Strengths and weaknesses
Timothy Amos's book -- which has no glossary, and otherwise shows no Japanese script for romanized Japanese terms -- is an examintion of the "buraku problem" (部落問題 buraku mondai) in Japan today, and how people who reside or once resided in a so-called "buraku" (部落) contend with their awareness of their buraku association and the discriminatory treatment they may at times experience because of attitudes others may have toward them on account of their buraku association. The book delves deeply into issues in "buraku studies" (部落研究 buraku kenkyū), particularly in "buraku history" (部落史 burakushi), with respect to both (1) the origins of yesteryears outcastes, such as eta (穢多) and hinin (非人), and people residing in buraku today, who Amos calls "burakumin" (部落民). and (2) how birth into a family with an outcaste in its ancestral tree, or with roots in a present-day buraku, effects identity in a society which doesn't encourage a positive embrace and display of pride in "buraku identity" (部落アイデンティティ buraku aidentiti) as a member of the "buraku diaspora" (部落ディアスポラ buraku diasupora) -- none of which terms Amos himself uses, but n which an ancestor may have been which have have outcaste "status" (身分 mibun) yesteryear's outcastes or todays buraku the populations of buraku -- who Amos calls "burakumin" (部落民) and how the implications of "status" (身分 mibum)in Japan and a revelation of his own field work in . Most of the author's personal contacts in this field of reserach, and other sources of information and inspiration concerning "buraku" and the "buraku problem" (部落問題 buraku mondai), are activists and activist-scholars, many of them affiliated with the Buraku Kaihō Dōmei (部落解放同盟) or English as Buraku Liberation League (BLL) as has been known in English for many decades. BLL's headquarters are in Tokyo, but the heart of its operations, its research arm, and its publishing house are in Ōsaka, where it's largest branch office continues to operate.
Amos, while generally eschewing the sort of "critical" language which mars so much that is written by students of "minorities" as "marginalized others" and the like -- adopts some of its metaphors, beginning with the book's title -- Embodying Difference -- which expresses what Amos calls its "central agenda", namely, "to explore the assertion that burakumin and eta are better seen as discourses of difference" (page 223).
Amos, paraphrasing Ritsumei University historian Hatanaka Toshiyuki (畑中敏之), asserts that "the 'buraku' and 'burakumin' are illusions -- they don't exist but simultaneously they are realities -- they have a clear existence" (page 223, and Note 23, page 271, Hatanaka, Migun/sabetsu/aidentiti; 'burakushi' wa bohyō to naru ka), 16). This would seem to allude to the book's subtitle, which suggests that "burakumin" exist today as a product of their "making" in "modern Japan" but people interested in maintaining an awareness of their origins in the undeniable existence of outcastes in "early modern Japan" up to 1871, when they were emancipated from their "mean" (base, inferior) legal status as eta, hinin, and others not of higher castes or classes, including members of the imperial family and aristocacy, or the warrior, farmer, craftsman, and merchant classes.
|
Hatanaka makes the paraphrased remarks in the preface of the following book (see my review at Hatanaka 2004 under Buraku issues on the Minorities page of the Bibliographies section).
畑中敏之
身分・差別・アイデンティティ：「部落史」は墓標となるか
京都：かもがわ出版、2004年7月1日
197ページ、単行本
Hatanaka Toshiyuki
Mibun, sabetsu, aidentiti; "Burakushi" wa bohyō to naru ka
[ Status, discrimination, identity: Will "buraku history" become a grave marker? ]
[ Status . . . grave post? ] (Amos)
197 pages, paper cover
Hatanaka actually writes this (Hatanaka 2004, page 16, my structural translation).
How can "buraku history" be portrayed, indifferent to discussions that concern the essence of the buraku problem, like ―― are "buraku"·"burakumin" illusions (幻想 gensō)? · Or are they actualities (実体 jittai)?
I will refer to this in the particulars of this book as well, but [regarding this question of their existence] I think as follows.
