This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Japan to teach patriotism to children

Gazerocks said:
teach patriotism? how's tt possible...I think it comes in a natural way, can't be forced?
Click to expand...

Before it became bad in the United States, we taught patriotism a great deal. Such figures as George Washington and Abraham Lincoln were deified into a specific American mythology that was created from the very dawn of the Republic. Children were made to memorize "The Midnight Ride of Paul Revere", read books like Johnny Tremain, and recite the Gettysburg Address. Disney movies about Davey Crockett fed into this mythologizing trend during the mid-20th century, making use of film as a medium to further impress patriotism upon children.

Granted, when you teach a mythology, even one as historically accurate (by comparison to other mythologies, that is) as the American one, you are, to some degree, indoctrinating students into a level of falsehood. For example, even though the story dates back to his lifetime, Washington never cut down the cherry tree. The anecdote was purposely fabricated by early American historians in order to intensify the cult of personality that surrounded Washington and enhance his legacy for future generations.

Sometimes, this education had negative aspects, such as the portrayal of Native American nations as savage antagonists. However, just as many films and books that depicted them as barbaric also took a much more realistic and objective approach during the 1950s and 1960s.

Patriotism itself is not a bad thing, as I said many months ago. It should most certainly be taught in public schools. But nationalism is wholly different, and far more intense. Patriotism would never lead a citizen to obey a dictator who demanded atrocities from him. Nationalism would.
 
GodEmperorLeto said:
Disney movies about Davey Crockett fed into this mythologizing trend during the mid-20th century, making use of film as a medium to further impress patriotism upon children.
Click to expand...

Yeah. and this stuff just made sure that history remained whitewashed.

Disney-fied history, which still exists in such places as Disney theme parks cover up history as much as Japan's right-wing trying to deny the existence of the "Comfort Women" and the Rape of Nanking.

Disney version, which to some extent still exists thanks to right wing ultra-nationalist talk show hosts such as Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage, and also Anne Coultier and Faux News' Bill O'Really,
...the Disney version would be that the continent's First Nations' people were super good friends with the land settling predator Europeans;
...that the A-bomb was not a war crime;
...that the invasion of Vietnam was not a war crime;
and that corporations such as Ford and Coca-cola brought a happy future for all.
...probably the biggest Disney-type myth is that change happened at the top. The Disney-type history myth totally leaves out that everyday people are the ones that brought the US to where it is today.

There is the myth that some corporate head or wise-man as president brought a better world.
NO single bigger myth exist in the US (and probably the world), than this.
Be it better working conditions, an end to legal discrimination, an end to the Vietnam war, .... none of these were brought upon by any single or group of enlightened rulers. ALL were forced upon the rulers, be they in gov't or the legal entities called corporations.
And the end of corporate rule will not come from above either.
Anything from above will be but a distraction or a re-adjustment of the way those on top rule.

Things such as patriotism, the dividing of us all by such petty things as land of origin are all distractions. Love for our friends, family, and home areas we grew up in are taken from us and transformed into something called nationalism or the more P.C. word "patriotism". But the rulers still war on us, using us as cannon fodder, and keeping the vast majority of the planet poor and calling it natural and others "uncivilized" or "not capable of understanding our enlightened ways".

It's a total joke on us. We are divided and war continues. You can see or feel it when an attrocity such as terrorist attacks in NY or Tokyo subways spark outrage and sympathy but equal or worse tragedies such as in Darfur or in Iraq during the 90s cause of sanctions do not.

down with patriotism and the wars and global poverty it feeds.
we're all in this together.

end crappy rant
 
Less discussion about the USA and Walt Disney. More about Shinzo Abe and the fine line between patriotism and nationalism.
 
Glenski said:
Less discussion about the USA and Walt Disney. More about Shinzo Abe and the fine line between patriotism and nationalism.
Click to expand...

I dunno about Sukotto, but I'm trying to be comparative. I don't think teaching patriotism is a bad thing, and indeed belongs in school, both in Japan and the United States (and everywhere else), but I also am trying to stress how nationalism is not constructive.

