Your Unpublished Thesis, Submitted for a Degree at Williams College and Administered by the Williams College Libraries, Will Be Made Available for Research Use

WILLIAMS COLLEGE LIBRARIES

Your unpublished thesis, submitted for a degree at Williams College and administered by the Williams College Libraries, will be made available for research use. You may, through this form, provide instructions regarding copyright, access, dissemination and reproduction of your thesis. The College has the right in all cases to maintain and preserve theses both in hardcopy and electronic format, and to make such copies as the Libraries require for their research and archival functions.

_The faculty advisor/s to the student writing the thesis claims joint authorship in this work.

_ 1/we have included in this thesis copyrighted material for which 1/we have not received permission from the copyright holder/s. If you do not secure copyright permissions by the time your thesis is submitted, you will still be allowed to submit. However, if the necessary copyright permissions are not received, e-posting of your thesis may be affected. Copyrighted material may include images (tables, drawings, photographs, figures, maps, graphs, etc.), sound files, video material, data sets, and large portions of text.

I. COPYRIGHT An author by law owns the copyright to his/her work, whether or not a copyright symbol and date are placed on the piece. Please choose one of the options below with respect to the copyright in your thesis.

_ 1/we choose not to retain the copyright to the thesis, and hereby assign the copyright to Williams College. Selecting this option will assign copyright to the College. If the author/s wishes later to publish the work, he/she/they will need to obtain permission to do so from the Libraries, which will be granted except in unusual circumstances. The Libraries will be free in this case to also grant permission to another researcher to publish some or all of the thesis. If you have chosen this option, you do not need to complete the next section and can proceed to the signature line.

/r/we choose to retain the copyright to the thesis for a period of J.ruL years, or until my/our death/s, whichever is the earlier, at which time the copyright shall be assigned to Williams College without need of further action by me/us or by my/our heirs, successors, or representatives of my/our estate/s. Selecting this option allows the author/s the flexibility of retaining his/her/their copyright for a period of years or for life. II. ACCESS AND COPYING If you have chosen in section I, above, to retain the copyright in your thesis for some period of time, please choose one of the following options with respect to access to, and copying of, the thesis.

�/we grant permission to Williams College to provide access to (and therefore copying of) the thesis in electronic format via the Internet or other means of electronic transmission, in addition to permitting access to and copying of the thesis in hardcopy format. Selecting this option allows the Libraries to transmit the thesis in electronic format via the Internet. This option will therefore permit worldwide access to the thesis and, because the Libraries cannot control the uses of an electronic version once it has been transmitted, this option also permits copying of the electronic version.

_ I/we grant permission to Williams College to maintain and provide access to the thesis in hardcopy format. In addition, I/we grant permission to Williams College to provide access to (and therefore copying of) the thesis in electronic format via the

Internet or other means of electronic transmission after a period of __ years. Selecting this option allows the Libraries to transmit the thesis in electronic format via the Internet after a period of years. Once the restriction period has ended, this option permits worldwide access to the thesis, and copying of the electronic and hardcopy versions.

_ I/we grant permission to Williams College to maintain, provide access to, and provide copies of the thesis in hardcopy format only, for as long as I/we retain copyright. Selecting this option allows access to your work only from the hardcopy you submit for as long as you retain copyright in the work. Such access pertains to the entirety of your work, including any media that it incorporates. Selecting this option allows the Libraries to provide copies of the thesis to researchers in hardcopy form only, not in electronic format.

_ I/we grant permission to Williams College to maintain and to provide access to the thesis in hardcopy format only, for as long as Ilwe retain copyright. Selecting this option allows access to your work only from the hardcopy you submit for as long as you retain copyright in the work. Such access pertains to the entirety of your work, including any media that it incorporates. This option does NOT permit the Libraries to provide copies of the thesis to researchers.

Signed (student author)_

Signed (faculty advisor)_

Signed (2d advisor, if applicable) ------

Thesis title 8 I �e..,p��f .fo.r ti ;JeeJ \f.·r;:o""

V 2-o I Date 5 ./ 1c >/ f BLUEPRINT FOR A NEW VISION: THE PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE OF WAR MUSEUMS IN JAPAN

LEO K. OBATA

Professor Eiko Maruko Siniawer, Advisor

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements fo r the Degree of Bachelor of Arts with honors in History

WILLIAMS COLLEGE

Williamstown, Massachusetts

APRIL 21, 2014

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements ...... i

Introduction: Why War Museums? ...... 1

Why War Museums? Why Japanese War Museums? ...... 1

General Landscape of War Museums in Japan ...... 6

Three Museums: Peace Osaka, Yushiikan and Showakan ...... 11

The New War Museum: Shin-Senso Hakubutsukan ...... 18

Chapter One: The Mission ...... 21

A New Mission for a New Museum ...... 21

The Demise of "Exhibition B" ...... 26

A Tug-of-War Between State and Citizen ...... ' ...... 35

An Immortal Mission for Immortal Heroes ...... 41

Be Wary of the State ...... 49

Chapter Two: The Exhibition ...... 51 Target Demographic ...... 51 Artifact versus Interpretation ...... 54

Space ...... 58 My Space ...... 63 Additional Elements ...... 67

Proposal for the New War Museum ...... 71

Chapter Three: The Logistical Structure ...... 72 Money Matters ...... 72 Museum Masterminds ...... 82

The Implications of Place ...... 89 Secure the Logistics ...... 96

Conclusion: Blueprint for a New Vision ...... 99 Sowing the Seed ...... 99

A Word on War Museums Abroad ...... 101

A Personal Aim Fulfilled...... 106 The Future of Japanese War Museums...... 110

Images and Diagrams ...... 112

Bibliography ...... 122

Acknowledgements

This proj ect could not have been completed without the help, guidance and inspiration provided by a number of special individuals.

I would like to express my deepest appreciation and gratitude to my advisor, Professor Eiko Maruko Siniawer. It would be impossible to capture the tremendous amount of both academic and personal counsel that you have given me in this acknowledgements page. The conversations we had during the weekly meetings were in many ways as valuable and meaningful to me as the thesis product itself. I can only hope that at least half of the brilliant ideas that went through my mind as we conversed in your office have made it onto the fo llowing pages.

I would also like to thank Professor Leslie Brown, Professor Thomas Kohut, and Professor Eric Knibbs of the History Department. In many ways, Professor Brown provided the original inspiration fo r this thesis in our junior seminar class, which explored documentary history and the importance of multi-media sources. One day in her office, she told me: "Write a thesis! Go to grad school!" Although the second suggestion has not been achieved yet, I present the product of the first, here. Professor Kohut and Professor Knibbs gave me valuable advice throughout the writing process. Without their comments, my thesis would have gaping holes and major contradictions in my arguments, and so I am fo rever grateful. Finally, I would like to thank Professor Frank Stewart and Professor Kasumi Yamamoto fo r their support throughout my fo ur years at Williams.

A special thanks to my colleagues in the thesis seminar, especially Sara and Alexandra. Without their support, fe edback and sightings in Sawyer Library (thank you to you too, you will be missed), I would not have been able to pull through this year.

I would like to thank my fa mily, especially my grandparents, fo r relating their experiences in the past war to me since I was a young child. The reason that I began to take interest in the field of war history was because their harrowing stories were so moving and memorable to me. Finally, I would also like to thank my Asian American peers in middle school and high school. My interactions with them fo rced me to realize that the legacy of the war still lies deep within the hearts of many people. Without this stimulation, I would not have been so invested in the issues that continue to affect war history today. 11 Introduction: Why War Museums?

Why War Museums? WhyJa panese War Museums?

Perhaps some of my readers are familiar with Rashomon (1950), a Japanese film directed by the famed filmmaker Kurosawa Akira, starring renowned actors such as

Mifune Toshiro and Kyo Machiko.1 Through the use of innovative techniques in cinematography and visual storytelling, Rashomon chronicled the tale of a woman's rape and the murder of her husband. The unique aspect lied in the story's narration through the perspectives of fo ur characters: the husband and wife, the bandit, and a bystander.

Strangely, their testimonials of the event were entirely different. The bandit admitted to his crimes, but insisted that he killed the husband in a fair duel; the deceased husband claimed that he took his own life; the wife portrayed herself as a helpless victim; and finally, the passerby recalled that the cunning wife spurred the two men against each other.

What is to be taken away fromth is peculiar tale? The lesson learned in Rashomon is that a single event can be remembered and told differently through multiple subjective narratives; conversely, the event cannot be captured adequately in a single, objective account. In the realm of history, subjectivity dominates storytelling. This can be said especially of the history of war, the central theme that lies at the core of my project. The portrayal of war history is often heatedly debated, and is notorious fo r provoking acrimonious disputes between people, organizations and even nations. The catastrophic nature of war-the sheer number of involved peoples, deaths and casualties, hatred between belligerents, and utt er disregard fo r humanity, among its other aspects-makes it

1 In accordance with writing conventions in Japanese, all Japanese names in this study have been written in manner of last name, firstname.

1 an event charged with adverse experiences and memories. Presenting the history of war through a centralized narrative or singular perspective is indeed an unachievable task.

Narratives of war have been recorded in a variety of media, such as textbooks, oral histories, documentary films and scholarly articles. The war museum is one such site in which history is portrayed. Often designed as an educational space, museums have played a central role in disseminating historical narratives to the public. As with any medium, they have been subj ected to intense disputes revolving around recurring issues and complexities of portraying war history. Historians, politicians, citizens' groups and curators, to name a fe w contingents, might hold different perspectives and conclusions about the war, and seek to utilize the museum to disseminate their conflicting views. In addition, they might employ museums for political purposes; challenge the narrative around which a particular museum operates; and prefer certain material that shapes and guides the viewer's understanding of the war towards a specific direction. Such fo rces- both internal and external in relation to the museum-function in diffe rent ways and fo r diffe rent purposes, and influence how war museums are designed and curated.

The purpose of this study is to investigate how various war museums in Japan have exhibited the history of the Asia-Pacific War, and more significantly, the ways in which they have been swept into the larger maelstrom of historical and socio-political disputes concerning the representation of war history .Z Although there is no question that the rendition of any war is an arduous endeavor, the Asia-Pacific War has been particularly wrought in controversy. Much has to do with Japan's war of aggression and

2 Asia-Pacific War is a term used to denote Japan's war that began in 1931 with the Manchurian Incident, and ended with its surrender to the Allied Powers in 1945. Other nomenclatures include World War II, which emphasizes the struggle in the European front; the PacificWar, which focuses on the conflict between Japan and the U.S. beginning with the attack on Pearl Harbor (1941); and the Fifteen-Year War, which, like the Asia-Pacific War, encompasses the entirety of Japan's conquest beginning in 1931. For the purpose of this study, I will refer to the war as Asia-Pacific War.

2 ruthless colonialism that ravaged East Asia and the Pacific, which brought indescribable suffering to a vast number of peoples; disagreements between Japanese and Asian perspectives on war-related issues, and general discrepancies in historiography; and matters of apology, reparations and reconciliation that have created deep fissures between

Japan and its neighbors in the postwar. All of the above points of friction have engendered string of antagonistic disputes, both domestically in Japan and abroad. The tempest has and continues to affl ict the war museum, as we shall see throughout this study.

Research for th is project has been conducted to offe r an answer to this central question: What are the possibilities, challenges and limitations that war museums in

Japan have faced in the postwar era, especially beginning in the 1980s? The methodology by which I will go about answering th is question is twofold. The first step is to survey prominent war museums in Japan, observe how they operate, and ascertain how they fail or succeed in maintaining integrity and carrying out their missions. The second consists of creating my own hypothetical museum with the fo llowing objectives. It must provoke visitors of various nationalities (especially Japanese, American, South Korean and

Chinese) to engage in productive discourse with each other, and appreciate the diverse narratives that revolve around th e concept of war history. It must also be grounded on a strong logistical system of policy, sponsorship and management that can withstand the various forces and bodies that might pressure the museum into shaping or altering its content in unwarranted ways. The proposal will come complete with the museum's basic pillars such as title, mission statement and location, to specifics including the exhibited

material, general layout and design, and sponsorship. By cross-examining th e extant

3 landscape of war museums in Japan with my own proposed museum, I will gauge whether or not my vision can weather the "larger maelstrom of historical and socio- political disputes" that I have described above. How will the imagined museum fa re against the fo rces that have routinely contested the autonomy, integrity and approaches of war museums? I aim to test the plausibility of my museum, and in which areas and to what extent its objectives and practicality hold. This experiment will conceivably reveal the real-life challenges and limitations, as well as the capabilities and potential that one might encounter when devising a war museum in Japan.

In order to contextualize the hypothetical museum within the broader history of

Japanese war museums, I will examine a wide selection of prominent museums in existence today. Exploring multiple sites will allow me to capture the landscape of

Japanese war museums and their socio-political histories in a comprehensive and nuanced manner. It is especially important to approach this topic by exploring a variety of sites, as it enables us to perceive prevalent issues that expose similar weaknesses in the museums. Conversely, we can distinguish the common strengths that the museums share in order to suggest effectual solutions that might remedy the problems that trouble others.

The limitations and insufficiency in existing scholarship lie here. Museological and historical literature has often fo cused solely on one specific site, instead of taking a

3 comparative approach that analyzes a variety of cases. In other words, fe w scholars have drawn upon multiple museums in order to reach a tenable conclusion about the broader implications of exhibiting war history. Perhaps one of the fe w works that does so is an

3 Focused scholarship exists especially for sites such as the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum and Yasukuni Shrine (which houses Yiishiikan War Memorial Museum.) These sites have gathered much attention in both Japanese and Western scholarship for a number of reasons. These include Hiroshima's significance in being the first city to have sufferedthe atomic bomb and Yasukuni's political significance in recent controversies over international relations.

4 article written by hi storians Laura Hein and Ta.k ena.ka Akiko, ti tled "Exhibiti ng World

War II in Japan and the United States since 1995," fe atured in the PacificHis torical

Review. 4 The study analyzed a number of war museums in Japan and the issues they fa ced in the past, while compari ng and contrasting them to their counterparts in the U.S.; yet even this article-whi ch provided inspiration fo r this proj ect-stopped short of considering how museums mi ght improve and counter such issues in the future. I ai m to take that one further step. By approaching the topic in a holistic manner, I hope to capture a more complete overview on how vari ous war museums have been curated in Japan, and endeavor to present a potential solution to the predicament.

Although war museums hav e become contested sites of memory especially in recent years, the portrayal of war hi story has always been a recurring issue that has negatively affected Japan's relati ons with the internati onal community. Both domestic and fo reign contingents hav e utilized museums as a channel to igni te nati onali sm, support government agendas, or incite hostility towards others; even a cursory examination of hi storical museums uncovers this fact. In order fo r war museums to remain empowered and protected against their dangerous politicizati on, it is becoming all the more important to inquire into the issue today. It is my ultimate goal and hope that thi s proj ect sheds light not only on their inevitable challenges and limitations, but also the great promise and potenti al fo r success that war museums-and hi storical museums on a grander scale- possess.

4 Laura Hein and Akiko Takenaka, "Exhibiting World War II in Japan and the United States since 1995," Pacific Historical Review 76, no. 1 (2007): 61-94.

5 General Landscape of War Museums in Ja pan

Various war museums in Japan have featured the history of the Asia-Pacific War

(1931-1945) in their exhibitions. The Asia-Pacific War was arguably the most historic and defining event in Japan's modem history, and the sheer number of museums, memorials and monuments that exist throughout various regions of the nation speaks to its significance. According to the Peace Museum and Wa r Me morial Guidebook, there are at least 85 museums in Japan that pertain to the Asia-Pacific War, but some scholars have even placed their estimates much higher at 200 or more. 5 A large percentage of these sites were constructed in the 1980s and 90s when Japan experienced a boom that

6 tripled the number of war memorials, monuments and museums. The increase occurred in response to a regional movement in East Asia, where Japanese and Asian individuals who had lived through the war revisited their experiences and protested the inadequacy of postwar reconciliation as provided by the Japanese government. Sympathizing with their cause, independent Japanese organizations and citizens' groups erected new war museums that exposed the war of aggression as perpetrated by the wartime Japanese state.

Such a take on war history was markedly absent in the country until the advent of this pivotal movement. I have carefully handpicked specific sites that embody and represent

the major narratives of war history, including the one discussed above, which have

prevailed in the postwar era. The diverse narratives that the museums promote reflect the

5 Rekishi Kyoikusha Kyogikai, Zoho heiwa hakubutsukan sensa shiryokangaido bukku (Tokyo: Aoki Shoten, 2004), 1-7. 6 Hong Kal, "The Aesthetic Construction of Ethnic Nationalism: War Memorial Museums in Korea and Japan," in Rethinking Historical Injustice and Reconciliation in Northeast Asia: The Korean Experience, ed. Gi Wook Shin, Soon-Won Park and Daqing Yang (New York: Routledge, 2007), 133.

6 purpose to which they were established and the mission they wish to fulfill, at the same time revealing the diverse ways in which various Japanese people have chosen to remember the experiences of the war.

What exactly do these narratives of war history suggest? Some scholars have delineated and circumscribed the most prominent standpoints into types, or categories.

Historian Yoshida Takashi, for example, defined three types of narratives in Japanese war museums: first are the museums that glorify or romanticize the war effort and the deceased Japanese soldiers; second are the museums that promote strong anti-war messages; and third are museums that avoid evaluating the war in order to satisfy both

7 critics and sympathizers of Japan's wartime past. Similarly, Hein and Takenaka, in their aforementioned study, suggested that some museums "unabashedly celebrate military actions," others "reject the legitimacy of war altogether and condemn World War II," and

8 finally a third set "limit[s] war-related exhibits to uncontroversial aspects." Indeed, it is valuable to observe and establish the differences in types of war museums in this method; yet, conceptualizing them within confined categories proves to be severely limiting, as the variation between each site can be subtle and nuanced. Perhaps a more appropriate way to map out and organize the various museums is by plotting them on a linear spectrum (Image 1.1) . The far ends of the spectrum culminate in antithetical narratives that portray the remembrance of the war: the first and second types as defmed by Tanaka,

and Hein and Takenaka. The third type of museums marks the center point: those that try

to remain neutral in their judgment by avoiding sweeping statements about the Asia-

7 Takashi Yoshida, "Whom Should We Remember? Japanese Museums of War and Peace," Th e Journal of Museum Education 29, no. 2/3 (2004) : 16-17. 8 Hein and Takenaka, 66-68, 75. What "uncontroversial aspects" exactly entails will be discussed later in this chapter.

7 Pacific War in general. Adopting this spectrum model allows us to account for the finer distinctions in their narratives, and avoid placing the sites into strictly demarcated categories.

The left end of the spectrum, as specified above, is populated with museums that emphasize Japan's role in the war as the aggressive perpetrator; that is, as the antagonist that wrongfully invaded and colonized various regions in East Asia, administered them under a violent, tyrannical rule, and committed heinous war crimes and atrocities. The war itself is often referred to as the Fifteen-Year War or the Asia-Pacific War in their

exhibitions. Such nomenclatures capture the broad time period between the Manchurian

Incident of 1931 and Japan's surrender to the Allied Powers in 1945. These museums

take an apologetic stance on Japan's involvement in the war by recognizing its culpability

and status as the perpetrator. They tend to hold the Japanese wartime administration and

military responsible for the root causes of the war and Japan's ultimate defeat. Moreover,

they place heavy emphasis on the continued promotion of peace in Japan and the world in

hopes that the same crimes and mistakes will never again be repeated. Their most ardent

enemies are the Japanese right wing and conservatives that condemn the presented

historical perspective as masochistic, unpatriotic and unhealthy, especially for the

education of Japanese youth. The narrative, the objectors insist, wrongfully depicts Japan

as the chief perpetrator of evil, and fails to instill a sense of pride and strong national

identity among the Japanese.

On the opposite end to the right of the spectrum lie war museums that glorify

Japan's involvement in the war, eulogize Japanese soldiers and the war dead, and

downplay the aggressive nature of Japan's colonial conquest. The war itself is often

8 referred to as the Greater East Asia War, the term used by Japan's wartime idealists. Such a take on war history has prompted Japanese leftists and Asian nations, especially China and South Korea, to label these war museums as neo-nationalistic, and as a dangerous harbinger that may point to Japan's remilitarization and revival of imperialist tendencies.

Through the glorification of war, these museums attempt to invigorate patriotic sentiments among visitors, in particular by targeting the younger generations. The central narrative often justifies Japan's "advancement"-instead of "invasion" or

"colonization"-as a virtuous mission that intended to oust Westerncolonialists and establish a Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere for the benefit of all Asian peoples.

Moreover, the narrative claims that the postwar independence movements that erupted across Asia, which resulted in a number of newly formed states, owed to Japanese military infrastructure and knowhow. As such, some museums have even proclaimed that the war was in some ways a victory for Japan, since its involvement ultimately freed East

Asia from the grasps of the West. Some scholars remark that Japanese youth visiting such

9 museums come out thinking that Japan had actually won the war.

The midpoint of the spectrum is designated as "neutral" war museums. These

sites neither emphasize the aggressive nature of Japan's campaign, nor attempt to glorify

its wartime valor. Instead, they tend to focus their exhibitions on a domestic location,

demographic or time period that pertains to the war-"uncontroversial aspects" as described by Hein and Takenaka-and forgo contextualizing these themes in the broader

implications of the conflict abroad. The most common aspect that the neutral museums

take up is the victimization of Japanese citizens at the home front. The war is termed to

9 Yoshibumi Wakamiya and Tsuneo Watanabe, "Yomiuri and Asahi Editors Call for a National Memorial to Replace Yasukuni," Japan Focus, Feb 14, 2006, http://www.japanfocus.org/-Watanabe-Tsuneo/2124.

9 suit the specific subject that is being discussed: For example, in a museum that recounts the stories of Japanese orphans, it is referred to as the "Pacific War" to contextualize their victimization in the war against the Allied Powers. Withholding a definitive stance on

Japan's wartime conduct can be interpreted as a deliberate strategy that the museum curators apply in an effort to protect themselves from the vicious debates and storms of criticism that their counterparts at the spectrum's poles have experienced traditionally. By concentrating on narrow topics and deferring from presenting a grand narrative on the war, they wish to satisfy both the leftist and rightist blocs. Despite the fact that these museums have sought to remain "neutral," however, they have nonetheless attracted voices of disapproval and opposition precisely for their neutrality and ambiguity.

Opponents argue that neutrality fails to offer anything meaningful to the discourse on war history, as it refrains from taking a definitive or conclusive standpoint on the matter.

There are numerous war museums in Japan today. Instead of surveying all or most

of these museums, it is more beneficial to select and focus on a few notable sites that

offer a decent representation of the spectrum model that I have outlined here. A fair

number of museums will be discussed throughout this study: large and small, famous and

less known, and representing various points on the spectrum. In the following pages, I

offer a short introduction to three significant sites in order to paint a general landscape of

war museums: Osaka International Peace Center (hereafter "Peace Osaka"), YiishUkan

War Memorial Museum, and National Showa Memorial Museum (also known as

"Showakan"). The policies, missions and socio-political histories of these three museums,

in addition to others, will be drawn upon throughout my analysis.

10 Th ree Museums: Peace Osaka, Yushiikan and Showakan

Three museums in particular will play a central role in this study. Each site serves as an exceptional representation of the left, right and center points-Peace Osaka,

Yushiikan War Memorial Museum and National Showa Memorial Museum, respectively--of the spectrum model. It is my hope that their introductions will present the reader with a general overview of the landscape of war museums in Japan.

Furthermore, it must be noted that the following portraits reflect the present state of the museums: what they look like today. We will delve deeper into their histories later on as we begin to explore them in more depth and detail. I will draw upon museum pamphlets, catalogs, websites and my own experiences visiting the sites in order to substantiate the

10 descriptions.

Peace Osaka, located within the grounds of Osaka Castle in Morinomiya, Osaka, is a museum that is publicly administered by the municipal government of the city of

Osaka. It is housed in a modem architectural complex, and boasts a variety of exhibition rooms, theater, reference library, lecture hall and seminar rooms that are open to public use. There are three permanent exhibition rooms: one that focuses on wartime Osaka and the air raids it endured; another that attempts to capture Japan's war of aggression in

Asia; and a third that surveys war and peace in the modem day. The museum's mission

statement declares: "The Osaka International Peace Center is conceived in memory of

Osaka's wartime victims and as an instrument to set forth new, regional support for the

11 cause of peace." Moreover, it states, "we [the Japanese people] shall not forget that

10 I was able to visit a number of war memorials, monuments and museums across Japan in the summer of 2013, through the Williams College Class of 1945 World Student Fellowship. 11 Peace Osaka, A Guide to the Exhibition: OsakaInter national Peace Center. English version of official museum pamphlet. Also available online at http://www.peace·osaka.or.jp/pdf/pamphlet_en.pdf.

11 Japan was responsible fo r the great hardships suffered by the peoples of China and other

Asian-Pacific region[s]."12 Peace Osaka attempts to render the Asia-Pacific War comprehensively by including all fronts in which Japan fo ught, spanning from North to

Southeast Asia, Oceania and the Pacific. Inevitably, thisresults in a lack of depth, but allows fo r extensive breadth. It ultimately presents a grand narrative of the Asia-Pacific

War that views Japanese wartime conduct as oppressive, militaristicand unjustifiable.

