Chapter 17 Appendix II Japanese Scholars’ Comments on "The Chrysanthemum and the Sword"
After its publication, it received a great response in Japan. In April 1949, "Intellect" magazine organized five scholars to hold a discussion (Tsurumi Kazuko, Kawashima Takegi, Kogata Naokichi, Isoda Susumu, Iizuka Koji). In May 1950, "Research on Ethnology" published a long commentary by five scholars (Takehiro Kawashima, Nambo, Arkakizaemon, Tetsuro Watsuji, and Kunio Yanagida). In May 1951, "Prospect" magazine published another 20-page review by Yoshikichi Tsuda.Some scholars spoke highly of it (of course there were also criticisms and doubts), represented by Takeyoshi Kawashima.Some scholars have fundamental doubts or discussions, represented by Tetsuji Tetsuro and Tsuda Sayokichi.The following is a brief introduction to the main points of these three scholars' comment articles.
The title of Kawashima Takei's article is "Evaluation and Criticism".The article repeatedly pointed out that the author of this book has never been to Japan, but he has collected such a large amount of ordinary and important factual materials, vividly depicting the overall picture of the Japanese spiritual life and Japanese culture, and leading to the basic and generally speaking. Characteristically decisive, despite the inevitable misinterpretation of observation and insufficient analysis, the intellectual capacity of the student is generally "admirable."He asked back: "Have Japanese scholars written such a book about the United States?" He believes that this book "exposes the ugly face of the Japanese in broad daylight and forces us to conduct deep reflection." "Japan during the war made the spiritual life, culture, traditions, etc. of the Japanese people, as if under a microscope, presented extremely clearly."This book and some books by foreigners studying Japan can hit the "sore spot" even more. "I hope all Japanese people will read this book." "More than any other nation, the Japanese are probably more blindly accepting their own traditions and ways of thinking, and judging things based on them. This is what we have been taught Education. This book will give us a great stimulus to reflection."
Kawashima also pointed out that Ruth's ability to write such a book is inseparable from the political and cultural environment in the United States.At that time, Japan was an enemy country of the United States, and the purpose of the research was to conquer, occupy, and rule Japan.Even so, the United States is different from those countries that only know how to force researchers to be like children and abuse the enemy's country. It actually conducts scientific and authentic analysis of the enemy's country in wartime.
Kawashima believes that: Chapter 1 of this book is methodology.Chapters 3, 5-6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12 are divided into chapters on Hierarchy, grace, righteousness, reputation, human relations, morality, self-cultivation, and children's education.Chapters 2, 4, and 13 are less important.
In terms of methodology, Kawashima believes that: Generally speaking, the social sciences of Britain and the United States are more empirical, while Japan is more speculative and does not pay much attention to evidence and data.However, Ruth's book is not only rich in information, but its strength lies in theoretical analysis.Sociological treatises often attach importance to the quantitative analysis of various phenomena, but this book focuses on the study of social structure and its functions, as well as the whole of culture and its various internal connections.Kawashima believes: "This is exactly the method of cultural anthropology." For the study of "heterogeneous cultural phenomena full of unknowns", as Ruth emphasized, this research method must be adopted in particular.Kawashima also believes that the Japanese should also pay attention to this research method when studying Japan, that is, they should pay more attention to "qualitative research" than "quantitative analysis".
That’s why Kawashima appreciates that this book first focuses on the analysis of the foundation of Japanese culture—hierarchy (note: the original book is Hierarchy, and the general translation is “hierarchy”. The Japanese translation is translated as “hierarchy”. is Hierarchy).This book carefully analyzes a set of cumbersome social rules that support the hierarchy, and points out that: Japan's hierarchy is based on the family system, and it is the hierarchy that ultimately defines people's actions and ways of thinking.While generally affirming this analysis, Kawashima also points out some misunderstandings: First, the family system of tenant farmers, day laborers, fishermen and urban petty citizens who account for a large proportion of the Japanese population is not so dignified.Second, it is inconsistent with the fact that the "neighboring group" no longer played a role in rural areas at that time.Neighborhood organizations have always been "the social foundation of Japanese totalitarianism."Third, it is also inconsistent with the fact that the Japanese army has abolished "honorific language" and that the army does not care about family status and plays an equal role.
