The Heterogeneity of Japan
Killian Huang
Carnegie Mellon University - Japanese Studies
1. Introduction
What have you learned about Japanese culture from the work(s) of your choice?
In terms of demography, Japan is one of the most homogenous countries in the world. This homogeneity has both historical and cultural explanations. “When Western culture arrived in Japan unannounced and uninvited, Japan must end over two centuries of isolation and face the consequences(Goossen 1997, pp. xiii)”. As Goossen described in The Oxford Book of Japanese Short Stories, Japan’s two centuries of isolation led Japan to develop its own unique culture that was untouched from the rest of the world. Even Japanese people themselves often think that their culture is unique to the extent that it is sort of inaccessible to foreigners. As a result, the Western image of Japan is often wrapped in layers of exoticism. For example, the extreme popularity of Nihonjinron, a genre of writing discussing Japanese cultural uniqueness, has led critics to be “beguiled by the self-defining rhetoric of uniqueness that pervades Nihonjinron(Reader 2003).” According to Burgess, many scholars, who underestimate the particularities of Japanese culture, have come to see Nihonjinron as something unique to Japan. In reality, Nihonjinron is simply a kind of discourse on national identity that almost every nation has. However, the fact that scholars come to mistake Nihonjinron as a unique genre to Japan goes to show just how exotic and mysterious Japanese culture is to the Western world.
Since Japanese culture is so different from Western culture, people tend to view them as homogenous. There are two reasons behind this phenomenon. Firstly, the psychological theory behind this homogenous view of Japan is called the outgroup homogeneity effect, where outgroup members seem more similar to one another and ingroup members seem more distinct from one another. Secondly, after WWII, the previously mentioned popular genre, Nihonjinron, received a lot of attention as Japanese people were trying to unite and recover a sense of identity and pride. For the purpose of uniting Japanese people at the time, the main theme of Nihonjinron was that the Japanese are a homogeneous people (tan'itsu minzoku) who constitute a racially unified nation (Mouer and Sugimoto 1986, p. 406). This deepened the view that the Japanese people were a homogenous race.
However, Japan is far less homogenous than people may think. For example, a lot of scholars have argued for the notion of “multicultural Japan” which stresses tolerance and cultural autonomy as epitomised by the slogan tabunka kyōsei shakai (multicultural co-existing society) (Burgess 2004). In this research project, we are going to explore the diversity of Japan from a different angle by looking at Japanese people’s values. Over the past decade, as Japan has become more accepting of differences among people, art that illustrates and praises individualism has emerged. Today, the tendency to express individual and conflicting opinions has become more prevalent.
Although Japan is often considered a homogeneous society, Japanese people have developed vastly conflicting views on how to live their life. Since the 20th century, expressions of these conflicting opinions have become more accepted in Japanese society. This research project is going to focus on three kinds of conflicts: the conflict between one and many, the conflict between two people and the conflict in perceptions.
2. Evidence
2.1. Evidence 1
In the case of conflict between one and many, both Kokoro by Natsume Soseki and Tokyo Drifter by Seijun Suzuki depict a man having his own standards and way of life that he lives up to against all odds. Kokoro was written in 1914 by Natsume Soseki(1867-1916) and was his last finished novel before he death due to stomach ulcer. He is one of the most influential Japanese author. In his final years, one other author that we read in class, Akutagawa Ryūnosuke, became close followers of his literary style. According to Goossen, Soseki also “[pioneered] a new literature, at once Japanese and modern, that could speak to the change and transformation going on [in japan](Goossen 1997, pp. xiii).” Tokyo Drifter was released in 1966 by Nikkatsu Company. Half of a decade has passed since the publication of Kokoro, but the discussion of conflict between one and the society had not changed. Tokyo Drifter was famous for its fleshy filming techniques and not so much for its storyline and character development. Unlike Soseki, who belong to the pioneer category, Suzuki is more of a survivor or even entertainer. We can see this through the main character Tetsu, he is “driven by the sense of urgency … [wants] to get moving, and fast(Goossen 1997, pp. xviii).” Tetsu is practically also a wanderer, but he strong beliefs make him more of a survivor in my opinion. Through the theme song by Hajime Kaburagi, we can feel his internal struggle to find a place in the society without compromising his own standards.
