Drawing from Marx, Foucault, and Mbembe, Driscoll puts forth an interesting interpretation of capitalist development in Imperial Japan that offers insights into the violent forms that capital accumulation can achieve under colonialism and its exploitation of the subaltern. Overall, I did find a number of flaws in Driscoll's analysis and theoretical framework. Yet, supplemented by more focused monographs, I do think there are some insights.
To briefly summarize the theoretical framework, the first section looks back at Chinese coolies in the Guangdong lease, the emergence of Japanese pimps as a capitalist force, the "hysterics" of colonist women, and Korean tennant farmers in the early stages of Japanese imperialism. Focusing on Gotō Shinpei as he moved from Taiwan to Manchuria to form the South Manchurian Railway, we see the establishment of biopolitics as formal subsumption. The subaltern was biologically managed and exploited through their health, living arrangements, or income. Formal subsumption entails agreement to labor, thus, psychiatric wards designed for female "hysterics" (often prostitutes kidnapped by Japanese pimps competing in the same business), the promise of remittance to Northern China, or the guarantee of arable land for Korean tennant farmers ensured that labor would be reproduced and exploited for the lowest wages possible. This initial step helped fuel Japan's entry into the imperial realm.
The second section delves into neuropolitics, wherein formal subsumption transforms into real subsumption and laborers become commodified products. Here, Driscoll points towards modern sexology, erotic-grotesque modernism, and Japanese ero-guro literature to illustrate how humans have been grotesqued into spectacle and eroticized commodities. We can observe Kon Wajirō's "modernologist" observations of urban consumption habits, Nakamura Kokyo and Tanaka Kōgai's anti-European embrace of sexual desire, or Edogawa Rampo's grotesque literary descriptions of murder as commodification, among a variety of others. Wildly popular in the Taishō Era, these new (modern?) conceptualization of sex and death (images appearing alongside each other in popular magazines) helped shape human as a disposable product.
The final section details when biopolitical formal subsumption transforms into Mbembe's "necropolitical deformal subsumption" through the mediation of of neuropolitical reformulation of humans as consumable things that do not need to be replicated. Here, with a renewed focus on Manchurio we witness the synergetic trifecta of Amakasu Masahiko's opium empire, designed to create as many adicts and profits as possible, Kishi Nobusuke's money laundering schemes, and Ayukawa Yoshisuke's use of forced labor for his Nissan factories. This trinity of drug money, new bureaucracy, and zaibatsu corporate war financing ensured that, as Driscoll often repeats, "war is a continuation of business by any means." It's easy to see when these three elements collaborate, how such an utter disregard for human life can be attained for the sake of profits.
Overall, I found this narrative of capitalist development fascinating, deriving from a strong theoretical background. I have read and appreciated a large number of the secondary sources cited im the bibliography and was pleasantly surprised to see some old professors from my undergrad mentioned in the acknowledgements, so the intellectual pedigree was perfectly acceptable an the promise of a reinterpretation of subaltern studies was an exciting proposal. Yet, we have to accept that Driscoll is proposing a meta-narrative that he seems to be desperately trying to make fit at times. At times it feels clear that he's devised a deductive methodology and is trying to squeeze in as much evidence as he can.
The first section seems to cover an all too broad spectrum of the subaltern that has already been covered in other monographs. Kawashima did well with tenant farmers, the chapter on coolies is too brief, and Muraoka's accounts as a pimp are historically sketchy as a source. This lack of focus runs the risk of lumping the subaltern into one category, creating an easy dichotomy between colonizer and colonized. Ironically, while Driscoll rightfully wishes to to move away from the "feel good" historiography of Jansen, etc., portraying Japanese modernization in a positive light, he neglects his own sources, such as Soh or Uchida, who have been working to portray a more nuanced picture of colonial relations.
The second section moves away from the subaltern almost entirely and starts moving towards grounds already covered by Harootunian. I did enjoy this section, as it revealed quite a bit of the Taishō Era crisis of modernity and total incorporation of consumer desire. However, losing focus on the subject at hand demonstrates in some ways a weak link in this narrative; we are unsure about what's happening to the subaltern and if they're being subsumed by this commodified lifestyle as well. Furthermore, in this section there is a heavy reliance on contemporary Japanese theoreticians and authors. While I'm skeptical of an overreliance on empirical evidence, there is a dearth in this section. It reads nicely as literary theory, but Harootunian provides a much more eloquent argument backed up by data.
The final section was by far the strongest. By maintaining a focus on Manchuria and providing a bevy of resources, Driscoll is able to convincingly argue for necropolitics as the final (fatal) stage of Japanese imperialism. This argument helped connect the first two sections and I could finally make sense of this theoretical arc and the constellation. Yet, the weaknesses of the first two sections still stick, which prevents this from being a better book.This isn't delving into the ridiculousness of the language, as I literally rolled my eyes at many sub-chapter titles and every mention of Kishi's semen (as my thesis was on Anpo, I'm very anti-Kishi, but we sometimes tread on libel).
As I said earlier, this book has a series of interesting events and details. Unfortunately, they can stray too far from the mark and weaken the overall thesis. I'd still recommend reading, as the theoretical insights are thought provoking and the historical details are very interesting (no matter how familiar you are with Japanese colonialism, you'll find something new). However, I still think this is a book that needs to be supplemented by its own sources for a better understanding and only marks a theoretical beginning that needs to be further developed.