There is a fine line between the two concepts, but it's there, and shouldn't be crossed. A patriotic Japanese student will love his country, but also be critical of his leadership. Then again, considering the Japanese cultural viewpoint of obedience and deference to leadership, it becomes increasingly difficult to imagine patriotic Japanese citizens being openly critical of their government. Patriotism + tatemae = nationalism? I wonder how much this equation contributed to the militarization of the government during the early 20th century? Considering what Abe rights in Towards a Beautiful Country, I'm starting to have serious thoughts as to how Japanese culture might apply patriotic education in the classroom.
 
The thing is,
Patriotism is indoctrination.
And it is from the top-down.
The opposite of the way any real change for more rights for more people has occurred - in the US at least.

While the top-down model is characteristic of Japanese culture, so
too is the idea of consensus. I wonder how much of the top-down isn't really
just for show or "officialdom". Maybe by the time officialdom decides to change it has become pretty much consensus among all those below that X is the way to go? Such often is the case in the US. Witness the population's disdain for the war in Iraq and the desire to end it, yet politicians of both major parties continue to fund it and build permanent military bases.


In the book Nationalisms in Japan (Sheffield Centre for Japanese Studies/Routledge Series) by Naoko Shimazu (editor)
Scholars put together papers on their particular expertise.
The editor/moderator explains in her segment one conclusion is that ideas of nationalism (I'd add its P.C. version "patriotism") are influenced by the ideas of nationalism/patriotism in countries throughout the world.

Japan, like the US, or any country for that matter, is not a bubble (except maybe economy - ouch). Even during Japan's historic self-imposed isolation there were still ports open to trade and the emperor's system had contact with the outside world. What better way to keep people under control than to keep them isolated and uneducated from the rest of the world, and/or at least obedient to some sort of central authority, in this case a country.


Comparative ideas from other countries, including on patriotism/nationalism are what helps form other countries ideas of such.

How can I criticize another country's system of indoctrination unless I first make attempts at criticizing the ones from the country I am from?


As for Disney, while one can hardly be faulted for wanting to have a break from the daily grind, their superficial white-washed unreality of history doesn't help. Maybe it would be better that Disney did not try to inform while they entertain for profit? "For profit" more often than not wants things uncontroversial and easily digestible to maximize profit. Disney just happens to be a highly visible example of this.
 
I have to disagree with you, Sukotto, at least in part about Japan not being in a bubble.

Yes, globalization is forcing Japan to open its eyes, ears, and doors, but it is terribly slow, and off the top of my head, I can list a few real sticklers here. Sorry if they are not related to nationalism or patriotism, but these are in response to what you wrote:

1) despite Japan's problems with growing numbers of elderly, it refuses to let in foreigners to do much of the work, and it is doing darned little to foster a rise in birth rate. There are no other options. Once the old people die off, who is going to be left to do the work?

2) Japan sends its businessmen overseas for work, but when they return, they are given a long period of time to "cool off" and lose the western ideas they may have learned. It doesn't want them here in many cases.

3) Japan is very tight with its foreign patents, especially in the pharmaceutical market. It wants the knowledge from abroad, but it is unwilling to share.

4) The English education here is pretty lame, yet Japan claims to recognize its importance. Still, it turns a blind eye by not doing anything substantive to improve its place in the world dominated by English speakers, and our illustrious Shinzo Abe's regime has just done a 180 on Koizumi's plans to put English as mandatory in elementary schools. Self-defeating language isolation.

OK, back to the nationalism tack (although all of my 4 points are related)...

How can I criticize another country's system of indoctrination unless I first make attempts at criticizing the ones from the country I am from?
Click to expand...
Aren't you Japanese? Somehow I got that impression. I thought we were criticizing (or critiquing) the Japanese attempts to teach patriotism, not the USA's. If you are American, so be it. The point here is Japanese.
 


Yes, but the point is ideas of nationalism(which to me, in some ways is another word "patriotism". As the Ultra-nationalist I've sometimes jokingly called the super-patriot.) are also reflected by international ideas as well. Before the Meiji restoration era and the imperialist wars in Manchuria and w/Russia, there essentially were no nationalisms in Japan at the level of the everyday person/citizen, according to authors in the book cited above.
And the ideas of that time through WW2 and even through today, reflect ideas of nationalism in the broader world.


By citing methods of indoctrination in the US and crimes committed in the name of the nation...to cite George Orwell
"The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them."
it might help put ideas of nationalisms/patriotism into perspective.

It's not so much a person's day-to-day habits, but people's ideas of the country or the state and "their side" in the world.