The first exhibition room chronicles the lives of Osaka citizens during the war, fe aturing air raids as a central theme. Although the content of this exhibition ostensibly concerns domestic life at the home front, its introductory panel opens with a statement that reads: The "Japanese people were responsible for having caused great hardships in the peoples of Asian and Pacific regions, the battlefields of the Fifteen Year Warwhich ended in August 15, 1945."13 Placing such an assertion at the beginning of the exhibition emphasizes the importance of historical context: although the people of Osaka suffered at home, they must not forget Japan's role in the war abroad. The second, larger exhibition room covers the Asia-Pacific War, beginning with the Manchurian Incident of 1931, through Japan's colonial expansion into Asia, and ending with Japan's surrender in 1945.

A great emphasis is given to the warcrimes that the Japanese army committed throughout the war, including the bombing of Shanghai, the Nanjing Massacre and the forced labor

of Koreans. Visceral photographs, artifacts and replicas thatrelate Japanese aggression

and brutality dominate the exhibition space. Other fronts, such as Southeast Asia and the

Soviet Union, are also addressed. Death dominates the exhibition. Japan's utter and

miserable loss is stressed at its conclusion, pointing to the senselessness and futility of

12 Visit to the museum, July 2013. Quote taken fromexhibition's English translation. 13 Visit to the museum, July 2013. Quote taken from exhibition's English translation.

12 war. The purpose behind Peace Osaka can therefore be defined in three points: to juxtapose the Osaka air raids with Japan's role as aggressor in the war, to admit to the

wrongdoings of the wartime state and army, and to firmly oppose the future use of war

fo r the promotion of everlasting peace. Drawing upon these observations, I situate Peace

Osaka to the far left of the spectrum of Japanese warmuseum s.

Yushiikan War Memorial Museum is located within Yasukuni Shrine in Kudan,

Tokyo. Yasukuni, which the Meiji Emperor commissioned in 1869, enshrines Japanese

soldiers who have died since the Boshin War (1868), and immortalizes them as divinities

14 by virtue of Shinto rites. Japanese war criminals who were indicted at the International

Military Tribunal for the Far East (1946-1948), which Allied Powers convened in Tokyo,

are also immortalized in the shrine since 1978. Neighboring countries have condemned

this enshrinement of war criminals, especially fo llowing visits made to the shrine by

Japanese politicians-including multiple prime ministers-as an unthinkable affront to

those who were victimized in Japan's war of aggression. The Yushiikan War Memorial

Museum, which claims to be the oldest war museum in the nation, was established within

the shrine's grounds in 1882 albeit undergoing several hiatuses and reconstructions due to

natural disasters and wars throughout its long history. Yfishiikan has drawn attention and

criticism for its particular portrayal of Japan's involvement in the war. Its exhibition

presents the war as a glorious aspect of Japanese history, prompting critics to label it as

nee-nationalistic and right wing. The mission statement declares: "Yushiikan is a

museum to inherit [ ...] records of enshrined divinities of Yasukuni Shrine by displaying

14 Shintoism, or the "way of the gods", was the state religion of Japan during the war. Shinto customs and practices were deeply embedded in wartimeJapanese thought and culture in which the Emperor of Japan was revered as a divine being. Extraordinary locations, natural environments, or deceased people can be worshipped as deities in Shintoism. The Boshin War was a major civil war that was fought between the Tokugawa Shogunate (the samurai class) and imperial forces wishing to restore sovereigntyto the emperor. The war ended in victory for the imperial forces, drawing centuries of rule under the samurai system to a close.

13 15 their historically important wills and relics." The stated "relics" include soldiers' personal possessions, uniforms, letters, weapons (the most common are Japanese swords), and larger displays including warplanes and machines. The museum also honors the

"sincerity of enshrined divinities who devoted themselves to build 'a peaceful nation'

[ ...] [and] dedicated their precious lives fo r their loving motherland, hometowns and families." Finally, the museum visitors are expected to "associate with and [ ...] learn fr om high-principled people," which presumably points to the Japanese people-thought to be descendants of god in the Shinto fa ith-showcasing a strong sense of

16 ethnocentricity that saturates the presented narrative.

The descriptions ofthe "Greater East Asia War" reveal an underlying patriotism that pervades Yiishiikan's central narrative. Japan's "advancement" into East Asia is described as a civilizing mission meant to help the backward-looking Chinese and

Koreans, and to liberate them from the grasps of Western imperialists. Crimes and atrocities that the Japanese military committed are never acknowledged; instead, the exhibition claims that "perfect care was taken to secure the safety of residents, and

17 historical and cultural monuments" in the region. For example, only one short paragraph is included fo r the "Nanking Incident"-commonly known as the "Nanjing

Massacre" or "Rape ofNanjing" carried out by the Japanese army in 1937 and claiming up to 300,000 Chinese lives-where Japanese soldiers "were to maintain strict military discipline and that anyone committing unlawful acts would be severely punished." Such an explanation implies that a large-scale massacre could have never occurred, owing to the superior military discipline of the Japanese army. The war against the United States is described primarily as a defensive one; that the U.S. triggered the war through oil

15 Yiishiikan, Yiishiikan War Me morial Museum. English version of official museumpamphlet. 16 Yiishiikan, Yiishiikan War Memorial Museum. 17 Visit to the museum, July 2013. Quote taken from exhibition's English translation.

14 embargoes and unequal trade treaties, and that Japan's efforts to avoid conflict were dashed by Washington's disinterest in peace. Furthermore, the attack on Pearl Harbor is justified as an inevitable, defensive mission that rightfully halted U.S. encroachment into

Japanese territory. The Battle oflwo Jima is praised as a military miracle, where the grossly outnumbered Japanese inflicted heavy casualties against the vast number of invading U.S. forces. The list goes on. Yiishiikan can be characterized as a museum that unabashedly glorifies Japan's involvement in the war by honoring the heroism of

Japanese soldiers, and maintaining a patriotic view on war history. It will be appropriately drawn upon as a site that represents the far right of the spectrum of war museums in Japan.

Located within walking distance of Yiishiikan is the National Showa Memorial

Museum, or Showakan. Showa denotes the period between 1926 and 1989 under the reign of Showa Emperor Hirohito. The museum's exhibition, reference library and audio- visual media rooms chronicle this period with an emphasis on the Asia-Pacific War.

However, rather than presenting a narrative of the war in general, Showakan fo cuses primarily on civilian life in Japan in the Showa era. As stated in its mission statement, the museum's "objective is to collect, store and exhibit historical data and information that is related to the hardships of citizens' life [ ...] during and after World War II, and provide

18 an opportunity fo r future generations to know about these hardships." A prominent citizens' organization, in collaboration with the national government, established the museum in 1999. The Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare, a branch ofthe government, currently administers the site.

18 Showakan, Showa-kan: We Convey the Life of Japanese During and After World War II. English version of official museum pamphlet. Also available online at http://www.showakan.go.jp/pdf/showakan_en.pdf.

15 The museum's two-floor exhibit narrates a period from 1935 through the postwar recovery in the 1950s. The exhibition space is divided into a number of sections, with each section representing a time period within the Showa era. A given segment chronicles the period in question through audio-visual material and artifacts, the most common being people's attire, posters, popular fo ods, photographs, video fo otage, statistical graphs and interactive stations. For example, the section on the Pacific War period (1941-

1945) displays the following material: air raid attire and gear; wartime propaganda posters; fo od served in the wartime household; video fo otage and images of bombed cityscapes; a statistical graph comparing the number of civilian deaths in prominent cities; and a life-sized bomb shelter replica. In contrast, the section on the immediate postwar era and U.S. occupation (1945-1950) exhibits: popular attire of city dwellers; posters encouraging reconstruction; fo od rations served to civilians; video fo otage of the occupation; statistical data showing factory wages by gender; and a replicated manual water pump. By conveying visual and concrete change between these periods, viewers experience a sense of movement through time fr om before and during, to after the war.

Unlike Peace Osaka and Yiishiikan, there is little mention of soldiers, battles and the imperial conquest abroad in Showakan's exhibition. It revolves solely around the experience of Japanese civilians living in wartime Japan. Moreover, Chinese, Korean,

Taiwanese and other Asian nationals who were fo rcibly incorporated into Japan's imperial system areconveniently excluded fr om the narrative. This was presumably an attempt to quiet dissenting voices fr om radical, ethnocentric, nationalist organizations, which tend to carry out lobbying activities with much enthusiasm and intensity.

Moreover, the museum portrays Japanese civilians as victims of the war, and never as

16 perpetrators. It paints them as unfortunate victims who were dragged into war by a tyrannical leadership, whilehonoring and empowering them as courageous heroes who endured a tumultuous era. Some scholars have termed thisthe "victim-as-hero" narrative.19 Whereas Yiishiikan immortalizes the soldiers who fought selflessly for the defense of their nation, and Peace Osaka exposes the vile nature of war, the perspective that Showakan puts forth is that of the average civilian's heroism and resilience in surviving the Showa period. To the curators, coping with the war at the home front was as noble an act as fighting at the frontlines of battle. The National Showa Memorial

Museum is placed at the center point of my spectrum model, as it deliberately sidesteps taking a position on the larger implications of Japan's involvement in the Asia-Pacific

War.

The above introduction to the three sites paints a general landscapeof war museums in Japan. As mentioned earlier, Peace Osaka, Yiishiikan and Showakan represent the three main points that lie on my spectrum model; however, I must stress that a variety of sites populate the space in between, and these museums will also be referred to frequentlythroughout the project. It is my hope that thisbrief introduction of the three museums has shown that there exists in Japan a number of divergent narratives of remembrance; and that my readers have been able to envision the spectrum model into which these various museums and their narratives can be organized. The following

chapters will provide detailed analyses of the socio-political histories behind these war

museums, which go beyond the current state of museums as described in their descriptions above. I now preface the final-and perhaps most crucial--componentof

19 James J. Orr, Victim as Hero: Ide ologies of Peace and National Ide ntity in Postwar Japan (Honolulu: Universityof Hawaii Press, 2001 ).

17 this study: the hypothetical war museum that allows us to consider the practical limitations, obstacles and possibilities of curating such a site in Japan today.

Th e New War Museum: Sh in-Senso Hakubutsukan

The hypothetical war museum is in essence a solution that I am suggesting that may prove to be immune to the struggles that its peers in Japan have faced, and continue to face today. Here, I reveal my museum-albeit in its most basic form-before embarking upon my endeavor, as it will assist my readers in grasping the logic and reasoning behind my analysis. The mission behind the museum, as described earlier, is twofold: It must serve as a space where people fromvarious backgrounds can engage in meaningful discourse about the multiplicity and complexity of war history; and it must also withstand the various forces and issues that affect the museum in unwarranted ways,

such as forcible alteration of its content, political exploitation, or transformation into a

site of conflict.

The fundamental aspects of museum policy lie in its mission, principles, and

responsibilities?0 The mission has been defmed above. In essence it is the objective that

the museum is designed to achieve. The principles arethe pillars that make the site a

museum: the target audience, exhibition, displayed material and funding. The principles

for my particular hypothetical museum are outlined as follows: the museum will

primarily be pitched towards adults of all nationalities, with an assumption that they are

entering the museum with some level of preconceived knowledge, notions and

perspectives about the Asia-Pacific War; the exhibition will employ audio-visual material,

including photographs, artifacts, video footage and oral histories; the museum will

20 Michael Belcher, Exhibitions in Museums (Leicester: Leicester University Press, 1991), 8-14.

18 consist of a main, permanent exhibition and supplementary components such as reference library and lecture hall; and finally, a private university will be its sponsor. The responsibilities of the museum lie with its curatorial and managerial staff. In essence, they definehow the museum is curated, operated and administered. The staff will consist of professional historians, museologists and architects. They will hail from diverse national backgrounds and hold differing views and opinions on the war. As the museum is designed to parrythe issues that plague its counterparts in existence today, the hypothetical date of establishment will be in the present day, in 2014. Itwill be located in

Bunkyo-ku, a ward in Tokyo, Japan, and named "The New WarMuseum," or "Shin

Sense Hakubutsukan"in Japanese. Like Rashomon, the New WarMuseum will provide

multiple subjective takes on the war, and place much of the probing, analysis and critical

thinking onto the visitors themselves.

The chapters of this study are determined according to the following

organizational structure. Chapter One will explore the museum's mission. Chapter Two

will examine the exhibition, including the displayed artifacts, physical space and target

audience. Chapter Three will discuss the logistical structure, including the museum's

administrative system, funding base and location. The project will conclude with a

finalized painting ofthe hypothetical museum, a survey of war museums abroad, a note

on my personal experiences with the legacy of war, and finally the implications that this

study poses fo r the future of war museums in Japan.

Why does this all matter? That is a question that perhaps my readers are

beginning to harbor. It is my hope that by the culmination of this study, I will have

convinced my readers of the significanceof warmuseums as a medium of promoting

19 history, the real problems and stumbling blocks that they have faced in Japan, and most importantly, the issues thatcontinue to create ripples between Japan and its East Asian neighbors concerningthe portrayalof war history. Moreover, the speculative methodology is an approach unique to this project. Scholars specializing in war history and museology have pointed out the flaws and problems thatwar museums have faced, but have seldom suggested a tangible remedy to the issue. The imagined construction of a hypothetical museum, at least to my knowledge, has never been attempted in a scholarly study. My museum will hit against seemingly insurmountable walls, stagger over recurring stumbling blocks, and face powerful forces that attempt to challenge its integrity. Though it may seem daunting and frustrating at times, I trust that my readers will findthe imaginative process compelling and worthwhile, and that they will bearwith me throughout the constructive process. With these thoughts in mind, let us now tum to the most crucial element of the New War Museum: its mission, a fitting starting point.

20 Chapter One: The Mission

A New Mission for a New Museum

The mission is in many ways a crucial pillar of a museum. It defines what the particular museum seeks to achieve. Some museologists use terms such as aim, purpose, policy and intent: all point to the same concept. The museum mission typically contains two components. The firstis the subject: who or what is being discussed in the exhibition? The second is the function: what is the museum trying to convey about the subject? The differences in subject and function, and their combinations, are what make each museum unique. Brief descriptions of Peace Osaka, Yushiikan and Showakan have been featured at the introduction of this study. Let us reexamine them but this time with a focus on their missions.

Peace Osaka was "conceived in memory of Osaka's wartime victims and to set forth new, regional support for the cause of peace."1 Moreover, it states: "we shall not forget that Japan was responsible for the great hardships suffered by the peoples of China and other Asian-Pacificregion[s] [ ...] and the peoples of Korea and Taiwan under

Japanese colonial rule."2 Its subjects are both Osaka's civilians and Asia's victims of

Japanese colonization. Through its exhibitions, the museum functions to memorialize-

"conceived in memory of'-the victimization of these peoples and uphold Osaka's investment in promoting peace. Yushiikan promises to "honor the meritorious service and illustrious memories of glorious spirits [eirei], and to illuminate the realities of the period

of modem history which these fallen heroes treaded."3 The subject is the Japanese war

1 Peace Osaka, A Guide to the Exhibition: OsakaIn ternationalPeace Center. 2 Peace Osaka. A Guide to the Exhibition: OsakaIn ternationalPeace Center. 3 Tadashi Yuzawa, "Goaisatsu," in Yiishiikanzuroku, ed. Yasukuni Jinja (Tokyo: Yasukuni Jinja, 2000), II. Cited in Hiroshi Nitta, "And Why Shouldn't the Japanese Prime Minister Worship at Yasukuni? A Personal

21 dead, or fallen soldiers, apotheosized by Y asukuni Shrine. The function is to honor and glorify their services during the war, and to present their heroism and benevolence as

"realities." Finally, Showakan is a "facility whose objective is to collect, store and exhibit historical data and information that is related to the hardships of citizens' life, including the bereaved families [ ...] and provide an opportunity for future generations to know about these hardships."4 Therefore, the subject that Showakan features is the lives of

Japanese citizens during the Showa era; the function is to educate future generations (i.e., the visitors) about thehardships theyendured. It is also worth noting that the didactic function is fairly common amongst missions in a variety of types of museums. The three distinct missions as posed by Peace Osaka, Yushlikan and Showakan show that they contain elements that make each site unique, whether it be subject exhibited or the

function fulfilled.

My imagined museum will be grounded in a mission that contains aspects that

none of the war museums in Japan possess today, including the sites touched upon above.

Japanese war museums are typically concernedwith pursuing and conveying one subject

that is seen as most significant, and presented in a single narrative taken for objective

truth. Yushlikan is an exceptional example. It portrays Japanese soldiers as saviors who

liberated Asia from Western colonialism, offering this interpretation as the one and only

reality; the "correct" way to make sense of the war. If an individual who had no

knowledge of the Asia-Pacific War visited Yiishlikan, he or she would capture only this

singular view of the war experience. As mentioned earlier, some observers have beheld

Japanese school children go into Yiishlikan and come out believing that Japan had

View," in Yasukuni, the War Dead and the Struggle fo r Japan 's Past, ed. John Breen (New York: Columbia University Press, 2008), 134. 4 Showakan, Showa-kan: We Convey the Life of Japanese During and After World War II.

22 actually won the last war.5 Certainly, this particularindividual would fail to grasp the multiple subjectivities and angles that make war history an intricate subject.

What if thereexisted a museum that gathered a number of narratives and aspects of the war experience? A museum with a purpose to demonstrate that such a cataclysmic event could not possibly be interpreted from one standpoint or narrative? My imagined museum will attempt to put forth an entirely new approach to exhibiting war history. In essence, it will offer an antithetical method to that of propagating a one-sided narrative of a single subject. Instead, the mission of my museum will be:

The New War Museum (Shin-Senso Hakubutsukan) is an institution that introduces new ways to study the history of the Asia-Pacific War. It researches, collects and exhibits artifacts from the war on multiple fronts, and contextualizes them in a variety of standpoints, aspects and subjective narratives. The Museum aims to assist its visitors in realizing that the complexity and multiplicity of experiences make it impossible to capture "war" through a single lens; that a single artifact on display can provoke entirely dissimilar interpretations among various people; and thatpursuing a single "truth" or "reality" is a narrow-minded and unproductive approach to contemplating history.

The purpose of my museum is fundamentallydifferent in a number of ways from the war museums extant in Japan today. Its subject embraces a variety of players involved in the

Asia-PacificWar, both in Japan and abroad; it functions not to promote a particular narrative, but multiple narratives, in order to stimulate visitors into critically thinking about war history and the ways it has conventionally been presented in museums. The

New War Museum attempts to offer as many interpretations of the war experience as possible into one site, recognizing and appreciating history as a multiplex discipline.

Let us returnto my spectrum model of Japanese war museums that I devised

earlier for the purposes of topographical organization. The New War Museum aims to

5 Wakamiya and Watanabe, "Yomiuri and Asahi Editors Call fo r a National Memorial to Replace Yasukuni."

23 remain "neutral" in its interpretation of the war, but unlike Showakan, which does so by focusing on a particular subject and thereby limiting its breadth in narratives, it will do so by taking on a variety of subjects and exploring multiple interpretations of the war experience. In other words, I aim to introduce a museum that attempts to tackle the very act of exhibiting through an original method. It is my hope that my model will impart how war museums in Japan are far too focused on one side of the story; the one and only

"truth." Why not offer multiple narratives, and leave it up to the viewers to reach their own unique interpretations and conclusions about the exhibition, and about the war?

Because the very act of exhibiting history is being tackled through a method that is

unique among the landscape of Japanese museums, my New War Museum cannot be

plotted on the spectrum model. Its uniqueness rejects the spectrum altogether. The New

War Museum must assume its place as the Rashomon of Japanese war museums. Visitors

who exit the exhibitions will have experienced a similar, perplexing sensation that the

viewers of Rashomon encountered upon finishing the film.

In fact, there does exist a site that, to a limited extent, resembles the concept of

my ideal museum: Peace Osaka. Although Peace Osaka is left-leaning in its interpretation

of Japan's role in the war, the breadth of narrativesthat are included in its exhibitions is

substantial when compared to its counterparts. Three exhibition rooms tackle distinct

themes about the destruction of Osaka (Exhibition A), the Fifteen Years War, or Asia

Pacific War (Exhibition B), and ongoing conflicts around the world in the present day

(Exhibition C). Exhibitions A and B offer both the victimization of Japanese civilians at

the home front, and the perpetration of war abroad by the Japanese army. Visitors are

presented with the fact that Osaka's citizens were not the only victims of the war, and

24 that Japan's wartime enemies and imperial subjects also suffered throughout the colonial conquest. Through these two exhibition rooms, the Japan-as-victim interpretation is exposed as being far too one-dimensional. Peace Osaka's approach demonstrates its efforts in presenting multiple narratives of the war experience; a course that neither

Showakan nor YushUkan attempt to take. My ideal museum will go furtherby offering additional subjects and aspects that Peace Osaka lacks, such as the experiences of

Japanese soldiers, enemy combatants and non-Japanese Asians who lived in wartime

Japan. These specifics on how I will go about doing this will be discussed in more detail in Chapter Two.

Stipulating a mission for an imagined museum is only the firststep to devising a realistic and complete proposal. How might I uphold such a mission in the real world? In order to answer this question, we must tum again to the sites in existence today. By emulating the ways in which museums have successfully carried out their missions, I can begin to piece together the greater puzzle of the New WarMuseum, and visualize its

establishment in a pragmatic setting. Moreover, it is important to consider not only the

cases of success, but also those of failures. I see Peace Osaka as an exemplary site for its mission and approach to exhibiting war history. Unfortunately, however, Peace Osaka

must be deemed a case of failure when it comes to carrying out and sustaining its mission.

I would now like to examine the site more closely, in order to gauge and steer clear from

its inherent weaknesses and vulnerabilities.

25 Th e Demise of "Exhibition B"

Peace Osaka is a compelling site to examine for the purposes of formulating my own museum. While the museum has a powerfulconcept, it also has detrimental flaws; in fact, there exist maj or weaknesses that uncover vital lessons on the art and practice of museum management. Because of these imperfections, Peace Osaka has struggledto maintain autonomy and integrity, and therefore uphold its mission. The previous section outlined the mission of the New WarMuseum. This section will explore the difficulties of sustaining such a mission by drawing upon both the history and the current state of

Peace Osaka.

The Osaka InternationalPeace Center (Osaka Kokusai Heiwa Senta), or Peace

Osaka, was established in 1991 as the frontrunnerof left-leaning war museums, commonlyreferred to as "peace museums." The prefectural and municipal governments

of Osaka planned, constructed and funded the museum, and they continue to manage the 6 site today. Although at the core of its content are the narratives of the city's citizens at

the home front, these themes are contextualized within the larger framework of Japan-as

perpetrator of the Asia-Pacific War. Where Showakan focuses only on the victimization

of city dwellers in Tokyo, Peace Osaka adds a significant layer by elucidating upon why

Osaka's civilians had to suffer air raids to begin with. Why did the Allied Powers bomb

Osaka, anong other maj or cities? The extensive exhibition on the Asia-Pacific War

answers this question. The finalpart of the exhibition explores the dangers of war

particularly nuclear warfare-in the present and future. As its name suggests, Peace

6 Osaka Prefecture is located in the Kansai region of Japan. Its capital is Osaka City.

26 Osaka ultimately conveys the importance of sustaining world peace by learning from

Japan's past mistakes.

The history of Peace Osakais relatively short when comparedto thelikes of

Yiishiikan, which was established before the war. Peace Osaka's original mission, initially proclaimed in 1991, has essentially remained unchanged. Quoted below is an excerpt of the "Prospectus" as declared on its English pamphlet:

In the course of the Second World War, the destructivepower of more than fifty air raids leftmaj or sections of Osaka totally demolished. [ ...] At the same time, we shall not forget that Japan was responsible for the great hardships suffered by the peoples of China and other Asian-Pacific region [sic], the battlegrounds of the Fifteen-YearWar which ended on August 15, 1945, and the peoples of Korea and Taiwan under Japanese colonial rule. Lasting global peace, [ ...] humankind's most fe rvent and elusive aspiration, can be achieved only if the peoples of the world can gather to share and discuss their first-hand experiences of the devastating consequences ofwar. Toward this end [ ...] the Osaka International Peace Center is conceived in memory of Osaka's wartime victims and as an instrument to set forth new, regional support for the cause of peace. [ ...] [It] is hereby established in order for Osaka to actively contribute to the attainment of global peace and prosperity through deepermutual exchange between the peoples of Osaka and the world. 7

Much of the above has been featured and explained in previous sections. Whatmakes

Peace Osaka a unique and beneficial site to explore is its emphasis on the importance of various people gathering to share their experiences of the war; presenting multiple perspectives is a paramount aspect of its aim.

Peace Osaka was one of the firstJapa nese "peace museums" that were established in the 1990s. Following the death ofHirohito, the Emperor of Japan who reigned during the war, in 1989, questions of war responsibility rose as a prominent issue discussed in

7 Peace Osaka. A Guide to the Exhibition: OsakaIn ternationalPeace Center.

27 politics and the media in Japan, as well as across Asia.8 Historians, politicians, curators and the public began to debate the portrayal of such events like the Nanjing Massacre, fo rced laborers, comfort women and other grievances caused by Japan's colonial ambitions. Since the end of the war in 1945, Japan had focused solely on reconstructing the nation and reviving its economy; contemplating war responsibility and making up fo r past wrongdoings was certainly not a priority during much of the immediate postwar era.

But how much longer could the Japanese turn their gaze away from the past? The death ofHirohito, a symbol of wartime Japan, was a prime opportunity and turning point for the Japanese to remove their veil of silence, and begin discussing responsibility and

reconciliation with old foes and victims. It was time to look long and hard at war history, and prove to the world that Japan had truly shed itself of militarismand had been reborn

as a peaceful nation.

This era of critical reassessment can also be attributed to the so-called "textbook

controversy," which first began in 1982. The textbook controversy was sparked when the

Ministry of Education, a branch of the national government, made an attempt to soften

the depiction of Japan's wartime brutality in several history textbooks that were certified

fo r use in secondary education schools. Some alterations, for example, included replacing

"invasion" with "advancement" to describe Japan's expansion into East Asia.9 The

movement to whitewash Japanese aggression in a select number of textbooks persisted

throughout the 1990s and into the 2000s. The fo rce behind the movement lied in right-

wing and ultranationalist groups, most prominently the Japanese Association fo r History

8 Xiaohua Ma, "Constructing a National Memory of War: War Museums in China, Japan, and the United States," in The Unpredictability of the Past: Me mories of the Asia-Pacific War in US.-East Asian Relations, ed. Marc Gallicchio (Durham: London: Duke University Press, 2007), 168. 9 Ma, 156.

28 Textbook Reform (Atarashii Rekishi Kyokasho o Tsuk:uru Kai) led by Tokyo University professor Fujioka Nobukatsu. They lobbied the government to propagate the "affirmative" view of war history, which attempted to justifythe war, rallying the right wing movement fromthe 1980s into the twenty-first century.10 It was also a reactionary pushback against the leftist camp that advocated for apology and reconciliation with Asia's former victims.

The debate on the interpretation of warhistory and responsibility permeated the museum community during this period. In response to the likes of older and right-leaning museums such as YiishCikan and the Chiran Peace Museum fo r Kamikaze Pilots (Chiran

Tokko Heiwa Kaikan) in Kagoshima-a museum that glorifiesthe patriotism of suicide pilots known as the kamikaze special forces-newer left-leaningmuseums such as Peace

Osaka and SaitamaPeace Museum were initiated and constructed beginning in the 1990s.

War museums that were erected duringthis period thus represented a microcosm of the largerdebate on the issue of warresponsibility that swept Japan and the Asian region by storm. Peace Osaka was the frontrunner of the leftist movement opposing those who heralded the "affirmative" view of war history; its mission reflected an attempt to educate

Osaka citizens not on the glory and honor, but the brutality and futility of the war.

Yet, what has been writtenabout Peace Osaka above is set to change entirely; and this momentous change leaves us with clues on how I must structure my museum to withstand revisionist forces. At the time of writing, Peace Osaka is undergoing a

sweeping modification in its founding mission. Its aim never to "forget that Japan was

responsible for the great hardships suffered by the peoples of [ ...] [the] Asia-Pacific

region" is to be removed entirely; and the exhibition on Japan's perpetration of the Asia-

10 Daniel C. Sneider, "The War Over Words: History Textbooks and International Relations in Northeast Asia," in History Textbooksand the Wars in Asia: Divided Me mories, ed. Gi-Wook Shin and Daniel C. Sneider (London: Routledge, 2011), 252.

29 Pacific War, Exhibition B, is anticipating a total expungement. The very aspect of the war that Peace Osaka had vowed to remember is undergoing an amnesia. In March 2013,

Peace Osaka issued a statement that the new mission would be: "To mournthe victims of the Osaka air raids and pray fo r peace; To convey the horrors of war and the importance of peace to future generations."11 The subject is now fo cused only on Osaka's civilians, and the function is to memorialize their suffering and promote peace. In fact, the renewed

Peace Osaka would bear a striking resemblance to Showakan: an Osaka-centric museum that only conveys the victimization of Japanese civilians, and refrains from offering the broader implications. The visitors would only be exposed to the domestic suffering of

Osaka's civilians, and insulated from the context of the war abroad.

The complete renewal is justifiedwith a peculiar pretext; that the exhibitions as they stand now are not suitable for younger, elementary and middle school children, which Peace Osaka has actively targeted. The renewal papers state that the exhibitions in their current state are "too difficult" for them to understand. In order to make the content more appropriate, the curators will remove graphic elements fromthe exhibitions and

implement child-friendly measures, such as lowering items on display and simplifying captions so that younger visitors can see and read them more accessibly. This, however,

is a mere pretext; a fa9ade. There is a conspicuous disconnect between revising an

exhibition to make it more child-friendly, and removing an entire exhibition devoted to

the Asia-Pacific War. The solution to the problem, in other words, is not rational, to say

the least.

11 Peace Osaka, "Peace Osaka tenji rinyuaru koso," OsakaIn ternational Peace Center (March 2013): 2, http://www.peace-osaka.or.jp/news/pdf/pdf20130406.pdf. Translated from the Japanese by author.

30 The renewal plan goes on to state that the exhibitions "have been criticized as

1 being too 'cruel', 'biased' and 'masochistic' (jigyakuteki)." 2 Moreover, it points out that some elements of the exhibitions were removed, altered or revised in the past due to protests pointing out their inaccuracies. Curiously, conservatives and the right wing have traditionally drawn upon terms such as "biased" and "masochistic" to criticize left- leaning war museums. Take anar ticle, for example, fromthe Sankei Shimbun, a conservative newspaper, which described Peace Osakaand its planned renewal in 2013.

The article berated its current exhibitions fo r displaying "fake photographs" (nise shashin), a "distorted view of history" (yugandarekish ikan), and a "narrow-minded

1 ideology" (henkyo na ideorogl). 3 The renewal plan is praised in the article as a righteous modification thatwill "finally normalize the museum, which was known for its masochistic, 'biased exhibitions' ."14 Similarly, in 2000, a right-wing group namedthe

Group to Correct Biased Exhibitions on WarMaterial (Senso Shiryo no Henko Tenji o

Tadasu Kai) condemned Peace Osakafo r its "seemingly intentional falsificationof truth" and described it as the "epitome of the 'masochistic view of history' ."15 Officials of the

Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), the dominant, conservative political party in Japan, have also routinely condemned Peace Osaka as a "center fo r propaganda activities based on politically biased ideology."16 The items that were removed fromthe museum in the

past were in fact due to pressures from right-wing activists who pointed out inaccuracies

in photographs, which depicted Japanese colonial activities, andtheir accompanying

12 Peace Osaka, "Peace Osaka tenji rinyiiaru koso": 1. 13 '"Nankin dai gyakusatsu' tenji tekkyo e: Nise shashin, waikyoku aitsugi Peace Osaka," Sankei Shimbun, September 18, 2013, http://sankei.jp.msn.com/west/west_life/news/13091 8/wlfl3091811140003-n1.htm. 14 "'Nankin dai gyakusatsu' tenji tekkyo e: nise shashin, waikyoku aitsugi Peace Osaka," Sankei Shimbun. 15 Yasuhiko, "'Peace Osaka' no mondaiten," Sensa Shirya no Henka Tenji o Tadasu Kai (2000): 1, http://osaka.nipponkaigi.com/katsudo/p-osaka/. 16 "Research Report on Japanese WarMuseums" (Zenkoku no sensa hakubutsukan ni kansuru chasa hOkokusho) cited in He in and Takenaka.

31 captions. In the late 1990s, for example, four photographs in Exhibition B that allegedly captured Korean laborers in Japan were removed when the activists fo und andprotested errors in their captions. 17

The language used to justify the renewal has a striking resemblance to the rhetoric often usedby the rightist camp. Why is a leftist Peace Osaka undergoing a fundamental transformation that would push it towards the right? Certainly, I must avoid what Peace

Osaka has done if I were to construct a museum withthe necessary autonomy to resist such revisionist forces. The reason behind Peace Osaka's weakness has to do with politics. As stated earlier, Peace Osaka is a public institution. The municipal and prefectural governments of Osaka fund and manage the museum, and civil servants carry 18 out its day-to-day operation. The powerful politicians who hold positions in the city and prefecture determine how Peace Osaka and other public museums are managed. If a left-

leaning mayor or governor is in power, then he or she might support war museums that

convey Japan's perpetration of the war; conversely, a right-leaning mayor or governor

might seek to whitewash Japan's aggression, and instead fo cus only on the victimization

of Japanese civilians or even assert an "affirmative" view of the war.

The imminent change that we are anticipating in Peace Osaka is representative of

fundamental changes in personnel that have recently occurred in Osaka's regional

administration. When Peace Osaka was introduced in 1991, the governor of Osaka was

1 Nakagawa Kazuo, a politician unaffiliated with any political parties (mushozoku). 9 His

political neutrality meant that he was not bound to the traditional liberal or conservative

17 '"Peace Osaka', kagai tenj i o tekkyo e: Ishin memba ra no 'j igyaku' hihan ga gennin?," J-Cast News, February 19, 2013, http://www.j -cast.com/201 3/02/19166012.html?p=all. 18 Hein and Takenaka, 83. 19 City of Higashi Osaka, "Osaka-fu chiji senkyo," City of Higashi Osaka, last modifiedFebruary 29, 2012, http://www .city. higashiosaka.lg .j p/00000025 8 8 .html.

32 parties that are characteristic of Japanese politics. The mayor of Osaka at the time, Nishio

Masaya, was also an unaffiliated politician.20 Their neutrality was imperative to the founding of Peace Osaka as it stands now; as a war museum that showed Japan as both a perpetrator and victim of the Asia-Pacific War. For the next decade, a string of unaffiliated politicians succeeded Nakagawa and Nishio, explaining how Peace Osaka fe igned major alterations throughout its twenty-year history. That is, until Matsui Ichiro and Hashimoto Toru became governorand mayor of Osaka, respectively. Peace Osaka's fate was very much sealed when thesetwo individuals were voted into office in 201 1.

Both Matsui and Hashimoto are known for their reputation as ultranationalist right-wingers. They were the founding fathers of the Japan Restoration Party (Nihon

!shin no Kai), a far-right political party established in 2012 and based in Osaka; Matsui is

Secretary General and Hashimoto is President of the party.21 Some examples of their activities might put their platforms into perspective. Hashimoto has made international headlines for his insensitive remarks on issues concerning Japan's involvement in the war.

In a recent incident, he claimed: "Anyone can understand that the system of comfort women was necessaryto provide respite for [ ...] men braving their lives under a storm of

22 bullets." Among his other comments is his suggestion that the U.S. Marines stationed in

Okinawa, an islet in SouthernJapan, should make more use of prostitution; U.S. officials have winced at thisremark. His extreme views have not only angered people in Japan and

2° City of Osaka, "Shicho senkyo no kiroku," City of Osaka, last modified September 24, 2012, http://www .city .osaka.lg.j p/senkyo/page/0000002 993 .html. 21 The Japan Restoration Party is that only political party that is headquartered outside ofTokyo, Japan's capital city. Instead, their headquarters are in Osaka City, perhaps explaining their popularity in the region. 22 Toko Sekiguchi, "Osaka Mayor Stirs Anger by Calling Comfort Women Necessary Evil," The Wall Street Journal, March 14, 2013, http:/lblogs.wsj.com/japanrealtime/2013/05/14/osaka-mayor-stirs-anger by-calling-comfort-women-necessary-evill. Comfort women were women who were often forced to accompany the Japanese armyas prostitutes and sex slaves. Although the Japanese government insists that the majority were compensated Japanese prostitutes, a large number were from Korea, China and other colonized territories.

33 abroad, but also prompted the national government to distance itself from the Restoration

Party. It is no surprise then, that Hashimoto immediately took issue with Peace Osaka when he assumed mayorship. He was quoted in 201 1 revealing his plans on initiating a

"developmental renewal that would bring more visitors [to Peace Osaka] and make it an educational site.'.23 Shortly fo llowing this statement, members from the Restoration Party toured Peace Osaka on a number of occasions, reaching the staple conclusion that it was

"masochistic," and therefore needed revisions. Governor Matsui, Hashimoto's right-hand man, also expressed similar concerns with Peace Osaka in an interview on February 14,

2013. He stated: "I've always been saying that [Peace Osaka] was masochistic."24

Although there have also been strong protests from civilian groups, led mainly by left-

leaning academics, to halt the renewal and prevent whitewashing, the plans are taking

place at a steady rate.

In an interim report on the renewal published in 2013, Peace Osaka laid out a

detailed blueprint of the new exhibitions. Although Exhibition A on Osaka during the war,

and Exhibition C on war and peace in the present day have been left virtually untouched,

Exhibition B will undergo a full transition from covering the entirety of the Asia-Pacific

War, to fo cusing only on the destruction of 0saka.25 Mention ofthemes such as

colonization, aggression and perpetration have all but disappearedfr om the proposed

exhibition. Moreover, although the current exhibitions open with a prologue that reminds

the audience of Japan's perpetration of the war, the revised version will only mention the

destruction and suffering of Osaka. After completing its alterations, the Osaka

23 '"Peace Osaka', kagai tenji o tekkyo e: Ishin memba ra no 'jigyaku' hihan ga gennin?," J-Cast News. 24 "'Peace Osaka', kagai tenji o tekkyo e: Ishin memba ra no 'jigyaku' hihan ga gennin?," J-Cast News. 25 Peace Osaka, "Peace Osaka tenji rinyiiaru 'kihon sekkei' chiikan hokoku," Osaka International Peace Center (2013): I, http://www.peace-osaka.or.jp/news/pdf/pdf20130910.pdf.

34 International Peace Center will have become an Osaka-centric war museum, concerned only with the victimization of the city's Japanese citizens.

Although the 1990s saw an intense national debate unfold on the issue of war history and responsibility, causing a great stir in the museum community as well, its ripples can still be felt today in the twenty-firstcen tury. At the time of writing, the renewal plans fo r Peace Osaka are being carried out as planned. By the end of 2014, the museum will have completed its full transformation: its outmoded equipment will be improved with newer replacements; its displays will be adjusted fo r younger visitors; and

Exhibition B as it stands today will have all but vanished, succeeded by a new subject, a new narrative and new displays. Although voices of opposition from civilian groups have not ceased, I speculate that the renewal will reach completion as planned. As we have seen, the reason rather straightforward: the regional government controls Peace Osaka.

The museum enjoys no autonomy or integrity. Its curators have no say in important decisions, even in the major renewal that they are undergoing today; only Osaka's politicians do. Had radicals like Hashimoto or Matsui not been elected, perhaps Peace

Osaka's fate might have changed its course. The demise of "Exhibition B" is a telling example of how ties to state authority (in this case the regional government) can lead to an unwarranted change in a museum's mission.

A Tug-of-Wa r Between State and Citizen

The National Showa Memorial Hall, or Showakan, located in Kudan, Tokyo within the vicinity of Yasukuni Shrine, underwent an exceptionally rigorous process of

preparations and debates. This was due to the fact that it was "the national government's

35 first foray into the semi-permanent memorialization of thewa r."26 Although the museum opened its doors to the public in 1999, twenty years had passed since the Nihon Izokukai, or Japan Association of Bereaved Families, submitted the initial proposal to the national government in 1979.27 The Izokukai, a citizens' group founded in 1947, is a large and well-connected organization comprised of descendants and family members of soldiers who were killed during the war. The group's main activity is to lobby the government in order to receive fm ancial benefits andremunera tion. Its influence in the political arena is substantial, owing to its strong ties with the LDP, which has dominated Japanese politics

28 in the postwar era. The lzokukai oftenterms the war as the "Greater East Asia War,"

which suggests their right-leaning historical views.29 Because of its deep connection with

the war dead, the Izokukai pitched the museum in 1979 as a site to honor and

memorialize the sacrificesthat Japanese soldiers, as well as their bereaved families, made

during the war.

Along with the Izokukai, there was a wide range of stakeholders who had a say in

the planning process the museum, including representatives from Japan's major

newspapers, state officials, corporate executives, academics, librarians, critics and

curators of other war museums. 30 Officials from the Ministry of Health and Welfare, a

cabinet-level ministry responsible for the social welfare of the Japanese people,

represented the national government. Because the proposed museum would be sponsored

26 Kerry Smith, "The Showa Hall: Memorializing Japan's War at Home," The Public Historian 24, no. 4 (Fall 2002): 37. 27 Smith, 41. 8 2 Smith, 42. 29 The group was also heavily involved in the failed movement to reunite Yasukuni Shrine with the state in the postwar: The significance of this stance will be illuminated further in the fo llowing section on Yiishiikan. 30 Nobumasa Tanaka, "Keisho sarenai rekishi: 'Senbotsusha Tsuito Heiwa Kinenkan' (kasho) koso o ou." Sensa Sekinin 1 (January 1994): 28. Translated from the Japanese by author.

36 nationally, the Ministry, and in turn the state, were responsible fo r the execution of the construction process, as well as funding and management. The movement towards the establishment of a national war museum thus began with a collaborative effort between the Izokukai, the Ministry and other involved people. The dialogue was later opened up to the public and the media as well. As the negotiations transpired, however, the Ministry began to exert its power and leverage over the planning process, appropriating the museum proposal altogether. By the time Showakan's plans were finalized, the collaboration between Izokukai and the state had all but deteriorated.

In its initial stages of conception beginning in the late 1970s, theproposed museum was entitled "WarBereaved Children's Memorial Hall." This clearly indicated the initial intent and influence of the Izokukai, which hoped to convey and memorialize the hardships endured by bereaved families. 31 The title also suggested that the museum would focus on war orphans, a symbol of the victimization of Japanese civilians during

(and after) thewar. After several years of discussion among the Izokukai members, however, they ultimately revised their plans andrenamed the museum as the "Peace

Prayer Comprehensive Center" (Heiwa Kinen Sogo Senta). This version was a massive

site that spanned over 200,000 square meters with exhibitions that "included displays of

weaponry and uniforms, dioramas of important battles, and other references to Japan's

modem military campaigns," in addition to the central themes of life at the home front

32 and memorialization ofthe war dead. The Izokukai had ambitiously decided to expand

their initial mission for the museum, which focused solely on victimized children, to one

that attempted to encompass the entirety of the Japanese war from the battlefront to home

3 1 Smith, 44. 32 Smith, 43.

37 front; and from the First Sino-Japanese War (1894-1895) to the Pacific War (1941-1945).

The proposed museum excluded any mention of war crimes, aggression or perpetration, which reflectedhow the Izokukai interpreted the war as a benign mission that liberated

Asia from Western imperialism. The plans for the museum therefore excluded any expressions of regret, apology or reconciliation with the Asian victims of Japanese aggression. The Izokukai fo rmally submitted the plan for the Peace Prayer

Comprehensive Center to the Ministry ofHealth and Welfare in 1984; only to be

summarily rej ected.

The reason behind the rejection was rather simple. As Tanaka Nobumasa, a leftist

academic who was involved in the planning process described it, "the plans were so

overambitious," in terms of physical size, sweeping content and massive costs fo r

construction and maintenance "that even the Ministry was unable to accept it."33 Instead,

the Ministry adopted the initial museum, War Bereaved Children's Memorial Hall, and

by doing so attempted to satisfy the Izokukai fo r the time being. Moreover, by focusing

on the victimization of Japanese children and excluding the broader implications, the

museum would defer taking a definitive stance on the war. For the Japanese government,

this was an imperative measure that had to be taken in a state-sanctioned war museum.

The views expressed in the museum would represent the official views of the Japanese

government:portra ying it as a war of aggression would surely anger the rightist camp,

not to mention the Izokukai, while glorifyingit as a benevolent campaignwould enrage

the leftists, as well as Japan's neighboring states. After much deliberation, the Ministry

unveiled the museum's mission in 1987: "1. To console war orphans and war bereaved

fam ilies; 2. To convey war history to future generations in an objective manner; 3. To

33 Tanaka, 16.

38 seek and promote peace."34 By this point in time, the Ministry and the central government had assumed full control over the museum's plan. Views that were deemed too leftistor rightist, including the initial ideas submitted by the Izokukai, were promptly removed from the proposal.

In 1992, the museum was renamed the "WarDead Peace Prayer Hall," when the

Ministry submitted a revised blueprint of the museum to the diet.35 The revised concept of the museum stated its mission to be the following:

As the fiftieth anniversary of the war draws closer, there are many individuals among the younger generations who are unaware of the reality that more than three million people lost their lives in the war, and that Japanese citizens endured an arduous wartime lifestyle. These individuals no longer feel the need to mournthose who died during the war. The Ministry for Health and Welfare [ ...] has decided to constructthe War Dead Peace Memorial Hall in order to pray for the realization of everlasting peace, a wish strongly coveted by the wardead and their bereaved families. 36

The statement continued: "In addition to being an institution that memorializes the war

dead, it must also convey the suffering caused by the war from the perspectives of the

citizens at the home front, as well as pass on the hardships that they endured during and

after the war to future generations."37 The museum, in other words, would focus solely on the suffering of the Japanese civilians who experienced the war backhome. Historian

Kerry Smith summarized this version of the museum well: "Although designers included

a very small section on China and Southeast Asia under Japanese control [ ...] the Hall

would neither attempt to describe the war's effects outside of Japan nor discuss Japan's

34 Tanaka, 17. 35 Tanaka, 21. 36 Tanaka, 22. 37 Tanaka, 22.

39 responsibility toward any of the nations ravaged by the war."38 The planned WarDead

Peace Prayer Hall was conceptualized around a neutral perspective on the greater context of the war. It limited its subjects to the Japanese war dead and war bereaved; the time period to the Pacific War (1941-1945) and the Occupation (1945-1952); and narratives to daily life and hardships at the home front.

The final change to its title came in 1998; two years afterits construction began in

1996. Ministry officials announced that the museum would be called the "Showakan," or

Showa Hall. The reasons behind the change were obscure. The Ministry only gave justification that "the Showa era's most significantevent was the great war" and thus

"evokes the effort of those who suffered because of the war."39 As Smith observed, "By not mentioning as part of the facility's name the war, the war dead, [or] memorialization,

and appropriating instead an entire era-name as its official label, the Ministry has

40 wrapped the facility ininnocuous language." The doors to the museum opened in 1999,

and to this day Showakan's name and mission have remained unchanged.

The various changes in its mission that Showakan underwent before its

construction can be rather complicated. To recapitulate, the maj or players in the initial

planning process were the Izokukai, a citizens' group, and the Ministry of Health and

Welfare, which represented the national government. The Izokukai preferred a massive

institution that memorialized the Japanese war dead, encompassing fallen soldiers and

civilians, as well as the war bereaved. The Ministry, however, adopted a more modest but

practical museum that focused on war orphans, and later included all civilians at the

home front. From there, the Ministry held sole control over the museum's planning

38 Smith, 45. 39 "Seishikimei 'Showakan' ," Asahi Shimbun, December 16, 1998. 40 Smith, 48.

40 process, andmade a number of key revisions. The final product, Showakan, was a museum that conveyed the lifestyles of Japanese civilians who lived in Japan during the

Showa era.

This account demonstrates how the national government eventually appropriated the museum blueprint, and exerted its authority over the course of the planning process.

Politics were heavily involved. The government's official position was at stake, which explains why the Showakan ultimately refrained from contextualizing the war and taking a definitive stance. Like Peace Osaka, Showakan epitomizes the conflict that often occurs between museum planners and-in this case-the national government. As it stands today, Showakan is the only state-sanctioned, sponsored, funded and managed war museum in Japan. Its "neutral" mission, while it might fe ign violent opposition from both leftistand rightist camps, lacks the depth and stimulation that I hope to achieve in the

New War Museum. Examining Peace Osaka and Showakan has revealed that state involvement-whether regional or national-in the planning process or museum operations may pose more obstacles than benefits.

An Immortal Missionfo r Immortal Heroes

Peace Osaka's concept as a war museum is praiseworthy, but its susceptibility to external pressures is an imperfection that must not be overlooked. In order to faithfully uphold the mission, a museum must possess a level of autonomy and integrity. The maj or impediment that Peace Osaka faced was governmental authority; the same can be said fo r

Showakan. How then, do museums that are not dependent on the state fare? We now tum to the opposite end of my spectrum model: Yiishiik:an War Memorial Museum. Yiishiikan

41 is in many ways Peace Osaka's antithesis. The museum' s concept entails conveying the war experience from the perspective of Japanese soldiers, in order to glorifytheir actions during the war. This is precisely what I am avoiding in my New War Museum;

Yushiikan's approach is far too nationalistic and one-sided for my purposes. On the other hand, however, there are aspects that we can learn from the museum. Like Peace Osaka and Showakan, Yushiikanhad close ties with state authority : the national government.

From its establishment in 1882 until l945, the state controlled the museum, and extensively utilized it as a site of propaganda. When the war ended, however, Yushiikan became a private institution, along with Yasukuni Shrine. It was freed from the

influences of higher authority, and regained independence as a denationalized museum.

The observations that will be made below reaffirmmy reservations about associating my museum with a governmental entity, and highlight the advantages of privatization; that is,

managing the site as a private, independent institution Let us investigate Yushiikan's

history, and bring to light what occurred when the museum severed its ties with the state.

Plans fo r Yushiikan emerged in 1877, during the early Meiji period (1868-1912).

The Meiji period saw the restoration and centralization of power to the emperor, the rapid

modernization of Japan, and an infatuation with advanced Westernculture and society.

