이석준 국무조정실장이 8일 정부 서울청사에서 독자적 대북제재조치 발표를 하고 있다.최해국 선임기자 seaworld@seoul.co.kr

이석준 국무조정실장이 8일 정부 서울청사에서 독자적 대북제재조치 발표를 하고 있다.최해국 선임기자 seaworld@seoul.co.kr

전국인민대표대회(전인대)가 개막하는 매년 3월 5일 새벽이면 중국에 상주하는 전 세계 기자들이 인민대회당 앞에서 ‘줄 서기 전쟁’을 벌인다. 총리가 낭독하는 ‘정부 업무보고’ 문건을 빨리 확보하기 위해서다. 이 문건에는 경제성장률 목표치 등 중국의 한 해 청사진이 나와 있다. AP와 같은 통신사나 블룸버그 등 경제 매체들은 아예 전날 밤부터 대기한다. 성장률 목표치를 가장 빨리 타전하기 위한 ‘1초 특종’ 경쟁인 셈이다. 토요일이었던 올해도 예외가 아니었다. 아직 컴컴한 6시 30분인데도 줄이 길게 늘어서 있었다. 한국 기자들이 줄을 서는 이유는 한국어(조선어)본이 너무 적기 때문이다. 문건은 중국어본 외에 영어, 프랑스어, 독일어, 일본어, 스페인어, 아랍어, 한국어본이 있는데, 유독 한국어본 문건은 70여부에 불과해 빨리 동난다. 중국 정부가 유일하게 한국어로 발표하는 문건이라 공신력이 높고, 전자파일로는 공개되지 않아 확보에 실패하면 난감한 상황에 빠진다. 서두른 덕택에 올해는 한국어본 두 부를 챙겼다. 느긋한 마음으로 일독하고 있는데 말끔한 정장 차림의 기자 두 명이 말을 걸었다. 북한 억양에 불안감이 가득한 목소리였다. “혹시, 조선어본 한 부 더 있으면 나눠 줄 수 있습네까”라는 부탁에는 간절함이 묻어났다. “너무 늦게 오셨네요”라고 하니 “한 발 늦었습네다”라며 한숨을 내쉬었다. 가방에 넣어 두었던 다른 한 부를 슬쩍 꺼내 보였다. ‘이젠 살았구나’라는 표정을 지었다. “저보다 선배인 거 같은데, 이렇게 도움을 주니 참 고맙습네다”라며 연방 고개를 숙였다. 문건을 주는 대신 명함을 달라고 했더니 선뜻 꺼내 주었다. 조선중앙통신과 노동신문 기자였다. 6일 이들과 통화를 했다. “남조선 선배님 덕분에 기사 송고 잘했다”며 고마워했다. 남북 상황을 묻지도 않았는데 “너무 민감한 시기라 편하게 만날 수도 없다”며 안타까워했다. 정말 편하게 만날 수 있는 날이 오면 다른 얘기는 다 빼고 기자 생활에 대해서만 두런두런 얘기하고 싶다. 베이징 이창구 특파원 window2@seoul.co.kr

송파구 주민과 공무원이 3일 ‘주민과 함께하는 새봄맞이 대청소’ 행사를 하면서 잠실운동장에서 신천역 구간의 버스정류장을 닦고 있다. 최해국 선임기자 seaworld@seoul.co.kr

