Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 00:03, 10 March 2005

I corrected the characters for "loyalty", they clearly must be "忠義" and not "尽忠", which cannot be pronounced as "chugi".

Thanks, bye''

Factual accuracy

It looks like some people have different beliefs regarding the bushido, and this is reflecting on the previous edits of this article. Something must be done about this, and until that happens, the {{disputed}} tag should remain there. Me, I don't know enough about the subject, so I can't really stick my finger on this. I hoped I could find something more reliable here. As for my opinion, I've always thought their code of honor was indeed real in that past. Something that was common sense, followed by a large part of the samurai. Now I don't know anymore, though.

The discussion pertaining this can be carried here.--Kaonashi 04:26, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Recent edits by anon user 203.62.217.146 sound dismissive and POV: "Bushido was the supposed warrior code of the samurai." "In reality, however, bushido was an invention of frustrated samurai", "Today it is dismissed by serious historians" "Bushido re-emerged during World War 2 as Japanese propaganda" etc... Maybe a line could be written on such alternative views (with "serious historian"'s reference please), but isn't organizing the whole article around this theme quite excessive? PHG 10:33, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I agree this page needs to stay disputed for awhile, and that anon should have worded their entry a little more elegantly, though the actual content of the entry is essentially correct. The mistake people make with the whole samurai/bushido thing is that they are mixing up the eras, and reading the wrong books. The Sengoku Jidai period samurai is the samurai that most people are familiar with. Most of the Akira Kurosawa samurai films are taken from this period (mid 15th century up until the beginning of the 17th century), and this is where the image of the warrior samurai that everyone is familiar with comes from. These samurai were as unloyal as you could imagine, retainers often changed masters, and daimyo were continuingly forming and breaking alliances as soon as an advantage was to be had. Then Tokugawa Ieyasu won the battle of Sekigahara and established the Tokugawa Bakufu, ushering in the "Edo period", and with it several centuries of peace. In this period the samurai quite rapidly became aristocrats. They still wore their swords and some of them even practiced the martial arts, but there were no battles to fight and most samurai spent their lives on guard duty, collecting taxes or enjoying poetry and theatre (along with booze and the odd trip to the brothel!). This is where the image of the elegant & learned samurai comes from, though even that has been exaggerated somewhat over the years. Now, the topic of bushido. I was going to write up my opinions on the matter, but the article listed on the current Bushido page, http://www.koryubooks.com/library/kfriday2.html, does a pretty good job of it (and it's written by historian Karl Friday, to boot). A quick summary would be - during the Edo period, the period of peace, the Tokugawa Bakufu had to find a way to satisfy and reward their samurai, who no longer had much of a chance of moving through the ranks without the opportunity of proving himself in battle, which had been the main cause of promotion in the Sengoku Jidai period. To do this the Bakufu tried to change the concept of "honour" from a personal one to that of the clan and your master. The intent of this was that even if you were likely stuck at your social level for your whole life, you should still work hard to make your clan and your daimyo look better, which in turn will make you look better. To anyone who has read "Hagakure" this should sound familiar, giving and not getting anything back but the knowledge that you've improved your clan's status. As you may imagine, this didn't quite work in practice as samurai are, after all, human beings, and are just as ambitious as everyone else. It also led to some problems, like with Lord Asano and the 47 ronin, who revenged their lord as any good samurai was supposed to, yet were still condemned to death because they acted contrary to the Bakufu's ruling on the matter. But the actions of these 47 men were pretty unique, and could not be considered the standard. The real problem is that during the Edo period there was a certain consensus of what defines a samurai, however it differed from clan to clan and was not a written code in any sense of the word, nor was it followed by each and every man who wore the two swords. It's also important not to think of this as "bushido", as this term was simply not used back in those times. I think a great book that should help disillusion people about samurai of this period is the dairy of Katsu Kokichi, titled "Musui's Story: The Autobiography of a Tokugawa Samurai". This is a great example of exactly what a good percentage of the samurai had become during the period of peace following Sekigahara. "The Taming of the Samurai" by Eiko Ikegami is also a great look at the changing role of samurai during the Edo Period, from a sociological perspective. It touches on the Hagakure as well. Personally, I think the Bushido article hosted here needs a couple of things to be complete - a quick description of the transition of the samurai from warriors to administrators, a description on what it meant to be a samurai in the Edo period, the appearance of Bushido as Japanese propaganda after the Meiji restoration and a final blurb about the modern view of the bushido code, comparing the fiction to fact.--AngusH 04:25, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

What I find wrong here is the way the anon user filled the article with his "the bushido was nothing but a farse" pseudo-arguments. Things were not so simple. There was a strong feeling of keeping an honorable status among the samurai of certain eras in the feudal Japan. What you say about the samurai changing their concepts through the ages, Angus, sounds more than plausible, but still, there was no farse. Sure, our minds are filled with fantasy nowadays, and that surely clouds our judgement regarding certain things (specially things like this), but I still think this article is filled with endless bias. I will give an example that might sound good for some, and might sound like BS to others, but there it goes anyway.

