Jump to content

The Chrysanthemum and the Sword: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Noroton (talk | contribs)
m fix typo
Changing short description from "1946 sociology book by Ruth Benedict" to "1946 book by Ruth Benedict"
 
(174 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|1946 book by Ruth Benedict}}
''The Chrysanthemum and the Sword'', was an influential study of the society and culture of [[Japan]] by [[Ruth Benedict]] and published in [[1946]] in the [[United States]] and later in translation in Japan, China and elsewhere.
{{For|the Mad Men episode|The Chrysanthemum and the Sword (Mad Men)}}
{{Infobox book
| name = The Chrysanthemum and the Sword
| title_orig = The Chrysanthemum and the Sword: Patterns of Japanese Culture
| translator =
| image = File:TheChrysanthemumAndTheSword.jpg
| caption = First edition
| author = [[Ruth Benedict]]
| illustrator =
| cover_artist =
| country = United States
| language = English
| series =
| subject = National Characteristics, Japanese
| genre = History/Anthropology
| publisher = [[Houghton Mifflin]]
| pub_date = 1946
| media_type = Print ([[Hardcover]])
| pages = 324 pp (first edition)
| isbn = 978-0-395-50075-0
| dewey = 952 19
| congress = DS821 .B46 1989
| oclc = 412839
| preceded_by =
| followed_by =
}}


'''''The Chrysanthemum and the Sword: Patterns of Japanese Culture''''' is a 1946 study of Japan by American [[anthropologist]] [[Ruth Benedict]] compiled from her analyses of Japanese culture during [[World War II]] for the U.S. [[Office of War Information]]. Her analyses were requested in order to understand and predict the behavior of the Japanese during the war by reference to a series of contradictions in traditional culture. The book was influential in shaping American ideas about [[Japanese culture]] during the [[occupation of Japan]], and popularized the distinction between [[Guilt–shame–fear spectrum of cultures|guilt cultures and shame cultures]].<ref>Ezra F. Vogel, Foreword, ''The Chrysanthemum and the Sword'' (Boston: Houghton Mifflin 1989)</ref>
The book influential in educating Americans about Japan during the occupation of that country after [[World War II]], and it filled a vacuum in Western studies of Japan, there was no extensive cultural study of Japan before The Chrysanthemum and the Sword, according to Sergei Alexandrovich Arutiunov, head of the Department of Caucasian Studies at the Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology at the Russian Academy of Sciences.<ref name=mwloc>Wolfskill, Mary, "Human Nature and the Power of Culture: Library Hosts Margaret Mead Symposium", article in ''Library of Congress Information Bulletin'', January 2002, as accessed at the U.S. Library of Congress Web site, [[January 13]], [[2008]]</ref>


Although it has received criticism (including harsh criticism), the book has continued to be influential among American anthropologists. "[T]here is a sense in which all of us have been writing footnotes to [''Chrysanthemum''] since it appeared in 1946", two anthropologists wrote in 1992.<ref>[http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:7N9VOXjHIHgJ:www.chineseupress.com/promotion/AsianAnthroV1sample/4.pdf+%22The+Chrysanthemum+and+the+Sword%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=21&gl=us]Plath, David W., and Robert J. Smith, "How 'American' Are Studies of Modern Japan Done in the United States", in Harumi Befu and Joseph Kriener, eds., ''Otherness of Japan: Historical and Cultural Influences on Japanese Studies in Ten Countries'', Munchen: The German Institute of Japanese Studies, as quoted in Ryang, Sonia, "''Chrysanthemum's'' Strange Life: Ruth Benedict in Postwar Japan", accessed [[January 13]], [[2007]]</ref>
Although it has received harsh criticism, the book has continued to be influential. Two anthropologists wrote in 1992 that there is "a sense in which all of us have been writing footnotes to [''Chrysanthemum''] since it appeared in 1946".<ref>[http://www.chineseupress.com/promotion/AsianAnthroV1sample/4.pdf] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140630210424/http://www.chineseupress.com/promotion/AsianAnthroV1sample/4.pdf |date=2014-06-30 }} Plath, David W., and Robert J. Smith, "How 'American' Are Studies of Modern Japan Done in the United States", in Harumi Befu and Joseph Kreiner, eds., ''Otherness of Japan: Historical and Cultural Influences on Japanese Studies in Ten Countries'', Munchen: The German Institute of Japanese Studies, as quoted in Ryang, Sonia, "''Chrysanthemum's'' Strange Life: Ruth Benedict in Postwar Japan", accessed January 13, 2007</ref> The Japanese, Benedict wrote, are