In Kokoro, the author portrays Sensei, a figure whom the narrator encounters in a serendipitous way and gradually begins to admire. The narrator meets Sensei completely by coincidence while he is taking a break from college. Sensei’s appearance resembles the average Japanese when the narrator sees him on the beach. The only reason that the narrator notices Sensei is because Sensei is with a pale-skin Westerner. As the narrator learns more about Sensei through their occasional meetups, Sensei’s past slowly gets unfolded. Sensei, despite being a wise and educated man, lives an idle and solitary life. Hardly anyone could understand his motivations - not even the narrator who eagerly pursues after Sensei, despite Sensei’s warning against it. There are many reasons behind the narrator’s interest in Sensei, but the author never mentions any of them explicitly. However, we can see it through his actions and his detailed recollections of what Sensei told him. One of the main themes of the novel is loneliness. Both Sensei and the narrator are lonely because they don’t see the kind of struggle that they are going through in other people. Out of all the people that the narrator meets in his life, Sensei for sure is the one that influences him in the most significant way. Sensei’s loneliness seems to be the result of his suffering from childhood. His uncle essentially stole Sensei’s inheritance when he was young while pretending to be taking care of Sensei. As Sensei grows up and encounters Ojousan, it was evident that he has a hard time to fully trust anyone. He would find Ojousan and Okusan to be friendly and family-like some days, but suspicious and untrustworthy on other days. For months, Sensei doesn’t trust the narrator either, for which he explains:“It is not you in particular that I distrust, but the whole of humanity(Soseki 1914, part I).” Sensei’s tendency to not trust people may be a contributing factor to his eventual suicide, but it is only a tip of an iceberg. Because of how much blame he took on himself for his best friend K’s suicide, Sensei can’t even trust himself. As the narrator describes: “A man capable of love, or I should say rather a man who was by nature incapable of not loving; but a man who could not wholeheartedly accept the love of another - such a one was Sensei(Soseki 1914, part I).” His love for humanity is so intense that he is terrified by the ugliness that lies in humanity. The narrator has always been wondering what is it that caused Sensei to become the kind of person he is - so different from everyone else. The narrator asks himself: “Was it ... the result of a coldly impartial scrutiny of [Sensei’s] own inner self and the contemporary world around him? And if one were as naturally reflective, intelligent; and as removed from the world as Sensei, would one inevitably reach the same conclusions(Soseki 1914, part I)?” This sort of philosophical discussion about one’s relationship with the society does not rise in daily conversations often. But Sensei is a thinker that seems to be contemplating on this kind of topic for years. When everyone else is striving to find a place in the modern Japan and be part of the busy cosmopolitan metropolis, Sensei is left out with part of his heart still in the Meiji Era. However, it is only natural for one to be nostalgic and miss the old way of things after such a huge social movement in Japan. In many ways, Sensei symbolizes kokoro, the heart of things during that time. Between the two extremes of the old and the new Japan, both Sensei, K and the narrator struggle to find their own belongings. So the narrator's parents, who represents the old Japan, fail to understand Sensei and think that “any man worth his salt would find some useful occupation, and that only a ne'er-do-well would be content to live in idleness.”(Soseki 1914, part 2) Sensei accepts his fate that he is going to be all on his own, in order to live the life he longs for.
In Tokyo Drifter, Tetsu decides to be the reformer that maintain his way of living with no more blood shedding. Throughout the film, Tetsu is always on his own, protecting his faith and sense of loyalty. Tetsu is a member of a recently deactivated gang has a completely different background than Sensei. However, Tetsu has a really strong sense of character and integrity to do what he thinks is right. Tetsu’s character is very different from everyone else depicted in the film. Most other gang members that Tetsu encounters during his trip seems to act for their own benefits. Even Tetsu’s old boss kurata betrayed him for his own sake. But despite being hurt by such betrayal, Tetsu refused to give up on his faith. His belief has put him in many dangerous situations where he almost sacrificed himself. He can’t be with his girlfriend either because it would only put her in more danger. Kenji Aizawa, another character who also left his old gang and seems to be a wanderer like Tetsu, helped Tetsu along his way when Tetsu was injured. When Kenji asked Tetsu to join him, Tetsu refused because he doesn’t like men without faith and loyalty.
