GoodDrama for your Android devices - free download  

AnimeToon.TV   GoodManga.Net

Medical Top Team Episode 16

Error! Embedding code not found for the host: embed.novamov.com

Medical Top Team Episode 16 English Sub

AnimeToon.TV   GoodManga.Net

Comments (178) ADD COMMENT

Avatar image

Shena

Good drama... It is different from other dramas which are made by Korean Directors. Little bit Romance with full of medical treatments... wowhh.. what a superb drama.. Well done!!! team. love it...
4 years ago . Report . Reply
Avatar image

chieshin

poor Chief Han. Dr.Park and Dr. Choi, please, i object for both of you! i am more happy if dr. Park will not end up to anyone(Dr.Choi and Dr. Seo) it is more like....i want Dr. Han and Dr. Seo, Dr. (minho) and Dr. Choi will end up together.
5 years ago . Report . Reply
Avatar image

SJun

Why do I have this feeling that Dr. Park's mother is the Vice President?
5 years ago . Report . Reply
Avatar image

abdz

All the comments below show how good this show is. In many other K-dramas most of the arguments are whether the show is better or not compared to others, or who is good in acting whether it has a good end or not.. blah blah blah. But here I was surprised to see a discussion beyond that. A discussion about the true massage of the show (I am not sure what I read here is the massage or not). People commenting here have gone out of the box. Whether the ratings are low or not, I think from the comments I read the show is a good one. It made the viewers use their brain to think issues other than romance, greed, power ... which is common in many shows. Good Job!
About 6 years ago . Report . Reply
Avatar image

UrsulaX

Lest I contradict myself, I am thinking of populism in a very narrow sense as advocacy for the people or the antithesis of elitism, as opposed to a specific political movement or party. I do understand the left-right representation and find it less objectionable than the capitalist-socialist argument in the sense that left-leaning politics attempt to mitigate social inequality, as Matt mentioned. However, right-wingers are not necessarily opposed to helping the disadvantaged or saving lives; charities are perfectly acceptable. They object to using the government to level the playing field. The characters in MTT, on the other hand, are debating the role the top team should play in helping troubled patients. Dr. Park is upset with the “lavish” hospital for its neglect and Chief Han for his “selfishness.” His dissatisfaction is not directed at the government or society at large. He is not criticizing class differences but the role those differences play in team/hospital priorities.
About 6 years ago . Report . Reply
Avatar image

UrsulaX

It’s actually a little frustrating that the show is not more political because we never see the underlying structural difficulties addressed. We’re restricted to Dr. Park’s insular idealism. If universal health insurance coverage has existed in S. Korea for over two decades, are the poor patients in MTT simply unable to afford the fees? Would a more political program advocate greater government regulations, subsidies, and incentives or private health insurance? The following article adds a little perspective: http://heapol.oxfordjournals.org/content/24/1/63.full
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

UrsulaX

Other links to references I mentioned earlier: http://www.oecd.org/korea/49818570.pdf and http://www.coopami.org/en/countries/countries_partners/south_korea/social_protection/pdf/south_korean_health_care_system.pdf
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

UrsulaX

http://www.coopami.org/en/countries/countries_partners/south_korea/social_protection/pdf/south_korean_health_care_system.pdf
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

UrsulaX

http://www.coopami.org/en/countries/countries_partners/ south_korea/social_protection/pdf/south_korean_health_ care_system.pdf
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Philosopher

@UrsulaX - Why do I agree with others (e.g. MisterMr and Novus) that Dr Park is Left-leaning. First to quote MisterMr: "The writer's left-leaning underpinnings are connoted. (Some here are too literal.) Park and his camp (won't call them his cronies) are portrayed as do-gooders, humanitarians, proponents of social justice. On the other hand, the capitalists/pragmatists are profit-driven flip floppers and elitists, to whom healthcare is a business." I have said that I agreed with MisterMr.
About 6 years ago . Report .
Avatar image

Philosopher

As a proponent of social justice (for instance, where healthcare ought to be fairly accessible to all) Dr. Park is by default an advocate of socialism, or at least he stands *closer* to this end of the socio-economic and political spectrum. That puts him on the left of the spectrum. This conclusion is probable since it's logically and reasonably inferred from the drama. (In aesthetic appreciation, a critique must be 'logical, reasonable and relevant'.)
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Philosopher

