Mid-American Guide Trans-Pacific Viewpoints March 3, 1996 Dear Editor, Professor Chalmers Johnson's emotional letter responding to my prior commentary was a surprise. His poor comprehension of the points I raised was the last thing I expected. He considered my comments as an attack upon the speakers at his conference. My purpose was to evaluate these Japanologists' linguistic and research accomplishments and to help establish better understanding and smother communication between Japan and the U.S. in global affairs. Given Dr. Johnson's thirty year's experience as a faculty member, he must understand rating students' performance by letter grade like "A" or "C minus." To judge performance is not attacking the work being evaluated. In my evaluation none of the conference speakers can compare with Dr. E. H. Norman in terms of Japanese language skill or historic insight. If Dr. Johnson believes all the speakers are as qualified in the field as was Dr. E. H. Norman, I might change my assessment of these University of California graduate Japanologists. This reminds me of the Japanese proverb, Tsuki to suppon, meaning, "It is as different as chalk from cheese" (especially Camembert). Consequently, I was not all "upset" about Dr. Johnson's conference, but only disappointed in the viewpoints expressed, when compared with recognized international standards. I have written many Japanese articles and books about political and economic behavior. I have always hoped if Dr. Johnson was able to read a few of my recent works, such as Diagnosis of Japanese Catalepsy, Tomei Books, 1993, or Japan is Critically in Peril, Yale Press, 1994. Almost all Japanologists, including Dr. Johnson, would find my own criticism of Japan far more fundamental and comprehensive than any revisionist group. My personal impression is that the American revisionist viewpoint does not seek ontological understanding but deals with the phenomenological level. I do wonder why Dr. Johnson decided to categorize me as a "racist." Does he have a logical reason for pinning such a label on me? If a globalist, as I believe myself to be, offers well-intentioned and constructive advice to a colleague, how is it possible that someone in the American community of Japanologists could construe that advice as some sort of disgraceful expression of cultural prejudice? I was disappointed not to receive an objective response from Dr. Johnson but only a reaction which suggests his acute sensitivity to criticism. Incidentally, I was also unimpressed by Mr. Eckel's letter addressed to me, because much of my main concern was directed toward how to improve the Japanologists' quality, especially their linguistic skill and performance. My article in the January Mid-America Guide is an English-language summary of my original Japanese report which is more specific and four times longer than the English version. The Japanese version appeared in the Sept. 25, 1995 issue of Takeyama Report, a members-only publication. Their membership is limited to the top business leaders in the Pacific basin, along with CEO's, chairmen, and presidents of firms listed in TESEMFS (Tokyo Stock Exchange Market First Section) or their equivalent. If there might be interest in republishing my original Japanese article for all of your readers, I would be happy to submit it again. More important, I would like to invite Japanologists of all stripes, including Mr. Exkel, to comment on these important subjects in the Japanese section of Mid-America Guide. This could be contributing to a better and more informed future for Japanology on both sides of the Pacific. Yours Sincerely, Hajime "Jim" Fujiwara |
home |