Assessment 3: Crime Story Essay — Systems, Memory & Justice

Systems of Truth in Parasite and “Medicine Woman”

Crime stories tell readers not just what happened but also whose version of the truth is allowed to prevail. Truth is not neutral but rather a constructed set of power relationships based on the influence of legal systems, social structures, cultural definitions, and the authority to speak about narratives. Crime stories highlight this dynamic and, therefore, how truth is itself the expression of power. In Bong Joon-ho’s film Parasite and the short story “Medicine Woman,” power is represented through tension between dominant and marginal perspectives, and therefore both works challenge our understanding of class structures and Indigenous knowledge within the context of creating a narrative. While Parasite illustrates the manner in which societal classifications create differing levels of access to visibility, belief, and credibility, “Medicine Woman” brings to the forefront Indigenous epistemologies in a manner that exposes the fallacy of allowing colonial or institutional authority to define truth based upon their institutional nature. As a whole, crime narratives are critical examinations of the making of truth, exposing the contingent nature of justice based upon who has it legitimized through their knowledge base.

Parasite debates whether or not the way we perceive things is disrupted by social hierarchy instead of reality. For the Kim family to get inside and take over the wealthy Park family household, it is not only based on what they said to be true, but also what the Park family perceives their own world to be. They don’t create elaborate lies, but rather they utilize what we already know about people’s views of class, professional status and educational attainment. When looking at an individual’s credentials, we see them as legitimate. When listening to someone’s accent, we take it as an indication of their legitimacy. The Park family has made a “truth” system based upon appearance, or looking wealthy, and what you can gain from cultural capital. Hence, the “truths” stated in this story are based on a person’s social position, not by evidence provided. This narrative illustrates how the structures of class inequality create an imbalance in the way people have “epistemic authority” regarding what counts as “truth.” As a result of this structure, people viewed as refined are given more credence than others viewed as being poor are made invisible or very much under suspicion.

The crime elements in the film are a direct result of how information is distributed unequally.

The Kims’ lies can be seen as less of a moral issue or transgression and more of how the Kims must lie in order to survive in a society that does not give them recognition. On the other hand, because of their wealth, the Parks do not need to question what they see; they are insulated from any repercussions by virtue of their social status. The inequity between the two families is particularly evident when the Park family discovers the hidden bunker below their house. The Park family’s understanding of their home has been turned upside down, as they now know that something (the truth) was beneath their feet. However, this discovery is still confined by societal perceptions of class. To the Parks, the former housekeeper’s husband is seen not as a human being with a past but rather as a contaminant, a “ghost” that disrupts the home. All the truths about him (his existence and suffering) cannot be understood or accepted by the Parks.

A bunker symbolizes hidden aspects of a capitalist system. It holds within its limits, the existence of people’s lives below ground (in the darkness). These individuals do not fit into the standard definitions of success, security, or acceptability as defined in societal standards for success; they live in an illegal state. When they commit crime during the garden party, it is not through an individual failing, but as a result of the larger societal structure pushing these people underground where they cannot exist. Once crime is committed, it is seen only as an isolated act of violence that happens out of the blue and has no connection to a larger, more pervasive history of systemic oppression and violence. The Parks Family experiences shock because crime is disrupting their manufactured reality; however, the future legal social truths that follow will protect the Parks Family, while failing to acknowledge the root causes created by a history of inequality.

“Medicine Woman” offers a different view than the Western European legal system. In this view, indigenous peoples have always been viewed as criminals by colonisers, and even criminals within their own countries. Therefore, the focus of the western medical system was always about punishment and retribution, while the traditional beliefs of the indigenous peoples were based on healing, remembrance and justice. The western system defined an individual based on the documents he or she possessed, as well as the diagnosis, punishment and treatment of a crime. By contrast, the authority of the medicine woman comes from experience, embodiment, as well as from tradition and community responsibility. The alternative nature of the medicine woman’s authority directly opposes the viewpoint of colonial authorities, who defined an individual as legitimate only if they had been certified and recognised through bureaucratic processes.