?It is common for the authors to include epilogues, however, yours was especially sincere and full of countless thank you-s. Humans are quite similar in genetic aspects(you even mentioned that the reason Kenya became a powerful nation in track-and-field is because it did not lose the talented ones to other sports). Sport is a way of exploring the inner-conscience, so enjoy. Such conclusion seemed a little bit cliche-tic in the first place, pardon me, but as I thought about it more and more, it seems to be a really valuable conclusion. It has been already two years since you wrote the book. If you have the chance to write the epilogue once again, what are the changes that you would want to make? -Haha…well, I think maybe I would try to make that sentence a little less cliche! And I always appreciate feedback, so there is no need for pardon whatsoever. For me, sport is the ultimate lens through which to examine human biological diversity. You can watch the opening ceremony in Rio this summer, and there will be Michael Phelps next to a 1500-meter runner as they walk in, and Phelps will be 18cm taller, but both men will be wearing the same length pants, because of the bodytypes that are advantaged in their respective sports. I find that beautiful and remarkable, if a bit cliche. I really didn’t think so many people would be interested in the book, so I didn’t have an audience in mind so much when I wrote the epilogue, it was more sort of wrapping things up in my own mind. So that’s why I mentioned a wide range of characters from NBA players to Steve Jobs, and discussed the idea of genetic engineering for a perfect athlete. It was just addressing many different things I had been thinking about, almost like I was talking to myself. I think if I could do it again, I would have made a more explicit section of the epilogue where I said: “Here, in short, are aspects of this research that have most influenced how I work outside of sports,” and suggest how they might apply to other people. For example, when I’m trying to learn something new now, I sample a range of techniques first, and pay attention to my learning rate, or “trainability” as I call it in the book. It pays off to spend some time up front finding the method in which you are most trainable. You may be behind at first, but it’s the best way to go. And using some of the information about how athletes “chunk” information to make quick decisions, I’ve applied some of that to learning information quickly, and I can now memorize full hour-long lectures even though I don’t think I have a special memory. So I think I would have taken some time to give a bit more of the practical, utilitarian background. I would still like to do that! ?You worked as a researcher in Alaska near the North Pole, wrote articles while traveling on a yacht... you have been consistently involved in environment and sports-science. You are now working as a journalist for Propublica. Your TED lecture ‘Are Athletes Really Getting Faster, Better, Stronger?’ from 2014 was watched by a quite large number of people in Korea as well. You seem like a person who is consistently interested in new things and inflamed by new topics. Do you have a personal life moto? Is there a specific field that you are especially interested in and working on in these days? -When I lived on the boat, a large research vessel, I was actually doing science, not writing articles yet. I wasn’t a journalist yet, and still thought I would be a scientist. But the more science I did, the more I asked myself: “Am I the type of person who wants to spend my whole life learning or two things new to the world? Or am I the type who wants to learn things new to me more often?” I decided I was the latter, and later realized you really can connect dots that even the scientists haven’t, because they have to focus very narrowly. I jumped from being a scientist to a journalist, and then from all sorts of different jobs. I left a fulltime job in Washington D.C., to take a temporary six-month job as a fact-checker at Sports Illustrated. I don’t know that I have a motto, but just as the development of the best athletes involves diversification prior to specialization, I want my experience to be very wide early in my career. When my learning curve begins to flatten, I want to be somewhere else. That’s difficult, because the pressure is to create a brand and stick to the same thing. But I just can’t. I think we too often progress in life by continually moving more and more toward what we are comfortable with. I want to spend my entire life forcing myself to try things and engage with ideas that I don’t find entirely comfortable. It’s the same with physical training. If you lift the same weight the same number of times every day, you will maintain your muscle, but you won’t force it to change for the better. Right now, I just finished a long story about drug cartels in Mexico, which was a new field for me, and fascinating to understand how those organizations get very good at doing very bad things. It definitely made me wonder about how leadership is structured in organizations, so I’ve been reading some of the psychology about that. And I’m also taking a fiction writing class, because, again, I want to get out of my comfort-zone, and force myself to try a kind of writing that I’m not comfortable with. It’s working! ?Your book was selected as a New York Times bestseller. Moreover, the photo of your book with President Obama was a hot issue as well. I wonder, had the President ever mentioned about the book himself or wrote you an email or mentioned in his SNS about the book. -The President never wrote to me, as I think he probably has a pretty busy schedule! Interestingly, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice mentioned in an interview that she was reading The Sports Gene as well. I enjoyed that, because she and President Obama are from different political parties obviously, and I was glad to think that perhaps people with very different viewpoints might be interested in it. I did see one interview online where President Obama was speaking with a runner who visited the White House, and told her some things about talent, and it made me think he had definitely paid attention to what he read in my book, as it sounded like it was straight from the pages. ?There was this video of you having a heated conversation in MIT with Malcom Gladwell, the founder of 1 million-hours-law. Are you still in an argument with him? -He and I still do discuss it, because we run together. But we have become very friendly. That doesn’t mean we agree, but my feeling is that he has gravitated somehwat more toward the evidence I’ve presented. I give him a huge amount of credit for being willing to change his mind when presented with evidence. He contends that the point of the law or “rule,” as he phrased it, was to show the importance of hard and sustained work. But that was never in question among scientists in the area, and I think the way that it has been applied is often a mistake. As I noted in my book, the scientist who did the actual work that led to the law has been pretty upset at what the public thinks it is. So I hope I helped correct that for people who are interested, although I certainly can’t reach as many people as Gladwell. ?You answered that ‘Phelps will be 18cm taller(than EL GUERROUJ), but both men will be wearing the same length pants, because of the body types that are advantaged in their respective sports. I find that beautiful and remarkable, if a bit cliche’. Could you explain further about why is that ’beautiful and remarkable‘? -In the early part of the 20th Century, there was an idea that there was an ideal way for all humans to be, and that anything different from that was bad. It deviated by fault or error. Instead, now that we better understand biological variation, it’s clear that tremendous variation is an essential part of evolution. There is no “perfect form,” only those that fit more readily into one environment or task than another. As such, I see sports as a celebration of humanity‘s physiological diversity. Some people have asked me if all these specialized body types take away some of the magic of sports for me. On the contrary, I think sports is a grand stage for appreciating biological diversity. Sports are simply contrived environments that we’ve created to test our psychology and biology. To me, the wider the range, the more interesting, and the more power sport has to appeal to everyone. I feel the same way about culture. I love the Olympics because it mixes cultures on a scale I don‘t think is really replicated just about anywhere else, and I like to see how that manifests. In short: at times human diversity is divisive, but in sport, it’s part of the celebration of achievement. Who is Epstein? He was born in Chicago, Illinois on the 31st of January, 1980. He majored in Environmental science and astronomy in Columbia University. He worked as an environmental research worker in the Artic Circle near Alaska. He also worked at the a seismological laboratory and charted the submarine topography of the Mediterranean ocean. As a sport-illustrate senior contributor, he is a celebrated journalists who writes sports-science and Olympics stories through careful research and checking, such as breaking the story that the Yankees‘ Alex Rodriguez, the tycoon of baseball was tested positive for steroids. He included his experience of being a varsity track-and-fields runner with teammates who came from Jamaica and Kenya and of working in the sports scenes in his book ‘The Sports Gene’, 2013. President Obama’s picture of buying the book at the bookstore was sensational. Also, Condoleezza Rice, the former secretary of state also recommended her acquaintances to read the book. Now he is working at the public benefit media ‘Propublica’ as a journalist and recently covered the story of the Mexican drug cartel’s local relief activity. Senior reporter Byong Sun Nim bsnim@seoul.co.kr

