Modernization in East Asia

As modernity has a compelling relationship with the past, many historians in 20th century already have analyzed Japanese history. They have dealt with several definitions such as development, modernization, and Westernization in attempt to define Japan however no one hardly has questioned and answered clearly about the nation itself. Tessa Morris-Suzuki has written an article about Japan as she addresses "the official definition of what it meant to be Japanese" (Tessa Morris-Suzuki, p.10). In her article she comments that the "definition itself was not constant or stable. Instead ... it was contextual and changing"(p.10). The following essay will discuss about what it means to be the modern nation - something Tessa Morris - Suzuki calls a "modern artifact" (p.10) in Japan and how this idea similarly applies to define another nation - China.

Tessa Morris - Suzuki begins her article with the observation that "Japan in its present form is a modern artifact, whose frontiers were drawn in the middle of the nineteenth century and have been a source of contention for much of the twentieth" (Tessa Morris-Suzuki, p.9). That is, because the formation of "Japan" as a modern nation involved a continuous reworking of the relationship in the past between the Japanese state and regional communities which refers to the relationship between the central government and the frontier societies of the Ainu and the Ryukyu Archipelago (p.10). In order to answer the nature of the nation itself, she draws attention to the problem of Japan's frontiers. She firstly approaches the problem by looking at three different views of the world - a view from the North, "the metropolis", and the South.

Perspective of Ainu society - a view from the North - is first to observe the changing political concept of Japan. Ainu society can be examined in two ways; society structure and language. Ainu society was structured around small self-organizing communities called Kotan (Tessa Morris-Suzuki, p.11). Particular areas of land were identified with particular communities depends on their hunting or fishing territories but not specifically "owned" by individuals or groups in the modern legal sense (p.11). This suggests that Ainu stayed as an independent and peaceful society and their idea of being "Japanese" was rather diplomatic than claiming ownership. This is evident in development of their language - Ainu-Japanese vocabularies, until the middle of seventeenth century while Ainu were still welcoming Japanese traders, were compiled for trade and diplomatic purposes (p.11). It was only until the eighteenth century when "merchants licensed by Matsumae started to set up fisheries in which they employed Ainu as semi-salve labor" (p.13), their society started to be in control by others. The merchants established more permanent bases in their territory (p.13). From this time onwards Ainu thought Japanese lacked the basic human etiquette for any further commercial exchange (p.13) then this brought the "Shakushain War, the large-scale Ainu uprising against Japanese incursions into their territory" (p.13). Therefore the term "Japanese" in this concept did not entirely include Ainu and the word Nihonjin was only used to distinguish Japanese from Chinese and Europeans (p.12) but was not to differentiate Ainu from Japanese. The distinction was political rather than racial (p.12).

Another way of looking at the nation is a view from "the metropolis", or at least from the standpoint of the relatively educated urban section of the Japanese (Tessa Morris-Suzuki, p.13). This view mainly focuses on Chinese or other foreign countries influence on Japanese as is Tokutomi Soho argues that "the concept 'foreign nations' brought forth the concept 'Japanese nation'". Map designers failed to clearly define the borders in Japan. They mostly made "unclear association between political neighbourhood and the colors represented on the map" (p.14). Before the late eighteenth century, most Japanese visions of the world outside were more powerfully influenced by China than by the West (p.14). It manifests in the illustrated Japanese-Chinese Encyclopedia where "China is listed as a 'Foreign country'" but "contains much more information about Chinese geography than they do about the geography of Japan" (p.15). Japanese perhaps tried to deny the fact their nation was getting shaped by China thus emphasis of the most important characteristic of Japanese laid on a sensitive appreciation of the beauties of poetry (p.16, Torii 1926, p.139). This description highlights Japanese identity in terms of creativity and spontaneous virtue as opposed to the rigidity and sterility attributed to Chinese learning (p.16). A view of "metropolis" of Japanese is being creative which to separate the nation from China or other foreign pressures.

The last view is from the South - Ryukyu kingdom corresponds to the "metropolis". From their point of view, Japan was deeply influenced by China as they also absorbed the same Ka-i model of the global order (Tessa Morris-Suzuki, p.16). "The kingdom constructed its own miniature version of the Chinese system, exacting tribute from outlying islands such as Yaeyama"(p.16). Japanese copied similar characteristics to the traditional Chinese. Despite the strong influence of Chinese, the kingdom was proud of owning a place as a crossroads of East Asian route (p.16). Although the kingdom might "lack military or political power"(p.16), it could still claim their position as "a special commercial hold over a vast geographical area" (p.16).

Redefintion of Ainu and Ryukyuans as "Japanese" should be shaped by two particular forces (Tessa Morris-Suzuki, p.17) from looking at these three different views. "The first was the force of Japan's changing relationship with China; the second, the force of the encounter with the European powers from the eighteenth century onward" (p.17). But the nature of Japan was not only influenced and continued to be "contextual and changing" (p.10) only by outside but also within the nation. At the beginning of the Tokugawa period - when there was an unfair monopoly trade between domain of Matsumae to be in charge and the Ainu and Satsuma's invasion subordinated the Ryuku Kingdom to its control (p.18) -