"The Koreans"

Just finished reading this excellent book about the Korean people, their history, and their perspectives. It has been extremely enlightening. The author, Michael Breen, is British, and has formulated some ideas about this complicated country while carefully trying not to generalize.
For example: "For Koreans, a contract is part of the symbolism involved in beginning a relationship. The contract is only as binding as the personal relations. Furthermore, the contract may often be seen by the Korean side as only symbolising the relationship between those who signed it, not the two corporations. If relations are very close, then insisting on a contract can be taken as an insulting indication of mistrust. If contracts are broken, extra-legal channels are used to resolve a dispute. It goes to court only when all else has failed" (169).
Also: "Koreans have bought into a negative view of their own history in this century. They do not have a regard for their past, not just because it is painful, but more significantly because they do not know how to look at it" (24).
Last one: "...Koreans have a different idea of where their ego, and their rights, start and stop than we do. Korean family members merge into one another, interfering and clinging and depending to an extent that would drive us to the therapy group. Close physical contact is the norm. Infants spend half their day strapped to their mother's or grandmother's back. Prams and playpens are uncommon because they separate parent and child. Children have the same bedtime as their parents and sleep in the same bed until they're about five" (50).
I lied. One more: "Unification is the stated goal of both sides. An innocent traveller may wonder, then, why has it not happened? When asked this, Koreans of north and south tend to blame others--foreign powers, political leaders. In fact, the answer lies in the meaning of the division. Two options were created and one choice is to be. Unification is a win-lose affair. It is important to note that the two Koreas have not unified because, for both, each unification goal has meant the removal of the other side. The goal of the communists was a communist Korea; the goal of the anti-communists was a Korea without communists. Until now, the Koreans would not permit two states to exist. Even the various proposals that would officially allow two sides to exist until they gradually merge are designed as hostile, slow-motion takeovers" (244).