Kawashima believes that Chapters 5 and 6 on "en" are the most painstaking and best written.Japan's social union is essentially a relationship of personal dependence or domination and obedience, which is already recognized as common sense.The question is: what kind of normative system and consciousness is used to establish and maintain this relationship?In this regard, there are not many discussions in the past.Kawashima believes that it relies on two principles: one is the principle of "en" and the other is the principle of "family".This book not only talks about "family", but also grasps "en" (chapters 5 and 6) and "righteousness" (chapter 7) and discusses them in depth.For "this kind of keen analysis", Kawashima believes that "I have to express my sincere admiration".
Kawashima also praised the other chapters (on "Human Relationship", "Moral Dilemma", "Cultivation", "Children's Learning", etc.), thinking that the Japanese would be "very interesting" and "enough to be thought-provoking". (For example, the Japanese have been instilled and educated since they were young, and they are required to obey them all their lives. They regard "sincerity" as the "highest morality" and "the highest ideal of morality", but in the eyes of the United States or other nations, it is just "religious madness against itself." Doctrinal fanaticism”!) At the same time, they all point out some misunderstandings or insufficient and inaccurate analysis, and put forward their own views.
On the methodology of the whole book, Kawashima pointed out two important shortcomings on the premise of overall affirmation: First, the lack of historical analysis.Japan is a changing Japan.After the Meiji Restoration, feudalism and civil society, Japanese style and Western style were often superimposed on one photo, influencing and radiating each other.The author of this book mentioned several times the "contradiction" of Japanese behavior, way of thinking or "pattern", which he finds hard to explain.In fact, if we can analyze it from the historical aspect, we may be able to solve it easily.Second, the author examines "Japanese" as a whole in this book.it's necessary.However, it cannot be ignored that there are various specific differences in class, occupation, region, and level of knowledge among Japanese people.When Americans study Japan, they must first regard the Japanese as a whole, which is necessary in terms of the order of research, but they cannot stop here.should be further analyzed.From the perspective of Japan at present, special attention should be paid to the study of various "forces" within Japan, especially the "mechanical relationship" between conservative "forces" and "forces" that require democratic reforms.Kawashima said that he had hoped that Mrs. Benedict would come to Japan in person to conduct research on Japan's democratic revolution and reconstruction of Japan, but unfortunately, she has passed away.
He and Tsuji Tetsuro's comments were written and discussed.The letter was addressed to cultural anthropologist Eiichiro Ishida.It was published under the title: "Doubts about the Value of Science".The letter said: He was old (note: he was 60 years old) and had no intention of reading this book.Mr. Ishida recommended this book to him, saying that "although there are errors in the details, in general it is quite insightful enough to prompt us to reflect."But after reading it, he felt that this book was not like an academic work, and hoped that Mr. Ishida would tell him: what is the academic value of this book?
He said: His feeling is not only that there are many fallacies or misunderstandings in the materials used in this book (although this is also a problem, but we should be tolerant to foreigners studying Japan), but that it is difficult to make such a universal statement based on the materials in the book. conclusion.The author should take into account that others can cite the same amount of data to reach the opposite conclusion.He said: If the scope of investigation and research is clearly limited to "the way of thinking of Japanese soldiers" or "the way of thinking of Japanese prisoners", it may still have some academic value.But the author says it is "the Japanese way of thinking" or "the model of Japanese culture", which becomes a partial generalization of the whole and draws an overall conclusion based on partial facts.
For example, the beginning of the book states: "War practices recognized by Western countries based on human nature obviously do not exist for the Japanese", and use this as information to understand the outlook on life or beliefs of the "Japanese".He Tsuji believes that the so-called "Japanese" here should be changed to "some Japanese soldiers".What this book talks about is only "the model of Japanese soldiers" and "the model of Japanese national quintessence soldiers", and it cannot be said to be "the model of Japanese culture".He also said: Among the Japanese soldiers, those who violated the customs of war are also a small number of tyrannical criminals, and such acts are also regarded as tyrannical illegal acts.For such acts, whether it was the Nanjing Massacre or the torture of prisoners, the military department tried its best to conceal it, so as not to let the people know the truth.This proves that most of the Japanese, and even the military itself, regard this kind of behavior as a violation of war customs, fearing that it will cause criticism from the people, otherwise why hide it?As for the Japanese not daring to criticize the military, this is another major problem.Therefore, it cannot be considered that the majority of Japanese are condoning tyranny and are accomplices.During the Russo-Japanese War, Nogi Nogi, the commander of the Japanese army, treated the Russian commander who surrendered with courtesy. This incident became a good story and was included in textbooks.Kazuji himself was a middle school student at the time, and he and his classmates spontaneously visited the prisoners of the Russian army.This shows that mistreating captives was not in line with the moral concepts of the Japanese at that time.
Another example is the doctrine of non-surrender. He pointed out that there is no such traditional concept in Japanese history.In the military songs of the Meiji period, the soldiers praised Kumagai Naomi, who had "intelligence and courage", and was a surrendered general (first participated in the crusade, and then surrendered Minamoto Yoritomo).Surrender is not a good thing, the Japanese see it this way, and so do the Westerners.The question here is: Some soldiers fanatically advocated "non-surrenderism" and forced their subordinates not to surrender. Can this be called "Japanese outlook on life" or "Japanese belief"?There is an excited mentality that would rather die than surrender on the battlefield, but this kind of psychology cannot be exaggeratedly described as "view of life" or "belief about morality".Among the samurai, "even if there are samurai who regard this psychology as their outlook on life, they are despised as 'pig warriors' (reckless and brave warriors). For more than ten years (referring to the period of Japanese fascist rule), this kind of pig warriors dominated Even so, it is said that this is a "model of Japanese culture", and this kind of arbitrariness is probably no different from the arbitrariness of the pig samurai."
Another example is slogans such as "spiritual power overcomes material power." Can such slogans be regarded as the characteristics of the Japanese?Check the Japanese newspapers and periodicals more than ten years ago of the "Manchurian Incident" (that is, the "September 18th Incident" in 1931), and you can't see such slogans. Instead, "historical materialism" is almost dominant.Such slogans and slogans emerged after the forces of the military supported young officers to seize power. They are "the way of thinking of the military."In the era of military autocracy, such mandatory slogans were popular everywhere.Insufficient weapons and ammunition advocate the victory of spirit over matter.When food and fuel were insufficient, the people were mobilized to do gymnastics to endure hunger and cold.If it is said that the "Japanese" way of thinking is that gymnastics can replace greenhouses and food, this kind of statement can only be astonishing.
With regard to "Eight Hongs and One Universe" and "Everyone deserves his place," Wazuji pointed out that it is a fact that Japanese war leaders used such slogans to promote aggression.However, most Japanese do not understand this kind of ancient language, and some principals were even criticized for pronouncing the word "纮" incorrectly.Most people treat such slogans as pressure from the military.It is very arbitrary to say that such slogans are the core of the "Japanese cultural model" and the embodiment of Japan's "class system". People like me didn't understand "Eight Hongs and One Universe" at first. I checked the notes in "Nihon Shoki", and the original meaning refers to a family in Japan, "compatriots from all over the world", and has nothing to do with foreign countries. "Each gets his own place" probably comes from "Ya Song, each gets his own place" in "Ya Song, each gets his own place", the original meaning is nothing more than each playing its own value.The military used these words as slogans to promote aggression.But it cannot be said that "compatriots from all over the world" is aggressive.The question here should be: Why are these slogans so rampant?Why can't the Japanese suppress these right-wing rioters?Why are these right-wing rioters impotent parliament and taking over the reporting establishment?Such research is important.
Regarding the "hierarchy" (referring to Hierarchy), Waji believes that modern Japan has preserved many ancient things, which is "the multi-layered nature of Japanese culture".There is some academic value in studying these things as "legacy of the feudal era".But this book repeatedly emphasizes "the Japanese"'s "trust in the hierarchical system", saying that the Japanese "settle themselves in their proper position in the hierarchical system."He Tsuji believes that this concept is a distant past.His grandfather's generation, born a hundred years ago, did have this idea.Few people in his parents' generation were like this.His own generation has been determined to pursue success and a higher status since they were teenagers.
Regarding the "family" in Japan, Kazuji believes that there may be many "old-style families" in Japan described in this book, but this kind of family has already been labeled as "old-style" as early as the Meiji era. brand.He, who has lived in Japan for 60 years, can only be dumbfounded to regard this old-style family as a "modern Japanese family".What he has come into contact with is that most young people choose careers and marriages according to their own will. If conflicts arise, it is mostly their parents who give way.
Regarding "giri" and "human feelings", Mr. Ishida once asked him to comment.He Tsuji believes that this issue is inseparable from the above points and it is difficult to comment.
The title of Tsuda Yoshikichi's article is: "The Country of the Chrysanthemum and the Sword: Japanese Studies on Foreigners".He first expresses his understanding of the author's intention and methodology.In a nutshell, this book believes: "How Japanese people behave on what occasions, how their characters behave, how their psychological conditions are, and the moral values and outlook on life that are the basis for these can all be learned from Japanese daily life and lifestyle. Come and understand." "The way of life, the way of looking at life, or the way of focusing when observing the focus of life is different from nation to nation." Japanese and Americans are different in these respects.Therefore, for the Japanese, it is necessary to study its characteristics. "There are certain systematic relationships between individuals and actions of a certain nation, which form certain 'patterns'." Tsuda said: This is what he understands. This book is a study of cultural anthropology. "Methodology" and "underlying assumptions".
Tsuda first raised the issue of data.He said: "The Japanese way of life", although it can be "generalized in one word", actually "contains various heterogeneous things".On the whole, it has undergone several changes in the long-term historical process, and the changes after the Meiji era have been unprecedented.Specifically, the lifestyles of Japanese people today have many differences due to status, occupation, education, knowledge level, etc., which cannot be ignored.As far as thinking is concerned, it may be Confucianism, Buddhism, or various modern Western thoughts.So complicated, how to investigate?Its difficulty may be difficult to overcome.Tsuda believes: "Cultural anthropology always requires a unified explanation of various life phenomena." This research method has not been used for a long time. Difficulties have arisen in modern Japan, which has a long history, a high level of civilization, and a complex culture.
Tsuda expressed respect for the author of this book's study of Japan in the United States, and believed that the author's heart was honest, and his observation of the nationals of Japan, an enemy country, was fair.There are quite some precise observations in the book, for example, it is said that the Japanese do not look forward to revolution, and that the so-called "revolution" is just a change of power; it is said that Japan's "Minmin Ichikui" (Japanese peasant struggle) and class struggle do not require system changes; It is said that although the emperor of Japan is regarded as a "god", it is actually of little significance and so on.However, due to short time (concentrated research time is no more than two years), special purpose (to complete the task), lack of knowledge about Japan, etc., the result is quite hasty judgment.And because the author is on the other side, the materials used are limited to English treatises or English translations of Japanese works, novels, legends, and wartime propaganda films.Even if you have direct contact with the Japanese in the United States, you should consider the socio-political status of these people, the nature of their knowledge, their ideological tendencies, and the authenticity of their records.In short, Tsuda believes that academic works cannot be without review and criticism of the collected materials.