Am I digging myself a bigger hole here?


Perhaps the main point to make, that the authors point out in the book above, is that there is not "Japanese Nationalism",
but "nationalisms in Japan".

Some ultra-nationalists or super-patriots try to claim you are not "patriotic" if you do not hold X belief. This is the same in every country.
In the US it might be you must stand for the pledge of allegiance to the flag, i.e. worship the country's flag as a deity, or "support the troops" in any war present or past and all the attrocities done in the name of the country, codenamed "freedom". Using atomic bombs might be one example.
vs
similar things in Japan-
it might some people's views that you are not patriotic or a self-hating Japanese citizen if you believe the Comfort Women or that the Rape of Nanking happened (they did).


Caster criticizes the US congress for bringing up the Comfort Women issue and mentions war crimes in Vietnam committed by the US.
He is half right. War crimes were committed by both the US and Japan, both being imperialist (no honor in empire, sorry).
And did the US appologize for invading Vietnam?
Not that I know of. I know the US did no compensate Vietnam monetarily as political leaders promised.

I'm sorry, but if criticizing war crimes done by the government of the country I happen to have citizenship in is un-patriotic, then I cannot help but be unpatriotic.

Ideas of nationalism/patriotism in one country are reflected in another.
Not necessarily mirror images, but similar.
How we mythologize the past reflects on the ideas of our respective countries today and how much of this thing called "patriotism" we have. Or what it means.


again,
Am I digging myself a bigger hole here? probably
 
Sukotto said:
Yes, but the point is ideas of nationalism(which to me, in some ways is another word "patriotism".
Click to expand...
That's your prerogative.

As I see it, yes. If any of the nationalism currently in Japan have this feeling, then don't you think it is pretty scary to teach such ideologies that lead to such feelings of animosity? Like I said, scary.


I don't think you are correct about the first point, I know you are dead wrong about the second (or are just using the word "deity" as an exaggeration), and you are way off with the third point (which is only a feeling shared by the politicians who sent such soldiers abroad; if citizens were supposed to support them, then over half of the USA is in contempt).

it might some people's views that you are not patriotic or a self-hating Japanese citizen if you believe the Comfort Women or that the Rape of Nanking happened (they did).
Click to expand...
Nobody says Japanese have to be "self-hating". Just that they realize such things happened and should not be swept under the carpet. Same B.S. happens elsewhere, and those citizens don't have to be self-hating.

And did the US appologize for invading Vietnam?
Click to expand...
Wait. Invade means enter forcibly to attack its citizens. I think the US, whatever its motives, came in to defend from another military force that invaded. Besides, that sort of "nationalism" was not backed by the American people anyway, and it is perfect example of a government (the USA) trying to persuade its people to follow its nationalistic goals (whatever the heck they were at that time). Such nationalism is what we are talking about here in regards to Japan. Teaching patriotism (love of one's country based on its foundation and good points) is one thing, but nationalism implies policy, which varies from administration to administration.

I'm sorry, but if criticizing war crimes done by the government of the country I happen to have citizenship in is un-patriotic, then I cannot help but be unpatriotic.
Click to expand...
Personally, I don't call that unpatriotic, but some of your Japanese politicians might. Ask them.

How we mythologize the past reflects on the ideas of our respective countries today and how much of this thing called "patriotism" we have. Or what it means.
again,
Am I digging myself a bigger hole here? probably
Click to expand...
I would think so.
 

actually, i am not Japanese, but US born citizen.

South Vietnam was essentially an invention of the US and/or France, outside powers anyway. US invaded after France decided continued colonization was no longer worth it. They left and the civil war eventually wound down quicker and less violent than with extra outside guns present.

since dissension can also be patriotic in a democratic society, how or are they also teaching this?
 
Whatever may or may not be the exact case with other events over the course of time, in other regions of the world, the matter of the present Japanese government's teaching of, or attempts to instill patriotism in public schools, is what should be under consideration.

I have been trying to keep my eyes open for that matter, but it is a little hard. I have two sons who are yet in the jr. high school realm, and am trying to see if I can see anything coming through in their school work, or papers that come to us. I can't really, at the moment.

It seems that on the elementary level, some effort is being made through the typical group projects that lean towards enviornmental cleanliness. That element of 'aikokushin' (love of country) [if I got the wording in the correct order--I sometimes slip on that] is good, I would say.

