Comments on: Pearl Harbor and the longue duree http://www.froginawell.net/japan/2006/12/pearl-harbor-and-the-longue-duree/ The Japan History Group Blog Wed, 03 Mar 2010 03:08:31 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9 hourly 1 By: Jack http://www.froginawell.net/japan/2006/12/pearl-harbor-and-the-longue-duree/comment-page-1/#comment-77669 Jack Fri, 03 Aug 2007 05:02:31 +0000 http://www.froginawell.net/japan/2006/12/pearl-harbor-and-the-longue-duree/#comment-77669 I just read the book and agree that the causal connection between Perry's black ships and Pearl Harbor is overplayed, particularly as it appears to be in service to of a cautionary message about blowback from the Iraq invasion. The book is quite enjoyable until he starts in with Freudian analysis of Japan's wounded ego. Is Perry's visit also to blame for the atrocities in Nanking and the Russo-Japanese war? How about the depression which left the people of Japan hungry and certainly looking for a way towards prosperity? And ignoring the strategic aspects of the attack on Pearl Harbor in favor of personal grudges and engaging in numerology (4 battleships sunk = 4 Black ships) only weakens the argument. There is no doubt that people have long memories, but to be honest, most people have long forgotten WWI in favor of the intervening battles and it would be difficult to drum up an attack now based on anything Kaiser Wilhelm ever did. Drawing parallels and decrying gunboat diplomacy is fine, but the final chapters of the book exploring the psychological effects of Perry's actions needs more supporting evidence to be taken seriously. I just read the book and agree that the causal connection between Perry’s black ships and Pearl Harbor is overplayed, particularly as it appears to be in service to of a cautionary message about blowback from the Iraq invasion. The book is quite enjoyable until he starts in with Freudian analysis of Japan’s wounded ego. Is Perry’s visit also to blame for the atrocities in Nanking and the Russo-Japanese war? How about the depression which left the people of Japan hungry and certainly looking for a way towards prosperity? And ignoring the strategic aspects of the attack on Pearl Harbor in favor of personal grudges and engaging in numerology (4 battleships sunk = 4 Black ships) only weakens the argument.

There is no doubt that people have long memories, but to be honest, most people have long forgotten WWI in favor of the intervening battles and it would be difficult to drum up an attack now based on anything Kaiser Wilhelm ever did.

Drawing parallels and decrying gunboat diplomacy is fine, but the final chapters of the book exploring the psychological effects of Perry’s actions needs more supporting evidence to be taken seriously.

]]> By: Jonathan Dresner http://www.froginawell.net/japan/2006/12/pearl-harbor-and-the-longue-duree/comment-page-1/#comment-57983 Jonathan Dresner Wed, 28 Mar 2007 08:47:16 +0000 http://www.froginawell.net/japan/2006/12/pearl-harbor-and-the-longue-duree/#comment-57983 In his original article, George Feifer wrote: <i>The wallop to her self-esteem by the unabashed imperialist’s naked bullying led more or less directly to more pain in Pearl Harbor. During the 88 years between those events, the Japanese never forgot their humiliation by the mighty East Asia Squadron that turned their lives upside down. The pleasure of revenge - unknown and unsuspected by Americans - swelled their jubilation in 1941, when their forces at last hit back, righteously as they saw it.</i> Sure, there's a "more or less" in there. It doesn't help: I stand by my reading of the article and by my genuine curiousity with regard to the larger arguments in his study of the opening of Japan. I'm particularly struck by his reference to "the color’s usual implication" with regard to the Black Ships; I admit that I've never paid that much attention to color associations in Japan and wonder whether the color really carried the same weight pre-bakumatsu. In his original article, George Feifer wrote: The wallop to her self-esteem by the unabashed imperialist’s naked bullying led more or less directly to more pain in Pearl Harbor. During the 88 years between those events, the Japanese never forgot their humiliation by the mighty East Asia Squadron that turned their lives upside down. The pleasure of revenge – unknown and unsuspected by Americans – swelled their jubilation in 1941, when their forces at last hit back, righteously as they saw it.
Sure, there’s a “more or less” in there. It doesn’t help: I stand by my reading of the article and by my genuine curiousity with regard to the larger arguments in his study of the opening of Japan. I’m particularly struck by his reference to “the color’s usual implication” with regard to the Black Ships; I admit that I’ve never paid that much attention to color associations in Japan and wonder whether the color really carried the same weight pre-bakumatsu.