As a developing Asian country, Japan desperately hoped to earn recognition as an equal

power amongst the Western nations. The war museum offered one medium through

which to showcase the power and prestige ofthe Japanese army, as was similarly being

done in Westernnati ons. Japanese officialsbegan devising plans fo r a national war

museum to be placed in Yasukuni Shrine, another state-controlled institution that had

42 been established in 1869.41 It was like hitting two birds with one stone: the nation's first war museum would also serve as a component of Yasukuni Shrine, which worshipped

Japanese soldiers as Shinto deities.

Reflectiveof the state's intentions, Yushfikan was originally pitched as a "facility that esteems the virtues of the worshipped deities [in Yasukuni], and displays weapons and relics of the past.'.42 In other words, Yushfikan served two purposes when its doors opened in 1882. The firstfunction was to serve as an extension of Yasukuni; a sanctuary where visitors worshipped the war dead as deities by virtue of Shinto rites. A spiritual element pervaded the museum's atmosphere, as visitors offered veneration for their warrior-ancestors. Artifacts were referred to as holy "relics," and the deceased warriors featured in the museum were described as "deities" (go-saijin).43 The second function was that of a gallery (chi nretsujo ); a site where weapons and machines of war that

Japanese fightersbrought to battle displayed for observation. The exhibited artifacts at this time were from domestic civil wars. Japan had not engaged in major battles or conflicts with foreign powers just yet. At the time of its conception then, Yushfikan amalgamated the aims of both a shrine and museum-Shinto and war history. The state succeeded in conceiving a nationally operated and funded war museum for the firsttime in Japanese history.

It is also important to note that the Shinto faith became the de fa cto state religion aroundthis time during the early Meiji period, when the leaders of the imperial

4 1 Perhaps Japan's emulation of advanced Western cultures explains why the museum's planners commissioned an Italian architect to design Yiishiikan; its original appearance resembled a medieval Italian castle. 42 Yiishiikan, "The History ofYusyukan," Yasukuni Jinja, last modified 2008, http://www.yasukuni.jp/-yusyukan/history/index.html. Translated from theJapanese by author. 43 Yiishiikan, "The History ofYusyukan."

43 government launched a crusade to nationalize the religion. Other faiths such as Buddhism were violently suppressed; all shrines in Japan were converted to Shinto and designated

"sites for the performance of state rites"; and the emperor assumed the title of "priest king," further dramatizing the ethnic myth that he was a descendant of the Sun goddess

Amaterasu, creator of the nation of Japan.44 Because the national government now endorsed Shinto, and Yushlikan was erected within the grounds of Yasukuni, a major

Shinto shrine, the museum's ties with the state became stronger than ever.

As the state became more and more invested in war and imperialism entering the twentieth century, its officials began to realize the museum's potential uses. Emperor

Hirohito proclaimed the "Yushlikan Edict" in 1935, where the museum was officially

recognized as a propagandistic site that the state would utilize to promote themes such as

patriotism, national defense and devotion (sacrificing one's life) to the emperor.45

Yushlikan published a catalog of its exhibitions in 1933, two years into the Asia-Pacific

War, which disclosed a modified mission that reflectedthe wartime atmosphere and the

intentions of the government. The opening statement declared that the museum was

erected as a "pantheon [dendo] that consoles the spirits of the gods [kami;the Japanese

war dead] and hymns their virtues"; in addition, it was a "museum that holds weapons

and other relics of war that inspire the spirit of the Japanese people."46 These aspects of

the museum remained constant with the original mission of 1882. However, the articles

on display were now directly linked to the "god of military arts" (bushin), and they were

intended to motivate visitors to think deeply about the importance of "national defense"

44 John Breen, "Introduction: A Yasukuni Genealogy," in Yasukuni, the War Dead and the Struggle fo r Japan 's Past, ed. John Breen (New York: Columbia University Press, 2008), 12. 45 '"Yushiikan-rei' to wa?," Shimbun Akahata, last modifiedNov 24, 2005, http://www.jcp.or.jp/akahata!aik4/2005-11-24/20051124faq12_0 1_0.html. 46 Yiishiikan, Yushukanyoran (Tokyo: Yiishiikan, 1993), i. Translated from the Japanese by author.

44 (kokubo). Militarism and nationalism became much more prominent and core themes in this version of the mission. Shinto and militarism were further conflated in the rhetoric as well. Shinto gods were now protectors of the Japanese soldier, inspiring Japanese men to enlist inthe military, fight to defend their homeland, and sacrifice their lives fo r the emperor who was himself thought to be a divine being.

Moreover, not only did wartime Yushiik:an exhibit weapons of Japanese warriors, it also began displaying the spoils of war captured fromenemy soldiers. These included banners seized during the First Sino-Japanese War (1894-1895), the figurehead of a

Russian ship fr om the Russo-Japanese War (1904-1905), and Chinese machine guns from the Manchurian Incident ( 1931). They were significant additions to the exhibition, since it marked the inclusion of non-Japanese artifacts fo r the firsttime in the museum's history. The additions were justified because the spoils would convey themight of the

47 Japanese army and commemorate (kinen) their glorious victories. Again, these changes reflected the hopes of the imperial government to promote militarism and nationalism in the minds of the museum's visitors.

Since Yushiikan's doors opened in 1882, its mission was molded in accordance with the interests of the imperial government. When the war erupted in the 1930s, the reins around the museum tightened. Because the state managed, operated and funded

Yushiikan, its mission was summarily revised to emphasize propagandistically the virtues of nationalism and militarism. In many ways, Yushiik:an was subject to the same vulnerability and susceptibility to change that Peace Osaka and Showakan are experiencing today. However, Yushiikan would soon be released fr om the grasps of the

47 Yushukan, Yushukanyoran, 32.

45 state. When the war came to a close in 1945, Yushlikan, along with Yasukuni, became private institutions. This marked the beginning of a new, promising era fo r the museum.

Yushlikan served as a significant site fo r transmitting propaganda during the war.

It is no surprise then that the U.S. Occupation authorities led by General Douglas

MacArthur immediately closed it down and terminated the Yushlikan Edict on September

t 48 11 h, 1945. "State Shinto" was also abolished when U.S. authorities privatized all religious institutions in Japan during the same month; Y asukuni and subsequently

49 Yushlikan were released fr om serving the Japanese government. For the next 35 years unti1 1980, Yushlikan entered a long hiatus, as it symbolized the grave mistakes and defeat of the wartime state; its building would be used as an office fo r a life insurance

50 company. In 1986, it finally reopened its doors to the public as a war museum once again. This time, however, it was a private institution and that was partnered with

Y asukuni Shrine; a wholly diffe rent institution fr om its wartime years. It had completely rid its exhibitions of state propaganda, and returnedto a mission that was reminiscent of the original version from 1882. The postwar mission statement made by Yuzawa Tadashi, the then-Chief Priest of Yasukuni, declared: "It is the mission and chief purpose of the

Yushlikan to honor the meritorious service and illustrious memories of these glorious spirits [eirei], and to illuminate the realities ofthe period of modem history which these

51 fallen heroes treaded." In a recent interview, a shrine priest confirmed to John Breen, a

scholar on Y asukuni studies, that Yushlikan' s "purpose is to honor the memory of

48 Cabinet of Japan, The Prime Minister of Japan, Yasukunijinjafuzoku Yushukan-rei o haishi suru (Tokyo: National Archives of Japan, 1945), http://www.digital.archives.go.jp/DAS/meta/listPhoto?KEYWORD=&LANG=default&BID=FOOOOOOOOOO 000008066&ID=MOOOOOOOOOOOO 1 776661 &TYPE=&N 0=. 49 Breen, "Introduction: A Yasukuni Genealogy," 19. 50 Yiishiikan , "The History ofYusyukan." 51 Tadashi Yuzawa, "Goaisatsu," 134.

46 52 Japanese war dead." Indeed, current exhibitions continue to address the fe atured war

53 dead as "mikoto," the honorific form of"god." To worship the soldiers as deities is the principal mission. The second component of the new mission states that it will "clarify

54 the truth about Japan's modern history." This aspect can be interpreted as a reactionary response to the "peace museums" that emerged in Japan in the 1980s and 1990s (e.g.,

Peace Osaka). Yushlikan attempts to paint its narrative of the war as the sole "truth"; that

Japanese soldiers were not perpetrators and aggressors of the war, but rather benevolent

55 liberators of Asia and loyal defenders of the "Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere."

Moreover, Breen observed that in today's exhibition, there is a complete absence of the

56 enemy, both in narrative and displayed artifacts. He convincingly suggested that this

omission "achieves splendidly [ ...] an amnesia of perpetration, of defeat, and, above all,

57 of the horror ofwar." Such an act represented YushUkan's foray into the greater debate

on war responsibility as the standard-bearer of the rightist, "affirmative" interpretation of

the war.

At first glance, independence from the state does not seem to have affected

Yushlikan substantially. After all, Yushiikan's main aim to honor and glorify the war

dead has remained unchanged before, during and after the war; whether or not it was run

publically or privately. However, this lack of change is the very aspect to which I must

draw our attention. The reason that Yushiikan can continue to portray Japanese soldiers

as heroes, saviors and liberators-as the protagonists-of the war in the present day owes

52 Breen, "Yasukuni and the Loss of Historical Memory," 152. 53 John Breen, "Yasukuni and the Loss ofHistorical Memory," 151. 54 Yuzawa, 2. 55 Greater East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere (Dai To-a Kyoeiken): An imperial, utopian concept devised by the Japanese wartime administration, where East Asian peoples would unite to form a cultural and economic bloc that rivaled the West. 56 Breen, "Yasukuni and the Loss of Historical Memory," 153. 57 Breen, "Yasukuni and the Loss ofHistorical Memory," 153.

47 precisely to the fa ct that it is now a private musewn. In no way does this "affirmative" view of the war adhere to the views of the Japanese state today. The government despite its recent lean towards the right under a more conservative leadership--would never sanction the narrative that is being conveyed within Yiishiikan's current exhibitions.

If, hypothetically, the state had retained control and influence over Yiishiikan, the musewn's mission would have been summarily revised and purged of its blatantly

"affirmative" elements. Aspects of honoring Japanese soldiers as deities and glorifying their deeds during the war would also have been removed. There is substantial reasoning behind this conjecture. Firstly, the separation of church and state, which was enforced by the Occupation in the immediate postwar era, still stand today in Japan. It would be illegal fo r the Japanese government to officially honor the war dead and apotheosize them as gods by virtue of Shinto rites. Secondly, recall the case of Showakan, the only war musewn that is currently endorsed and funded by the national government. I have labeled Showakan as a neutral musewn. Its subject is intentionally fo cused onto Japanese civilians at the home fr ont, and it functions only to educate its visitors of this "neutral"

topic. Japanese officials deliberately took these measures in order to avoid drawing

criticism--domestically and fr om abroad-for presenting a glaringly left- or right

leaning interpretation of the war. In other words, the central government would never

approve of the extremely right-wing narrative presented in Yiishiikan. Therefore, I claim that had Yiishiikan remained a public, state-run musewn, its mission would have been

wholly different fr om that which we are seeing today.

As we have observed, Yiishiikan became a private musewn when the war ended

in 1945. The reason that it is able to promote a heavily rightist take on war history is

48 because it enjoys independence from state authority; whether it be a regional, as is the case with Peace Osaka, or national, as with Showakan. Yushiikan now boasts an autonomy that neither Peace Osaka nor Showakan had to begin with. It has the liberty to propagate its nationalistic, "affirmative" narrative, as long as it keeps its distance from a higher authority that might intervene. Although I will not emulate Yushiikan's approach to exhibiting war history, its logistical characteristics as a private museum do present

58 advantages and teach us a valuable lesson.

Be Waryof the State

When devising plans fo r the New War Museum, I must ponder the points we have

observed in this chapter. My museum will attempt to fu lfillthe fo llowing objective:

encourage a diverse visitor base to appreciate the multiplex characteristics of war history

and engage in productive conversation with one another. In this section, my original

mission was juxtaposed with three prominent museums in Japan. Peace Osaka retains a

commendable approach to exhibiting war history. However, its vulnerability to

government officials who possess the power to press their views onto the museum is a

characteristic that must be avoided. Showakan was appropriated by the central

government, and in order to satisfy the needs of the state, it avoids commenting on the

broader topic of war history. Although Yushiik:an's mission is far too rightist fo r the

purposes of my museum, the autonomy it enjoys today is a favorable aspect that can be

58 Some might argue that Yasukuni Shrine can move to exercise its authority over Yiishiikan, influencing it in unwarranted and unchecked ways. However, I argue that this is a non-issue for Yiishiikan. This is because Yasukuni and Yiishiikan have fully compatible ideals and identical missions: to venerate the war dead. Therefore, Yasukuni would never act upon Yiishiikan to alter the museum in an unfavorable way that would go against their mission. The two institutions in essence are one in the same; they are different means to the same end.

49 emulated. Be wary of the state: this point will be kept in mind when I deliberate and strategize how to fa ithfully carry out the mission of my museum. Now that I have stipulated my mission, let us tackle the imagined museum fr om a new angle. The next chapter on the museum exhibition, which includes the target audience, presented narratives, and the exhibition space itself comprise the second pillar of the war museum.

Conceptualizing these key elements will move us one step closer to envisioning the creation of my museum.

50 Chapter Two: The Exhibition

Target Demographic

We have now reached the most imaginative portion of my project and methodology. In this chapter, I will lay out a blueprint fo r the New War Museum that I envision. I will touch upon key pillars that manifest in successful exhibitions, and add my own modifications to better suit my objectives. This section will also attempt to visualize the imagined exhibit; that is, how the physical space will look. Offering a blueprint for my museum and exhibition will in turn allow us to consider its fe asibility in a real-world setting.

Before designing my exhibition, however, it is imperative that I consider for whom my museum is built: the target demographic. Museums are institutions that are open to the public, and anyone can visit them. More oftenthan not, however, curators and administrators specify a target demographic that they especially wish to attract to their museum. The exhibitions are in turn designed and molded so that they are appropriate and suitable for the audience of interest. For example, as we have observed previously, post-renewal Peace Osaka is determined to attract a younger audience: students on school trips and young children with their fa milies are some groups that Peace Osaka will soon target specifically. In order to provide fo r this younger visitor base, the museum's exhibitions will fe ature displays that are physically placed lower, and captions and descriptions will be revised so that they can be read and understood by children. Drawing from another example, Yushiikan mainly targets Japanese shrine-goers who have honored

1 the war dead at Yasukuni before arriving at the museum. However, interestingly

1 Yiishiikan is located past the Yasukuni's main shrine (hondo), thus impelling visitors to pay their respects to the enshrined spirits.

51 Yushiikan's exhibitions are also lined with captions and explanations translated into

English. This suggests that the museum is also targeting Westeme rs, most likely because it wishes to refute the view often accepted outside of Japan that portrays Japanese

2 soldiers as brutes and war criminals. It is also reasonable to interpret the English translations as a practical measure to attract non-Japanese visitors: Yasukuni Shrine is a popular tourist destination that draws numerous sightseers from abroad. Even this rudimentary analysis shows that curators effectively mold their exhibitions in order to attract and suit the target demographic.

In the broadest sense, the target demographic fo r my proposed war museum is a mature and diverse audience with at least a rudimentary understanding of the Asia-Pacific

War. I say "mature" as in adults, as well students at least enrolled in secondary education.

The concept of the museum may strike as too complex fo r a younger age group below middle school to fully grasp and appreciate. Moreover, individuals with no prior knowledge of the history of the warmight experience utter confusion fr om the multiplicity of narratives, or even gravitate heavily towards one perspective to maintain

consistency in a single narrative. The odds of the visitors having no prior knowledge of

the war is rather improbable, given the centrality and importance of the event not only in

Japan, but around the world. However, I must prevent the phenomenon that some have

observed at Yushiikan, where visitors-more often than not children-with no prior

knowledge come out the museum with an extremely skewed understanding of the war.

The exhibition will thus be presented mainly to those who can comprehend and

2 Interestingly, the exhibition is only translated in English. There are no translations in other languages, notably Korean and Chinese (despite the great number of Korean and Chinese tourists that visit Japan). This may suggest two possibilities: First, that not many Korean and Chinese visit Yasukuni or Yiishiikan, given its controversial nature; and second, conversely, that Yiishiikan does not wish to cater to, or even attract Korean or Chinese visitors.

52 appreciate the mission of the museum, and be able to proceed through it to critically compare their own views with those presented in the museum. It is also beneficial fo r the

museum to attract visitors with a strong, singular view on war history; that is, those who

veer strongly to the left- or right-leaning interpretations of the war. Perhaps the variety in

perspectives will create new insights into approaches of war history fo r these individuals,

motivating them to embrace views other than their own, or at least acknowledge the

multiplicity in historical narratives. Finally, it will be productive ifthe museum prompted

not only Japanese visitors, but also those hailing from fo reign countries (and fo reigners

living in Japan) to visit the site. Specifically, visitors fr om Japan's neighboring countries,

such as China and South Korea where the controversy on war history is especially

pronounced, will be invited to visit the museum. Gathering a diverse group of non

Japanese individuals in the exhibition space is constructive in two ways. First, it allows

fo r discourse within the exhibition to transcend a solely Japanese standpoint, given

people can communicate in Japanese, English, Chinese, Korean or any other mutual

language. As such, the exhibition captions and text will be offered in these languages.

Opinions and thoughts from a non-Japanese voice will likely stimulate discussion; it is

also wholly compatible with the mission of my museum in which showing the other point

of view is a pillar of utmost importance. Second, it will also have a reverse effect on the

non-Japanese visitors, in which they realize or reaffirm that diverse interpretations of war

history do exist in Japan. No matter the political relations between Japan and its

neighbors that have deteriorated over the controversy on war history, it is my hope that

the museum demonstrates how the views of various Japanese people and historiography

are not homogeneous. Narratives in Japan are certainly heterogeneous, and it is

53 imperative that this message comes across to all museumgoers. It is the ultimate objective that by targeting the above audience, visitors will reach--or at least come close to-a mutual understanding that there is no such notion as a singular "truth." The task then, that

I must tum to now becomes: How do I make this vision a reality through the curation of my exhibit?

Artifact versus In terpretation

As museologist Michael Belcher claimed, a museum exhibition is in essence a

3 "medium of communication." He wrote : "The most important and unique characteristic

of a museum exhibition is that it facilitates an encounter between visitor and [ ...] object";

it "provides a controlled contact with the real, authentic obj ect, and this is what it makes

. museum exhibitions so vitally important.', In the context of the war museum, the objects

to which Belcher refers would be the displayed historical artifacts. These include various

types of media, like photographs, weapons ofwar, personal possessions, letters and other

obj ects. My museum will employ a variety of such artifacts; this is the most visceral

method of communication that a curator retains in his or her arsenal.

The question then becomes: How much should the artifacts be "explained" to the

visitors? Should the curator take a proactive approach in contextualizing the displayed

obj ects in certain ways? Or, in the contrary, refrain from imposing particular

interpretations of the artifacts, and allow the visitors themselves to come up with their

own conclusions? This distinction is one of the most significant choices that a curator

3 Belcher, 38. 4 Belcher, 38. By real and authentic, Belcher means that the artifacts are not replicated. Although this is not necessarily of utmost importance fo r historical museums (large displays are usually replicas), it is a significant convention that is often upheld in finearts museums.

54 makeswhen planning an exhibition. In his study, Belcher delineated these two antithetical approaches as "Didactic" versus "Object-oriented" methods. In didactic exhibitions, he wrote, "instructional and educational functions are not leftto the objects themselves but are undertaken by the interpretive media."5 That is, the curator actively asserts his or her voice through"in terpretive media," such as captions and wall labels. On the other hand, object-oriented exhibitions are "reliant upon objects which form the basis ofthe concept, and which take precedence over any form of interpretive media."6 In this approach, analysis is largely leftup to the visitors themselves, and the visceral reactions that the artifacts induce in them. The curator in effect yields his or her control over the ways the audience reaches their conclusions. For my museum, I will attempt to amalgamate these two seemingly incompatible methods. The didactic and object-oriented, when implemented appropriately, can be united to form a powerful and impactful exhibition.

The ultimate aim of the New War Museum is to convey the multiplicity of interpretations that create the concept of war history. In order to do so, each single artifact that is presented in my museum will be accompanied with multiple captions that offer conflicting interpretations. It is impossible to portray warthrough a single optic.

Instead of widening or focusing one lens, my museum aims to include as many diverse lenses as possible in order to demonstrate this concept of narrative multiplicity. Let me illustrate this by providing a few examples. Consider the photograph of Japanese soldiers

5 Belcher, 62. 6 Belcher, 66.

55 7 marching into the city of Nanj ing (Image 2.1). Three captions will accompany the image: The first describes the soldiers as invading aggressors consciously carrying out an imperial conquest; the second portrays them as humble draftees locked in a rigid military structure who were simply following orders from their superiors; and a third explains that they were liberators carrying out a righteous campaign to fr ee Asia of Western influences.

Another example is an image of Japanese civilians employed at a military factory (Image

8 2.2). This photograph might be depicted as an explicit act of supporting the imperial war effort; while another interpretation might paint them as civilians coerced into servitude by an ill-advised militant government. The correspondence between U.S. Generals Thomas

Handy and Carl Spaatz who authorized the dropping of the atomic bomb can be contextualized in contradictory ways as well. The firstcaption will convey the horrors of nuclear warfare and condemn the act as a flagrant war crime; next to it, a second

description will defend its use as a necessary act that eventually saved a tremendous

9 number of lives for both belligerents of the war (Image 2.3). Such a design will convey to the visitors that a single object can be interpreted in vastly dissimilar ways.

As I have hinted previously, the approach is "didactic" in some ways and "object-

oriented" in others. It is didactic because the displayed obj ects are presented through

certain interpretations and preconceived narratives. However, the distinction fr om the

conventional didactic method is that there are multiple explanations that contextualize the

7 "Bild 183: Japanische Truppen bei der Einnahme von Nanking," January 1938, Allgemeiner Deutscher Nachrichtendienst, Zweiter Japanisch-Chinesischer Krieg, Das Bundesarchiv, 183-U1002-502, http://www.bild.bundesarchiv.de/archives/barchpic/view/7844405. 8 "R6d6 busoku ni jyosei teishintai: Gunjyu k6j6 de kinr6 hoshi," June 8, 1944, KK Kyodo News Site, last modified July 7, 2013, http://www.kyodo.co.jp/photo archive/shuusenkinen/attachment/%C2%8Cr%C2%8Eu%C2%8Dh%C2%8Fe%C2%82a%C2%8Bi%C2%9 8j %C2%95o%C2%8Ed/. 9 "Letter Received from General Thomas Handy to General Carl Spaatz Authorizing the Dropping of the First Atomic Bomb," July 25, 1945, Records ofU.S. Air Force Commands, Activities, and Organizations, 1900-2003, National Archives, 542193, http://research.archives.gov/description/542193.

56 object. Visitors are fo rced to consider a variety of interpretations and carefully ponder which resonates most as closest to "reality." The point here, however, is that there is no single narrative that is in fact "closest" to the truth. The viewer must therefore carefully observe the displayed artifact, consider their visceral reaction, cross-examine the various interpretations, and conduct their own analyses to reach unique conclusions. This concept is what makes my exhibition an amalgamation of the didactic and the obj ect-oriented. It benefits from elements of both models.

The types of artifacts selected for the New War Museum are diverse. Media will include photographs, video fo otage, obj ects (e.g., personal belongings, journals and other items), and excerpts from oral histories. All displayed artifacts belong to a specific, momentous event that pertains to the war. These include events such as the Manchurian

Incident (1931), Nanjing Massacre (193 7), the colonization of Korea ( 1910-1945), and the issue of comfort women and forced laborers; militarization of civilians, wartime propaganda, and air raids; the attack on Pearl Harbor (1941 ), the Battle of Okinawa

(1945), and Hiroshima and Nagasaki (1945); and finally postwar events such as the

Occupation (1945-1952) and the Tokyo War Crimes Trial (1946). The core typological structure in which the displayed obj ects will be organized is comprised of these key historical events. These events can be interpreted in conflicting and provocative ways; in other words, I invoked my curatorial authority and deliberately chose the most controversial of historical events that continue to spark debate and disputes in the discipline todays. The reason behind this organizational decision will be explained in more detail in the coming sections.

57 Sp ace

Exhibitions come in many different sizes, appearances and atmospheres. From smaller museums like the Chiran Peace Museum fo r Kamikaze Pilots, to massive structures like the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum, their respective curators and designers make expert use of the exhibition floor in order to execute specific aims. When planning the exhibition, one of the most important aspects that the curator contemplates is how visitors "move." Belcher introduced two factors that dictate how visitors move about

10 space: individual displays and circulation routes. Individual displays have been briefly touched upon above: In essence they are the objects that are displayed in the exhibition.

More specifically, an individual display typically denotes a cluster of artifacts that are organized by theme (e.g., time period, event or artist) and placed in a certain area of the exhibition space (e.g., section of room, wall or pillar). By situating individual displays in particular positions, curators are able to predict and moderate the visitors' circulation routes; that is, the paths which visitors take to proceed around the exhibit space.

The war museums in Japanthat we observed in previous chapters came in diverse fo rms. Let us now take a closer look at how space is physically designed in their exhibitions by exploring the individual displays and circulation routes. Take Peace Osaka,

fo r example. Peace Osaka is divided into three exhibition rooms. Upon entering the

museum, visitors are encouraged to proceed through the rooms in order, from Exhibition

A (Osaka Air Raids), B (Fifteen Years War) andC (Aspirations fo r Peace). Evidently, the

curators are controlling how visitors circulate through the individual exhibition rooms by

prescribing a suggested order. First, they are exposed to the victimization of Osaka; this

view is then challenged within the context of the broader war; and fm ally, the three-part

10 Belcher, 112.

58 installation concludes with a call fo r the continued promotion of peace. As soon as the visitors enter the museum, they have already been guided to go about the exhibitions in a certain sequence.

