First thing's first, it would be best if I were to introduce a little background of these two concepts I am pondering on. A 1950's Japanese film entitled Rashomon directed by Akira Kurosawa which was based on Ryunosuke Akutagawa's short story In a Grove. The film simply revolves on a story of a crime (rape and murder) committed with a bunch of witnesses (including the suspect himself) giving testimonies incosistently on what had happened in the scene of the action. The other is more of a broad concept which some people would think has nothing to do with the former, Japanese Politics. Yes! You heard me right... Japanese Politics. Well, one might say that rape and murder does happen in politics in some countries but definitely I have not heard of any issues regarding those in Japanese Politics. But come to think of it after watching the film, there is this question that keeps on bugging me; who is telling the truth among those witnesses? Now that is something I could relate to Japanese Politics, though not necessarily the truth but its concept!
Truth, a word that can be defined in many ways. Another word that I want to introduce that would compliment and help in understanding it is perspective or views whatever you want to call it for the reason that I want to define truth in connection with what I have mentioned above. Truth depends on the perspective or views of individuals in a certain event. Like what happened in the film, no objective truth really came out. Objective in a sense that no actual facts of what had happened really appeared. It also means that although truth differs on how people see it they are in fact, plausible.
Okay enough with the "Rashomon" truth. So what does it got to do with Japanese Politics? Metaphorically speaking, it is the different ways on how we look and understand Japanese Politics. I have stumbled upon a review of the book entitled The Postwar Japanese System by William K. Tabb in which it says that the metaphor of Rashomon is applicable in understanding the politics, history and culture of Japan. I tried to compare and somehow integrate it with the books entitled Japanese Political History Since the Meiji Renovation by Richard Sims; Structure and Policy in Japan and United States by Peter F. Cowhey, Mathew Daniel; Japanese Political Culture by Takeshi Ishida; and Institutions, Incentives and Electoral Participation in Japan by Yusaku Horiuchi. So I came up with a conclusion that maybe Japanese Politics can be understood in the perspective of Japan's history, culture and even through comparison with other politics like that one of United States. Though each perspective would definitely result to a different understanding of Japanese politics, the point is they arrive with actual facts.
So it is important not to let our ways of seeing things be narrowed down for it will definitely hinder us from seeing larger realities.
P.S : Nosebleed! Am I coherent? >_<
Truth, a word that can be defined in many ways. Another word that I want to introduce that would compliment and help in understanding it is perspective or views whatever you want to call it for the reason that I want to define truth in connection with what I have mentioned above. Truth depends on the perspective or views of individuals in a certain event. Like what happened in the film, no objective truth really came out. Objective in a sense that no actual facts of what had happened really appeared. It also means that although truth differs on how people see it they are in fact, plausible.
Okay enough with the "Rashomon" truth. So what does it got to do with Japanese Politics? Metaphorically speaking, it is the different ways on how we look and understand Japanese Politics. I have stumbled upon a review of the book entitled The Postwar Japanese System by William K. Tabb in which it says that the metaphor of Rashomon is applicable in understanding the politics, history and culture of Japan. I tried to compare and somehow integrate it with the books entitled Japanese Political History Since the Meiji Renovation by Richard Sims; Structure and Policy in Japan and United States by Peter F. Cowhey, Mathew Daniel; Japanese Political Culture by Takeshi Ishida; and Institutions, Incentives and Electoral Participation in Japan by Yusaku Horiuchi. So I came up with a conclusion that maybe Japanese Politics can be understood in the perspective of Japan's history, culture and even through comparison with other politics like that one of United States. Though each perspective would definitely result to a different understanding of Japanese politics, the point is they arrive with actual facts.
On the other side, its concept can also be applicable on the side of the politicians and bureaucrats themselves. Their actions and the arguments they give with regards to state matters for instance. In the case of the Liberal Democratic Party and Democratic Party of Japan; their perspectives manifested in their arguments with regards to governance of the country and the status quo differ with each other although both are indeed plausible or acceptable. Even though they view things in a different way, their aim still coincide in one point which is the development of Japan.
So it is important not to let our ways of seeing things be narrowed down for it will definitely hinder us from seeing larger realities.
P.S : Nosebleed! Am I coherent? >_<
No comments:
Post a Comment