By
Andrew Doughman
November 2, 2009
One year ago, on Oct. 30, Joji Kohjima had been chatting with a friend when he saw it out of the corner of his eye: In the middle of Red Square, a man was drenching himself in gasoline.
Kohjima stood up from where he had been seated next to the obelisk and hesitated a moment before he could fully comprehend what was happening. Once he understood, Kohjima said he “instinctively” sprinted across Red Square toward the older man, who had just finished dousing his body in gasoline.
“When I got there, he stopped pouring it on himself and he kind of wiped his eyes so he could see, and he kind of looked at me as if to say ‘just stop, don’t get involved,’” Kohjima said. “I knew at that point that he was going to light himself on fire.”
Last Friday, one year later, a crowd including Kohjima gathered for a memorial upon the same spot where the man had covered himself in gasoline, lit himself aflame and burned, despite efforts from UW students to use water, fire extinguishers and even their clothing to put out the flames.
The man, later identified as In Soo Chun, had suffered burns over 90 percent of his body and died later that day at Harborview Medical Center. King County Medical Examiner authorities later ruled the 61-year-old former UW custodial worker’s death a suicide.
The event remains clear, even a year later, in the minds of those who saw it happen.
“I think I’m going to think about In Soo Chun just about every day for the rest of my life,” Kohjima said.
Gizachew Cassa, a UW custodian, knew Chun because they worked in nearby buildings.
“We all come here to have a better life, and this kind of thing happens … it’s just … I don’t understand,” he said in a phone interview with The Daily.
Cassa’s lingering astonishment and his desire to further understand Chun’s actions were two themes repeated again and again in speeches delivered at the memorial.
UW custodial workers and members of the group International Workers and Students for Justice (IWSJ) called for an investigation of Chun’s death. While Chun left no apparent note as to why he immolated himself in Red Square, speakers at Friday’s memorial asked the university to investigate whether Chun may have been protesting the treatment of custodial workers.
“[The media] did not bring up questions of what the work conditions were like or why he might have chosen such a public and dramatic way to kill himself,” said Ian Morgan, a member of IWSJ and a preschool teacher. “The coverage only focuses on his own personal issues.”
Several speakers argued that Chun, a Korean immigrant and naturalized U.S. citizen, may have killed himself in such a public place to make a statement, much as other Koreans have committed public suicide to draw attention to labor-rights issues in Korea.
Indeed, Chun Tae-Il, a 22-year-old factory worker, had also doused himself in gasoline and lit himself aflame in a Seoul marketplace in 1970. Chun Tae-Il, however, had died screaming “Obey the labor laws! We are not machines,” as he burned to death.
In Soo Chun left no apparent message.
Speakers at last week’s memorial also criticized the media, which they believed portrayed Chun as insane. One such criticism targeted UW spokesperson Norm Arkans, who called Chun a “troubled person” in a Seattle P-I story last year.
“I said ‘troubled,’ and that word was carefully chosen,” Arkans told The Daily last Friday. “I think anyone who goes to the extreme he did to do away with himself reflects a troubled soul. No one knows the depths of what he was going through.”
On the same note, Arkans also said there will be no investigation into Chun’s death.
“There’s no basis for any sort of investigation; nothing warrants that,” he said. “There’s nobody who’s going to be able to answer the question of why he did what he did.”
Reach reporter Andrew Doughman at news@dailyuw.com.
11 Comments
#1 Sean
on November 1, 2009 at 11:32 p.m.(Denver, CO | Unverified Name | UW Community)
Oh please, its QUITE a stretch for a union to try to tie this suicide to their conflict with UW. This man chose to kill himself in an ugly manner in front of students on campus. This is about where HE was as a person in HIS life.
It is also about how his actions effected many students who he forced to witness a violent event and several who tried to save his life. I think the union involvement with this is grossly disrespectful to the students who were forced to witness this and to the UW community as a whole.
#2 arielw
on November 2, 2009 at 9:14 a.m.(Seattle, WA | Unverified Name | UW Community)
Sean, where does this article mention a union's involvement with the memorial?
A video of the memorial is on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=d...
#3 Holland A.
on November 2, 2009 at 9:36 a.m.(UW Campus | UW Community)
I am also sickened that a political group is using this man's death for political gain, trying to draw connections to working conditions at UW to this man killing himself. I think that is a dishonor to his death.
I think it's great to hold a memorial service, but to politicize his death is awful.
#4 Luke
on November 2, 2009 at 9:50 a.m.(Seattle, WA | Unverified Name)
ariel: "UW custodial workers and members of the group International Workers and Students for Justice (IWSJ) called for an investigation of Chun’s death. While Chun left no apparent note as to why he immolated himself in Red Square, speakers at Friday’s memorial asked the university to investigate whether Chun may have been protesting the treatment of custodial workers."
#5 jenkins
on November 2, 2009 at 4:40 p.m.(Seattle, WA | Unverified Name)
Holland and Sean, were you at the memorial? If you were, you obviously didn't listen very carefully. The three dominant messages in the numerous speeches that former co-workers and other staff on campus gave were: 1) We mourn In Soo Chun's death; 2)This could have been anyone of us because of the working conditions we are exposed to; and 3) We must never let this happen again. To ensure this, we must organize together to fight managerial abuse and improve our situation. i gotta ask you, which situation is really a disgrace to In Soo Chun's life: Staff at UW stand together to remember the man and pledge their commitment to preventing further tragedy; or everyone pretending there is nothing wrong at UW, and later this year, we have another suicide? The memorial was very powerful and important, but the goal is to not have to do more memorials for other workers. Detaching an individual's death from the environment and society surrounding the person, as you two advocate, is a recipe for disaster. i wonder, do you really have In Soo Chun's or others' best interests at heart, or would you be fine with having more and more deaths and memorials each year, just as long as no one mentioned anything about the university or management?
