What do you think?
Rate this book
The Japanese Character : a Cultural Profile
Written during a period (1935-38) when, according to the author, there was much talk of the Japanese spirit and of the superiority of things Japanese, the essays collected here explore the essential nature of the Japanese character. The author notes that "the virtues of the Japanese national character are not only mistaken by foreigners, but are frequently misunderstood by the Japanese themselves." His penetrating examination of the Japanese character opens up important new avenues of thought on a subject about which, even today, comparatively little has been written in English.
- GenresJapan
Paperback
First published October 10, 1988
8 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
October 17, 2022
In the original preface to The Japanese Character written in 1938 Hasegawa noted that the chapters were a collection of some of the essays he had written on the topic since 1935. Educated in Japanese law and British literature in the late 1890’s he offered a wide array of examples of the general points he made taken from Japanese social and political history, religions, and fine arts including literature, drama, and architecture. His knowledge of China and the West allowed him to make comparisons to and contrasts with aspects of those civilizations as well.
The author did a credible job of articulating some general observations which, in my own readings over the years, others have also made about the Japanese culture and people. These include such things as the Japanese have always been very adept at assimilating concepts or practices from other cultures but then modifying these to fit their own needs and proclivities. For example, they modified Chinese ideographs to make them more readily available to people other than elite scholars. Or their close relationship with nature has meant that they have emphasized, especially in their private lives, simplicity and austerity over complexity or showiness. For example, their homes are generally modest in size and they do not dress in gaudy colors. Or the limited availability of arable land required two things of them. First, that they make the most of the resources they do have. Second, that living in close proximity because of the country’s limited land mass fostered self restraint and courtesy in their relationships with each other.
Hasegawa provided 70 references over the course of the book’s 150 pages of narrative text. While these are available in 6 pages at the end of the book, there is no bibliography.
Some things in TJC provided helpful context to the reader. First, the translator offered a 3 page note for the book’s 1965 translation into English. Second, Kaji Ryuichi wrote a 12 page biographical essay about Hasegawa’s education and career. Third, there are a few pages of photos of some of the fine arts and architecture noted in the book. Finally, there is a list of the historical periods of Japan from 646-1912 which were discussed.
Perhaps it was limitations in the length allowed for the essays but oftentimes the comparisons offered were very general. Was Hasegawa assuming his readers would have a solid foundation of knowledge about the characteristics of Chinese vs Japanese literature or architecture? Or a thorough base of information about the political and social dynamics of the various eras of Japanese history which he commented on? Fortunately, I know enough about 18th-early 20th century Japan to have been able to follow his arguments relating to this period most of the time. References to earlier eras about which I know much less or Chinese culture about which I know very little were not so readily understood by me.
Additionally, the author made some points about Japanese history which, IMHO, were simplistic at best and self serving at worst. For example, he opined that the ‘Japanese can be prone to impulsive or fanatical attitudes but rarely has this led to confusion. They always maintained the ability for self restraint and careful thought.’ The transition from the Tokugawa military dictatorship to the so called Meiji Restoration in 1868 and well into the 1870’s was not as calm and well organized as Hasegawa would have liked his readers to believe. There were profound and sometimes violent struggles for control over the government during those years. Perhaps it was the censorship which was already prevalent by the mid 1930’s which led him to ignore the upheavals which the country experienced in the Manchurian Incident in 1931 and its subsequent militarism.
The author noted that the Japanese ‘primitive fear of forests’ had resulted in there not being any wooded parks in cities. I agree that there is folklore which depicts ghosts and other intimidating creatures as residing in forests. But what about Ueno Park or Meiji Shrine in Tokyo? I think most people familiar with that city would agree that there are large wooded areas in these two locations.
The translator allowed some vocabulary to remain in the original Japanese. Perhaps this was out of a desire to enhance the book’s authenticity? Or was it because some terms are admittedly very difficult to translate? But it would have been better had he provided a glossary. Or translations in parentheses.
Given these limitations I ended up as much, if not more, disappointed in as satisfied with TJC. For that reason I would give it 2 stars. While the intentions were well meaning, the execution was lacking in some significant respects.
The author did a credible job of articulating some general observations which, in my own readings over the years, others have also made about the Japanese culture and people. These include such things as the Japanese have always been very adept at assimilating concepts or practices from other cultures but then modifying these to fit their own needs and proclivities. For example, they modified Chinese ideographs to make them more readily available to people other than elite scholars. Or their close relationship with nature has meant that they have emphasized, especially in their private lives, simplicity and austerity over complexity or showiness. For example, their homes are generally modest in size and they do not dress in gaudy colors. Or the limited availability of arable land required two things of them. First, that they make the most of the resources they do have. Second, that living in close proximity because of the country’s limited land mass fostered self restraint and courtesy in their relationships with each other.
Hasegawa provided 70 references over the course of the book’s 150 pages of narrative text. While these are available in 6 pages at the end of the book, there is no bibliography.
Some things in TJC provided helpful context to the reader. First, the translator offered a 3 page note for the book’s 1965 translation into English. Second, Kaji Ryuichi wrote a 12 page biographical essay about Hasegawa’s education and career. Third, there are a few pages of photos of some of the fine arts and architecture noted in the book. Finally, there is a list of the historical periods of Japan from 646-1912 which were discussed.
Perhaps it was limitations in the length allowed for the essays but oftentimes the comparisons offered were very general. Was Hasegawa assuming his readers would have a solid foundation of knowledge about the characteristics of Chinese vs Japanese literature or architecture? Or a thorough base of information about the political and social dynamics of the various eras of Japanese history which he commented on? Fortunately, I know enough about 18th-early 20th century Japan to have been able to follow his arguments relating to this period most of the time. References to earlier eras about which I know much less or Chinese culture about which I know very little were not so readily understood by me.
Additionally, the author made some points about Japanese history which, IMHO, were simplistic at best and self serving at worst. For example, he opined that the ‘Japanese can be prone to impulsive or fanatical attitudes but rarely has this led to confusion. They always maintained the ability for self restraint and careful thought.’ The transition from the Tokugawa military dictatorship to the so called Meiji Restoration in 1868 and well into the 1870’s was not as calm and well organized as Hasegawa would have liked his readers to believe. There were profound and sometimes violent struggles for control over the government during those years. Perhaps it was the censorship which was already prevalent by the mid 1930’s which led him to ignore the upheavals which the country experienced in the Manchurian Incident in 1931 and its subsequent militarism.
The author noted that the Japanese ‘primitive fear of forests’ had resulted in there not being any wooded parks in cities. I agree that there is folklore which depicts ghosts and other intimidating creatures as residing in forests. But what about Ueno Park or Meiji Shrine in Tokyo? I think most people familiar with that city would agree that there are large wooded areas in these two locations.
The translator allowed some vocabulary to remain in the original Japanese. Perhaps this was out of a desire to enhance the book’s authenticity? Or was it because some terms are admittedly very difficult to translate? But it would have been better had he provided a glossary. Or translations in parentheses.
Given these limitations I ended up as much, if not more, disappointed in as satisfied with TJC. For that reason I would give it 2 stars. While the intentions were well meaning, the execution was lacking in some significant respects.
Displaying 1 of 1 review