On the anniversary of the Hiroshima bombing
this week (the 6th of August) there was a special viewing of the documentary "Yasukuni" during the Melbourne Film Festival.
If anyone hasnt seen the film and doesnt wish to be spoiled then stop reading now.
The movie was directed by Li Ying a Chinese director (who had lived in Japan for over 20 years) his movie is somewhat of a "fly on the wall" type documentary that shows the shrine processions by the priests and soldiers as well as the protests, politics and history that has surrounded the shrine since the end of World War 2.
One event in particular portrayed the Nationalists spreading petitioning (what I can only assume to be) the government to call the whole "Nanking Massacre" a sham and fabrication. The film overall I felt presents the right wing nationalists as a dangerous force and the government apathetic to those families that wish to have their sons names removed from the shrine.
One fact I did not know that even Buddhist monks were forced to go to war and became enshrined at Yasukuni. The families of these soldiers strongly believe that the shrine symbolises Japan's aggression in Asia and want no part inside the shrine. All of this culminates in a scene where a native Taiwanese woman angrily demands her brother's ashes be returned to Taiwan from Yasukuni.
Throughout the movie, the director intersperses an interview with one of the last sword forgers for Yasukuni, who is now in his 90's. Throughout the movie he goes about the painstaking process in creating the swords given to soldiers over 50 years ago. Towards the end it is clear why the director chooses to focus on this particular man.
Throughout this movie I could only wonder what his aim was with this movie? Was it anti-nationalist? Anti-government? Anti-Japanese? There have been accusations that the movie was anti-Japanese but I did not necessarily get that feeling. It certainly was of the view that what the Japanese did during the war was not right and the war criminals being enshrined there should not be worshipped by the Prime Minister or be enshrined there in the first place.
This movie had a lot of disturbing images but I felt there wasnt anything significantly new revealed about Japan and the war. It did illuminate however a lot of the Shrine's processions and the feverish reverence the nationalists hold for the Emperor (who's own involvement in the war remains a mystery).
That leaves the question then I suppose....what is the stance Japan should take with the war? The film does not give any answers...only images that depict the sad history of a war that tore Asia apart.
this week (the 6th of August) there was a special viewing of the documentary "Yasukuni" during the Melbourne Film Festival.
If anyone hasnt seen the film and doesnt wish to be spoiled then stop reading now.
The movie was directed by Li Ying a Chinese director (who had lived in Japan for over 20 years) his movie is somewhat of a "fly on the wall" type documentary that shows the shrine processions by the priests and soldiers as well as the protests, politics and history that has surrounded the shrine since the end of World War 2.
One event in particular portrayed the Nationalists spreading petitioning (what I can only assume to be) the government to call the whole "Nanking Massacre" a sham and fabrication. The film overall I felt presents the right wing nationalists as a dangerous force and the government apathetic to those families that wish to have their sons names removed from the shrine.
One fact I did not know that even Buddhist monks were forced to go to war and became enshrined at Yasukuni. The families of these soldiers strongly believe that the shrine symbolises Japan's aggression in Asia and want no part inside the shrine. All of this culminates in a scene where a native Taiwanese woman angrily demands her brother's ashes be returned to Taiwan from Yasukuni.
Throughout the movie, the director intersperses an interview with one of the last sword forgers for Yasukuni, who is now in his 90's. Throughout the movie he goes about the painstaking process in creating the swords given to soldiers over 50 years ago. Towards the end it is clear why the director chooses to focus on this particular man.
Throughout this movie I could only wonder what his aim was with this movie? Was it anti-nationalist? Anti-government? Anti-Japanese? There have been accusations that the movie was anti-Japanese but I did not necessarily get that feeling. It certainly was of the view that what the Japanese did during the war was not right and the war criminals being enshrined there should not be worshipped by the Prime Minister or be enshrined there in the first place.
This movie had a lot of disturbing images but I felt there wasnt anything significantly new revealed about Japan and the war. It did illuminate however a lot of the Shrine's processions and the feverish reverence the nationalists hold for the Emperor (who's own involvement in the war remains a mystery).
That leaves the question then I suppose....what is the stance Japan should take with the war? The film does not give any answers...only images that depict the sad history of a war that tore Asia apart.