The narrative of “Medicine Woman” identifies a significant link between the violence that has taken place historically and the oppression of Native cultures today. The cycle of harm doesn’t occur at one particular moment in time but rather incorporates the effects of many generations who have suffered losses due to cultural destruction, deprivation of their land, and neglect from the dominant society. In this context, the practice of the Medicine Woman offers a means to re-conceptualise the concept of justice from solely a legal context to one that engages with issues of personal and community restoration. The western judicial systems fall short of providing adequate process and resolution for the depth and scope of historical harm experienced by so many Indigenous peoples. The practice of the Medicine Woman, in contrast, acknowledges the concept of trauma beyond official recognition and resolution, as it transcends the parameters of the modern legal system in terms of accountability for all types of structural violence that has occurred against Indigenous communities, regardless of perpetrator or time frame.

The narrative examines the issue of ‘who is allowed to speak authoritatively about harm’. Often, Indigenous peoples are excluded from institutional narratives and their knowledge is viewed as ‘superstitious’ or ‘anecdotal’; by highlighting the perspective of the medicine woman in ‘The Medicine Woman’, this text turns the tables on who holds the narrative authority. Rather than being discovered through investigation or created by institutions, the truth is something that needs to be carried, remembered, and shared generationally. The story questions the traditional conventions of a crime narrative that rely on rational deduction and closure through the legal system, and instead proposes that truth may also be partial and ongoing, and will not necessarily achieve a final resolution.

When compared, both “Medicine Woman” and Parasite demonstrate how power is maintained through the function of ‘systems of truth’. In Parasite, Truth is directly related to those who hold wealth and therefore have power over all things through their ability to control the resources available. In ‘Medicine Woman’, however, Truth has been contested throughout history along colonial lines and has created a dichotomy between instances of Indigenous Knowledge versus Institutional Authority. Together these two texts illustrate the existence of competing epistemologies in Criminal Narratives, demonstrating how both instances of violence are not viewed as isolated incidents, but rather part of competing interests for control over the definition of ‘justice’. In each case the definition of Justice will be shaped not by what transpired but rather which definition of ‘Truth’ has been accepted as valid.

Most importantly, both works resist any kind of closure. In Parasite, Ki-woo imagines buying the house and saving his father from the bunker; this fantasy is characterised as something that will never happen. The imagined outcome illustrates that inequality still exists and that the belief that there is money or social mobility is false. In this regard, truth does not reveal how someone can be redeemed; truth reveals how oppressive a system is to everyone involved. Similarly, “Medicine Woman” does not provide a way to find legal justice or validate anyone’s suffering through an institutional setting. Instead, if healing does happen, it will take place outside of the systems that have caused harm; therefore, since there is no closure in either text, both express their concern for justice systems where order is valued above equality.

These storys both ask the audience to participate in creating truth. Parasite asks viewers to challenge their own beliefs regarding class, work, and respectability. The film’s dark humour and changing perspectives leave no moral certainty, making viewers aware of how social conditioning shapes their views. “Medicine Woman” requires readers to question the limitations of their own understanding of knowledge. It prompts them to consider who they trust and why. In both of these examples, audiences are invited to take part in the process of building truth rather than simply accepting it as consumers.

Ultimately, the crime and mystery stories of Parasite and “Medicine Woman” illustrate that the basis of crime stories is always about authority: Who has the right to determine what is considered as a reality,whoserespective suffering will be acknowledged, and what is considered acceptable truth for society to accept. By showing how the mechanisms that create and determine the truth of an individual or group through the power of class and colonialism, these works portray justice as being a concept that is not only weak but also contentious. This transforms how readers/viewers understand kind of material on crime and mystery. It changes their understanding of how to think of justice, and therefore, challenges both readers/viewers to consider that truth is never just found; it is always determined who has the ability to determine the truth. As a result, crime and mystery narratives are also used as a form of critique of how our society functions, and the concept of justice is not possible until we identify and take apart the systems which define who can say what and who will not speak.

Works Cited

Bong, Joon-ho, director. Parasite. CJ Entertainment, 2019.

Grace, Patricia. “Medicine Woman.” The Sky People, Penguin Books, 1994, pp. 59–70. (If your course uses a different edition or page range, replace the book title, year, and pages accordingly.)