Romantic views of other cultures

[nerdanel]

This thread was split off at Wilma's request from the Japan earthquake and tsunami thread. Nel, please feel free to retitle as you please.

—Prim, 10:19 AM PDT, 20 March 2011

______________________

Is anyone else concerned about the romanticizing of Japanese culture brought on by this earthquake/tsunami/nuclear disaster? I'm starting to feel fatigued by the "no looting" claims (which seem not to be factually supported), critiques of individualism and competitiveness, and championing of communitarianism. My concerns are twofold. First, I fear this is yet another example of exoticizing (and in this case, romanticizing) an Asian population, something that the West loves doing at intervals. Second, I disagree that the American (or Western) attributes being condemned by comparison - individualism, competitiveness, self-definition (rather than definition by one's community), capitalism - are things that we need to change in our society, whatever may be working (or not) in a given other country.

One example of what I'm talking about: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/20/opini ... istof.html

[yovargas]

This may be more appropriate for another thread but your comment hits on something I've been thinking about a lot of late: there are many cultures around the world, and there are often some real, significant differences between cultures. Is it truly wrong to 1) acknowledge those differences and 2) express ones like/dislike of those differences? It's can be a difficult line to walk, but I do think that our fears of un-PC-ness has made it so that we can't talk about real cultural differences without fear of charges of racism (not that you, nel, did that here). I have certainly never lived in Japan so have no experience of their culture and yet I'm 100% certain that there are real differences between their culture on the culture I live in. Is it truly wrong to admire some of those differences?

[nerdanel]

Of course it's not wrong to express liking or disliking of those differences. Of course, one should do so accurately. Here, stating that the Japanese were so motivated by the public good that "they" didn't loot (this was stated in absolute terms by early news articles) turned out to be incorrect. It turns out that some Japanese, when motivated by desperation, do in fact loot - just like some Americans (and one presumes, Europeans, Africans, Latin Americans, etc.) So, as I said, in praising another culture's differences, we have to watch out for absolute statements that reflect a romanticized, exoticized view. "How come 'they' are so much better than us? 'They' manage not to steal for the good of the community," was the tone of many of the early news reports. It would have been better to note specific examples of the Japanese coming together to help each other, and to have noted in non-absolute terms (if true) that the rate of reported theft/looting was lower than after Katrina/9-11/whatever.

As for the differences in question, to the extent true, my problem is that I do not admire them (and I do not think it is racist to say that). If a communal-good-over-individual-good model is working for another society, far be it from me to storm in and advise that society to change it. (For instance, I've learned that some African human rights documents are much more concerned with the communal good/communal rights than are Western regional human rights documents. As far as I'm concerned, that's "their" right to reach different conclusions re: what works best in their respective societies.) But, as a staunch and passionate individualist: I see the individual as the fundamental building block of society. I believe that individuals are entitled to prioritize and realize their own conception of a meaningful life, and that they should not have to subordinate their desires to some "greater good" (whether family or society) unless they freely choose to do so. A society in which the individual's needs, desires, dreams, wants, are minimized for some conception of the greater good is not one that I would champion or choose to live in. I have no firsthand experience of Japan, and I'm not sure whether it is as extremely communitarian as some of these Western writings are claiming. But if it is - while respecting their society's right to define itself - I wouldn't want us to go down the same path.

As various commentaries on these articles romanticizing Japanese culture have pointed out, Japanese solidarity has at some level been achieved via homogeneity, because their social policy has been one of extreme legal hostility towards immigrants. That alone would make me reluctant to emulate the way they have legally/practically structured their society.

[Holbytla]

How much of this is media driven?
Is this a case of journalists looking for an angle to the story?

I do believe the Japanese culture has its share of admirable qualities that should be recognized, but not in favor of denouncing other cultures' qualities that appear to be in dis-chord with those qualities.

BTW, the author of that piece in the NYT, spent five years in Japan. While that may give him some insight into the culture, it also hardly makes him unbiased.

[Hachimitsu]

I think what Nel brings up is a really good subject, and I would like to comment on it. Particularly romanticization precipitated by disaster. But I don't think it's 100% right for this thread so, I would like to request a thread split.
Edit: Grammar

Edit again since I fail at spelling. I am just going to add some initail thoughts here on the NYT article. First of Sept 11. Americans came together. New York was changed. A friend of mine had visited before and about a year or 2 after and she said parts of New York felt like a town rather then a giant mega city. People were nicer and expressed care and concern more openly for each other then they previously did.

[Primula Baggins]

Sure thing, Wilma. I tried to do it from my laptop but it hung up, so I'm at my desktop now. Just a sec.

Edit: Done.

[vison]

Some years ago when Japan's economy was the envy of the world, there were countless articles about how "Western" businesses and workers just couldn't measure up to the Japanese model. It is edifying to read some of those articles now - because the very qualities that seemed to create that fabulous economy are in large part responsible for the mess its in now. The one saving grace is that the Japanese owe their debt mostly to themselves.

