Hara:"The Thought of Japan" Original Author: Atsushi Sasaki Rin: Yoneoka Ikono: 红cha awa nori
Arrangement and a little Chinese proofreading: People Gillang Roof -Qunqing Building 7 provides joint collaborative support, if you are interested in this article and would like to provide translation proofreading support, please contact us;
Prologue: Landscape of "Zero Zero-Year Thoughts"
Chapter 1: What is "New School"?
Chapter 2: Akira Asada and Shinichi Nakazawa – The End of Differentiation
Chapter 3: Shigehiko Tsugeshiwa Hatagetani Yukito: "Fumimoto Yo" Work"
Chapter Four: The "Problem" of the So-Called "Postmodern"
Chapter Five: The Three Men of the "Nineties" – Kazuya Fukuda, Hideshi Otsuka, and Shinji Miyadai
Chapter 6: The Nation of Japan as a "Place of Evil."
Chapter 7: The Appearance of Higashi Hiroki
Chapter Eight: The Animalized "Zero Zero"
Prologue – The Landscape of "The Thoughts of the Zero-Zeros"
preface
This book attempts to explore the changes in "Japanese thought" from the eighty years to the present from the author's own perspective.
When I write this, a few questions will probably arise in the minds of readers.
"Why is it from the eighties?" (Before that?)"
"Why did you write it?"
"Then again, what exactly is 'thought'?"
There should be many other questions, but let's answer them in order first.
The first question is "Why did it start in the eighties?". What can be called "thought" certainly existed before the eighties, and I think that's a matter of course. I have two answers to this question.
First of all, the author, who was born in 1964, has only been exposed to "thought" in real time since about 1980, and is in the midst of its "change". If you look at the formal discussion from the next chapter, you can see that the content of this book is mainly to quote the author's personal memories or occasional feelings (and also try to re-examine the time from the perspective of the present). Although it is not my personal memoir, I would rather truthfully present the "history" of "Japanese thought" that a "reader of ideas" can directly access to than to write an objective general history, so in any case, it can only begin in the eighties.
The second answer is more important. This reason is described in more detail later. In this book, I would like to try to think, "Why is 'Japanese thought' like this now?" This is a problem. Then, in retrospect, despite all the "changes" that can actually be seen as the starting point of an intrinsically linked lineage, it is only in the early eighties. In other words, there was a kind of "severance" between the "eighties" and the "Japanese thought" stream before the eighties. This book divides this distinction between before and after this "cut off" in terms of "Japan" and "Japan Country" (the original is Katakana ニッポン), and the following translations of the prologue will also use "Japan Country" to represent ニッポン, translator's note). And I think that after the so-called "zero zero zero" and the 1980s, the genealogy of "Japanese thought" that lasted for about thirty years can probably be regarded as a "cut-off" inserted into the spectrum.
For the second question, it can be said that half of it has been answered. So far, I have mainly carried out critical activities aimed at so-called culture/subcultures in the fields of art/expression such as music, film, and novels. That's pretty much the case now. In other words, of course, the author himself is not one of the people who support the "idea of the Japanese nation", nor is he a professional researcher, but can be said to be just a "reader". But as a reader, I've been reading a lot of "thoughts" all along. After reading a lot, all kinds of ideas will arise. So I wanted to try to sort out the "japanese thinking" myself at this point in time.
Moreover, this has to do with the overall proposition of this book, and I think there are things that can only be seen because I am not on the "stage" of "Japanese national thought." It is also good to have a "history = series of thoughts" written by people who do not directly participate in the "change" of "thought", but always a dedicated "audience".
The third question is rather difficult to answer. How about giving a rough definition here for the time being. "Thought is something that is formed after the original influence of some 'knowledge' is expanded." Well, that doesn't seem to be a good illustration. For example, I think that "criticism" and "philosophy" are similar to "thought", and in the Japanese context, from where to where is "criticism" and where to start is "thought", the boundaries between them are quite ambiguous, and I feel that not all of what is called "philosophy" is enough to be called "thought". To put it more precisely than the previous definition, thought is "beyond the original closed boundaries of what is called 'criticism', 'philosophy', and 'learning', and has become popular." This may be more appropriate, but it is still somewhat uncertain whether it has reached the level of "popular population". In short, let's think of it as something that summarizes "knowledge" such as "criticism", "philosophy", and "learning", and "power up". That being said, how "knowing" becomes "thought" has changed with the times. This book will also explore such changes.
I don't know if this counts as a preface, but as a pre-said excuse = pretext, or so it seems. Although I think there may be people who do not accept it, this introduction is too long, so let's continue to go on.
So let's briefly sketch the "present" scenery of the "Japanese thought."