<blockquote>both aggressive and unaggressive, both militaristic and aesthetic, both insolent and polite, rigid and adaptable, submissive and resentful of being pushed around, loyal and treacherous, brave and timid, conservative and hospitable to new ways...<ref>Ruth Benedict, ''The Chrysanthemum and the Sword'', page 2, 1946</ref></blockquote>
The book also affected Japanese conceptions of themselves when it was translated into Japanese in [[1948]]. Even in [[2005]], the book was influential when it sold well in translation in China.

The book also affected Japanese conceptions of themselves.<ref name="Kent1999">{{cite journal |last1=Kent |first1=Pauline |title=Japanese Perceptions of "the Chrysanthemum and the Sword" |journal=Dialectical Anthropology |date=1999 |volume=24 |issue=2 |pages=181–192 |doi=10.1023/A:1007082930663 |jstor=29790600 |s2cid=140977522 |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/29790600 |access-date=20 August 2023 |issn=0304-4092}}</ref> The book was translated into Japanese in 1948 and became a bestseller in the [[People's Republic of China]] when relations with Japan soured.<ref name=afap>Fujino, Akira (January 8, 2006). "Book on Japanese culture proves a bestseller in China". ''[[The Advocate (Stamford)|The Advocate]]'' of Stamford, Connecticut. Tribune News Service.</ref>


==Research circumstances==
==Research circumstances==
{{See also|Empire of Japan}}
This book which resulted from Benedict's wartime research, like several other [[United States Office of War Information]] wartime studies of Japan and Germany,<ref>Robert Harry Lowie, ''The German People: A Social Portrait to 1914'' (New York: Farrar & Rinehart, 1945); John F. Embree, ''The Japanese Nation: A Social Survey'' (New York: Farrar & Rinehart, 1945</ref> is an instance of "culture at a distance", the study of a culture through its literature, newspaper clippings, films, and recordings, as well as extensive interviews with German-Americans or Japanese-Americans. The techniques were necessitated by anthropologists' inability to visit [[Nazi Germany]] or wartime Japan. One later ethnographer pointed out, however, that although "culture at a distance" had the "elaborate aura of a good academic fad, the method was not so different from what any good historian does: to make the most creative use possible of written documents."<ref>Vogel, Foreword, p. x.</ref> Anthropologists were attempting to understand the cultural patterns that might be driving the aggression of once-friendly nations, and they hoped to find possible weaknesses or means of persuasion that had been missed.


Americans found themselves unable to comprehend matters in Japanese culture. For instance, Americans considered it quite natural that American [[prisoners of war]] would want their families to know that they were alive and that they would keep quiet when they were asked for information about troop movements, etc. However, Japanese prisoners of war apparently gave information freely and did not try to contact their families.
Benedict's war work included a major study, largely completed in [[1944]], aimed at understanding [[Culture of Japan|Japanese culture]].

This book, incorporating results of Benedict's wartime research, is an instance of ''anthropology at a distance.'' Study of a culture through its literature, through newspaper clippings, through films and recordings, etc., was necessary when anthropologists aided the United States and its [[Allies of World War II|allies]] in World War II. Unable to visit [[Nazi Germany]] or Japan under [[Hirohito]], anthropologists made use of the cultural materials produced studies at a distance. They were attempting to understand the cultural patterns that might be driving their aggression, and hoped to find possible weaknesses, or means of persuasion that had been missed.

Americans found themselves unable to comprehend matters in Japanese culture. For instance, [[United States|Americans]] considered it quite natural for American [[prisoners of war]] to ''want'' their families to know they were alive, and to keep quiet when asked for information about troop movements, etc., while Japanese POWs, apparently, gave information freely and did not try to contact their families. Why was that? Why, too, did Asian peoples neither treat the Japanese as their liberators from Western [[colonialism]], nor accept their own supposedly obviously just place in a hierarchy that had Japanese at the top?

