|
|
|
|||||||
| Portal | Royal Articles | Royal Calendar | Register | FAQ | Members List | Royal Links | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
||||
 |
 |
 |
|
||
 |
 |
|
|||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
#141
07-21-2008, 01:53 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
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  
|
|
#142
07-22-2008, 11:06 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thank you very much, Abbie!
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.  
|
|
#143
07-22-2008, 06:21 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
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
|
|
#144
07-24-2008, 12:48 PM
|
||||
|
||||
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.
|
|
#145
07-25-2008, 01:05 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
-- Abbie
|
|
#146
07-26-2008, 11:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
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?
|
|
#147
07-27-2008, 01:22 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
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.
|
|
#148
10-21-2008, 12:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thank you, Emi!
Thank you, Emi, for your highly interesting comparison of the two books! And I am very sorry indeed for my answer coming so very late – I really could not make it earlier.
I found especially interesting what you said about the reasons for the differences between the two books (inside – outside perspective). Seen from this point of view, they obviously both have their merits. I have to admit that I had a certain prejudice against Hills´ book (that I would never have expressed here as it cannot be more than a mere prejudice, me never having read the book), I think especially because of the chapter titles concerning Masako and Naruhito - something like "mummy´s boy" and "daddy´s g.irl " – that, to me, seem to be rather "cheap" psychology, so to speak. Of course, Naruhito´s existence WAS very important for his mother. Her situation was already so difficult that without him being born so shortly after her marriage and without his being a boy she might have completely broken down. (We know that he was for several years her only child and that she suffered, at least, one miscarriage between him and his brother. I really do not want to imagine what would have become of her if she had been childless during these years before Fumihito was born. Horrible thought indeed.) So, of course, there always was a special contact between them – so special maybe that it was not so easy for her to welcome his bride with open arms as she could do with his brother´s bride… So far the situation matches the cliché of "mummy´s boy". But as to Naruhito being spoilt and pampered and protected from the rough side of life (as you would assume a "mummy´s boy" would have been) – all who have read "The Naru-chan-constitution" at the beginning of this thread would know what an incorrect description of the circumstances of his education that would make… The same thing is to be said about "daddy´s g.irl" – sure, Masako followed in her father´s professional footsteps, so far correct. But the term does not show that she actually followed in her MOTHER´s footsteps, too, who had been a business woman and had been working for Air France before her marriage – certainly unusual in her generation. And, what is more, the term actually clouds the fact that although Masako DID follow in her father´s professional footsteps she acted by doing so AGAINST HIS WISH AND ADVICE: Hisashi Owada had made it clear to his daughter that he wanted her to stay in the US and to start working there. He probably foresaw with how many obstacles his daughter would have to deal if she returned to Japan, still insisting on having a brilliant career, and like a caring father, he had obviously wanted to protect his daughter from adversity. (Nice try… )Both these incidents biased me against Hills´ book as they seemed to me to denote an attitude of hunger for the sensational and an unwillingness to really take a close look at the facts of the individual case and a tendency to take refuge in psychological commonplace clichés instead. But now I see that he might have used these expressions because he simply did not have some of the information that Fritz and Kobayashi had – for example about father Owada´s advice to his daughter that is probably an insider information. And, anyway, these are only chapter titles, maybe chosen a bit unluckily, but that does not necessarily mean that the actual content of the chapter could not be much more reflected and to the purpose. I would, actually, be very interested indeed to know if this is so. So if you, Emi, or anybody who has read the book would like to share their opinion on this point I would be quite thrilled to hear it. And one thing more: you mention that Hills says more than Fritz and Kobayashi about the attitude in Japan concerning IVF. If you could give some of the details of what he says I would also very much like to hear it. I am interested in that because I, personally, after the information I got, do not doubt any more that Aiko as well as Hisahito were conceived by IVF, and I am even more convinced of it as the people concerned try to cover it up in a – to me - absolutely ridiculous way. (See also this link that says: "Shukan shincho reported that the baby's father, Prince Akishino, had let it slip that he and his wife were expecting a boy, exposing the official story -- that the couple "didn't want to know" the s.ex (credited to Ichiro Kanazawa, medical supervisor to the Imperial Household Agency) -- for the lie many suspected it was." The Family And The Society: Search results for A+ +would+be+better+for+Japan I am not sure if this will work as I cannot write g.irl properly. If it does not, try The Family And The Society: It's a boy for Japan: magazine and then serach in the blog for A+ g.irl+would+be+better+for+Japan - obviously, you would have to remove the period that I had to put to make