Focusing on the physical space within each individual exhibition room also demonstrates how visitor behavior is regulated in a precise manner. In Exhibition A, fo r example, the route in which visitors are encouraged to proceed manifests in guiding walls and narrow pathways. Take a look at Image 2.4, a map of Exhibition A. Once visitors enter the room (in the diagram, the entrance is demarcated by the gap under the artifact

"One Ton Bomb and Incendiary Bomb"), a curved partition immediately fo rces them to

11 turn towards the left and into the exhibition space. This opening trajectory ensures that visitors will proceed through the individual displays in the intended clock-wise fashion:

"Fire-Ravaged Ebisubashi-suji Area"; "What were the Osaka Air Raids Like?"; "Records of the Large-Scale Air Raids on Osaka"; "Testimonies by Air Raid Victims"; "Pictures

Drawn by Air Raid Victims"; "Orientation Video"; "Air Raid Damages in Japan"; and so on. The visitors exit the room upon viewing the "DraftOrder" display, located at the far right of the map, which prepares them fo r the next exhibit, Exhibition B. The way in which Room A is designed encourages the viewers to walk through the space in a linear sequence. Belcher designated this style-fairly common in museums-an "arterial" circulation route, in which the exhibition is oriented in a "continuous path, whether

12 straight, angular or curving, which offers the visitor no alternative route." The arterial orientation is most suitable fo r a linear narrative; consequently, its rigidity pressures the

11 Peace Osaka. A Guide to the Exhibition: OsakaIn ternationalPeace Center. 12 Belcher, 112.

59 visitor to move in one direction only .13 The curators retain much control in this type of configuration. They are able to supervise the order in which the audience views and circulates through the individual displays, and therefore the sequence in which information is conveyed.

The next exhibition room is also organized in an arterial fashion. Let us turn to

Image 2.5, a map of Exhibition B. Upon entering the room beginning with the "Prologue," viewers are given one route to circulate around the exhibit. The sequence commences with China, courses through Siberia, Korea, South East Asia, Pacific Region, Okinawa,

Hiroshima, Nagasaki and ends with Auschwitz.14 Again, the curators retain much authority over the exhibition space, and the order in which the audience cycles through the displayed material. The space is designed so that viewers naturally move in a linear, clock-wise direction to circulate throughthe space.

Now fo r something slightly different: Exhibition C, as seen in Image 2.6. The visitors' circulation route is not governed in any particular way in this exhibit.15 The exhibition is situated in a much more open space when compared to the other installations, literally with higher ceilings and a larger floorarea. The spaciousness rids the exhibition of a guided movement pattern. Moreover, there is a lack of narrow pathways and leading partitions that regulate viewer circulation. Belcher would designate this type as a "block" design: a "non-system in that it provides free random circulation, dependent on the whim of the visitor or the attraction power of individual exhibits. This self-directing space is conditioned only by the location of the entrance/exit."16 Examining its floormap, we

13 Belcher, 112. 14 Peace Osaka. A Guide to the Exhibition: OsakaIn ternational Peace Center. 15 Peace Osaka. A Guide to the Exhibition: Osaka International Peace Center. 16 Belcher, 113.

60 notice that the individual displays in Exhibition C are set up in a seemingly arbitrary fashion, inviting visitors to choose how they proceed through the space.17

Exhibition A and B are engineered to convey specific historical narratives to the audience, which explains their arterial design. Curators are inclined to communicate a linear historical narrative with a linear exhibition; the level of control allows them to carefullycraft the message that is imparted to the audience. Exhibition C, on the other hand, deals with a broader theme on the prospects of war and world peace in the future.

Visitors are encouraged to contemplate and speculate how they themselvescould contribute to the achievement of everlasting peace. Appropriately, the exhibition lacks a rigid circulation route. Examining the way space is designed in Peace Osaka thus demonstrates how its curators employed different methods and models, and possessed varying degrees of control in each exhibition room and the museum overall.

Curators have access to an infinite amount of possibilities when designing exhibition space. Arterial and block exhibitions demonstrate two (antithetical) models of

exhibition design. Belcher provided a number of possible circulation patterns in addition to these two. Alternative patterns arevisible in other war museums. For example, the

Exhibition and Reference Library for Peace and Consolation (ERLPC), a small museum

located in Shinjuku, Tokyo, is arranged in what Belcher described as "corridors." As seen

in Image 2. 7, once the visitors are oriented in the narrow pathway, they proceed into an

exhibition space that is partitioned into three corridors, or smaller chambers. These

17 The Y -shaped object that dominates the center of the exhibition is not a wall partition. It is a table that holds a variety of primary sources pertaining to the war (e.g., magazines, picture books, photo books, etc.) where visitors can sit down and look through them. There is also a section on the table where visitors are encouraged to write down their reflective thoughts and messages on the exhibition, and on the themes of war and peace. It should be considered an individual display on its own.

61 corridors explore different themes: "Soldiers," "Prisoners of War," and "Repatriation."18

Showakan also makes use of corridors, as seen in Image 2.8, where visitors firstcycle through an introductory passage and are then greeted with corridors that exhibit specific time periods of the Showaera. 19

Larger museums typically amalgamate these designs, which Belcher termed

"composite" exhibitions.20 Taking a look at the main structure of Hiroshima Peace

Memorial Museum (Image 2.9), we can observe how visitors circulate through a massive exhibition floorthat combines arterial, block, corridor and other designs?1 It is, however, fairly apparent that based on various design models implemented in Japanese war museum, most sites tend to make use of circulation routes that allow the curators to exert their influence and authority over the visitors' movement. Even the Hiroshima Peace

Memorial Museum, as see in the floor map, recommends a suggested tour path. War museums exhibit war history: after all, it seems most reasonable to design a historical exhibition with a linear progression, since history as a concept is easiest to capture through a sequence of chronological events. Such an approach, however, is not what I aim fo r in the New War Museum. Rather, I challenge this general convention by introducing anothermodel, specifically molded to fitthe needs of my site.

18 Heiwa Kinen Tenji Shiryokan, "Shisetsu an'nai," Heiwa Kinen Tenji Sh iryokan, last modified20 11, http ://www .heiwakinen.j p/facilities/index.html. The exhibition is shown on the top half of the map. The bottom half houses other facilities, such as a theater, media library and special exhibition room. 19 Showakan, "Shisetsu an'nai," Showakan, last modified20 14, http://www .showakan.go .j p!floor/6f7f/index.html. 20 Belcher, 114. 21 Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum, "Let's Look at the Displays: Main Building," Hiroshima Peace Site, accessed April 1, 2014, http://www.pcf.city .hiroshima.jp/frameNirtual_ e/visit_ e/west.html.

62 My Sp ace

Proposed floor map of the exhibition fo r the Ne w War Museum, Image 2. 1 0.

For the main exhibition featured in my New War Museum, I plan to install a design designated as the "free"model (see Image 2.1 1).22 In essence, the free model is a variation of the block design; instead of an open space, however, a number of displays mounted on columns, pedestals or vitrines are installed throughout the exhibition floor.

For my purposes, I choose pedestals as the main mode of display: mounted on each pedestal is one artifact. In Belcher's suggested "free" model, there is an entrance where visitors are greeted with an introductory panel. Upon being oriented by this panel, they then enter the exhibition floor.

In my exhibition, the individual pedestals will be placed in clusters in accordance with the event to which they pertain. Each cluster will consist of three pedestals, or three artifacts, preferably of different media. For example, a pedestal cluster with the theme,

"The Nanjing Massacre/Nanjing Incident/Rape ofNanjing" will have three pedestals that might display a photograph, an oral history transcriptand an artifact. Furthermore, as

seen above, the event in question will be named in several different nomenclatures. In this case, the "Nanjing Massacre" has been referred to differently by various people: for example, Japanese conservatives typically specifythe event as the "Nanjing Incident," while Chinese and American scholarshiphas traditionallytermed it the "Nanjing

Massacre" and "Rape ofNanjing."23 The pedestal clusters will be situated symmetrically

in a square formation throughout the exhibition floor. There is no single or correct order

22 Belcher, 114. 23 The latter was made famous by Iris Chang, a Chinese American journalist who wrote The Rape of Nanking. Iris Chang, The Rape of Nanking (New York: BasicBooks, 1997).

63 in advancing through these displays. Visitors are freeto make their way to the pedestals that most appeal to them; it is, however, ideal if each visitor cycles through all the displays, which they will be encouraged to do at the introductory panel.

As stated earlier, I only base my exhibition on the free model of the Belcher typology. I will build upon this basic model and craft it into a nuanced and more suitable design that sustains the particular mission of my museum. There are a number of crucial adjustments that I would like to make. First, my exhibition will have four entryways, all with identical introductory panels. The introductory panel will explicitly state the mission of the museum, a basic preface to the Asia-Pacific War and the controversy that surrounds its history in the present day, and most importantly, the intent behind the design of space. The panel will also offer strategies that visitors can utilize to critically analyze the displayed artifacts. For example, they will be asked to consider key matters:

When the artifact was produced; for and by whom the artifact was meant; the purpose it served; and how various individuals-both in the past when the artifact was made, and in the present, that is, fellow museumgoers-might react to it. These are general analytical questions that the audience should be mulling over while they interact with and make sense ofthe displayed obj ects. The entrances will also serve as exits; on the opposite surface of the introductory panel will be written the epilogue to the exhibition. The epilogue will reiterate the mission of the museum; ask the visitors to reflect on their findings; and invite them to engage in discussion with other visitors on their thoughts on the exhibition and war history in general.

After perusing the introductory panel, the visitors will enter the room. The square floor will be substantially large: I imagine an area that is at least 100 by 100 fe et with

64 ceilings more than 20 fe et high. This will ensure that the openness and sense of liberty will be effectively relayed, prompting the viewers to move about unimpeded. It will also invite and motivate spontaneous discussion among the visitors. The pedestals, as described previously, will be organized into groups of three, and these clusters will in turn be placed in a four by fo ur formation. This would yield 48 artifacts to display, which

illustrate 16 unique historical events. These events were introduced in a previous section,

and include examples such as the Nanj ing Massacre, the issue of comfort women,

Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and the Tokyo War Crimes Trial. Because the visitors retain the

freedom to proceed through the displays in their own desired order, the events will not be

placed in a rigidly chronological fashion. Instead, they will be randomly situated; the

pedestal clusters will be repositioned periodically (perhaps monthly) to create a fresh new

arrangement. 24

The pedestal consists of an artifact protected inside a square glass case, atop a

base that allows the viewer to examine it at eye level. On the fo ur sides of the base will

be written several different captions-at least two, no more than fo ur-that capture the

displayed object throughdif fe rent lenses and interpretations. As the visitor moves around

the pedestal in a circular movement, he or she will cycle through the several narratives.

By the time the visitor progresses through all the pedestals, he or she will have absorbed

a variety of interpretations that capture a number of controversial events in conflicting

ways. Admittedly, the viewers will be overwhelmed and confounded; the purpose of the

museum is not to present a clear-cut, conclusive, or singular interpretation of the war.

The obj ective is to inspire the visitors to realize that there is no single truth; only a

multitude of subjective "truths."

24 New artifacts and acquisitions will also cycle into the exhibition periodically.

65 It is, however, necessary to prevent absolute confusionor anarchy from overtaking the minds of the valued audience. This is bound to happen if the exhibition lacks a clear introduction and orientation that prepares thevi sitors of what awaits them past the entrance. It is thus imperative that the viewer is wholly aware of the New War

Museum's mission. This should manifest clearly in marketing (i.e., advertisement) programs and information pamphlets for potential visitors, and more importantly, in the fo ur identical introduction/epilogue panels that the audience encounters upon entering and exiting the exhibition. To reiterate, the panels will clearlypresent the museum as a unique site that takes a different approach to exhibiting war history; displays a number of artifacts explained through conflicting interpretations; seeks to disorient the visitors and prompt them to embrace the complexities and diversity of views; and finally encourages them to engage in discourse amongst each other. Outlining these points will also prevent another possible outcome: that the audience inadvertently veers towards one perspective, that is, a right or left-leaningperspective of the war, as they strive to maintain consistency in a single narrative. Such an outcome must be prevented, and the introduction/epilogue panelsare designed to fulfillth is purpose.

The exhibition is deliberately designed to carry out my mission. Building upon the models that Belcher suggested, I have proposed a number of adjustments that suit the needs of my aims and intents. It is impossible-and certainly not productive-to attempt to predict how visitors will react to such an exhibition. Yet, I am confidentthat by drawing upon museological and curatorial theory, as well as examples of war museums in

Japan, my design presents at least a well-grounded hypothesis.

66 Additional Elements

War museums are typically comprised of elements in addition to its main exhibition, such reference libraries, multimedia viewing stations, theaters, special exhibitions and lecture halls. Visitors are oftenencouraged to make use of these additional components to fo llow up on the main exhibition. There are many advantages that come with including supplementary facilities in the museum structure, since they offer activities that allow visitors to engage in ways that could not be done in the exhibition room. These include further reading in reference libraries (secondary sources elucidating the exhibited artifacts are oftenkept here); viewing video fo otage in multimedia stations and films in theaters; visiting special exhibitions that uncover aspects of the themes that are not expounded in the permanent exhibit; and participating in forums or lectures given on pertinent topics. These additional elements are an appealing aspect fo r individuals who wish to delve deeper, and administrators utilize them to attract more visitors and further the museum's versatility.

I plan to implement these supplementary facilities into the New War Museum.

However, certain precautions must be heeded. If they are not structured and managed appropriately, they tend to pose more difficultiesthan advantages. The reason lies in the public nature of these components; that is, they are typically open to public use, where any individual or organization is permitted to utilize them so long as an inquiry is sent to the administrators beforehand. The nonexclusive nature ofthese facilities has unexpectedly led to external organizations appropriating them as venues of political activism. The spaces have even become a public battleground for debates between groups with conflicting views. Dialogue between these antagonistic organizations has proved to

67 be exceptionally heated and vicious; museums officialshave attempted to facilitate and control them to no avail.

One of the most infamous examples of the exploitation of supplementary facilities occurred in Peace Osaka in 1999 and 2000. The dispute began when the Group to Correct

Biased Exhibitions on War Material (introduced in Chapter One) made use of Peace

Osaka's theater to screen Pride (Puraido: Unmei no toki), a Japanese filmreleased in

1998 that chronicled the life and death of Toj o Hideki, former General of the Imperial

Army and Prime Minister of Japan during the latteryears of the war. Tojo was convicted and executed in 1948 as a Class A war criminal, and is notoriously remembered for being the mastermind behind Japan's wartime leadership?5 Yoshida Yasuhiko, a representative of the Group to Correct Biased Exhibitions on War Material, commented on the screening: "Because the museum was constructed and runs on taxes collected form

Osaka' s citizens, we the Tadasu Kai [Group to Correct Biased Exhibitions on War

Material] must utilize Peace Osaka and propagate fromhere the "truth" that is absent from its exhibitions."26 The film illustrated Tojo's psyche during the Tokyo War Crimes

Trial, and ventured to humanize hischaracte r. The screening of the film is was an exceptional example and product of the discourse on war history that swept through

Japan during this period. It captured theright-wing camp's collective rally to honor the

Japanese war dead and re-present them through a humanistic and redemptive lens. In fact,

25 Pride, directed by Shunya Ito (1998; Tokyo, Japan : Toei Company, Ltd.). 26 Yoshida, 6.

68 the filmvenerated Tojo as a national hero who "defended the pride of the Japanese people."27

The fact that a right-wing group was able to screen this provocative filmreveal s the vulnerability of the supplementary facilities that are open to public use. Although

Peace Osaka's officials scrambled to block the screening on grounds that it contradicted the museum philosophy, the activists pushed through withtheir plan. Peace Osaka' s defenselessness lied in its lack of legitimate reason or the legal means to halt them.28

Events turnedfo r the worse when, in response to the screening, a leftistcitiz ens' organization sympathetic to Peace Osaka, named Peace Osaka Citizens' Network (Peace

Osaka Shimin Nettowak:u), arranged a forum titled "International Citizens' Forum in

Osaka" ("Kokusai Shimin Foramu in Osaka"). The forum was held successfully, this time in the museum's lecture hall on December 11, 1999?9 Inviting a number of prominent

speakers, it explored the Nanjing Massacre and reaffirmedthe criminality of Japanese wartime conduct. 30 The feud finally escalatedto an unmanageable level when, in

retaliation to the forum, the Group to Correct Biased Exhibitions on War Material held yet another event at Peace Osaka. Provocatively titled "TheBi ggest Lie of the Twentieth

Century: A Thorough Investigation into the Nanjing Massacre" ("20-Seiki Saidai no Uso:

Nankin Dai Gyakusatsu no Tettei Kensho"), itwas held on January 23, 2000 in Peace

Osaka's lecture hall; the same venue used for the "International Citizens' Forum in

27 Osaka Municipal Worker's Union, "'Peace Osaka' o mamori hatten saseru tame," Jichiken Hokokusho shu 29 (October 2000), http://www .j ichiro.gr.jp/jichiken_ kako/report/rep _yamaga ta28/jichiken_ hokoku! heiwa05/heiwa05 .htm. 28 Osaka Municipal Worker's Union, '"Peace Osaka' o mamori hatten saseru tame." The filmscreening was defended on grounds of freedom ofspeech. 29 Osaka Municipal Worker's Union, "'Peace Osaka' wo mamori hatten saseru tame." 30 While the fo rum was being held, 40 right-wing propaganda vans parked outside Peace Osaka in display of their protest. Osaka Municipal Worker's Union, "'Peace Osaka' wo mamori hatten saseru tame."

69 Osaka."31 In the span of one month, two opposing citizens' groups had utilized the same lecture hall in hopes of propagating antithetical messages, and museum officials were utterly powerless in controlling the exchange. "The Biggest Lie of the Twentieth Century" would soon spark an international uproar, when the Chinese embassy in Japan publicly condemned the conference as an "event thatirritates friendly relations between China and

Japan."32 Although further sparring was finally brought to an end when Peace Osaka revised its regulations, closing its lecture hall and theater from public use, the chain of unforturJate events shed light on the dangers of implementing supplementary components without taking the necessary precautions.

My museum can certainly benefitfrom theimplementa tion of components that supplement the main exhibition. The New War Museum can hold forums in its lecture hall, for example, where prominent scholarswith opposing views will be invited to give talks in dialogue with each other and participate in open debate withthe audience. Films chosen by the museum administrators will be screened in the theater, and discussion will be held afterwards with visitors and invited speakers. The reference and multimedia libraries will allow visitors to further explore the diverse sources that were used drawn upon to contextualize the displayed artifacts. However, measures must be taken to prevent what Peace Osaka experienced in 1999 and 2000. Regulations that disallow external organizations from inquiring into using the museum facilities will be stipulated and enforced at the New War Museum. Instead, individuals and organizations will be able to utilize the space only upon invitation fr om the museum. These supplementary facilities will benefitthose who wish to broaden theirhorizons and extend their

3 1 Yoshida, 3. 32 Osaka Municipal Worker's Union, '"Peace Osaka' o mamori hatten saseru tame."

70 knowledge on the various displays and narratives that were present in the main exhibition.

If structured and managed properly, such additional elements will offer visitors a more complete and enjoyable experience.

Proposal fo r the Ne w War Museum

Thus concludes the blueprint for the New WarMuseum. The target audience, exhibition and additional components were designed and engineered with the overarching mission in mind. The main exhibit itself embodies a bold message and critique on the way war history has been, and continues to be exhibited in Japanese museums. Unlike the war museums that we explored previously, my site embraces visitor freedom: physically, in circulating about the exhibition, and ideologically, in reaching their own unique conclusions. The way the exhibition is curated reflects this attitude. Giving up so much control and autonomy to the audience is a decision from which Japanese warmuseums have traditionally shied away. Thus, my site will serve as an experiment that will hopefully yield positive results, and leave a lasting impression on the visitors on new insights to approaching the field of war history. However, simply inventing an imaginative blueprint provides, as of now, at best a plausible hypothesis. In order to make the concept more pragmatic and to ensure its successful implementation, I must now turn to the logistics of the imagined museum: funding, administration and location, among other key elements.

71 Chapter Three: The Logistical Structure

Money Matters

Over the course of this study, I have explored missions, exhibitions and histories of prominent war museums in Japan. I have also pointed out the power of politics that revolve around these museums, and how it can greatly affect their integrity. Drawing from these observations, I proposed an original mission that my New War Museum will uphold, and outlined how it will achieve this aim through its exhibition. Now, I turn to the logistical structure of my museum: How should the New War Museum be managed and operated in a practical sense? Factors that will be considered in this chapter are funding base, administrative structure and location. My imagined museum will be able to sustain its mission and exhibition if it is structured on a rigid and well-developed logistical framework. The first element that I will explore is the funding base. Financial resources is perhaps the most crucial component of the logistical structure: As we shall see, money matters tremendously. From construction expenses to maintenance fe es, acquisition of artifacts to compensating staff, museums demand substantial upkeep to carry out its operations. Let us examine fromwhat channels prominent war museums acquire their financial resources, and consider the pros and cons of each. The conclusion that emerges is reminiscent of what we encountered in previous chapters: With money comes politics, and it is best to steer clear of "public" funding provided by state entities.

Although we explored Peace Osaka and its renewal plan, it is valuable to revisit its case once again from a financial perspective. According to its "Articles of

Endowment," there are five mainway s that Peace Osaka obtains revenues: the start-up endowment; value of assets; revenue from business (e.g., from its gift shop, and

72 transactions with other museums and organizations); donations and grants; and membership fees. 1 The most substantial portion of its revenues comes fromthe first channel: the endowment. Peace Osakais listed as an "Incorporated Foundation" (zaidan hojin), meaning that it is a legal corporation that draws from a monetary fo undation to manage its business. As discussed earlier in the study, Osaka'spref ectural and municipal governments manage Peace Osaka, andthis model has led to an unwarranted renewal that is set to change its essence as a war museum. Although I claimed earlier that the renewal will be implemented due to this power structure, much of the decision also involves the financial leverage that the prefecture and city possess. Peace Osaka's endowment comes from OsakaCity and OsakaPref ecture. The amount that the two administrative bodies provide is two hundred million yen, or around 1.95 million U.S. dollars: half comes from the city, and the other half from the prefecture.2 In the case of Peace Osaka, not only does the municipal and prefectural governments retain administrative power, it also controls its source of funding.

The fact that the regional governmentpays fo r Peace Osaka's finances is a crucial point to scrutinize. This has negatively affected Peace Osaka's integrity in a number of ways. First, right-wing opposition groups have routinely criticized the museum fo r using government funds, drawing attention to the fact that they come fromtaxpay er money.

Yoshida, from the Group to Correct Biased Exhibitions on War Material, stated in 2000:

If Peace Osakawas operated by a private endowment, then there would be no issue. But Peace Osakais an incorporated foundation that runs on a two hundred million yen investment from the prefectural and municipal governments. The museum stands on the city and prefecture's property,

1 Peace Osaka, "Zaidan hoj in Osaka Kokusai Heiwa Senta: Kifukoi," OsakaIn ternationalPeace Center (2008): 1. 2 Peace Osaka, "Zaidan hoj in Osaka Kokusai Heiwa Senta (Peace Osaka) no gaiyo," OsakaIn ternational Peace Center (2007): 1, http://www.peace-osaka.or.jp/about/pdf/z03 .pdf.

73 which was leased for free, and its construction expenses were paid for by the city and prefecture as well. In other words, it is a "public" museum established and maintained on taxpayer money. 3

Yoshida objected to the regional administrationusing his own money, in the fo rm of taxes, to create and maintain a war museum with views to which he passionately disagreed. He claimed that it would have been a non-issue had Peace Osaka been operating on a private foundation. For him, this scenario would be acceptable, because it would entail a private museum running on its own private money; not in the name or funds of the state. Yoshida went on to assert: "In other words, with our tax money it exhibits 'fake photographs' and thrusts upon young children and students the so-called

'masochistic view ofhistory' fjigyaku shikan]: That is the true nature of Peace Osaka."4

Even before the renewal plan was unveiled in 2013, Peace Osaka's dissenters were protesting the origins of the museum's finances, and it soon became a staple argument in their rhetoric. A museum's funding structurecan thus create debate and public scrutiny, depending on what sources they are drawn from.

Right-leaning politicians had been paying attention to complaints lodged by the likes of Yoshida as early as the 1990s. In 1996, LDP Diet members stated in an

"Investigative Report on War Museums" that Peace Osaka "serves as a site to propagate

[senden] a specific ideology [tokutei no ideorogf] , and was constructed and managed using taxes levied on citizens of the city and prefecture."5 Likewise, in 1997, LDP Diet member Kitano Yoshimitsuberated Peace Osaka fo r operating on tax money, asserting

3 Yoshida, 1-2. 4 Yoshida, 2. 5 Hitoshi Koyama, "Peace Osaka mondai: Saikin no keika ni tsuite," Hisutoria 159 (1998): 135. Translated fr om the original by author.