==Criticism==

One critic {{Fact|date=December 2007}} has written that ''The Chrysanthemum and the Sword'' is "long since... discredited since Benedict had no direct experience in Japan" and described it as "considered shallow and overtly racist".

C. Douglas Lummis has written: "After some time I realized that I would never be able to live in a decent relationship with the people of that country unless I could drive this book, and its politely arrogant world view, out of my head."<ref name=cdl1>[http://japanfocus.org/products/details/2474]Lummis, C. Douglas, "Ruth Benedict's Obituary for Japanese Culture", article in ''Japan Focus'' an online academic, peer-reviewed journal of Japanese studies, accessed [[January 13]], [[2007]]</ref>


==Reception in the United States==
Lummis, who went to the [[Vassar College]] archives to review Benedict’s notes, wrote that he found found some of her more important points were developed from interviews with Robert Hashima a Japanese-American native of the United States who was taken to Japan as a child, educated there, then returned to the U.S. before [[World War II]] began. According to Lammis, who interviewed Hashima, these circumstances helped introduce a certain bias into Benedict's research: "For him, coming to Japan for the first time as a teenager smack in the middle of the militaristic period and having no memory of the country before then, what he was taught in school was not 'an ideology', it was Japan itself." Lammis thinks Benedict relied too much on Hashima, who he said was deeply alienated by his experiences in Japan. "[I]t seems that he became a kind of touchstone, the authority against which she would test information from other sources."
Between 1946 and 1971, the book sold only 28,000 hardback copies, and a paperback edition was not issued until 1967.<ref name = "LRB sales">{{Cite journal |last = Johnson |first = Sheila |year= 2014 |title = Letters: Unfair to Anthropologists |url = http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n07/letters |journal = [[London Review of Books]] |volume = 36 |number = 7 |accessdate = 6 April 2014 }}</ref> Benedict played a major role in grasping the place of the [[Emperor of Japan]] in [[Japanese popular culture]], and formulating the recommendation to President [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]] that permitting continuation of the Emperor's reign had to be part of the eventual surrender offer.{{citation needed|date=July 2015}}
<ref name=cdl1/>


As of 1999, 350,000 copies were sold in the US.<ref name="Kent1999"/>
==Reception of the book in the United States==


==Reception in Japan==
Benedict played a major role in grasping the place of the [[Emperor of Japan]] in Japanese popular culture, and formulating the recommendation to President [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]] that permitting continuation of the Emperor's reign had to be part of the eventual surrender offer.
More than 2.3 million copies of the book have been sold in Japan since it first appeared in translation there.<ref name="Kent1999"/>


John W. Bennett and Michio Nagai, two scholars on Japan, pointed out in 1953 that the translated book "has appeared in Japan during a period of intense national self-examination&mdash;a period during which Japanese intellectuals and writers have been studying the sources and meaning of [[Japanese history]] and character, in one of their perennial attempts to determine the most desirable course of Japanese development."<ref name=hhp>[https://books.google.com/books?id=dS7DwqiUKnwC&dq=%22the+chrysanthemum+and+the+sword%22&pg=PA305] [[Helen Hardacre|Hardacre, Helen]], "The Postwar Development of Japanese Studies in the United States", (Brill: 1998), {{ISBN|90-04-08628-5}} via Google Books; the Bennett-Nagai quote may be from John W. Bennett and Nagai Michio, "The Japanese critique of Benedict's The Chrysanthemum and the Sword," ''American Anthropologist'' 55 :401-411 [1953], mentioned at {{cite web |url=http://research.yale.edu/wwkelly/Japan_anthropology/profiles/Benedict.htm |title=Reading notes &#124; Benedict, the Chrysanthemum and the Sword |accessdate=2008-01-14 |url-status=dead |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20080405203601/http://research.yale.edu/wwkelly/Japan_anthropology/profiles/Benedict.htm |archivedate=2008-04-05 }} Web page titled "Reading notes for Ruth Benedict's ''The Chrysanthemum and the Sword'' (1946)" at the Web site of William W. Kelly, Professor of Anthropology & Sumitomo Professor of Japanese Studies, Yale University; both Web sites accessed January 13, 2007</ref>


