The infamous kiss episode of What’s Wrong with Secretary Kim isn’t “wrong” in a simplistic sense, but its perceived problems stem from a complex interplay of audience expectations, cultural nuances surrounding consent, and the specific narrative choices made regarding the characters’ trauma and emotional development. It reflects a common pitfall in romantic comedies: sacrificing character depth and sensitive pacing for heightened dramatic tension and instant gratification.
Deconstructing the Dissonance: More Than Just a Kiss
While the series as a whole is widely beloved, the kiss episode, specifically Episode 9, often elicits criticism. These criticisms typically center around the perceived imbalance of power dynamics, the rushed nature of the central characters’ relationship progression, and, most importantly, the potential misrepresentation of trauma recovery through romantic entanglement. Viewers express discomfort with the perceived pressure Secretary Kim feels to reciprocate the CEO’s advances despite her own unresolved feelings and personal boundaries.
The show, at its core, is a romantic comedy. However, the darker elements of the characters’ shared traumatic past, especially related to their kidnapping ordeal, demand a more delicate and considered approach. By prioritizing the romantic “fantasy” trope over responsible representation of healing and mutual respect, the episode inadvertently creates a narrative that some viewers find troubling. This isn’t to say the kiss itself is inherently wrong, but the context surrounding it warrants closer examination.
Exploring the Nuances: Power, Trauma, and Expectations
Understanding the discomfort requires acknowledging the specific context. Young-joon, the CEO, is portrayed as possessing significant power and influence. While he genuinely cares for Mi-so (Secretary Kim), his actions sometimes reflect a lack of awareness regarding the impact of his position.
Mi-so, on the other hand, is portrayed as incredibly competent and professional. However, she carries the weight of past trauma and struggles with opening herself up emotionally. The series intends to depict her journey towards healing and self-discovery, but the kiss episode potentially undermines this narrative by suggesting that romantic love can automatically resolve deep-seated emotional wounds. This can be a dangerous and ultimately misleading message.
Furthermore, expectations play a significant role. Viewers often approach K-dramas with certain expectations regarding romance, humor, and character development. When the narrative deviates from these expectations, or when it feels rushed or insensitive, it can lead to disappointment and criticism. In this instance, the kiss, while intended to be a romantic highlight, triggered concerns related to healthy relationship dynamics and responsible representation of trauma recovery.
FAQs: Unpacking the Controversy
FAQ 1: Is the kiss episode actually problematic?
It’s a matter of perspective. While some viewers enjoy the romantic tension and consider it a pivotal moment in the characters’ relationship, others find it problematic due to the perceived imbalance of power and the rushed portrayal of their emotional development. The episode touches upon sensitive topics, and its execution isn’t universally well-received.
FAQ 2: What specifically makes the power dynamics questionable?
Young-joon holds significant power as the CEO. While his intentions are generally good, his position inherently influences his interactions with Mi-so, his employee. Critics argue that this power dynamic isn’t sufficiently acknowledged or addressed in the context of their romantic relationship, potentially blurring the lines of consent, even subtly. The feeling that Mi-so must reciprocate, even unconsciously, due to his position contributes to the discomfort.
FAQ 3: How does the episode relate to the characters’ shared trauma?
The episode risks trivializing the characters’ shared trauma. Both Young-joon and Mi-so experienced a deeply disturbing event as children. While the series aims to depict their healing journey, critics argue that the emphasis on romantic entanglement as a solution undermines the complexity of trauma recovery. It suggests a quick fix where a slower, more considerate exploration of their individual and shared healing processes would have been more appropriate.
FAQ 4: Is it wrong to enjoy the episode if I don’t find it problematic?
Absolutely not. Viewer interpretation is subjective. If you enjoyed the episode without feeling uncomfortable, that is perfectly valid. Entertainment is meant to be enjoyed, and different viewers will have different reactions based on their own experiences and perspectives. It’s important to acknowledge the differing viewpoints and engage in respectful discussions.
FAQ 5: Could the episode have been handled differently to avoid the criticism?
Yes. The writers could have dedicated more time to exploring Mi-so’s emotional state and allowing her to genuinely process her feelings before rushing into the kiss. A more nuanced approach that emphasized communication, mutual respect, and individual healing would have been better received by many.
FAQ 6: Does the Korean cultural context play a role in how the episode is perceived?
Yes. While the show is enjoyed internationally, the Korean cultural context influences perceptions of relationships and power dynamics. Some cultural norms might be perceived differently by Western audiences, contributing to the varying interpretations of the episode.
FAQ 7: Is the “CEO falls for his secretary” trope inherently problematic?
Not necessarily. The trope can be executed responsibly by acknowledging the power imbalance and ensuring that the relationship is built on mutual respect, consent, and genuine affection. The problem arises when the trope is used carelessly, without addressing the potential ethical considerations.
FAQ 8: Does this controversy ruin the entire series?
Not at all. The What’s Wrong with Secretary Kim series has many redeeming qualities. The overall storyline is engaging, the performances are captivating, and the series provides moments of genuine humor and heart. One controversial episode doesn’t negate the positive aspects of the series as a whole.
FAQ 9: What are some alternative approaches the show could have taken?
Instead of immediately focusing on a romantic kiss, the episode could have explored Mi-so’s internal struggles and her hesitation to enter a romantic relationship. Open communication between Young-joon and Mi-so about their fears and boundaries would have fostered a more authentic and respectful connection. Showcasing their individual healing processes alongside their growing affection would have resonated more deeply with viewers.
FAQ 10: Are there other K-dramas that handle similar themes more sensitively?
Yes. Numerous K-dramas explore sensitive themes with greater nuance and care. Shows like It’s Okay to Not Be Okay and My Mister delve into complex emotional issues and relationship dynamics with more depth and sensitivity, providing examples of responsible storytelling.
FAQ 11: What can viewers do if they feel uncomfortable with aspects of the show?
Viewers are encouraged to engage in respectful discussions, share their opinions online, and ultimately, choose whether or not to continue watching the series. Constructive criticism can help improve the quality of future productions.
FAQ 12: What is the main takeaway from this controversy?
The main takeaway is that even lighthearted romantic comedies must approach sensitive themes with care and consideration. The What’s Wrong with Secretary Kim kiss episode serves as a reminder of the importance of responsible storytelling, mindful representation of trauma, and the need for mutual respect and consent in any romantic relationship, fictional or otherwise. The controversy sparks a vital conversation about the responsibilities of creators and the expectations of the audience.