74 that "Peace Osaka's exhibitions are all lies; we should cut their grants."6 Heeding these contentions, the firstmeasures that GovernorHashimoto Toru took when he beganto plan for the major renewal was to cut all spending and grants on Peace Osaka in 2010.7

Since then, Peace Osaka's events and operations have been sustained on money privately donated by its sympathizers. 8 Again, this is anexample that exposes the dangers of associating my museum with the state. Politicians can always trim government spending on a given war museum, making it tremendously difficult fo r it to carry out its activities.

Moreover, endowments, grants and foundations based on government spending are particularly dangerous, as it may not only harbor dissent among politicians, but also among the citizenry; afterall, it is taxpayermoney that is being utilized to maintain a public institution.

What are other sources of fundingthat I might consider? If government funding is undesirable, what about "private" money? What does one meanby "private" to begin with? Financialchann els that can be considered private include donated money, personal money, corporate money and institutional money, among others. For the purposes of this chapter, "private" will refer to funding sources that do not come fromthe state; whether it be the national or regional administration. Still, the scope of private sources must be outlined and narrowed. Let us examine some resources other than governmentfu nding that war museums can draw from.

6 Koyama, 135. 7 Masahiro Iga, '"Kagai tenj i no tekkyo o nerau Peace Osaka 'tenj i rinyiiaru koso' ni hantai no koe o!," Kodama Tachi ni Watasuna! Abunai Kyokasho Osaka no Kai (2013): 2, http://www7b.biglobe.ne.jp/�hotline-osakalpisu.pdf. 8 Iga, 2.

75 The Mugonkan in Nagano Prefecture is a unique museum that exhibits paintings and illustrations produced by art students who were drafted into the army.9 Mugonkan translates as "House of the Voiceless." Kuboshima Sei'ichiro, a prominent art collector bornduring the war, fo unded the museum in 1997.10 The exhibition displays paintings, postcards and letters made by the student draftees-most of them in their twenties-who died in battle or shortly afterthe war. Many works depict the soldier-artists' mothers, wives and loved-ones, and are accompanied with captions that describe their stories.11 In essence, Mugonkan is a fine arts museum, but with a strong anti-war message that would place it among the left-leaning war museums; its subject is narrow and fo cuses solely on art students who died during the war. The visitors are encouraged to view and reflect silently on the artwork, artists and importance of human life; hence the name, "House of the Voiceless." The extraordinary aspect about Mugonkan that brings us back to the topic of funding, is that it was fo unded and is maintained on Kuboshima' s personal capital.12

Moreover, Kuboshima collected and purchased the displayed artworks himself, when he embarked upon a trek throughout Japan to track down the items in the early 1990s.13 In other words, the museum is the product of one man: Kuboshima plarmed, constructed and sponsored the museum on his own funds alone. The firstpossible method to privately finance a museum is thus by drawing fr om an individual's personal resources.

9 Ueda City,"Mugonkan," Ueda City Off icial We bsite, last modified 2010, http://www.city.ueda.nagano.jp/hplkanko/museum/mugonkan.html. 10 Yoshikuni Igarashi, Bodies of Me mory:Narratives of War in Postwar Japanese Culture, 1945-1970 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2012), 6. 11 Igarashi, 6. 12 ShinshiiTott eoki J6h6, "Mugonkan, Shinano dessankan," Sh inshU Totteoki JohO, last modified November 4, 2013, http://www.mtlabs.co.jp/shinshu/museum/mugon.htm. 13 Alan Gleason, "Mugonkan: Pictures Worth Ten Thousand Words," DNP Art Communications, last modified Fed 3, 2014, http://www.dnp.co.jp/artscape/eng/ht/0812.html.

76 This, however, is much easier said than done. Kuboshima was an extremely successful-and evidently wealthy-businessmanand artcolle ctor. Although he possessed the necessary capital to establish and oversee his own museum, this is a rare case that does not apply to most museum curators. Kuboshima also keeps his museum small in size, and the number of exhibited items is maintained at 600; a relatively modest amount compared to the larger museums.14 Yushiikan,for example, stores 100,000 artifacts in its displays andreserv es.15 Given the ambitions and scale of my imagined museum, leaving its funding to the resources of a single individual is unrealistic and an unlikely choice. Moreover, Mugonkan is suffering today from dwindling finances, which has prompted the museum to call fo r contributions fromthe public.16 Placing the burden

on a single individual to continuously sustain the museum's funds often creates

difficulties over an extended period oftime.17

This leads us to another source of potential income: donations. Donations,

however, should be regarded with caution andreserva tion. These are not a reliable or

stable sources of revenue, as donations are spontaneousacts over which the museum has

no control. It would be wise to consider donations as a secondary source of fundsthat

augments other more dependable resources. Another related source of funding is from a

large group of people with the same interests: the citizens of a given city, or a citizens'

group with a common aim. When a large group of citizens gather fo r a single cause, they

14 Gleason, "Mugonkan: Pictures Worth Ten Thousand Words." 15 Yiishiikan, "Yushukan," Yas ukuni Jinja, last modified2008, http://www.yasukuni.or.jp/english/yushukan/. 16 Mugonkan, '"Ezukuroi bokin' no onegai," Mugonkan, accessed Feb 16, 2014, http://www .mugonkan.jp/edukuroi.html. 17 In fact, the ideal case would be th is: if an individual with extreme wealth that could be sustained for a infinite amount of time established and maintained a private museum. However, the possibilities of this happening are rather low and unrealistic. Kuboshima is one of the only curators to have done this, and his museum is hitting financial obstaclestoday.

77 can pool theirmoney to create and maintain a private foundation. The concept is similar to that of donations; however, the members of the group are required to financeand sustain the museum, unlike public donations that are not obligatory. This guarantees a steady fundingbase that should keep themuseum in operation. Oka Masaharu Memorial

Nagasaki Peace Museum is one such site whose founders and officerspride themselves over the fact that it is operated entirely out of the citizens' personal pockets. The museum was founded in 1995 in Nagasaki City, in memory of Oka Masaharu (1918-1994), a

Protestant minister and fo rmer member of the City Assembly who was known fo r his fervent opposition against Yushiikan's portrayal of the war and his relief efforts fo r

Korean atomic bomb survivors.18 Reflective ofOka's stance, the museum is a left-leaning institution that depicts the view of Japan-as-perpetrator, demanding the Japanese government for an honest apology and proper compensation for its wartime victims.19 Its exhibitions include topics on "Korean Atomic Bomb Survivors," "Forced Labor," "The

Truth of 'The Sphere of Co-Prosperity in East Asia'," "Comfort Women," and "Postwar

Compensation."20 As stated on its website, the museum is managed and sustained solely on the funding base of its members, who apparently take pride in having "never gained any support from [the] government [or] any business, so we can make any plan and [do] what we want to do."21 As bluntly stated in the above assertion, the Oka Masaharu

Museum is able to blatantly criticize the Japanese government and exhibit an

18 Oka Masaharu Kinen Nagasaki Heiwa Kinenkan, "Oka Masaharu san ni tsuite," OkaMa saharu Kinen Nagasaki He iwa Kinenkan, last modified January 8, 1999, http://www .d3 .dion.ne.jp/-okakinen/oka!oka3.html. 19 Yoshida, 17. 20 Oka Masaharu Kinen Nagasaki Heiwa Kinenkan, "What is 'Nagasaki Peace Museum'?," Oka Masaharu Kinen Nagasaki He iwa Kinenkan, last modified Jan 8, 1999, http://www.d3.dion.ne.jp/-okakinen/English/setumeiE.html. 21 Oka Masaharu Kinen Nagasaki Heiwa Kinenkan, "What is 'Nagasaki Peace Museum'?" This statement is taken from the English version of the site, which is rather poorly translated.

78 exceptionally leftistnarra tive precisely because it has no ties to the state and is funded independently. The annual membership fe e is posted at 10,000 yen, or roughly 100 U.S. dollars?2 Revenue from these citizen-members allows for the museum to carry out its day-to-day operations, and fulfill new acquisitions if need be.

Thus, funding from a citizens' group is a viable source of capital to found and maintain a museum. However, if we put Oka Masaharu Museum-and other such war museums funded solely on sympathetic citizens-into perspective with the likes of Peace

Osaka and Showakan, which arepublicly funded with massive endowments, the glaring differences become evident. The museum's scale, robustness of exhibition, number of visitors and other aspects are invariably superior when it receives funding fromthe state.

It is not to say that my New WarMuseum is an extravagant site that requires astronomical resources. As a war museum that proclaims an ambitious aim and unique

concept to fundamentally change notions on war history, it is advantageous if my

museum is well-equipped to a certain, respectable degree. If private funds from an

individual or a citizens' group are not wholly ideal, then what are the remaining options?

Another alternative to consider is the private institution. In fact, we have already

encountered a site that derives funding through this model: Yiishiik:an. Yasukuni Shrine

sponsors Yiishiikan; and as we have seen, it enjoys an autonomy and integrity that sites

like Peace Osaka lack.23 The fact that resources are drawn froma private institution has

bolstered its protection from external pressures. The private institution in essence

amalgamates the best of both worlds. It offers a large income, but from a non-government

22 Oka Masaharu Kinen Nagasaki Heiwa Kinenkan, "Shiryokan kai'in e no osasoi," OkaMa saharu Kinen Nagasaki Heiwa Kinenkan, last modifiedJanuary 8, 1999, http://www.d3.dion.ne.jp/-okakinenlkaiin.html. 23 Kevin Doak, "A Religious Perspective on the Yasukuni Shrine Controversy," in Yasukuni, the War Dead and th e Struggle fo r Japan 's Past, ed. John Breen (New York: Columbia University Press, 2008), 63.

79 source. While private institutions are not directly prone to politics in the way the national or provincial governments are, they also often possess large monetary fo undations; usually on a much larger scale than the funding options that I have discussed earlier.

Yasukuni's robust finances allow fo r Yiishiikan to remain one of the oldest and largest war museums in Japan, boasting grandiose displays of fighter planes, artillery and even a locomotive train; not all museums are able to enj oy exhibitions of this scale, due to the tremendous costs of purchasing and preserving such large artifacts. There are certain

24 advantages to private institutions that cannot be overlooked.

Let me briefly return to the New War Museum. To reiterate, the mission is to present a new approach to exhibiting the history of the Asia-Pacific War. It will incorporate multiple conflicting narratives about the war that convey how it is impractical to attempt to portray its history through one perspective; the value in learning history is to

accept the existence of multiple truths that a variety ofhistorical participants present. It

was at this point in my analysis that I realized a particular private institution that I

speculate might resonate with the aims of my museum: the private university. The

university is an institution that values education, critical thinking and intellectual

inspiration. A university that values a liberal education would be doubly favorable, as it

encourages new and diverse ways of thinking. These ideals are wholly compatible with

the objectives of my museum. Moreover, institutions of higher education commonly

enjoy a generous endowment, making it an attractive fu nding base. The sponsor and

24 There are, of course, other channels of funding. These include entrance fees collected from visitors, revenue from giftshops, and business with other museums and organizations, among others. However, these are all secondary sources that produce less money, and that are meant to supplement the main foundation or endowment. As such, these channels will not be studied in detail here.

80 financialpartner that I choose for the New WarMuseum will therefore be the liberal . . . pnvate umvers1ty. 25

In fact, there exists a museum in Japan thatfo llows this logic and model: Kyoto

Museum fo r World Peace at Ritsumeikan University in Kyoto, Japan.26 Ritsumeikan is a

prestigious private university thatwas established in 1900. The museum, which is

situated withinRitsumeika n's campus, opened its doors in 1992. It exhibits the history of

wartime Kyoto, but also tackles the broader implications of the Asia-Pacific War by

acknowledging Japan as the initiator and aggressor.27 The reason thatRitsumeikan chose

to erect its own war museum posts promising possibilities for my museum. The mission

statement for the Kyoto Museum states: "As a university, Ritsumeikan felt thatit had a

social responsibility to promote the development of a peaceful society, and therefore

established the Kyoto Museum for World Peace to fo ster the understanding necessaryto

build a peaceful world."28 This reveals that at least one private university in Japan found

the establishment of a museum to be a viable method for the conveyance of war history.

Peter van den Dungen, a British scholaron peace studies, praised the museum's concept:

25 As stated in the section, the private university is not directly prone to politics and the state, and therefore is less likely to act negatively upon my museum for political reasons. That is, because the private university possesses an autonomy of its own, my museum will be further insulated from the state. Moreover, some might argue that the university could decide to cut fundsto my museum (for what ever reason, as admittedly there are internal "politics" within private institutions) and therefore impact the museum's integrity. Although there is no way to tell if this might occur, I argue that the odds of this happening are much lower for the private university than, say the national or regional government considering their inherent unpredictability (i.e., unfavorable politicians can be elected at any time). I must also stress the importance of compatibility in values and missions between the museum and the university. As long as the university remains a center for learning, intellectual discourse and liberal thought, I am confidentthat they will not act to influence my museum in any harmful way. In some ways, the logic is similar to that of Yasukuni and Yiishiikan. They enjoy an absolute compatibility in mission, which annuls any tension between the two institutions (see Chapter One, fo otnote 58). 26 Kyoto Museum for World Peace, "Kyoto Museum for World Peace, Ritsumeikan University," Ritsumeikan Un iversity, last modifiedJune 6, 2013, http://www.ritsumei.ac.jp/mng/er/wp museum/english/index.html. 27 Kyoto Museum for World Peace, "The Fifteen-Year War," Ritsumeikan Un iversity, last modified 1997, http://www .ritsumei.ac.j p/mng/er/wp-m useum/english/fifteen_war .html. 28 Kyoto Museum for World Peace, "Introduction: Founding Purpose," Ritsumeikan University, last modified 1 997, http://www .ritsumei.ac.jp/mng/er/wp-museum/english/director_ fou nging.html.

81 The Kyoto Museum has always been an inspiring example, not least because of its institutional setting. Given the responsibility of universities as the prime centers in every country of the world for the discovery and dissemination of knowledge, it was heartening to know that there was at least one university-and a prominent one, too--whose campus incorporated a peace museum. 29

Van den Dungen rightfully identifiedthe compatibility between museum and university.

It is this harmony in philosophy and values that I emphasize in advocating for collaboration with a liberal private university. As the Kyoto Museum for World Peace at

Ritsumeikan University demonstrates, there is good reason to believe that funding and promotion for my New War Museum can be obtained from a sympathetic institution. It is with these thoughts in mind that I tum to another fundamental aspect of museum management: the administrative structure.

Museum Masterminds

Along with funding, another important logistical fe ature of the war museum is its administrative structure: Who runs the day-to-day management? Much of what I discussed in the previous chapters involved external contingents that affected the integrity of a war museum. Pressures fromthe central government,changes in political platform of the regional administration, and fundingfr om state-sponsored endowments are some examples. These were all forces fromou tside that acted upon the museum. In this section, I will instead magnify into the museum's internal administration. As we saw in the previous chapters, are there patterns that we can seek out and lessons fromwhich to learn in how museums are directed?

29 Peter van den Dungen, "Preventing Catastrophe: The World's First Peace Museum," Ritsumeikan Kokusai Kenkyu 18, no. 3 (March 2006): 23. http://www.ritsumei.ac.jp/acd/cg/ir/college/bulletin/voll8- 3/DUNGEN.pdf.

82 Naturally, the more robust and grandiose the museum, the larger the circle of its administrators will be. For example, a single individual, Kuboshima Sei'ichiro, manages the Mugonkan. He carries out the museum's operations, which include a number of responsibilities such as curating the exhibition, acquiring new artwork and marketing the museum to attract more visitors. The Mugonkan is a unique case in this regard. Most sites, however, necessitate a coterie of individuals to populate its management team. Let us look at Peace Osaka once again. Peace Osaka makes public its officers, withinf ormation including their name, professional background and compensation. Here is a selection of

Peace Osaka's officers as of January 2014 until March 2015:

Chairman Mushakoj i Kinhide, Former Vice President of United Nations University

Board Director Kaneko Satoru, Current Director of Soai Gakuen High School and President of Soai University 30

Standing Director Okada Shigenobu, Former Secretariat of Osaka Prefectural Government Labor Relations Commission

Board Member Oe Keiko, Director of Osaka Prefectural Government Cultural Relations Division

Board Member Nagai Testuro, Superintendent of Osaka Municipal GovernmentBoard of Education

BoardMember Kawasaki YUko, Lawyer

Board Member Takahashi Eiko, BoardDirector of Osaka International Cultural Association 31

BoardMember Nishigaki Masaki, Songwriter

Supervisor Nakai Masatsugu

30 Both Buddhist institutions. 3 1 An NPO.

83 3 CEO of Chibo 2

At first glance, the board seems to showcase a striking diversity. The individuals hail fromvarious fields of expertise, including academia, law, religion, and the private and public sectors. However, it becomes evident upon closer examination that the board is missing key individuals that would be essential to museum management: professionals in museology and history. Furthermore, a large percentage of board members are representatives of Osaka's prefectural and municipal governments. There are seemingly arbitrary individuals as well, such as a songwriter, lawyer, and CEO of a private business, who appear to have nothing to do with neither museums nor war history. Such a composition of administrators, as we will see, has proven to be detrimental to Peace

Osaka's integrity as a war museum.

Although Peace Osaka's regulations dictate that the current board must periodically elect new officers (or reelects current officers),they also add that the decision must then be forwarded to the governor of Osaka for final approval; in other words, the governor has the final say in who is admitted into the board.33 Moreover, both the governor and mayor of Osaka are designated "Advisers" to the museum, and they possess the executive power to influence important decisions that the museum administrators make.34 The fo cus of authority to government officials allowed Hashimoto to dismiss all board members that he deemed were a hindrance to his Renewal Plan on

April l, 2013.35 Thus, those currently serving as board members (introduced above) are

32A chain of Okonomiyaki (street fo od native to Osaka) restaurants. Peace Osaka, "Yakuin meibo," OsakaInte rnational Peace Ce nter, last modifiedJanuary 24, 2014, http://www .peace-osaka.or.jp/about/pdf/Q20 12_ 00. pdf. 33 Peace Osaka, "Zaidan hojin Osaka Kokusai Heiwa Senta: Kifu koi," Osaka International Peace Center (2008): 2. 34 Peace Osaka, "Zaidan hojin Osaka Kokusai Heiwa Senta: Kifu koi": 5. 35 lga, I.

84 all individuals that Hashimoto personally approved and handpicked to carry out his bidding. Again, this speaks to the recurring theme that leaves me with serious reservations about associating my museum with state entities. Time and time again, through changes in mission, cutting of funds, and now the unchecked appointment of board members, the state has proven itself as a dangerous and powerful force that often does more harm than good.

Peace Osaka is an archetypal public museum where government officialsand civil servants compose the majority of the managerial structure. As Hein and Takenaka observed in their study, staffmembers who run Peace Osaka "are not professional museologists [ ...] Rather, most are career civil servants who just happened to be appointed to the curatorial division of a peace museum as partof their regular rotation through local government."36 When major decisions are made in the upper echelons of the regional government-as was done by Hashimoto--the civil servants operating the museum on a day-to-day basis are left with no choice but to adhere to the commands of their higher-ups. As seen in the list of board members, there are no professional museologists or experts on war history. They are unequipped with professional knowledge that would enable them to defend the museum when it is faced with pressures from external forces. Hein and Takenaka also emphasized this point, stating that "these local bureaucrats lack expertise in the history of the war, making it difficultfo r them to articulate an effective defense of their institutions," and that "the staff later failed to draw

37 on any [ . ..] resources in response to the attacks" made by right-wing groups. The same

36 Hein and Takenaka, 83. 37 Hein and Takenaka, 83.

85 can be said for war museums such as Showakan, a state institution administered by civil servants of the central government.

In their valuable study, Hein and Takenaka contrastedthe likes of Peace Osaka and Showakan to Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum. Hiroshima Peace Memorial

Museum, as introduced previously, is a massive site that chronicles the experience of the atomic bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima City on August 6, 1945. It is located within the grounds of the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park, a 122,000 square meter park that was constructed in 1954 near the epicenter ofthe atomic blast.38 It is home to a number of museums, monuments and cenotaphs devoted to the history of Hiroshima during the war, and a popular tourist destination fo r those visiting the city. The municipal government of

Hiroshima funds the Peace Memorial Museum. However, its staff team is significantly different from that of Peace Osaka, boasting a composition that allows for more autonomy and professionalism. To compare with Peace Osaka's board, here is a list individuals that make up the committee fo r Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum:

Committee Director Imanaka Wataru, Special Adviser to Chiigoku Shimbun 39

Vice Director Oi Kenji, Professor Emeritus at Hiroshima City University

Vice Director Mizumoto Kazumi, Vice President of Hiroshima City University's Hiroshima Peace Institute

Committee Member Ubuki Satoru, Former Professor at Hiroshima Jogakuin University

Committee Member Kamiya Kenji, Vice President of Hiroshima University

38 Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum, "Guide Tours to Peace Memorial Park and Vicinity," Hiroshima

Peace Site, last modified20 01, http://www.pcf.city.hiroshima.jp/frameNirtual- e/tour- e/guidel .html. E A local newspaper.

86 Committee Member Rai Ki'ichi, Professor Emeritus at Hiroshima University

Committee Member Shizuma Kiyoshi, Professor at Hiroshima University Institute of Engineering

Committee Member Tsuboi Sunao, Board Director of Hiroshima Prefecture A-Bomb Victims' Association

Committee Member Ichimaru Norioki, Representative of Hiroshima Affairs and Regional Revitalization Research Institute 40

Examiningthis list, we can see that the committee members behind Hiroshima

Peace Memorial Museum are concentrated in the field of academia. All members are professionals and experts in diverse areas of study. For example, Oi Kenji and Ichimaru

Norioki are professionals in the fields of architecture, urban planning and museology;

Ubuki Satoru and Rai Ki'ichi are professors of war history and the history of Hiroshima;

Kamiya Kenji and Shizuma Kiyoshi are specialists on radiation biology and medicine; and Mizumoto Kazumi is an expert on political science and international relations.

Moreover, unlike Peace Osaka, there are no members who are government officialsor

civil servants associated with the state. This permits staff and curators to manage the site unencumbered by political pressures or demands, and to administer a competent museum efficiently and effectively. Moreover, owing to these professionals, the museum implements compelling and effectual operations, including:

Gather[ing] questionnaire sheets, notebooks, and exit interviews of visitors to understand their movement patterns and conversations as they go through the museum. Their findingsare thenused to modifythe exhibits. These are standard methodologies used by museums all around the world and it is not surprising that Hiroshima, one ofthe few [Japanese] museums to have professionally trained staff, has most fully adopted them.41

40 Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum, "Shiry6kan tenji kent6kai i'in meibo," Hiroshima Peace Site, last modifiedMarch 19, 2013, http://www.pcf.city.hiroshima.jp/ken/meibo1 .html. 41 Hein and Takenaka, 84.

87 Hein and Takenaka cogently argued that in contrast, "Peace Osakahas prohibited their own oral history narrators from talking about subjects other than their personal experiences [ ...] [and] has also withdrawn educational worksheets that it had created fo r school children after receiving criticism that they were 'too biased. "'42 Peace Osaka lacked the experts who possessed the necessaryknowledge and professional skills to defend the museum against its most vociferous critics, which, as we have seen, led to a series of unfortunate incidents. After all, how could a board composed of civil servants, a songwriter, alawy er and a CEO of a restaurant chain effectively operate a war museum wroughtwith provocative narratives? Unfortunately, they never stood a chance.

The level of managerial competence behind Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum and Peace Osakavaries substantially. The lessons for the New War Museum are also apparent. It is essential that the museum's board be constituted of a rich pool of professionals with knowledge and expertise in a variety of relevant fields;the most important being museology or curatorship, and war history. It would also require individuals trained in architecture, design and marketing to fulfill other logistical tasks.

These individuals will have diverse opinions on the war themselves. Some might capture the war through a leftistperspective , others might situate their views towards the right. In no way should my board be homogeneous: It must embrace a diversity of opinions. This also means that the board is multinational, in that it is composed of individuals from diverse national backgrounds. The crucial prerequisite, however, is that all members in the administration must support and be invested in the mission behind the museum.

While Peace Osaka's board lacked individuals with skills that pertained to museology or

42 Laura Hein and Akiko Takenaka, "Exhibiting World War II in Japan and the United States," The Asia Pacific Journal: Japan Focus, July 20, 2007, http://www.japanfocus.org/-Laura-Hein/2477.

88 war history, those in Hiroshima were fully engaged in pertinent fields on a personal level, such as the effects of atomic bomb radiation, modem history of the city and museum architecture. Likewise, the members that compose the board of the New War Museum will stand behind its approach to exhibiting war history, and the ideas it pioneers. The masterminds behind the museum are the ones who mold the museum's existence and day-to-day operations; it is of utmost importance that they are selected with much contemplation and the findings reached in this section in mind.

Th e Implications of Place

The final logistical aspect that I will examine inthis chapter is location: Where

should the imagined museum be placed, and how significant is the setting? It is oftenthe case that with location come serious implications. This is most evidently portrayed through museums such as the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum, the Nagasaki Atomic

Bomb Museum and the Okinawa Peace Memorial Museum. The location in which these

museums are situated carry tremendous significance. Hiroshima Peace Memorial

Museum and the Nagasaki Atomic Bomb Museum were constructed near the epicenter of the atomic bombs, symbolic experiences unique to these cities. Hiroshima Peace

Memorial Museum is situated across from the Atomic Bomb Dome, an emblematic

structure that withstood the atomic blast and has been preserved since 1945 as a material

token of the destruction. Moreover, the museum, which is located in a deltaic region, is

flanked by two of Hiroshima's maj or rivers where countless victims perished.43 Okinawa

Peace Memorial Museum is located on the shores of ltoman City in the main island of

43 An annual memorial service is held on the anniversary of the atomic bombs, in which lanterns are released into the rivers to console the souls that were lost.

