JRCA Vol. 20, No. 1 (2019), pp.207-245 207

Discourse on within the Korean Community of Kyoto

Nataša Visočnik Department of Asian Studies, Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana

Abstract In recent years, an increasing number of immigrants, together with greater pressure on the state from both outside and within to recognise the diversity of its society, have caused a shift in public and academic attention from the idea of as an ethnically homogenous to the concept of a ‘multicultural Japan’. This paper explores the emergence of the notion of ‘multicultural coexistence’ and focuses on the assimilation of foreigners in Japan. In the foreground of this endeavour, the country’s Korean minority has struggled to be included in Japanese society through different types of civic groups and neighbourhood associations. A machizukuri process in Higashi Kujo (an area around Kujo Street) in the city of Kyoto, as well as the Madang Festival, are presented along with the details of their organization, revealing the multiple meanings of this process and festival, respectively. Through a close look at these cases, the article shows how different groups of people work together to make their society a shared and diverse community.

Key words: Multiculturalism, Multicultural coexistence, Community building, Higashi Kujō Madang festival

208 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community 209

Beyond a Homogeneous Nation

The idea of Japan as an ethnically homogeneous nation has prevailed in the country for many decades, and is often accompanied by a discursive representation referred to as tan’itsu minzokuron (単一 民族論, usually translated as ‘theories of monoethnicity’ or sometimes ‘’). In this vein, belonging to a nation-state is seen as being part of its culture.1 It is this notion, as a product of a particular political-economic system, which prevents people from expressing and valuing cultural diversity (Macdonald 1995: 296). In Japan, as part of the process of opening up to the West during the Meiji period, the flow of information and the uncritical acceptance of various concepts and perceptions of the Japanese themselves, as well as of the world, emerged. Japan wanted to become equal to Western and wished others to see it as such. Through identity creation, searching for answers to questions about the origins of the and culture, Western states have acknowledged Japan as a unique mono-cultural society in terms of its culture. That the nation is homogeneous has been generally accepted both within and outside Japan for decades, despite that some minorities live there. At the turn of the millennium, with the rising number of immigrants due to labour shortages, pressure on the state and its institutions became increasingly powerful (Douglass and Roberts 2000: xix). This was reinforced by the ever-growing battles of minority groups, who throughout their existence in Japan have posed a challenge to the assumption that the nation-state is ‘homogeneous’

1 The concept of ‘culture’ that Macdonald (1995: 294) uses refers to constellations of ideas, technologies and forms of social organisation though which people express what it means to be in the world, to be social and to be human. Culture is thus a process as well as a product (see also Hall 1996: 2). 208 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community Nataša Visočnik 209

Beyond a Homogeneous Nation while still being overlooked. For this reason, the existence of resident foreigners, among them The idea of Japan as an ethnically homogeneous nation has the Korean minority, has been seen as a ‘problem’ in Japanese society prevailed in the country for many decades, and is often accompanied for most of the post-war period. The impression of ethnic by a discursive representation referred to as tan’itsu minzokuron (単一 residing in Japan challenges the belief that Japan is ‘homogeneous’, 民族論, usually translated as ‘theories of monoethnicity’ or while also raising questions about what it means to be ‘Korean’ or sometimes ‘monoculturalism’). In this vein, belonging to a ‘Japanese’. Koreans constitute the second largest ‘foreign’ community nation-state is seen as being part of its culture.1 It is this notion, as a permanently living in the country. Despite their similarities in product of a particular political-economic system, which prevents physical appearance and their considerable acculturation to people from expressing and valuing cultural diversity (Macdonald mainstream Japanese society, have been 1995: 296). In Japan, as part of the process of opening up to the discriminated against by both the Japanese state and society (see West during the Meiji period, the flow of information and the Hicks 1997; Ryang, ed. 2005; Chapman 2006). They continue to uncritical acceptance of various concepts and perceptions of the face and respond to diverse forms of discrimination, they experience Japanese themselves, as well as of the world, emerged. Japan wanted human rights violations and social injustice, as well as to become equal to Western nations and wished others to see it as intra-communal political diversity, which is relevant to others’ such. Through identity creation, searching for answers to questions experiences in the West and beyond. The Korean diaspora has about the origins of the Japanese people and culture, Western states historically struggled against legislative and social exclusion and have acknowledged Japan as a unique mono-cultural society in terms attempts at assimilation; it has been pushing for social change and of its culture. That the nation is homogeneous has been generally recognition of an ethnically diverse . Recent increases in accepted both within and outside Japan for decades, despite that the number of migrants and greater pressure on Japan to accept its some minorities live there. At the turn of the millennium, with the society’s cosmopolitanism have drawn more attention to the idea of a rising number of immigrants due to labour shortages, pressure on the ‘multicultural Japan’. Efforts to achieve a better quality of life have state and its institutions became increasingly powerful (Douglass and been channelled through civic engagement, whereby people work to Roberts 2000: xix). This was reinforced by the ever-growing battles of enhance their environments. In this context, Takaya (2006: 45) minority groups, who throughout their existence in Japan have posed defines multiculturalism ‘as a position which positively views a challenge to the assumption that the nation-state is ‘homogeneous’ differences between different races, cultures, ethnic groups, religions, languages, traditions and so on, and recognizes the rights of 1 The concept of ‘culture’ that Macdonald (1995: 294) uses refers to minorities’. constellations of ideas, technologies and forms of social organisation though This paper thus investigates how, under the influence of foreigners which people express what it means to be in the world, to be social and to be human. Culture is thus a process as well as a product (see also Hall 1996: 2). coming to Japan, the concept of multicultural coexistence (tabunka 210 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community 211 kyōsei 多文化共生) has become increasingly common in Japan. The other question is how minority groups living in the country for decades, such as the Korean minority – called zainichi Koreans (在日 コリアン, Koreans residing in Japan) – have responded to contemporary discourses surrounding this notion. The research is focused on a group of zainichi Koreans living in the city of Kyoto, especially in Higashi Kujo (an area around Kujo Street), where several months of fieldwork2 and interviews were conducted. The paper presents the process of community building in Kyoto by scrutinising the organisation and multiple meanings of the Madang Festival in Higashi Kujo. The paper also explores how different groups of people work together, as well as how their social actions and citizen activism make their society a more diverse community.

New Ideas About Multiculturalism

In the last few decades, many new ideas about multiculturalism have been emerging in Japan. From the 1980s onwards, the process of internationalisation (kokusaika 国際化)3 occurred by connecting the country to – and working with – the outside world. McCormack (1996: 2) claims that as the belief in Japan’s uniqueness grew more

2 I am grateful to all of my informants in Higashi Kujo at the time of my fieldwork, and also for later sharing information via email and additional interviews during my visits over the past few years. Insightful comments by the two anonymous reviewers helped to shape the paper into its current form. I would like to thank the editor, Uesugi Taeko, for all the advice and instructions provided through the process of writing this text. I also acknowledge the financial support received from the ARRS (Slovenian Research Agency; research core funding No. P6-0243). 3 Internationalism is a political direction that seeks co-operation among peoples and countries based on the recognition of independence and equality (McCormack 1996: 3). 210 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community Nataša Visočnik 211 kyōsei 多文化共生) has become increasingly common in Japan. The powerful, so did concerns about the consequences of other question is how minority groups living in the country for internationalisation, along with the nation’s economic status. The decades, such as the Korean minority – called zainichi Koreans (在日 desire to purify and clarify the notion of a Japanese identity was – コリアン, Koreans residing in Japan) – have responded to and is – a local manifestation of the global phenomenon of identity contemporary discourses surrounding this notion. The research is politics. focused on a group of zainichi Koreans living in the city of Kyoto, Since most identities are imaginary constructs, the creation of a especially in Higashi Kujo (an area around Kujo Street), where several ‘true’ national one has been unsuccessful, and often leads to inherited months of fieldwork2 and interviews were conducted. The paper fantasies about the nature of racial, ethnic and cultural arrangements. presents the process of community building in Kyoto by scrutinising According to Hall (1996), identity is formed at the crossroads the organisation and multiple meanings of the Madang Festival in between external discourses and practises, as well as internal psychic Higashi Kujo. The paper also explores how different groups of people processes that produce subjectivity. Identities act as points of work together, as well as how their social actions and citizen activism identification and attachment, as they have the ability to exclude and make their society a more diverse community. omit the exterior (Hall 1996: 4-5). All identities work based on exclusion – through the construction of marginalised entities. In the New Ideas About Multiculturalism case of Japan, the key hierarchy or duality is represented by Japanese versus foreigners. Marginalisation and the exclusion of others are In the last few decades, many new ideas about multiculturalism necessary for the self-identification of any nation, including Japan have been emerging in Japan. From the 1980s onwards, the process (Creighton 1997: 212). of internationalisation (kokusaika 国際化)3 occurred by connecting As a result, in the past, many Japanese did not realise there were the country to – and working with – the outside world. McCormack also peoples living among them who differed from them in terms of (1996: 2) claims that as the belief in Japan’s uniqueness grew more culture, language and religion. Amino (1990: 23-27) believes that this homogeneity is one aspect of the state’s sense of isolationism, 2 I am grateful to all of my informants in Higashi Kujo at the time of my preventing the Japanese from becoming aware of the rights of other fieldwork, and also for later sharing information via email and additional interviews during my visits over the past few years. Insightful comments by the ethnic groups and ignoring minority ones. Insensitivity to other two anonymous reviewers helped to shape the paper into its current form. I groups is seen in relation to foreigners and the institutions that deal would like to thank the editor, Uesugi Taeko, for all the advice and instructions with them; the idea of homogeneity and the isolationism of the state provided through the process of writing this text. I also acknowledge the financial support received from the ARRS (Slovenian Research Agency; research puts pressure on peoples such as the Ainu, Koreans and Okinawans. core funding No. P6-0243). In earlier times, there was already the idea of a ‘mixed nation’. When 3 Internationalism is a political direction that seeks co-operation among peoples Japan conquered its colonies, it had to admit that there were people and countries based on the recognition of independence and equality (McCormack 1996: 3). from other nations in the country, although these were supposed to 212 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community 213

assimilate as soon as possible (Oguma 2002: 19-24). At the end of the Second World War, an ideological establishment quickly came into being, in which the ‘homogeneous nation’ was again dominant, and which remained in the foreground until the end of the 20th century. Eventually, many Japanese and Western scholars began to critically analyse the literature on the so-called homogenous Japanese nation, essential Japanese culture and . These included Roger Goodman (2005),4 who highlighted primordialism within theories of nihonjinron5 or ‘discourse about the Japanese’ and the view of Japanese culture and ethnicity in comparison to the monolithic ‘West’. From the processes of internationalisation, the concept of a ‘different culture’ (ibunka 異文化) emerged that was used to label the ‘cultures of others’ (tasha no bunka 他者の文化). At the same time, the task of examining and presenting ‘Japaneseness’ within nihonjinron discourse became more complex and sensitive due to mixing with ‘others’. The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports and

