Cupola 2017- 2018

Christopher Newport university The Cupola 2017- 2018 The Cupola 2017-2018 The Undergraduate Research Journal of Christopher Newport University 1 Avenue of the Arts Newport New, VA 23606 The Cupola is the undergraduate research journal of Christopher Newport University. Publication of The Cupola is made possible by the generous support of the Douglas K. Gordon Endowed Fund. Papers published in The Cupola have undergone review by the Undergraduate and Graduate Research Council. The final product has been edited and compiled by the Office of Undergraduate Research and Creative Activity. In addition to online publication, this year we are happy to present the journal in print form. Each student published in The Cupola is awarded a $500 stipend in recognition of their fine work; the top two accepted submissions are awarded an additional $500 from the Douglas K. Gordon Endowed Fund. ã2018 All rights belong to individual authors The Office of Undergraduate Research and Creative Activity Dr. David A. Salomon, Director Dr. Michaela Meyer, Academic Director 757.594.8586 cnu.edu/research interweb.cnu.edu/research Dr. Douglas K. Gordon Dr. Douglas K. Gordon taught at Christopher Newport College and then University for twenty- eight years. He arrived at Christopher Newport College in 1980 as Assistant Professor of Basic Studies. In 1982 he was promoted to Associate Professor of English and in 1988 to Professor of English. He became Dean of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences in 2002 after serving a year as Associate Dean. As Dean, he chaired the Task Force on Curriculum and Academic Life that developed the Liberal Learning Core Curriculum, the only complete revision of the general education curriculum in the history of CNC/CNU. Because of his commitment to professional development, he established CLAS Dean’s Office Grants (DOGS) that have resulted in at least 10 book manuscripts, proposals, chapters and revisions. Dr. Gordon held many leadership positions at the institution. He was president of the Faculty Advisory Committee (predecessor to the Faculty Senate) for two years, Chair of the Department of Basic Studies and the Department of English, and NCAA Faculty Athletics Representative. He founded Omicron Delta Kappa National Leadership Honor Society at CNU and was faculty advisor to Alpha Chi National Honor Society and Sigma Tau Delta International English Honor Society. He chaired the Football Feasibility Committee that led to the football program at CNU and served as master of ceremonies at Department of Music events like Holiday Happening and as a reader for the Classic Club’s dramatic readings. He was the “Liberal Learning Guy” for HR orientation of new employees and during admissions events. His scholarship is in the areas of dogs in literature, teaching writing and bluegrass and country music. Publication of The Cupola is largely made possible due to Dr. Gordon’s generous and continuous support of undergraduate research and creative activity. Table of Contents Kristen Frazee, Justice and Memory: How the Perceptions of Injustice at the Tokyo War Crimes Trial Impact Japanese Memories of World War II 1 Douglas K. Gordon Award Melissa Jones, Lord Elgin, the Parthenon Marbles, and the Repatriation Debate 33 Douglas K. Gordon Award Emily Coffey, A Shifting National Identity in Twentieth Century Mexican Photography 65 Kaija Craft, “Welcome To Your Tape:” An Analysis of Suicide, Signs of Suicide, and Sexual Assault in 13 Reasons Why 94 Brady Michael DeHoust, “Of Men and of Angels”: An Axiology of Communication 124 Daniel Glenn, Lincoln to Guantanamo: Civil Liberties in Wartime 152 Paige M. Long, Mental Health Stigma and Advocacy on U.S. College Campuses 173 Haley Reynolds, The Cognition of Animals: Why Descartes was Wrong 186 “Justice and Memory: How the Perceptions of Injustice at the Tokyo War Crimes Trial Impact Japanese Memories of World War II” Kristen Frazee Faculty Sponsor: Dr. Xiaoqun Xu, Department of History Abstract This paper examines the controversial International Military Tribunal for the Far East (also known as the Tokyo War Crimes Trial) and the impact that the perceived injustices of the trial might have had on Japan’s memory of World War II. It first looks at the historiography on the Tokyo War Crimes Trial and the claims that have been made about the mishandling of justice. It then uses primary sources to evaluate the validity of these claims and determine the extent to which the issues existed and affected the proceedings of the trial. Finally, the paper looks at how the issues, real or not, have affected the way the Japanese remember World War II, as well as the impact that these memories have had on their society, government, and international relations. The paper concludes that, while some issues did exist in the trial, the mishandling of justice was not nearly as extensive as is often claimed. However, the claims have been so often repeated and therefore perpetuated that they have had a