As it entered ‘Modern’, westerners began to consider themselves superior in comparison with uncivilized ‘savage culture’. Westerners represented Orient on the base of superiority or adapted it through the filter, Orientalism. So did westerners visiting Chǒsun in the period of opening harbors. The method in which westerners represented Chǒsun was in the frame of Orientalism. In truth, they also distorted the image of Chǒsun seriously, where there was westernerss' power-captivity willl toward strangers and strange things. It was missionary's representation system, travellers' ‘image violence’ and nation-centralism that made ‘Chǒsun image’ distorted. However, it assumed more complicated aspects than Orientalism by Edward Said. Though they are Orientalists, they tried to judge objectively and there are many diffeent perspectives and interpretations among westerners. Among their texts, there were culture-relativism and even culture criticism. It might be the result of culture contact or self-reflection through others. Even so, it is too simple if we accept the westerners' affirmative assessment or good impression on Chǒsun as it is. Therefore, we have to set three preconditions. First, as long as westerners, who have relatively affirmative image on Chǒsun, were confined into theoritical structure called ‘western versus orient’ or ‘western and societies else’, they were involved in Orientalism discourse. Second, mostly westerners obtained affirmative assessmests in the course of searching for the possibility of Chǒsun's civilization. Third, westerners' curiosity on difference and good will were through the angle of ‘downward’ or ‘merciful’ position. Westerners had sympathetic, but contemptuous attitude. Nevertheless, they showed refined perspective over Chǒsun's savagery and ignorance. And this was the unique method of viewing Modern. ‘Savage but civilized Chǒsun’, this was the westerners' primary perspective.

As it entered ‘Modern’, westerners began to consider themselves superior in comparison with uncivilized ‘savage culture’. Westerners represented Orient on the base of superiority or adapted it through the filter, Orientalism. So did westerners visiting Chǒsun in the period of opening harbors. The method in which westerners represented Chǒsun was in the frame of Orientalism. In truth, they also distorted the image of Chǒsun seriously, where there was westernerss' power-captivity willl toward strangers and strange things. It was missionary's representation system, travellers' ‘image violence’ and nation-centralism that made ‘Chǒsun image’ distorted. However, it assumed more complicated aspects than Orientalism by Edward Said. Though they are Orientalists, they tried to judge objectively and there are many diffeent perspectives and interpretations among westerners. Among their texts, there were culture-relativism and even culture criticism. It might be the result of culture contact or self-reflection through others. Even so, it is too simple if we accept the westerners' affirmative assessment or good impression on Chǒsun as it is. Therefore, we have to set three preconditions. First, as long as westerners, who have relatively affirmative image on Chǒsun, were confined into theoritical structure called ‘western versus orient’ or ‘western and societies else’, they were involved in Orientalism discourse. Second, mostly westerners obtained affirmative assessmests in the course of searching for the possibility of Chǒsun's civilization. Third, westerners' curiosity on difference and good will were through the angle of ‘downward’ or ‘merciful’ position. Westerners had sympathetic, but contemptuous attitude. Nevertheless, they showed refined perspective over Chǒsun's savagery and ignorance. And this was the unique method of viewing Modern. ‘Savage but civilized Chǒsun’, this was the westerners' primary perspective.

Orientalism, Representation, Civilization, Savagery,Missionary, Traveller