What do you think?
Rate this book
The Myth of Japanese Uniqueness
The ?nihonjinron? is a body of writing and thought which constitutes a major and highly thought of academic industry in Japan. It analyses the Japanese identity and presupposes that the Japanese differ radically from other people in their make-up. It believes that their uniqueness is due to linguistic, sociological and philosophical differences.First published in 1988, this book is a critical analysis of the thought on which the ?nihonjinron? is based. Placing particular emphasis upon psychoanalysis, which constitutes the centrepiece of the book, Peter Dale reasons that the ?nihonjinron? should be treated as a mythological system.
- GenresJapanHistoryNonfiction
Paperback
First published January 1, 1986
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
May 14, 2023
It might have been good if I could understand it. I don’t think it’s meant for a laymen. There are difficult and technical vocabulary throughout; German and French words; long, unclear sentences; references to books and authors that you’re just supposed to know about. Like I said, it’s probably meant for people who are already experts in this field. For me, it was a trudge the whole way through, and I didn’t enjoy it at all. Two stars just for the few parts that I actually understood.
May 21, 2022
Nihonjinron is a school of thought about Japan espoused by Japanese intellectuals which developed in the early 20th century. It was refined and incorporated into the country’s justifications for its ultranationalist strivings in the 1930’s. Post WWII it evolved into a system of thought used to support the country’s so called economic miracle of the 1960’s-1980’s.
In the Introduction to The Myth Dale opined that it is based on three assumptions. First, the Japanese people constitute a culturally and socially homogeneous racial entity whose essence is unchanged from prehistoric to modern times. Second, the Japanese differ radically from other peoples. Third, the concepts which underlie these beliefs are so unique that analysis by outside sources is deemed impossible.
Over the course of 241 pages of narrative text the author attempted to prove that it is a kind of ‘fictional mentality’ supposedly based on ancient traditions, some of which were contrived in the early years of Nihonjinron’s development. The concepts utilized are ‘…not understood by its adherents as intellectual constructs but as objective descriptions of social mores.’ It is ‘ideological coercion and a self fulfilling prophecy’ because it is accepted as a given: as the reality of Japanese life.
To his credit Dale took a scholarly approach to making his case. He relied mostly on extensive Japanese language primary and secondary sources which are referenced and annotated at the end of each chapter. He also quoted some parts of these sources in a timely way to elaborate on the points being made. He organized the book into chapters focusing on the language used in Nihonjinron; its concepts about Japanese human nature, personality development, and interpersonal relations; its sociopolitical historical underpinnings; and its application to other fields. He utilized tables and charts on occasion to underscore his explanations of how Nihonjinron distinguishes Japanese ways of thinking and living from Western ones. Finally, he provided brief descriptions of the careers of the Japanese thinkers whose work he described.
Unfortunately, even when the author succeeded, as with his analysis of the language utilized in Nihonjinron, he greatly undermined his efforts stylistically. More specifically, his prose throughout the book was so full of complex, compound sentences that he made complicated concepts and terminology harder, rather than easier, to understand. His text was not reader friendly in two other ways. First, he used such difficult vocabulary as ‘autochthonous, immanentism, hierophant, hypostatize, prolixity, and jejune.’ Second, he sometimes inserted German, French, and/or Latin phrases without any translations. As the book went along on it got more and more tedious to read.
This kind of pedantic pretentiousness was even more apparent in Dale’s application of classic psychoanalytic theory to evaluate Nihonjinron’s notions of human nature, personality development, and family/social relations. In critiquing these ideas he was guilty of engaging in the same kind of closed system thinking which he accused Nihonjinron of. For example, as Japanese child rearing and social relations do not support the development of individual autonomy they are ‘regressive’ and ‘infantile.’ There was no recognition on his part that these value judgments are culture specific. More specifically, why should Japan have to strive to meet Freud’s notions of healthy development?
As one all too often sees in psychoanalytic literature Dale opined that the Japanese writers trying to utilize psychoanalytic concepts to explain Nihonjinron did not understand them because they were never trained thoroughly enough in psychoanalysis. He even went so far as to criticize one famous theorist’s notions (Takeo Doi) for his having unresolved personal problems of his own. Based on my years of training and experience as a psychologist with a reasonable foundation of knowledge about psychoanalytic theory this is a classic psychoanalytic technique: ‘if you don’t agree with the message, attack the messenger.’