Can a genetic test tell whether my child who seems to be talented in sports will be able to succeed as a professional? When is the best time to select the right sport? If the child puts in efforts of more than 1 million hours, will he/she have the ability that no one can possibly think of challenging? There might be a quite large number of parents with such questions. David Epstein, the American sports-science journalist who published ‘The Sports Gene’ in 2013 advised through the e-mail interview that ‘There is no such test like that at the moment. It is actually best to experience diverse kinds of sports in one’s adolescence and choose a certain sport when one comes of age, being able to check one‘s degree of achievement and concentrate fully on the choosen sport’. Apart from certain sports such as golf and gymnastics, too much of either early or immersion education is not recommendable in sports. Following are the Q&As. ?First, I have to confess that I was personally touched by the well-done research and committed interviews. I guess that the time for writing took much longer than you had expected. Also, what were the reasons that you decided to write this book and how much are you satisfied with the outcome? -The research time for the book did indeed take longer than I expected. The topic was so complex, and there was, unfortunately, a lot of poorly done science I had to sift through to find the best work. (I was lucky I had a science background that helped with that.) For the first year, I did not write a word, I only tried to read 10 scientific papers a day, every day. As far as why I decided to write the book, it really came out of my own experience as an athlete, and as a sports spectator. I grew up in an area outside of Chicago where I ran on high school track teams with a lof of Jamaican immigrants. We had so many amazing sprinters, and when I realized Jamaica was an island of 2.5 million people, I wondered what could possibly be going on there to make so many fast sprinters?! And then in college, I moved up to run longer distance, and now I was running against Kenyan athletes, and learning that they weren’t just Kenyan, they were all from one small minority tribe, the Kalenjin. So, again, I’m wondering: What in the world is going on over there? Those questions combined with things I would see on television, like a women’s softball pitcher striking out the best Major League hitters. As soon as I saw that, I made an estimate calculation of the speed of her pitch and the closer distance of the mound to see if there was less time to swing, and there wasn’t, so I wondered why the men couldn’t hit it. So I just kept keeping all these questions in my mind, and when I had the opportunity, I wanted to go as far toward answering them as possible using the best available science. So really it was my own curiosities, and I didn’t know that so many other people would be interested. ?Your book‘s greatest strength may be that the readers can go through your experience as a varsity track-and-field player for 800 meters and also the interviews with Barry Bonds and Jennie Finch. Your theory of knowledge bulk was really intriguing as well. So, what you really wanted to say is that one cannot choose between nature and nurture. Concentrated workouts are important, however, there is no need to put in 1 million hours of work. One can experience diverse kinds of sports while he/she is young and then once he/she comes of age, he/she can choose one specific filed and put in his/her efforts. This is what you offer as an advice for parents who have kids that seem to be talented with sports. Is it right? -That’s right. The science has moved past the question of “nature or nurture,” and on to attempting to figure out what the balance of nature and nurture is in any specific situation. Without both genes and environments, there are no outcomes at all. So the real quest is to understand the interplay of nature and nurture, and how we can best use it. And this is important, because some people asked me after the book came out why scientists even study genetics if we can’t change it. The answer is that we can alter environments so that people get more out of their genetics. That’s why I use that quote toward the end of the book by J.M. Tanner?who was the world’s expert in body growth and development, and was a worldclass athlete: “Everyone has a different genotype. Therefore, for optimal development, everyone should have a different environment.” The more we understand about nature, the more we can help tailor the nurture to help everyone get the best out of themselves. As far as putting in hours of work, you’re exactly right. There is no magic number of hours. When I went through the work about the 10,000-hours rule, I expected to find something amazing I could write about. But what I found was work filled with statistical problems that needed to be addressed, because it’s actually damaging the development of athletes. The actual research shows that the typical route to success in most sports?and in fact many other activities?is to have a “sampling period,” where the learner has exposure to a wide variety of skills early, before then focusing in and specializing. That’s why I added an afterword to the book, and you can see, on pages 416 and 417, I added the charts with the aggregate data that show the development path of elite athletes. They sample sports early, and practice less and in a less technical manner early on than their peers who plateau at lower levels. There are exceptions, of course, and golf may be one because it’s a very unusual endeavor, in which the athlete is not time limited