Why are Japanese geographers so uncritical?

: Recent trend of critical human geography in Japan

 

Toshio Mizuuchi

 

Assoc. Professor, Ph.D.

Dept. of Geography, Graduate School of Literature and Human Sciences,

Osaka City Univ. Osaka, 558-8585, JAPAN

mizuuchi@lit.osaka-cu.ac.jp

http://www.lit.osaka-cu.ac.jp/geo/e-st_mizuuchi.htm (English)

 

 

Touching international critical geography

The second international critical geographers conference was held at Taegu, South Korea in August, 2000. Both theoretical and practical researches filled the conference about the polemical issues of the uneven development, land and housing problem, changing industrial structure, local politics, everyday life, cultural space, and political economy. Postmodern conditions, industrial system, the problem of nation state, culture, and environment were generally discussed from the standpoint of political economy approach. As compared with rise of such critical geography seen in the Anglo-America, Korea and Taiwan, existence of the critical geography in Japanese academic world seems to be very small and weak. In sociology, economics, and political science of Japan, they are paying a bigger interest in the critical geography in this Anglo-American world than geographers in Japan. This paper illustrates that why such a twisted phenomenon has arisen and what action Japanese critical geographer should set out to such a strange phenomenon.

It is no doubt by two books published in 1989, which were entitled with the term of postmodern, that critical geography affected extensively social sciences. The secret of this extensive acceptance of the works of Harvey and Soja is locating where they always hold critical viewpoint over the actual world and adhere the spatial idea as a key concept. Thus, he understood the new discourse of postmodern conditions and continued to perform cultural, political, and intellectual criticism. Soja(1989, pp.158-159) also asserted that 'It is now possible to begin to generalize about the particularities of capitalist spatialization and to particularize the generalizations of s spatialized critical social theory. ……filled with new conditions and possibilities that challenge established modes of understanding. Making theoretical and practical sense of this contemporary restructuring of capitalist spatiality has become the overriding goal of an emerging postmodern critical human geography’.

Such a special feature of critical geography was having greatly deviated from the existing style and methodology of geography or sociology, as a sociologist's Ueno (1999) stated ('Spatial turn in sociology and geography and after', Review of Contemporary Thought 26-13). Their spatial theory was not simply situated as interdisciplinary, rather it questioned the relevance of discipline itself, and solve and release the role and restraint of a discipline it holds, in addition it helped to deviate the disciplinary thinking in another direction, and invite readers to activities of various practices in everyday life, or resistance. Ueno further described as follows. It is quite difficult in this Japanese academic society to thrust a leg into the arena of space theory-thinking as in the Anglo-American world, as long as a geographer is to be a ‘serious’ traditional geographer. Moreover, although he might not sympathize, he is ready to understand geographers' silence, inappreciative attitude, and hesitation to such space theory. I, as a geographer, cannot but agree the backward situation prevailing among geographers' community, and further ask why Japanese geographers keep silence to a debate of spatial theory. I would start to point out in the following section some specific problems within the geographer' community in Japan.

 

Poor heritage of critical stance in Japanese human geography

According to the National University system, historically, geography had been belonging to a department of science in the east Japan, and physical geography has taken the lead. On the other hand, in the western part of Japan, geography had been belonging to a department of literature, and human geography has predominated the academy of Western Japan. In the department of literature in the University of Tokyo, generally located in a top hierarchy of a disciplinary system, human geography is not existing there, therefore, in a social science system, geography is used to be paid little attention and evaluation. In addition, the presence of geography is always scarce and the evaluation to this discipline is not high among the government bureaucrats of Japan where the University of Tokyo governs its system. Suspending the judgment of right or wrong for this situation, it can be said that geography was institutionally set outside the structure where a channel to the political decisions or a policy-making process were easily working. However, since geography existed in elementary secondary education, it had considerably many academic posts reserved for geography in the department of education. Moreover, the blessed time had continued long that the barrier to becoming university teacher was a relatively low and graduate student who majored in geography was not so big population.

Concerning the academic level, great scholars like Marx or Weber did not exist, and translation culture had not been rooted. In addition, geographical terms were valid only within the closed market of geography. Therefore, between other human and social sciences, geography was taking delay with the whole flow of academic restructuring. There was also little participation in a policy-making and also little circulation of the books of geography, which gains a common reader. Entry to the geography from an activist and social movement leader was also close to zero. There was no opportunity by which geography in academy was motivated with the strained relation facing local movement and local people.

