


































1

Medical Imperialism: Examining DiMoia's account of the Proliferation of 
Western Medicine in Modern South Korean history

Review by: Bryce Anderson

June 7, 2021

 DiMoia, J. (2013). Reconstructing Bodies: Biomedicine, health, and nation-building in South 
Korea since 1945. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.

John P. DiMoia critically assesses how medicine in Korea has historically navigated the 
complexities of imperialism and social change. Employing the term fragments to represent the 
various elements from which medical discourse in South Korea has been assembled from, 
DiMoia contends that historically occupied South Korea has a bifurcated medical epistemology 
and ontology. Assembling the book as case studies, DiMoia reveals how the dichotomy of 
Western and Korean medicine has infiltrated various areas of health and medicine, including 
public health and epidemics, embodiment, reproductive behaviors, biological sampling and 
reconstructive surgeries.

Beginning at the point in time of Japanese occupation of Korea (1910-1945), DiMoia explains 
that the presence of medical pluralism in Korean society--mainly, the dichotomy between Korean 
traditional medicine (influenced by traditional Chinese medicine) and Western biomedicine 
(influenced by American and Japanese imperialism) -- was cause for a range of confusion. The 
ambivalence created by this categorical confusion (2), has resulted in the unequal power 
relationship between Korean Traditional medicine and Western biomedicine. For example, 
DiMoia argues that the reason that traditional Korean medicine was suppressed with the new 
licensing system was the Japanese colonizers' eagerness to bring medical modernity to their 
colony (5). Moreover, upon the end of Japanese occupation, the American Military adopted a 
deeply ambivalent attitude towards traditional practitioners of Korean medicine (52), 
consequently replicating many of the choices made under Japanese colonialism (66). 

In providing an example of how medical knowledge and information is disseminated and 
proliferated, DiMoia demonstrates ideas about medicine and health originated from institutions 
in larger Korean cities, and consequently must travel through a difficult course to reach the outer 
limits of the country. For example, his framing of the ‘Minnesota Project’: a collaborative 
relationship between America and Korea that saw American medical technology and methods 
(i.e. surgery) be implemented in major hospitals in Seoul, the Korean capital. As DiMoia 
carefully highlights, this new medical technology did not immediately take hold and ‘convince’ 
citizens of its use, and proliferate throughout Korea; rather, it gradually made its way through 



2

public acceptance, beginning in inner cities such as Seoul, and eventually reaching outside to 
rural areas (albeit much later). Along the way, US medicine was constantly under scrutiny and 
suspicion, however, it did eventually gain wide acceptance and usage. 

DiMoia is able to capture the tension of the challenges that Western Biomedicine has brought to 
the 'Korean body' through exploring medical transitions such as the proliferation of plastic 
surgeries and reproductive technologies. Akin to the aforementioned dichotomy between 
biomedicine and Korean medicine, this is another instance of ambivalence that characterizes 
medical imperialism. For example, DiMoia examines how reconstructive surgeries intersect with 
Western influence, including the controversy and ambivalence that this brought to the ethics of 
changing eye-lid size. Furthermore, reproductive technologies brought by imperial powers such 
as America were experimented on Korean citizens, mainly women, leading to the exploitation of 
Korean bodies under a colonial regime.

While DiMoia masterfully crafts the Japanese imperial project, there is less here on the 
significant role played by the US in this regard. For example, DiMoia does make a point to 
acknowledge that the American military held an ambivalent attitude towards practitioners of 
Korean medicine. But could perhaps benefit from a more thorough unpacking of the motivations 
and goals of America proliferating power and knowledge throughout the Korean peninsula.

In spite of this, DiMoia’s book is an important study on how the imperial and colonial power of 
Japan have intersected with the Korean medical system. It is a clear demonstration of the 
networks of actors using the less powerful for their own personal and industrial gain. It is an 
argument against the natural proliferation of Western biomedicine, and an important framework 
of medical imperialism that has great use for further colonial studies. Furthermore, DiMoia’s 
contention that the Korean state has performed its own internal colonization, in 'leaving rural 
villagers (the “traditional”) behind for a new type of favored citizen: an ideal much cleaner, 
healthier, and disciplined' (226) is noteworthy. In sum, Dimoia’s analysis provides important 
evidence to show that Medical imperialism does not happen along a linear trajectory; rather, it 
intersects with historical context, cultural ideas about the body, international relations, and forms 
of identity. Given the pandemic of 2020 and the resulting homogenizing medical approaches, this 
contribution to understanding medicine as serving imperialism has lasting significance. 

Bryce Anderson is a Canadian PhD student based at Dalhousie University. His research focus 
on suicide, and more broadly health and the history of medicine, with a focus on South Korea.

© 2021 Bryce Anderson


