I get the feeling that this is going to be like the manga Fruits Basket (aka Furuba), except Yuki (Yoo Jung) gets the main girl instead of Kyo (In Ho). After a long time and a lot of fights, they come to understand and (at least) tolerate each other with the help of the main girl. Anyone else see the resemblance?

Also, I doubt the flashback into YJ's childhood is done. I bet his father is about to get a firsthand look at what Prof. Baek was talking about with the friends that YJ brought home, which will be what really brings what the prof. said straight home.

I know that there are a lot of differing opinions on whether what YJ did was "in the right," but if I found out my 8-or-something-year-old could calmly manipulate their peers and seniors that easily, I'd be creeped out. Average kids can be manipulative, yes, but I've never seen such smooth manipulation done by someone so young.

The guy is a natural chess player. I applaud cunningness to a degree, but I'm still suspicious. Why are so many characters claiming that he ruined their lives? We still haven't seen exactly how much he did or didn't have a hand in their downfall. Could it all really be a misunderstanding or did they really have it coming? The author hasn't given us enough information to really tell if he's a bad guy or not. One moment it's "Oh, look how nice and normal he is" and then it's "Creepy schemer pulling the strings". I get the sense that he's a true neutral: not good or evil. However, he's willing to do things that your average joe isn't for retribution's sake, and that's what scares me. They're interesting to read about, but in real life, they're... politicians and CEOs lol

If it were me, I'd stay away from YJ. He's such a smooth operator, it makes it too hard to tell where you stand with him. Is spending your life second guessing his intentions worth it, because it seems like he can cause a lot of damage if you get on his bad side.

shameless self-advertising: please check out my new MMV called Paradise ^_^;;

_________________
"Nothing ever becomes real till it is experienced -- even a proverb is no proverb to you till your life has illustrated it."
- John Keats

Ok... I'm not comparing who is worser than who...
It's up to you to decided... You can say Jung is worser or In Ha is. (In my opinion it's In Ha though)

What's the problem with me is that Prof. Baek....
His own grandchildren already had issues, shouldn't he spent his time try to correcting his own problem first rather than trying to solve anyone else's?

It's like in the school when you haven't even finish your homework, but trying to do other's.... That's what I meant by hypocrite....
It doesn't matter who has the bigger problem, but shouldn't you solve your own first before doing someone else's?

This discussion seems less about whether Jung is "in the right" and more about why he behaves the way he does and whether or not it's normal. It seems to me that many find his behavior unnatural and imply that there is something inherently off about Jung, but I don't think the manipulation comes from his inherent character. And if he does have a disorder that's not under his control so isn't his fault, and disorders can be managed. Basically I'm saying I don't think this behavior of his has to be permanent, and that there is hope for him yet, don't write him off! x3 Our main source of hope for him of course is his interactions with Sul, and the different sides we see of him when he's around her.

As I see it his main problem is his emotional and social development is stunted. Jung himself admits to being childish (during Ah Young incident): he seems to default to the juvenile concept of justice and retains a selfish point of view. What I hope to see from this series is a growth in Jung, as a result of knowing Sul (but not just her, she's a starting point for helping understand other characters too), and him learning the proper way to treat people and the proper way to manage his own feelings.

But of course where we are now seems far from that since there's still so much we don't know about him, and his arc will probably have a lot of rough parts. And I'm definitely not disagreeing that he is suspicious, certainly not everything can be explained away as misunderstanding, because: is an excellent point, he is the common denominator. There will probably be lots of dialogue on what he did or did not do and subsequent conflict with Sul which will hopefully lead to an opportunity for Jung to reflect.

I also want Sul to grow based on knowing Jung. It seems she's getting out of "I'm suspicious of Jung all the time" mode and into "I'm dating Jung so I should actually attempt to get to know him better and understand his point of view" mode. And also hopefully there will be more communication cause lack of that is the source of a lot of trouble, amirite?? xD But anyway, the growth to me is what relationships are all about, and I would just love love love that between these two <3 (I also like the idea of this thing starting off superficial and turning into something deeper) I love In Ho and obviously he could use some growth too and I want that but as far as romance no, I think he's better suited as a friend to Sul. There I said it, my opinion on the pairings haha I tried to stay neutral but I had to get it out xP

I'm with CherryCherry on this one. The problem with In Ho and In Ha is far less problematic, because it can be fixed and is something that develops according to certain circumstances. They have anger issues and in In Ha case, selfishness and psychotic behavior. Those are all fixable psychological faults that develop gradually. We don't know when those problems started to develop for those two because we don't see much of them before Prof.'s death (and who is to say that he wasn't already trying to help his grandkids with whatever problems they had at that young age?). Jung, as mentioned before, is exhibiting the signs of sociopathy. That is what the Professor is talking about. He is concerned and his intentions are good, although it's known that it's not something that can be fixed and can only escalate and no one knows what causes it. Claiming that something needs to bring physical harm to someone else to be truly bad is a misconception. There is no need for actually going around and causing physical harm to anyone. If that is your definition of "bad", your are probably too young to understand what true evil looks and feels like and the horror that one person can bring just by sheer presence and words. ( IN NO WAY am I implicating Jung in this, he is not THAT twisted.... I'm just stretching something else here )

But let say that all of the above is wrong. Lets put away presumption and take logic into account. Think about it this way: Why would the author even go into such a thing if it didn't have any weight in the story? It's proven that readers often loose the grip on reality and can completely merge with the fiction believing there are things going on beyond what they are reading (I do that all too often). So sometimes to understand something without bios it helps to snap back to reality. This is a fictional story where the author has all the control and right now she, herself, is pointing some things out. She chose to create a professional character who deals in child psychology (very "coincidental"), provided a background for his credibility (fixing whatever problems Jung's father had, must have been something big because he remained in his debt to the point of taking in his grandkids), provided him with a good, intelligent, trustworthy character (as seen through the father's respect). Then she created a situation for him to observe and analyze and put the words in his mouth. This is no real life, it's a linear story where everything is predetermined by one person. Is the author trying to mislead us? What's the point of going this far? Is the Professor a bad guy who is trying to hurt Jung or his father? I don't understand the negativity his character is facing. He is trying to help because he cares for them, so what's with the retaliation against him? He is just a "messenger". Consider also that it's never an easy task to point out to someone you care for that there is something wrong with their child. You have to really care about them to put yourself in such a situation (aaaand I'm back in fiction world...).

Jung may not be a sociopath (I don't think he really is one because it wouldn't be appropriate for this story; there's just no point since he is obviously not an antagonist), but he is nowhere close to a typical normal, misunderstood hero (there will be no point in that either) and you don't need to be a sociopath to exhibit sociopathic qualities. But that brings about an important point - there is no main antagonist in this story, which I just noticed... very strange, not even an inanimate one.

Wow you sure did call it. The flashback didn't end and his Dad saw him in the act. Nice~

thanks. it just seemed too awkward and choppy for the flashback to just stop short there, with YJ's friends coming over and all. it seemed like the perfect opportunity for the kid to show his chops. it's what i would've done.

_________________
"Nothing ever becomes real till it is experienced -- even a proverb is no proverb to you till your life has illustrated it."
- John Keats

The final piece falls in place...now jung can never be called evil person...
i just guess author wants the readers to b apprehnsive about jung...but in real when he is a good one..till now his actions were never unreasonable.. just practical...
I'm sooo glaaaaddd....now that he is clreared of all his past actions...
Thanks yuko....this is the IMP chapter... to go on with jung bias..

_________________
All experiences may not be usefull but helpfull.