The landscape of "zero zero scholarship"
Fast forward in time, the 200X years, the so-called "zero zero", there are few left. (This book was published in 2009) Nowadays, if you go to a large bookstore to see the "Thought (Books)" counter, the books there are probably divided into three categories.
1. "Left-wing" books in the broad sense. Working Poor and others, from works on the discussion of real-world issues on wages/labor issues to highly philosophical theoretical books (from the Rain Palace to Antonio Negri), cover a considerable range, because the Japanese state now holds the cause of the long-term malaise that does not know when to end, and it can be said that this category is the most published now.
2. The so-called "Teachings of the Sages" books. For example, works that affirm the characteristics of "morality (ethics)" or "way of thinking" that are unique to The Japanese nation (people) (different from other countries). Of course, the republishment of books by Jiro Shirasu and Kenichi Yoshida, who had a strong retro tendency some time ago, is also characterized by the republishing of books by pre-war thinkers such as Jiro Shirasu and Kenichi Yoshida, who were constantly reprinted/re-evaluated. In addition, in my opinion, modern versions of "sages" such as Osamu Hashimoto and Uchida Shu, as well as Nakajima Yoshimichi, who read as a theory of life with highly philosophical content (I think so) can also be counted in this category.
Then there is the "Higashi Hiroki class" as one of the major categories of the current "thought = criticism" landscape. If I explain it in advance, I think this is the "complete type" of "Japanese national thought." This category includes authors of sociology, psychology, and other disciplines.
Higashi Hiroki Higashi and sociologist and associate professor at the University of Tokyo, Served as editor-in-charge, and in April 2008, the magazine (mook, Mukezhi, rightly speaking) "Map of Ideas", which was first published 10,000 copies (an out-of-the-box number for this type of book of this era), sold out immediately, and within a few weeks of its release, an additional 5,000 copies were printed. In that magazine/publishing difficult past, this was a record for a noticeably unusual sales volume. "Vol.2" of "Thought Map" was released in December 2008 and "vol.3" was released in May 2009, and it is stated that it will continue to be published in the future. In addition, Higashi Hiroki's critic cultivation program "Higashi Hiroki's Zero Zero Academic Dojo", which began at the same time as the "Thought Map", also received great attention. The "Zero Zero Dojo" is a project that allows the "Critics Reserve" who signed up to participate to pass the layers of interesting levels, and finally let the participants who broke through the final selection debut in the first edition of 10,000 one-line books.
How powerful the "Zero Zero Academic Dojo" is, here I would like to record it with my own eyes. The fourth selection of the "Zero Zero Dojo" was held at the venue of the "Seventh Literary Flea Market" held in Akihabara on November 9, 2008, and the participants formed a team of two to sell each group of 500 "Criticism Doujinshi" for themselves to target this day. Its sales volume will be combined with the scores given by Higashi Hiroki higashi and Katsushi Ota ( at the time) who hosts Kodansha BOX, which hosts Zero Zero Academia " , to get the total score, and the three groups with the highest scores will pass this screening, which is such a selection. The Literary Free Market, or "Literary Free Market" for short, is a "Flea Market for Novels and Criticisms of Fandom/Personalism" that began at the initiative of Hideshi Otsuka, who appears in the fifth chapter. On that day, an additional area was set up specifically for "Zero Zero Academics" separate from the main venue.
In the venue of "Zero Zero Academic", the five groups of official registered participants and the three groups of "kickers" who joined as a special project of this round added up to a total of eight groups, that is, a total of 8 copies of "Criticism Dourenzhi" were sold. The sales looked extremely enthusiastic. The "Literary Flea Market" was held for only one day, only five hours from eleven a.m. to four o'clock in the afternoon, and five groups of eight groups sold out five hundred copies within the time limit (the speed of each group was different), and the last eight groups sold more than three thousand eight hundred copies in total. (In other words, the three groups that could not be sold out also sold more than 80%)
There may also be readers who have not felt the impact of this sales volume, which is a completely eye-popping number, as is the sales of the first volume of the "Thought Map". In fact, my own firm also opened a booth there, so I was able to see first-hand the power of "zero zero academia". Although "Zero Zero Academic" has set up a separate entrance to avoid confusion, from the morning there is a long queue at the entrance, and as soon as the opening time comes, guests flock to it. Probably because of the influence of "zero and zero scholarship", "Wen Free" also had many more visitors than last time (thanks to this, the author's booth sales are also very good), and it is the degree to which each product can sell three-digit sales. And "zero zero scholarship" is five times more, and the producer is only a writer who is "above the layman and less than a critic", and his fame and evaluation still need to be improved. But the reality is that from the "Zero Zero Academic" area, there is a burst of "five hundred sold out!" The applause of the clapping, the venue of "Wen Free" was filled with a strange excitement. So that at some point, even we who are not directly related to "zero zero scholarship" began to clap our hands together (laughs) to bless the glorious qualified. Ah, speaking of which, I also lined up to buy all eight volumes...