Moreover, many human geographers belonged to the department of literature, and they are regarded as taking mild stance based on apolitical cultural science. It is a fact that such a human geographers was considered as researching hobby-like non-thoughtful manner in political economy, by economic geographers of a department of economics who graduated with acknowledging the pride of one of the social science. How critical geography was positioned in the closed discipline market of human geography, which grew up from the department of literature? There, the critical viewpoint was never turned to the political society and cultural situation of Japan, Rather, such a viewpoint must be forcibly made within a discipline itself. note: See Mizuoka (1997: ‘The disciplinary dialectics that has played eternal pendulum swongs: spatial theories and disconstructionism in the history of alternative social and economic geography’ in “Geographical review in Japan” about the trend of critical geography in economic geography.

If the meaning of being critical defines it as the counter movement to the mainstream human geography, from the second half of the 1970s to the beginning of the 1980s, geography with critical stance corresponded to humanistic geography and social geography at that time. Among outcomes of humanistic geography, only Yamano's review article stood prominent, and afterward, very few empirical studies were produced (Yamano, 1979: recent trend in humanistic geography). About social geography, especially for example in the heritage of critical geography, a series of review paper (Takeuchi, 1976: Social geography and the Third world, 1980: Radical geography movement and radical geography, 1984: Geography of David Harvey, and 1984: Revival of geopolitics and the new development of political geography (in Hitotusbashi Ronso except 1980 paper in Human Geography of Japan)) of Takeuchi were prominent in the 1980s. Moreover, translation of 'Social Justice and the city' of Harvey in 1980 timely was published by Takeuchi et. al. and obtained great readership. However, they were all review paper about the current researches that followed up European and American trend. It is regrettable to say that critical geography was not appeared in the real sense of critical social theory. The situation of living peacefully in the market in the discipline and describing normally and neutrally present condition were structurally embedded, and the mechanism was also functioning well in which geography was institutionally reproduced even if not being critical. Such factors might serve to weaken the sense of impending crisis of geography.

The rise of social theory-oriented geography in the Anglo-American world which started in the 1980s enter to Japan in the beginning of 1990s, and began to be taken in through some translations in Japan. note: The influential books of geography were translated such as Harvey(1980: justice, 1989: limits, 1991: urbanization, 1999: postmodern), Scott(1996: metropolis), Tuan(1988: dominance, 1988: space & place, 1991: fear, 1991:morality, 1992, topophilia, 1993: segmented, 1994: passing, 1997: cosmos), Relph(1991: place), Knox(1993-95:social geogr., 1997: world cities), D.Smith(1985: greener), P.Jackson(1991: exploring), Pinch(1990: cities & service), Taylor(1991-2: political), Massay(2000: division), Lefebvre(2000: production), G.Rose(2000: gender), Cosgrove & Daniels(2001: iconography), Soja(2002: postmodern) . In geography, the number of translations is very few compared with sociology. One of the ways chosen in order to overthrow such an inactive situation was translating both theoretical and empirical informative books, however, in itself, this activity was only to catch up a new theoretical current in Anglo-American geographical literatures with passive posture. Hamatani (1991: (newsletter of 'Theory and subject for social geography' no.2, See below.)), looking back upon the 1980s, deplored the academic circles’ situation as follows. "I wonder whether it is a run-up of a future leap or the sign of break down which has covered the discipline of human geography in Japan at large. Early retirement of the researchers over 40 years old, delay of achievement of a young researcher. Why it became like this? Is it because the inescapable phenomenon which comes from an advancement of theory, or is it because a deviation of problematique of research, or that of a paradigm? Although there will be no other way but to try hard if it is the former, there might be accompanying with an evil on the advancement of too much abstraction or sophistication. If it is the latter, the deconstruction of a perspective will be demanded. Translation of a good book, on the contrary, may also wither a geographer facing the high degree of sophistication."

 

 

Advent of new challenges

The research group which was going to overthrow such a situation was established in 1991, whose name was 'Theory and subject for social geography', with a small financial background of the Association of Japanese Geographers. Here, five interest groups gathered together in this research group, whose member were more than twenty younger generations geographers in the years of 30s including graduate students. They tended to take a value-laden approach in the stance of anti-mainstream geography. Their research orientations were considered as follows: 1. Explaining and describing spatial phenomenon that is considered to be a social problem, 2. Grope of new cultural and social geography for breaking through traditional humanistic approach, 3. Improving the relevance of the study of geographical thought, 4. Theoretical reconstruction of the economic geography in the line of Harvey's orientation of 1980s, 5. Following of political economy approach in the Anglo-American geography. note: News letter No. 1 of this research group dated 15 May 1991.

