What do you think?
Rate this book
Japan's Minorities: The illusion of homogeneity
Based on original research, Japan's Minorities provides a clear historical introduction to the formation of individual minorities, followed by an analysis of the contemporary situation.
This second edition identifies and explores the six principal minority groups in Japan: the Ainu, the Burakumin, the Chinese, the Koreans, the Nikkeijin and the Okinawans. Examining the ways in which the Japanese have manipulated historical events, such as Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the contributors reveal the presence of an underlying concept of Japaneseness that excludes members of these minorities. The book addresses key themes including:
the role of this ideology of race in the construction of the Japanese identity historical memory and its suppression contemporary labour migration to Japan the three-hundred year existence of Chinese communities in Japan mixed-race children in Japan the feminization of contemporary migration to Japan.Still the only scholarly examination of issues of race, ethnicity and marginality in Japan from both a historical and comparative perspective, this new edition will be essential reading for scholars and students of Japanese studies, ethnic and racial studies, culture and society, anthropology and politics.
256 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1996
5 people are currently reading
138 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 - 6 of 6 reviews
December 30, 2022
This book was a bit of a ... well it was ambivalent to me.
Two things at the start:
1) I hate longass introductions that don't even belong to the official page count
2) Is the similarity between the japanese term minzoku and the chinese minzhu a coinciddence?"
Apart from this, the book started promising. We got told about the whole treatment of lepers and leprosy as hereditary, then compulsory sterilization being written out of the law in 1996 (started in 1948), something that sounds somewhat like the Völkerschauen in the German Empire, albeit the text isn't clear as to whether the exhibits on Taiwanese, Ainu, Chinese, Koreans and Ryükyüans featured actual people, only that it portrayed them as stuck in the past. At the end of this chapter, when I saw the notes, I realized that this is a compillation of works by different authors. That made me finish the book faster, much fster than I suspected.
So apparently the origin of the Ainu is more complex than simply being the original inhabitants of Japan being pushed ever northwards by the Japanese, I was not surprised at all. According to this chapter, there had been at least two cultures prior and a distinct Ainu culture can only be umabiguously identified in the 13th century, so late middle ages. And I understand that tourism might not be liked by all Ainu, but under the described condition, I really see no other option for raising living standards among them and have some income to deal with their problems. With the described history and social condition, generating and selling Ainu inspired artwork looks like the best option to make a living and continue your culture. But the author seems to have no interest in that. And as interesting as the information about the Ainu in the 21st century is, I really have to wonder how accurate this still is. This 2nd edition came out in 2009 and deals with information that is no younger than 2003, so almost 13 years out of date by the time I read this. So how are issues like identity, culture, passinge etc. Today?
The next chapter on mixed blood people might be confusing. Apparently "mixed-blood" here is referring to mixed children who can be easly identified as such, unlike e.g. Japanese/Korean mixes, so who knows whether that term isn't misleading for those not in the know. Also, based on the differing responses to those children in post-war Japan, I do wonder whether the author would have been so sympathetic if these were Germans and not Japanese, because the arguments etc. sound similar.
The chapter about the burakumin in Japan was really forgettable, I was tempted to just skip it because so far the only interesting and somewhat new thing was that this title developed over time and was not simply there during the Tokugawa period.
The next author gave some evidence for the presence of black Africans prior to modern times (via the Han and Tang empires) in Japan, however, I do wonder whether the same mistake is made here that is made so often: Equating African with black African, for all we know these Africans mentioned were Northern Africans, which is not unlikely considered the described trade routes.Furthermore, it is stated that those Japanese encountering Africans were influenced by their "European mentors" but then why did none of their views change upon encountering Africans? The author never adresses that, why did it become and stay so negative? And the author even makes the claim that some japanese buddha statues depict sub saharan africans, but there is no evidence except for that one account and that one could simply have made a mistake due to the coloring of a statue. And while the author often does deal in nuance, I think there is a strong tendency to attribute japanese attitudes towards blacks to outside influence, not their own observations. And it was really weird that the author left it uncommented that this Langston Hughes clearly could not have been correct when he said he hoped that the Japanese won't become colonials, since in 1933 they already had colonies. Leaving this uncommented was bad enough, but she only once called what the empire did colonial abuses but then never again and also she never mentions Thailand as not being colonized either, none of the authors did. It was very noticeable that the author has a clear tendency to attribute racism by Japanese and blacks to whites, it is so strong that with blacks towards okinawans there is no mention of wartime propaganda, just that the blacks are mistreated and so they mistread the japanese. The rest of the chapter is supposed to be "current" time but I skipped it, there was no reason to read it.