4 Goodman presents several other nihonjiron critics like Carol Gluck, Ross Mouer, Wendy Smith and Eyal Ben-Ari, together with many Japanese scholars such as Befu Harumi, Sugimoto Yoshio, Hata Hiromi, Yoshino Kosaku and Aoki Tamotsu. 5 In a broader sense, Burgess (2012) defines nihonjinron as the discourse on the national identity, traces of which have been found in the Tokugawa period, especially after the Meiji during the formation of the nation-state. In a narrower sense, this is a post-war construct that conveys the need to express one’s identity and feelings of pride among the Japanese, as the occupation by the Allied Nations and the loss of the Empire were bitter experiences. Between 1948 and 1978, as many as 700 books were written in the fields of sociology, linguistics, psychology, biology, chemistry and physics, which were parallel to the creation of a Japanese national and . Nihonjinron thus emphasises the uniqueness of the Japanese culture and people, and advocates ways of being special. However, this kind of discourse is not singular, and can be found everywhere as a kind of cultural nationalism. 212 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community Nataša Visočnik 213 assimilate as soon as possible (Oguma 2002: 19-24). At the end of Science and Technology (MEXT) stresses the need to maintain an the Second World War, an ideological establishment quickly came ‘international sense’ (kokusaisei 国際性) by experiencing global into being, in which the ‘homogeneous nation’ was again dominant, interactions and understanding other cultures (Burgess 2012). Qi and and which remained in the foreground until the end of the 20th Zhang (2008: 2, 4) even claim that discussions about other cultures century. Eventually, many Japanese and Western scholars began to (ibunkaron 異文化論) have constructed the idea that Japanese critically analyse the literature on the so-called homogenous Japanese culture is superior to other ones. The Japanese word for ‘i’ (異) carries nation, essential Japanese culture and national language. These a negative connotation because it means ‘different’, ‘odd’ and ‘strange’. included Roger Goodman (2005),4 who highlighted primordialism Thus, these debates place Japanese culture as a point of reference, as within theories of nihonjinron5 or ‘discourse about the Japanese’ and many other countries did for themselves in the framework of the view of Japanese culture and ethnicity in comparison to the nationalism. monolithic ‘West’. In the early 1990s, the notion of kyōsei (共生, cohabitation or From the processes of internationalisation, the concept of a co-existing)6 became the centre of talks on improving economic ‘different culture’ (ibunka 異文化) emerged that was used to label relations between Asian countries; this idea refers to ‘Japanese’ and the ‘cultures of others’ (tasha no bunka 他者の文化). At the same ‘foreigners’ coexisting harmoniously in Japan. In the late 1990s, the time, the task of examining and presenting ‘Japaneseness’ within adjective tabunka (多文化) or ‘multicultural’ was added to kyōsei. nihonjinron discourse became more complex and sensitive due to Ideally, tabunka kyōsei means a situation where people from various mixing with ‘others’. The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports and cultures, ethnicities and identities live together peacefully. In recent years, due to increasing immigration, it has been used to describe 4 Goodman presents several other nihonjiron critics like Carol Gluck, Ross different cultures within Japan. There was a non-governmental Mouer, Wendy Smith and Eyal Ben-Ari, together with many Japanese scholars organisation (NGO) supporting foreigners that proclaimed itself ‘the such as Befu Harumi, Sugimoto Yoshio, Hata Hiromi, Yoshino Kosaku and 7 Aoki Tamotsu. Centre of Tabunka Kyōsei’ after the Great Hanshin-Awaji 5 In a broader sense, Burgess (2012) defines nihonjinron as the discourse on the Earthquake of 1995 (Takaya 2006: 45). In 2006, the Ministry of national identity, traces of which have been found in the Tokugawa period, Internal Affairs and Communications (MIAC) formulated ‘The especially after the Meiji during the formation of the nation-state. In a narrower sense, this is a post-war construct that conveys the need to express Regional Multicultural Society Promotion Plan’ as a guideline to one’s identity and feelings of pride among the Japanese, as the occupation by build multicultural societies in local areas, stating that foreigners the Allied Nations and the loss of the Empire were bitter experiences. Between 1948 and 1978, as many as 700 books were written in the fields of sociology, linguistics, psychology, biology, chemistry and physics, which were parallel to 6 A literal translation could also be ‘symbiosis’, ‘living together’ or ‘conviviality’ the creation of a Japanese national and cultural identity. Nihonjinron thus (Takaya 2006: 45). emphasises the uniqueness of the Japanese culture and people, and advocates 7 There is a Centre for Multicultural Society in Kyoto as well; it provides ways of being special. However, this kind of discourse is not singular, and can translation services, training for medical interpreters, lectures and medical be found everywhere as a kind of cultural nationalism. support (Web Source 2). 214 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community 215 should not be forced to assimilate or endure discrimination, but rather should be treated as equal members of society (Takaya 2006: 49). This term also comes up frequently in government campaigns to encourage foreigners to become involved in society. Today, this term is used by local residents and groups of volunteers; it is the goal of various workshops and seminars around the country to facilitate a smooth transition for Japanese society towards becoming a tabunka kyōsei shakai (多文化共生社会, Multicultural Co-operative Society) (Web Source 1). This call for multiculturalism is also expressed in economics; regarding the competition of human resources under globalisation and neo-liberalism, one of the main goals is to pursue diversity because it can contribute to increased competitiveness (Takaya 2006: 51). Otherwise, the term represents equal partners in theory, but in practise, it could also mean a hierarchical relationship between ‘a dominant group’ (Japanese) and a ‘subordinate group’ (foreigners). As Burgess (2012) explains, with this ‘term, the dominant group affirms its own distinctness and separateness’. Thus, kyōsei also creates boundaries that consolidate the non-membership of foreigners in Japanese society, without granting access to resources and power. A very similar critique is presented by Hara (2009) in his article about multiculturalism in the Okubo district of Tokyo, where the ‘multicultural coexistence policy’ (MCP) is used in different activities to promote multicultural coexistence. Coming to the fore here is the notion of multiculturalism and coexistence with other cultures, which is reflected in the numerous activities undertaken by the Japanese government with the aim of promoting diversity in society. However, looking closely at new concepts about multiculturalism, we find that its meaning as employed by Japanese institutions in the Japanese political context is sometimes conceptualised more as ‘anti-multiculturalism’ (Burgess 214 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community Nataša Visočnik 215 should not be forced to assimilate or endure discrimination, but 2008). The terms ‘diversity’ and ‘multiculturalism’ do not have the rather should be treated as equal members of society (Takaya 2006: same meaning, since diversity is regarded as being related to human 49). This term also comes up frequently in government campaigns to resources and not to people’s rights (Takaya 2006: 51; see also Hara encourage foreigners to become involved in society. 2009). Multiculturalism and the multicultural education of foreigners Today, this term is used by local residents and groups of volunteers; lead to both inclusion and exclusion at the same time. This type of it is the goal of various workshops and seminars around the country multiculturalism is not intended for the benefit of cultural minorities, to facilitate a smooth transition for Japanese society towards but primarily for that of the social and cultural majority. The present becoming a tabunka kyōsei shakai (多文化共生社会, Multicultural idea of multiculturalism is limited to ‘cultural’ and ‘international’ Co-operative Society) (Web Source 1). This call for multiculturalism exchange – and not exchange as a whole – which means that is also expressed in economics; regarding the competition of human foreigners and ‘others’ are invited to share their culture with the resources under globalisation and neo-liberalism, one of the main Japanese, and vice versa. Many associations, cultural entities, goals is to pursue diversity because it can contribute to increased organisations and events are called kokusai kōryū (国際交流), which competitiveness (Takaya 2006: 51). Otherwise, the term represents refers to international exchange. Multicultural coexistence (tabunka equal partners in theory, but in practise, it could also mean a kyōsei) in Japan is as complicated as its definition. On the one hand, hierarchical relationship between ‘a dominant group’ (Japanese) and a it is seen as a challenge to the coherence of the national identity that ‘subordinate group’ (foreigners). As Burgess (2012) explains, with this sustains the popular image of ethnic homogeneity in Japan; on the ‘term, the dominant group affirms its own distinctness and other hand, it has been considered a retrogressive force that separateness’. Thus, kyōsei also creates boundaries that consolidate the destabilises the civic solidarity needed to cultivate a responsible non-membership of foreigners in Japanese society, without granting citizenry (Kwak 2009: 161-2). access to resources and power. A very similar critique is presented by One reason why the discourse on Japan’s ‘multiculturalism’ – along Hara (2009) in his article about multiculturalism in the Okubo with connected words such as kokusaika, ibunka, kyōsei and tabunka – district of Tokyo, where the ‘multicultural coexistence policy’ (MCP) have arisen in Japanese society is that the homogeneous identity has is used in different activities to promote multicultural coexistence. become compromised due to a greater influx of people and pressure Coming to the fore here is the notion of multiculturalism and from minorities. This has been followed by debates and research on coexistence with other cultures, which is reflected in the numerous minorities that have criticised the nihonjinron (Amino 1990; Burgess activities undertaken by the Japanese government with the aim of 2008, 2012; Weiner 2009; etc.), as well as numerous discussions on promoting diversity in society. However, looking closely at new Japan’s uniqueness (Weiner 2009; Lie 2001; McCormack 1996). concepts about multiculturalism, we find that its meaning as From the perspective of ‘others’ – in this context Koreans – the employed by Japanese institutions in the Japanese political context is meanings of kyōsei and multiculturalism differ slightly; thus, it is sometimes conceptualised more as ‘anti-multiculturalism’ (Burgess necessary to take a closer look at the case of zainichi Koreans living in 216 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community 217

Higashi Kujo in Kyoto. However, we have to scrutinise this kind of multiculturalism with a critical eye, since in everyday life Koreans still face discrimination, especially in the last few years under the influence of right-wing groups and politicians, along with the hate speech used by anti-Korean movements, which are also part of wider anti-foreigner movements.

The Circumstances of Koreans in Japan

Koreans form now the second largest 8 ‘foreign’ resident community in Japan. This includes zainichi Koreans (who have been living in Japan for several generations) or ‘oldcomers’, and recent immigrants from , or ‘newcomers’. 9 Despite their similarities in appearance, as well as their significant acculturation to Japanese society, Koreans still face discrimination, both at the level of the state as well as society. These individuals mostly have Korean10 passports since Japan only

8 According to data from the Ministry of Justice, 497,707 Koreans lived in Japan in 2015. Their population has been slowly declining since 1945, when they formed the biggest ; 600,000 stayed in Japan. In the 1990s, there were 700,000 of them. The data show that the number of Koreans is falling, while that of the Chinese minority is rising (Web Source 3). There are several reasons for this, suggested by Markus Bell (2016), such as naturalisation and marrying Japanese individuals. He also claims that ‘Koreans will not disappear from Japan, rather we may see the emergence of a truly transnational community, in which members exercise a flexibility in regard to where they identify’. 9 The term ‘newcomers’ was first used in the 1980s when Japan received a bigger wave of foreigners: refugees from Vietnam (their migration began in 1975). Later, more groups arrived such as Nikkeijin (Japanese Brazilians), Filipinos and Chinese; starting in the 1980s, they came to Japan to fill a labour shortage and were labeled ‘newcomers’ as well (see more Nakano 1995). 10 After the Second World War ended, in 1952, the government revoked 216 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community Nataša Visočnik 217