2.2. Evidence 2
The conflict in moral values that exists between two people is well portrayed in anime Death Note by Araki, etc. and Psycho-Pass by Shiotani, etc. Both work is famous for portraying conflicts between two people. Both Death Note and Psycho-Pass belong the most to the Settlers category because there is an overwhelming amount of western literature references in it. It seems like the director “did not find it necessary or natural to draw a hard line between the foreign and the native(Goossen 1997, pp. xiv).” One could also argue that they are entertainers because the traces of Japanese culture in these anime is vanishing. Besides its form of art as anime, one could hardly tell any Japanese traits in them. Even though both work was published after Goossen and therefore not considered when Goossen was writing about Japanese short stories, they demonstrate to a large extent how much Western culture has influenced their work. In Psycho-Pass, there are literally 51 books either directly quoted or referenced and none of them were written by a Japanese author. A lot of those books are science fictions that have deep philosophical implications. Some of them are classics such as 1984 by George Orwell and Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? by Philip K. Dick. Some of them are classic plays by Shakespeare such as Hamlet and Macbeth. In addition, both Death Note and Psycho-Pass have a lot of references to Christianity and the Bible. Light is always holding an apple which symbolizes Adam committing his original sin. In one of the episodes, L is massaging Light’s feet, which is similar to Jesus massaging one of his followers’ feet. The later betrayal of that follower draws a parallel to Light’s betrayal of L, while L still considers Light as his friend. Given that Christianity was prohibited and suppressed in Japan for a long time, as we read in Silence by Shusaku Endo, it becomes more clear that in the contemporary era, Japanese artists welcome Western culture and influence more.
In Death Note, the two main characters, Light and L, have conflicting moral standards and views on what justice embodies. Both of them tries to act as the arbitrator that determine what is right and what is wrong. The essential question that is posed to the audience by Death Note is whether an individual has the right to sentence someone to death. In Death Note, Light supports the statement above, that is that an individual has the right to sentence someone to death as long as he or she deemed that the act is for the good of the society. In contrast, L believes the opposite. L believes in the judgment by law and insists that no matter how terrible a crime someone has committed, no one has the right to punish the criminal by themselves. The issue that Death Note focuses on is death penalty. The history of death penalty can be traced back to literally the beginning of civilization on Earth. However, it hasn’t received much attention in either philosophical or political discussions until about 400 years ago when the term capital punishment emerged. Even then, it was often discussed by Western philosophers. The two most common approach to capital punishment are retributivism and utilitarianism, initially proposed by Kant and Bentham, correspondingly. It is clear that in Death Note, Light has a utilitarian view where he believes that the serial killers that he sentences to death are for the good of the society and that his action is morally justified. The most famous quote in Death Note is probably the following by Light: “This world is rotten, and those who are making it rot deserve to die. Someone has to do it, so why not me (Araki etc., 2006)?” To which L would replies the following: “This isn't divine judgement. It's the work of some childish killer who’s playing at divine retribution. That's all (Araki etc., 2006).” Throughout the anime, the audience enjoys the battle not only between the two main characters, but also the battle between the philosophy that they embody. Through this anime, we can see the Western influence that was brought to Japan in terms of philosophy. Moreover, through the intense battle between the two main characters, we can see how Japanese pop culture respects and values conflicting philosophies.
In Psycho-Pass, the two main characters, Kogami and Makishima, have conflicting opinions about how one should live under the fictional system that manages a utopian society. Kogami believes that in order to realize the intrinsic fairness in human nature, one has to act against the law occasionally. Makishima, on the other hand, believes that society exists to let people be themselves and connect with other, and that a society which does not do so is deemed to be overthrown. Similar to Death Note, these two main characters represent very different philosophies. Kogami essentially believes in the retributivism mentioned above. He believes that Makishima deserves to die because he has enticed many others to commit crime. Similar to the case of L, when the law fails to capture and bring justice to the crime that is committed, someone has to step up to make the judgement call. In this case, Kogami is willing to put his life at risk to act on what he thinks is the right thing to do, which is to sentence Makishima to death. Against the fictional system, Sibyl, who doesn’t recognize Makishima as a criminal, Kogami decides to break the law to do what is right in his own judgment. Makishima, on the other hand, believes that all of humanity live to achieve their free will and he is willing to sacrifice everything for letting people to be mentally free of societal and moral constraints. Makishima clearly declares his goal in life with the following: “I want to see the splendor of people’s souls.” In order to achieve his goal, he has sacrificed many lives, all of which he deems necessary for a revolution against the Sibyl system. He believes that Sibyl essentially takes away the necessity and thus the ability for people to think and reflect on the society that they live in. Throughout Psycho-Pass, Kogami strives to bring Makishima to justice for all the killing he as done, while Makishima is attempting to overthrow the Sibyl system through various crimes. It is not very clear in the anime that Makishima believes in utilitarianism, because he wants to overthrow the Sibyl system for his own interest rather than that of the people. However, the audience can still identify the clear conflicting values between Kogami and Makishima. In many scenes, Kogami is training so that he is prepared to catch the opportunity to kill Makishima. Similarly, Makishima describes Kogami as the loyal dog of the Sibyl’s system who is solely focused on biting him down. This conflict is presented throughout Psycho-Pass and eventually resolved in Kogami killing Makishima and escaping the society that is under Sibyl’s control.