Japanese social critic and philosopher Tamotsu Aoki said that the translated book "helped invent a new tradition for postwar Japan." It helped to create a growing interest in "ethnic nationalism" in the country, shown in the publication of hundreds of ethnocentric [[nihonjinron]] (treatises on 'Japaneseness') published over the next four decades. Although Benedict was criticized for not discriminating among historical developments in the country in her study, "Japanese cultural critics were especially interested in her attempts to portray the whole or total structure ('zentai kōzō') of [[Japanese Culture]]," as [[Helen Hardacre]] put it.<ref name=hhp/> [[Douglas Lummis|C. Douglas Lummis]] has said the entire "nihonjinron" genre stems ultimately from Benedict's book.<ref name=cdl1/>
==Later reception of the book in Japan==


The book began a discussion among Japanese scholars about [[Guilt–shame–fear spectrum of cultures|"shame culture" vs. "guilt culture"]], which spread beyond academia, and the two terms are now established as ordinary expressions in the country.<ref name=cdl1/>
More than two million copies of the book have been sold in Japan since it first appeared in translation there.<ref name=dcl1/>


Soon after the translation was published, Japanese scholars, including Kazuko Tsurumi, [[Tetsuro Watsuji]], and [[Kunio Yanagita]] criticized the book as inaccurate and having methodological errors. American scholar C. Douglas Lummis has written that criticisms of Benedict's book that are "now very well known in Japanese scholarly circles" include that it represented the ideology of a class for that of the entire culture, "a state of acute social dislocation for a normal condition, and an extraordinary moment in a nation's history as an unvarying norm of social behavior."<ref name=cdl1/>
[[John W. Bennett]] and [[Michio Nagai]], two scholars on Japan, pointed out in 1953 that the appearance of the translated ''Chrysanthemum'' in Japan "has appeared in Japan during a period of intense national self-examination &mdash; a period during which Japanese intellectuals and writers have been studying the sources and meaning of Japanese history and character, in one of their perennial attempts to determine the most desirable course of Japanese development."<ref name=hhp>[http://books.google.com/books?id=dS7DwqiUKnwC&pg=PA305&lpg=PA305&dq=%22the+chrysanthemum+and+the+sword%22&source=web&ots=Mpbno7w7qQ&sig=yK_1dfjqm_XkLgasugA3Ffz-30o#PPA305,M1]Hardacre, Helen, "The Postwar Development of Japanese Studies in the United States", (Brill: 1998), ISBN 9004086285 via Google Books; the Bennett-Nagai quote may be from John W. Bennett and Nagai Michio, "The Japanese critique of Benedict's The Chrysanthemum and the Sword," ''American Anthropologist'' 55 :401-411 [1953], mentioned at [http://research.yale.edu/wwkelly/Japan_anthropology/profiles/Benedict.htm]Web page titled "Reading notes for Ruth Benedict's ''The Chrysanthemum and the Sword'' (1946)" at the Web site of William W. Kelly, Professor of Anthropology & Sumitomo Professor of Japanese Studies, Yale University; both Web sites accessed [[January 13]], [[2007]]</ref>


Japanese ambassador to [[Pakistan]] Sadaaki Numata said the book "has been a must reading for many students of Japanese studies."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.pk.emb-japan.go.jp/Ambassador/flower_show_25nov00.htm |title=Ambassador Numata's Speech at Flower Show 25 Nov 2000 |date=2006-01-11 |accessdate=2011-11-24 |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20060111041038/http://www.pk.emb-japan.go.jp/Ambassador/flower_show_25nov00.htm |archivedate=2006-01-11 |url-status=dead }}</ref>
The Japanese social critic and philosopher [[Aoki Tamotsu]] said the translated book "helped invent a new tradition for postwar Japan". The book helped increase the momentum of a growing interest in "ethnic nationalism" in the country, shown in the publication of hundreds of ethnocentric "nihonjinron" (treateses on "Japaneseness") published over the next five decades. Although Benedict was criticized for not discriminating among historical developments in the country in her study, "Japanese cultural critics were especially interested in her attempts to portray the whole or total structure ('zentai kozo') of Japanese Culture", as Hardacre put it.<ref name=hhp/> C. Douglas Lammis has said the entire "nihonjinron" literature stems ultimately from Bennett's book.<ref name=dcl1/>


According to [[Margaret Mead]], the author's former student and a fellow anthropologist, other Japanese who have read it found it on the whole accurate but somewhat "moralistic". Sections of the book were mentioned favorably in [[Takeo Doi]]'s book, ''[[The Anatomy of Dependence]]'', but he is somewhat critical of her analysis of Japan and the West as respectively shame and guilt cultures, noting that while he is "disposed to side with her," she still "allows value judgements to creep into her ideas."<ref>{{cite book |last=Doi |first=Takeo |author-link=Takeo Doi |date=1973 |title=The Anatomy of Dependence |url= |location=Tokyo, New York |publisher=Kodansha International |page=48 |isbn=0870111817}}</ref>
Her book began a discussion among Japanese scholars about "shame culture" vs. "guilt culture" which spread beyond academia, and the two terms are now established as ordinary expressions in that country.<ref name=dcl1/>


In a 2002 symposium at [[The Library of Congress]] in the United States, Shinji Yamashita, of the department of anthropology at the University of Tokyo, added that there has been so much change since World War II in Japan that Benedict would not recognize the nation she described in 1946.<ref name=mwloc>Wolfskill, Mary, [https://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/0201/mead.html "Human Nature and the Power of Culture: Library Hosts Margaret Mead Symposium"], article in ''Library of Congress Information Bulletin'', January 2002, as accessed at the U.S. Library of Congress Web site, January 13, 2008</ref>
Soon after the translation was published, Japanese scholars, including [[Tsurumi Kazuko]], [[Watsuji Tetsuro]], and [[Yanagida Kunio]] criticized the book as inaccurate and having methodological errors. American scholar C. Douglas Limmis has written that criticisms of Benedict's book "now very well known in Japanese scholarly circles" include that it represented the ideology of a class for that of the entire culture, "a state of acute social dislocation for a normal condition, and an extraordinary moment in a nation's history as an unvarying norm of social behavior".<ref name=cdl1/>


Lummis wrote, "After some time I realized that I would never be able to live in a decent relationship with the people of that country unless I could drive this book, and its politely arrogant world view, out of my head."<ref name=cdl1>Lummis, C. Douglas, [http://www.japanfocus.org/-C__Douglas-Lummis/2474 "Ruth Benedict's Obituary for Japanese Culture"], article in ''Japan Focus'', an online academic, peer-reviewed journal of Japanese studies, accessed October 11, 2013</ref> Lummis, who went to the [[Vassar College]] archives to review Benedict's notes, wrote that he found some of her more important points were developed from interviews with Robert Hashima, a Japanese-American native of the United States who was taken to Japan as a child, educated there, then returned to the US before [[World War II]] began. According to Lummis, who interviewed Hashima, the circumstances helped introduce a certain bias into Benedict's research: "For him, coming to Japan for the first time as a teenager smack in the middle of the militaristic period and having no memory of the country before then, what he was taught in school was not 'an ideology', it was Japan itself." Lummis thinks Benedict relied too much on Hashima and says that he was deeply alienated by his experiences in Japan and that "it seems that he became a kind of touchstone, the authority against which she would test information from other sources."<ref name=cdl1/>


==Reception in China==
The Japanese ambassador to [[Pakistan]] called the book "must reading for many students of Japanese studies".{{fact}}
The first Chinese translation was made by [[Taiwanese people|Taiwanese]] [[anthropologist]] Huang Dao-Ling, and published in Taiwan in April 1974 by Taiwan Kui-Kuang Press. The book became a bestseller in China in 2005, when relations with the Japanese government were strained. In that year alone, 70,000 copies of the book were sold in China.<ref name=afap/>


==See also==
Other Japanese who have read this work, according to Margaret Mead, found it on the whole accurate but somewhat "moralistic". Sections of the book were mentioned in [[Takeo Doi]]'s book, ''[[The Anatomy of Dependence]]'', where he uses some of her concepts to expand upon his ideas, as well as giving a critique of the concepts covered in the book.{{fact}}
* [[Bushidō]]
* [[Honne and tatemae]]


== Citations ==
In a 2002 symposium at [[The Library of Congress]] in the United States, Shinji Yamashita of the department of anthropology at the University of Tokyo, added that there has been so much change in post-World War II Japan that Benedict would not recognize the nation she described in 1946.<ref name=mwloc/>
{{Reflist}}


==Notes==
==Further reading==
* Kent, Pauline, "Misconceived Configurations of Ruth Benedict", ''Japan Review'' 7 (1996): 33-60. {{JSTOR|25790964}}.
<references/>
* Ryang, Sonya, "Chrysanthemum's Strange Life: Ruth Benedict in Postwar Japan", ''Asian Anthropology'' 1: 87-116. {{doi|10.1080/1683478X.2002.10552522}}. {{PMID|17896441}}.
* Shannon, Christopher. "A World Made Safe for Differences: Ruth Benedict's The Chrysanthemum and the Sword", ''American Quarterly'' 47 (1995): 659-680. {{doi|10.2307/2713370}}. {{JSTOR|2713370}}.


==External links==
==External links==
* {{FadedPage|id=20190750|name=The Chrysanthemum and the Sword}}
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20150722071650/http://classes.yale.edu/03-04/anth500b/projects/project_sites/02_alexy/ruthchrysanthemum.html "Ruth Benedict, The Chrysanthemum and the Sword"] (Allison Alexy Yale University, archived July 22, 2015)


{{DEFAULTSORT:Chrysanthemum And The Sword}}
[[zh:菊与刀]]
[[Category:1946 non-fiction books]]
[[Category:Anthropology books]]
[[Category:Books about Japan]]
[[Category:Houghton Mifflin books]]

Latest revision as of 09:59, 13 October 2024

The Chrysanthemum and the Sword
First edition
AuthorRuth Benedict
Original titleThe Chrysanthemum and the Sword: Patterns of Japanese Culture
LanguageEnglish
SubjectNational Characteristics, Japanese
GenreHistory/Anthropology
PublisherHoughton Mifflin
Publication date
1946
Publication placeUnited States
Media typePrint (Hardcover)
Pages324 pp (first edition)
ISBN978-0-395-50075-0
OCLC412839
952 19
LC ClassDS821 .B46 1989

The Chrysanthemum and the Sword: Patterns of Japanese Culture is a 1946 study of Japan by American anthropologist Ruth Benedict compiled from her analyses of Japanese culture during World War II for the U.S. Office of War Information. Her analyses were requested in order to understand and predict the behavior of the Japanese during the war by reference to a series of contradictions in traditional culture. The book was influential in shaping American ideas about Japanese culture during the occupation of Japan, and popularized the distinction between guilt cultures and shame cultures.[1]

Although it has received harsh criticism, the book has continued to be influential. Two anthropologists wrote in 1992 that there is "a sense in which all of us have been writing footnotes to [Chrysanthemum] since it appeared in 1946".[2] The Japanese, Benedict wrote, are

both aggressive and unaggressive, both militaristic and aesthetic, both insolent and polite, rigid and adaptable, submissive and resentful of being pushed around, loyal and treacherous, brave and timid, conservative and hospitable to new ways...[3]

The book also affected Japanese conceptions of themselves.[4] The book was translated into Japanese in 1948 and became a bestseller in the People's Republic of China when relations with Japan soured.[5]

Research circumstances

[edit]

This book which resulted from Benedict's wartime research, like several other United States Office of War Information wartime studies of Japan and Germany,[6] is an instance of "culture at a distance", the study of a culture through its literature, newspaper clippings, films, and recordings, as well as extensive interviews with German-Americans or Japanese-Americans. The techniques were necessitated by anthropologists' inability to visit Nazi Germany or wartime Japan. One later ethnographer pointed out, however, that although "culture at a distance" had the "elaborate aura of a good academic fad, the method was not so different from what any good historian does: to make the most creative use possible of written documents."[7] Anthropologists were attempting to understand the cultural patterns that might be driving the aggression of once-friendly nations, and they hoped to find possible weaknesses or means of persuasion that had been missed.

Americans found themselves unable to comprehend matters in Japanese culture. For instance, Americans considered it quite natural that American prisoners of war would want their families to know that they were alive and that they would keep quiet when they were asked for information about troop movements, etc. However, Japanese prisoners of war apparently gave information freely and did not try to contact their families.

Reception in the United States

[edit]

Between 1946 and 1971, the book sold only 28,000 hardback copies, and a paperback edition was not issued until 1967.[8] Benedict played a major role in grasping the place of the Emperor of Japan in Japanese popular culture, and formulating the recommendation to President Franklin D. Roosevelt that permitting continuation of the Emperor's reign had to be part of the eventual surrender offer.[citation needed]

As of 1999, 350,000 copies were sold in the US.[4]

Reception in Japan

[edit]

More than 2.3 million copies of the book have been sold in Japan since it first appeared in translation there.[4]

John W. Bennett and Michio Nagai, two scholars on Japan, pointed out in 1953 that the translated book "has appeared in Japan during a period of intense national self-examination—a period during which Japanese intellectuals and writers have been studying the sources and meaning of Japanese history and character, in one of their perennial attempts to determine the most desirable course of Japanese development."[9]

Japanese social critic and philosopher Tamotsu Aoki said that the translated book "helped invent a new tradition for postwar Japan." It helped to create a growing interest in "ethnic nationalism" in the country, shown in the publication of hundreds of ethnocentric nihonjinron (treatises on 'Japaneseness') published over the next four decades. Although Benedict was criticized for not discriminating among historical developments in the country in her study, "Japanese cultural critics were especially interested in her attempts to portray the whole or total structure ('zentai kōzō') of Japanese Culture," as Helen Hardacre put it.[9] C. Douglas Lummis has said the entire "nihonjinron" genre stems ultimately from Benedict's book.[10]

The book began a discussion among Japanese scholars about "shame culture" vs. "guilt culture", which spread beyond academia, and the two terms are now established as ordinary expressions in the country.[10]

Soon after the translation was published, Japanese scholars, including Kazuko Tsurumi, Tetsuro Watsuji, and Kunio Yanagita criticized the book as inaccurate and having methodological errors. American scholar C. Douglas Lummis has written that criticisms of Benedict's book that are "now very well known in Japanese scholarly circles" include that it represented the ideology of a class for that of the entire culture, "a state of acute social dislocation for a normal condition, and an extraordinary moment in a nation's history as an unvarying norm of social behavior."[10]

Japanese ambassador to Pakistan Sadaaki Numata said the book "has been a must reading for many students of Japanese studies."[11]

According to Margaret Mead, the author's former student and a fellow anthropologist, other Japanese who have read it found it on the whole accurate but somewhat "moralistic". Sections of the book were mentioned favorably in Takeo Doi's book, The Anatomy of Dependence, but he is somewhat critical of her analysis of Japan and the West as respectively shame and guilt cultures, noting that while he is "disposed to side with her," she still "allows value judgements to creep into her ideas."[12]

In a 2002 symposium at The Library of Congress in the United States, Shinji Yamashita, of the department of anthropology at the University of Tokyo, added that there has been so much change since World War II in Japan that Benedict would not recognize the nation she described in 1946.[13]

Lummis wrote, "After some time I realized that I would never be able to live in a decent relationship with the people of that country unless I could drive this book, and its politely arrogant world view, out of my head."[10] Lummis, who went to the Vassar College archives to review Benedict's notes, wrote that he found some of her more important points were developed from interviews with Robert Hashima, a Japanese-American native of the United States who was taken to Japan as a child, educated there, then returned to the US before World War II began. According to Lummis, who interviewed Hashima, the circumstances helped introduce a certain bias into Benedict's research: "For him, coming to Japan for the first time as a teenager smack in the middle of the militaristic period and having no memory of the country before then, what he was taught in school was not 'an ideology', it was Japan itself." Lummis thinks Benedict relied too much on Hashima and says that he was deeply alienated by his experiences in Japan and that "it seems that he became a kind of touchstone, the authority against which she would test information from other sources."[10]

Reception in China

[edit]

The first Chinese translation was made by Taiwanese anthropologist Huang Dao-Ling, and published in Taiwan in April 1974 by Taiwan Kui-Kuang Press. The book became a bestseller in China in 2005, when relations with the Japanese government were strained. In that year alone, 70,000 copies of the book were sold in China.[5]

See also

[edit]

Citations

[edit]
  1. ^ Ezra F. Vogel, Foreword, The Chrysanthemum and the Sword (Boston: Houghton Mifflin 1989)
  2. ^ [1] Archived 2014-06-30 at the Wayback Machine Plath, David W., and Robert J. Smith, "How 'American' Are Studies of Modern Japan Done in the United States", in Harumi Befu and Joseph Kreiner, eds., Otherness of Japan: Historical and Cultural Influences on Japanese Studies in Ten Countries, Munchen: The German Institute of Japanese Studies, as quoted in Ryang, Sonia, "Chrysanthemum's Strange Life: Ruth Benedict in Postwar Japan", accessed January 13, 2007
  3. ^ Ruth Benedict, The Chrysanthemum and the Sword, page 2, 1946
  4. ^ a b c Kent, Pauline (1999). "Japanese Perceptions of "the Chrysanthemum and the Sword"". Dialectical Anthropology. 24 (2): 181–192. doi:10.1023/A:1007082930663. ISSN 0304-4092. JSTOR 29790600. S2CID 140977522. Retrieved 20 August 2023.
  5. ^ a b Fujino, Akira (January 8, 2006). "Book on Japanese culture proves a bestseller in China". The Advocate of Stamford, Connecticut. Tribune News Service.
  6. ^ Robert Harry Lowie, The German People: A Social Portrait to 1914 (New York: Farrar & Rinehart, 1945); John F. Embree, The Japanese Nation: A Social Survey (New York: Farrar & Rinehart, 1945
  7. ^ Vogel, Foreword, p. x.
  8. ^ Johnson, Sheila (2014). "Letters: Unfair to Anthropologists". London Review of Books. 36 (7). Retrieved 6 April 2014.
  9. ^ a b [2] Hardacre, Helen, "The Postwar Development of Japanese Studies in the United States", (Brill: 1998), ISBN 90-04-08628-5 via Google Books; the Bennett-Nagai quote may be from John W. Bennett and Nagai Michio, "The Japanese critique of Benedict's The Chrysanthemum and the Sword," American Anthropologist 55 :401-411 [1953], mentioned at "Reading notes | Benedict, the Chrysanthemum and the Sword". Archived from the original on 2008-04-05. Retrieved 2008-01-14. Web page titled "Reading notes for Ruth Benedict's The Chrysanthemum and the Sword (1946)" at the Web site of William W. Kelly, Professor of Anthropology & Sumitomo Professor of Japanese Studies, Yale University; both Web sites accessed January 13, 2007
  10. ^ a b c d e Lummis, C. Douglas, "Ruth Benedict's Obituary for Japanese Culture", article in Japan Focus, an online academic, peer-reviewed journal of Japanese studies, accessed October 11, 2013
  11. ^ "Ambassador Numata's Speech at Flower Show 25 Nov 2000". 2006-01-11. Archived from the original on 2006-01-11. Retrieved 2011-11-24.
  12. ^ Doi, Takeo (1973). The Anatomy of Dependence. Tokyo, New York: Kodansha International. p. 48. ISBN 0870111817.
  13. ^ Wolfskill, Mary, "Human Nature and the Power of Culture: Library Hosts Margaret Mead Symposium", article in Library of Congress Information Bulletin, January 2002, as accessed at the U.S. Library of Congress Web site, January 13, 2008

Further reading

[edit]
  • Kent, Pauline, "Misconceived Configurations of Ruth Benedict", Japan Review 7 (1996): 33-60. JSTOR 25790964.
  • Ryang, Sonya, "Chrysanthemum's Strange Life: Ruth Benedict in Postwar Japan", Asian Anthropology 1: 87-116. doi:10.1080/1683478X.2002.10552522. PMID 17896441.
  • Shannon, Christopher. "A World Made Safe for Differences: Ruth Benedict's The Chrysanthemum and the Sword", American Quarterly 47 (1995): 659-680. doi:10.2307/2713370. JSTOR 2713370.
[edit]