Just by taking a look at the "Thought Map" and the "Zero Zero Dojo", we can find that in the current "landscape" of "criticism = thought", The presence and influence of Higashi Hiroki are very prominent. In addition, Tokihiro Uno, who wrote "Imagination of the Zero-Zeros", Tomoshi Hamano, who wrote "The Ecology of Architecture", and Ryo-Dai Fukushima, who has not yet published a separate book, and Hirohito Kurose, are all rookies who have entered the "Zero Zero" and have expanded with the influence of Higashi Hiroki, and they have also received widespread attention. This can be called "the victory of Higashi Hiroki alone"—half out of envy, half out of ridicule. But in this case, the question that has to be asked is "Why can Higashi Hiroki achieve 'one-man victory'?" This book also explores this issue. Speaking of which, this book is an attempt to follow the trajectory of the "Japanese National Thought" from the 1980s to the 1900s, and I am also wondering whether it has become an answer.
One of the key words in the book is "Performance"
The book is basically divided into three parts, in chronological order, each decade, that is, divided into three parts: the eighties, nineties, and zeros. It is such a rather untechnical structure. But of course, each decade is not considered completely separately and considered separately. The author takes a perspective that is superficially disconnected, but in fact continuous. Rather, it is the intention of this book to dissect the wonderful consistency (and the like) of the "japanese thought" lurking in the seemingly tortuous and complex "changes" of the "change". Therefore, before entering the official chapter, in order to make the "consistency (something like that)" better understood, I want to introduce and explain a few keywords first.
First of all, although it is necessary to summarize the "japanese thought", this book does not analyze the core and specific contents of each "idea" one by one and explain the changes of each . That kind of work is beyond the author's ability, and if you want to write it so carefully, it will be far beyond the capacity of the new book. But the more fundamental reason is that rather than considering "the thought of japan" as the "content of thought" itself, I regard it more as something that can be established because of the "behavior" of thought. "Behavior" (literally zhen る舞い) is translated into English as "performance". That is to say, I think that it is more important than what the "thought" says and how it says it because of what happens to the narrative of the thought (what it wants to do).
Needless to say (and here dare to write "don't say" is also a form of performance), this term for "performance" was analyzed by Higashi in his debut work Existential, Postal (existential, post-mail). This was originally proposed by John Langshaw Austin in his theory of the behavior of language, and its understanding is based on the distinction between "constative"/performative", which later arose in the controversy between Jacques Derrida and John Rogers Searle. This two-point opposition of "content/behavior" is not only the most important point in understanding "thinkers" like Higashi Hiroki, but also in understanding the "ideas of japan." More precisely, including cases where "behavior" is not intentionally emphasized, the aspect of "behavior" is given overwhelming importance compared to "content", which I believe is also characteristic of "Japanese thought". Sometimes it is clear that no one has understood the "content" (or where there is almost no such thing as "content"?), but the effect of that "thought" is exerted according to some kind of effective "performance", and this is also the case.
The second key word in the book is "Seesaw"
In response to "performance," if one wants to describe the history of "Japanese thought," one can see that "change" and "content" are two different things. For example, when a new "thought" comes on, the most effective thing is that it is different from other "thoughts" of the past—at least in the eyes of people. More deeply, an important condition for it to be accepted as a new idea and to have some influence is to make people think that because of its appearance, the idea that already exists has been renewed/transcended/declared to be ended (or can be ended). It would be a great success if the "thought readers" of the time could be persuaded that the "thoughts" of someone in the mainstream had become "decisively obsolete."
As a result, "Performance", which is the dividing point of "Japan's thought", will become as sharply opposed as possible to the "ideas" that preceded it in any case. This was not just the case with intentional "performance", which the "thinkers" of the time obviously did not have, but the result was supported because it could become an opposition to the "thought" that had always existed. However, the unconscious "success" of the lack of performativeness is staged several times and is absorbed as a fact = data of an "effective strategy". The number of cases in which new "thinkers" deliberately raised "conscious oppositions" as "performance" increased at the time. The author believes that in the zero and zero this so-called "pendulum movement" was pushed to the extreme, but it will not be discussed in depth here.
Now suddenly throw out a metaphor of "pendulum", which is simply "reverse swing". From right to left, from left to right, the larger the swing, the better the effect. Of course, it's not just about the left and right swings. From top to bottom, from bottom to top; from the outside to the inside, from the inside to the outside... There are various ways to swing, the way to be swinged. The key is to make the arrangement of the schematic diagram of "thought" faithfully and vividly show this constantly reversing style.
In this way, in fact, it seems that a considerable part of the changes in the "japanese state's thinking" over the past thirty years can be explained by such a pendulum movement. Moreover, it is not just the antagonism between "thinkers", even if it is only a "thinker", his career may produce many huge and fierce "swings" of thought for various reasons. No, mentioning this, for example, one of the important themes of "Japanese thought" is the problem of "turning", which may also be regarded as a kind of "pendulum movement". How to say, for this country, in these important dimensions such as ideology and political beliefs, which should be related to the fundamentals of personality, suddenly find that they are on the opposite side of the trend, and such groundbreaking things happen from time to time. So in a sense, the "pendulum movement" may be a manifestation of the special habits of the Japanese people (?).
So, is this a phenomenon that can be called the "unfolding of dialectics"? No, there is no "Aufheben" that sets a counter-argument to a thesis and then rises to a higher level with the help of the opposition between the two, and the pendulum is simply a left-right swing. At first glance, there may seem to be some radical change, but in the long run, it is only the pendulum that has returned to its previous position, so it is understandable that the "reversal" of a thought on its predecessors is only a temporary thing, and such things will happen from time to time. In other words, although the two extremes of "oscillation" between the thoughts are displayed, their internal realities are balanced with each other.
Based on this meaning, if you abruptly change the words, the author believes that "Seesaw" is more appropriate than "pendulum". As soon as the "seesaw" goes up, which end floats in the air, the other end will touch the ground, but the process is repeated. At the extreme, to explore the "changes" in the "thinking of the Japanese nation" may be to watch the children who have been playing seesaw. Whenever there is a "reversal", it will make people feel thrilled, but whenever they look back, they will unexpectedly feel that there is not much change.
After writing all of this, I guess immediately there will be "How can it be such a simple thing?!" Blame and spit strike. But I think (or doubt, surprised) that maybe it's actually a lot simpler than we've always thought. In fact, the "seesaw principle" is everywhere in the "japanese thought", and I would like to confirm this in the official chapter.
The third key word in the book is "Player"
As readers know, the English word "player" has many meanings such as competitor, performer, performer, and so on. This book will refer to the "thinkers" who appear as "players." This is because they are performing "performance" and "competition", "performance" in the double sense. For them, the scene of "thought" is both "theater", "game board", "playground", and "seesaw" as mentioned in the previous section. This book will select a few main players in different eras and examine the "performance" of their "thoughts".
So, at what level is its "acting/competitive/gaming" and how is it censored and evaluated? This brings us to the next key word.
The fourth key word in this book is "the market of ideas"
Finally, there's the unfamiliar-sounding word "thought market." It sounds strange because it's a word that I coined for this book. Literally, it means "market" of "thought."
One of the characteristics of the "Japanese ideas" after the 1980s was that they circulated actively as commodities. Specifically, with the advent of the "new school of thought" mentioned in the first chapter, "ideas" become "commoditized" in one fell swoop (more precisely, "ideas" have been shown to be "commodities"). In the "thought market" of that time, whether it could become a "commodity" full of charm would be fed back to the value of "thought" itself, and this situation was extremely common even at the end of the "zero zero". There is an equivalence between "commodity value" and "value of thought (as thoughts)", and even if it is not said, at least the statement that "well-selling ideas" = "valuable ideas" is true. However, the author believes that the equation of "unsold ideas" = "worthless ideas" is not valid, but even so, whoever thinks that what sells well is better than what cannot be sold.
Of course, the difference between "selling well/not selling" and the existence of "thought" should have been considered separately, but there is an ambiguous relationship between the two in any case, because there are actually quite good "ideas" that sell well. In any case, the de facto binding force of "selling is really good" is very large, unless there is a fairly strong self and self-confidence, it is very difficult to care about the influence of the "thought market", temper your "thoughts" and then stick to it all the time, especially after entering the zero zero.
One reason for this is that the "university" protects the system of things called "thoughts" in various senses, and because of reasons such as the legalization of independent administration and the lack of children, it has been involved in the actual economic principles, even if it is unwilling. Moreover, the deteriorating publishing downturn has led to the crisis of the decline of the "thought market" itself, further exacerbating the pressure that it must be sold anyway, even if it is only slightly more than the less sold. Then, among the previously mentioned "Thought Map" and "Zero Zero Academic Dojo", or "Thought = Criticism" in a broad sense, like Tokihiro Uno's Imagination of the Zero Zero, which has caused a rare fanaticism in recent years, there are books that actually sell well, so that in the future, the "market" will become more and more affected by "thought", and the bias estimate will be stronger.
This book wants to use the keyword "thought market" to analyze the prediction-expectation of "ideas" in various eras because they "can sell well/sell badly", and the results-facts of "selling well/not selling well", which is a bias and distortion before/after the event.
Trying to explain it roughly, I will continue to use the above keywords in the official chapters and explain their concepts in more detail.
So, let's get started.