Concerning approach 1, it asserted that geography should be associated with how social problem has been tackled by geographers. As one reason of inactivity of human geography in Japan, during more than twenty years or so, this discipline have made light of or deleted issues that were concerning with problem, politics and planning, in contrast with pursuing too much the general tendency or normality of spatial behaviors and patterns. Specifically, Ota, Mizuuchi et al., appealing against the importance of taking up ethnicity and a gender problem, began to plan a serial column of "ethnicity, gender", in the most popular common magazine in Japan "Chiri (Geography)" 39 times from July, 1989 to December, 1993. note. Most of the writers who appeared in this series consisted of a member of an above-mentioned research group.

Then, the argument about the methodology of geography was developed focusing on the problem of gender, ethnicity, and a minority. It can be said that, for the first time, they problematized on the geography magazine how all the critical problems of class, gender, ethnicity, etc. could be articulated. In the same magazine, a series essays of 'Social geography and its periphery' was planed by Mizuuchi during one year just after the project of the special issue of social geography in May, 1993. Becoming clear from these contents, it could be pointed out that the contributors were mainly belonging to not only social problem group of 1 but including new socio-cultural geography group of 2, and reconstructionist of economic geography of 4.

Concerning the accumulation of empirical research, it called attention as a typical and prominent social geography of Niwa (1991)'s field study of day-laborers districts and Naito(1991,1995)'s work about Turkish guest-workers problems in Germany, which were both accomplished by participants observation research. However, the theoretical naiveness was pointed out to this kind of social geography, it was criticized to be directed to stand on social theory simultaneously based on concrete example consciously.

 

'Spatial turn' in the neighboring disciplines

As compared with the backward situation of geography, growing interest to spatial theory have been attracting researchers in the neighboring disciplines. Especially in sociology, political science, economics, development of the spatial theory might stem from the reconstruction of the contemporary capitalism theory in the middle of the 1980s. This argument was preceded as state theory which drew keen attention how the crisis management was in operation in the territory of a nation-state, and for sociology, it came to be woven from a critical view for spatial fetishism of the Chicago School to creating relative judgment to the modernized actual world. Rereading of the space theory of Lefebvre made the theoretical important point in this case. Critical stance to the analysis of the modern capitalist economy and society according to the post-Marxist horizon, started to be discussed in the Japanese academic arena of political science (Mizuguchi, Sato), sociology (Yoshihara, Machimura, Yoshimi), and economics (Hirai), and it served as rise of a spatial theory. In this disciplinary current, urban sociologists most often adopted especially Harvey's works after the “Conditions of postmodernity”, which had timely caught the dynamics of political economy of the changing capitalist society centering around the concept of time = space compression.

From the position of new urban sociology inspired by Castells, Yoshihara edited "Frontier of urban theory" as early as in1986, and wrote down "Social theory of urban space" as the critical study for the contemporary city. Urban sociologist, Machimura also edited in 1991 "Frontier of urban sociology: structure, space, method", with his critical review of global city and postmodern urban theory. Another wave of spatial sociology was the approach represented by Yoshimi and Ueno who derived his interest from cultural-studies research (Yoshimi, Ueno). Entering into the 1990s, cultural studies have been received as a current of post-colonial representation analysis, which was added with the critical view to nation-state, and also emphasized the connection with the resistance movement of oppressed people. Thus, cultural studies have attracted young researchers' concerns as a kind of politics of representation. Yoshihara, Yoshimi et al. also planed "The imaginative power of urban space", and "The body of city, space of city" in the series of the urban sociology toward the 21st century in 1996. These books brought the concern about the spatial theory also including history. Using the term of spatiality and space as a key word, the new problematique were carving out, and it reclaimed the perspective and the imaginative power of new recognition there.

The research group of the above-mentioned social geography was succeeded, in 1994, to that of "Space and society" research group, which has continued to be a core group tackled with such a subject. First, the research exchanges were planned with urban sociologists, economists, and historians who received spatial theory research of Anglo-American geography more profoundly. All projects were planned by Mizuoka's initiative, and one of them was the Japan Association of Economic Geographers' annual symposium of space and society in 1993, to which D. Ley and well-known spatial theorists in the neighboring disciplines in Japan were joined. Another was in the Association of Japanese Geographers annual conference, where D. Harvey and several other spatial theorists also attended. The former symposium was later arranged by several papers, whose title was, 'Geography and studies of modern urban history', 'A study of the theories of the state in political geography', 'Economics and spatial configuration in the Japanese alternative geography and the theory of spatial configuration', 'Theoretical pluralism in Anglo-American human geography'. The latter symposium was constructed by the speeches of 'Harvey and logical positivism, quantitative geography', 'Harvey in the Marxist economics', 'Harvey's critics of post-modern theory', 'Harvey and the study of geographical history' after the keynote lecture of 'Why is now Harvey's geography?'