2.3. Evidence 3
Conflicts also exists in different perceptions of truth, as depicted in Rashomon by Kurosawa and Death Parade by Tachikawa. It is hard to put this topic into any category because the theme of conflict in perception is truly globally universal. This conflict exists everywhere and between any two human beings. If I have to label these work, they would both be trail-blazers in exemplifying the Rashomon effect. They both have “taken what they could use from Western literature, they moved on ... [to establish a] a genre linked with, but not identical to, its counterpart in the West(Goossen 1997, xiv).” Through the term Rashomon effect, which is named after Rashomon, we can see the influence that Japanese literature has internationally. In addition, Death Parade also includes a lot of references to Buddhism and Shintoism. These are the two most popular religions in Japan. This further shows that Death Parade has borrowed techniques from others for its own purpose of introducing the audience to religions in Japan.
In Rashomon by Kurosawa, a case of murder and four different recollections of what happened were presented to the audience. Throughout the movie, the audience may feel like they are getting closer and closer to the truth. But the truth behind the movie is that: “Human beings are unable to be honest with themselves about themselves. They cannot talk about themselves without embellishing (Kurosawa).” In Death Parade by Tachikawa, people (usually two) who died at the same time are sent to a place where they recall all their doings in their lives in order for the audience to decide who goes to heaven and who goes to hell. The audience is presented with different cases each episode, and through a small game, the people spill the truth about their lives and their darkest secrets. Since the people who were sent to the place usually know each other in their real lives, they tend to have different perceptions of past events. So they argue about what the truth is. It is then left to the audience to decide who did the right thing. Death Parade essentially utilizes the Rashomon effect to stir the audience to make a judgement call at the end of every episode to resolve the contradictory interpretations that the two people presented. The biggest difference between Rashomon and Death Parade is that the conflict in perception in Death Parade is much more emphasized and the internal thoughts of each character is presented to the audience as well. Since the characters in Death Parade are asked to play a small game, such as throwing darts or bowling, the sense of competition and the desire to win have a strong presence in each episode. In Death Parade, Each character are no longer describing their case to a righteous judge or the innocent audience in a court as in Rashomon. The characters now have their own secret intentions to win the game despite hurting the other player and internal moral conflicts to hide the worst of themselves. This result in a much stronger presentation of conflicts in perception than Rashomon because characters are directly confronting each other and sometimes saying cursing word in each other’s face.
Conflicts in perceptions are different from the previous two conflicts because by human nature, people don’t agree on facts. Conflicts in perceptions are not usually depicted on media through direct confrontation and argument. They are rather implied through different upbringing and cultural backgrounds. Conflicts in perceptions also set the foundation of other conflicts - if two people can’t even agree on seemingly simple facts like the earth is not flat or Chairman Mao massacred millions of Chinese people, what is the basis for people to build similar values upon?
3. Conclusion
What have you learned about Japanese culture from the work(s) of your choice?