and does not need to predict the actions of others. But the fact is, most performers who go on to become elite do not follow the Tiger Woods path of early specialization. They follow the Roger Federer path; his parents forced him not to focus on tennis too early, and to continue playing badminton, basketball, and soccer before he could specialize. That’s the norm for those who become creative adult athletes. (And, by the way, there is evidence the best musicians do this as well.) Still, even looking at the data, people often don’t believe me. They send me messages: “Ok, maybe in some American sport that’s true, but never in soccer!” Well, luckily for me, shortly after the German national team won the World Cup, this study came out showing that they followed this exact pattern as well. The best players spent more time in unstructured activities as kids, and put off full specialization until after their less skilled peers. The study is called “Practice and play in the development of German top-level professional football players.” As an aside, Malcolm Gladwell and I had a public debate about this, and he conceeded that he didn’t expect people to take the 10,000-hours so seriously. You can see it here on YouTube. He and I have become running partners, so we continue to discuss on our own time! ?What was the most difficult part of writing the book? Even though you are an investigative reporter, it would have not been easy to do interviews while traveling since you would have to check the sources and work on the drafts on the plane. -Well, I didn’t have to do too much on planes, because I took a long time to write the book. When I chose my publisher, my priority was not the best financial offer, but the publisher that would make me an equal partner in determining how long I needed in order to write the book. In some ways, I still felt rushed, but I didn’t want to be on the normal timeline of one year or 18 months, because I knew I needed to learn a lot of material. So that was ok. It was a challenge, though, to arrange some of the interviews. In the last chapter of the book, I tracked down a man who was living as a reindeer farmer in the Arctic, and didn’t speak English, and it took me a while even to figure out that he was still alive and I should go visit him! Really, though, there were two aspects that stood out as very difficult: 1) If I wanted to give an honest examination of the top, I had to write about race and gender, and those are very sensitive topics. I got my CV ready just in case I had to find a new job. 2) I learned that some of my own intuition about the world was incorrect. I learned how hard it is, even faced with the data, to change my mind about certain things I believed for a long time and wanted to continue believing. It just took me some time to come to terms with that and write honestly about the data. For example, the chapters about genetic diversity in Africa, and about how physiology influences the willpower to train, were at first hard for me to digest intellectually, because much of the information was contrary to my intuition. But, in the end, that is why we have science, because we can’t rely on our intuition. --------------------- Two-thirds of Koreans have the gene which can pass through the doping(prohibited substances) test? David Epstein’s book ‘The Sports Gene(Translated version p.213)’ contains dangerous content that can instill a false belief on a quite large number of athletes in this nation. Swedish scientist Jenny Jakobsson Schulz, utilizing data from both Sweden and Inha University Hospital in Incheon, found out a scandalising fact. Those who have a pair of the gene mutant ‘UGT2B17’, which has the ability to cheat the most common anti-doping screening test ‘T/E ratio’, were more commonly found in East asia. The team actually mentioned that especially two thirds of Kroeans have this mutant. The T/E ratio test which searches for the ratio of testosterone to another hormone called epitestosterone views the ratio of 1:1 as normal and if the ratio goes above 4:1, than that there is a possiblity of doping. The research team determined that a lot of people have a gene that influences how they excrete testosterone in their urine, and they can dope without the T/E ratio changing, so they will still pass the test. They recommend that for drug testing to be more effective, it would have to be genetically tailored. On the 23rd of the last month, I requested an authority from Korean Anti-Doping Association(KADA) about how much of this is true and how much information do the domestic researchers and the KADA have on this news. Epstein further explained on this by answering “When I too asked anti-doping officials about this work, some of them said, ‘Oh no, it’s fine, that’s not right.’ Or, ‘That’s very rare.’ But it is right, and it’s not rare, so they are in denial.” “The good news, though, is that the T/E ratio test is becoming less important, as technologies like the biological passport are taking over.” He added, “Christiane Ayotte, one of the top anti-doping scientists in the world, was more honest. She told me, ‘This is one reason why I can’t retire until we have a better screening test than the T/E ratio.’. KADA Education-PR deputy answered on the 3rd, ”T/E ratio is just a primary testing method and is not used as a decisive material for the doping judgement. For example, we use secondary test methods such as IRMS, and also a biological informational system with diverse information for making the final conclusion. So, passing the T/E ratio test does not mean that one can avoid the doping test.” Senior reporter Byong Sun Nim bsnim@seoul.co.kr

