Recently I have read the following Book. A book summary is as follows:
Book
title: Oguma, Eiji. 2002. A Genealogy of ‘Japanese’ Self-images.
Translation by |David Askew. Melbourne: Trans Pacific Press.
Book
summary:
Translation
Introduction
-the formation of a national self-image was linked
to a great extent to relationships with the Other (xviii).
-Japan could not be understood simply with the framework
of Orientalism i.e. the
representation of the East created by the West (xix).
-Japan nativist scholars lauded the ancient myths of
Japan, and this romanticism viewed China, not the West, as the Other. (xix).
-the national
polity theory and the ideology that idealized the monarchy centered on the
Emperor as a system that was unique to Japan.
-the book argues that the mixed nation theory lent itself to the claim that the Japanese nation
embodied the unification of the Asian; the neighboring regions could be assimilate
into the Japanese nation to become a great Japanese empire (xx).
-this book discusses how Japanese politicians used
ancient Japanese history and myth to justify the policies of the day.
-the book was a case study of universal issues, such
as nationalism and the reconstruction of texts shared in common by members of a
nation.
Book's Introduction
-the book would establish two facts: 1. the prewar great
Japanese empire was a multi-national empire, including Taiwan and Korea. 2. On
the myth of ethnic homogeneity there had been very little research on how and
when it emerged.
-the book would examine historically when and how
the myth of homogeneous nation emerged, and provide a sociological analysis of
the myth’s function (xxviii).
-The theme of this work was a genealogy of the
consciousness of identity held by the Japanese, and how did this self-image
changed as circumstance changed (xxviii).
-the research requires both a sociological approach and a history
of ideas approach. Using one of Max Weber’s books as an example on doing
research into the consciousness of the majority people, the author describes the
difference between the sociological and historical approaches (xxxi). One
important work of Weber was his
argument on the important of the ethics of puritanism, which while was antagonistic
the pursuit of profit, contributed it to the birth of modern capitalism. He made
this argument by examination the ideas of Calvinism,
and compared it with Indian and Chinese thoughts. This approach was well known
in sociology but not in historiography (xxxi).
-historical research emphasized on limiting the
focus of research, Weber by contrast placed no limits on either time or place (xxxii)
-the debate about whether society was the sum of all its parts or something greater
was one that existed in all area of social sciences. The idea that society was
larger than the sum of its parts was seen in the ideas of Emile Durkheim. In sociology individual
phenomena was seen as ripple of the surface of great sea that was called the society
(xxxiii). What was important was whether or not the abstracted model was
persuasive. In history facts were
seen as being of the greatest importance, whether a universal model could be established
or not was of secondary importance.
-in the conclusion the author analyzes sociologically
the perceptions of the self and other as seen in the various discussion on the Japanese
nation (xxxv). Similar mixed approach had been done in works by Michel Foucault and Edward Said. Among Japanese scholars, those
which had produced cross boundary academic work included Mita Minesuk, Yamanaka
Hayato and Kano Masanao (xxxvi).
-the target of the book was the various discourses
discussed by individual thinkers on the identity of the Japanese nation (xxxvi)
-Part one
of the book (ch.1-6) was about the thoughts of an ‘Open Country’ (pg.1).
-Ch. 1: the first theory of the origin of the
Japanese nation based on a modern scientific discourse must be dated from the
excavation of the Omori shell mounds by Edward Morse (3).
-the theories of the Japanese nation had developed
into two different currents by the 1880s. One was the mixed nation theory. The
other was the homogeneous nation theory. Today the two currents sometimes
opposed and sometimes supported one another, and reflected the international
status of Japan, and the stage of Japanese nationalism in each of the major
periods from the 1880s to the present (15).
-Ch.2: it was about the debate on mixed residence in
the interior of Japan. For half a century after 1885, the homogeneous nation
theory was pushed aside in the press, and the mixed nation theory moved into
the mainstream discourse. One reason was that the people of the great Japanese
empire began to define themselves as a superior nation capable of moving out
into the world (29).
-Ch. 3 was about the theory of the national polity
and Japanese Christianity. The author defines the national polity theory, the ruling
ideology of the empire which saw the great Japanese as a large family state
presided over by the imperial family. The theory re-emerged in the late 19th
century as a germ for a monarch centered on the emperor (31).
-how did the national polity theorist manage to
maintain their position after Korea and Taiwan was incorporated in the great
Japanese empire would be discussed in this chapter (32).
-Ch.4: during the period of the annexation of Korea,
most of Japanese anthropologists based their theory of the origins of the
Japanese nation on the mixed nation theory. Japanese was a mixture of a
continental people, the Malays from the south, and the indigenous Ainu. (53).