The next chapter only had the interesting fact that chinese immigrants to Japan at first mostly worked in restaurants, barber shops and clothing industry... that sounds similar to US history. However, I skipped the rest of the chapter, as these "contemporary" chinese are decades out of date.
I skipped the chapter on "multiethnicity" in Japan as well, that was 17 years out of date so who knows how it is today.
The chapter on zainichi Koreans in Japan and their history was interesting, but it has the problem that so many of its data is almost 20 years old by now. And as for Japan opening... well, it had just basically closed down for 2 years, so I would not put my hope on that.
The next historical chapter was better: you see, the daimyo Satsuma used Ryükyü (aka Okinawa) to basically trade with foreigners during the Tokugawa period. You know, the more I read about that period the more it is clear that it was never as isolated as claimed so often.
The way the next chapter described Okinawan identity made it sound like it can be quite strenous and conflicting. The author said that this has been part of Okinawa for centuries now, but it really seems odd. Granted, no clue how much of it is still true today.
The last chapter was on Brazilian Japanese coming to Japan and I did wonder whether these Brazilian Japanese still present themselves as Brazilian in Japan today. It was interesting to read how they basically came to Japan with very idealized images in their head, saw themselves as Japanese in Brazil but then were identified as Brazilian in Japan.
So in the end, this was a very mixed bag and the weakest part of the book was the information on "current" Japan, because who knows how much of it is still relevant.
Two things at the start:
1) I hate longass introductions that don't even belong to the official page count
2) Is the similarity between the japanese term minzoku and the chinese minzhu a coinciddence?"
Apart from this, the book started promising. We got told about the whole treatment of lepers and leprosy as hereditary, then compulsory sterilization being written out of the law in 1996 (started in 1948), something that sounds somewhat like the Völkerschauen in the German Empire, albeit the text isn't clear as to whether the exhibits on Taiwanese, Ainu, Chinese, Koreans and Ryükyüans featured actual people, only that it portrayed them as stuck in the past. At the end of this chapter, when I saw the notes, I realized that this is a compillation of works by different authors. That made me finish the book faster, much fster than I suspected.
So apparently the origin of the Ainu is more complex than simply being the original inhabitants of Japan being pushed ever northwards by the Japanese, I was not surprised at all. According to this chapter, there had been at least two cultures prior and a distinct Ainu culture can only be umabiguously identified in the 13th century, so late middle ages. And I understand that tourism might not be liked by all Ainu, but under the described condition, I really see no other option for raising living standards among them and have some income to deal with their problems. With the described history and social condition, generating and selling Ainu inspired artwork looks like the best option to make a living and continue your culture. But the author seems to have no interest in that. And as interesting as the information about the Ainu in the 21st century is, I really have to wonder how accurate this still is. This 2nd edition came out in 2009 and deals with information that is no younger than 2003, so almost 13 years out of date by the time I read this. So how are issues like identity, culture, passinge etc. Today?
The next chapter on mixed blood people might be confusing. Apparently "mixed-blood" here is referring to mixed children who can be easly identified as such, unlike e.g. Japanese/Korean mixes, so who knows whether that term isn't misleading for those not in the know. Also, based on the differing responses to those children in post-war Japan, I do wonder whether the author would have been so sympathetic if these were Germans and not Japanese, because the arguments etc. sound similar.
The chapter about the burakumin in Japan was really forgettable, I was tempted to just skip it because so far the only interesting and somewhat new thing was that this title developed over time and was not simply there during the Tokugawa period.