Despite the stylistic obstacles noted its relatively brief analysis of the sociopolitical context of Nihonjinron was informative. Dale did a good job of explaining how it first arose as an effort by the government to quell social and political unrest after the Russo Japanese War in 1904-05. Conservative leaders in government began to stress the importance of adherence to ancient traditions like filial piety and Emperor worship along with more intense moral education in the schools in hopes of protecting the status quo and undermining a growing interest among Japanese intellectuals in fostering individual autonomy.
Given how much effort was required to overcome the significant stylistic flaws in The Myth and the fact that its psychoanalytic analysis was seriously, albeit predictably, myopic I cannot give it more than a 2 star rating. Even for someone like me with a long standing interest in Japan and a background in psychoanalytic theory I was more relieved than satisfied when I completed it.
In the Introduction to The Myth Dale opined that it is based on three assumptions. First, the Japanese people constitute a culturally and socially homogeneous racial entity whose essence is unchanged from prehistoric to modern times. Second, the Japanese differ radically from other peoples. Third, the concepts which underlie these beliefs are so unique that analysis by outside sources is deemed impossible.
Over the course of 241 pages of narrative text the author attempted to prove that it is a kind of ‘fictional mentality’ supposedly based on ancient traditions, some of which were contrived in the early years of Nihonjinron’s development. The concepts utilized are ‘…not understood by its adherents as intellectual constructs but as objective descriptions of social mores.’ It is ‘ideological coercion and a self fulfilling prophecy’ because it is accepted as a given: as the reality of Japanese life.
To his credit Dale took a scholarly approach to making his case. He relied mostly on extensive Japanese language primary and secondary sources which are referenced and annotated at the end of each chapter. He also quoted some parts of these sources in a timely way to elaborate on the points being made. He organized the book into chapters focusing on the language used in Nihonjinron; its concepts about Japanese human nature, personality development, and interpersonal relations; its sociopolitical historical underpinnings; and its application to other fields. He utilized tables and charts on occasion to underscore his explanations of how Nihonjinron distinguishes Japanese ways of thinking and living from Western ones. Finally, he provided brief descriptions of the careers of the Japanese thinkers whose work he described.
Unfortunately, even when the author succeeded, as with his analysis of the language utilized in Nihonjinron, he greatly undermined his efforts stylistically. More specifically, his prose throughout the book was so full of complex, compound sentences that he made complicated concepts and terminology harder, rather than easier, to understand. His text was not reader friendly in two other ways. First, he used such difficult vocabulary as ‘autochthonous, immanentism, hierophant, hypostatize, prolixity, and jejune.’ Second, he sometimes inserted German, French, and/or Latin phrases without any translations. As the book went along on it got more and more tedious to read.
This kind of pedantic pretentiousness was even more apparent in Dale’s application of classic psychoanalytic theory to evaluate Nihonjinron’s notions of human nature, personality development, and family/social relations. In critiquing these ideas he was guilty of engaging in the same kind of closed system thinking which he accused Nihonjinron of. For example, as Japanese child rearing and social relations do not support the development of individual autonomy they are ‘regressive’ and ‘infantile.’ There was no recognition on his part that these value judgments are culture specific. More specifically, why should Japan have to strive to meet Freud’s notions of healthy development?
As one all too often sees in psychoanalytic literature Dale opined that the Japanese writers trying to utilize psychoanalytic concepts to explain Nihonjinron did not understand them because they were never trained thoroughly enough in psychoanalysis. He even went so far as to criticize one famous theorist’s notions (Takeo Doi) for his having unresolved personal problems of his own. Based on my years of training and experience as a psychologist with a reasonable foundation of knowledge about psychoanalytic theory this is a classic psychoanalytic technique: ‘if you don’t agree with the message, attack the messenger.’
Despite the stylistic obstacles noted its relatively brief analysis of the sociopolitical context of Nihonjinron was informative. Dale did a good job of explaining how it first arose as an effort by the government to quell social and political unrest after the Russo Japanese War in 1904-05. Conservative leaders in government began to stress the importance of adherence to ancient traditions like filial piety and Emperor worship along with more intense moral education in the schools in hopes of protecting the status quo and undermining a growing interest among Japanese intellectuals in fostering individual autonomy.
Given how much effort was required to overcome the significant stylistic flaws in The Myth and the fact that its psychoanalytic analysis was seriously, albeit predictably, myopic I cannot give it more than a 2 star rating. Even for someone like me with a long standing interest in Japan and a background in psychoanalytic theory I was more relieved than satisfied when I completed it.
November 22, 2010
Che Dale abbia una gran testa è fuor di dubbio.