During this period the foundation for the mixed nation theory was created. This
was in opposition to the national polity theory. (53).
Ch. 5: it talks about the theory that the Japanese
and Korean shared a common ancestor. This was viewed as one of the most odious
ideologies that justified the aggression acts of the great Japanese empire (64).
-The mixed nation theory in anthropology began with Tsuboi, the common ancestor theory was
further developed by Hoshino and Kume. Meanwhile all the arguments of the Christian
intellectual were formed from the opposition to the national polity theorist
and the nativist scholars (80).
-Ch.6: it is about the Japanese annexation of Korea.
In august 1910, at the time of the Japanese annexation of Korea, mixed nation
theories praised the annexation. Articles advocating the pure blood theory were
not seen in leading Japanese newspapers (81). One event that symbolized the
turnaround in the current of thought was the conversion of Inoue Tstsujiro to
the mixed nation theory. (91) He said that through the annexation “the Japanese
have accomplished a new development that will enable them in future to move out
on to the great stage of continent and thus the world”. The door was now fully
open. After this, this course in the great Japanese empire run along the lines
laid down during this period until Japanese expansionism reached its limits and
imploded (92).
Part 2 (ch.7-ch.11) was about the thought of ‘Empire’.
-Ch.7 was
about history and the ‘abolition of discrimination’. Later assessment on the
historian Kita Sadakichi had split into two camps. One praised him for the idea
that the Japanese nation was a mixed one; the other camp criticized him using
history to justify colonial rules. The author asserts that Kita was the most
important ideologues of the mixed nation theory in the great Japanese empire.
Kita tried to use the mixed nation theory to fight racial discrimination (95).
-Ch.8 was about the reformation of the national polity theory.
If Hozumi Yatsuka, Kato Hiroyuki and Inoue Tegtsujiro were the first generation
national polity theorist, the idea of the second generation of the national
polity theory said that “what is urgently required is to develop a national
polity theory based on the facts of today’s national polity, which has come to
encompass various peoples, both inside and outside Japan, as nationals of the
one country”. National polity theorist had reformed their theory by
incorporating the mixed nation theory. They abandoned the image of a
homogeneous and pure blooded Japan, in response to the new needs of the expanding
empire (110).
-by about 1920s, the mixed nation theory was thus already being
utilized by national polity theorist.
-how were the alien nations within the empire explained, after
the denial both of the theory that the Japanese and Koreans shared common
ancestor and of rule through power? Of course, it was possible to accept them
as adopted children or foster children. This was the logic decided that would
enlarge the national polity, while maintain the idea of family state; at the
same time include alien nations (119).
-Ch.9: it talks about the re-writing of textbooks in japan.
-Ch. 10 talks about a strange theory that the Japanese were in
fact Caucasian (143).
-Ch.11 talks about Gakamure Itsue who was known as an anarchist,
a poet, and a path-breaking feminist historian.
Part 3 (ch.12-17)
Part 3 (ch.12-17)
-Ch. 12 talks about the birth of an Island Nation’s folklore. The
chapter talks about Yanagita Kunio in order to shed light on the analyses of the
national consciousness of Japan as a whole. He was one of the few writers
shifted from the mixed nation theory to the homogeneous nation (175). Folklore
was used a means of integrating the nation (189).
- Rice was seen as the only folklore that could be relied on to
unite the whole country from below. As long as rice remained the staple crop of
Japan, Yanagita could use it as a folklore common throughout the archipelago.
Japanese were people came from the south islands with rice and settled in the
archipelago, a place without an indigenous people (199). The schema of an
island nation with a homogeneous folklore based on rice cultivation had a
decisive influence on the later self-image of Japan. This duality of
exclusivism and peace was to become a fundamental character of the postwar myth
of the homogeneous nation (202).
-Ch.13 asserts that it was true that Kiyono and Hesebe had departed
from the conventional interpretation of the Kiki myth. The chapter concluded
that after the defeat in WWII when the empire was cut down to its original
size, both the theory that Japanese and Korean shared a common ancestor, and
the theory of mixed nation lost their influence, the idea of these two
anthropologist on the origin of the Japanese nation came to be accepted as the
new paradigm (236).
Ch.14 - Following the annexation of Korea, the theory of
homogeneous nation seemed to have been relegated to the sidelines of the
Japanese press. However it had not disappeared. The views of |Shiratori
Kurakichi and Tsuda Sokichi embodied the major antithesis to the mainstream
discourse in the Empire of the day – the mixed nation theory – and their
theories played a large role in the formation of the postwar myth of the
homogeneous nation (237).
-Shiratori claimed that Kiki myth were not historical facts but
stories (243). Tsuda adopted the mixed nation theory in a history textbook he
edited in 1902. However, like Shiratori, Tsuda converted to the homogeneous
nation theory following the Russo-Japanese war and the annexation of Korea
(244).
