Problem: Applying western theories on japanese films

[Michael McCaskey]

Dear Robert Geib,

I would suggest that you see as many Japanese films as possible yourself, draw your own conclusions based on your experience, and then see whether what you know from your own experience matches any given theories, partially or fully.

But, on the other hand, if you are mainly focused on theory--

>Do you suggest, that japanese cinema is a 'special case' and cannot be approached by >models and theories based on western thought? Should they be used reflectively, >assuming the role of a distant observer, always insisting on the 'special case' of >the japanese history of art and perception? Or should I take a more postmodern >approach, where I don?t really care about the 'otherness' of japanese cinema (thereby >also circumventing the notion of the 'exotic') and simply apply these theories if >they seem viable? 

Marx & Engels decided that their developmental theories of society might not apply to Asian societies, and this concept of "difference" was later carried on and developed by Karl August Wittvogel (also spelled Wittfogel), in an attempt to create an Asian theory of historical development on the basis of "hydraulischer Despotie," or "Orientalische Despotie" (Oriental Despotism). The main book was Die orientalische Despotie, 624 Seiten Verlag: Kiepenheuer & Witsch (1962). I believe he also wrote a book on China:

Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft Chinas Produktivkr?fte, Produktions- und Zirkulationsprozess Versuch der wissenschaftlichen Analyse einer grossen asiatischen Agrargesellschaft Reprint der Ausgabe von von 1931 


There's a thumbnail sketch at

http://www.bongards.gmxhome.de/apw4.html

Also

Beitr?ge zur marxistischen ?sthetik. Hrg.: Andreas W. Mytze. [Aufs?tze aus den Jahren 1930-1932. Mit neuem Vorwort Wittfogels und Bibliographie der Wittfogel-Raubdrucke. 

And many more books by and about KAW and his theories.

It may be that revisiting these theories might yield some interesting results. KAW is probably the main major Marxist thinker who dealt with theories about Asia. 

Though it may be that your own ideas, based on your own direct observations, may be just as interesting, if not more so.

Best Wishes,

Michael McCaskey
Georgetown Univ.
Wash. DC



 



----- Original Message -----
From: Robert.Geib at gmx.de
Date: Friday, October 12, 2007 6:30 am
Subject: Problem: Applying western theories on japanese films

> Dear subscribers of KineJapan,
> 
> First, I want to introduce myself: I?m a young scholar of media 
> studies from Jena, Germany. I?m currently preparing my 
> dissertation on body & memory in contemporary japanese cinema. I 
> want to show that current japanese films (Kurosawa, Tsukamoto, 
> Oshii and others) contribute aesthetically to a broad debate about 
> body and memory in cultural- and media studies. 
> 
> Drawing on the works of film phenomenology, the writings of 
> Foucault and Deleuze and recent trauma theory, I want to 
> articulate a specific view of the body and memory that emerge 
> through close analysis of these films. Of course I?m just in the 
> first steps of my research and I have a lot more preliminary 
> research on the topic to do, but a certain problem has already 
> occured and I wonder if some of you could help me out.
> 
> The reemergence of the body and memory particular in film practice 
> and theory since the late 1980s is closely linked to a criticism 
> of the dominance of ocular vision in certain branches of film 
> theory. These theories are based on certain assumptions, stated by 
> Jonathan Crary and Donald Lowe among others, that ocular centrism 
> is a distinctive feature of modern (western) societies. This mode 
> of perception that can be traced back to philosophical belief 
> systems of the Enlightment, the invention of single-point 
> perspective in the Renaissance and technological changes of the 
> media landscape (namely photography and cinema).
> 
> Now I?m a little reluctant to apply these models of a history of 
> perception and subject formation on japanese cinema; models that 
> are based on the analysis of specific historic, aesthetic and 
> social circumstances in western europe. Although many ideas of the 
> Enlightment were adopted in the Meiji restauration and 
> technologies like photography and cinema were quickly imported and 
> assimilated, I?m not sure if the implicit hierarchy of the senses 
> (which can be broken down to a slogan like 'seeing equals 
> knowing') has found it's way into the modern japanese society 
> (given the complex nature and history of japanese adaptation of 
> foreign ideas). 
> 
> Do you suggest, that japanese cinema is a 'special case' and 
> cannot be approached by models and theories based on western 
> thought? Should they be used reflectively, assuming the role of a 
> distant observer, always insisting on the 'special case' of the 
> japanese history of art and perception? Or should I take a more 
> postmodern approach, where I don?t really care about the 
> 'otherness' of japanese cinema (thereby also circumventing the 
> notion of the 'exotic') and simply apply these theories if they 
> seem viable? 
> 
> I really hope that I?m not beating any dead horses here, but I 
> would very much appreciate if some of you could comment on my 
> problem and suggest further literature on that issue.
> 
> Thanks in advance and greetings from Germany,
> Robert Geib
> 
> -- 
> Psssst! Schon vom neuen GMX MultiMessenger geh?rt?
> Der kanns mit allen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/multimessenger
>