Tsuda expresses many of his own views on what is discussed in this book.Mainly focused on the emperor and Japan's "hierarchy" (Hierarchy) issues.I think this book: "It is inappropriate to put the emperor at the top of the class." social relationship.Such as the emperor, the Chinese, bureaucrats, the army, the parliament, enterprises, the public, the intellectual class, as well as the subordinates, ranks, status, masters and servants, masters and apprentices, leaders and brothers of special societies, etc.Think: "The emperor of Japan has never been considered a sacred existence in the religious sense", "never was a power holder, but maintained his status and played his role as a unified symbol of the country, the people, and the spirit", "Although the word 'symbol' did not exist in the past, it best expresses the essence of the emperor's status" and so on.
He also believes that to describe "every nation in its own right" as establishing a "hierarchical" order in the world with Japan as the supreme ruler is an exaggerated propaganda by the military forces during the war.It is comical to think of this as "the Japanese way of thinking".He also denied that "there is no wartime convention in the eyes of the Japanese".
In his opinion, it is strange that this book compares "en" to debt.He admits that the Japanese morality does have shortcomings, but thinks that the book says that Japanese morality is rooted in "shame" and forced by external forces, and that the Japanese do not have the concept of fighting "evil", etc., which may come from Christianity. position.It is inappropriate to use the ancient ideas of "Araman" and "Wamon" to prove that the Japanese do not have the concept of "evil", and to think that modern Japanese also have the ideas in "The Story of the Forty-seven Scholars".He also believes that this book was written during the war, and it is easy to regard the actions or propaganda of the Japanese military during the war as the demands or thoughts of the Japanese, and describe the Japanese as a warlike nation.
This book uses Japanese slang and everyday expressions as materials. Tsuda agrees, but also points out that the explanations may not always be accurate.Regarding the title of the book "Chrysanthemum and Sword", Tsuda said: after the Meiji era, "sword" was also regarded as a kind of art, but this book is still regarded as a "symbol of war"; as for the beauty of "chrysanthemum", it is far more than that The cultivation techniques described in the book, especially, lie in the Japanese's deep aesthetic feeling for nature, autumn colors, chrysanthemum posture, and chrysanthemum fragrance, which the author failed to appreciate.
Tsuda's discussion is both long and complicated, and it only gives a brief clue as above.
The research and comments of Japanese scholars in recent years, known catalogs include: C. Douglas Lummis (C. Douglas Lummis), translated by Kadi Yong: "Internal Foreign Countries - Re-examination of "The Chrysanthemum and the Sword" ( "Nai Naru Foreign Chrysanthemum and Sword Reexamination"), Jiji News Agency, 1992, 8th edition (1981, 1st edition); Nambo "On the Japanese—Meiji から Today まで", Iwanami Shoten, first edition in 1994, 1997 7th edition; Mori Sadahiko: "The Chrysanthemum and the Sword Rediscovered", Tokyo Book Publishing Association, 2002 first edition, etc.
Looking at various reviews, it can be generally said that reviewers from the perspectives of sociology and cultural anthropology spoke highly of this book, while reviewers from the perspectives of philosophy and history had fundamental doubts or confusion.Leaving aside specific issues, as far as fundamental doubts are concerned, to a large extent it is a matter of perception of the emerging discipline of cultural anthropology.The actual situation shows that: with the progress of the global era, ethnic and cultural issues are becoming more and more prominent, and cultural anthropology is developing day by day.The book has also been a bestseller.In Japan, according to statistics, the Japanese translation of this book was reprinted more than 100 times in 48 years from the time it was published in 1948 to 1996, with a print run of more than 2.3 million copies. According to the average Japanese population, more than 40 people own one copy. .In the United States, an article in "Leadership Weekly" listed this book as the 71st among the 100 masterpieces that leaders must read.Read and understand Japanese scholars' comments on Japan, it should be beneficial for us to further study Japan and even improve the level of social science research.
Notes: Revised Japanese translation.
Notes: Revised Japanese translation.