89 Okinawa, a Southern Japanese islet where a major campaign took place during the Pacific

War. Known as the Battle of Okinawa, it was the only engagement to have occurred on

Japanese soil, and the largest military operation of the Pacific War in which both belligerents suffered heavy casualties. Itoman, the city in which the Peace Memorial

Museum is located, was the Southernbastion of the defending Japanese army. The

Okinawa Peace Memorial Museum is situated in this symbolic site.

The museums that have been studied in depth thus far, such as Yushiikan and

Peace Osaka, are also located in sites that are related to their topics and missions.

Yiishiikan is situated in Kudan, the district where the Imperial Palace is located. This testifiesto the museum's wartime proximity to the emperor, andits symbolic role in the

Empire of Japan and the imperial army. Peace Osaka, on the other hand, was constructed atop the former site of one of Osaka's major factories that produced heavy artillery and other weapons during the war.44 The choice of location reflectsthe museum's mission to not only depict Osaka as a target of air raids, but also an active perpetrator: Osaka's wartime industry was sustained through the production of weapons andamm unition, which would later be used against peoples abroad. These are some examples where the war museum was placed in a location that carried geopolitical significance, and implications to its theme and mission. Choosing a favorable location for my war museum, however, is not as straightforward a task. This is because the New War Museum is not associated with a single event, demographic or region that would allow me to choose an obvious location that has geopolitical ties with the topic. It encompasses the war as a whole: I must therefore contemplate the location through a different approach.

44 Peace Osaka, "Senseki meguri to kanko moderu kosu," Osaka International Peace Center, last modified 2007, http://www .peace-osaka.or.jp/model_course/.

90 Let us now consider the Tokyo Peace Memorial Museum (hereafterTokyo Peace

Museum), a museum that memorializes the victims of the Tokyo air raids. The story behind Tokyo Peace Museum shows the gravity of location, and reveals obstacles that can thwart efforts to choose a suitable site. The first point that must be made about the

Tokyo Peace Museum is that it does not exist. Its blueprint was conceived in 1987, but the physical construction of the museum never took place. According to the initial

proposal, it bore a striking resemblance to Peace Osaka, the Kyoto Museum, and other

"peace museums" of its time. Among the key elements of its mission were: to convey the

tragedies of war; to portray the destruction of Tokyo by air raids; to cooperate with the

international community in order to propagate the message fo r peace; and to actively

involve the citizens of Tokyo in this proj ect.45 Moreover, like Peace Osaka, it realized the

need to acknowledge that Japan was the perpetrator of the war. It stressed the importance

of the "wartime experience of invasion and colonization that the Asia-Pacific region

endured as a result of Japanese involvement."46 Reflective of this statement, a large

portion of the planned exhibition covered "The Path Leading to the Tokyo Air Raids,"

which would have looked almost analogous to Peace Osaka' s "Exhibition B."47 The

initial proposal also stressed a strong desire fo r independent citizens' groups and a private

8 fo undation to operate and fund the museum. 4

In 1995, the planners submitted their proposal to Aoshima Yukio, then governor

of Tokyo. The reason that the Tokyo Peace Museum never reached fo rmation was largely

45 Heiwa Hakubutsukan o Tsukuru Kai, "Shutoken ni kaisetsu ga kitai sareru 'heiwa hakubutsukan' kihon koso, shian," The Japan Peace Museum (January 1987): 6-8, http://www.peace museum.org/documentcenter/concept/index.htm/. 46 Heiwa Hakubutsukan o Tsukuru Kai, 3. 47 CaryKaracas, "Place, Public Memory, and the Tokyo Air Raids," The Geographical Review I 00, no. 4 (October 2010): 529. 48 Heiwa Hakubutsukan o Tsukuru Kai, 11.

91 due to the fact that the planners-a coalition of citizens' groups based in Tokyo-were unable to reach an agreement with the municipal government over logistical issues such as physical scope of the museum structure, and issues of content such as portraying Japan as the war' s perpetrator.49 A major obstacle that hindered the process, and which I would like to fo cus on fo r the purposes of this section, is the heated debate that erupted on the topic of location. Although it was not the only issue that plagued the Tokyo Peace

Museum, fa ilure to agree on a favorable location was a crucial flawthat contributed to the museum's ultimate demise. Cary Karacas, an American geographer who specializes in catastrophes and their memorialization in urban landscapes, has studied the Tokyo

Peace Museum and the subsequent dispute that unfolded in detail. Upon receiving the proposal from a citizens' organization, named the Group to Establish a Peace Museum

(Heiwa Hakubutsukan o Tsukuru Kai), the municipal government reviewed the plans and suggested that the museum be housed in Y okoami Park.5 0 Yokoami Park is located in

Sumida Ward near Tokyo Bay, and was fo unded and maintained by the municipal government.

This was a controversial proposition, which was summarily met with much wrath from various citizens' groups for a number of reasons. First, the park's relatively small area necessitated a significant downsizing of the museum.5 1 The municipal government proposed that the exhibition space would be reduced from 2,000 square meters, as initially planned, to 900 square meters. The physical area of the park, the officials argued,

simply could not accommodate the large structure of the Tokyo Peace Museum. There

49 Tsutomu Iwakura, "Tokyo-to chiji Aoshima Sachio sama, Tokyo-to Heiwa Kinenkan (kasho) ni tsuite no

iken 'Tomin kara no iken kobo ni kotaete'," The Japan Peace Museum (November 1998): 1-2, http://www.peace-museum.org/documentcenter/for- tokyo/pm-tokyo.htm. 5° Karacas, 520. 5 1 Karacas, 530.

92 was more to the issue. Second, Yokoami Park was already home to a memorial and museum fo r a separate historical event: the Great Kanto Earthquake of 1923. This was one of the most disastrous earthquakes to have ever ravaged Japan, in where 90,000 people perished. 44,000 died in the vicinity of Yokoami Park, which explains why the city decided to construct the Earthquake Memorial Hall, a shrine-like memorial for the victims, and the Reconstruction Commemoration Hall, a museum exhibiting the history

52 ofthe earthquake, within the park grounds. The Earthquake Memorial Hall dominates the center of the park, and the Reconstruction Commemoration Hall is a robust structure that situates itself in the eastern section. City officials demanded that the Tokyo Peace

Museum be merged with this Reconstruction Commemoration Hall through a series of renovations: both the physical structure of the museums, and the exhibitions themselves,

53 they argued, would have to be merged.

Those opposing the Yokoami Park option, which included the original Group to

Establish a Peace Museum, air-raid survivors, bereaved families, local residents and architects, were immensely dissatisfied with the suggestion. In a series of statements in protest, they voiced their concerns that "Y okoami Park could not accommodate the

5 memorialization of two separate catastrophes." 4 Hashimoto Yoshiko, an air-raid survivor and dissenter explained that "given the scale of suffering experienced on the site in 1923

55 [ ...] not enough room was leftto represent another tragedy." Moreover, in a 1998 report,

Iwakura Tsutomu, president of the Group to Establish a Peace Museum, stated:

"Personally, I fe el that [the idea of] earthquake-plus-air-raid is crude. Ever since I was a

52 Karakas, 522. 53 Karakas, 530. 54 Karakas, 530. 55 Karakas, 530.

93 child, every time there was an earthquake I would be taught of the tragedies associated with the Earthquake Memorial Hall; so it is difficult fo r me, emotionally, to accept the idea of merging the museums."56 Memorializing more than one tragedy in a single space

-especially a small space-thus sparked a significant controversy. The planners behind the museum fe rvently opposed the city's suggestion to place the museum in Yokoami

Park, because a sanctuary for a separate catastrophe was already occupying the spaceTo them, Y okoami Park was not an appropriate location that could provide fo r the dual tragedies of the Great Kanto Earthquake and the Tokyo air raids.

Another wave of dissent came from the museum planners when the municipal government suggested that the Tokyo Peace Museum be built underground in Yokoami

7 Park, in order to keep the existing structures for the Earthquake victims intact. 5 lwakura summarily-and quite angrily-dismissed this suggestion, stating that "Placing the

'peace symbol of twenty-first century Tokyo' in an underground chamber in Yokoami

Park is appalling," and urged the municipal government to "consider a new location fo r

8 the museum with more sincerity."5 Dissenters resisted the idea of constructing the museum underground, because it would marginalize the significance of the Tokyo air raids, and disrespect both the victims and survivors. The opposition exerted all the more energy to thwart the government's plans, holding public meetings, signature drives and petition movements.59

56 lwakura, 2. 57 Karakas, 530. 58 lwakura, 2. 59 Karakas, 530.

94 The death knell for the museum sounded in August 1999 when the metropolitan government passed a revolution that froze the construction of the museum altogether.60

Admittedly, there were a number of fo rces that acted against the establishment of Tokyo

Peace Museum. As touched upon previously, these included the city's reluctance in meeting the planners' initial demands, the right-wing counteroffensive against peace museums that picked up steam during this period, and the election of a conservative governor, Ishihara Shinataro, who in 1999 refused to support its construction. However, a major obstacle that the Tokyo Peace Museum faced, andthat I have argued was a crucial reason behind the museum plan's ultimate collapse, was its proposed location. The fact that the planners and the local administration were unable to find or agree upon a suitable location indicates that placing a museum is an essential decision that must be contemplated carefully. A small monument devoted to those lost in the Tokyo air raids, named the Dwelling ofPeace, stands in Yokoami Parktoday; the result of later compromises made between citizens and the city in 1999.61 Tokyo Peace Museum itself has not yet materialized to this day.

The above observations have yielded significant lessons. Drawing from what I have learned, I propose that the New War Museum will be located in Tokyo, the capital city of Japan. Tokyo, being one of the most multi-cultural of Japanese cities, will pragmatically allow fo r the most exposure of the museum to non-Japanese visitors: cross- cultural discussion within the exhibition space, as I have demonstrated in the previous chapter, is a key aspect of my mission. More specifically, the New War Museum will be placed in Bunkyo Ward ofTokyo. Literally translating to "literary capital," Bunkyo is a

6° Karakas, 532. 61 Karakas, 532.

95 metropolitan districtknown fo r being the city's educational center: it is home to a number of prestigious universities (including the University of Tokyo's main Hongo campus), and renowned literati such as Natsume Soseki, Mori Ogai and Higuchi Ichiyo have resided in the neighborhood. With deep cultural roots in academia, intellectual discourse and the arts, Bunkyo Ward is a district that is compatible with the aims of my museum.

Magnifying further in, the museum structure will be constructed in a location within

Bunkyo that the sponsoring university, discussed earlier in the chapter, holds privately.

The university campus is one option, but the onlyrequirement that is ab solutely necessary is that the university owns the property of interest. The museum can be established in a favorable location away from the university's main campus, as long as the above prerequisite is met. Finally, the location cannot hold memorial functions or be associated with other historical events, as this might create undesired tension between multiple contingents. This has been demonstrated through the unfortunate downfall of the

Tokyo Peace Museum. To recapitulate, the New War Museum will be located on private land held by the sponsoring university, in the Bunkyo Ward of Tokyo, Japan. The location has been decided with deliberation over fa ctors including pragmatic advantages, geopolitical significance, andmost importantly, compatibility of values.

Secure the Logistics

In order to successfully execute my concept, I have established and secured a durable logistical structure. For a war museum to uphold its mission, it must be constructed upon a number of key pillars. In this chapter, I explored options for funding base, administrative committee and location. By examining the various socio-political

96 histories of war museums in Japan, I have deduced valuable lessons for the logistics of my own imagined museum. First, that fu nding should be sought from a private source.

Given the generous scale of my envisaged museum, it would be most practical if l sought funding from a large, private institution; the best option being the liberal, private university. The reason behind this decision is that private universities have little to no direct influence from the state-an entity that I strive to avoid-and that my museum mission might be well-received in the academic community.

Second, the museum administration will exclude politicians, civil servants and other government personnel. We have seen that operation and management are most efficiently carried out when a diverse group of professionals takes up the task. These individuals would include persons with expert background in key areas such as war history, museology, curatorship and architecture. More specifically pertaining to the New

War Museum, the committee will be comprised of a heterogeneous team of individuals with a diverse spectrum of views on the war. The crucial characteristic is that they must all express their will to uphold the museum mission; that is, they must embrace and support the concept in which war history is depicted through a multitude of lenses and perspectives, and the interpretations largely left up to the visitors.

Finally, the museum must be located in a suitable site. As I have shown, war museums are often placed deliberately in a location that is geopolitically relevant to their exhibited content or mission. However, given the nature of my museum, which, contrary to the likes of Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum and Okinawa Peace Memorial

Museum, does not possess a specific topic that could be linked to a location with fundamental ties, the decision becomes trickier. Moreover, as seen through the Tokyo

97 Peace Museum, there are sites that already hold meaning and implications to other historical events, making them inappropriate options fo r additional memorials or museums. Location, then, must be chosen with careful consideration. As fo r my imagined museum, it will be located in the Bunkyo Ward of Tokyo. More specifically, it will be established on land privately owned by the sponsoring university. These decisions ensure that the New War Museum will make the most out of the advantages associated with its location.

The mission, exhibition and logistical structures have finallybeen laid out fo r the

New War Museum. It is my hope that through these chapters, the concept fo r my imagined museum has been conveyed and justified through the analysis of extant war museums in Japan. In the fo llowing section, which concludes this study, I will briefly repaint the concept of my museum, flush out the remaining details, and consider how it contributes to the current landscape of Japanese war museums. To these closing remarks I now tum.

98 Conclusion: Blueprint fo r a New Vision

Sowing the Seed

Although I doubt that such a site as the proposed New War Museum will materialize in Japan in the nearfuture, I am confidentthat my idea has provided valuable

input and has offered something new to the scholarship on museology and war history in

Japan. My proj ect offers two elements to the existing historiography: First, it presents a

comparative analysis of a number of dissimilar war museums in Japan by surveying their

socio-political histories; and second, fromthis analysis I devise both conceptual and

logistical solutions to the issues I saw by proposing a unique war museum that embodies

my findings.

The final vision of the New War Museum attempts to accomplish many goals. It

is located in the Bunkyo Ward of Tokyo, Japan, for its compatibility with the district's

cultural roots. The private university will sponsor the museum, so that it can secure

sufficientfunds and support from a sympathetic academic community. A group of

diverse individuals with expertise in fieldspertinent to museology and history, and with a

commitment to its mission, will be selected to administer the museum. The museum's

permanent exhibition will present war history by displaying a number of artifacts and

contextualizing them through multiple lenses. Supplementary facilities, including a

reference library, multi-media rooms, lecture hall and theater will be incorporated to offer

visitors a more complete museum experience. A large and diverse audience will visit the

site, and engage in discourse amongst each other both within and outside museum

grounds. Such is the envisioned implementation of the New War Museum. In essence, the

ultimate purpose of this project was to suggest a solution to an issue that I found

99 problematic and detrimental to History as a field of study. Through the completion of this study, I offered a potential fo rmula that could solve the problem that I perceived in the practice of exhibiting war history in Japanese museums. The value of the project lies in its strong fo undation on both theory and empirical evidence, making it not only imaginative, but also achievable, if i chose to pursue its realization later on in my career.

The intention was to make my proposed museum as practical and realistic as possible. If my readers were convinced even of the slightest possibility that my museum could be established, I have successfully arrived at my goal.

Perhaps some may adeptly point out that the blueprint fo r the New War Museum does not directly remedy the difficulties that the individual war museums examined throughout this study have faced. If I took issue with the way war museums are designed and curated, why not fix the sites themselves? Why devise plans fo r a new museum that might face its own obstacles? My response to this contention is that an attempt to instigate an all-inclusive "revolution" throughout the entire landscape of war museums is simply impossible and unproductive. With such a straightforward approach comes a torrent of complications. It requires an unimaginable amount of time, resources and capital, not to mention persuading the curators of each museum that a change incourse is necessary.

Moreover, I do not wish to alter the vast landscape of museums to fit the particular vision demonstrated in my museum. Modifying all museums to match my

model would naturally create a homogeneous topography that contradicts the philosophy

and values expressed throughout this project; that diversity is key. This is another reason

why the most fitting option was to suggest a new war museum altogether. Planting a

100 unique site into the current landscape, I conjectured, would serve as material commentary to the issues I had discerned. The introduction of this innovative concept might stimulate the minds not only of my museum's valued visitors, but also the curators and planners of

peer war museums, and in turn the broader historical and scholarly community. My aim

was therefore not to launch a radical revolution that would sweep throughout and alter the

entire population of museums, but to place a new idea-a seed-into the heart of Tokyo.

Ideally, it would encourage and motivate people to think more critically and analytically

about museums, about war, and about the discipline of history and "history-telling" in a

broader sense.

A Word on War Museums Abroad

I must acknowledge that the scope of this study was significantly narrowed within

the borders of Japan and a certain time period. War museums exist across the world in

many countries. There are some sites that I would now like to bring to our attention, in

addition to their Japanese counterparts that have been explored in this project. These

include war museums in the Unites States, South Korea and China. I will also touch upon

sites in Germany, a vanquished nation that has often been compared to Japan in historical

scholarship.

Perhaps the event that best highlights the debate over exhibiting war history in the

U.S. is the Enola Gay controversy. As Rein and Takenaka opened their comparative

study on U.S. and Japanese war museums, "There was little conflict over museum

portrayals of World War II [in the U.S.] until the huge battle over the National Air and

Space Museum's 1995 exhibit on the Enola Gay (the airplane used to drop the bomb on

101 Hiroshima)."1 The curators of the museum, which is part of the Smithsonian Institute, initially planned an exhibition that would juxtapose the plane with the nuclear destruction wrought upon the city of Hiroshima. This would have been achieved by displaying photographs and artifacts that conveyed the harrowing nature of the bomb, borrowed from the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum, alongside the aircraft itself. The plans were subsequently halted, however, when the curators met fierce protest from veterans' groups claiming that such an exhibition would send an unfavorable, "anti-American" message to the visitors, many of whom were young American children. The curators ultimately capitulated; the museum currently displays the Enola Gay "without discussing the human suffering caused by its use or the ambiguous legacy of nuclear weaponry since

1945," and as Hein and Takenaka cogently concluded, the outcome "suggests that

Americans are not yet willing to take Japanese opinions into consideration when

designing exhibits about the war."2 The museum's integrity was thus jeopardized due to

pressures exerted by a powerful, external organization. Parallels can be drawn here with the likes of Peace Osaka in Japan; any exhibition or museum is prone to pressures from

various political fo rces.

Japanese war museums have also been compared and contrasted with sites in

other Asian countries, namely South Korea and China. Hong Kal, a scholar on visual art

and culture, explored similarities and differences in Japanese and South Korean museums

in her article, "Commemoration and the Construction ofNationalism: Warmemorial

Museums in Korea and Japan." One of South Korea's most prominent war museums is

the WarMemorial of Korea, a state-sanctioned institution located in the capital city of

1 Hein and Takenaka, 63. 2 Hein and Takenaka, 91.

102 Seoul. The site opened in 1994, and as Kal observed, "commemorate[s] the war dead who sacrificedtheir lives fo r the defense of the nation," and imbues the visitors with patriotic spirit.3 The massive structure boasts robust exhibitions, large monuments, a 4D theater, and a collection of war machines, among other elements. The themes covered in its exhibitions range from ancient history to the Korean War (1950-1953). Interestingly, the section on the Asia-Pacific War is modestly presented in terms of length and depth when compared to the other sections. As the main purpose of the museum is to glorify

Korea's war history, the curators most likely glossed over this period, which was defined by colonization under Japanese rule. In sharp contrast, the Independence Hall of Korea, another national institution located in Cheonan, 95 kilometers to the south from Seoul, opened its doors to the public in 1987 withthe specific aimto expose the criminality of

Japanese colonization (and other fo reign invasions that occurred throughout Korea's history), and honor those who defended the land until the nation gained independence in

1945.4 The atmosphere of the Independence Hall is exceptionally patriotic, and is designed to convey the adversity of Japanese militarism. These two sites, among others, have been studied in Japanese scholarship on museology, especially in works published in the 1990s. As seen through these sites, the aims endeavored in South Korean war museums primarily involve instigating and maintaining a high sense of patriotism among the audience; as Kal has suggested, this may be due to the ongoing threat posed by the

conflict and tensions with North Korea. 5 There seems to be little variety in perspectives

on the war. To the curators, it was a war of resistance, independence and redemption, and

3 Kal, 135. 4 Deoksang Kang, "Nittei shokuminchi shihai to chOsen minzoku," in Senso Hakubutsukan, ed. Shin'ichi Arai (Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1994), 41. 5 Kal, 135.

103 visitors are constantly reminded of where the Japanese stood at this time in history.

Moreover, the central governmentof South Korea administers and funds most prominent war museums in the nation, which suggests that the exhibited material is designed to

promote state-sanctioned narratives. Again, the power dynamic between state and museum is an issue that can be discerned in South Korea as well.

China also has a robust array of war museums, many of which specificallytake up the war of independence waged against Japan. According to Kasahara Tokushi, a

Japanese historian, there are three categories of war museums in China: provincial

museums, museums on the anti-Japanese war in general, and museums on massacres and

war crimes that the Japanese fo rces committed.6 All three categories of museums offer

war history as a vital component of their exhibitions. Like South Korean sites, Chinese

museums revolve around the dissemination of patriotism and pride in the nation's history.

The Japanese are oftenportra yed as perpetrators and antagonists, and the war is painted

as a righteous struggle for independence. The national and provincial governments

administer and sponsor most of these public museums. A rudimentary survey as

conducted above demonstrates that a large portion of war museums in both South Korea

and China were established and are maintained by the state, and promote state-sanctioned

narratives. There is little to no room for a variety in accounts and perspectives, and the

paradigmatic purpose fo r these sites is to bolster patriotism and a sense of national

identity among the audience.

Finally, on war museums in Germany: As a vanquished nation like Japan,

German war museums have traditionally shied away from overtly glorifying its war

6 Tokushi Kasahara, "Chiigoku no konichi senso kinenkan," in Senso Hakubutsukan, ed. Shin'ichi Arai (Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1994), 47.

104 history. An exhibition titled "Hitler and the Germans: Nation and Crime," which opened in 2010 at the German Historical Museum in Berlin, was exposed to media coverage fo r its unique take on the war in Germany. The New York Times reported that it focused on the "everyday way that ordinary Germans once accepted, and often celebrated, Hitler," and how and why "the society [ ...] nurtured and empowered him."7 The curators explained: Presenting the message that "Hitler did not corral the Germans as much as the

Germans elevated Hitler [ ...] was arguably more vital fo r Germany now [ ...] as rising nationalism, more open hostility to immigrants and a generational disconnect from the

8 events of the Nazi era have older Germans concerned about repeating the past." The exhibition, in other words, was designed as a material reminder and warning to contemporary society for Germany's wartime blunders. As the curators asserted, this type of exhibition would have been difficult to initiate a few decades ago: In 1995, an exhibition in Hamburg "was widely condemned for showing that the Wehrmacht, or regular army, committed atrocities on the eastern fr ont, just like [ ...] the Nazi special police. The public was not ready to widen the sense of responsibility fo r Nazi-era wrongs."9 We can observe that Germany, like Japan, underwent a period of debate and controversy over war history and its representation in museum settings. This particular exhibition was a direct product of this discourse.

In all of these countries, the exhibition of war history has been a significant subj ect that continues to draw attention and controversy. The advantage of my New War

Museum is that the model has the potential to transcend national borders. The concept of

7 Michael Slackman, "Hitler Exhibition Explores a Wider Circle of Guilt," New York Times Online, October 15, 2010, http://www.nytimes.com/20 I 0/1 0/16/world/europe/16hitler.html?pagewanted=all. 8 Slackman, "Hitler Exhibition Explores a Wider Circle of Guilt." 9 Slackman, "Hitler Exhibition Explores a Wider Circle of Guilt."

105 establishing a museum thattackles the war experience through multiple perspectives has the promises of success in any one ofthese countries: Japan, the United States, South

Korea, China or Germany. There could very well be a New War Museum in the U.S. that incorporates both Japanese and American interpretations of the Enola Gay. Although slightly more complicated in South Korea and China-the influencethat the state retains over the representation of history is relatively powerful-aNew War Museum could exist that tackles the war in ways that attempt to fo ster mutual understanding, and alleviate tensions between these nations and Japan in the present day. The German museological community might also see advantages in incorporating a New War Museum into its landscape, in order to assist the curbing of social issues that the curators of the German

Historical Museum viewed with much concern. For the purposes of this particular project,

I reasoned that it would be most productive ifi worked only within the context and

framework of Japanese history, instead of attempting cross-national comparisons.

Research on these foreign sites should firstbe done within the context of their national

histories, and only then can one venture to carry out a comparative project. Such an

enterprise lies far beyond the scope of this study, but it could be worthwhile to gauge the

degree of fe asibility and usefulness the New War Museum model in diverse

environments that lie beyond Japan.