If reading too much into the film is a crime then I am guilty as charged. But I stand on my convictions - then and now.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Novus

You aren't alone..
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

UrsulaX

If one were to argue that Dr. Park and the Dr. Jang personified populism and cronyism, respectively, I would agree that there are a number of examples (you and others have provided a few) to support that claim. I like eLily’s comments about these two, as well, particularly concerning the “clash between idealism and pragmatism” (see earlier episodes). However, the show does not focus on the political and economic systems beyond the hospital either to suggest root causes of the problems or to promote systematic changes. The government is a nonentity. There is little implication that cronyism is dependent on capitalism or that reallocation of resources via the state is the solution to inequity. While Dr. Park may lament a poor patient’s circumstances, he works at a private hospital and his approach is apolitical.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

UrsulaX

Instead of espousing political ideologies, MTT emphasizes struggle at an individual level. The fate of the patients who can’t afford treatment is left to the doctors, who must decide whether they are willing to compromise their positions to help them. It’s as if class disparities and power struggles are inevitable impediments that the protagonists must transcend by remaining humble, willing to sacrifice individual gain for the benefit of others, and faithful to the people and ideals that sustain them. In that sense, MTT owes more to Buddha, Confucius, and Laozi than Karl Marx or Adam Smith.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Philosopher

Therein lies the locus of the conflict. UrsulaX has approached MTT as a literary work (or relating to or dealing with literature - http://www.thefreedictionary.com/literary - which MTT isn't). We have approached it as art/aesthetics. From Wikipedia (a source of apparent repute to UrsulaX, so she won't mind my quoting it: 'Art can act as a means to some special kind of knowledge. Art may give insight into the human condition. Art relates to science and religion. Art serves as a tool of education, or indoctrination, or enculturation. Art makes us more moral. It uplifts us spiritually. Art is politics by other means. Art has the value of allowing catharsis.'
About 6 years ago . Report .
Avatar image

Philosopher

This is the philosophy of aesthetics. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aesthetics
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Philosopher

Aesthetics include music, FILM (movie, play, drama), dance, painting - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aesthetics
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Philosopher

As for, "I would agree the morality is pretty obvious, but what does the show actually say about politics?" My short answer: approaching MTT as art, I saw the drama as nuancing the politics of capitalism and Marxist (social) engineering.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Matt

I saw the characters playing out the Hegelian Dialectic: Park (Thesis) vs Han (Antithesis) to bring about synthesis (a 'meeting halfway' resolution to their conflict. You could call it the left vs the Right for want of a better term but it can lead to misunderstandings.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Philosopher

Right, Matt. Some of our colleagues ascribed the conflict in terms of capitalism vs socialism, for want of a better term. 'Thesis vs. Antithesis' is certainly a better terminology. You brought up a good point in another thread - something about innuendos pertaining to government intervention. This is the Synthesis. MTT does suggest that socialized healthcare is the solution to the inequity in the distribution of healthcare opportunities, an indictment on Capitalism as the source of poverty. And this is Marxist social engineering.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Matt

@UrsulaX - since Philosopher (FYI, I know this person very well) has stated he/she won't be back to debate with you, I guess you get to have the last say. Two points I would like to make if I may: you seem to have let the word 'connoted' go over your head. Are you deliberately being obtuse? Your dismissal of Philosopher's argument of MTT's political connotations makes the rest of your refutations a moot point.
About 6 years ago . Report .
Avatar image

Matt

I have adjudicated in inter-college debates for 20 years and I too can see how you are accusing Philosopher of things he/she has never espoused. And it appears to me that the only reason Philosopher appears to have brought up 'relativism' is that YOU first accused this person of taking an 'anything-goes' approach to art. That you are gratuitously rambling on about the internal inconsistencies of relativism when it was YOU who first accused him/her of being a post-modernist suggests that you have some reading comprehension issues. I am aware of Philosopher's worldview and I assure you that this person is not in favor of relativism. AAMF, he/she is more than aware of the flaws of this ism and has published several articles on them.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Matt

"However, there is nothing wrong with raising an objection if the story or writer does not seem to support a viewer’s claim." Can you see the irony of this statement in light of your arguments?
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Matt