"Buraku"·"burakumin" are illusions = they don't exist, however, they are actualities = they exist. Though they don't exist, they exist (they are made to exist), and this is "buraku"·"burakumin". I think this way [about this]. "Though they don't exist, they exist" ―― that this antithetic way of taking [regarding] them holds, is because the viewpoints (standpoints) [of existence and non-existence] are different. One of them [existence or non-existence] is taken [regarded] from a different viewpoint (standpoint).
"[That buraku·burakumin] are illusions" ―― This is the form (姿 sugata) that they should be in essence (本来のあるべき姿 honrai no aru beki sugata), which is to say something from the standpoint of not being fettered by discrimination (差別に囚われない立場 sabetsu ni torawarenai tachiba). If [one views them] from the standpoint of not being fettered by discrimination, in essence "buraku·burakumin" and such don't exist, that is, they are illusions. There is no wall of discrimination·discriminated to partition [separate] them (彼ら kare-ra) [buraku·burakumin] [from others]. There may also be a perception of "illusion = do not exist owing to not knowing buraku discrimination (部落差別 buraku sabetsu), which is to say ignorance (無知 muchi); however, at the stage where [wall] in some form is known, does [this perception] change to "[buraku·burakumin] are actualities = [they] exist" perception fettered by discrimination?; or does [it] become something that confirms anew the "[they] are an illusion = [they] don't exist" perception?; in the end it comes to be a matter of dividing into these two [perceptions]. It is thought that what determines this division, is not the quality or quantity of the person's knowledge of buraku discrimination, but the something that depends the person's human perceptions.
|
I have graded this book "B" in recognition of a few serious flaws, some of which -- without the counterbalance of several strengths -- would have brought it down to a "C".
Top
Author
Forthcoming
Top
Publicity
The back cover of the book promotes its like this.
"There are very few monographs in English on the problem of burakumin or outcaste identity in Japan...Timothly Amos has written a clear, readable account of the contingencies of buraku identity in Japan."
Elyssa Faison, Associate Professor of Japanese History, University of Oklahoma
The burakumin, Japan's largest minority group, have been the focus of an extensive yet strikingly homogenous body of Japanese language research. The master narrative in much of this work typically links burakumin to premodern occupational groups engaged in a number of socially polluting tasks like tanning and leatherwork. This master narrative, when subjected to close scrutiny, tends to raise more questions than it answers, particularly for the historian. Is there really firm historical continuity between premodern outcaste and modern burakumin communities? Does the discrimination faced by these communities actually remain the same? Does the way burakumin frame their own experience significantly affect mainstream understandings of their plight?
Embodying Difference is the result of a decade-and-a-half-long search for answers to these questions. Based on an extensive array of original archival material, ethnographical research, and critical historiographical work, it argues that there needs to be a fundamental reconceptualisation of the buraku problem for two main reasons. First, the master narrative (Note 1) is built on empirically and conceptually questionable foundations; and second, mainstream accounts (Note 2) tend to overlook the very important role burakumin and other interested parties play in the construction and maintenance of the narrative. By continually drawing a straight line between premodern outcaste groups and today's burakumin, and equating the types of discrimination suffered by members of this community today with that faced by their premodern counterparts, the Japanese government, the general population, scholars, and burakumin activists tend to overlook some of the real changes that have often taken place both in who is identified as members of socially marginalized groups in Japan and how they experience that identification. Clinging to this master narrative, moreover, serves to restrict the ways in which burakumin can productively and more inclusively identify in the present to imagine a liberated future for themselves (Note 3). Amos's attempt to rethink the boundaries of buraku history and the category of the outcaste in Japan results in a compelling study that also offers us insights on how to comparatively frame the 'undeniably similar' dalit question. (Note 4)
Timothy Amos is Assistant Professor in the Department of Japanese Studies at the National University of Singapore.