Higashi Kujo in Kyoto. However, we have to scrutinise this kind of recognises jus sanguinis (right to blood) and not jus soli (right to multiculturalism with a critical eye, since in everyday life Koreans still birth) citizenship; the former means that at least one parent must face discrimination, especially in the last few years under the have Japanese citizenship. Some individuals can be fully integrated influence of right-wing groups and politicians, along with the hate into society and thus become naturalised. While this process has been speech used by anti-Korean movements, which are also part of wider quite simplified for Koreans in recent years, it remains a complex, anti-foreigner movements. long bureaucratic procedure, which in many cases involves the adoption of a name that is both read as – and appears – ethnically The Circumstances of Koreans in Japan Japanese. (There have been some cases – especially of celebrities – of people who became naturalised using their Korean names.) In Koreans form now the second largest 8 ‘foreign’ resident addition, Japan does not recognise dual citizenship. Hence, people community in Japan. This includes zainichi Koreans (who have been who want to naturalise must give up their Korean citizenship (see living in Japan for several generations) or ‘oldcomers’, and recent Brown 2015; Inazuki 2002). Resident Koreans have the status of immigrants from South Korea, or ‘newcomers’. 9 Despite their ‘special permanent resident’ and have access to social security, similarities in appearance, as well as their significant acculturation to pensions and the health insurance system. However, like all foreigners, Japanese society, Koreans still face discrimination, both at the level of they do not have the right to vote, and some provisions of pensions the state as well as society. and social protections do not apply to them. Starting in 1953, they These individuals mostly have Korean10 passports since Japan only lost the right to employed in public services, but after a memorandum was signed between Japan and South Korea in 1991, 8 According to data from the Ministry of Justice, 497,707 Koreans lived in Japan agreed to broaden opportunities for zainichi Koreans wanting Japan in 2015. Their population has been slowly declining since 1945, when to work as teachers in public schools (Chapman 2006: 79). they formed the biggest minority group; 600,000 stayed in Japan. In the 1990s, 在日 there were 700,000 of them. The data show that the number of Koreans is The verbatim meaning of zainichi is ‘to be present in Japan’. falling, while that of the Chinese minority is rising (Web Source 3). There are Although such individuals have lived in Japan since the Japanese several reasons for this, suggested by Markus Bell (2016), such as naturalisation occupation of Korea in 1910, they have long been considered and marrying Japanese individuals. He also claims that ‘Koreans will not disappear from Japan, rather we may see the emergence of a truly transnational community, in which members exercise a flexibility in regard to where they identify’. national affiliation with Japan for all former colonial subjects living there 9 The term ‘newcomers’ was first used in the 1980s when Japan received a (including Koreans) on the grounds of Article 2-(a) of the San Francisco Peace bigger wave of foreigners: refugees from Vietnam (their migration began in Treaty. They were forced to take back their Korean or Chinese , 1975). Later, more groups arrived such as Nikkeijin (Japanese Brazilians), which changed once again after the political division of Korea. Koreans had to Filipinos and Chinese; starting in the 1980s, they came to Japan to fill a labour decide which Korea to belong to. This was an ideological decision, since most shortage and were labeled ‘newcomers’ as well (see more Nakano 1995). Koreans came from South Korea, but some opted for (see also 10 After the Second World War ended, in 1952, the government revoked Visočnik 2014). 218 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community 219

‘temporary’ residents. In the past, this expression reflected the desire of many Koreans to return to their home country, which was most pronounced after the Second World War, when the Allies occupied Japan and many Koreans moved back to Korea. Today, many fourth- and fifth-generation Koreans that live in Japan are permanent residents, with no desire to ‘go back’. Nevertheless, the term zainichi survived and reflects the reality of institutional discrimination by the Japanese state and society (see more in Visočnik 2013). This group is divided into North and South Koreans based on their political affiliation, as well as which organisation they belong to (Mindan,11 Soren,12 and also Zainichi Korean Jinken Kyōkai 13 ). According to their political affiliation, they are called either zainichi Kankokujin (在日韓国人, South Koreans residing in Japan) or zainichi Chōsenjin (在日朝鮮人, North Koreans residing in Japan), but lately, with greater apolitical tendencies among young people, the term zainichi Korean (在日コリアン) has emerged. While the first generation of zainichi tried to develop their own businesses without claiming rights as Japanese citizens, the second and third generations insisted on their fundamental rights as permanent residents. Their demands addressed violations of the rights of permanent residents, and they called for institutional

11 Mindan 民団 (Zai Nippon Daikan Minkoku Mindan, 在日本大韓民国 民団) is an organisation of people who identify with South Korea. 12 Soren 総聯 (Zai Nihon Chōsenjin Sōrengōkai, 在日本朝鮮人総聯合会) is for people who identify with North Korea. Soren is also called Chongryon (朝聯). 13 在日コリアン人権協会, also formerly known as Mintōren 民闘連 (Minzoku Sabetsu to Tatakau Renraku Kyōgikai, 民族差別と闘う連絡協議 会 ), was created in 1970 by young zainichi Koreans to fight ethnic discrimination by encouraging a multicultural and positive approach to the integration of Koreans into Japanese society. In 1995, it was reorganised and renamed (see Fukuoka and Tsujiyama 1992; Web Source 8). 218 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community Nataša Visočnik 219

‘temporary’ residents. In the past, this expression reflected the desire changes. In the 1990s, the zainichi finally won the right to access of many Koreans to return to their home country, which was most public housing and pensions. Moreover, they are now entitled to pronounced after the Second World War, when the Allies occupied become government employees (see Weiner 2009; Ryang, ed. 2005). Japan and many Koreans moved back to Korea. Today, many fourth- Due to various conflicting affiliations, diverging perceptions of and fifth-generation Koreans that live in Japan are permanent space and time (temporary versus permanent), different political residents, with no desire to ‘go back’. Nevertheless, the term zainichi divisions (North versus South Korea), intergenerational tendencies, survived and reflects the reality of institutional discrimination by the education (Korean or Japanese schooling) and socioeconomic status, Japanese state and society (see more in Visočnik 2013). Koreans in Japan operate with numerous opposing ideas, which This group is divided into North and South Koreans based on creates a very complex life for the diaspora (Chapman 2008: 5; Lee their political affiliation, as well as which organisation they belong to 2012: 2). In a broad sense, identity research must acknowledge that (Mindan,11 Soren,12 and also Zainichi Korean Jinken Kyōkai 13 ). the diaspora includes multiple identities at any given moment; the According to their political affiliation, they are called either zainichi identity associated with the ‘diaspora’ is only one of them, although it Kankokujin (在日韓国人, South Koreans residing in Japan) or may be the most important in shaping how migrants perceive zainichi Chōsenjin (在日朝鮮人, North Koreans residing in Japan), themselves in another country. The younger generation no longer has but lately, with greater apolitical tendencies among young people, the two homelands, as their domicile in Japan has become an undeniable term zainichi Korean (在日コリアン) has emerged. fact. Since the 1980s, young Koreans have had much more positive While the first generation of zainichi tried to develop their own views of their own hybridity, and are searching for a different path businesses without claiming rights as Japanese citizens, the second that does not lead to naturalisation, nor belonging to one of the two and third generations insisted on their fundamental rights as Korean nationalities (Iwabuchi 2005: 68). In the past, naturalisation permanent residents. Their demands addressed violations of the implied that people had to renounce Korean culture, while in today’s rights of permanent residents, and they called for institutional Japan, Korean culture is often promoted. Hence, young people do not see as many obstacles to, for example, ‘mixed’ marriages anymore, 11 Mindan 民団 (Zai Nippon Daikan Minkoku Mindan, 在日本大韓民国 although some parents still oppose it. Hester (2008: 139) mentions 民団) is an organisation of people who identify with South Korea. 12 Soren 総聯 (Zai Nihon Chōsenjin Sōrengōkai, 在日本朝鮮人総聯合会) that the Japanese attitude has expanded to further the notion of kyōsei is for people who identify with North Korea. Soren is also called Chongryon (living together with diversity), through which the ethnic boundary 朝聯 ( ). between Koreans and Japanese might shift in the future, perhaps even 13 在日コリアン人権協会, also formerly known as Mintōren 民闘連 (Minzoku Sabetsu to Tatakau Renraku Kyōgikai, 民族差別と闘う連絡協議 allowing for the emergence of a new category of Koreans – ‘Korean 会 ), was created in 1970 by young zainichi Koreans to fight ethnic Japanese’ – who would represent Japanese people that trace their discrimination by encouraging a multicultural and positive approach to the ancestors to the Korean peninsula. However, these ideas are not integration of Koreans into Japanese society. In 1995, it was reorganised and renamed (see Fukuoka and Tsujiyama 1992; Web Source 8). widespread, especially in light of recent developments and the rise of 220 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community 221 anti-Korean movements in Japan, which make the category of ‘Korean Japanese’ impossible at present.

Machizukuri and Civil Engagement in Areas of Discrimination

Areas like Higashi Kujo, a precinct of Kyoto’s Southern District (Minami-ku 南区), where most zainichi Koreans in the city live, have faced many changes in the last few decades whereby local citizens’ movements and civic engagement have spread rapidly throughout the state. There is considerable evidence of high levels of motivation and enthusiasm among Japanese people regarding efforts to make their environments more liveable, as demonstrated by the increase in urban planning (see Sorensen 2001) across the country during the 1990s. With the aim of enhancing the quality of the local setting and of environmental management processes, such activities are widely referred to as machizukuri (街づくり or ‘community building’)14 and represent an important development in local politics and urban management in Japan. Thousands of machizukuri processes have been established nationwide in an enormous outpouring of local energy, into attempts to achieve more bottom-up input in which citizens play an active role in environmental improvement and administration. These processes are carried out by hundreds of groups that were founded over two decades (1984-2003) in four major areas: (1) care for the elderly and disabled; (2) immigrant and refugee support; (3) environmental protection and (4) village revitalisation or local community building (muraokoshi/machizukuri).

14 These activities aim at community development, as well as neighborhood building or town-making. 220 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community Nataša Visočnik 221 anti-Korean movements in Japan, which make the category of Most of these groups are voluntary associations, and there has been ‘Korean Japanese’ impossible at present. much support for citizens’ activities (shimin katsudō 市民活動) from bureaucrats, the mass media, civic groups and volunteer centres Machizukuri and Civil Engagement in Areas of (Avenel 2010: 231). Discrimination Zainichi Koreans in Kyoto have mostly settled along the city’s border in the southern district, where the marginalised community of Areas like Higashi Kujo, a precinct of Kyoto’s Southern District burakumin15 (部落民) also live (see Visočnik 2014 and Yamamoto (Minami-ku 南区), where most zainichi Koreans in the city live, 2012). This place is also referred to by its location relative to Kyoto have faced many changes in the last few decades whereby local Station: eki-ura (駅裏, ‘behind the station’). The front of Kyoto citizens’ movements and civic engagement have spread rapidly Station faces north towards the old Imperial Palace and the city throughout the state. There is considerable evidence of high levels of centre. In many cities, eki-ura districts contain residences and motivation and enthusiasm among Japanese people regarding efforts occupations of ‘the wrong side of the tracks’. This might be because to make their environments more liveable, as demonstrated by the train stations were built on the edges of cities, where the land values increase in urban planning (see Sorensen 2001) across the country were lower, and so they housed older, outsider communities (Caron during the 1990s. With the aim of enhancing the quality of the local 2003). Until the 10th century, there were gates called Rajomon (羅城 setting and of environmental management processes, such activities 門) in these marginal zones that served as a border dividing the inner are widely referred to as machizukuri (街づくり or ‘community city from the suburbs. On this borderline, which belongs to neither building’)14 and represent an important development in local politics the inner nor the outer world, various kinds of people could meet. In and urban management in Japan. Thousands of machizukuri Kyoto, this site became home to the impoverished working class and processes have been established nationwide in an enormous foreigners. Its residents lived on the edges of social life, and the area outpouring of local energy, into attempts to achieve more bottom-up input in which citizens play an active role in environmental improvement and administration. These processes are carried out by 15 Burakumin are the largest discriminated population in Japan and constitute about 2% of the entire population. They are not a racial or ethnic minority, but hundreds of groups that were founded over two decades (1984-2003) rather a caste-like minority among ethnic Japanese. The prejudice they face is in four major areas: (1) care for the elderly and disabled; (2) religiously sanctioned class discrimination. A key concept in understanding any immigrant and refugee support; (3) environmental protection and (4) form of bigotry is that of ‘defilement’, which is usually related to an occupation such as undertakers, leather producers or butchers. The undesirable land that village revitalisation or local community building (muraokoshi/machizukuri). was designated for this group was not taxed and viewed as simply ‘outside the system’, which gradually led to a codification of a caste-like system during the Edo period that was the direct antecedent of buraku prejudice. Today, the 14 These activities aim at community development, as well as neighborhood descendants of this group still face discrimination just by living in such areas building or town-making. (see more in Visočnik 2014). 222 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community 223 became known as a buraku16 (部落, ‘hamlet’). According to Gurung and Kollmair (2005: 10), marginality is primarily defined and described by two major conceptual frameworks – societal and spatial – which are both possible to find in these two cases. The societal framework focuses on human dimensions such as demography, religion, culture, society, economics and politics in connection with access to resources by individuals and groups. This is how both the burakumin, as native (but outcast) Japanese, and zainichi Koreans, as an , have been disenfranchised in one sense. Since both groups live at the edge of the city, they are also spatially isolated. This explanation of the spatial dimension of marginality is primarily based on physical location and distance from centres of development, lying at the edge of – or being poorly integrated into – the system (Gurung and Kollmair 2005: 10), as seen in the context of Kyoto. Since the collapse of the bubble economy in the early 1990s, machizukuri groups and projects have spread widely throughout Japan (Sorensen and Funck, eds. 2007). Shortly after the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake of 1995, the government was unable to cope with the crisis as efficiently as local and regional volunteers and non-profit organisations (NPOs) engaged in machizukuri. This was the beginning of a more serious consideration of the social aspects of community building on the part of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), which adopted machizukuri as a part of its platform. The process of urbanisation has been especially strong since the 1960s, and since the 1990s, the idea of machizukuri has become