There are many things about the Japanese that I admire. But their culture is their culture, not mine. Because they are many in a small space, their rules of etiquette are severe - this is necessity. Yet, there are times when they allowed to "let loose" and, boy, do they let loose.

As for looting: well, "looting" out of desperation, as in stealing food and water when you are thirsty and hungry, that's one thing. Breaking into appliance stores and stealing TVs is another. I think we need to define "looting".

[Túrin Turambar]

As various commentaries on these articles romanticizing Japanese culture have pointed out, Japanese solidarity has at some level been achieved via homogeneity, because their social policy has been one of extreme legal hostility towards immigrants. That alone would make me reluctant to emulate the way they have legally/practically structured their society.

Their extreme hostility to immigration is pretty sensible in my view. The country is small, and only a small part of it is flat enough to live on. I doubt that anyone who has caught a peak-hour train in Tokyo would suggest that Japan needs more people. But of course, that (along with many other aspects of their culture) is a product of their situation.

There is a lot of romanticising Japan in the west, particularly amongst young anime-following men. There’s even a term for it IIRC. I suspect it’s because the Japanese are so different, so homogenous, and prima facie so successful. I’ve long had an interest in Japanese culture and history myself, and I’d love to return to learning Japanese one day and make another trip to the country. But I don’t have an idealistic view of the country, and I wouldn’t want to live there long-term.

As a specific point, I can’t stand their revisionism over the Second World War. The government, historians, and the community in general take little responsibility for either waging a war of aggression on their neighbours or the atrocious conduct of their armed forces, unparalleled in modern times. Japanese Prime Ministers continue to pray at shrines dedicated to war criminals as bad as Eichmann and Hans Frank. That is symbolic of a great deal of what I think is still wrong with Japan today.

[Hachimitsu]

As yov points out, I don't think it's at all wrong to admire and possibly emulate some of the nicer qualities. But there are 2 sides to every coin.
It's a tough balancing act because one can appear racist while not being one, and one can hide their racism by trying to appear "constructive" or helpful". (I personally remember one pundit, commentator, author (who is of South Aisan origin) and all he could ever talk about when talking about black people n America was some horribly negative "stat" about black people. To the point where it seemed clear he had "issues".)

Individualism is much more recent societal phenomenon , many societies are trying to cope with/fight/run from it. Many societies worked with communalism because it seemed over all that it worked and there was not other means of thinking. Evolutionary-wise it's was pretty dangerous to live alone as a primate in Africa, society and social responsibilty helps us survive.

Individualism, brings quite a bit of uncertainty (especially if it takes an extreme form of abandoning all or any social resposibility), and it's seems quite cold and uncaring. (Although I do notice when indiviuals find a group that suits them, they do become communal to a degree. As my mother always quoted, "No man is an island" (She'd quote much more, but this post is long enough.))

While people talk about how the Japanese don't loot, they don't talk about how that communalism can hold people back. With the nuclear issues, it's probably best for people to evacuate out to the 80km zone, especially those with young kids. But if people leave it will look bad, and they could hurt their societal reputation if they don't stay and stick it out together (this could even mean loss of job oppourtunities). So leaving to save yourself could mean serious social disharmony (leaving at the darkest hour), and for some reason it could be difficult to convince everyone to leave.

One person didn't evacuate until his employer told him to head south and hope the wind does not shift. Regardless of his feelings he didn't leave before because it would be impolite and not very honourable to his boss. (There is a workaholic aspect to their culture). In that situation many would not even think of broaching the subject with the boss. This in part why think Japanese reporting on the nuclear aspect of the disaster should be more honest, since they know some people will stay and stick it out when they really shouldn't.

So while communalism and politeness are nice and wonderful, there is a very negative side attached.

In that same vein, one of the criticisms I have about Japanese society is that they are quite reluctant to change. Even if a situation sucks or is inefficient, etc, everyone would rather suffer through it, rather then have someone stand up and suggest changing to improve it. Even if it's just a simple minor change. Standing up and saying situation X sucks and we should change it, would be pretty awful socially (this can be seen in how they run business to selling dvds to how they make clothes). it's better to just suck it up.

I think while the NYT article does talk about some of the Japanese issues with foreigners and does note some historical examples, he does have a sort of a romantic view. There are plenty of current examples of how Japan aren't big on foreigners. But you know, it was home to him for 5 years and I am sure it was a place he cared about. With possibly 10 000 dead it may not be the greatest time to point out all the parts of Japanese culture that sucks.

Also, it's a very old society that has had to cope with earthquakes and tsunami's on a regular basis.The island is at a point where 3 tectonic plates intersect If every time there was a disaster and it turned into every man for themselves, Japanese society wouldn't have been able to handle regular disasters. They certainly would not be the #3 economy (just recently slipped from #2). It's a very small island with a huge population and limited resources, they sort of had no choice in terms working for the communal good. (The US on the other hand historically had lots of resources and lots of land).