Notes
1. Whether the master narrative is a fancy expression for the "orthodox" or "mainstsream" of "standard" or "boilerplate" or "reflexive" view of so-called "buraku" and their denizens past and present -- or whether Amos calls it this because he regards it as a tactic especially BLL's continuing struggle to politically force the Japanese government to recognize "buraku residents" as "descent group" under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) -- is difficult to say. Amos mentions BLL's interest in ICERD in passing, but does not touch on the frankly self-contradictory content of its appeals (see "Issues with issues" below).
2. It appears that mainstream accounts is intended as a synonym for the master narrative. The term "mainstream" is often used in English-language writing on buraku issues to mean the "general masses" (一般大衆 ippan taishū) or "general society" (一般社会 ippan shakai) part from buraku residents. Over the decades of the late 20th century following World War II, BLL, a postwar reincarnation of politically suppressed prewar liberation movement organizations, resorted to pushy sit-in "denunciations" of publishers who had printed a book or an article it considered in some manner "discriminatory". Most publishers BLL held hostage to its protests gave in to its insistance that they publish an apology and adopt its understandings of history in future publications. Writers and editors learned to avoid saying anything that would ruffle BLL's ideological feathers, and they generally adopted its proletarian "discriminated against" (被差別 hisabetsu) and "unliberated" (未開放 mikaihō) adjectives for "buraku". Buraku liberationists are also known to have forced publishers to censor and rewrite passages in some Japanese translations of works in English, in which the author had not characterized buraku in such ways or otherwise sufficiently victimized their residents. Amos briefly describes denunciation tactics and touches upon "political correctness" in present-day media representations, and alludes to the manner in which buraku liberation movements have contributed to "The Making of Burakumin in Modern Japan". But he fails to ask whether there is a "mainstream" understanding of the "buraku problem" in Japan -- whether most adults in Japan can be said to have an awareness of "the master narrative" or of any narrative for that matter.
3. To suggest that there are ways in which burakumin can productively and more inclusively identify in the present to imagine a liberated future for themselves assumes that (1) they exist, (2) their state of existence is somehow unliberated, and (3) their future liberation hinges on their ability to productively and more inclusively identify in the present. Amos gives very little attention to the divisiveness and internecine rivalry within the "buraku liberation movement" (部落解放運動 buraku kaihō undō) over the years. He briefly mentions BLL's arch rival, Zenkairen, and remarks that it declared the "liberation movement" over in favor of focussing on human rights. Amos
(pages 16 and 166), which he more fully calls "All Japan Federation of Buraku Liberation Movements" in English (page 264, note 32). It's Japanese name, which he does not give, was Zenkoku Buraku Kaihō Undō Rengō Kai (全国部落解放運動連合会, or Zenkairen (全解運) for short.National Federation of Buraku Liberation Movements (Zenkoku Buraku Kaiho Undo Rengokai, abbreviated "Zenkairen")
But he does not mention that BLL's arch rival -- 全国部落解放運動連合会 , , a BLL split-off, declared an end to the need to liberate buraku and remade intself into a human rights group. Amos failed to report the rival organizations say, however, thatBLL's rival was that this group, , swapped its "buraku liberation" name for a "human rights" name. and turned its attention to human rights generally. Amos failed to mention that the dthe 2nd largest organization former arch rival, a Communist Party faction that split off from BLL BLL's former arch rival, the Communist Party affiliated faction that broke away from BLL several decades ago, after continuing its own "buraku liberation" struggle for a few decades, declared its struggle over as far as "buraku liberation" is concerned -- and changed its name to one which concerns only "human rights" generally. Amos both amply and interestingly discusses the shift from "buraku liberation" to "human rights", to some extent championed by BLL at the same time BLL clings to its "liberation" agenda. Amos does not cite the position by , which has
To even suggest that
in anything it dares publish on so-calledbruakadjectives for "buraku" -- in general" or "general society" (一般な社会 ippan-na shakai) also used to imply society in general, for "in mainstream account
Timothy Amos’ attempt to rethink the boundaries of buraku history and the category of the outcaste in Japan results in a compelling study of buraku issues for any audience.
