評價と批判(<特集>ルース・ベネディクト『菊と刀』の與えるもの)

抄録

1) The richness of the factual data and the sharp insight of the author are amazing. 2) That Benedict begins her analysis with hierarchy in Japanese society is presumably based upon her recognition of it as the fundamental structural aspect of Japanese society as a whole. This is evidence of her keen analytical power. But there are some ambiguities and confusions regarding the factual data (e.g., structural-functional aspects of the tonarigumi of urban areas and the kumiai of rural areas ; honorifics and hierarchical structure of the army, etc.). There are various important problems in this field, which must be studied further : e.g., the relationships of hierarchy and family system ; the family system as a social and psychological basis of or background for totalitarianism. 3) The chapters on on and the duties originating from it contribute greatly to Japanese studies. But there are some misunderstandings regarding the factual data : e.g. the nature of nimmu, loyalty to the lord and master, and giri to one's name ; the relation of giri to ninjo, which is one of the most important problems among the behavior patterns of the Japanese. The chapter on ninjo suggests many interesting problems, but the reviewer thinks there are many misunderstandings of the factual data and in the analysis of ninjo (its relation to other behavior patterns, particularly giri, which is very important for understanding the structure of Japanese culture, is neglected). 4) That the author mentioned the "dilemma of virtue" as one of the characteristics of Japanese culture is evidence of her keen insight. But as far as the analysis of it is concerned, the most important factors are neglected. First, the moral principles that determine the behavior of the Japanese are not internal sanctions, but external sanctions (such as contempt from the world, losing one's face, etc.), and this fact is closely related to the existence of the "dilemma." Second, the life of the Japanese is like a double-exposure negative, where the opposing elements are superimposed one on another, fusing and interpenetrating. For example, the samurai morals (the absolute denial of the natural man) vs. ordinary people's morals (the open assertion of the natural and physical man) ; feudal vs. modern ; gemeinschaftlich vs. gesellschaftlich, etc. 5) The analysis of "shuyo" is very interesting and instructive for us Japanese. As shuyo, majime or makoto and other specifically Japanese virtues have not been studied as yet in Japan, the author's merit is to be highly appreciated. But further studies are desired. In particular the social background of these virtues must be clarified. It is probably to be found in the social-political structure of Japanese feudalism. 6) The chapter, "A Child Learns" is also very instructive for us. But questions must be raised as to the factual data on which the author's analysis is based. There are many other methods of training children in Japan, which vary from group to group, and which might result in considerably different conclusions about Japanese character. 7) In conclusion, the reviewer would like to add a few words concerning methodology. First, the author has neglected the historical aspect of her subject. When a society like that of Japan, which is in process of rapid change and transition, becomes the object of study, an historical approach should not be neglected. In present day Japan, the feudal and the modern, the oriental and the occidental, are co-existing, and they reflect and influence one another. In other words, there are many inconsistencies between various patterns of culture, and these inconsistencies can only be explained fully if the analysis is made with historical considerations. Second, the Japanese people and culture appear to Benedict as a homogeneous unit, and it is to be admitted that the aim of this book was to

(View PDF for the rest of the abstract.)