Book Review: Mirror of modernity: invented traditions of modern Japan

P. Waley
{"title":"Book Review: Mirror of modernity: invented traditions of modern Japan","authors":"P. Waley","doi":"10.1177/096746080100800215","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Japan, we are often told, was the first non-Western country to enter the hallowed time/space of modernity. There is therefore a sort of paradigmatic power to Japan’s transition from a state of premodern Innocence to one of modern Experience. The apparently abrupt and radical nature of the change has not been lost on the Japanese themselves, who have devoted much thought to the particularities of their trajectory. Within a few years in the 1860s and 1870s, the emperor, an obscure and impoverished figurehead, had been catapulted into the position of a sacred national symbol, and through the adept construction of unifying institutions a small number of leading politicians were able to forge a consciousness of a nation-state called Japan and of its inhabitants as subjectcitizens. In doing so, they were remorselessly inventive and imaginative in their creation of new traditions. Mirror of modernity concerns itself less, however, with this early period of centrally scripted history than with a later stage of appropriation and manipulation of tradition. The defining scheme of the book is that of ‘invented tradition’. The reference to Hobsbawm and Ranger’s The invention of tradition (Cambridge University Press, 1983) is explicit. But the earlier work is left far behind, stranded by the high tide of its naïve historicism, while the present volume immerses itself comfortably and productively in the warm currents of social theory. ‘Traditions’, Stephen Vlastos reminds us in his introduction, ‘are shaped by everything from capitalist markets to technological innovation in the ongoing process of incorporating and reorganizing new knowledge’ (p. 6). Traditions – supremely ideological as they are – stand caught in a ‘disjuncture between the rhetorical posture of invariance . . . and their actual historicity’ (p. 7). Traditions spring from attempts to give meaning to modern life through a carefully scripted rendition of a status quo ante. In this sense, they are perhaps not so much invented as crafted or moulded. Running through the contributions to this book is an insistence on the overwhelming significance of state and capital, but above all of state. The state in modern Japan is characterized as inventor, appropriator, mobilizer and manipulator of traditions. In the early decades of this century and again in the more recent days of Japanese economic triumphalism, the state has successfully scripted a tradition of harmony and cooperation and cast it in a dominant role. In his chapter, Ito Kimio describes how the penumbral figure of Prince Shotoku, an early seventh-century regent, was turned in prewar years into the apostle of a national cult of harmony, while Frank Upham writes of how a political elite found it expeditious to define and implant a national tradition of non-litigation, a tradition substantially at variance with documentary evidence. In similar fashion, Andrew Gordon explores how leading industrialists over several generations wove and embroidered a tradition of warm paternalism in Japanese industry through reference to native ‘beautiful customs’. They were able in this way to define a Japanese style of capitalism that was not fully capitalist because it conBook reviews 239","PeriodicalId":104830,"journal":{"name":"Ecumene (continues as Cultural Geographies)","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2001-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecumene (continues as Cultural Geographies)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/096746080100800215","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Japan, we are often told, was the first non-Western country to enter the hallowed time/space of modernity. There is therefore a sort of paradigmatic power to Japan’s