A Personal Aim Fulfilled

As a second-generation Japanese American, I have personally experienced the

legacy of the Asia-Pacific War. My parents emigrated from Japan to the U.S. in the 70s; I

was bornin 1992, in New York City. Although I was exposed to the history of"World

1 06 War II" beginning in the latter grades of elementary school, it seemed to have occurred in a land and time far away from the small universe in which I dwelt. However, through the occasional conversations about the war with my fa mily and relatives, I began to recognize its gravity at an earlier age than most. All of my grandparents were involved in the war effort, and I would gather brief extracts of their experiences during the rare instances when they shared their stories. My paternal grandfather served as an army recruit stationed in the southern Japanese island of Kyiishii. Although he had passed away before I was born, my father informed me that he had manned a radar station, and that he would be the first to flee the site when the specks on the screen indicating Allied bombers appeared. My maternal grandfather was an aeronautical engineer: he designed planes for the Imperial Navy. During the latter stages ofthe war, he resided in the development team for the Shusui, a jet-propelled fighter thatnever saw the light of day. Althoughhe currently suffers from dementia, I remember how he would often show me his collection of books on war machines that lined his atelier. Both of my grandmothers were mobilized at munitions factories in the Kansai area of Japan. I have found that they are more reluctant to share their stories; their memories are defined by perilous experiences of narrow escapes from the constant air raids that targeted their factories. My maternal grandmother still vividly remembers a traumatic incident where Allied planes gunned down a fe llow classmate when they had been standing inches apart.

My initial academic encounter with war history occurred when I received my first history textbook in a public middle school in New York City. Given the stories I heard

from my grandparents, I had entered the classroom with a Japanese-centric view of the war experience. I was appalled when I opened the textbook, only to see that the Japanese

107 were painted as evil adversaries, and the there were many events that exposed the brutality ofthe Japanese army. The two that I remember vividly are the sections on Pearl

Harborand the Bataan Death March, as these were chronicled in great detail in the textbook. What I found especially offending at the time was the textbook's account on the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The chapter described the events as a necessary evil; that the U.S. made the correct decision because it saved a tremendous number of lives fo r both sides. To me, this conclusion was absolutely blasphemous. I recall heatedly countering this claim and asserting the criminality of the action in a class debate.10 It was aroundthis time that I began to sense the conflictbetween my own views with those taught in the classroom. I would soon feel the fu ll force of this clash when I entered high school in 2006.

Throughout my teenage yearsas a high school student, I encountered many

instances where my Asian American peers aggressively confronted me about Japanese

war atrocities committed during the imperial campaign. Being the only Japanese

(American) individual in my school, I became the obligatory individual on whom the

blame was assigned. They often demanded apology or indemnification for what my

ancestors had supposedly done to theirs. In other words, I had become somewhat of a

standard-bearer fo r a wartime Japan, whose history they viewed with much contempt.

Ever since, I took interest inhow the war and its legacy affected the lives of both the

people of the past and present, especially in Japan, the United States and Asia. The

regrettable aspect of all of this, though, was that my "interest" inhistory was at the time

being propelled with a fe ar of and disdain for my Asian American peers. I vowed that I

10 Thankfully, my instructor organized a debate to discuss Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I am gratefulthat my school was rather liberal, and encouraged discussion over lecture.

108 would study history in order to prove my peers wrong, and to redeem the dignity of my grandparents and my culture �hat they had so insolently defamed. I made it my personal aim to become an expert in war history when I attended college.

Nevertheless, as we matured, such incidents gradually lessened and ceased altogether by the time I graduated high school. My fe ar and disdain also progressively diminished. When I entered Williams College, the episodes became distant and bittersweet memories of my generally idyllic teenage years. It was hence due solely to the

appeal of Williams' history courses and department-a coincidence unrelated to my pre

college experiences-that I decided to major in the discipline. Never in high school did I

imagine, or could have fo reseen, that I would even choose to write a thesis on war history.

In retrospect, however, it all makes sense. It is evident that these decisions were

subconsciously made as a result of what I had experienced earlier in my life: the oral

histories passed down from my grandparents, the textbooks I encountered in school, the

petulant conflicts with my peers ... The dots have been connected, as these experiences

were what ultimately led to the inception and completion of this project. The crucial

difference between then and now, as I realize today, is that this journey was propelled not

by fe ar and disdain, but by a real curiosity and scholarly interest in the discipline of

history. In other words, my personal aim fr om back in high school was fulfilled, but

without its undesirable elements. I am now enjoying the most desirable outcome possible,

allowing me to look back on this project with great satisfaction.

Warhistory manifests in a multitude of ways, one of which, as we have seen,

includes the war museum. The war museum was a favorable starting point, as I always

harbored a curiosity in the fields of curatorship and museology. It was one element that I

109 happened to focus on in order to explore a way in which war history was passed on and passed down. Textbooks, the medium that sparked my questioning of war history in grade school, are another. Documentary films, academic lectures and scholarly publications are further examples. The findings that I have presented here in this particular project, in other words, comprise just one piece of the grand puzzle. Exploring other methods and media of war history must be reserved for another occasion, but they are valuable steps that I must take in order to complete the larger picture in the future.

Th e Future of Japanese WarMus eums

While I can only speculate on the future of war museums, I imagine there to be a movement in Japan towards the establishment of newer, innovative museums, just like mine, that tackle the war in novel ways. Discourse on the representation of war history is a topic that is garnering attention at an unprecedented level in Japan today, given tense relations between Japanese and Asian nations over a myriad of issues: territorial disputes, the Yasukuni Shrine controversy and profound differences in national historiography, to name a fe w. I predict that the war museum, being a practical medium that can be used effectively to disseminate historical narratives, will be reappraised as a key device that boasts enormous potential to influence not only international relations, but also, simply

but more crucially, the way in which people remember and reconcile with war in general.

We can choose to exploit the war museum as a channel to promulgate dangerous,

nationalistic-propagandistic messages on war; but the war museum can also serve,

conversely, as a constructive instrument that allows us to teach and convince posterity

fromrepeating the grave mistake, that is, of waging of war. War museums do not make

110 this vital decision: We do. Here, I put forth my blueprint for a new vision, and it is my hope that it will spark intellectual discourse on this matter among relevant communities and the society at large today.

111 Images and Diagrams

Image 1.1: Th e Sp ectrum Mo del of Japanese War Museums

Tok-yo Mugonkan SDF Museums I

Kvoto,.; Okinawa I I Saitama Hiroshima ERLPC Chiran I I

Left-leaning Neutral Right-leaning

Diagram created by author.

112 Image 2.1: Fall of Nanjing

"Bild 183: Japanische Truppen bei der Einnahrne von Nanking," January 1938, Allgemeiner Deutscher Nachrichtendienst, Zweiter Japanisch-Chinesischer Krieg, Das Bundesarchiv, 183-U1002-502, http://www.bild.bundesarchiv.de/archives/barchpic/view/7844405.

Image 2.2: Female fa ctory workers in wartime Jap an

"Rodo busoku ni jyosei teishintai: Gunjyu kojo de kinro hoshi," June 8, 1944, KK Kyodo News Site, last modified July 7, 2013, http://www.kyodo.eo.jp/photo archive/shuusenkinen/attachment/%C2%8Cr%C2%8Eu%C2%8Dh%C2%8Fe%C2%82a%C2%8Bi%C2%9 8j %C2%95o%C2%8Ed/.

113 Image 2.3: Letterfrom General Handy to General Sp aatz

"Letter Received fr om General Thomas Handy to General Carl Spaatz Authorizing the Dropping of the First Atomic Bomb," July 25, 1945, Records of U.S. Air Force Commands, Activities, and Organizations, 1900-2003, National Archives, 542193, http://research.archives.gov/description/542193.

114 Image 2.4: Floor Map of Peace Osaka Exh ibition A

Peace Osaka, A Guide to the Exhibition: OsakaIn ternational Peace Center.

Image 2. 5: Floor Map of Peace Osaka Exhibition B

Peace Osaka, A Guide to the Exhibition: Osaka International Peace Center.

Image 2. 6: Floor Map of Peace Osaka Exhibition C

Peace Osaka, A Guide to the Exhibition: OsakaIn ternational Peace Center.

115 Image 2. 7: Floor Map of Exh ibition and Reference Library fo r Peace and Consolation

Heiwa Kinen Tenji Shiryokan, "Shisetsu an 'nai," He iwa Kinen Tenji Sh iryokan, last modified20 11, http://www .heiwakinen.j p/facilities/index.html.

Image 2. 8: Floor Map of Exh ibition in Showakan

Showakan, "Shisetsu an'nai," ShOwakan, last modified20 14, http://www.showakan.go.jp/floor/6f7f/index.html.

116 Image 2.9: Floor Map of Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum, Main Building

Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum, "Let's Look at the Displays: Main Building," Hiroshima Peace Site, accessed April I, 2014, http://www.pcf .city.hiroshima.jp/frame/Virtual_e/v isit_e/west.html.

117 Image 2.10: Floor Map of Exh ibition in th e Ne w War Museum

Entrance l r------�

Introduction

Epilogue

Pedestal Cluster 0 0 0 o o o o o o

0 0 0 0

""'" o o o o tTl d) o o o o ;:I () q s:: § � (") ..... � s:: [.l.l tv 0 0 0 0 o o o o o o o o

0 0 0 0 o o o o o o o o

Entrance 3 Diagram created by author.

118 Image 2.11: Th e Belcher Typ ology of Exhibition Sp ace

Michael Belcher, Exhibitions in Museums (Leicester: Leicester University Press, 1991 ), 1 14.

119 Additional Images forRe ference

Yiishiikan, photograph by author.

Peace Osaka, photograph by author

120 Sh6wakan, photograph by author.

121 Bibliography

Primary Sources

Arai, Shin'ichi, ed. Sensa Hakubutsukan. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1999.

"Bild 183: Japanische Truppen bei der Einnahme von Nanking." January 1938. Allgemeiner Deutscher Nachrichtendienst, Zweiter Japanisch-Chinesischer Krieg. Das Bundesarchiv, 183-U1002-502. http://www.bild.bundesarchiv.de/archives/barchpic/view/7844405.

Cabinet of Japan. The Prime Minister of Japan. Yasukunijinjafuzoku Yilshilkan-rei o haishi suru. Tokyo: National Archives of Japan, 1945. http://www.digital.archives.go.jp/DAS/meta/listPhoto?KEYWORD=&LANG=de fault&BID=F0000000000000008066&ID=MOOOOOOOOOOOO 1 776661 &TYPE=& NO=.

City ofHigashi Osaka. "Osaka-fu chiji senkyo." Cityof Higashi Osaka. Last modified February 29, 2012. http://www.city.higashiosaka.lg.jp/0000002588.html.

City of Osaka. "Shicho senkyo no kiroku." City of Osaka. Last modified September 24, 2012 http://www .city.o saka.lg.jp/senkyo/page/0000002993 .html.

Heiwa Hakubutsukan o Tsukuru Kai. "Shutoken ni kaisetsu ga kitai sareru'h eiwa hakubutsukan' kihon koso, shian." TheJapan Peace Museum (January 1987): I ll. http://www. peace-museum.org/documentcenter/concept/index.htm.

Heiwa Kinen Tenji Shiryokan. "Shisetsu an'nai." He iwa Kinen Te nji Shiryokan. Last modified 201 1. http://www .heiwakinen.jp/facilities/index.html.

Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum. "Guide Tours to Peace Memorial Park and Vicinity."Hi roshima Peace Site. Last modified200 1. http://www.pcf.city.hiroshima.jp/frameNirtual_e/tour_e/guide l .html.

---. "Hiroshima Heiwa Kinen Shiryokan tenji kentokai i'in meibo." Hiroshima Peace Site. Last modifiedMarch 19, 2013 . http://www.pcf.city .hiroshima.jp/ken/meibo l .html.

---. "Let's Look at the Displays: Main Building." Hiroshima Peace Site. Accessed April 1, 2014. http://www. pcf.city .hiroshima.jp/frameN irtual_e/visit_ e/we st.html.

Iga, Masahiro. "'Kagai tenji no tekkyo o nerau Peace Osaka 'tenji rinyuaru koso' ni hantai no koe o!" Kodomo Tachi ni Watasuna! Abunai Ky okasho Osaka no Kai (20 13): 1-8. http://www7b.biglobe.ne.jp/�hotline-osaka/pisu.pdf.

122 Iwakura, Tsutomu. "Tokyo-to chiji Aoshima Sachio sama, Tokyo-to Heiwa Kinenkan (kasho) ni tsuite no iken 'Tomin kara no iken kobo ni kotaete' ." The Jap an Peace Museum (November 1998): 1-4. http://www. peace-museum.org/documentcenter/for _tokyo/pm-tok yo.htm.

Koyama, Hitoshi. "Peace Osaka mondai: Saikin no keika ni tsuite." Hisutoria 159 (1998): 133-136.

Kyoto Museum for World Peace. "Introduction: Founding Purpose." Ritsumeikan University. Last modified 1997. http ://www.ritsu mei.ac.jp/mng/er/wp-museum/english/ director_fo unging.html.

---. "Kyoto Museum for World Peace, Ritsumeikan University." Ritsumeikan University. Last modified June 6, 2013. http://www.ritsumei.ac.jp/mng/er/wp museum/englishlindex.html.

--- ."The Fifteen-Year War." Ritsumeikan University. Last modified 1997. http://www.ritsumei.ac.jp/mng/er/wp-museum/english!fifteen_war.html.

"Letter Received from General Thomas Handy to General Carl Spaatz Authorizing the Dropping ofthe First Atomic Bomb." July 25, 1945. Records ofU.S. Air Force Commands, Activities, and Organizations, 1900-2003. National Archives, 542193. http ://research.archives.gov/description/542193.

Mugonkan. "'Ezukuroi bokin' no onegai." Mugonkan. Accessed Feb 16, 2014. http:// www.mugonkan.jp/edukuroi.html.

---. "Senbotsuga gakusei irei bijyutsukan 'Mugonkan' ." Mugonkan. Accessed Feb 16, 2014. http://www.mugonkan.jp/.

"'Nankin dai gyakusatsu' tenji tekkyo e: Nise shashin, waikyoku aitsugi Peace Osaka." Sankei Shimbun, September 18, 2013. http://sankei.jp.msn.com/west/west_life/news/13091 8/wlf13091 811 140003- n1.htm.

Oka Masaharu Kinen Nagasaki Heiwa Kinenkan. "Oka Masaharu san nitsuite ." Oka Masaharu Kinen Nagasaki He iwa Kinenkan. Last modified January 8, 1999. http://www .d3 .dion.ne.jp/�okakinenloka/oka3 .html.

---. "Shiryokan kai'in e no osasoi." Oka Masaharu Kinen Nagasaki He iwa Kinenkan. Last modifiedJanuary 8, 1999. http://www.d3.dion.ne.jp/�okakinenlkaiin.html.

---. "What is 'Nagasaki Peace Museum'?" Oka Masaharu Kinen Nagasaki He iwa Kinenkan. Last modified Jan 8, 1999. http://www.d3.dion.ne.jp/�kakinen!English!setumeiE.html.

123 Osaka Municipal Worker's Union. "'Peace Osaka' o mamori hatten saseru tame." Jichiken Hokokusho-shu 29 (October 2000), http://www.j ichiro.gr.jp/jichiken_kako/report/rep_yamagata28/jichiken_hokoku!h eiwa05/heiwa05 .htm.

Peace Osaka. A Guide to the Exhibition: Osaka In ternational Peace Center. (Museum pamphlet in English.)

"'Peace Osaka', kagai tenji o tekkyo e: Ishin memba ra no 'jigyaku' hihan ga gennin?" J Cast News, February 19, 2013. http:// www.j -cast.com/20 1 3/0211 9 1 660 1 2.html?p=all.

Peace Osaka. "Peace Osaka tenji rinyiiaru 'kihon sekkei' chiikan hokoku." Osaka In ternational Peace Center (2013): 1-2. http://www.peace osaka.or.jp/news/pdf/pdf2013091 0.pdf.

---. "Peace Osaka tenji rinyiiaru koso." Osaka In ternational Peace Center (March 2013): 1-7. http://www.peace-osaka.or.jp/news/pdf!pdf20130406.pdf.

---. "Senseki meguri to kanko modem kosu." Osaka International Peace Center. Last modified 2007. http://www.peace-osaka.or.jp/model_course/.

---. "Yakuin meibo." Osaka In ternational Peace Center. Last modified Jan 24, 2014. http://www.peace-osaka.or.jp/about/pdf/Q201 2_00.pdf.

---. "Zaidan hojin Osaka Kokusai Heiwa Senta: Kifu koi." Osaka In ternational Peace Center (2008): 1-6.

---. "Zaidan hojin Osaka Kokusai Heiwa Senta (Peace Osaka) no gaiyo." Osaka In ternational Peace Center (2007): 1. http://www.peace osaka.or.jp/about!pdflz03.pdf.

Pride. Directed by Shunya Ito. 1998. Tokyo, Japan: Toei Company, Ltd.

"Rodo busoku ni jyosei teishintai: Gunjyu koj o de kinro hoshi." June 8, 1944. KK Kyodo News Site. Last modifiedJuly 7, 2013. http://www.kyodo.co.jp/photo archive/shuusenkinen/attachment!%C2%8Cr%C2%8Eu%C2%8Dh%C2%8Fe%C 2%82a%C2%8Bi%C2%98j%C2%95o%C2%8Ed/.

"Seishikimei 'Showakan'." Asahi Shimbun, December 16, 1998.

Shinshii Totteoki Joho. "Mugonkan, Shinano dessankan." Shinshu Totteoki Joho. Last modified Nov 4, 2013. http://www.mtlabs.co.jp/shinshu/museum/mugon.htm.

Showakan. "Shisetsu an'nai." Showakan. Last modified 2014. http ://www.showakan.go.jp/floor/6flf/index.html.

124 --- . Showa-kan: We Convey the Life of Japanese During and Af ter World War II. (Museum pamphlet in English.)

Ueda City. "Mugonkan." Ueda City Offi cial We bsite. Last modified 2010. http://www. city .ueda.nagano.jplhp/kanko/museum/mugonkan.html.

Yasukuni Jinja, Yushukanzuroku. Tokyo: Yasukuni Jinja, 2000.

Yoshida, Yasuhiko. "'Peace Osaka' no mondaiten." Sensa Shiryo no He nko Tenji o Tadasu Kai (2000): 1-6. http://osaka.nipponkaigi.com/katsudo/p-osaka/.

Yiishiikan. "The History ofYusyukan." Ya sukuni Jinja. Last modified 2008. http://www. yasukuni.jp/-yusyukanlhistory /index.html.

---. Yushukan War Me morial Museum. (Museum pamphlet in English.)

---. "Yushukan." Ya sukuni Jinja. Last modified 2008. http:// www.yasukuni.or.jp/englishlyushukan/.

---. Yushukanyoran. Tokyo: Yiishiikan, 1993.

Yuzawa, Tadashi. "Goaisatsu." In Yushukan zuroku, edited by Yasukuni Jinja. Tokyo: Yasukuni Jinja, 2000.

Secondary Sources

Belcher, Michael. Exhibitions in Museums. Leicester: Leicester University Press, 1991.

Breen, John. "Introduction: A Yasukuni Genealogy." In Ya sukuni, the War Dead and the Struggle fo r Japan 's Past, edited by John Breen, 1-21. New York: Columbia University Press, 2008.

---, ed. Yasukuni, the War Dead and the Struggle fo r Japan 's Past. New York: Columbia University Press, 2008.

Chang, Iris. Th e Rape of Nanking. New York: BasicBooks, 1997.

Doak,Kevin. "A Religious Perspective on the Yasukuni Shrine Controversy." In Yasukuni, the War Dead and the Struggle fo r Japan 's Past, edited by John Breen, 47-69. New York: Columbia University Press, 2008.

Dubin, Steven C. Displays of Power: Memory and Amnesia in the American Museum. New York: London: New York University Press, 1999.

125 Gallicchio, Mark, ed. Th e Unpredictability of the Past: Me mories of the Asia-Pacific War in US-East Asian Relations. Durham: London: Duke University Press, 2007.

Gleason, Alan. "Mugonkan: Pictures Worth Ten Thousand Words." DNP Art Communications. Last modifiedFed 3, 2014. http:// www.dnp.co.jp/artscape/eng!ht/0812.html.

Kal, Hong. "The Aesthetic Construction of Ethnic Nationalism: War Memorial Museums in Korea and Japan." In Rethinking Historical Injustice and Reconciliation in Northeast Asia: Th e Korean Experience, edited by Gi Wook Shin, Soon-Won Park and Daqing Yang, 133-153. New York: Routledge, 2007.

Kang, Deoksang. "Nittei shokuminchi shihai to chosen minzoku." In Sensa Hakubutsukan, edited by Shin'ichi Arai, 41-46. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1994.

Karacas, Cary. "Place, Public Memory, and the Tokyo Air Raids." The Geographical Review 100, no. 4 (October 2010): 521-537.

Kasahara, Tokushi. "Chugoku no konichi senso kinenkan." In Sensa Hakubutsukan, edited by Shin'ichi Arai, 47-52. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1994.

Harwit, Martin. An Exhibit Denied: Lobbying the History of Enola Gay.New York: Copernicus Springer-Verlag, 1996.

Hein, Laura and Akiko Takenaka. "Exhibiting World War II in Japan andthe United States since 1995." PacificHi storical Review 76, no.l (2007): 61-94.

---. "Exhibiting World War II in Japan and the United States." The Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus, July 20, 2007. http://www.j apanfocus.org/-Laura Hein/2477.

Luke, Timothy W. Museum Politics: Power Plays at the Exhibition. Minneapolis: University of Minneapolis Press, 2002.

Igarashi, Yoshiku ni. Bodies of Memory: Narratives of War in Postwar Japanese Culture, 1945-1970. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2012.

Ma, Xiaohua. "Constructing a National Memory of War: War Museums in China, Japan, and the United States." In Th e Unpredictability of the Past: Memories of the Asia Pacific War in US.-East Asian Relations, edited by Marc Gallicchio 155-200. Durham: London: Duke University Press, 2007.

MacDonald, Sharon, ed. Th e Politics of Disp lay: Museums, Science, Culture. New York: London: Routledge, 1998.

126 Nitta, Hiroshi. "And Why Shouldn't the Japanese Prime Minister Worship at Yasukuni? A Personal View." In Yasukuni, the War Dead and the Struggle fo r Japan 's Past, edited by John Breen, 125-142. New York: Columbia University Press, 2008.

Ockman, Joan, ed. Out of Ground Zero: Case Studies in Urban Reinvention. Munich: New York, Prestel Verlag, 2002.

Orr, James J. Victim as Hero: Ideologies of Peace and National Identity in Postwar Japan. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2001.

Rekishi Kyoikusha Kyogikai .. Zaho heiwa hakubutsukan sensa shiryakan gaido bukku Tokyo: Aoki Shoten, 2004.

Sekiguchi, Toko. "Osaka Mayor Stirs Anger by Calling Comfort Women Necessary Evil." The Wa ll Street Jo urnal, March 14, 2013. http://blogs. wsj .com/japanrealtime/20 1 3/05/14/osaka-mayor-stirs-anger-by calling-comfort-women-necessary-evil/.

Shin, Gi Wook, Soon-Won Park and Daqing Yang, ed. Rethinking Historical Injustice and Reconciliation in Northeast Asia: The Korean Experience. New York: Routledge, 2007.

Shin, Gi-Wook, and Daniel C. Sneider, ed. History Textbooks and the Wars in Asia: Divided Memories. London: Routledge, 2011.

Slackman, Michael. "Hitler Exhibition Explores a Wider Circle of Guilt." The New Yo rk Times Online. October 15, 2010, http:// www.nytimes.com/20 10/1 0/1 6/world/europe/16hitler.html?pagewanted=all.

Smith, Kerry. "The Showa Hall: Memorializing Japan's War at Home." The Public Historian 24, no. 4 (Fall 2002): 35-64.

Sneider, Daniel C. "The War Over Words: History Textbooks and International Relations in Northeast Asia." In History Textbooks and the Wars in Asia: Divided Memories, edited by Gi-Wook Shin and Daniel C. Sneider, 246-268. London: Routledge, 2011.

Tanaka, Nobumasa. "Keisho sarenai rekishi: 'Senbotsusha Tsuito Heiwa Kinenkan' (kasho) koso o ou." Sensa Sekinin 1 (January 1994): 8-31.

Wakamiya, Yoshibumi and Tsuneo Watanabe."Yomiuri and Asahi Editors Call for a National Memorial to Replace Yasukuni." Japan Focus, February 14, 2006, http://www.j apanfocus.org/-Watanabe-Tsuneo/2 124.

127 Van den Dungen, Peter. "Preventing Catastrophe: The World's First Peace Museum." Ritsumeikan Kokusai Kenkyu 18, no. 3 (March 2006): 23-36. http://www.ritsumei.ac.jp/acdlcg/ir/college/bulletin/vol18-3/DUNGEN.pdf.

Yoshida, Takashi. "Whom Should We Remember? Japanese Museums of War and Peace." The Jo urnal of Museum Education 29, no. 2/3 (2004): 16-20.

'"Yushiikan-rei' to wa?" Sh imbun Akahata. Last modifiedNov 24, 2005. http://www.j cp.or.jp/akahata/aik4/2005-1 1 -24/2005 1 1 24faq 12_0 1_O.h tml.

128