16 The term buraku is normally used for areas where burakumin live and is an abbreviated term for hisabetsu-buraku ( 被差別部落, ‘a hamlet where discriminated people live’). The term buraku broadly means ‘hamlet’ and is used for other areas as well. 222 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community Nataša Visočnik 223 became known as a buraku16 (部落, ‘hamlet’). more prominent. It was first conceived of as an ideological According to Gurung and Kollmair (2005: 10), marginality is counterpart to conservative city planning. Local communities were primarily defined and described by two major conceptual frameworks unified in neighbourhood associations (NHAs) such as tonarigumi – societal and spatial – which are both possible to find in these two (隣組), chonaikai (町内会, ‘community councils’), jichikai (自治会) cases. The societal framework focuses on human dimensions such as and burakukai (部落会), with heads that were not employed by cities demography, religion, culture, society, economics and politics in or towns. Some of these NHAs, located in discriminated hamlets, connection with access to resources by individuals and groups. This is played an essential role in liberation movements campaigning for the how both the burakumin, as native (but outcast) Japanese, and rights of burakumin in Kyoto’s buraku (Yamamoto 2009: 38; see also zainichi Koreans, as an ethnic group, have been disenfranchised in Nishimura 2010). Besides modernising and improving the city’s one sense. Since both groups live at the edge of the city, they are also living conditions by building new houses and facilities, the resident spatially isolated. This explanation of the spatial dimension of movement in Kyoto gained enough traction to preserve important marginality is primarily based on physical location and distance from heritage sites such as the Bank of Yanagihara (柳原銀行), which was centres of development, lying at the edge of – or being poorly founded by the burakumin community. The buraku liberation integrated into – the system (Gurung and Kollmair 2005: 10), as seen movement was able to exercise great political power, and large in the context of Kyoto. amounts of national funds were invested over a 27-year period in the Since the collapse of the bubble economy in the early 1990s, Dowa Taisaku Jigyo (同和対策事業, Project for the Assimilation of machizukuri groups and projects have spread widely throughout Buraku people) project. Japan (Sorensen and Funck, eds. 2007). Shortly after the Great The bubble economy gentrified inner cities, whose land Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake of 1995, the government was unable to represented an object of investment and speculation. Apartment and cope with the crisis as efficiently as local and regional volunteers and office buildings were built, altering the urban landscape, which had non-profit organisations (NPOs) engaged in machizukuri. This was previously been dominated by flat, grey houses (Muraki 2014). the beginning of a more serious consideration of the social aspects of Marginalised districts moved into the public limelight; pioneering community building on the part of the Liberal Democratic Party initiatives were developed, such as welfare-oriented efforts geared (LDP), which adopted machizukuri as a part of its platform. towards the elderly and disabled, which were experimental examples The process of urbanisation has been especially strong since the of urban regeneration. 1960s, and since the 1990s, the idea of machizukuri has become The process of machizukuri in Kyoto began under the liberation movement of another disenfranchised group known as burakumin 16 The term buraku is normally used for areas where burakumin live and is an (people of buraku), who lived in the same neighbourhoods and also 被差別部落 abbreviated term for hisabetsu-buraku ( , ‘a hamlet where had an influence on the struggle of zainichi Koreans. In the case of discriminated people live’). The term buraku broadly means ‘hamlet’ and is used for other areas as well. burakumin, the negative consequences of marginality served as a 224 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community 225 starting point for innovation, which manifested in very successful community building projects. In view of this, one group’s involvement in community building can serve as know-how for other marginal communities through collaborations with cities and local self-governing establishments (Yamamoto 2009; Yamamoto 2012). The study of machizukuri contributes to the debate on the following three sets of issues. The first entails the role of machizukuri projects in creating more liveable, sustainable cities, which the abovementioned projects aim at. It is widely argued that a great challenge of our time is learning how to create cities that are economically vibrant, provide a high quality of life and health for their residents, and foster long-term environmental sustainability through reduced resource consumption and waste production. The second set of issues relates to local governance: its shifting role in managing shared spaces in terms of relations between the central and local governments, as well as between citizens and the state. The third set of issues concerns the changing conceptions of civil society’s role in local governance, such as movements that have been central to attempts at political reform. A key site of practical efforts to form new governance practises and priorities has been at the scale of the urban neighbourhood through various machizukuri processes (Sorensen and Funck 2007: 2-3). As Imada (2010: 21) states, civil society (shimin shakai 市民社会) consists of people who participate in civil engagement, which means taking part in public life; this is what machizukuri represents.

Living in Kyoto – Higashi Kujo

More people from the working class live in Minami-ku than in any other Kyoto district, and many came from rural regions in search of 224 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community Nataša Visočnik 225 starting point for innovation, which manifested in very successful employment, in addition to those who immigrated for other reasons. community building projects. In view of this, one group’s Besides restaurants and clubs, parts of the land near the Kamo River involvement in community building can serve as know-how for other are lined with factories and industrial buildings. Residential zones marginal communities through collaborations with cities and local include both standard houses and apartments, as well as occasional self-governing establishments (Yamamoto 2009; Yamamoto 2012). government-subsidized condominium blocks, where people with The study of machizukuri contributes to the debate on the disabilities live. Because of the big zainichi Korean community, the following three sets of issues. The first entails the role of machizukuri area is sometimes called ‘Kyoto’s only international town’. Korean projects in creating more liveable, sustainable cities, which the eateries and household stores line the streets, and the Korean abovementioned projects aim at. It is widely argued that a great language is often heard. Koreans who, in the 1910s, found their challenge of our time is learning how to create cities that are farms taken away and their harvests confiscated by the Japanese economically vibrant, provide a high quality of life and health for colonial government and companies through a land survey project in their residents, and foster long-term environmental sustainability Korea (土地調査事業), were rounded up, commandeered as forced through reduced resource consumption and waste production. labour, and wound up living in Japan. Before and during the Second The second set of issues relates to local governance: its shifting role World War, Koreans came to live in Higashi Kujo as low-wage in managing shared spaces in terms of relations between the central manual laborers, working on the Higashiyama train tunnel, on a and local governments, as well as between citizens and the state. project to widen Kujo Street, reinforcing the Kamo River’s bank and The third set of issues concerns the changing conceptions of civil in industries such as cloth-dying (Web Source 5). They moved to the society’s role in local governance, such as movements that have been edge of the city where another outsider community, the burakumin, central to attempts at political reform. A key site of practical efforts to was already residing. form new governance practises and priorities has been at the scale of Many Koreans stayed in Kyoto after the war, even though they the urban neighbourhood through various machizukuri processes wished to return to their homeland. The area started to develop (Sorensen and Funck 2007: 2-3). As Imada (2010: 21) states, civil quickly, with small and medium dyeing factories and flower shops. society (shimin shakai 市民社会) consists of people who participate The Koreans also collected used paper, old clothes and iron scraps to in civil engagement, which means taking part in public life; this is sell. However, with the end of high economic growth in the 1960s, what machizukuri represents. these industries were abandoned. Much of the younger generation left, with only elderly families – mainly issei (一世, ‘first-generation Living in Kyoto – Higashi Kujo immigrants’) – remaining. People lived in poor conditions such as illegal housing, which was forgotten by the government. There were More people from the working class live in Minami-ku than in any numerous fires; the biggest one occurred in the 1960s, leading to other Kyoto district, and many came from rural regions in search of multiple deaths (Kim 2013: 2). Until the 1990s, the majority of the 226 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community 227 individuals living in this place – which remains dilapidated – were senior citizens without pensions. Starting in the 1990s, other foreigners began to move there, such as Filipinos and Peruvians who could not speak Japanese and lacked social resources (e.g. relatives, savings, pensions, institutional knowledge and sources of information). Yamamoto Takamori (Yamamoto 2012) calls this zone a slum17 housing people from lower social classes; for this reason, social movements were difficult to establish. It took a long time for NPOs to enter the scene and for organisations to form. First with the help of Catholic groups, later NPOs, and then with some aid from the city government and administration, things slowly got better (Kim 2013: 3; see also Yamamoto 2012; Yamamoto 2009). Although the Dowa Taisaku Jigyo project ended in 1997,18 the idea of inclusive development and city planning continued in Kyoto, with benefits for other disadvantaged groups that were also welcome to live with the buraku in the spirit of building a diverse community. This meant that other ethnic groups could move in, although this was not successful at the beginning, as zainichi Koreans and burakumin were not truly cooperating at the time. A second attempt in Kyoto to bring together different groups was the ‘Outline of the Master Plan of Kyoto City (2001-2010)’, which emphasised a city

17 In Osaka, similarly, an was reproduced in Ikuno Ward, which has historically been dominated by zainichi Koreans. Wooden tenement housing for working-class people was already there, but there were also numerous public housing projects to which zainichi Koreans had no access (Mizuuchi 2002: 27). 18 In 1969, the Diet passed the Law on Special Measures for Dowa Projects (同 和対策事業特別措置法), which shaped burakumin life for more than three decades by enhancing the physical environment of buraku neighborhoods through machizukuri initiatives, including social welfare programs that provided financial aid, educational scholarships and subsidised public housing (Nishimura 2010: 125). 226 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community Nataša Visočnik 227 individuals living in this place – which remains dilapidated – were where all people could live without discrimination or violation of senior citizens without pensions. Starting in the 1990s, other their human and civil rights, as stated on the website of Kyoto’s foreigners began to move there, such as Filipinos and Peruvians who municipal government (Web Source 7). A lot of volunteer groups could not speak Japanese and lacked social resources (e.g. relatives, started to follow these goals as well, among them Korean entities such savings, pensions, institutional knowledge and sources of as Mindan and Soren (Harajiri 2010). In particular, Catholic groups information). Yamamoto Takamori (Yamamoto 2012) calls this zone have organised many efforts (Yamamoto 2012). a slum17 housing people from lower social classes; for this reason, Even though the personal connection between the buraku and social movements were difficult to establish. It took a long time for zainichi areas did not became stronger, Koreans still benefitted from NPOs to enter the scene and for organisations to form. First with the these programs, especially during the last few years of the Dowa help of Catholic groups, later NPOs, and then with some aid from Taisaku Jigyo project. A new home for the elderly was built in the city government and administration, things slowly got better Higashi Kujo. Many new apartments were erected as well. Parks were (Kim 2013: 3; see also Yamamoto 2012; Yamamoto 2009). renewed and new community centres opened. What is really Although the Dowa Taisaku Jigyo project ended in 1997,18 the interesting is that the idea of a diverse community is much more idea of inclusive development and city planning continued in Kyoto, present in the Korean community than ever before; an increasing with benefits for other disadvantaged groups that were also welcome number of non-Koreans are joining the community and moving into to live with the buraku in the spirit of building a diverse community. new apartments. This meant that other ethnic groups could move in, although this Another example of civil society’s work is Kibo No Ie (希望の家, was not successful at the beginning, as zainichi Koreans and ‘House of Hope’), a Catholic organisation for children. It was burakumin were not truly cooperating at the time. A second attempt founded in 1967, a few years after the great fire in Higashi Kujo in in Kyoto to bring together different groups was the ‘Outline of the 1960, when many buildings burned down (Web Source 4). This Master Plan of Kyoto City (2001-2010)’, which emphasised a city group offered parents the opportunity to bring their children to a daycare nursery. At first, most Koreans took their children just for the 17 In Osaka, similarly, an ethnic enclave was reproduced in Ikuno Ward, which daycare, but over the years, the centre has grown. It has become a has historically been dominated by zainichi Koreans. Wooden tenement housing for working-class people was already there, but there were also place where not only children, but also adults, can get together and numerous public housing projects to which zainichi Koreans had no access socialise, and arrange events like the Madang Festival, which was (Mizuuchi 2002: 27). established in 1993 to promote coexistence and cooperation. The 18 In 1969, the Diet passed the Law on Special Measures for Dowa Projects (同 和対策事業特別措置法), which shaped burakumin life for more than three Kibo No Ie project has played an important role in machizukuri, as it decades by enhancing the physical environment of buraku neighborhoods hosts meetings and lays out plans for Higashi Kujo, which is through machizukuri initiatives, including social welfare programs that changing rapidly; every year witnesses the rise of new apartments or provided financial aid, educational scholarships and subsidised public housing (Nishimura 2010: 125). community facilities. 228 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community 229