transition from a state of premodern Innocence to one of modern Experience. The apparently abrupt and radical nature of the change has not been lost on the Japanese themselves, who have devoted much thought to the particularities of their trajectory. Within a few years in the 1860s and 1870s, the emperor, an obscure and impoverished figurehead, had been catapulted into the position of a sacred national symbol, and through the adept construction of unifying institutions a small number of leading politicians were able to forge a consciousness of a nation-state called Japan and of its inhabitants as subjectcitizens. In doing so, they were remorselessly inventive and imaginative in their creation of new traditions. Mirror of modernity concerns itself less, however, with this early period of centrally scripted history than with a later stage of appropriation and manipulation of tradition. The defining scheme of the book is that of ‘invented tradition’. The reference to Hobsbawm and Ranger’s The invention of tradition (Cambridge University Press, 1983) is explicit. But the earlier work is left far behind, stranded by the high tide of its naïve historicism, while the present volume immerses itself comfortably and productively in the warm currents of social theory. ‘Traditions’, Stephen Vlastos reminds us in his introduction, ‘are shaped by everything from capitalist markets to technological innovation in the ongoing process of incorporating and reorganizing new knowledge’ (p. 6). Traditions – supremely ideological as they are – stand caught in a ‘disjuncture between the rhetorical posture of invariance . . . and their actual historicity’ (p. 7). Traditions spring from attempts to give meaning to modern life through a carefully scripted rendition of a status quo ante. In this sense, they are perhaps not so much invented as crafted or moulded. Running through the contributions to this book is an insistence on the overwhelming significance of state and capital, but above all of state. The state in modern Japan is characterized as inventor, appropriator, mobilizer and manipulator of traditions. In the early decades of this century and again in the more recent days of Japanese economic triumphalism, the state has successfully scripted a tradition of harmony and cooperation and cast it in a dominant role. In his chapter, Ito Kimio describes how the penumbral figure of Prince Shotoku, an early seventh-century regent, was turned in prewar years into the apostle of a national cult of harmony, while Frank Upham writes of how a political elite found it expeditious to define and implant a national tradition of non-litigation, a tradition substantially at variance with documentary evidence. In similar fashion, Andrew Gordon explores how leading industrialists over several generations wove and embroidered a tradition of warm paternalism in Japanese industry through reference to native ‘beautiful customs’. They were able in this way to define a Japanese style of capitalism that was not fully capitalist because it conBook reviews 239
书评:现代性之镜:现代日本的虚构传统
我们经常被告知,日本是第一个进入现代性神圣的时间/空间的非西方国家。因此,日本从前现代的纯真状态过渡到现代的经验状态,有一种范式的力量。日本人自己也意识到了这种明显的突然和激进的变化,他们花了很多时间思考自己轨迹的特殊性。在19世纪60年代和70年代的几年时间里,天皇这个默默无闻、一贫如的傀儡,一跃成为神圣的国家象征。通过娴熟地建立统一的制度,少数主要政治家能够形成一个名为日本的民族国家的意识,并将其居民视为臣民。在这样做的过程中,他们在创造新传统方面发挥了无情的创造力和想象力。然而,《现代性之镜》更关注的是后期对传统的挪用和操纵,而不是早期的中央脚本历史。这本书的定义方案是“发明的传统”。参考霍布斯鲍姆和兰杰的《传统的发明》(剑桥大学出版社,1983)是明确的。但是早期的作品被远远抛在后面,被naïve历史主义的高潮搁浅,而现在的卷则沉浸在社会理论的暖流中,舒适而富有成效。“传统”,斯蒂芬·弗拉斯托斯在他的引言中提醒我们,“在整合和重组新知识的持续过程中,从资本主义市场到技术创新,一切都在塑造传统”(第6页)。传统——就其本身而言,是高度意识形态的——陷入了“不变的修辞姿态之间的脱节……”以及它们实际的历史性”(第7页)。传统源于试图通过对现状的精心编排来赋予现代生活意义的尝试。从这个意义上说,与其说它们是发明出来的,不如说是精心制作或塑造出来的。贯穿本书的贡献是对国家和资本的压倒性重要性的坚持,但最重要的是国家。近代日本的国家具有传统的发明者、占有者、动员者和操纵者的特征。在本世纪头几十年,以及最近日本经济的必胜信念中,日本政府成功地塑造了和谐与合作的传统,并将其置于主导地位。伊藤木雄在他的章节中描述了七世纪早期摄政王昭德亲王的影子是如何在战前的几年里变成了国家和谐崇拜的使徒,而弗兰克·厄普姆则写道,一个政治精英是如何迅速地定义和确立了一种不起诉的国家传统,一种与书面证据大相径庭的传统。以类似的方式,安德鲁·戈登探讨了几代领先的实业家如何通过参考当地的“美丽习俗”,在日本工业中编织和刺绣温暖的家长式传统。他们通过这种方式定义了一种日本式的资本主义,而这种资本主义并不是完全的资本主义
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信