-by defining the descriptions of alien nations in the Kiki myths
as wild fantasies, Tsuda dismantled the foundations of the mixed nation theory
(246).
-roughly speaking, Tsuda’s thought was an expanded version of
that part of the national polity theory which argued that imperial rule was not
rule through power, but a union created by the natural affection that joined the
Emperor and people (251).
-Ch.15: in this chapter the author locates the theory of
Professor Watsuji Tetsuro (1889-1960) on the Japanese nation within the
discourse of his time. Together with Yanagita and Tsuda, his influence on the
postwar theory of Japanese culture was enormous (260).
-Watsuji’s view could be summarized as that Japanese nation emerged
through a mixture of an Indian and a Tungus people (270). He argued that
culture was closely related to climate, and divided the world’s civilization into
three types, the monsoon type, the desert type and the pastoral type (272).
Watsuji’s theory of the homogeneous nation was formed before the war ended and
included elements of peace and culture that were warmly embraced in postwar
Japan (283). He was a leading figure who supported the Symbolic Emperor system (appeared in postwar) (284).
-Ch. 16 asserts that from 1931 to 1943 there was a large number of
mixed nation theorist active in the press, apart from those mentioned earlier.
At the same time, there was also a backlash against the mixed nation theory.
One cause of the backlash was a growing anxiety about intermarriage and the
mixing of blood (289).
-Ch.17: In August 1945 Japan surrendered. As a result of the
defeat, Japanese intellectual could no longer call upon the logic of the past.
They lost the framework with which they could discuss alien ethnic groups.
Everything that had previously been thought to be correct was turned upside
down (298). It was a moment theorists emerged. The self-image of Japan as an
island nation that contained no aliens was therefore peaceful and tranquil was
very attractive to a people tired of a war (299).
-what was new in Tsuda’s argument was its heart-searching
reflection on the war, and his response to the emerging concept of the
emperor’s responsibility for the war. Tsuda’s conclusion was that the imperial
household was the center of national unity and the living symbol of the
national spirit in the homogeneous nation-stage. If democracy was a system where
the people became the master of the state, then it was natural that the emperor
should become the symbol of the state. The new constitution of 1946 defined the
Emperor as a symbol, the postwar system was therefore known as the Symbolic Emperor System (301).
-the Marxist scientific rule of history was the development of
productivity and the class struggle (314).
-with the collapse of the prewar mixed nation theory, there was
nothing left to prevent the myth of ethnic homogeneity form taking root. There
was roughly speaking two ways by which the myth of a homogeneous nation was established.
One was through a conservative discourse that argued for the unity of the
nation with the state and the Emperor. On the other hand, the homogeneous
nation theory was also used by critics of Japan. According to them the problem
of Japan was its lack of an international sense because Japan was a unique homogeneous
nation-state (317)
-in the 1970s, trade friction and high yen forced the Japanese to recognize Japan’s position n the
international economy. As Japan’s status in international society rose, self-consciousness
about how the Japanese were viewed overseas increased; there was an
unprecedented boom in theories about the Japanese (319). Much of the nihonjinron discourse stressed in
concert the extent to which the Japanese were unique and had been homogeneous
since time immemorial (319).
Book's Conclusion (pp.321-349)
-this book attempts to shed light on the transition in the
discourse on the Japanese nation from the era of great Japanese empire
throughout the postwar years. A sociological analysis allows us to pigeonhole
the prewar mixed nation theory and the postwar homogeneous nation theory (321).
-in summary, the transition in the discourse on the Japanese
constituted a movement to use the theory of ethnic homogeneity for protection
when Japan was weak, and to use the mixed nation theory to interact with outside
world when it was strong (323).
-there was an important different between the great Japanese
Empire and Western power. When facing the West, the people of modern Japan
felt inferior, perceiving themselves as colored people threaten by the Western
powers. When facing the people of their own colonies, they saw themselves as
superior members (331).
-the search for the identity of a nation almost always emerged as a reaction to a challenge generated by a preconception caused by an
encounter with an alien existence. The history of the nation was invented as a
storehouse of knowledge from which the inventor as a member of the nation could draw guides to behavior. This creativity was not necessary an intentional
distortion of history, it was a form of the Rorschach
test in psychology. The person being tested was shown a meaningless stain of
ink on a sheet of paper and was asked what it represents. Various answers would be given. The theory of the Japanese nation oscillated whenever Japanese
relation with the outside world changed (347).
-the essence of mythologizing the past was to escape from the
trouble of fear involved in facing up to the other (384). It was the gap between
overconfidence and physical weakness that allowed myth to emerge (349).
沒有留言:
張貼留言