Top
Readability
Forthcoming
Top
Originality
Forthcoming
Top
Back matter
Forthcoming
Acknowledgements, Explanatory Note on Style, 7 chapters including Introduction and Epilogue, Notes, Bibliography, Index, and 1 photograph by author integrated into text (page 151)
Top
Terminology
Forthcoming
so-called "buraku" (部落), a Sinific term for "hamlet" or "village" or "settlement" or part thereof, which is now used almost exclusively to refer to neighborhoods in towns or settlements in rural areas that are thought to be have historical links with yesteryears "outcastes" or what I prefer to call "subcastes".
Top
Issues
Forthcoming
FCCJ_buraku_debate.html
Diene_2006_mission_to_japan.html
Zenkairen versus BLL
BLL was supported by the Japan Socialist Party (JSP), and Zenkairen was backed by the Japan Communist Party (JCP). Zenkairen (Zenjinren) endeavored to expose BLL's tactics and vested interests. Though its arguments have sometimes been insufferably doctrinaire and self-righteous, its voice has been one reason BLL has failed to get the government to enact a Fundamental Law for Buraku Liberation [Buraku kaiho kihon ho] and pass a new dowa measures law.
While BLL has continued to push for "buraku liberation", Zenkairen celebrated the expiration in 2002 of the final extension to the 1969 special measures law it had opposed since its proposal in 1965. Scholars who shared Zenkairen's view of the "buraku problem" declared an "end to buraku history". They argued that "buraku discrimination" had become a problem of the past. The small risk of encountering discrimination that still existed could best be reduced by liberating everyone from the very notion of "buraku". And in 2004, Zenkairen eliminated "buraku" from its organizational name and became Zenjinren.
BLL, though, wants to keep the word "buraku" and its "buraku liberation" movement alive. Toward this end, it has been very actively campaigning, in Japan and overseas, to "minoritize" buraku residents.
BLL's racialist lobbying
Over the years, BLL has also been petitioning a number of United Nations human rights committees. In particular, it has lobbied the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD), which monitors compliance with the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), to get the Japanese government to recognize that residents of former outcaste communities are in some sense a "descent" minority and therefore fall within the scope of ICERD.
Of course, recognizing "buraku residents" under ICERD would be tantamount to "racializing" them -- contrary to BLL's (and ever buraku liberation and dowa organization's) claims that people who can trace their ancestry to yesteryears eta/hinin outcastes "are not of a different [biological] race [ijinshu] or a different [ethnic] race [iminzoku], but without doubt are [of] the Japanese [ethnic] race [Nihon minzoku], [and are] Japanese people [nationals] [Nihon kokumin]."
Never mind that this is a highly racialist statement. Never mind that it racializes Japanese, and virtually equates "Japanese race" with "Japanese nationality" -- thus undermining the racial and ethnic neutrality of Japanese nationality -- which includes not only people of Ainu, Okinawan, Chinese, and Korean ancestries, but people of numerous other racial, ethnic, and national ancestries.
The problem is that, such efforts on BLL's part to set buraku in liberation concrete, and to institutionalize special status and entitlements for buraku residents -- in the name of human (much less "racial") rights -- is totally contrary to the spirit of the 1871 abolition of outcaste status, and Article 14 of the 1947 Constitution, which prohibits any laws that discriminate on the basis of race or status.
Top
1. Introduction to the Buraku Problem
Forthcoming
Top
2. The Problem of Buraku History
Forthcoming
Top
3. The Problem of Buraku Discrimination
Forthcoming
Top
4. Modernity as Purgatory
Forthcoming
Top
5. Walking to Liberty in Osaka
Forthcoming
Top
6. Narrating Buraku Experience in Contemporary Japan
Forthcoming
Top
7. Epilogue: Return from Discursive Exile
Forthcoming
Top
|