Parte come grecista, con la conoscenza di almeno quattro lingue sulle spalle (inglese; italiano; tedesco; francese), che legge correntemente (e ci si legge testi di Kant, Hegel, e idealisti successivi... mica libretti turistici); e poi si interessa dell'influsso dello sciamanesimo sulla poesia epica. È in cerca di confronti sul tema che arriva al Giappone. E allora, vista l'occasione, si mette a studiare anche il giapponese... una lingua in più non fa mai male. E non solo arriva a leggere testi nipponici specialistici non tradotti in quantità (cosa non facile anche per chi la lingua di Yamato la studia da tanto tanto tempo), ma arriva anche, tra i primi nel cosiddetto "Occidente", a rinvenire nei testi nipponici la presenza di quella rete di costrutti ideologici populist-nazionalisti noti come nihonjinron; a tracciarne una mappa, ad esaminarla e smontarla pezzo pezzo mostrandone i retroscena, e a proporne eziologia e genealogia.
Tanto di cappello. Promosso a pieni voti.
Parte come grecista, con la conoscenza di almeno quattro lingue sulle spalle (inglese; italiano; tedesco; francese), che legge correntemente (e ci si legge testi di Kant, Hegel, e idealisti successivi... mica libretti turistici); e poi si interessa dell'influsso dello sciamanesimo sulla poesia epica. È in cerca di confronti sul tema che arriva al Giappone. E allora, vista l'occasione, si mette a studiare anche il giapponese... una lingua in più non fa mai male. E non solo arriva a leggere testi nipponici specialistici non tradotti in quantità (cosa non facile anche per chi la lingua di Yamato la studia da tanto tanto tempo), ma arriva anche, tra i primi nel cosiddetto "Occidente", a rinvenire nei testi nipponici la presenza di quella rete di costrutti ideologici populist-nazionalisti noti come nihonjinron; a tracciarne una mappa, ad esaminarla e smontarla pezzo pezzo mostrandone i retroscena, e a proporne eziologia e genealogia.
Tanto di cappello. Promosso a pieni voti.
Per nulla facile, e denso di presupposti teorici multidisciplinari (dall'antropologia, alla sociologia, alla psicoanalisi, alla storia, la linguistica e l'economia), il libro di Dale è uno di quelli che, quando riesci a percorrerli, ti fan sentire con soddisfazione quasi fisica i tuoi circuiti sinaptici danzare nel mentre apprezzano e penetrano e vivono la complessità del testo e si lasciano da essa modificare, alla ricerca di nuove configurazioni e concetti ancora non sospetti.
Dall'alto della sua erudizione e intelligenza, Dale si può anche permettere una certa ferocia, e prese di posizione anche molto nette e trancianti, nei confronti di questa mania novecentesca di tanti studiosi giapponesi, di voler fare del proprio paese un unicum intatto e immacolato, eterno di fronte alle pretese di una Storia identificata con un fantasmatico "Occidente".
Il grosso punto debole che rischia di far barcollare l'intera operazione di Dale è la sua eziologia, cioè il ricorso a spiegazioni di stampo psicoanalitico (e quindi quasi totalmente infondate per definizione, più mitologiche che empiriche): questi giapponesi affermano l'unicità profonda e l'omogeneità immutabile della propria cultura perché, dice Dale, sarebbero impigliati in un narcisismo infantile che sogna nostalgico il tempo dell'unione assoluta e incondizionata tra bimbo & madre, a fronte di una modernità e di un "Occidente" che invece assumerebbero il ruolo del padre alienante da sfidare, del principio di realtà con cui combattere e/o scendere a patti.
Il Giappone come infante pre-edipico che non accetta il travaglio della Storia e della crescita? Dale lascia intendere, poi, senza mai affermarlo chiaramente, che questo rifiuto della crescita potrebbe avere le sue origini nelle modalità educative giapponesi, che a una cura materna avvolgente, eccessiva e protratta nel tempo più del dovuto fanno seguire un'uscita brutale e improvvisa in un mondo sociale (della scuola, del lavoro) esigente, spietato, disumano.
E così, lungo il percorso, quasi sembra che Dale arrivi a riaffermare suo malgrado una tesi sull'omogeneità giapponese, proprio mentre si proponeva di smontarne le sorelle (come a dire: "quegli stranieri sono tutti razzisti"). Sebbene riservi una riga per segnalare che no, non è così, suo obiettivo non è quello di fornire la psicoanalisi di un popolo, ma solo di quella cricca di studiosi che ne affermano l'unicità. Forse una riga è troppo poco?
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews