blanket ignorance

[drainer at mpinet.net]

 I think that in the context of what she said, it made sense, and it wasn't
meant as a generalization. But more so, I think it should be pointed out
that she is not American, the "our" is not necessarily linked to her
statement. Maybe she was pointing out melodrama in the media.

"...to simplify cause and effect by asserting instead that there are
sweeping national traits to explain specific human actions or situations.
" --  But isn't this the defining characteristic of identity in this
country?  (I am joking, although such a generalization could be made.)

-d

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mark Mays" <tetsuwan at comcast.net>
To: <KineJapan at lists.acs.ohio-state.edu>
Sent: Monday, June 28, 2004 4:09 PM
Subject: Re: blanket ignorance


My first thought about the statement was "there's one in every group" and
let it slide. It wasn't until I saw it repeated in another post did I
consider that there should be some kind of challenge to the statement. There
are probably many people who come to the list seeking some "expertise" on
not only film but Japanese culture and some might go away and repeat the
same idea as an expert opinion.

I was sort of hoping that a Japanese person would speak up, however it's
good you did Joanne.
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: j.izbicki at att.net
  To: KineJapan at lists.acs.ohio-state.edu
  Sent: Monday, June 28, 2004 1:39 PM


  I expected a flurry of messages to appear about a previous poster痴
blanket comment that "Japanese are childish and theatrical."  Others have
apparently decided to ignore the remark but I think some comment is due.

   I already deleted the message but with due respect must assume that the
writer has had little or superficial interaction with Japanese people and is
still under the sway of 1940s-50s generalizations about Japan.  Or have I
lost my sense of humor and the comment was meant to be a joke?  I hope
members of this list have gotten beyond attributing any single trait or
peculiarity 用ositive or negative・to ALL the people in any given
country--or of any ethnic or racial or gender group.  It痴 much more
informative and helpful to look at specific forces and contexts at play than
to simplify cause and effect by asserting instead that there are sweeping
national traits to explain specific human actions or situations.



  In 1951, Douglas MacArthur made a post-SCAP (i.e., after he壇 been fired
by Truman) comment that lost the respect he壇 gained (gained justifiably or
not) of many Japanese while he had been Supreme Commander of the Allied
Powers.  The comment was that 奏he Japanese・were 斗ike a boy of twelve as
compared with our development of forty-five years.・SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes">  The 双ur・apparently meant 羨merican,・
suggesting a too common assumption among stereotypers that their
listeners/readers share and approve the stereotype--in this case that
Japanese people couldn't measure up to American maturity.  Even if MacArthur
meant to apply his view only to the political situation in Japan, he was
still ignoring a history of sophisticated and complex political
structuration and struggle in the country.  MacA's personal history,
however, suggests he was applying the ! put-down more broadly.

  (MacA痴 comment is from the 滴earing to Conduct an Inquiry into the
Military Situation in the Far East,・82nd Congress, 1st session, 1951.
Quoted in Takamae Eiji痴 的nside GHQ,・p. 7.)



  Joanne Izbicki