 

Critical geographical approach has just started!

   At last, in order to support financially the research group activity which repeated the theory-informed empirical researches with critical views, Mizuuchi et. al. applied for research fund support to the Ministry of Education. Three research projects of 'Social theory and geography' in 1993, 'Socio-economic theory in geography and spatial thought' in 1995, and 'Political geographical research of Japan' in 1995 had started each from two to three years' duration. The former two research projects, which respectively H. Nozawa and T. Mizuuchi was the head, inherited the member and its theme of research organization, which had started from 1978 as a Japanese version of research group activity of the history of geographical thought under the guidance of IGU. The reports books were published in English about the history of geography, the history of a map, and a geographer's bibliography using the common subtitle of the “Japanese contribution to the history of geographical thought”, and their contribution was large which put geographical thought into the geographical subject and analysis.

  However, there was a tendency to push in geopolitical approach and a theoretical inclination of a nation state theory or new socio-cultural geography in the term inside geography, and the intellectual circuit connected to the macro-political social structure of modern Japan was not fully opened. It was these research projects above-mentioned that broke through this situation. In the latest volume of No. 6, (“Social Theory and Geographical Thought”, Edited by H Nozawa, 1996), some research members tried to tackle the spatial theoretical studies in the current geographical debate in order to adapt them to developing an original view in their fact-findings. 'Geographical thought and the formation of nation state' of T. Mizuuchi (1994) also tried to connect the nation-state theory to such a historical research of geographical thought. It examined critically what relation geographical thought and geography had in the formation of nation state, and added the critical viewpoint to the existing historical research of geographical thought, and tried to renew this geographical field. It was an epoch-making contribution of emancipating geographical idea from the very major journal of "Shiso (The review of thought)".

And focusing on this Mizuuchi's activity, he published the collection of translations with the cooperation works of the research group members of 'Space and society' entitled as "Horizon of the studies of society and space" in 1996, and also, at the same time, edited the annual journal of "Space, society, and geographical thought". With the former book, influential papers appeared in the 1970s early in the 80s, which should already also be called neo classic, was translated such as Harvey, Soja, Thrift, Cosgrove, Gregory, Ley, and Buttimer. Concerning the latter annual journal, Mizuuchi is editing it by using the fund of the Ministry of Education. According to the editorial strategy, it should run outside the existing lane, which is paved by "Geographical review of Japan" and "Human Geography of Japan". This journal now covers original papers with challenging and attractive theme, which are filled with discussion but just a bit lack of completeness that the existing established journals used to require. It also includes timely translating influential papers (now up to 34 translations of D. Harvey(4), Ó`Thalthail(2), Gregory, Pinch, S.J.Smith, Lafestin(3), L.McDowell(3), P.Jackson, L.Kong, Raichert(2), Valentine(2), Domosh, R.Sack, Nash, A.Kobayashi, G.Benko, Townsend, J.Agnew, S. Chirstpherson, etc.). In original papers, they deal with and contain the theme of theoretically articulated with politics and spatiality, Foucault's Heterotopia, Bergson's space and duration, about a nation-state, geographical thought, and geopolitics, nation state and imaginative geography and Japanese geopolitics in the academy, Haushofer and German-Japan military relation and geographical thought and nation building and geographic survey by military etc.. part of these researches are preponderantly deepened to the geopolitics of prewar days by which has been tabooed for so long. They also pursue the relevancy of social geography, in demonstrating the present conditions of illegal migrant workers and NPO activities, and slum clearance in Okinawan community etc., which produce good quality of monographs of touching the real local actual facts. The contributors, besides geographers, have spread to sociologists, or political scientists. And among socio-political geography and the field of geographical thought, it has grown to be the active journal, which attracts attention most.