Although individualism can lead to a lot of problems too and society would fall apart if going to the extreme. The musical chairs story is a good analogy I think. I think we should start to become aware of trying to cope with a mix of individualism with the communal good, because China definitely applies to the latter (at least in theory), and they are the current #2 economy.

Besides what's wrong with not being greedy? I remember a prof of mine and another student who was a parent and they were talking about the "mine!" phase their kids were going through. (Teaching sharing is hard.) One of the dad's pointed out in Indonesia where he previously had worked, the children there don't go through the "mine!" phase.

While people talk about cultural issues and disaster, I think one has to be careful to look at both sides. While people mention a lot of bad things that happened in New Orleans, there was also leadership that emerged in trying to get people help. I remember journalists being guided by a chosen leader of a very large shelter. One could clearly see he was a passionate man trying as hard as he could to get help for the people in t e shelter and he said explicit things about how there were dead people in the streets and women in the shelter didn't have feminine items. I always thought of that as different way of banding together, and taking a very proactive approach

Also remember the gap between the rich and poor is wider in the US then in Japan.


For communalism and whether it needs a homogeneous society I don't know, but I think people are working to figure that out.

I am posting this and I am sure I did some cross posting. Me sorry.

[Holbytla]

The whole romanticizing thing is ironic, because since way back, the Japanese have had a large infatuation with American culture.
The cowboy clothing, the Elvis impersonators and a number of other things.

So maybe we are each seeing something in the other culture that we feel is lacking in our own?

[Hachimitsu]

Holby, I think you are correct.

[WampusCat]

Some Native Americans are in the uncomfortable situation of being discriminated against and put down as individuals living here and now, while at the same time their past culture is romanticized.

The romanticization is better than the racist disdain that Europeans in general brought to the cross-cultural encounter, but it still isn't a realistic appraisal.

It suggests that Native American culture is only good if they are in the tragic role of martyrs.

[vison]

I am always somewhat bemused by the fact that in Germany, anything to do with Native Americans (or Native Canadians) is just ENORMOUSLY popular. And Louis L'Amour novels . . . . reenactment clubs, etc.

And cowboy music is a big deal in Norway.

The world, she is a strange place.

[Primula Baggins]

Around here (western U.S., specifically Oregon) you can find all kinds of ultra-romantic Native American kitsch: "dream catchers" in fluorescent colors, posters and greeting cards with lurid and gauzily romantic paintings of Native Americans (wolves are usually there too). Judging by where it's for sale, these are popular items with blue-collar and pink-collar workers. And this is a shadow of real cultures that existed right where we're all living; and our coming here helped diminish or extinguish them.

I wonder if the fascination and romanticization aren't part of a yearning for escape, for something different than the known. Something better than what we already have.

[River]

Europeans in general have an infatuation with the American West, or, more accurately, the idea of it. Weirds me out every time.

[WampusCat]

And some Americans have the same fascination with England, Scotland and Ireland.

[axordil]

And some Americans have the same fascination with England, Scotland and Ireland.

There the connection is often genealogical, either in reality or fancy. Also--with the Celtic peoples in particular one might draw an analogy (for Americans) of how some Europeans romanticize Native Americans. There's an attraction to cultures in extrimis, with either a real or imagined Golden Age to hearken back to. I have no problem understanding the pull there, even if it does by necessity come packaged with exoticism.

Americans who get into the whole English Royal Family thing, on the other hand, I have no rational explanation for.

[Hachimitsu]

That, I really don't understand.

About romanticizing Native Americans, I have seen it in Europe. A few years ago it was all the rage in home decor magazines Europe. Those romantic pictures with wolves I see them all the time, while actual Native art and sculpture, by Native artists isn't exactly easy to get. (Big sis a fan of Native sculpture, and I have always liked the organic abstract art. ) I don't even think the ROM and other Museums in Toronto have exhibits by current artists like Brian Jungen. If they did, I'd be lining up for tickets (I used to be on the ROM's mailing list.

I will admit I do romanticize the culture a bit since I have a strong sympathy for how they have been treated historically. But I know that no culture is perfect.

I think as Ax said there is a nostalgia for a possibly imaginary Golden age.

[River]

Honestly, I think what happens regarding Celts and Native Americans/Canadians is people read about how their cultures worked and spot ways of doing things that just seem fundamentally nicer or better. And since those cultures are either dead or close to it, the uglier bits of them are lost. The part where I get really weirded out about the European infatuation with the West, though, is their conception of what it was like for white people on the frontier. It wasn't all outlaws and stage coach raids, y'know.

Americans who get into the whole English Royal Family thing, on the other hand, I have no rational explanation for.

I think it's got the same sort of appeal reality shows about other rich and famous types have, but with a fairy tale flavor and more pageantry. I went to London nine years ago and just happened to be walking down the right street when the Horse Guard came by. Clopping hooves, red coats, tall feathery hats, the whole nine yards. I had no idea who they were or what was going on, but everyone else was behaving like this was just totally ordinary (which, to them, it was). To me, though, it was anything but.

[axordil]

It wasn't all outlaws and stage coach raids, y'know.

Absolutely. There were also train robberies.