Finally, with the permission of my colleagues, I have the dubious honor of revealing that for the past four weeks we have been engaging in a social experiment which has confirmed to us that there are people here who are plagiarists that blindly commit this crime of journalism. Our experiment has included making fallacious thematic claims about the existence in MTT of 'crony capitalism' and the socialism vs capitalism conflict. About 20 of us are involved in this experiment to expose the plagiarists. We thank all of you for inadvertently exposing yourselves with your participation.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Philosopher

Adddendum - UrsulaX, yu said, "I learned good literary criticism involves supporting a thesis with examples from the text." As a literature major, I agree with this statement. MTT, however, is NOT literature. MTT is not viewed as written material. It is (broadly speaking) an aesthetic piece of work. As someone who has read Philosophy of Aesthetics, I believe that MTT merits a philosophical approach in its appreciation.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Philosopher

Thank you, Matt.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

audri

why can't we respect each other's opinion?
About 6 years ago . Report .
Avatar image

UrsulaX

I never meant to be disrespectful. I think Philosopher and I misunderstood each other.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

audri

really? from where I stand one person did all the misunderstanding and accusing, sorry, my assessment of things.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

UrsulaX

Sigh. Maybe it would be better to just address Philosopher’s original comments directly: “I disagree with your contention that since drama lacks a social commentary it is not a satire.” That was not my contention, but we both already acknowledged that. “There are moral and political satires and Animal Farm is an example of a political satire.” Agreed. What does that have to do with the previous sentence? If moral & political commentary = social commentary and social commentary = satire, moral & political commentary = satire does not contradict the point Philosopher is criticizing unless moral & political commentary <> social commentary (hence my assumption). “The moral and political commentaries connoted in MTT are loud and clear;” I would agree the morality is pretty obvious, but what does the show actually say about politics? Does it criticize the South Korean government or its officials? Examples would be helpful. Animal Farm, for instance, was pretty specific …
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

UrsulaX

“what's more because one side (that of Dr Park and those linking arms with him) is more often than not portrayed in a favorable light, it becomes a Left-leaning commentary.” What does Dr. Park have to do with a left-leaning commentary? The connection is not as obvious as Philosopher implies. In fact, it’s one of the points we’re debating. “aesthetic appreciation is the function of the readers or viewers. An author's intended message while throwing light on our understanding of the aesthetic work is only secondary.” That’s debatable. When it comes to interpreting Animal Farm, for example, I think Orwell’s thoughts on the Soviet Union are more insightful than the thoughts of some random reader with no knowledge of Russian history …
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

UrsulaX

“I feel that if viewers believe there is a Left vs Right and capitalist vs socialist message in this drama, it is in their right and they should be respected for their opinion.” What does that even mean? Was anyone denying them that right or disrespecting anyone? Is disagreeing a form of disrespect? You do not respect someone for a flawed argument; you respect the person regardless by sharing your concerns in a cordial way. “Indeed the setting is a Korean hospital; nevertheless MTT's Internet audience is an international one; genre fans have the right to relate the story's moral and polemical within a global context.” No one’s denying anyone’s rights. However, there is nothing wrong with raising an objection if the story or writer does not seem to support a viewer’s claim.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Philosopher

UrsulaX - let this be my final reply to you as this is wasting my time. I had erroneously assumed that you held the idea that satires contained only social commentaries. I was making a correction to this error. You said MTT lacked a social commentary; ergo it was not a satire. I was pointing out that MTT contained moral and political commentaries (or innuendos thereof). I was not pointing out that moral and political commentaries were not social commentaries. In fact I am saying they are indeed social since I said I was agreeing with MisterMr and Novus whose posts had all been comments about the drama's social and political underpinnings.
About 6 years ago . Report .
Avatar image

UrsulaX

I argued that MTT lacks “irony and potent social commentary” (irony and potent being the key words) and expounded on that notion in my later posts, but I’ve beaten that horse to death. Anyone can look up the word satire, watch MTT, and decide whether it fits the term. I tend to think heavy-handed moralizing is pretty standard for K-dramas of this type, and the actors playing Dr. Jang and some of the other exaggerated characters tend to ham it up in other dramas, as well, so I have a hard time saying this is satire without saying the same of most shows. When I think of satire, I think of Dr. Strangelove, Stephen Colbert, or Animal Farm (as you already mentioned). I think of acerbic criticism in the form of irony or humorous ridicule. While my classification may be too narrow, Dr. Jang’s success in the MTT universe bothers me. Where satire would portray him as a fool, MTT makes him a contemptible villain with the power to suppress protagonists we are meant to take seriously.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

UrsulaX

In response to your earlier arguments, of course you do not have to explain why you think the show’s portrayal of Dr. Park is leftist, but it would be easier than picking apart my attempts to infer where that idea came from. When you originally mentioned respecting others’ right to an opinion, were you responding to some perceived violation of that principle? What does respect entail? To me, critical analysis can be a form of respect because one is actually taking the time to weigh and evaluate another perspective. Apparently, I was wrong to conflate respect and legitimacy, but why respect an invalid opinion? I prize expert opinions and substantiated or defensible positions over unfounded arguments. Am I alone? Also, you did argue that the show’s representation of Dr. Park leant its themes “left-leaning” connotations, so how was I wrong to conclude Dr. Park defined the show’s ideological stance from your perspective?
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

UrsulaX

I agree with miiura’s point about criticism, but by what criteria is an argument “reasonable, logical, and relevant”? I learned good literary criticism involves supporting a thesis with examples from the text. Likewise, good arguments use the source material to explain a particular position. It’s necessary to be literal when comments do not define frequently used terms in the same way, so I relied on online definitions in some cases to explain my reasoning. Most of my “red herrings” were conditional statements in which “you” could have been interpreted to mean anyone. I did not deliberately misrepresent you; I had very little to work with and your comments tend to be more critical than enlightening. Moreover, most of my arguments were not about you or art but terminology, approach, and context. I would agree art is subject to interpretation (as are some terms), but that interpretation should come first and foremost from the art itself. How else are we to expand our horizons?
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

UrsulaX

The arbitrary use of politically loaded terms warrants some criticism because polemical ideologies have appropriated words like “capitalism” and “socialism” to such a degree that they lose all meaning and inflame rather than enlighten discourse. Therefore, when someone argues that a position is capitalist or left-wing in a particularly vague way, I question whether it’s a valid opinion or the musings of an ideologue looking to pick a fight. I also question whether it’s meaningful to place the drama inside such a narrow box. South Korea’s healthcare system seems to pose some ideological contradictions, but I don’t know much about it. My initial emphasis on context and source was not to argue that an understanding of the country was necessary to appreciate the drama’s allegorical underpinnings, but rather to shed light on our own ideological boxes, which may obscure any message writers are trying to convey.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

UrsulaX

Finally, arguments in favor of relativism often seem disingenuous in their misrepresentation of the concept. Proclaiming no absolute right answer has absolutist undertones and is often used to either justify an anti-intellectual rejection of critical thought or to deny the existence of standards that are clearly in place. As subjective as the art world may be, for example, there are still works considered masterpieces and others deemed amateurish. There lies some frame of reference--some notion of what a masterpiece is--that informs each relative perspective. Therefore, relativism is not abandoning judgment but identifying the frame of reference used to make that judgment. In my argument, a specific definition of satire is the frame of reference used to establish whether the drama is satirical. It is possible to argue whether it is according to that definition, which is why you disputed the definition in the first place.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

eLily

And some people think this show is boring... LOL...
About 6 years ago . Report . Reply
Avatar image

tooth

heated debate can't make this drama any more engaging..don't deceive yourselves folks
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

UcallingMe

Nice try..
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

UrsulaX

@Philosopher: To stay within the character limit, I made some leaps earlier. You did not explain how the show’s portrayal of Dr. Park is leftist. Since I could only concede that the show had populist undertones, I tried to clarify how my position differed from yours. Since you suggested the socialist vs. capitalist argument was perfectly legitimate and characters like Dr. Park served to define the show’s moral compass, I was merely arguing that those characters should then support such thematic interpretation. The argument was poorly executed, however, and I was partly responding to other comments that had referenced Dr. Jang. Instead, I would argue that criticism based on examples from the series is superior to unfounded claims. Finally, my remark about genre conventions was alluding to my earlier argument: MTT lacks the wit and spirit of satire; the writers recycle popular characters and themes to further the plot and engage the audience, not to ridicule some aspect of society.
About 6 years ago . Report .
Avatar image

Philosopher

"You did not explain how the show’s portrayal of Dr. Park is leftist." Why d I have to? You are the one making a false claim about me. Please re-read my original posts.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Philosopher

"Since you suggested the socialist vs. capitalist argument was perfectly legitimate" - I made no such suggestion. I was defending others' right to an opinion.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Philosopher

"characters like Dr. Park served to define the show’s moral compass: - That's your argument, not mine.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

UrsulaX

Please rephrase your original post when you first referenced Animal Farm. I appreciate the fact that you responded to my original comment, but I clearly do not understand what you were trying to say.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Philosopher

Look, UrsulaX, I don't believe it's productive explaining anything to you because I think you want to be right, but there are no right and wrong answers in art/aesthetics (unless someone is totally absurd as in your Santa Claus analogy). Anything I have to explain concerning the issues, whether perceived, described or prescribed, would, I believe, go over your head unless you rid yourself of the assumption that there can be only ONE correct interpretation. It's not right answers that count - as we discussed below, it's what's reasonable, logical and relevant.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

miiura

as my professor told me, there's no right answer to understanding art like movies and TV. There's only what is reasonable, logical and relevant. Please chill everyone. You are all logical, reasonable and relevant (to the plot of MTT) cannot wait to read your comments to ep 17 next OK :) :)
About 6 years ago . Report .
Avatar image

Philosopher

Your professor is right. It's what I teach my students as well. And I know I sound combative in my comments so if I have been offensive or intimidating I apologize.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

heretic

...apology accepted, Philosopher :P
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

juohn

so gung-ho. thats why we should stick to comments about actors' good looks and acting skill. like this no quarrells and fights
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Philosopher

Really, @heretic? MY apology has been accepted? ;)
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

heretic

...what, Philosopher? What do I have to apologize for?
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

heretic

Some of you must be kidding me. (You know who you are.) There's no crony capitalism? MTT is not a satire 'coz irony is absent? 0-0 Do you think all the patients at Kwanghe University Hospital are wealthy? No. We have seen that little girl, Ba Wi, wasn't wealthy. Neither were the father and son in eps. 14-16. So who took sponsorship for their treatment in the end? Quite likely the government in the form of taxation. That's socialized medicine because that's the presence of government intervention; by logical inference the presence of crony capitalism cannot be dismissed.
About 6 years ago . Report .
Avatar image

heretic

....... (cont.) Or the sponsorship may come from donation by wealthy philanthropists. For all that Dr. Park may seemingly disdain about the business (profit making) side of healthcare, it's the revenue of businesses that helps pay for the treatment of the poor he so believes deserve equal opportunities to healthcare. Every poor patient Dr. Park treats owes his life to philanthropy. And that's dramatic irony for you. If anything I see MTT as a social commentary, and hence a satire, on both the Left and the Right.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

mrsKang

without coming across as taking sides I see it like this. Some of you are able to watch MTT and assimilate it to your experience, knowledge and education because you have lived longer, traveled widely and read a lot. The rest are limited in these such personal experiences and education ... so different conclusions are drawn from MTT based on different experiences and knowledge.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

heretic

@mrsKang -precisely - and it is this assimilation with an empirical understanding of an artistic work that makes appreciation of the work (such as of films, movies, poetry) subjective but interesting. We don't all watch MTT with an understanding of Korean healthcare - that's beside the point. We come to it with an understanding of our experience of healthcare in the context of our culture and location. So I appreciate the diversity of comments offered. What I find ignorant are the ones that try to silence the others with their "I-know-it-all" replies.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Philosopher

mrsKang, some are also too literal, which is a rigid and wooden interpretation of art. I prefer to approach aesthetics as allegory.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Philosopher

Let me qualify that I do not approach all aesthetics as allegory lest I am accused of taking an 'anything-goes-approach'.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Philosopher

@UrsulaX- "As a lone wolf, Dr. Park refuses to be assimilated into any organization, so the idea that he promotes government or any type of socialist collective seems wrong," -This is another straw man argument. Kindly prove that I have ever made this claim about Dr. Park. From what I have been able to conclude, you have put forward several strawman arguments that are invalid. IOW, you have put words in my mouth.
About 6 years ago . Report . Reply
Avatar image

UrsulaX

You used Animal Farm to suggest some satires (e.g., political satires) do not involve social commentary, am I wrong? I was refuting your argument. I can read between the lines and recognize prominent themes; I just avoid assuming those themes are a reflection of a specific world view when the series does not necessarily suggest that. I am not sure how you’re defining aesthetic appreciation here, but is there not a whole history of criticism and the different theories behind it? If I understand your anything-goes approach correctly, I could argue MTT is all about Santa Claus and nobody would have any business suggesting otherwise. Is that right? (Note: I am not trying to be condescending, but sorry if I came over that way.)
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Philosopher

correction to below: *condescendingly* adviced
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Philosopher

"You used Animal Farm to suggest some satires (e.g., political satires) do not involve social commentary, am I wrong?" Yes, UrsulaX, you have assumed wrongly. You are also raising several red herrings and more straw man arguments. Are you going to ignore my other questions (because talking about aesthetic appreciation and post-modern relativism is deviating from the points of contention I have with you)? If so, let's cease and desist and not waste each other's time anymore.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Philosopher

"If I understand your anything-goes approach correctly, I could argue MTT is all about Santa Claus and nobody would have any business suggesting otherwise.: - Again, straw man fallacy.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

UrsulaX

@Philosopher: Moral and political commentaries are forms of social commentary. If you look up social commentary on Wikipedia, you will find Animal Farm included as an example. Don’t get me wrong: MTT has some obvious moral and populist themes, but they’re so broad and conventional within the genre that it’s hard to argue anything specific is being criticized apart from greed and Machiavellian behavior. Also, while the left may lean towards populism, populism is not left-wing per se, and while viewers’ impressions may trump writers’ intentions, not all interpretations are equally valid. If you think the show pits socialism against capitalism, show how the two representations of good and evil, Dr. Park and Dr. Jang, reflect that agenda. As a lone wolf, Dr. Park refuses to be assimilated into any organization, so the idea that he promotes government or any type of socialist collective seems wrong, while the unscrupulous Dr. Jang would be self-serving with or without capitalism.
About 6 years ago . Report .
Avatar image

Philosopher

Exactly - glad you see that political and moral commentaries are social too. No need to preach to the choir; someone said below that some people here are too literal and you're one of them. The rest of us are reading between the lines. Mine is not the onus to prove anything since aesthetic appreciation as I have already said is subjective. This is a discussion board and I'm not paid to give lessons in that discipline. Furthermore, it would take too much time and space.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Philosopher

And I take offense to the fact that you have condescending adviced me to look up wikipedia, which is not a site I particularly count as reliable. I have read Animal Farm and I teach it at college level.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Philosopher

"If you think the show pits socialism against capitalism, show how the two representations of good and evil, Dr. Park and Dr. Jang, reflect that agenda". - This is a straw man fallacy.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Philosopher

"Also, while the left may lean towards populism, populism is not left-wing per se," Kindly show when I have ever argued this position?
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Philosopher

"MTT has some obvious moral and populist themes, but they’re so broad and conventional within the genre that it’s hard to argue anything specific is being criticized apart from greed and Machiavellian behavior." When did 'conventional' become a disqualification for classifying an aesthetic work? Careful you don't come across as an intellectual snob.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Anonyyyyym

Seo <3 Park ~ XD I want them together ~ lol. whatamisaying
About 6 years ago . Report . Reply
Avatar image

junior_surgeon

now we are almost at the end of the series. And every one seems can predict who will end up together...Sigh...as not happened as everybody wish... now let guess who is his mother, what will happen to VP and the fate of the team.
About 6 years ago . Report . Reply
Avatar image

gambatte

poor chief han :((
About 6 years ago . Report . Reply
Avatar image

heiiiu

park tae shin x choi ah jin? are you kidding? i want dr. park with professor seo! they're just too cute... but lately they seem just friends..
About 6 years ago . Report . Reply
Avatar image

arlene

nice drama I love dr park tae
About 6 years ago . Report . Reply
Avatar image

eLily

I agree with Ursula. I'm still not that convinced that it's about left vs right, socialism vs capitalism. If anything it seems to follow the usual fictional conventions of the underdog going up against the high and the mighty. A kind of David and Goliath story. That's probably how most people including the writer would see it. It was the case in Brain anyhow. Like it or not, people aren't that politically engaged. Anyway, I've really enjoyed this discussion.
About 6 years ago . Report .
Avatar image

eLily

I meant to say "most people".
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

UrsulaX

I have enjoyed it, too. I had a few additional responses to earlier comments from others, which I’ll post here since I can no longer add them to the posts below. @Novus: Exaggerated characterization is not the same thing as satire. Most of the characters in MTT are caricaturized to create the hero myth eLily mentioned, and I would argue that the show is lacking the irony and potent social commentary found in satire. I think Lutheran is correct about misunderstood terminology here. Cronyism occurs when promotion depends on relationships rather than skill. Friends promote friends. Crony capitalism is when businessmen are in league with members of the government and the two essentially scratch each other’s backs to get ahead. We have definitely seen examples of cronyism in this drama. I am not sure about crony capitalism; I have not been watching that closely, so I can’t recall whether government officials have been involved in hospital politics.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

UrsulaX

@socialismSukz: There are very few original arguments, but many existing perspectives deserve extra attention when they are neglected. I was not intentionally copying anyone (e.g., eLily and I were arguing different things, though we agreed on several points), and I thought the following main points differed from what had already been posted: (1) the villains seem to be exaggerated stereotypes to give the protagonists mass appeal rather than to further some trenchant satire on capitalism; and (2) any social criticism is linked to healthcare issues in South Korea, not the polemical healthcare debate in the U.S. From what I understand, the nature of universal healthcare in South Korea has actually perpetuated a “laissez-faire” market for medical services, so the socialism vs. capitalism simplification everyone loves does not apply. However, I am guilty of not citing my sources (JMAJ, OECD, etc.) on the state of healthcare in South Korea.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Philosopher

@UrsulaX - I am taking MisterMr's and Novus' position. I disagree with your contention that since drama lacks a social commentary it is not a satire. There are moral and political satires and Animal Farm is an example of a political satire. The moral and political commentaries connoted in MTT are loud and clear; what's more because one side (that of Dr Park and those linking arms with him) is more often than not portrayed in a favorable light, it becomes a Left-leaning commentary.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Philosopher

@eLily: aesthetic appreciation is the function of the readers or viewers. An author's intended message while throwing light on our understanding of the aesthetic work is only secondary. I feel that if viewers believe there is a Left vs Right and capitalist vs socialist message in this drama, it is in their right and they should be respected for their opinion. Indeed the setting is a Korean hospital; nevertheless MTT's Internet audience is an international one; genre fans have the right to relate the story's moral and polemical within a global context.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

marilyn

i think dr. choi and dr. kim are too young for their role as residents. plus, dr. choi character as being childish is also not in reality as doctor. it would have become better if she plays the role of a nurse, well, she's cute though.
About 6 years ago . Report . Reply
Avatar image

kpop

Full Episode eng Sub Download or Streaming: http://goo.gl/o7dmli
About 6 years ago . Report . Reply
Avatar image

Matt

@Novus, I thought so. Ack - I'm usually too lazy or tired to engage.
About 6 years ago . Report . Reply
Avatar image

Matt

@MisterMr, thank you. Your gracious response is appreciated.
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Kimber

Matt, if you don't mind my asking. RU Matthew Starr?
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Matt

@Kimber: No, why?
About 6 years ago . Report
Avatar image

Kimber

My apologiy - I was wondering. Disregard my query pliz.
About 6 years ago . Report
No html allowed. Max 1000 chars.
No html allowed. Max 1000 chars.
Only alphabets, numeric digits, underscore (_), and dash (-) are allowed. Min. 4 chars and Max 16 chars.
Anti spam code:
Please enter the character as shown in the image above. Alphabet case doesn't matter.
Max 500 chars.
Max 500 chars.
Anti spam code
Please enter the character as shown in the image above. Alphabet case doesn't matter.

Video Already Reported!

You have already reported this video.

Video Already Reported!

A guest has already reported this video using your current IP address ().
Max 500 chars.
Max 500 chars.
Anti spam code
Please enter the character as shown in the image above. Alphabet case doesn't matter.

Download Already Reported!

You have already reported this download.

Download Already Reported!

A guest has already reported this download using your current IP address ().
Max 500 chars.
Max 500 chars.
Anti spam code:
Please enter the character as shown in the image above. Alphabet case doesn't matter.

Comment Already Reported!

You have already reported this comment.

Comment Already Reported!

A guest has already reported this comment using your current IP address ().
Avatar image

name

cbody
timestamp . Report . Reply
Avatar image

name

timestamp . Report