국내 증시가 모처럼 반등했다. 유가증권시장의 코스피 지수는 3월 첫 거래일인 2일 국제 유가 상승과 중국, 미국 등의 통화정책 기대감 덕에 30.76포인트 오른 1947.42로 장을 마쳤다. 서울 중구 을지로 KEB하나은행 본점 딜링룸에서 한 직원이 전광판 앞을 지나고 있다. 최해국 선임기자 seaworld@seoul.co.kr

살아있는 개를 북극곰에게 던지는 충격적인 순간이 포착돼 논란이 일고 있다. 2일(현지시간) 영국 데일리메일은 최근 러시아 시베리아 최북동부 추코트카 해안의 한 가정집에 나타난 북극곰에게 개를 던지는 남성의 영상을 기사와 함께 보도했다. 영상에는 북극곰에게 허름한 창고 주변에 출현한 북극곰의 모습이 보인다. 한 남성이 커다란 개 한 마리를 끌고 간 뒤, 창고 아래 북극곰에게 던진다. 이를 지켜보던 주변 사람들이 비명을 지른다. 북극곰 코앞에 떨어진 개는 기겁하며 북극곰을 피해 달아나지만 생사여부는 명확지 않다. 한편 영상 속 장소는 지난 2014년 유튜브에서 화제가 된 북극곰에 공격당하는 러시아 여성의 모습이 포착된 곳과 동일한 곳으로 알려졌다. 북극해와 마주한 러시아 북부 마을엔 온난화로 북극의 얼음이 녹아 먹잇감인 물개가 사라지면서 북극곰들의 출현이 잦아지고 있다. 사진·영상= 24/7 WorldBreakingNews-3 youtube 영상팀 seoultv@seoul.co.kr ☞ ‘인간 잔인함의 끝은?’ 칼집 낸 살아있는 물고기에 술 먹이는 남성 ☞ 사람들 셀카 장난질에 숨을 거둔 어린 희귀 돌고래

