I was reading the bibliography of Shutting Out The Sun by Michael Zielenziger, when
I came across a couple of books written by Robert N. Bellah, which I found
extremely intriguing. I was
familiar with him through a book he co-wrote with several other sociologists
called habit of the heart that I read post-college that had a profound effect
on me. I was bowled over that he was actually a Japanologist by training. I tracked down the two books, Imagining
Japan and Tokugawa Religion. I have started reading Imagining Japan and it has
been extremely informative and though provoking, so much so that I might devote
several posts to the book of essays.
In this post I will mostly discuss his illuminating introduction where
he coalesces his many years of study and reflection into a single narrative on
the evolution of Japan Society.
I found many of his ideas helpful in clarifying some of my
own uniformed opinions. In particular he discusses the slippery question of the
validity of nihonjinron (discourse about
the Japanese-their uniqueness, exceptionalism, or particualrism). I have come across books that have had
this label but seemed useful in their interpretations of Japanese society (for
example Takei Doi’s two books The Anatomy of Dependence and Anatomy of Self). He states that many of these books have truths tot hem but
lack a comparative perspective, which is why I suspect Zielenziger chose to
compare Japan with Korea in Shutting Out the Sun. He also discusses the
influence of German nationalism on nihonjinron that seems to borrow the concept of Gemeinschaft, which suggest that the countries are “relational”
rather than “individualistic.” Thus Volksemeinschaft (national or folk community) was translated as kokumin
kyoudoutai. It seems that the main consumers of nihonjinron tend to be businessmen and educators, who seem to
have more dealings with foreigners than other professions and feel the need to
understand one’s own uniqueness that can be helpful in explaining their culture
with staples like “the Japanese are community-oriented than westerners,” “the
Japanese are close to nature,” etc.
He also notes the de-emphasis of the samurai and military tradition in
postwar writing that has the farmer peasant as the historical ideal at the
center.
I think he rightly focuses on the paradoxical ideas of
tradition and modernity that coexist in Japan society today. He frames this debate with in the
context of the loaded implications of both terms. Thus he cites the influence of Weber in defining what it is
that makes modern societies different from those which preceded it and he draws
the conclusion that ”modern capitalism” birth by the Protestant reformation is
the main concept in which we can distinguish from the two. However, there was
no protestant Reformation, however, there were equivalents like Buddhist,
Confucian, Christian, and Marxist movements that never quite overtook the
preaxial traditions in Japan, hence the remaining traditional traces of
Japanese culture.
He pays particular attention to the role of religion on
society. He discusses the role of Shinto in Meiji society and how there was a
conscious effort to remove the Buddhist role from government and society that
led to emperor worship, nationalism, and ultimately to the imperialistic
actions that led to WWII. (I realize that I am doing no justice to his complex
explanations and conclusions, but I found them thought provoking and ultimately
accurate)
Bellah made an interesting observation about Natsumi
Soseki’s preoccupation with individuality. He is the modern giant of Japanese literature and I have
read the first volume of his seminal book I Am A Cat, however, his discussion
of his intellectual concerns inspires me to seek out more of his
literature. It seems that Soseki
was interested in the role of individualism in relation to the nation and
nationalism. It seems he felt that it was important to know when to the
interests of the state and ahead of the individual.
Another apt observation by Bellah states that Japan is only
understandable in relation to its neighbors. Thus, modern Japan was shaped by the outside influences of
nationalism, capitalism, imperialism, fascism, and democracy. These external influences produced
specific Japanese responses to these influences and shaped their path tot
modernism.
In another section Bellah highlights the three major points
of development in Japanese history. The first major point was the seventh
century appropriation of Chinese culture.
The second major point was the Meiji appropriation of Western culture,
and the last was the American Occupation and the appropriation of liberal
democratic ideas. Therefore, these
three historical movements fascinate me, especially the last two since they
seems to show distinctly how Japanese culture has arrived where it is as the
current second world economic power.
Recent Comments