In 2013 a new building was constructed that includes the Kyoto City Network Salon for Community Welfare and Multicultural Exchange. Every day, there is childcare for pre-school children, and in the afternoon, children from primary and secondary schools wait there for their parents to return from work. There are facilities for official gatherings, play rooms for children and seminar rooms (Kyoto University uses them). Children or adults can practise instruments or take courses in English. Women take art classes. Many associations can meet and organise events. From the second floor up, there are apartments for rent. As the whole building is financed by the Kyoto city government, the rent for the apartments is low, and is determined according to each resident’s income. Besides Koreans, other groups are also welcome, such as elderly people and students. This has become an important establishment where multiculturalism is highlighted and accomplished. According to Kim Kwangmin, in 1980, in some parts of Higashi Kujo, there was no water or sewage, and many wooden houses lined the streets. In those days, almost 80% of the population in ‘area number 40’ of Higashi Kujo was Korean (Kim 2013: 2). When Kim Kwangmin came to Higashi Kujo from Ikuno (in the city of Osaka), it seemed as if everyone around the place had forgotten it. Although the inhabitants negotiated and fought with officials to improve their living environment, all their attempts seemed to have failed. In 1982, after some incidents where discrimination occurred, as well as meetings involving principals from schools in the neighbourhood, the idea of multicultural life emerged. In the 1980s, a lot of foreign residents moved into Higashi Kujo. At the main daycare centre, everyone had the right to daycare for their children and education, no matter what their socioeconomic conditions (Kim 2013: 7-8). In 2000, the daycare centre received support from the 228 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community Nataša Visočnik 229

In 2013 a new building was constructed that includes the Kyoto city government, but at the same time also faced problems; to avoid City Network Salon for Community Welfare and Multicultural compulsory closure, local residents tried to gain support through Exchange. Every day, there is childcare for pre-school children, and in various advertisements. (Kim 2013: 8-9). Since 2002, the volunteers the afternoon, children from primary and secondary schools wait have not only been Korean, but have come from other countries like there for their parents to return from work. There are facilities for Thailand, the Philippines, , Indonesia, Russia and . As official gatherings, play rooms for children and seminar rooms (Kyoto Kim writes, the multiculturalism at this centre considers not only University uses them). Children or adults can practise instruments or cultural differences, but also generational ones. There are also take courses in English. Women take art classes. Many associations exchanges between people from elderly homes, which are called can meet and organise events. From the second floor up, there are yasuragi kōryū (やすらぎ交流) or ‘peaceful exchanges’ (Kim 2013: apartments for rent. As the whole building is financed by the Kyoto 14). city government, the rent for the apartments is low, and is Another association is the Salon for Intercultural Exchange determined according to each resident’s income. Besides Koreans, Network (多文化交流ネットワークサロン), which was established other groups are also welcome, such as elderly people and students. in 1993 with the aim of promoting coexistence (共生, kyōsei) and This has become an important establishment where multiculturalism cooperation between different groups of people. It also organises is highlighted and accomplished. different activities for Koreans as well as other foreigners, such as the According to Kim Kwangmin, in 1980, in some parts of Higashi Madang Festival (Kim 2013, 14; see also Chin 2013). Every year in Kujo, there was no water or sewage, and many wooden houses lined April, the Salon has a spring festival called Korea-Japan Day; children the streets. In those days, almost 80% of the population in ‘area and adults gather at the Salon, and the members of Higashi Kujo number 40’ of Higashi Kujo was Korean (Kim 2013: 2). When Kim Madan perform Korean music and dances. Kwangmin came to Higashi Kujo from Ikuno (in the city of Osaka), Other associations provide support for people in need such as the it seemed as if everyone around the place had forgotten it. Although Collaborative Workplace Miyabi (共同作業所みやび) for the the inhabitants negotiated and fought with officials to improve their homeless and unemployed; the Japan Center for Independent Living living environment, all their attempts seemed to have failed. (日本自立生活センター) for the severely disabled; Asian People In 1982, after some incidents where discrimination occurred, as Together (APT), which helps newcomers; and the Kyoto Pag-Asa well as meetings involving principals from schools in the Filipino Community (京都パグアサ・フィリピン・コミュニティ) neighbourhood, the idea of multicultural life emerged. In the 1980s, for Filipino immigrants (Yamamoto 2012).19 a lot of foreign residents moved into Higashi Kujo. At the main Growing numbers of Japanese have become involved in these civic daycare centre, everyone had the right to daycare for their children and education, no matter what their socioeconomic conditions (Kim 19 APT is a group within the Kyoto Young Women’s Christian Association 2013: 7-8). In 2000, the daycare centre received support from the (YWCA). 230 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community 231 organizations; they feel the need to actively participate in building a multicultural society, as the participants themselves say. However, anti-Korean movements have always been present in Kyoto as well. Especially active in recent years are members of Zaitokukai (在特 会),20 who spread hate speech against Koreans online. They have organised rallies, including a very violent one in 2009 in front of Kyoto’s First Korean Primary School (which is sponsored by North Korea and Soren), where they shouted racist phrases through loudspeakers.

The Higashi Kujo Madang Festival: An Ethnic or a Multicultural Festival?

Madang festivals occur in many cities (e.g. Kobe, Nara, Fukuyama) around Japan and are usually called ‘ethnic festivals’ (民族まつり, minzoku matsuri) (Iida 2014). They celebrate pluralism and Korean ethnicity, and are an observable, instrumental element of cultural communication. They provide ethnic recognition for individuals and groups, the search for an ethnic identity, and the conscious exhibition of distinctive traits (Lee et al. 2012: 36). A festival prepares a communicative platform for manifestations of ethnicity and cultural unity, with the key objective being to demonstrate and experience a particular identity (Kataoka 2014: 154). During such a festival, performances and food booths attract visitors who come to experience other cultures.

20 Zainichi Tokken o Yurusanai Shimin no Kai (在日特権を許さない市民の 会), meaning the ‘Association of Citizens against the Special Privileges of the Zainichi’) is an ultra-nationalist, far-right, extremist political organisation, which calls for an end to the state welfare and alleged privileges afforded to zainichi Koreans (Visočnik 2014). 230 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community Nataša Visočnik 231 organizations; they feel the need to actively participate in building a These festivals were started in Osaka by zainichi Koreans in 1980 multicultural society, as the participants themselves say. However, due to the flow of many newcomers from South Korea and foreigners anti-Korean movements have always been present in Kyoto as well. from countries like China, the Philippines and Peru. They evolved Especially active in recent years are members of Zaitokukai (在特 from previous ethnic events like the Ikuno Ethnic Cultural Festival 会),20 who spread hate speech against Koreans online. They have (Ikuno Minzoku Bunkasai 生野民族文化祭, 1983-2002), the One organised rallies, including a very violent one in 2009 in front of Korea Festival (ワン・コリア・フェスティバル) and Shitennoji Kyoto’s First Korean Primary School (which is sponsored by North Wasso (四天王寺ワッソ, a festival held at Shitennoji Temple), all Korea and Soren), where they shouted racist phrases through from the Osaka region, where the majority of zainichi Koreans live. loudspeakers. These festivals aim to represent Korean ethnic culture and identity (Ikuno), calling on young Koreans to acknowledge their background The Higashi Kujo Madang Festival: An Ethnic or a and the historical connection between Koreans and Japanese, along Multicultural Festival? with the preservation of zainichi Koreans’ ethnicity. Since the 1990s, more than 100 ethnic festivals have been established throughout Madang festivals occur in many cities (e.g. Kobe, Nara, Fukuyama) Japan (Iida 2014: 3).21 Most are called ‘ethnic festivals’ but a few around Japan and are usually called ‘ethnic festivals’ (民族まつり, have the purpose of advancing multiculturalism and are called minzoku matsuri) (Iida 2014). They celebrate pluralism and Korean tabunka matsuri (多文化祭, ‘multicultural festivals’), such as the ethnicity, and are an observable, instrumental element of cultural festival in Higashinada-ku in the city of Kobe. communication. They provide ethnic recognition for individuals and Higashi Kujo Madang (東九条マダン) began in 1993. The groups, the search for an ethnic identity, and the conscious exhibition participants include men and women in Higashi Kujo, associations of distinctive traits (Lee et al. 2012: 36). A festival prepares a (like Hanmadan and the Korean Youth Association), children from communicative platform for manifestations of ethnicity and cultural the daycare centre in Kibo no Ie (Chin 2013: 21-28) and numerous unity, with the key objective being to demonstrate and experience a students from Kyoto University and the Kyoto University of Art and particular identity (Kataoka 2014: 154). During such a festival, Design (京都造形芸術大学). It takes place at the beginning of performances and food booths attract visitors who come to November, but preparation begins in July. People can follow news experience other cultures.

21 More information about Korean ethnic festivals can be found in the book 20 Zainichi Tokken o Yurusanai Shimin no Kai (在日特権を許さない市民の The Creation and Development of Ethnic Festivals, edited by Iida Takafumi 会), meaning the ‘Association of Citizens against the Special Privileges of the (2014), with detailed descriptions of the festivals and their historical Zainichi’) is an ultra-nationalist, far-right, extremist political organisation, development. Especially worth noting is some research by Ogawa Nobuhiko which calls for an end to the state welfare and alleged privileges afforded to (2014) on the posters for Higashi Kujo festivals between 1993 to 2013, and zainichi Koreans (Visočnik 2014). Kataoka Chiyoko’s (2014) research on the Higashi Kujo festival. 232 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community 233 regarding the festival on the official website (Web Source 5) and the Facebook page (Web Source 6). The festival’s success depends on the efforts of countless people, as well as on the cooperation of various groups, who are all volunteers. The monthly meetings of the executive committee (実行委員会, jikkōiinkai) keep the individual committees (such as for art, drama, music, food and fundraising) in touch with one another. The festival is normally held on the school grounds in Higashi Kujo.22 Big posters and street banners proclaim slogans that celebrate Korean culture, along with colourful pictures, mats (ゴザ, goza) and stages for performances (Kataoka 2014: 155-6). At food stands, women cook Korean and Japanese cuisine. The executive committee hosts a meeting to launch the preparations in Higashi Kujo Bunko Madang Centre (東九条文庫・マダンセンター), to which all people involved are invited. Some music performances occur earlier in different parts of Higashi Kujo, usually in parks, where people can see Korean instruments (Web Sources 5 and 6). At the hub of this production is madang geki, street drama. Local volunteer actors use a self-scripted play to explore the predicaments of their everyday lives. The end of the drama signals the beginning of a final dance in which everyone joins in. Before or after the main performance, children and adults dance, play music and walk in a parade. They perform punmuru (プンムル, 風物, a traditional Korean art form that is also called pungmul-nori (풍물놀이/風物놀이), nong-ak (농악/農樂), or that takes place with music and dance, as well as samulnori (サムルノリ) (Kim 2013: 8-10; see also Chin 2013 and