호주의 한 가정집 콘센트 구멍에서 거대 뱀이 발견돼 놀라움을 주고 있다. 인터내셔널 비즈니스 타임스(IBT) 호주판의 최근 보도에 따르면, 호주 퀸즐랜드에 거주하는 한 남성은 고장이 난 콘센트를 뜯었다가 충격을 받고 말았다. 콘센트 구멍 안으로 거대한 호주 토종 ‘카펫 비단뱀’(carpet python) 한 마리가 숨어 있던 것이다. 신고를 받고 출동한 뱀 포획 전문가 리치 길버트(Richie Gilbert) 또한 좁은 구멍 안에 거대한 몸을 구겨 넣은 뱀의 모습을 보고 깜짝 놀랐다. 길버트에 따르면, 비단뱀은 바깥세상으로 나오려 하지 않았고 약 1시간이 지난 후에야 겨우 콘센트 밖으로 꺼낼 수 있었다. 콘센트 구멍에 있던 비단뱀은 몸 여러 곳곳에 전기 충격으로 인한 화상을 입은 상태였다. 현재 비단뱀은 호주 동물원에 옮겨져 치료를 받고 있다. 한편 카펫 비단뱀은 따뜻한 곳을 좋아하기 때문에 집 안의 세탁기나 냉장고 뒤쪽이나 자동차 보닛에서 많이 발견된다. 카펫 비단뱀은 독이 없어 물려도 생명에 지장은 없지만 무는 힘은 매우 강한 것으로 알려졌다. 사진=Richie Gilbert, 영상=New World 3/유튜브 영상팀 seoultv@seoul.co.kr ☞ 나무 위 다람쥐 순식간에 사냥하는 표범☞ 자신의 애완뱀과 수영하며 노는 호주 남성

‘치매 노인에 대한 가족의 책임은 어디까지인가.’ 2일 일본 국민들 사이의 화제는 전날 대법원 격인 최고재판소가 내린 치매 노인의 전차 사망사고에 대한 판결로 모아졌다. 심한 치매를 앓던 구순 노인이 길에서 배회하다 전차에 치여 숨진 사건과 관련해 최고재판소는 “가족의 감독 책임을 인정하지 않는다”는 최종 판결을 내렸다. 1, 2심의 “(치매노인 관리에) 가족의 감독 책임이 있다”는 판결을 뒤집은 것이다. 사고 당시 철도회사인 JR도카이 측은 “사고로 발생한 철도 운행 지연 손해 비용 등 720만엔(약 7800만원)을 배상하라”고 유족을 상대로 소송을 제기해 원심에서 이겼다. 1심은 치매 노인의 부인과 장남 모두에게 720만엔 배상판결을 내렸지만, 2심은 함께 사는 부인에게만 감독 책임을 인정해 360만엔을 배상하도록 판결했다. 장남은 사망자와 20년 이상 떨어져 살아 배상 책임이 없다는 취지였다. 당시 사고는 2007년 부인(당시 84세)이 깜빡 잠든 사이 91세의 남편이 순식간에 집을 떠나 배회하다가 발생한 것이다. 1, 2심은 “책임 능력이 없는 사람이 유발한 손해에 대해 ‘감독 의무자’에게 손해 책임(배상)을 물을 수 있다”는 민법 규정을 적용해 사망자 유족에게 배상 책임을 인정했었다. 그러나 최고재판소는 “가족이 용이하게 감독할 수 있는 경우 등은 배상 책임을 물을 수 있는 사례도 있지만, 이 사건은 거기에 해당하지 않는다”고 판단했다. 감독할 수 있었던 상황이 아니었다는 것으로 현재의 개호(介護·노인돌봄) 실정을 배려한 판단이다. 이날 판결의 메시지는 “치매 노인에 대한 보호와 감독은 가족뿐 아니라 사회 전체가 져야 한다”는 것이었다. 개인의 책임 의무와 사회에 폐를 끼치지 않는다는 점을 유달리 강조하는 일본 사회에서 최고재판소의 판결은 상당히 진전된 것이었다. 그만큼 치매 노인 돌봄이 어렵고, 그 책임과 의무를 개인과 가정에만 지우기에는 가혹하고, 이미 공동체 모두의 공통적이고 보편적인 짐이 됐다는 점을 확인한 셈이다. 도쿄의 한 직장인은 “치매 문제가 너나 할 것 없이 모두의 어깨를 짓누르기 시작한 상황에서 개인 부담을 덜어준 판결이란 점에서 안도했다”고 말했다. 후생노동성은 기존의 고령화 속도라면 2025년에는 65세 이상 고령자 5명 중 1명인 700만명이 치매 환자가 될 것으로 예측했다. 도쿄 이석우 특파원 jun88@seoul.co.kr

