Oh Ha-young: 'I must face criticism for things I didn't do'

As actress Oh Ha-young becomes embroiled in controversy surrounding her great-grandfather's pro-Japanese activities, the issue has expanded into a debate over so-called 'guilt by association'—questioning how far descendants can be held accountable for the mistakes of their ancestors.

While Oh Ha-young herself did not engage in pro-Japanese activities, opinions are sharply divided on whether she bears responsibility for the criticism, given that she emphasized her ancestor's achievements while introducing her family history.

The controversy began when Oh Ha-young introduced her family history on the KBS 2TV show "Problem Child in House." During the broadcast, she mentioned that her family has been a lineage of doctors for four generations and spoke about her great-grandfather, An Sang-ho.

However, the atmosphere shifted abruptly after An Sang-ho's past pro-Japanese activities were revealed following the broadcast. Oh Ha-young's side reorganized their position and issued an apology after an initial explanation, and Oh Ha-young herself apologized via her SNS for her ignorance of history and her careless remarks.

Oh Ha-young later admitted her lack of awareness, stating, "I only knew fragmentary aspects of my great-grandfather's life through stories passed down by my family." She added, "I believe the fact that I did not know does not provide a reason to turn away from or lightly treat that history," expressing her intention to take her great-grandfather's mistakes seriously.

However, rather than subsiding, the controversy has moved to a new point of contention. Since Oh Ha-young was not a direct participant in pro-Japanese activities, arguments have been raised that criticizing descendants for the actions of their ancestors constitutes 'guilt by association.'

In fact, some have expressed the opinion that it is unjust to hold descendants responsible for the actions of ancestors that occurred before they were even born. Some Japanese media outlets have even characterized this controversy as a "modern-day guilt by association," criticizing the reaction of Korean society.

On the other hand, counterarguments are equally strong.

An online post garnered significant sympathy, receiving over 13,000 'likes,' with a comment to the effect of: "If you boasted about things you didn't do, you should similarly be prepared to be criticized for things you didn't do."

This argument differs from calling for legal or moral responsibility for the great-grandfather's pro-Japanese activities from Oh Ha-young personally. The core issue is whether it is appropriate to actively invoke an ancestor's positive history as part of one's own family history, while drawing a line to say it is unrelated to the descendant when the negative history included in that same record is revealed.

Ultimately, this debate sits at a point that is difficult to explain through the simple dichotomy of whether it is 'guilt by association or not.'

Legally, individuals are not held responsible for the actions of their ancestors. However, the counterargument is possible that the moment one introduces a family's history and achievements as part of their identity or a point of pride, the light and shadow contained within that history can also become subjects of discussion.

In particular, the issue of pro-Japanese activities during the Japanese colonial period is not a simple matter of an individual's past, but a complex issue intertwined with colonial rule, cooperation, and historical evaluations after liberation. Therefore, it is necessary to distinguish between demanding that descendants carry the sins of their ancestors and asking how descendants will remember and explain their ancestors' actions.

It seems Oh Ha-young was conscious of this point, as she did not use her "ignorance" as an excuse in her apology. While admitting she did not fully know her great-grandfather's life, she stated that such ignorance could not be a reason to ignore or treat history lightly.

The question left by this controversy is not ultimately whether sins can be attributed to descendants. It is closer to asking how much responsibility one has to look at the entire history when speaking of a family's honor.

While one should be wary of substituting an ancestor's mistakes for the sins of a descendant, an attitude that selectively inherits only the achievements of an ancestor to boast about while remaining silent on uncomfortable history can also be a target of criticism.

The debate surrounding Oh Ha-young is unfolding exactly on that borderline. If one does not equate the legal concept of 'guilt by association' with the social responsibility regarding historical memory, this controversy could lead to a more fundamental question beyond an actress's family history: how Korean society will remember the history of the past and pass it on to future generations.