it appear) Even before Kako was born the press had been speculating that this child might be the future heir of the Japanese throne, if a boy. And then, in December 2003, the Akishino couple had been officially requested by the Grand steward of the kunaicho to have another child "for the interest of the monarchy". Under these circumstances, it is simply not believable that the Akishinos "did not want to know" their baby´s gender before birth. The whole nation was eager to get this information and only the parents of the potential "little saviour" should feel no curiosity? And if I even go so far as to believe that: is not it then the last piece to make the story impossible to believe that, according to press reports, prince Akishino took the information that the baby was born and was a boy "with calmness"? Sure, sure, I know he is a Japanese prince and owes it to his dignity to not jump high up into the air and scream: "Yeah! Yeah! Yeah! We did it!" (Although it is a nice picture… ) But if he really did not know before that it was a boy I would, at least, have expected him, to smile gladly and say: "Thank you for this very good piece of news." instead of showing "calmness". In my opinion: they were overdoing it. I would rather have believed that Hisahito was a piece of luck if they had behaved more naturally during the pregnancy and afterwards.It seems to me that the only explanation why it was so important to act the i.nnocent was because there was indeed something that they wanted to hide from the public at any cost, and that can only be the fact that Hisahito´s life began, as well as his cousin´s, in a test tube. And I simply wonder that obviously nobody had scruples to take refuge in this method on one hand, and that, on the other hand it should still be so absolutely unthinkable to admit it. You can think about IVF whatever you want and I certainly understand people who have a problem with it, that´s not my point. But for people who have made use of IVF so readily in order to solve what they see as a major national problem it seems to me to be a bit ungrateful to afterwards disown it. Maybe this is also an "Nobody mentions the elephant in the room"-thing but I would really like to know some more about the Japanese public opinion about IVF because it might help me to understand this attitude better that seems to me to be highly inconsistent. Well, so far. (I have to say still more but I think for today that will do. )
|
|
#149
10-21-2008, 02:58 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
|
#150
10-21-2008, 03:11 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I have read the Hills book and he is not at all disrespectful to the royals themselves. He does not attempt to hide his disdain for the IHA, which is not the same thing. Also, it is not accurate to assume that his nationality clouds his objectivity or precludes him from being a royalist.
The cutesy chapter title names have more to do with the corrolation of the defining influence that Naruhito's mother had upon him as well as the defining influence that Masako's father had upon her.
__________________
I am a leaf on the wind, watch how I soar.
|
|
#151
10-21-2008, 03:25 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
They tend not to be reverential which is great, and means that they won't take too much at face value. The people from Down Under, that I know personally think Royalty is "for the birds" and are most opinionated about wanting them out of their lives, for good. Dealing with them up close and personally, is where I got my opinion of Australians from. I can also tell you that Aussies are laid back folks and a pleasure to associate with. Again, it's all "No worries, Mate" with them. It's great I am sorry if my post read as though I were stereotyping any nationality. I hadn't meant to do that.
|
|
#152
10-21-2008, 03:55 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Although I'm from North America, I come from a mini-culture which is non-confrontational--a culture where it's considered "bad manners" to say something that, although true and kindly put, might be unpleasant for the person to hear. It's also considered rude to let a person know that you're bothered about something he or she has done or said. And believe me, my genetic background is about as far from north-east asia as one can get.
So, yes, I can understand the bit about "saving face," at least in the way it's interpreted from where I come. I've moved into another province now; and although I first found the people here too up-front, I've come to appreciate that quality very much. The non-confrontational lifestyle might be very polite, but it means that people don't say what they really mean and that eventually there's a big blow-up because people don't discuss things until situations become very heated.Quote:
Last edited by Mermaid1962; 10-21-2008 at 03:59 PM. Reason: misspelled word
|
|
#153
10-21-2008, 07:21 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Americans and Japanese are so different, in many respects. Masako Owada must have found, being so Americanized as she was, her new postion of the CP of such a tradition-bound country very, very hard indeed to adjust to. In light of this, I don't think anyone could have avoided getting ill, from all the stress. I am glad to see some signs of her getting a bit better, or looking as though some therapy might be helping her. GOOD for the CP Masako!
|
|
#154
10-22-2008, 05:54 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
My sister visited New York City years ago and was told to expect loud, rude people; but she and the people she was travelling with were pleasantly surprised at how helpful people were and how polite.
I hope that we get to see Masako in some official capacity at some point. That way, we'll know for sure that she's "on the mend." Quote:
|
|
#155
10-22-2008, 06:00 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
There we are. It never pays to go in with negative expectations of folks. Nor, to stereotype anyone, either, I dare say .....
|