2일 코스피지수가 30포인트 넘게 크게 올라 1,947.42로 장을 마감하였다. 서울 중구 KEB하나은행 본점 딜링룸. 2016.3.2 최해국seaworld@seoul.co.kr

‘누가 잠자는 고양이의 코털을 건드렸나??’ 1일(현지시간) 영국 데일리메일이 소개한 영상에는 최근 이스라엘 항구 도시인 엘라트(Eilat)의 한 공원에서 잠자던 고양이를 깨운 어린 소녀가 고양이에게 봉변을 당하는 모습이 담겨 있습니다. 부모 중 한 명이 촬영한 것으로 보이는 이 영상에는 공원 잔디밭에 엎드려 잠자고 있는 고양이를 괴롭히는 소녀의 모습이 보입니다. 소녀가 발을 굴러 고양이를 깨웁니다. 선잠을 깨 화가 난 고양이가 소녀를 뒤쫓기 시작하고 이를 피해 작은 언덕으로 올라간 소녀가 발을 헛디뎌 콘크리트 난간 아래로 곤두박질칩니다. 소녀가 별 탈 없이 무사하길 바랍니다. 사진·영상= 24/7 WorldBreakingNews-3 youtube 영상팀 seoultv@seoul.co.kr ☞ “아빠, 저한테 왜 이러세요” 눈폭탄 맞은 아이 ☞ ‘촬영하지 마!’ 가만있던 거미의 갑작스러운 습격

2일 코스피지수가 30포인트 넘게 크게 올라 1,947.42로 장을 마감하였다. 서울 중구 KEB하나은행 본점 딜링룸. 2016.3.2 최해국seaworld@seoul.co.kr

1일 서울 용산구 전쟁기념관 기획전시실에서 열린 서울신문 공동 주최 ‘모네, 빛을 그리다’전을 찾은 관객들이 작품을 관람하고 있다. 인상파의 대가 클로드 모네의 작품을 디지털 입체 영상 기술로 구현한 컨버전스 아트를 선보이는 이번 전시는 그림으로는 느낄 수 없는 공감각적 체험을 선사해 흥행 바람을 일으키고 있다. 최해국 선임기자 seaworld@seoul.co.kr

2일 코스피지수가 30포인트 넘게 크게 올라 1,947.42로 장을 마감하였다. 서울 중구 KEB하나은행 본점 딜링룸. 2016.3.2 최해국seaworld@seoul.co.kr

2일 코스피지수가 30포인트 넘게 크게 올라 1,947.42로 장을 마감하였다. 서울 중구 KEB하나은행 본점 딜링룸. 2016.3.2 최해국seaworld@seoul.co.kr

2일 코스피지수가 30포인트 넘게 크게 올라 1,947.42로 장을 마감하였다. 서울 중구 KEB하나은행 본점 딜링룸. 2016.3.2 최해국seaworld@seoul.co.kr

금천구가 마련한 청소년 뮤지컬 ‘레미제라블’에 출연하는 지역 청소년들이 공연을 앞두고 29일 구청 연습실에서 막바지 연습을 하고 있다. 최해국 선임기자 seaworld@seoul.co.kr

황교안 국무총리가 29일 서울 세종로 정부서울청사에서 열린 제24차 국제개발협력위원회 회의에서 위원들의 다양한 의견을 듣고 있다.최해국 기자 seaworld@seoul.co.kr

