Japan Passing by Japanologists? Akihiro Odanaka

Editorial: Japan Passing by Japanologists? Editorial: Japan Passing by Japanologists? Akihiro Odanaka Recently I read on a website an interesting article about Japanologists abroad,1 although the topic is already known to those who are familiar with international academic milieus. The author, Eiji Oguma, a Japanese sociologist, stayed in Germany several years ago and saw firsthand the difficulties that young Japanologists in Europe faced; the idyllic days of studying the Japanese language and culture are gone, and Japanologists today are obliged to make their research on Japan in wider contexts, integrating other disciplines such as history, political science and anthropology. As a matter of fact, this method is optimum for them to survive in the academia system of ever-accelerating competition. They have to apply for grants and job offerings whenever possible, which is not often in German-speaking countries. As a result, they write articles, books and applications in English, even though their research field is Japan. (Writing papers in Japanese makes no sense!) It is only the researchers in Japan who are spared such hardships, as if they were living in a secluded country, having no other language capabilities than Japanese. From such a situation arises, notes Oguma, the phenomenon of “Japan passing by” Japanologists as they are busy following the latest research trends in English. They don’t have enough time to read Japanese papers and books, as they search for grants, write papers, and organize conferences and lecture sessions. It is ironical that the more global these scholars become, the less they can afford to pay atten- tion to research activities in the source culture. The author, considering the current problems of Japanologists, speculates that Japanese scholars of the humanities could take a far more advantageous position than they have, if only they were capable of writing papers in English. He further thinks this situation will become inevitable as the domestic market (job offerings at Japanese universities) is shrinking, and that Japanese specialists will, in the end, have to turn their eyes overseas. I am not sure if Oguma’s prediction will be realized, but I agree with him on one point; the study of Japanese culture should be more internationalized. As Minae Mizumura, a novelist who wrote about the discrepancy between her Ph.D candidate days at Yale University and her personal attachment to Japanese literature, lamented over the paradox between English-oriented globalization and the need for maintain- ing a particular culture.2 To prevent the extinction of Japanese language and culture, we must make both the claims for universality and particularity compatible. Besides, we should stress that Japanese culture is not solely the property of the “Japanese,” and thus should be open to everyone; using English is a practical solution to realizing such an idea. Against these backgrounds, our journal is conceived to be a small contact zone between Japanese scholars who are willing to expand out of their closed society and those who want access to Japanese theatre studies within a wider and more comparative perspective. The present issue comprises two articles, a roundtable record, and three book reviews. While the journal is not voluminous, as it is still developing, I am convinced it will provide theater researchers with relevant information. ——————————————————————————————— 1 https://mirai.kinokuniya.co.jp/2017/07/592/ (Last consulted on Dec. 29 2020). 2 Minae Mizumura. Nihongo ga horobirutoki. Tokyo: Chikumashobō, 2008. An English translation is available: Minae Mizumura. The Fall of Language in the Age of English. Translated by Mari Yoshihara and Juliet Winters Carpenter. New York: Columbia University Press, 2015. – 1 – English Journal of JSTR The paper by Kōzo Yamaji, translated from Japanese by Alan Cummings of SOAS, University of London, follows the basic concept of our journal; it introduces noteworthy papers written in Japanese to English readers. In fact, Yamaji is a renowned researcher in the study of Japanese folk performing arts, his name being often cited in English research works. Readers are therefore provided a chance to read his writing firsthand, though it constitutes only a part of his academic achievements. The paper examines how one tradition of performing arts was reinvented in the late 19th century. By coincidence, Jihye Kim treats another instance of the formation of cultural heritage: the canon- ization of kabuki by famous actor Danjūrō IX around the same period as Yamaji’s case-study. Danjūrō IX (1838–1903) was a great kabuki principal whose significance in modern kabuki has been much discussed by Japanese kabuki specialists, but is scarcely known to English readers. The author argues how his conversion from an active kabuki reformer to a conservative one took place, focusing on his produc- tions before the Emperor in 1887. The roundtable held by Jonah Salz and others — sessions realized through Zoom — was a timely event precisely because they discussed the repercussions of COVID-19. The participants, most of them North America-based researchers who study Japanese theater using the English language, talked about such topics as how Japanese theater people and foreign researchers coped with the crisis, the effectiveness of remote conferences, and future prospects of theatrical activities after the pandemic. Additionally, what makes the record attractive is that they asked themselves their raison d’être during this critical time – how they encountered the Japanese theaters and became researchers. Such reflection suggests a possible meth- odology for reconsidering the role of overseas (as well as domestic) researchers as theatrical facilitators. The three book reviews are arranged in the order of their date of publication, but interestingly enough, they are successively linked like a cascade. First, Daniel Gallimore introduces anthologies of Japanese plays translated into English since 2016. He overviews the latest outputs of Japanese play- wrights. Meanwhile, one of them, Kurō Tanino, a promising playwright and director of the new generation, appears in Mari Boyd’s monograph reviewed by Claudia Orenstein. The reviewer analyzes the book’s relevance in terms of the contemporary development of Japanese puppet theaters, including robots and manipulated objects. Then, the third book, reviewed by Laurence Kominz, treats the puppet plays in the early modern period — bunraku — with regard to their political implications. Readers can thus see, through the reviews, two aspects of Japanese puppet theaters, modern and early modern. Lastly, it is a shame that some of the editors also appear as the authors of the books and records in the journal. This is because the most active members in promoting the globalization of theater studies in Japan gather around the present editorial board. We hope more researchers — in Japan and abroad — will participate in the journal as a means of disproving the separation of Japanese theater researchers from their counterparts overseas. EJ-JSTR editorial board Akihiro Odanaka, editor-in-chief Osaka City University Tove Bjoerk Saitama University Mari Boyd Professor emerita of Sophia University Masami Iwai Meijo University Jonah Salz Ryukoku University Nahoko Tsuneyama Keio University – 2 –.

Load more