22 On November 3rd 2018, for the first time, the festival was not held in Higashi Kujo (Minami Ward), but in a former elementary school in Shimogyo Ward (Web Sources 5 and 6). 232 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community Nataša Visočnik 233 regarding the festival on the official website (Web Source 5) and the Kataoka 2014). Facebook page (Web Source 6). The festival’s success depends on the Performances occur on different stages around Higashi Kujo, efforts of countless people, as well as on the cooperation of various where people can try the instruments for themselves. In other areas groups, who are all volunteers. The monthly meetings of the they can also do art or calligraphy in workshops, as one informant executive committee (実行委員会, jikkōiinkai) keep the individual said. Besides the food stalls, there are stands where people can buy committees (such as for art, drama, music, food and fundraising) in Korean or Japanese products like masks and books. In the interviews, touch with one another. people explained that they liked to participate in the festival as they The festival is normally held on the school grounds in Higashi could socialize, do something new and have a good time. Kujo.22 Big posters and street banners proclaim slogans that celebrate Like many other festivals in Japan, the Higashi Kujo Madang Korean culture, along with colourful pictures, mats (ゴザ, goza) and Festival struggles with the underlying features of daily life in Kyoto stages for performances (Kataoka 2014: 155-6). At food stands, that make production difficult: a lack of free time, rehearsal space and women cook Korean and Japanese cuisine. The executive committee open civic places for performances. Unlike other festivals in the hosts a meeting to launch the preparations in Higashi Kujo Bunko region, this one is neither city-led event nor a shrine or Madang Centre (東九条文庫・マダンセンター), to which all people temple-centred event (with these two kinds dominating Kyoto’s involved are invited. Some music performances occur earlier in cultural production). The funds mostly come from fundraising different parts of Higashi Kujo, usually in parks, where people can see campaigns. They also get some money from the city of Kyoto, but it Korean instruments (Web Sources 5 and 6). is only half the amount needed to set up performance spaces. For this At the hub of this production is madang geki, street drama. Local reason, a lot of effort is put into raising money by asking local Korean volunteer actors use a self-scripted play to explore the predicaments of and Japanese companies, as well as individuals, to chip in. their everyday lives. The end of the drama signals the beginning of a Recently a lot has changed, in particular with regards to final dance in which everyone joins in. Before or after the main coordinating the festival. As Caron (2003) – who has researched the performance, children and adults dance, play music and walk in a Madang Festival from its inception – notes, the organisers were parade. They perform punmuru (プンムル, 風物, a traditional originally sceptical that it would succeed, and thought it could not Korean art form that is also called pungmul-nori (풍물놀이/風物놀이), modify the status quo. This was confirmed by an informant, a nong-ak (농악/農樂), or that takes place with music and dance, as well zainichi Korean, who has been involved in the festival since the as samulnori (サムルノリ) (Kim 2013: 8-10; see also Chin 2013 and beginning. According to him, today the main organisers and participants (both Japanese and Koreans) see things in a positive light. The arrangements are not as difficult any longer because there is 22 On November 3rd 2018, for the first time, the festival was not held in more financing, and people are much more willing to participate and Higashi Kujo (Minami Ward), but in a former elementary school in Shimogyo Ward (Web Sources 5 and 6). work to prepare for the festival throughout the year. 234 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community 235

One of the Japanese informants, who is one of the main organisers, has no problem coordinating and asking people for financial support because he can use his spare time to do so. His wish is that more Japanese will take part in the festival, even just by watching it. According to him, this kind of cooperation is not only for kyōsei, but also for the economic prosperity of the area. During the festival, locals sell food and goods that are locally produced, which provides for the community. In the past only Koreans belonging to Mindan could and did participate, but today, we see individuals from the group Soren, or young people who do not belong to any association, becoming involved since they are becoming increasingly apolitical, as explained by a young festival participant. As for its name, in Korean, madang (마당, ‘yard’)23 signifies a plaza where people meet, and the festival is a site for ethnic cultural exchange. The aims of the festival include transmitting cultural knowledge between generations of Koreans, promoting awareness of the need for the region’s neighbours to acknowledge their common problems and provide each other with mutual support, and obtaining recognition from the city and the nation regarding heterogeneity being the basis for respecting human rights (Web Source 5; Muraki 2014). Through their call to honour heterogeneity (ishitsusei, 異質性) as a fundamental aspect of human rights – not only in the sense of ethnicity, but also in terms of different generations and physical conditions – the Higashi-Kujo Madang community offers a counter-public critique of Kyoto’s (and Japan’s) exclusively ‘Japanese’

23 The literal translation into English is ‘yard’, but in this context, Madang is meant as a ‘common place’, ‘square’ or ‘plaza’. In Japanese, the term hiroba 広 場 or ‘square’ is often used as the translation. 234 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community Nataša Visočnik 235

One of the Japanese informants, who is one of the main organisers, public sphere. Out of their experience of social, political, economic has no problem coordinating and asking people for financial support and cultural exclusion from Kyoto’s lifescapes, they have acquired a because he can use his spare time to do so. His wish is that more keen understanding of the practises that create inclusion while Japanese will take part in the festival, even just by watching it. professing equality. Kataoka (2014: 157) presents the four main goals According to him, this kind of cooperation is not only for kyōsei, but of the festival: (1) South Koreans, North Koreans and Japanese also for the economic prosperity of the area. During the festival, participate jointly to liberate themselves from prejudice in a place of locals sell food and goods that are locally produced, which provides exchange; (2) that the paths of people from the Korean peninsula and for the community. In the past only Koreans belonging to Mindan Japan continue to intertwine, with generational exchanges where could and did participate, but today, we see individuals from the space can be made for the ethnic education of children; (3) to fulfil group Soren, or young people who do not belong to any association, the Korean wish to unite the North and South Koreas, with the becoming involved since they are becoming increasingly apolitical, as Madang becoming a site for mediating this; and (4) that different explained by a young festival participant. people residing in Higashi Kujo live in a state of coexistence in the As for its name, in Korean, madang (마당, ‘yard’)23 signifies a plaza Madang. where people meet, and the festival is a site for ethnic cultural The festival is no longer simply a Korean ethnic festival, as more exchange. The aims of the festival include transmitting cultural and more Japanese people participate and other minorities are invited knowledge between generations of Koreans, promoting awareness of to take part, although the organisers say that the focus remains on the need for the region’s neighbours to acknowledge their common Korean culture. The content is also changing, with fewer politically problems and provide each other with mutual support, and obtaining engaged topics and more stories from the everyday lives of both recognition from the city and the nation regarding heterogeneity Japanese and Koreans. In addition to Korean music, they play being the basis for respecting human rights (Web Source 5; Muraki Japanese music or use Japanese and Korean instruments. The main 2014). play is written by Japanese and Koreans, with more Japanese people Through their call to honour heterogeneity (ishitsusei, 異質性) as from Kyoto, as well as other parts of Japan, among the audience. a fundamental aspect of human rights – not only in the sense of Since the third festival, there has been a call for more diversity within ethnicity, but also in terms of different generations and physical the public arena, revealing multiple voices and a demand for reflexive conditions – the Higashi-Kujo Madang community offers a democratic processes that extend from the state to communities, such counter-public critique of Kyoto’s (and Japan’s) exclusively ‘Japanese’ as bringing together people from different ethnic and social backgrounds. Current movements within the festival’s organisation show how it 23 The literal translation into English is ‘yard’, but in this context, Madang is is becoming self-sustainable: The executive committee has been taken meant as a ‘common place’, ‘square’ or ‘plaza’. In Japanese, the term hiroba 広 場 or ‘square’ is often used as the translation. over by third-generation resident Koreans and younger Japanese 236 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community 237 organisers. Furthermore, the third Madang included a Philippine dance troupe; some years after this, a dance group from Okinawa performed as well. Today all participants (Korean, Japanese, Filipino and others) are involved in producing this multicultural celebration. For example, not only are Korean music and dances (such as punmuru) featured, but also Japanese music (such as wadaiko 和太鼓, or Japanese drums) and Filipino, Okinawan and Brazilian dances. The 2016 guests included Japinong Sessionista (a Filipino guitar group), a vocal group from Kyoto and Four Disabilities, a group of four individuals with disabilities. In 2018, the audience heard the lively rhythms of samba and saw a sumo (相撲) tournament. The mission statement of the festival asserts: ‘We want to create a festival for everyone, so that Koreans and Japanese in Higashi-Kujo can be united’ (Web Source 5). Hence, the festival can truly be called multicultural as it provides ‘minority groups with a place for cultural community celebration, drawing on people’s memories and experiences of their birthplace, and reaffirming community and culture’ (Lee et al 2012: 96).

Conclusions: The Festival as a Multicultural Social Movement

The concept of multiculturalism in Japan remains limited to ‘cultural’ and ‘international’ exchanges. It is interesting that the application of multiculturalism to Japanese society only works for new arrivals, and not so much for already existing minorities. This is why a great deal of scepticism is required when exploring current ideas about ‘multicultural’ Japan. A lot of work and struggle occurs through civic engagement (such as neighbourhood associations), mostly by volunteers. This has all been incorporated into movements 236 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community Nataša Visočnik 237 organisers. Furthermore, the third Madang included a Philippine such as machizukuri, establishing international exchange centres for dance troupe; some years after this, a dance group from Okinawa Koreans in Kyoto. One especially successful story is the Madang performed as well. Festival, which is one of many such celebrations in Japan. Today all participants (Korean, Japanese, Filipino and others) are A festival opens up a space for voluntary discourse and a involved in producing this multicultural celebration. For example, democratic recoding of knowledge that was previously unavailable for not only are Korean music and dances (such as punmuru) featured, comment. This space is an arena for public meta-commentaries about but also Japanese music (such as wadaiko 和太鼓, or Japanese the social circumstances of the community. Belonging to the drums) and Filipino, Okinawan and Brazilian dances. The 2016 community means taking on the work of the festival, and the work of guests included Japinong Sessionista (a Filipino guitar group), a vocal the festival implies constructing an entire counter-culture against the group from Kyoto and Four Disabilities, a group of four individuals dominant code of nationalised Japaneseness in Kyoto (Melucci in with disabilities. In 2018, the audience heard the lively rhythms of Caron 2003). The collective action of the Higashi Kujo Madang has samba and saw a sumo (相撲) tournament. The mission statement of not been evaluated by direct responses from the Kyoto government. It the festival asserts: ‘We want to create a festival for everyone, so that succeeds through its goal to free its members from being subject to Koreans and Japanese in Higashi-Kujo can be united’ (Web Source 5). the prevailing code. Hence, the festival can truly be called multicultural as it provides We might conclude that the event creates a counter space of ‘minority groups with a place for cultural community celebration, identity in Kyoto, open to the public sphere on a public street. It drawing on people’s memories and experiences of their birthplace, reveals – not just for small neighbourhoods of thoroughly and reaffirming community and culture’ (Lee et al 2012: 96). marginalised peoples, but for the city and nation as a whole – an alternative to the everyday life supplied by the state. Thus, its Conclusions: The Festival as a Multicultural Social organisers call it a tabunka matsuri. As such, it facilitates a space for Movement various kinds of entertainment, artistic performances, drama, games, food, music and dance – a whole repertoire of festival practises. The concept of multiculturalism in Japan remains limited to Although the festival is arranged by the Korean minority living in a ‘cultural’ and ‘international’ exchanges. It is interesting that the district of Higashi Kujo, it is also a social and civil movement of application of multiculturalism to Japanese society only works for disenfranchised voices in general. For the Japanese, people with new arrivals, and not so much for already existing minorities. This is disabilities and other foreigners, it is a way to find common ground why a great deal of scepticism is required when exploring current (madang) upon which to put aside differences and acknowledge ideas about ‘multicultural’ Japan. A lot of work and struggle occurs commonalities. This particular image of being together came about through civic engagement (such as neighbourhood associations), in a final decontrolled emotional state, signalling the presence of mostly by volunteers. This has all been incorporated into movements festivities (Caron 2003). The Koreans in Kyoto are, on the one hand, 238 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community 239 quite assimilated into Japanese society, and the local government financially supports them in enhancing their living environment. On the other hand, they are still alienated and treated like foreigners. Nevertheless, the idea of multiculturalism has come to life much more easily among minorities that support the coexistence of different cultures, which in Kyoto is reflected in the extremely rich programming of associations and events such as Kibo no Ie, the Salon for Intercultural Exchange Network and the Madang Festival, where multiculturalism has thrived. The people involved claim that with all these groups and community building processes, they are now more connected and working together to make their community a better place to live in. They have many more connections and better relationships with Japanese people as well, but of course, there are undesirable situations that they try to overcome such as hate speech, rallies and graffiti. A comparison of circumstances in Kyoto with those of other regions where zainichi Koreans live (Kawasaki, Osaka and Tokyo) would reveal more about the characteristics of the groups applying multiculturalism as a tool to enhance people’s lives. The movement towards a more multicultural Japan is not a one-directional process for those who believe in kyōsei for people of different backgrounds. This is why we have to examine the matter from a critical angle and consider that the Japanese who participate in such events accept diversity and enjoy it, while many others would never take part. Although the concept of multiculturalism has been adapted to ‘neo-liberalism’ and applied to some official policies, in reality, the broader society and social relationships are changing very slowly.

