In Japan Crash, Time Obsession May Be Culprit
NEW YORK TIMES, Apr 27, 2005
By NORIMITSU ONISHIAcross the country, the [recent train accident that killed more than 100 people] has already caused much soul-searching over Japan’s attention – some would say obsession – with punctuality and efficiency. To many, the driver’s single-minded focus on making up the 90 seconds seemed to reveal the weak points of a society where the trains really do run on time, but where people have lost sight of the bigger picture.
“Japanese believe that if they board a train, they’ll arrive on time,” said Yasuyuki Sawada, a 49-year-old railway worker, who had come to look at the crash site. “There is no flexibility in our society; people are not flexible, either.”
Mr. Sawada was one of many people who came to stand and watch behind the yellow police line here, and who saw deeper problems hidden in the accident. “If you go abroad, you find that trains don’t necessarily arrive on time,” Mr. Sawada said. “This disaster was produced by Japanese civilization and Japanese people.”
Why is the NYT’s Japan coverage so awful? I can forgive the perenially crappy Howard French because 1.) it’s not his area of expertise, and 2.) his non-Japan coverage is decent. But as Onishi is either Japanese or of Japanese descent, shouldn’t he know better than to pawn this kind of crap off on us? If this is any guide, I expect coverage of the next Amtrak derailment to prominently print the quote of some gawker saying, “This disaster was produced by American civilization. . .”
Meanwhile, at the Manchester Guardian:
Japan’s failure to own up to its past threatens its future
The Guardian, Saturday April 23, 2005
By Martin JacquesAfter being obliged by Tokyo to provide a seemingly endless series of documents, the cheerful official at the Japanese embassy in London eventually informed me that the person who helps to look after my little boy – and who happens to be Filipino – would be granted a visa to join us in Nagoya for four months. Alas, when she arrived at the airport, immigration officials interrogated her for over two hours, told her at one point that she would not be allowed in, and then finally agreed to admit her.
Japan does not like immigration. That is self-evident from even the most cursory observation of a street in any large Japanese city. It is difficult to see anyone who is not Japanese. That said, it seems highly unlikely that this kind of indignity would have been inflicted on a white person. It is directed especially at Japan’s near neighbours, particularly those from south-east Asia. As if to ram home the point, all visitors from that part of the world are required to go through a special health check before being allowed into the country.
The story is a metaphor for Japan’s attitude towards its east Asian hinterland. After centuries of isolation, Japan’s rapid industrialisation after 1867 catapulted the country into the ranks of the advanced world and left its neighbours trailing in its wake. This disparity served to further distance Japan from Asia and fuelled the kind of supremacist attitudes which saw Japan colonise Korea and Taiwan, north-east China and then briefly, during the second world war, most of south-east Asia, often with considerable barbarity…
The humanity! This unsuspecting journalist — lulled into a false sense of security by those coniving officials at the London embassy — watches helplessly as his nanny gets asked a few questions at the airport. Clearly her plight is a metaphor for Japan’s historical bigotry and whitewashing of its past. What? You don’t see it? Why, it’s as “self-evident from even the most cursory observation” (how silly of me not to have caught it earlier!)
With thanks to Debito.
That Guardian article is pretty shit, but the NYT one isn’t nearly as bad. The NYT has done some lousy articles on Japan in the past, but at least this one is based on interviews with Japanese people in Japan, and not a bunch of ex-pat kids they found chilling out in the East Village. You highlighted a comment by a Mr. Sawada, but not a clueless pundit, just a Japanese rail worker.
It is a little early to start assigning blame though, especially if the perpetrator is as amorphous as ‘Japanese culture.’ At least let the engineers finish their investigation first to make sure that there wasn’t a simple mechanical failure of some kind.
I find Norimitsu Onishi’s articles to be very good most of the time, and I don’t think that Mr. Sawada’s comment is particularly off-base. As I said on my blog a little while ago, Amtrak (and, I suspect, most Euro/American transport companies) would rather take a delay and play it safe than push the envelope like this train engineer apparently did. This is why Japanese trains and airplanes are so darn punctual compared to the rest of the world. It might also explain why parts keep falling off of JAL airplanes…
Still, it remains to be demonstrated why this is the case. Mr. Sawada obviously believes it’s one of those inexplicable cultural tendencies; Reuters seems to believe it’s simply because the competition is tougher in Japan, and companies there are more willing to cut corners and avoid extra safety precautions. I’m tempted to believe Reuters (if there were a real competitor for Acela, I believe Amtrak would be trying to run it as long as they could), but maybe the two are one and the same. “Japanese culture” is amorphous, but it comes from something: maybe this cultural quirk is the result of market forces.
Regarding Jaques article, I don’t remember the details but read a report on the Japan’s ratcheting up of visa requirements, particularly for service related occupations, in response to a rather toughly worded US report on the the world’s sex trade, where Japan took some hits. I’m sure you are more versed in it than I but it does parallel our own tightening of previously lax visa policies done in response to different events and having similar results — more questions and a skeptical attitude at the border, but nothing personal.
Fifty years ago they were bastards for promoting comfort women. Today, they are bastards for trying to eliminate it.
BTW, I do appreciate your bringing Jaques article to my attention as it reminds me I have yet to write my letter to the producers of Person Who Helps Look After Children 911, on their obviously discriminatory practice in the selection of persons who help look after children for their program. I can’t imagine where would the world be without the helpful terminology of enlightened French reporters so far be it from me to suggest to Jaques that maybe the whole process would have been a breeze if he had just written “Nanny” on the damn application. (I can’t believe this story got by the Guardian editors without that change.)
I really hate the Chinese Communist Party. I hope it will lose authority in the near future.
“You will delighted to know that Jacques has been let loose again with familiar disastrous results”:http://buyo.blogspot.com/2005/11/martin-jacques.html