profound impact on Japanese memories of World War II. 2 The International Military Tribunal for the Far East has been largely forgotten by history. Scholars tend to focus on the more notorious Nuremberg Trials, and the Japanese public remains apathetic about the events that took place after the Japanese surrender. The trial began on April 29, 1946, and lasted more than two years. In the course of the tribunal twenty-eight Japanese political and military leaders were tried for war crimes committed during the Second World War. In the end, one defendant was deemed mentally unfit for trial, two died before a judgment was made, and the rest faced sentences ranging from seven years in prison to death by hanging. The tribunal was followed by many subsequent war crimes trials which led to the conviction of many more Japanese defendants, but the IMTFE quickly faded into the past and was forgotten by most. The IMTFE is not the center of frequent discussion, but that does not mean that it is not controversial. From the start, the tribunal was accused of bias and inconsistency. The defendants submitted complaints and even the justices themselves admitted to being uncomfortable with certain aspects of the trial. The supposed issues ranged from how evidence was handled, to who participated in the trial, to the very legal basis for the tribunal. Nevertheless, the tribunal was carried through and stands as the official judgment on Japanese actions during World War II. However, not everyone accepts the results as a fair and accurate application of justice. Claims of “victor’s justice” and continued questioning of the legality of the trial give the IMTFE an uncertain legacy. While many remain uninterested in the tribunal and its results, a growing number of Japanese and international scholars, politicians, and citizens discredit the IMTFE and perpetuate a different version of history. However, the claimed injustices may not have been as extensive as many would like to assume. There were sure issues with the tribunal, but many of the claims do not stand up when considered in their full context. The fact that so many people believe the issues exist is problematic in and of itself. This distorted perception of the past shapes how the events of World War II are remembered by different groups in Japan. The International Military Tribunal for the Far 3 East remains controversial and plays an important role in influencing post-war memory of Japanese war crimes and the consequences of those perceptions. Historiography The scholarship on the Tokyo War Crimes Trial is limited. Although significant historically, the IMTFE is generally overlooked in favor of the Nuremberg Trials. However, the academic work that does exist on the subject is diverse. Books and articles were written both during and immediately after the trial, as well as many years or decades later. These show how academics viewed the trial in different points in time and under different circumstances. The perspectives of the scholarship also vary. Some scholars take completely to the idea that the trial was unfounded, unfair, and a total mishandling of justice. Others take a more moderate stance. These scholars believe that the convictions were necessary and the issues that did exist were only allowed in order to carry out essential justice. Some even go so far as to say that the Tokyo War Crimes Trial had a profoundly positive impact on Japan and on the evolution of international justice. Despite their small number, the varied and evolving perceptions of the scholarship on the IMTFE make for a complicated historiography. The books and articles discussed in this paper take many different approaches to the trial. However, each one has a valuable perspective and can be used to assess the issues and biases that existed in the IMTFE and how they contribute to post-war memories of World War II. Richard Minear’s Victor’s Justice (1971) is an early and well known piece of scholarship on the Tokyo War Crimes Trial. This book serves as the starting point for most subsequent studies on the ethics and legality of the IMTFE, and is frequently cited throughout the other works discussed in this paper. Minear’s work takes a fairly negative stance regarding the tribunal and how it was run. Most of the book works through an extensive list of issues and complaints about the IMTFE. These criticisms cover a time from before the trial was established to events that occurred in the aftermath. 4 Minear points out flaws in the foundation of the IMTFE, the justices, the defendants, the evidence, and virtually every other aspect of the tribunal. In addition, he looks at the motives and reasons behind why some of these issues may have existed. He concludes that the IMTFE was set up to ensure conviction, and therefore was nothing more than “victor’s justice.”1 In order to support these claims, Minear relies heavily on the dissenting opinions that were written by several of the justices after the conclusion of the trial.

Load more