Organizing to prevent future deaths is the highest honor former co-workers could pay In Soo Chun.
#6 Holland A.
on November 2, 2009 at 6:08 p.m.(Kirkland, WA | UW Community)
Jenkins, you are assuming In Soo Chun's death was a result of his working conditions, and calling for action to change those conditions, based on his suicide. That is politicizing his death, because we do not know why he decided to commit suicide.
Also, to say working conditions at UW will lead to future deaths is sophomoric. If the UW working conditions are a breeding ground for suicide, then we would expect there to be other such incidents prior to and after In Soo Chun's. However, that has not been the case, and I suspect it will not be.
Many people have crappy jobs and crappy management, very, very, few decide to kill themselves over it. Most quit their jobs, or deal with, or something other than killing themselves. Thus to quickly assume that his job caused his suicide without any facts, other than your perception that conditions are bad is juvenile. Before you go around questioning my motives, look at your own.
Finally, I hope you are a custodial, if you are making statement like this, "we must organize together to fight managerial abuse and improve our situation."
#7 Joe D.
on November 2, 2009 at 7:31 p.m.(Location Unknown | UW Community)
The union (WFSE/AFSCME 1488 had-has no grounds for investigation. We have traumatized members and work situations which are (to say the least) problematic. The shock of what happened coupled with years of watching a plantation mentality permeate the system led people to conclude the two MUST be linked. While we will never know-it might good for the community if the UW proceeded as if they knew that their actions contributed and took more action to change the work enviorment.
#8 Sean
on November 2, 2009 at 9:44 p.m.(Denver, CO | Unverified Name | UW Community)
Having worked as a custodian at one point in the private sector and having had mostly non union jobs I am extremely dubious of the lens through which the unions on campus are viewing a variety of "issues".
Businesses have operational realities and I have had my share of having to adapt as a worker to changing business dynamics. This is called normal. I've worked at UW in union positions. I have felt abused by other union members but I have not felt abused by the University. The Professional staff at UW has no desire to be unionized nor does the faculty. If there was rampant abuse we all would be aware of it.
I was saddened by this man's death, and saddened that he felt he needed to inflict this violent action on Red Square as students and staff were present and forced into witnessing a traumatic event. Again, for a labor union to try to use his death is shameful and I think most people will see it for what it is. I walked through the memorial that day. By the way.
#9 Holland A.
on November 3, 2009 at 8:41 a.m.(Kirkland, WA | UW Community)
Great idea Joe, let's assume guilt until proven innocent. Do you have anyone who heard In Soo Chun talk about how much he hated his job and wanted to kill himself, anyone, family or friend? None that I have heard of.
You are viewing the situation through your own lens. You go into it thinking the work conditions are so bad, then you see a tragic event and instantly think, the work conditions caused it. To simplify the cause of suicide to one single influence is completely wrong, I don't know how else to express that.
The human instinct wants to badly to live, we can see that throughout history. People have suffered much worse work conditions, and conditions in general than I or anyone else could imagine, yet they never kill themselves. People everyday go to jobs, and the thought of suicide never crosses their minds. It seems to be a more obvious link, to assume that many things influenced In Soo Chun's decision, instead of the singular influence Joe and Jenkins seem so bent on promoting.
#10 Matt
on November 3, 2009 at 9:37 a.m.(Auburn, WA | Unverified Name)
A few clarifications:
1) International Workers and Students for Justice (IWSJ) is the group that organized this memorial. It is not the same thing as the union, WFSE Local 1488. IWSJ is a group of rank and file custodians, tradespeople, students, and off campus workers coming together to take action against poor working conditions at UW. These conditions include speed up/overwork, management retaliation for organizing, arbitrary transfers, lack of free speech, and on the job injuries among other issues. IWSJ initiated this memorial independently of the WFSE officials but welcomed support from large numbers of fellow union members and everyone else who came out in support (SLAP members, Democracy Insurgent, Organized workers for labor solidarity, a solidarity statement from the Korean American community group Nodutdol, etc). Although IWSJ does not represent the union, we are certainly pro-union and one of our goals is to resist what we see to be union busting efforts on the part of the UW management.
2) IWSJ did not "politicize" In Soo Chun's death. His death was already political. It was political in how the media portrayed him as crazy and made no effort to look into what his life was like, what his working conditions were like, etc., to find out why he choose to take his life in such a public way. It was political in that the historical and cultural context was overlooked and the media ignored the role of self-immolation in the Korean labor movement. It was already political in how many of In Soo Chun's coworkers felt, and still feel that he may have been trying to make a statement on their behalf. Commenters who dismiss all of this context are showing tremendous disrespect to custodians who are grieving and dealing with this traumatic event in a way that brought hope and a much needed sense of community. The message that folks expressed throughout the memorial was that never again should a worker feel so alone that he would resort to such drastic measures. Commenters do not understand the need workers feel to build political community to support each other under very difficult circumstances.
Also, the memorial provided as space for students like Joji who were deeply affected by In Soo Chun's death to reflect and process and grieve with others. Please show some respect for that ya'll.
#11 Reader
on November 4, 2009 at 1:31 p.m.(UW Campus | Unverified Name | UW Community)
Thanks Andrew. You're doing a good job.
Post a comment