238 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community Nataša Visočnik 239 quite assimilated into Japanese society, and the local government References financially supports them in enhancing their living environment. On the other hand, they are still alienated and treated like foreigners. Amino, Yoshihiko 網野善彦 『日本論の視座―列島の社会と国家』 Perspectives for Theory of Nevertheless, the idea of multiculturalism has come to life much 1990 ( Japan: Societies and States of the Archipelago). 東京：小学館 (Tokyo: more easily among minorities that support the coexistence of Shogakukan). different cultures, which in Kyoto is reflected in the extremely rich Avenel, S. A. programming of associations and events such as Kibo no Ie, the Salon 2010 Making Japanese Citizens. Civil Society and the Mythology of the Shimin for Intercultural Exchange Network and the Madang Festival, where in Postwar Japan. Berkeley, Los Angeles and London: University of California Press. multiculturalism has thrived. The people involved claim that with all Bell, M. these groups and community building processes, they are now more 2016 Japan’s Diminishing Korean Minority. Society for East Asian connected and working together to make their community a better . December 14. Retrieved January 15, 2019. place to live in. They have many more connections and better http://seaa.americananthro.org/2016/12/japans-diminishing-korean-mi relationships with Japanese people as well, but of course, there are nority/. Brown, L. undesirable situations that they try to overcome such as hate speech, 2015 Caught between Two Countries: Zainichi Koreans in Japan. Virginia rallies and graffiti. A comparison of circumstances in Kyoto with Review of Asian Studies 17, 254-61. those of other regions where zainichi Koreans live (Kawasaki, Osaka Burgess, C. and Tokyo) would reveal more about the characteristics of the groups 2008 Celebrating ‘Multicultural Japan’: Writings on ‘Minorities’ and the applying multiculturalism as a tool to enhance people’s lives. Discourse on ‘Difference’. Electronic Journal of Contemporary Japanese Studies. Retrieved January 12, 2016. The movement towards a more multicultural Japan is not a http://www.japanesestudies.org.uk/articles /2008/Burgess.html. one-directional process for those who believe in kyōsei for people of Burgess, C. different backgrounds. This is why we have to examine the matter 2012 (2004) Maintaining Identities. Discourses of Homogeneity in a Rapidly from a critical angle and consider that the Japanese who participate in Globalizing Japan. Electronic Journal of Contemporary Japanese Studies such events accept diversity and enjoy it, while many others would 19 April. Retrieved January 12, 2016. http://www.japanesestudies.org.uk/articles/Burgess.html. never take part. Although the concept of multiculturalism has been Caron, B. adapted to ‘neo-liberalism’ and applied to some official policies, in 2003 Community, Democracy and Performance: The Urban Practice of Kyoto’s reality, the broader society and social relationships are changing very Higashi-Kujo Madang. Santa Barbara: The New Media Studio. slowly. Retrieved March 25, 2018. https://hcommons.org/deposits/item/hc:23735/. Chapman, D. 2006 Discourses of Multicultural Coexistence (Tabunka Kyōsei) and the ‘Old-comer’ Korean Residents of Japan. Asian Ethnicity 7(1), 89-102. 240 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community 241

Chapman, D. 2008 Zainichi Korean Identity and Ethnicity. London and New York: Routledge. Chin, Teiru 陳太一 2013 「共生・協働のまつり東九条マダン―日本籍朝鮮人としての関 わり」. (Festival of Coexistence and Cooperation – Higashi Kujō Madan: Relations of Japanese Koreans). 京都市地域多文化交流ネッ トワークサロン（編）『多文化社会を生きる』 (Living Multicultural Society) 1, 21-38. 京都：京都市地域多文化交流ネットワークサロ ン (Kyōto: Kyōtoshi Chiiki, Tabunka Koryu Nettowāku Saron). Creighton, M. R. 1997 Soto Others and Uchi Others: Imagining Racial Diversity, Imagining Homogenous Japan. In M. Weiner, ed. Japan’s Minorities, pp.211-38. London and New York: Routledge. Douglass, M., and Roberts G. S., eds. 2000 Japan and Global Migration: Foreign Workers and the Advent of a Multicultural Society. London and New York: Routledge. Fukuoka, Y., and Tsujiyama, Y. 1992 Mintohren: Young Koreans against Ethnic Discrimination in Japan. The Bulletin of Chiba College of Health Science 10(2). Retrieved February 15, 2019. http://www.han.org/a/fukuoka92.html. Goodman, R. 2005 Making Majority Culture. In J. Robertson, ed. A Companion to the Anthropology of Japan, pp.59-72. Malden etc.: Blackwell Publishing. Gurung, Ghana S. & Michael Kollmair. 2005 Marginality: Concepts and Their Limitations. IP6 Working Paper No. 4. Zurich: University of Zurich, NCCR North-South. Hall, S. 1996 Introduction: Who Needs Identity? In S. Hall and P. Du Gay, eds., Questions of Cultural Identity, pp.1-17. London: Sage Publications. Hara, Tomoaki 原知章 2009 「多文化共生」を内破する実践―東京都新宿区・大久保地区の 「共住懇」の事例より (Imploding the “Multicultural Coexistence” Policy – The Case of Kyojukon in the Okubo District of Shinjuku, Tokyo). Japanese Journal of Cultural Anthropology 74(1), 136-55. Harajiri, Hideki 原尻英樹 240 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community Nataša Visočnik 241

Chapman, D. 2010 「街づくりの必要性の根拠について―京都市東九条地区のコ 2008 Zainichi Korean Identity and Ethnicity. London and New York: リアン系住民による街づくり」(On the Basis of the Necessity of Routledge. City Planning: Town-making by Korean Residents in the Area of Chin, Teiru 陳太一 Higashi Kujō in Kyōto City).『立命館産業社会論集』(Ritsumeikan 2013 「共生・協働のまつり東九条マダン―日本籍朝鮮人としての関 Industry Society Papers) 46(1), 219-37. Retrieved January 15, 2018. わり」. (Festival of Coexistence and Cooperation – Higashi Kujō http://www.ritsumei.ac.jp/ss/sansharonshu/assets/file/2010/46-1_06-01. Madan: Relations of Japanese Koreans). 京都市地域多文化交流ネッ pdf. トワークサロン（編）『多文化社会を生きる』 (Living Multicultural Hester, J. T. Society) 1, 21-38. 京都：京都市地域多文化交流ネットワークサロ 2008 Datsu Zainichi-ron: An Emerging Discourse on Belonging among ン (Kyōto: Kyōtoshi Chiiki, Tabunka Koryu Nettowāku Saron). Ethnic Koreans in Japan. In N. H. H. Graburn, J. Ertl, and R. K. Creighton, M. R. Tirney, eds., Multiculturalism in the New Japan. Crossing the Boundaries 1997 Soto Others and Uchi Others: Imagining Racial Diversity, Imagining Within, pp.139-50. New York and Oxford: Berghahn Books. Homogenous Japan. In M. Weiner, ed. Japan’s Minorities, pp.211-38. Hicks, G. L. London and New York: Routledge. 1997 Japan’s Hidden Apartheid: the Korean Minority and the Japanese. Douglass, M., and Roberts G. S., eds. Aldershot: Ashgate. 2000 Japan and Global Migration: Foreign Workers and the Advent of a Iida, Takafumi 飯田剛史 Multicultural Society. London and New York: Routledge. 2014 「「民族まつり」の展開と課題」(The Development and Tasks of Fukuoka, Y., and Tsujiyama, Y. ‘Ethnic Festivals’). 飯田剛史編『民族まつりの創造と展開』(In T. 1992 Mintohren: Young Koreans against Ethnic Discrimination in Japan. The Iida ed. The Creation and Development of Ethnic Festivals), pp.3-40. 科 Bulletin of Chiba College of Health Science 10(2). Retrieved February 15, 学研究費成果報告書 (Unpublished report of a research funded by 2019. http://www.han.org/a/fukuoka92.html. the Japan Society for the Promotion of Sciences). Goodman, R. Imada, M. 2005 Making Majority Culture. In J. Robertson, ed. A Companion to the 2010 Civil Society in Japan: Democracy, Voluntary Action, and Philanthropy. Anthropology of Japan, pp.59-72. Malden etc.: Blackwell Publishing. In H. Vinken, Y. Nishimura, B.L. J White, and M. Deguchi, eds., Civil Gurung, Ghana S. & Michael Kollmair. Engagement in Contemporary Japan: Established and Emerging Repertoires, 2005 Marginality: Concepts and Their Limitations. IP6 Working Paper No. pp.21-40. London: Springer. 4. Zurich: University of Zurich, NCCR North-South. Inazuki, Tadashi 稲月正 Hall, S. 2002 「在日韓国、朝鮮人の社会移動―移動パターンの析出と解釈」 1996 Introduction: Who Needs Identity? In S. Hall and P. Du Gay, eds., (Social Mobility of Zainichi Koreans and North Koreans: the Questions of Cultural Identity, pp.1-17. London: Sage Publications. Deposition and Interpretation of Movement Patterns). 谷富夫（編） Hara, Tomoaki 原知章 『民族関係における結合と分離―社会的メカニズムを解明す 2009 「多文化共生」を内破する実践―東京都新宿区・大久保地区の る』(In Tomio Tani, ed., The Binding and Separation in Ethnic Relations: 「共住懇」の事例より (Imploding the “Multicultural Coexistence” Explication of Social Mechanism), pp.559-95. 京都：ミネルヴァ書房 Policy – The Case of Kyojukon in the Okubo District of Shinjuku, (Kyoto: Minerva-shobo). Tokyo). Japanese Journal of Cultural Anthropology 74(1), 136-55. Iwabuchi, K. Harajiri, Hideki 原尻英樹 2005 Political Correctness, Postcoloniality, and the Self-representation of 242 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community 243