The next author gave some evidence for the presence of black Africans prior to modern times (via the Han and Tang empires) in Japan, however, I do wonder whether the same mistake is made here that is made so often: Equating African with black African, for all we know these Africans mentioned were Northern Africans, which is not unlikely considered the described trade routes.Furthermore, it is stated that those Japanese encountering Africans were influenced by their "European mentors" but then why did none of their views change upon encountering Africans? The author never adresses that, why did it become and stay so negative? And the author even makes the claim that some japanese buddha statues depict sub saharan africans, but there is no evidence except for that one account and that one could simply have made a mistake due to the coloring of a statue. And while the author often does deal in nuance, I think there is a strong tendency to attribute japanese attitudes towards blacks to outside influence, not their own observations. And it was really weird that the author left it uncommented that this Langston Hughes clearly could not have been correct when he said he hoped that the Japanese won't become colonials, since in 1933 they already had colonies. Leaving this uncommented was bad enough, but she only once called what the empire did colonial abuses but then never again and also she never mentions Thailand as not being colonized either, none of the authors did. It was very noticeable that the author has a clear tendency to attribute racism by Japanese and blacks to whites, it is so strong that with blacks towards okinawans there is no mention of wartime propaganda, just that the blacks are mistreated and so they mistread the japanese. The rest of the chapter is supposed to be "current" time but I skipped it, there was no reason to read it.
The next chapter only had the interesting fact that chinese immigrants to Japan at first mostly worked in restaurants, barber shops and clothing industry... that sounds similar to US history. However, I skipped the rest of the chapter, as these "contemporary" chinese are decades out of date.
I skipped the chapter on "multiethnicity" in Japan as well, that was 17 years out of date so who knows how it is today.
The chapter on zainichi Koreans in Japan and their history was interesting, but it has the problem that so many of its data is almost 20 years old by now. And as for Japan opening... well, it had just basically closed down for 2 years, so I would not put my hope on that.
The next historical chapter was better: you see, the daimyo Satsuma used Ryükyü (aka Okinawa) to basically trade with foreigners during the Tokugawa period. You know, the more I read about that period the more it is clear that it was never as isolated as claimed so often.
The way the next chapter described Okinawan identity made it sound like it can be quite strenous and conflicting. The author said that this has been part of Okinawa for centuries now, but it really seems odd. Granted, no clue how much of it is still true today.
The last chapter was on Brazilian Japanese coming to Japan and I did wonder whether these Brazilian Japanese still present themselves as Brazilian in Japan today. It was interesting to read how they basically came to Japan with very idealized images in their head, saw themselves as Japanese in Brazil but then were identified as Brazilian in Japan.
So in the end, this was a very mixed bag and the weakest part of the book was the information on "current" Japan, because who knows how much of it is still relevant.
April 28, 2012
Race a social construct determined by historical and national context. "Racialized" minorities distinguished by relative size, settlement pattern, length & status of residence, degree of social economic and political integration, or by a combination of these factors.
September 24, 2018
hihgly interesting reading
June 16, 2012
I decided to read this to find out more about the Ainu after reading Harukor: An Ainu Woman's Taleby Honda Katsuichi.
In the process I found out about another dimension to Japanese war crimes in WWII in the articles about Chinese and Koreans in Japan. Japan kidnapped members of both these nations for forced labor in Japanese factories. The saddest impact of this forced labor were the thousands of Koreans who were victims of the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
I also found out about Japanese-Brazilians, an immigrant group with a fascinating background.
For more details and links to further resources, see my blog entry about Japan's Minorities at http://www.maskedpersona.blogspot.com
In the process I found out about another dimension to Japanese war crimes in WWII in the articles about Chinese and Koreans in Japan. Japan kidnapped members of both these nations for forced labor in Japanese factories. The saddest impact of this forced labor were the thousands of Koreans who were victims of the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
I also found out about Japanese-Brazilians, an immigrant group with a fascinating background.
For more details and links to further resources, see my blog entry about Japan's Minorities at http://www.maskedpersona.blogspot.com
Read
April 16, 2015For anyone who wants to look beyond the lacquered veneer of the self-curated image of Japan.
Read
March 13, 2015I want to read this book. because I think this book is good. I want to know minorities in japan
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews