A German book about Crown Princess Masako

[HRH Abigail]

Originally Posted by ChiaraC

I have always made a point to let it become clear which of the things I say is part of the summary and which is just my opinion but I see that in the part "Great expectations" the last remark (about Masako being required to work a goddess´s miracle) might be taken as part of the summary. For clarification: the last part about the contradictory expectations of the public towards Masako is indeed a summary of what Fritz and Kobayashi say but the very last remark about the goddess´s miracle is NOT Fritz and Kobayashi, that is just my own sarcasm overflowing…

ChiaraC.:

Every single time, that I read posts of yours, I can't believe how fluent you are in English. I mean, your English is almost perfect! I am telling you that many an American does not post as articulately as you do.
It's amazing.
Sorry to appear to be overly-fawning here, but, I am just waiting for you to confess to me that you are really an American, or something.

-- Abbie

[ChiaraC]

I am aware that for a foreigner my English is rather good but that it is so good as you describe it I did not know.
Thank you for encouraging me!

But, no, I am definitely not American. I have never even been to the US – and if I should have been living there in a past life I definitely do not remember anything of it...

Maybe one of the reasons is that I am very fond of reading and have read many English books in the original , books by Dickens, Thackeray and Jane Austen. (She is my all-time-favourite!) And also Harry Potter.
As this obviously helps I´d like to recommend it.

[HRH Abigail]

Originally Posted by ChiaraC

I am aware that for a foreigner my English is rather good but that it is so good as you describe it I did not know.
Thank you for encouraging me!

But, no, I am definitely not American. I have never even been to the US – and if I should have been living there in a past life I definitely do not remember anything of it...

Maybe one of the reasons is that I am very fond of reading and have read many English books in the original , books by Dickens, Thackeray and Jane Austen. (She is my all-time-favourite!) And also Harry Potter.
As this obviously helps I´d like to recommend it.

Well, you are welcome ... I am eternally amazed is all.

I have been to Europe a few times, and the one thing that always impresses me about the Natives of almost any country there, is how cosmopolitan and educated everyone appears to be. And, fluent in likely more than one language. I am American and probably should not be disparaging my own countrymen, but ... I really do think we could do well to beef up our education demands and requirements, here.

I will stop here. Enough said. I don't want to appear to be too fawning or favouritist.

-- Abbie

[Emi]

Wow, can't believe this is the end of the translation, I"ve been enjoying the discussion so much I almost don't want it to end :).

All I can say is: thank you thank you ChiaraC for being so generous to share this book with us and your own opinions. Am really busy right now but will add further comments later about the topics in the book.

[HRH Abigail]

Originally Posted by Emi

Wow, can't believe this is the end of the translation, I"ve been enjoying the discussion so much I almost don't want it to end :).

All I can say is: thank you thank you ChiaraC for being so generous to share this book with us and your own opinions. Am really busy right now but will add further comments later about the topics in the book.

ChiaraC. is a jewel isn't she?

-- Abbie

[ChiaraC]

Abbie, you make me blush… Thank you!

In fact, that IS one of the points in our (German) school system that I appreciate (There are others that I do NOT appreciate, though): that every child is offered to learn, at least, one foreign language, often two or three.

But I´ll disloyally tell you something about my countrymen, too: Germans love to be right, and that sometimes has as a consequence that they are not open to change or to learning new things - as then they´d have to admit that they have been wrong (or imperfect) before… And that is something which US-Americans are usually very good at. They say: “That obviously wasn´t such a good thing that we did there, let´s go ahead and change that.” or “That is a very good new idea, let´s try that.” They would not say: “I said yesterday that this is wrong and this is right, and that means it will be like that for evermore.”

All nations have good points and bad points. But nationality is not an unchangeable destiny as we can see in Naruhito: He is Japanese, and he still wanted to be able to speak his mind and to defend his values even in a controversial situation. Certainly NOT a typical Japanese quality. But he made it! (Does not mean, though, that when YOU change the rest of the nation will change, too… Probably not… )

Thank you, Emi! Honestly, for a simple reason I am glad I am done: from August until Mid-September I´ll be so busy that I wouldn´t have had time to translate a single sentence even if I had not succeeded in finishing the summary before. But on the other hand, I really enjoyed doing this translation and sharing with you, and I am sorry that it is over…
But I am, for sure, looking very much forward to reading your opinions when you will have time to write them down!

Anyway, I would be thrilled to read any comments on the contents I have put here. And maybe somebody from the Ben-Hills-group would tell us about the differences between the views of those two books, so we can find out together which interpretation of this or that point would seem to be the more convincing?

[Emi]

About the Ben Hills book, I actually ended up reading it before this thread was started so it has been interesting to compare and contrast the two. Some general comments about the two books:

It's clear that both authors put a lot of effort into researching the books. I felt that Ben Hills book was written from the perspective of a Westerner looking into Japan, while the Fritz and Kobayashi (F and K) book is written from the inside explaining to the outside world how it all works. I should also add that Ben Hills is also a broadsheet journalist and won the Walkley Award (one of Australia's most prestigious journalism awards). In other words, like and F and K he also has a reputation to uphold, and while you should never believe everything you read, at very least the primary sources should be credible.

In the Hills book there is more on the time Naruhito and Masako spent overseas, especially Masako's time at Harvard and both their experiences at Oxford. I presume for a Western journalist it was probably easier to access overseas sources, though he did spend a considerable amount of time in Japan as a journalist. The book also names all the sources used, so it was probably harder to get people in the inner circle to talk which may be why the book feels like it is written from an outside perspective.

I do feel that the F and K book was more objective than the Ben Hills book (though is there anything such as true objectivity in an issue like this?). The F and K book is more analytical and digs quite deep to explain the reasons/background behind the events we have read about in the papers. I felt that the Ben Hills book pursued more of an agenda, namely a sympathetic opinion of Masako and that the IHA was the baddie (I'm generalising but IMO that's the general gist). It basically bypassed the role of the Emperor and Empress, the generation gap issue, and how the Emperor actually does have a fair amount of power when it comes down to the decisions made at the top level of the IHA. This was entirely new info that I learnt from reading the F&K book. However Ben Hills does include interesting discussion of the possibility Aiko was conceived from IVF and the views of IVF in Japan, and also how Masako's coming from a Japanese family but having spent most of her life overseas shaped her personality, including contradictory aspects.

I want to add something else that is entirely my own input. I have read the discussion on this board about Naruhito's comments at that now well-known press conference. I want to emphasis I respect his actions and the loyalty he has shown to his wife, but as someone who comes from a North East Asian background I also want to explain why it was criticised by some sections of the Japanese media and society, especially the older generations.

Although I am not Japanese the countries in North East Asia (by this I mean China, Japan and Korea) share some important connections through culture, historical influences, philosophy and language. One aspect that is still very important today is the cultural element of "face". This is a difficult thing to explain but basically it means whatever happens you at least give people their social veneer in public, that you preserve their outward respectability, there is a common saying that you should at least give someone enough "face" to be able to meet them again. We have already talked about national characteristics and perhaps the disadvantage of overpoliteness is that sometimes no-one is willing to directly mention the elephant in the room! IMO this is one of the reasons the IHA continually refers to Masako's depression as "adjustment disorder", because to talk about it directly is for Masako and the Imperial Family to lose face. Think what you may of that, I'm just trying to explain the possible reasoning for the euphemism.

Which finally brings us to Naruhito's comments. By so directly exposing the conflict to the media he caused the Imperial Family (esp the Emperor and Empress) and IHA to lose face big time. It's not pleasant for any royal family to have it's problems publicly exposed, but for a society where face is still important, this is especially so. Of course the subsequent actions of other members of the Imperial Family did not help matters. But you can see how face was still a consideration in how the criticisms were never directly worded, and even Naruhito did not directly criticise his parents.

That's my two cents worth for now. I'm not trying to say what Naruhito did was wrong, in fact given everything it was a brave thing to do, and I really think he must have felt it was the last resort in desperate circumstances. I'm just trying to explain a possible reason for why some did not view it favourable, even if they may have agreed with what he said.