日本語文学のなかにあらわれた戦時性暴力の表象を考察する．現代日本の暴力をめぐる構造を，ジェンダーとナショナリズムという視座から検証するため，学術的背景を概観した上で，問題の所在を明らかにし，今後の見通しと課題を提起する．戦時性暴力と現在の日常との連続性，植民地公娼制度と「

」問題の連続性，戦時性暴力が「恋愛」という物語形式を通して不可視にされる文化的構造について論じ，日本語文学における「花柳小説」というジャンルがもつ問題，文学が「」の記号をどのように扱ってきたのかという問題を整理していく．戦時性暴力をあらたなかたちで描く現代小説における批評性を展望し，今後の課題を示した．

抄録全体を表示

This paper examines the effectiveness of educational resource material designed as a case study exercise for use in a university classroom to improve intercultural communication between Japanese and Koreans. The material was based upon current issues surrounding the history of “comfort women” in WWII. After participating in the case study exercise in a class on intercultural communication, a total of 147 students wrote reaction papers assessing this case study material as an effective intercultural communication teaching method. The author applied content analysis methodology to these student papers. The results showed that the majority of the students reacted positively to the utilization of these materials in the exercise. Furthermore, 85% of the students reacted to the “comfort women” in this case study by empathetically adopting their perspectives. In conclusion, the case study methodology employed in this classroom exercise was effective in inducing empathy, which has the potential to enhance intercultural communication between university students from Japan and Korea. Finally, the author proposed utilizing history based materials for improving intercultural relations.

抄録全体を表示

　本書は日本軍「

」制度、原爆投下、日系人強制収容など戦時暴力を題材としている。ただし当該暴力そのものを論じたものではない。そうした暴力の被害者側にいる「アジア」にルーツを持つ「北米アジア系の人々がどのように応答したのか、その多様性と複雑性を探る」ことこそ、本書が「試み」たことである。本書において最も注目すべき点は、先学が築いた「批判的比較研究」の方法論を導入し、複数の暴力を「補償是正」の範囲を広げる形で同時並列的に語ったことにある。多様な資料を用いつつ「アジア系アメリカ」の戦争記憶表象を様々な視角から論じた本書は貴重な情報と示唆に富むものである。

抄録全体を表示

This paper aims to identify the various phases of historical issues between Southeast Asia and Japan. Japanese military rule during World War II (WWII) in Southeast Asia lasted about three years. Although they ruled differently in each area, life under Japanese rule was harsh in general for the people and communities in Southeast Asia. Japanese rulers exerted control and cracked down on anti-Japanese factions, even slaughtering them in some cases. They also economically exploited the local communities, which led to serious economic damage including starvation. In addition, they mobilized a great number of local people as forced labor (romusha), comfort women (ianfu), and auxiliary soldiers/auxiliary service personnel (heiho).

In comparison with other Northeast Asian countries like South Korea and China, the negative legacy of Japanese rule is currently not politicized in Southeast Asian countries. However, not long ago, wartime experiences caused by Japanese imperialism were serious political issues between these countries and Japan. This paper shows how historical issues between Southeast Asia and Japan have been politically dealt with from the 1950s and the 1990s; it also examines Japan’s treatment toward these issues and its problems then and now.

The 1950s and 1960s saw Japan and Southeast Asian countries conclude Japan’s provision of reparations and sub-reparations, which had lasted almost 20 years. However, Japanese reparation did not completely resolve the friction arising from the legacy of Japanese imperialism during the WWII; in the post-WWII era, human rights had begun gaining traction as a global code of norms, and demands for “war responsibility” and “war compensation” had been rising since the 1970s. Against this backdrop, many Asian peoples who suffered under Japanese imperialism began to raise their voice, including Korean women who were taken in as comfort women. Similar demands for compensation also came from the Philippines and Indonesia in the 1990s with varying degrees of success. The Asian Women’s Fund to compensate and restore dignity to former comfort women was relatively successful in the Philippines, but did little for those in Indonesia. On the other hand, the Tokyo Local Court, Tokyo High Court, and The Supreme Court had rejected a law suit by the group of former comfort women in the Philippines who had demanded the Japanese government to compensate them. The Japanese government also did not respond to calls for compensation by ex-auxiliary soldiers/auxiliary service personnel in Indonesia.

These days, Southeast Asian countries avoid friction with Japan, maintaining a good relationship with Japan in order to balance the rising China. However, as the 21^st century progresses, the mainstreaming of human rights continues to advance. “War compensation” is being taken more seriously than before. Japanese people should recognize that they carry the negative legacy and “war responsibility” of having imposed suffering on local peoples and communities in Southeast Asia.

抄録全体を表示

This paper focuses on issues surrounding the interpretation from Japanese to English of former Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s apology statement concerning “comfort women” on April 27, 2007. At that time, U.S. House Resolution 121, which demands that the Japanese Government apologize for war crimes, was about to be adopted, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Japan was trying to prevent its passage. Prime Minister Abe, who had a considerable nationalist support base, used the phrase “moushi wake nai,” which was interpreted as “to express apology.” An experimental survey the author conducted with Japanese-English translators demonstrated that this translation amplified a tone of regret, and reactions on the part of the Japanese, U.S., Chinese and Korean media were clearly affected by it. Studying apology communication in multilateral diplomacy from the perspective of the translator is likely to contribute to successful diplomacy and it is the author’s hope that this paper paves the way for more comprehensive studies regarding apology translations in diplomacy.

抄録全体を表示