one who proclaims the assumption also applied in Dano, so please find a source to prove your claim. Thanks. --Appletrees 22:10, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I am busy too so I can not reply fast. I guess you haven’t been reading the previous post PROPERLY, I am aware it pays the mountain deity and other gods. It is same with the Chinese festival where they worship other gods and meanings too. I have read both Korean and Chinese sources and even Korean sources states that the Dano festival does celebrate the dead Chinese poet. The Chinese festival also mean to have good harvest and a good year, but this does not mean the dead poet celebration is ruled out. You can not use your POV, "the majority of the Korean has not heard of the Chinese poet" is not a valid reason nor source. And even when the Koreans do not know about the dead poet does not mean the festival does not celebrate it. I know plenty of Chinese who do not know what the dragon boat festival is about.

However, what you stated does not rebut the claim that Dano is a celebration of the dead Chinese poet. Meanwhile, i have found a Korean sources saying so. You have no source that indicates Koreans do not celebrate the dead poet. What your sources say is it it celebrates other deities too. WHAT YOU HAVE JUST SAID ONLY SHOWS THE FEATURES OF THE DANO FESTIVAL. if you look closely: "The festival includes a shamanistic ritual on the Daegwallyeong Ridge, which pays tribute to the mountain deity and male and female tutelary deities." It even stated that the "the festival includes . shamanistic ritual...." which means it is stating the feature of the festival. NOT THE MEANING OF THE FESTIVAL.

As with so called Korean culture unlike china, it is not a relevant topic in this discussion. We are talking about Dano and not Korean culture overall. I am studying Far East Asian history and so far it has unique Korean features but not totally unique. You can not have something unique Korean if it derives from something else. As with Korea, It is not simply ‘conveyed’ but Korea was willing to sent scholars and emissaries to China and to learn from the Chinese and to take as much Chinese culture, religion, technology and language from China. I am well aware of the fact Korea is like a mini China, the dress, the written language, the architecture, beliefs, technology, tradition nearly everything that Korea borrowed from China but added some unique features. But this does not make it uniquely Korean. You can not say Buddhism is a unique Chinese or Korean because it is from India. Nor Dano can be a unique Korean because it is from China.

UNESCO does not state this festival is not originated from china nor it states it does not celebrate the death Chinese poet. But it does not matter what UNESCO says anyway. we are studying history not politics. it is well aware that Korean laid a claim to this festival while it was an Korean adoption to the Chinese festival. —Preceding unsigned comment added by James collins123 (talk • contribs) 13:30, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

I found a Korean source saying it was the Chinese poet who killed himself: (the sources uses Korean pronunciation)

"Dano is the 5th day of the 5th lunar month, and is also called the Suri day or the Chunjungjul. The origin of Dano is said to go back to ancient China during the days of King Hwe and the Cho Dynasty. A subject named Gulwon, after falling into the traps of the treacherous, commits suicide at Myuklasu to demonstrate his faithfulness. This took place on the 5th day of the 5th lunar month. Since then, memorial services for Gulwon have taken place every year. This custom conveyed to Korea to become Dano." [5]

This source clearly states that Dano celebrates the Chinese poet. And it is from a Korean source, if you say it is my assumption then you are clearly ignoring the facts that do not suit your needs. This is an encyclopedia; you can not ignore a source and twists its meaning. If it clearly state that it is, then it should be interpret and record as it is. Encyclopedia is a facts book and it shall be providing as much information from sources as possible for the readers to judge.

Linking a Korean language website as a source would only cause confusion and can not prove your point. Please, use English sources for English reading wikipedia pages. Every source I found, even on your own UNESCO sources states the festival is from China. Therefore, it is totally valid to state that the "Korean adaptation has different features...". so far you have not provided a single source to rebut my claim. What you have done is adding additional information on the Dano features. James collins123 13:22, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Why don't we leave this to Hit Bull, Win Steak to judge. We shall not complain on Hit Bull, Win steak's final judgment. As I trust that he is fair. James collins123 13:57, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

The source that James provided seems ambiguous to my reading. It might be saying that the festival is an annual celebration in memory of the poet, but it also might be saying that it's an annual celebration that's merely derived from the Chinese festival honoring the poet. Thus, the issue of Qu Yuan's involvement in modern Dano celebrations is not resolved there in one way or the other. Either way, though, the doesn't meet our guideline on sources (WP:RS), and can't be used within the article. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 17:07, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm trying to look for evidence that the modern Korean festivities include a role for Qu Yuan. I haven't found any yet, but I haven't exhausted all reasonable avenues of inquiry, either, so I'm reluctant to take too firm a position on the issue until I'm certain. I've also asked for input from Wikiproject Korea and Wikiproject China, in the hope that someone there might be able to shed additional light on the matter. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 17:07, 30 October 2007 (UTC)