Responses
I actually really like the idea of Sungkyung being an allegory for abuse and addiction. His experiences and his approach towards “love” can blur on the lines of addition. Always wanting, always on the verge. And Cheong-rim always have him just enough—and never too much. It’s like the idea of Cheong-rim was just barely enough to keep him hanging, but not too much.
gave*
I suppose I understand how people would perceive this as a sadist/masochist relationship, and how they’d be made for each other, but I don’t really agree. I viewed it more in a sense where Sungkyung was always in a position where he’s a victim of perpetual abuse. He doesn’t know better—he isn’t supposed to know better as someone who was born and raised, and conditioned into habitual behavior. It’s not the first time he’s been sexually abused—it’s referenced multiple times that someone came before Cheong-rim.
I also think the same can be said for Cheong-rim, who’s previously stated that he sees his young suffering self in Sungkyung, although given how he’s raised and his questionable personality(disorder?) he’s taken on the role of abuser.
I don’t agree that with the popular idea that Sungkyung has always matched him card for card when we’re talking about behavioral traits, Sungkyung has ever been the aggressor, in fact I don’t recall a point in the story where he’s ever taken on a dominant role? He was always conditioned to be the victim, and I think the story might push a different narrative if you perceive his actions a different way, maybe some people think because he encouraged the behavior means that he was deserving of it? I don’t agree. I think Sungkyung is a great ideator or concept for the cycle of abuse, and addiction but I don’t see him in a position where he had ever been deserving of what happened to him.