Nobody Knows question

Alexander Jacoby a_p_jacoby at yahoo.co.uk
Mon May 17 03:26:44 EDT 2010


Dear All,

I am just putting the finishing touches to an essay on Koreeda's Nobody Knows, and I have two questions which I'd be splendidly grateful if anyone could answer over the next couple of days (I ought to be returning the final draft to Arthur Nolletti on Thursday).

Firstly, a question which might require a little knowledge of Japanese custody law. When the convenience store owner asks why Akira and his siblings don't alert social services, Akira says that "We wouldn't be able to stay together. That happened before and it was terrible mess." My question is what we assume "That happened before" implies. Are we to assume that the kids were reported to social services and split up before because their mum has left them alone for long periods before? Or is the implication that the mother has failed to register the births, and therefore doesn't have legal custody of the kids?

Secondly, and relatedly, I've read conflicting accounts of the original 1988 case. Some say that none of the five children of the original mother had had their births registered. Others say that the eldest child, the model for Akira, had been registered, but that the other four had not. Can anyone give me chapter and verse on this (preferably with a source!).

All the best,

ALEX

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.yale.edu/pipermail/kinejapan/attachments/20100517/48ca4b6d/attachment.html 


More information about the KineJapan mailing list