From viewing the project of a special issue concerning new wave of geography in a major journal of sociology, architecture, or urban planning, it was noteworthy to mention that the architects’ journal of “Ten Plus One” issued a special edition entitled 'new geography' in 1997. While terms called geography, space, place, location etc. were seen everywhere in this edition, and translation of Harvey and Massey etc. were included, most contributors were, ironically enough, non-geographers except geographers of Mizuuchi and Oshiro. In the round-table talk which Mizuuchi and Oshiro were invited to attend, urban sociologist Yoshimi and a fine-arts historian Taki clearly pointed out that there had been no foundation in which an argument of post-modernism was received by geography of Japan. Thus, readers were quite acknowledged through this special issue that geography in Japan did not have for the academic environment at all, which cherished critical research. By introducing the word 'space', transformation of thought and ideas within the discipline could be introduced to evoke new set of problematiques, where sociology, history, and economics had keenly required. However, in the case of geography, it can be said that such development of thinking did not decisively need a term called space, a place, mapping, and a location.

It was the book that shared such a term completely “From space to place” published in 1998 by Arayama and Oshiro, who are younger members of the research project above mentioned. According to Onjo and Oshiro (1998), about the geographical approach which 'reads' modern Japan which they claim, ‘Since formation in the modern world, in a changing relation of space in a global scale, two questions in this geographical approach, should be highlighted with tracing back work how the material apparatus, institution, everyday custom, 'common feeling' of each social groups which are supporting our present society are established and reproduced through the social production of `space', 'landscape' and 'place', which have been compulsorily included in this relation’. Another question is posed that what kind of social practice geography is describing and reading this modern society, where academic disciplines of geography was institutionally produced and established as one of its sub-system (Onjo and Oshiro, 1998, pp.1-2). This proposition must be borne in mind. As opposed to the description of geographical facts which geography has dealt with conventionally, and such a new approach gives the depth of the thinking for seeing in total ideology and strategies which knowledge, science, technology, discourse, and eyes posses (Hisatake 1995, p. 239). As this Hisatake's indication, it obviously becomes an important work to describe spatially and critically the mechanism of formation of the national land space.

On reflecting this kind of critical view, Mizuuchi, in 1999, edited such stance in English as "Nation, Region and the politics of Geography in East Asia" just after his participation of the First East Asian Critical Geographers Conference and by encouragement received from its attendants. The two strong streams of the studies on geographical thought and those on space and society are now articulated in this volume. They also lead us to focus on the spatial issues of nation state building, state intervention, geographical imaginations and discourse, colonialism and geopolitical concerns.

Simultaneously, in 1999, one of the active journal of "Gendai Shiso (Review of the Contemporary Thought)" planned to launch the special issue entitled 'Spatial transformation', which contained several original papers and five translations by the research project members. In original papers, such as 'How should geography be a critical discipline?' Mizuoka elaborated on the opinion of N. Smith translation in the same journal, clearly demonstrated as a social accusation the outline of the geography of economical exploitation and social oppression, and asserted that the political activism from a grassroots level should be required for such critical geography. Mizuuchi illustrated, in 'Total war, planning and the configuration of national land space', the irony of the history in which the spatial planning most powerfully progressed using the ‘opportunity’ of total war, and clarified the political and power nature of geographical ideology. Hisatake, in his 'Heritage of Japanese geopolitics', started from using metaphor that Hawaii in the prewar days was a small Manchuria, demonstrated the reality of the U.S. Asian and Pacific Rim Region’s strategy at that time, and critically and comprehensively showed the political expansionism of Japan. It is, thus, that clear critical geography should serve to judge the role and practice of national state policies and its execution (Mizuuchi, 2000), and in other words, state policy and state intervention becomes the main problematique of geography.

Cultural studies in terms of spatial representation and political economy of space, which attract younger generation researchers, might have to now reply practically to responding to the changing present conditions (Kato, Kato and Kanda). We need a critical geography which supports thinking how to articulate actual local problems and to exchange a dialog theoretically and globally (Hsia and 2000). Furthermore, critical geography should promote norm-worth of the human life in citizen society or ecological environment as Choi (2000) claimed, and it should throw more strongly critical concerns, supported by theoretical concern, toward many actual problems. And critical geography should encourage people who are going to make effort to solve such many problems and to revive some trials for the transformation of the present situation. In the future, it is necessary to unify both practical knowledge of the people in everyday life and the theoretical knowledge of political economy. Such a movement in East Asia is now in the situation that the critical geography of Korea and Taiwan precedes Japan. Moreover, geography of Japan is exposed to the crisis of deconstruction by university reform. Critical geography cannot but overcome such a crisis and it must be tentatively concluded both practically and theoretically that the necessity of weaving substantial relations with actual locale and university is keenly high.