리오나도 디캐프리오가 20여 년에 걸친 오스카 도전사에 마침내 마침표를 찍었다. 영화 ‘레버넌트: 죽음에서 돌아온 자’에서 아들을 죽이고 부상한 자신마저 버린 동료에게 복수하고자 혹독한 대자연에서 처절한 생존 의지를 표현한 그가 29일 제88회 아카데미 시상식에서 남우주연상을 거머쥐었다. 그의 수상은 아카데미상 전초전이라고 할 수 있는 주요 시상식에서 남우주연상을 휩쓸면서 ‘당연한 일’이 돼 버렸다. 시카고 비평가협회상, 골든글로브, 크리틱스 초이스, 미국배우조합상, 영국 아카데미 등 상이라는 상은 모조리 가져가 아카데미상을 받지 않는 것이 오히려 이상할 정도였다. 디캐프리오는 그동안 조연과 주연으로 아카데미상 후보로 4차례 이름을 올렸으나 번번이 수상에 실패했다. 그만큼 수상에 실패한 배우는 적지 않지만 워낙 스타 배우이다 보니 그를 두고 ‘오스카 징크스’라는 말이 돌았고, 심지어 ‘레오의 레드 카펫 광란’(Leo‘s Red Carpet Rampage)이라는 게임까지 나왔다. 오스카와의 질긴 악연은 1994년에 시작된다. 디캐프리오는 ’길버트 그레이프‘(1993)에서 지적장애가 있는 ’어니‘ 역으로 남우조연상 후보에 올랐다. 당시 만 19세의 풋풋한 외모에 순진무구한 지적장애아 연기로 대중의 주목을 받았으나 수상의 영광은 ’도망자‘(1993)의 토미 리 존스에게 돌아갔다. ’바스켓볼 다이어리‘(1995), ’로미오와 줄리엣‘(1996) 등으로 전 세계적인 인기를 얻은 디캐프리오는 ’타이타닉‘(1997)에서 또 한번 굴욕을 맛봤다. ’타이타닉‘은 작품상, 감독상, 여우주연상, 여우조연상 등 14개 부문이라는 역대 최다 부문에 후보로 올랐으나 정작 주연을 맡은 디캐프리오는 후보로 이름조차 올리지 못했다. ’타이타닉‘에서 그는 “내가 세상의 왕이다”(I’m the King of the World!)라고 외쳤으나 공염불에 그친 셈이다. 마틴 스코세이지 감독과 두번째로 작업한 ‘에비에이터’(2004)로 골든글로브상을 받은 그는 두번째로 아카데미상에 도전했으나 ‘레이’의 제이미 폭스에 가로막혔다. 그의 세번째 도전은 ‘블러드 다이아몬드’(2006)였다. 다이아몬드를 밀수출하는 용병 출신의 대니 아처를 연기해 호평을 받았으나 ‘라스트 킹’(2006)의 포레스트 휘태커에 밀렸다. 우간다의 독재자 이디 아민을 연기한 포레스트 휘태커는 당시 골든글러브, 미국배우조합상뿐 아니라 각종 비평가상을 휩쓸다시피 했다. 최근의 실패는 다시 마틴 스코세이지 감독과 함께 작업한 ‘더 울프 오브 월 스트리트’(2013)였다. 당시 골든글로브는 드라마 부문에서는 ‘달라스 바이어스 클럽’의 매튜 맥커너히에게, 뮤지컬·코미디에서는 디캐프리오에게 상을 주었으나 아카데미상은 몸무게를 21㎏이나 줄이며 호연을 펼친 매튜 맥커너히의 손을 들어줬다. 이번 수상으로 오스카와의 질긴 악연을 청산했으나 그가 ‘레버넌트’에서 보여 준 연기가 ‘남우주연상감’이냐는 논란의 소지가 있어 개운치 않은 측면이 있다. 영화에서 영하 30도의 한겨울에 벌거벗거나 들소의 생간을 씹는 등 투혼을 불살랐으나 ‘고생했구나’라는 생각이 들지언정 아카데미 수상에 실패한 전작들에서 보여준 것 이상의 연기력을 선보였는지에 대해서는 의견이 엇갈리기 때문이다. 온라인뉴스부 iseoul@seoul.co.kr