I think one of the biggest demonstrations of honor to one's owns beliefs, at that time, was the seppuku. The reasons varied greatly. Tainted reputation, overwhelming disappointment, protest, etc. Cases of seppuku, however, weren't isolated among the samurai community. They were very common. It was part of their culture, and still is, in certain ways. It comes from the concept that it's better to have an honorable death than live a life in shame. It was a fast way of getting rid of every single dishonor on their lives. It was an act considered to be so full of honor, that after it's done, the person would be forgiven of everything. A decent ending. Now, anyone paid attention to the recent cases of mass suicides in Japan, set up via the Internet? Young people commiting suicide together inside cars? Would that be just a coincidence? I wouldn't say so. There's more there than meets the eye.

I'm not just pulling that off my head, though. I've read a lot about it, so nah, I'm not wrong. You might think this is completely unrelated, but to everybody that read a thing or two about suicide in Japan, you know that these aren't the only cases. Why do certain subway stations in Japan have acrylic barriers in the platforms to prevent people from jumping down the rails? Keep thinking.

Alright, this is just an example. Now, to my point. Would a culture that preserved such traditions based purely on honor (which "evolved" through the ages, certainly), so strongly, have nothing to do with that same honor? It's true I'm talking about something more complex than bushido right now, but see if you can trace the connections. As it's said in the seppuku article, "Seppuku was a key part of bushido". I'm still talking about the same thing, besides the appearances. "Invention of frustrated samurai"? I wouldn't say so. --Kaonashi 01:07, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hi, I agree with AngusH. But this article is titled Bushido which is a term that did not even exist before the late Edo period and in fact probably the Meiji era (mid 1800s). Niitobe's book Bushido, written in English, is the most widely read text on this topic and it is largely fictious, although Japanese themselves have adopted much of it. Niitobe turned his back on Japan. The book Shogun is another bad influence.

Just as well I didn't write this article, it would have been far more pointed. Maybe I can re-write it.

As for Seppuku, it was far more rare than reported. Mostly it was a forced suicide. Originally the individual stabbed himself and the assitant decapitated him after sufficient agony had been endured. By the Edo period people were commiting seppuku with (folded) fans, they reached for the fan as a purely symbolic act and were decapitated by the "assistant".

Kaonashi, there are no subway stations in Tokyo with acrylic barriers to prevent suicides.

Yes, there are. It's glass by the way, if that makes any difference. This time I'll even show you exactly where I read about it. That's a famous Brazilian magazine that talks exclusively about the Japanese culture. What you're referring to is right at the editorial. Too bad you won't be able to see it. And yes, you guessed it. It's Tokyo. Congrats.

As for seppuku, I'm afraid you don't completely understand it. The "assistant" you talk about was usually a close friend of the person in question. He was there to finish his pain as soon as possible, by yes, chopping the head. They had no reasons to make the seppuku committer endure more pain than necessary. Now, about the "forced seppukus" you also referred to, that's not that different either. When captured prisoners were sometimes given the choice of commiting seppuku or by dying by the sword of someone there. To be given such a choice was a great regally. It was better to commit seppuku and die a honorable death than dying by the hands of the enemy, once again. In that case, the "assistant" would be there to end the person's pain just as fast. No changes on that. Otherwise, why would the enemy suggest the seppuku anyway? It's a chance of being "forgiven" by many. Not a chance of getting through even more pain.--Kaonashi 15:43, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• Factual accuracy: sliding walls in the recently built subways throughout Japan are not designed specifically to avoid suicides, but more generally as a security feature against people falling on the tracks. It's been especially implemented when there the trains are fully automated and don't have drivers (such as the Yurikamome line going to Odaiba), but not exclusively. It is also a usefull security feature when you have a Shinkansen rushing through a station without stopping (in that case these are not "walls", but sliding barriers about 1 meter high, which cannot prevent someone jumping over anyway). By the way, the latest line in the Paris Subway also has sliding transparent wall: Paris Metro Line 14, which is also fully automomated. Of course, there are also some suicides in France too...PHG 21:59, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Kaonashi (literally) Mr No Face, I have lived in Japan for 8 years, Tokyo for 3. I catch the subway daily and have never seen a barrier of any type. Perhaps you could tell me the name of the line and station that have these barriers. As PHG mentioned the Yurikamome does, but if I remember correctly that is a monorail (certainly not a subway) and of course the Shinkansen (bullet train) has them at some stations.

Yes I do understand Seppuku; problem is there was no enemy after Tokugawa united Japan. I used quotes on the term assistant as during this era seppuku was used as a form of execution and the assitant was most usually not a close associate and the subject did not stab himself.

The biggest problem with Japan's history is that most of the English (or non-Japanese) texts are wrong.

I say those who disagree with what 203.62.217.146 has to say change this article back at least for the moment. elvenscout742 16:54, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I disagree. In my opinion leave it as it is now until someone comes up with something better. Better a sharp, pointed entry than a fictional and misleading one. --AngusH 05:11, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

What you say would make sense, if the "sharp" and "pointed" content in question had any theoric basis. Never saw those claims anywhere else. What I did see, funnily enough, is exactly the "fictional and misleading" claims. I'll refrain from this discussion from now one, though. Better that way.--Kaonashi 00:03, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)