]]> By: George Feifer http://www.froginawell.net/japan/2006/12/pearl-harbor-and-the-longue-duree/comment-page-1/#comment-57930 George Feifer Tue, 27 Mar 2007 18:24:07 +0000 http://www.froginawell.net/japan/2006/12/pearl-harbor-and-the-longue-duree/#comment-57930 Apologies for my long delay in responding to Jonathan Dresner's comment about my "Why We Should Remember Our Role in Forcing Open Japan When We Commemorate Pearl Harbor," published on December 4th. Apparently Mr. Dresner is a careless reader or a devotee of the old trick of refuting an argument not made by an author but by the refuter, who has put it in the author's mouth. Nowhere did I argue the nonsense that a single connects "all these dots," or, specifically, that "Pearl Harbor is a direct result of Perry’s opening of Japan." On the contrary, I took pains to state that "that wasn't the whole truth - not nearly the only cause of the 'sneak attack..." With so many real issues to discuss and debate, what's the use of that kind of challenge? Is it a new (or old) form of academic spin? Apologies for my long delay in responding to Jonathan Dresner’s comment about my “Why We Should Remember Our Role in Forcing Open Japan When We Commemorate Pearl Harbor,” published on December 4th. Apparently Mr. Dresner is a careless reader or a devotee of the old trick of refuting an argument not made by an author but by the refuter, who has put it in the author’s mouth. Nowhere did I argue the nonsense that a single connects “all these dots,” or, specifically, that “Pearl Harbor is a direct result of Perry’s opening of Japan.” On the contrary, I took pains to state that “that wasn’t the whole truth – not nearly the only cause of the ’sneak attack…” With so many real issues to discuss and debate, what’s the use of that kind of challenge? Is it a new (or old) form of academic spin?

]]> By: ChrisM. http://www.froginawell.net/japan/2006/12/pearl-harbor-and-the-longue-duree/comment-page-1/#comment-37455 ChrisM. Thu, 07 Dec 2006 17:53:56 +0000 http://www.froginawell.net/japan/2006/12/pearl-harbor-and-the-longue-duree/#comment-37455 To be fair to Feifer, I don't think he's saying that Pearl Harbor was simply a consequence of chance emotion. I don't know for sure, but I suspect Perry must have been taught in naval strategy while the Pearl Harbor officers were rising through the ranks. On the other hand, the intellectual and ideological positions that came to power after Perry had been a strong undercurrent for decades, or some could argue over a century. Any event that undermined the bakufu's status quo would probably have led to the same result. I agree with J. Dresner that Pearl Harbor seems destined by too many factors to have been avoidable had Perry not gone. Plus, what record would we have of Okinawa without his diary and illustrations? To be fair to Feifer, I don’t think he’s saying that Pearl Harbor was simply a consequence of chance emotion. I don’t know for sure, but I suspect Perry must have been taught in naval strategy while the Pearl Harbor officers were rising through the ranks. On the other hand, the intellectual and ideological positions that came to power after Perry had been a strong undercurrent for decades, or some could argue over a century. Any event that undermined the bakufu’s status quo would probably have led to the same result. I agree with J. Dresner that Pearl Harbor seems destined by too many factors to have been avoidable had Perry not gone. Plus, what record would we have of Okinawa without his diary and illustrations?

]]> By: Jonathan Dresner http://www.froginawell.net/japan/2006/12/pearl-harbor-and-the-longue-duree/comment-page-1/#comment-37228 Jonathan Dresner Tue, 05 Dec 2006 08:02:50 +0000 http://www.froginawell.net/japan/2006/12/pearl-harbor-and-the-longue-duree/#comment-37228 <i>OK, so maybe we cannot realistically imagine Pearl Harbor happening WITHOUT Perry opening Japan</i> Actually, I have an easier time with that than with the converse: Pearl Harbor was one of those historical events that, in retrospect, seems overdetermined by multiple factors: imperialism, technology, resource security, geography, racialism and nationalism, migration.... Of course, if you're willing to ignore intervening contingencies and take a really long view, you could probably find a triggering humiliation as the point-of-origin for almost any conflict. Those other humiliating colonial experiences? Wars waiting to happen. OK, so maybe we cannot realistically imagine Pearl Harbor happening WITHOUT Perry opening Japan

Actually, I have an easier time with that than with the converse: Pearl Harbor was one of those historical events that, in retrospect, seems overdetermined by multiple factors: imperialism, technology, resource security, geography, racialism and nationalism, migration….

Of course, if you’re willing to ignore intervening contingencies and take a really long view, you could probably find a triggering humiliation as the point-of-origin for almost any conflict. Those other humiliating colonial experiences? Wars waiting to happen.

]]>