‘Koreanness’ in Japan. In S. Ryang, ed., Koreans in Japan. Critical Voices from the Margin, pp.55-73. London: Routledge Curzon. Kataoka, Chiyoko 片岡千代子 2014 「京都・東九条マダンにおける「担い手意識」の拡大―「多文 化共生」の民族まつりにおける参加の論理」. 飯田剛史（編） 『民族まつりの創造と展開』(In Iida Takafumi, ed., The Creation and Development of Ethnic Festivals), pp.154-72. 科学研究費成果報 告書. (Unpublished report of a research funded by the Japan Society for the Promotion of Sciences) Kim, K. 金光敏 2013 「多文化共生教育―希望の家カトリック教育園の取り組み」 (Multicultural Education: Efforts of House of Hope Kindergarten). 京 都市地域・多文化交流ネットワークサロン編『多文化社会を生 きる』(Living Multicultural Society) 1, 2-20. 京都：京都市地域多文 化交流地域・多文化交流ネットワーク・サロン (Kyoto: Kyotoshi Chiiki, Tabunka Kōryū Nettowaku Saron.) Kwak, J. H. 2009 Coexistence without Principle: Reconsidering Multicultural Policies in Japan. Pacific Focus 24(2), August: 161-86. Lee, I. S., Arcodia, C., and Lee, T. J. 2012 ‘Key Characteristics of Multicultural Festivals: A Critical Review of the Literature.’ Event Management 16: 93-101. Retrieved January 20, 2018. https://doi.org/10.3727/152599512X13264729827758. Lie, J. 2001 Multiethnic Japan. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Macdonald, G. 1995 The Politics of Diversity in the Nation-state. In J. C. Maher and G. Macdonald, eds., Diversity in Japanese Culture and Language, pp.291-315. London: Kegan Paul International. McCormack, G. 1996 Introduction. In D. Donald et al., eds., Multicultural Japan: Paleolithic to Postmodern, pp.1-15. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Mizuuchi, T. 2002 The Historical Transformation of Poverty, Discrimination, and Urban Policy in Japanese City: The Case of Osaka. Retrieved November 12, 2013. 242 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community Nataša Visočnik 243

‘Koreanness’ in Japan. In S. Ryang, ed., Koreans in Japan. Critical Voices http://www.lit.osaka-cu.ac.jp/geo/pdf/frombelow/0308_frombelow_mi from the Margin, pp.55-73. London: Routledge Curzon. zuuchi.pdf. Kataoka, Chiyoko 片岡千代子 Muraki, Mitoko 村木美都子 2014 「京都・東九条マダンにおける「担い手意識」の拡大―「多文 2014 (2013) 「「四〇番地」一世たちの聞き取りの掲載（再録）にあた 化共生」の民族まつりにおける参加の論理」. 飯田剛史（編） って」(‘The Area No. 40’: On the Posting (Reprint) of Listening to Life 『民族まつりの創造と展開』(In Iida Takafumi, ed., The Creation Stories). 京都市地域・多文化交流ネットワークサロン（編）『東 and Development of Ethnic Festivals), pp.154-72. 科学研究費成果報 九条の語り部たち―14 人の聞き取り報告―』(Storytellers of 告書. (Unpublished report of a research funded by the Japan Society Higashi Kujō – Reports of Listening of 14 People), pp.146-7. 京都：京都 for the Promotion of Sciences) 市地域多文化交流ネットワークサロン (Kyōto: Kyōtoshi Chiiki, Kim, K. 金光敏 Tabunka Koryu Nettowaku Saron). 2013 「多文化共生教育―希望の家カトリック教育園の取り組み」 Nakano, H. (Multicultural Education: Efforts of House of Hope Kindergarten). 京 1995 The Sociology of in Japan. In J. C. Maher and G. 都市地域・多文化交流ネットワークサロン編『多文化社会を生 Macdonald, eds., Diversity in Japanese Culture and Language, pp.49-72. きる』(Living Multicultural Society) 1, 2-20. 京都：京都市地域多文 London: Kegan Paul International. 化交流地域・多文化交流ネットワーク・サロン (Kyoto: Kyotoshi Nishimura, Y. Chiiki, Tabunka Kōryū Nettowaku Saron.) 2010 Civic Engagement and Community Development among Japan’s Kwak, J. H. Burakumin. In H. Vinken, Y. Nishimura, B.L. J White, and M. 2009 Coexistence without Principle: Reconsidering Multicultural Policies in Deguchi, eds., Civil Engagement in Contemporary Japan: Established and Japan. Pacific Focus 24(2), August: 161-86. Emerging Repertoires, pp.119-38. London: Springer. Lee, I. S., Arcodia, C., and Lee, T. J. Ogawa, Nobuhiko 小川伸彦 2012 ‘Key Characteristics of Multicultural Festivals: A Critical Review of the 2014 「民族まつりコンテンツの内容分析―京都・東九条マダン ポ Literature.’ Event Management 16: 93-101. Retrieved January 20, 2018. スター図像の 21 年―」(The Analysis of the Contents of Ethnic https://doi.org/10.3727/152599512X13264729827758. Festival – Kyoto Higashi Kujō Madan Poster Images during Twenty-one Lie, J. Years). 飯田剛史（編）『民族まつりの創造と展開』(In I. Takafumi, 2001 Multiethnic Japan. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. ed., The Creation and Development of Ethnic Festivals), pp.133-53. Macdonald, G. (Unpublished report of a research funded by the Japan Society for the 1995 The Politics of Diversity in the Nation-state. In J. C. Maher and G. Promotion of Sciences) Macdonald, eds., Diversity in Japanese Culture and Language, Oguma, E. 小熊英二 pp.291-315. London: Kegan Paul International. 2002 The Origin of the Myth of Ethnic Homogeneity: The Genealogy of ‘Japanese’ McCormack, G. Self-images. Melbourne: Trans Pacific Press. 1996 Introduction. In D. Donald et al., eds., Multicultural Japan: Paleolithic Qi, J., and Zhang S. P. to Postmodern, pp.1-15. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2008 The Issue of Diversity and Multiculturalism in Japan. Paper presented Mizuuchi, T. at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research 2002 The Historical Transformation of Poverty, Discrimination, and Urban Association. March 24-29, 2008. New York. Policy in Japanese City: The Case of Osaka. Retrieved November 12, Ryang, S., ed. 2013. 2005 Introduction: Resident Koreans in Japan. In Koreans in Japan. Critical 244 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community 245

Voices from the Margin, 1-12. London in New York: Routledge Curzon. Sorensen, A. 2001 Urban Planning and Civil Society in Japan: Japanese Urban Planning Development during the ‘Taisho Democracy’ Period (1905-31). Planning Perspectives 16, 383-406. 2002 The Making of Urban Japan Cities and Planning from Edo to the Twenty-first Century. London: Routledge. Sorensen, A., and Funck, C., eds. 2007 Living Cities in Japan. In Living Cities in Japan: Citizens’ Movement, Machizukuri and Local Environments, pp.1-36. London: Nissan Institute and Routledge. Takaya, S. 2006 Mulitculturalism in Japan: A Victory over Assimilationism or Subject to Neo-liberalism? 『立命館言語文化研究』(Ristumeikan Language and Culture Study) 18(3), 45-57. Retrieved January 5, 2018. http://www.ritsumei.ac.jp/acd/re/k-rsc/lcs/kiyou/18-3/RitsIILCS_18.3 pp.45-57Takaya.pdf. Yamamoto, Tetsuji 山本哲司 2009 「被差別部落におけるく被差別の表象〉とまちづくりの課題一 生活史の聞き取りから」(The Representation of Discrimination in Discriminated Buraku and Tasks of Town Development: from Listening to Life History)『龍谷紀要』(Bulletin of Ryukoku) 30(2), 37-54. Retrieved December 15, 2013. http://repo.lib.ryukoku.ac.jp/jspui/bitstream/10519/741/1/r-ky_030_0 2_005.pdf. Yamamoto, Takanori 山本崇記 2012 研究課題：「高齢化する社会的マイノリティ集住地域における 福祉の担い手と社会的資源の効果的活用に関するシステム開 発」(The Research Results: The Development of System of Welfare Workers and Effective Use of Social Resources in Aging Social Minority Residence Areas). Retrieved November 25, 2018. http://www.nihonseimei-zaidan.or.jp/kourei/pdf/24/yamamoto.pdf. Visočnik, N. 2013 Self- and Other-Representations of the Korean Minority in Japan. Dve domovini/Two Homelands 37, 113-22. 2014 Koreans in Japan: Process of Community Building in Marginal Places 244 Multiculturalism within Kyoto’s Korean Community Nataša Visočnik 245

Voices from the Margin, 1-12. London in New York: Routledge Curzon. in Kyōto. Asian Studies 2(2), 89-107. Sorensen, A. Weiner, M, ed. 2001 Urban Planning and Civil Society in Japan: Japanese Urban Planning 2009 (1997) ‘Self’ and ‘Other’ in Imperial Japan. In M. Weiner, ed., Japan’s Development during the ‘Taisho Democracy’ Period (1905-31). Minorities: The Illusion of Homogeneity, pp.1-20. New York: Routledge. Planning Perspectives 16, 383-406. 2002 The Making of Urban Japan Cities and Planning from Edo to the Web source 1: OECD. International Migration Outlook 2015 Edition. Paris: Twenty-first Century. London: Routledge. OECD Publishing. Sorensen, A., and Funck, C., eds. http://www.keepeek.com/Digital-Asset-Management/oecd/social-issues-migration- 2007 Living Cities in Japan. In Living Cities in Japan: Citizens’ Movement, health/international-migration-outlook-2015_migr_outlook-2015-en#page220. Machizukuri and Local Environments, pp.1-36. London: Nissan Retrieved December 19, 2015. Institute and Routledge. Web Source 2: Center for Multicultural Society Kyoto. Takaya, S. http://www.tabunkakyoto.org/. 2006 Mulitculturalism in Japan: A Victory over Assimilationism or Subject to Retrieved December 19, 2015. Neo-liberalism? 『立命館言語文化研究』(Ristumeikan Language and Web source 3: 法務省 (Ministry of Justice). 在留外国人統計（旧登録外国人 Culture Study) 18(3), 45-57. Retrieved January 5, 2018. 統計）統計表 (Statistics of Resident Foreigners (Statistics of the Former Registered http://www.ritsumei.ac.jp/acd/re/k-rsc/lcs/kiyou/18-3/RitsIILCS_18.3 Foreigners), A Statistical Table). Retrieved June 5, 2015. pp.45-57Takaya.pdf. http://www.e-stat.go.jp/SG1/estat/List.do?lid =000001139146. Yamamoto, Tetsuji 山本哲司 Web source 4: 希望の家保育園 (Kindergarten House of Hope). Retrieved 2009 「被差別部落におけるく被差別の表象〉とまちづくりの課題一 August 15, 2017. 生活史の聞き取りから」(The Representation of Discrimination in http://www.kyoto-kibounoie-hoikuen.ed.jp/. Discriminated Buraku and Tasks of Town Development: from Listening Web source 5: 東九条マダン趣旨文 (Higashi Kujō Madang Purpose Statement) to Life History)『龍谷紀要』(Bulletin of Ryukoku) 30(2), 37-54. (Higashi Kujō Madan Shushibun). Retrieved June 15, 2014. Retrieved December 15, 2013. http://www.h-madang.com. http://repo.lib.ryukoku.ac.jp/jspui/bitstream/10519/741/1/r-ky_030_0 Web source 6: 東九条マダン. (Higashi Kujō Madang). Retrieved November 1, 2_005.pdf. 2018. Yamamoto, Takanori 山本崇記 https://www.facebook.com/higashikujomadang/. 2012 研究課題：「高齢化する社会的マイノリティ集住地域における Web source 7: “Outline of the Master Plan of Kyoto City.” Retrieved January, 15. 福祉の担い手と社会的資源の効果的活用に関するシステム開 2014. 発」(The Research Results: The Development of System of Welfare http://www.city.kyoto.jp/koho/eng/plan/img/english.pdf. Workers and Effective Use of Social Resources in Aging Social Minority Web source 8: 在日コリアン人権協会 (Zainichi Korian Jinken Kyōkai). Residence Areas). Retrieved November 25, 2018. Retrieved March 28, 2019. http://www.nihonseimei-zaidan.or.jp/kourei/pdf/24/yamamoto.pdf. http://koreanshr.jp/about.html. Visočnik, N. 2013 Self- and Other-Representations of the Korean Minority in Japan. Dve domovini/Two Homelands 37, 113-22. 2014 Koreans in Japan: Process of Community Building in Marginal Places