I learned that Japanese people have conflicting values and ideologies, thus the heterogeneity of Japan. Although Japan is often considered a homogeneous society, Japanese people have developed vastly conflicting views on how to live their life. This research project is focused on three kinds of conflicts: the conflict between one and many, the conflict between two people and the conflict in perceptions. The conflict between one and many is portrayed in Kokoro and Tokyo Drifter, where the main character acts against the common sense during their times. The conflict between conflict between two people is demonstrated in Psycho-Pass and Death Note, where two people of very different ideology battle against each other. The conflict in perceptions is presented in Rashomon and Death Parade, where different subjective truths are presented for the audience to pick a side. Since the 20th century, expressions of these conflicting opinions have become more accepted in Japanese society. Although all the works mentioned above to some degree present conflicting values of Japanese people, the contemporary anime, Death Note, Psycho-Pass and Death Parade, have much greater focus on the conflicts than the classic literature, Kokoro, Tokyo Drifter and Rashomon. In both Kokoro and Tokyo Drifter, the main characters are lonely and isolated because of their unique values. In Kokoro, despite the respect that the narrator has towards Sensei, Sensei ultimately commits suicide because the era that he belongs to has ended. Similarly, in Tokyo Drifter, the audience is supposed to like Tetsu as a honorable and loyal figure. However, he is doomed to be a wanderer that doesn’t belong anywhere because he himself rejects stability and wants to be a reformer. In both work, the characters have to make sacrifices for their difference in values and opinions with the society. Even in Rashomon, the conflict in perception is presented at a courthouse where the characters describe what they think happened to the audience without much confrontation with each other. The audience is then left to judge and determine what really happened. In contrast, the contemporary work puts conflicts in the spotlight and focuses on direct confrontation. In Death Note and Psycho-Pass, both directors uses color in lighting and shading to contrast the different ideologies and standpoints between the two main characters: Light is red and L is blue, Kogami is black and Makishima is white. There are so many one-on-one direct fighting and arguing scenes. Even though there were a lot of fighting scenes in Tokyo Drifter, it was mostly for entertainment purposes. Tetsu never tries to convince others to believe in his ideology. He seems to only want to prove his point through actions and he avoids all kinds of confrontation. In Death Parade, the two people who died at the same time are both invited to the bar to argue about the truth and to present themselves in the best light possible. Unlike Rashomon, the characters themselves must fight against each other to win the judge’s favor. All of these work acknowledges the existence of conflicting views and values in Japan and exposes them through means of art and literature.
Work
- Araki, Tetsuro, and Tsugumi Ōba. Death Note =: Desu Nōto. , October 3, 2006. TV broadcast.
- Kurosawa, Akira. Rashomon. Tokyo: Daiei, 1950.
- Natsume Sōseki, Trans. Meredith Mckinney. London: Penguin Classics, 2010.
- Tachikawa, Yuzuru. Death Parade. Madhouse Studio, March 2, 2013. TV broadcast.
- Shiotani, Naoyoshi, Katsuyuki Motohiro, and Gen Urobuchi. PSYCHO-PASS. Madhouse Studio, October 12, 2012. TV broadcast.
- Suzuki, Seijun, director. Tokyo Drifter. Nikkatsu, 1966.
Bibliography
Araki, Tetsuro, and Tsugumi Ōba. Death Note =: Desu Nōto. , October 3, 2006. TV broadcast.
Burgess, Chris. “The 'Illusion' of Homogeneous Japan and National Character: Discourse as a Tool to Transcend the 'Myth' vs. 'Reality' Binary.” The Asia-Pacific Journal, vol. 8, no. 9, ser. 1, 1 Mar. 2010. 1.
Goossen, Theodore W. (1997) Introduction. In Goossen ed. The Oxford Book of Japanese Short Stories (pp. xi-xxxi). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kurosawa, Akira. Rashomon. Tokyo: Daiei, 1950.
Natsume Sōseki, Kokoro. Trans. Meredith Mckinney. London: Penguin Classics, 2010.
Reader, Ian. 2003: 'Identity, Nihonjinron, and Academic (Dis)honesty: A Review of Hegemony of Homogeneity: An Anthropological Analysis of Nihonjinron by Harumi Befu and A Genealogy of "Japanese" Self-Images by Eiji Oguma'. Monumenta Nipponica 58:1 (Spring), pp.103-16.
Shiotani, Naoyoshi, Katsuyuki Motohiro, and Gen Urobuchi. PSYCHO-PASS. Madhouse Studio, October 12, 2012. TV broadcast.
Suzuki, Seijun, director. Tokyo Drifter. Nikkatsu, 1966.
Tachikawa, Yuzuru. Death Parade. Madhouse Studio, March 2, 2013. TV broadcast.