Comments on: China at war

By: Frog in a Well - The China History Group Blog

Frog in a Well - The China History Group Blog — Sun, 30 Apr 2006 14:25:18 +0000

[...] Speaking as one who looked at the exhibit before it vanished, there was a lot of context. The images were used to illustrate an argument about the role of the war and its images in creating Japanese ideas about China and Asia. The execution images were pretty clearly presented as examples of wartime propaganda. I don’t think anyone could honestly look at the exhibit and think that the authors were endorsing the murder of Chinese, and the MIT students say as much. Like Johnathan Dresener, I find this type of thing tiresome. Textbooks use pictures of Hitler all the time, but they don’t include disclaimers that the authors and publishers are not Nazis. In American politics this protest is the type of thing that is sometimes called a kabuki dance, a show of passion and interest that everyone knows is staged and that nobody, even those claiming to be outraged, takes seriously. 1 [...]

By: Frog in a Well - The Japan History Group Blog

Frog in a Well - The Japan History Group Blog — Sun, 30 Apr 2006 08:42:09 +0000

[...] I had planned to blog on a John Dower web project cited by Alan Baumler, because it’s a fantastic collection of historical images, nicely curated. Now, if you follow the the link, you get redirected to an MIT Press Office Statement that explains that the exhibit is offline while Dower and Miyagawa negotiate with members of the MIT Chinese student community who objected to an image of a Chinese being beheaded, a classic piece of Japanese propaganda, one that sets the tone for the next half century. The problem, according to the articles I’ve seen was a lack of “accessible historical context” clearly warning viewers of the violent and racist content of the imagery. [...]

By: J Chan

J Chan — Mon, 10 Apr 2006 23:30:19 +0000

Alan Baumler

Perhaps you could expand on what you think the interesting points were, so that the standard explanation could be revised.

By: Alan Baumler

Alan Baumler — Sun, 09 Apr 2006 23:25:39 +0000

J Chan,

It is pretty standard to blame the Empress Dowager for the state of the Navy, but not really accurate. The Chinese ships were every bit as well-armed and equipped as their Japanese counterparts. The American observer who sailed with the Chinese fleet also praised the courage of the Chinese sailors, who continued to fire until their ships sank under them. Thus the question of why the Chinese lost is actually a pretty interesting one.

Most of what I know about this comes from Bruce Swanson’s Eighth Voyage of the Dragon Naval Institute Press, 1982

By: J Chan

J Chan — Sun, 09 Apr 2006 21:59:55 +0000

The Qing government did purchase modern ships from Britain for the naval war with the Japanese, but however to save money (or rather diverting funds for personal projects), the Empress Dowager decided not to equip the ships with the modern cannons designed for these ships. The Chinese admirals thus had the modern ships but not the necessary weapons on board. These ships were bigger than the Japanese ships, but were sitting ducks for the smaller and more versatile Japanese ships with modern weapons. One of the envoy who came to Britain for the purchase of the ships died in Britain and his grave is still in Liverpool.

As for the individual Chinese military personnel, they really had nothing to fight for, the regime was so transparently corrupt that the thought with every individual was on how to line one’s own pocket and at the same time survive.

By: Jonathan Dresner

Jonathan Dresner — Sun, 09 Apr 2006 19:29:28 +0000

I’m not sure there’s been a decent military history of the war from the Japanese side in English, either. I’ll root around in my collection and see if I can come up with something.

By: Alan Baumler

Alan Baumler — Sat, 08 Apr 2006 11:52:25 +0000

I’m not really sure about the technology either, but I do remember reading that at least in ships the Chinese had ones as modern and in most cases bigger than the Japanese. I think it is in Swanson’s history of the Chinese Navy. There is not a lot of detailed military history stuff on exactly why the Chinese lost the war, which is always frustrating when students ask (which they do.)

By: Jonathan Dresner

Jonathan Dresner — Sat, 08 Apr 2006 06:58:23 +0000

I’m not sure about the technology. The Chinese had access to the same technology, but I don’t have the impression that they actually possessed as many high-quality guns, ships, etc.

There’s no question, though, that the Japanese military had a distinct advantage in training and discipline.

The Dower site is fantastic. I’ll have to blog on that myself soon. Thanks!