Anyway, leaving other parts of the world on the side, here in JAPAN, I can't see any really overt stuff happening yet, as regards teaching patriotism to the school kids.
 
Sukotto said:
South Vietnam was essentially an invention of the US and/or France, outside powers anyway.
Click to expand...
Wrong. The Geneva Accords, which accompanied worldwide de-colonialization, was signed between Cambodia, the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, France, Laos, the People's Republic of China, the State of Vietnam, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Culturally, Champa (S. Vietnam) was always separate from Dai Viet (north). The split was natural. The Viet Minh wanted the whole thing. It was not arbitrary, and it was not an "invention".

US invaded after France decided continued colonization was no longer worth it.
Click to expand...
Wrong again. The French left. The U.S. placed men in S. Vietnam to train the S. Vietnamese Army. The U.S. deployed soldiers in S. Vietnam after Congress gave L.B.J. a blank check following the Gulf of Tonkin Incident. The initial tactic was to deploy Marines to hold and defend airfields in S. Vietnam while bombing N. Vietnam. It was not initially an invasion, but the ground forces had defensive objectives. These gradually shifted overtime to search-and-destroy missions due to the nature of guerilla warfare.

They left and the civil war eventually wound down quicker and less violent than with extra outside guns present.
Click to expand...
Wrong on two counts. One, it was not a civil war. S. Vietnam was politically and culturally independent of the north, and was recognized as a sovereign nation. Saddam Hussein claimed Kuwait as the 19th province, and nobody considers Iraq's 1991 invasion of it as a "civil war", but as an aggressive invasion of a recognized sovereign state.

Secondly, the war didn't wind down, it ended. Linebacker 1 and 2 were largely successful and pulling the N. Vietnamese into peace talks. After two years, the N. Vietnamese broke the peace treaty. Repeat: BROKE THE PEACE TREATY. S. Vietnam fell shortly after.

Mars Man said:
Anyway, leaving other parts of the world on the side, here in JAPAN, I can't see any really overt stuff happening yet, as regards teaching patriotism to the school kids.
Click to expand...
There was a big stink a while back about Tokyo(?) teachers being fired or fined over not singing the Japanese national anthem, and about Japanese students being forced to sing it in schools. It isn't that the song was being required, but the nature of the lyrics themselves which were sparking the "civil disobedience" on behalf of the teachers.

I just read something yesterday about it again, but I cannot find the article link. If I do, I'll post it.
 
Yes. That issue of firing teachers at the public schools because they refused to sing the anthem--for whatever reason--is evidence of a certain lack of democratic-like thinking. I agree about the real cause of the decision--as far as I know in most cases--not to sing, were due to the words themselves, yes.

That issue came up before the matter of changing the education law, and I am generally following that. On the elementary, jr.high, and highschool levels, I have not noticed any outright 'teaching' which could clearly be seen as having been designed to teach 'patriotism' or even instill it.

Please do keep in mind that my idea of what 'patriotism' is, may be slightly different. (I think I spelled that out on another thread related to this same subject which had been earlier)

I hope we can leave other countries behind, now. . .
 

It is a mere ideology of ant-Japan.

there are so many Zainichi teachers who refused to sing.
They are basically civil servants.
It is not possible to political act by the ideology.

if they were the Japanese and stayed Foreign country for 3 years, they would realize how they were stupid.
 
Thanks for your reply, caster51 san. Could I ask you to please elaborate a little more? I can't quite see the logic flow of the argument. Thank you. MM
 
Mars Man:
you are living in Japan, right
then you are watching your home country from a Foreign country
You are sure to live in a foreign country and to have understood how much you love your home country over again.
It might not be understood when you are in the home country.
you would sing your National anthem at world cup.
it is natural feeling...
however, you know it is not nationlism.

how do you want your home country to become?
Do you hope for the profit of another country more than the profit of the home country?

anyway
I think a lot of Japanese feel the birth as the Japanese happy.
Patriotism is not a nationalism.
The person who thinks so is foolish.
it is easy to understand nationalism.
however it is so defficult to understand what real patriotism is...

at first, that is way Japan should teach what real patriotism is.
then we must understand what we should do ...
 
caster51 said:
They are basically civil servants.
It is not possible to political act by the ideology.
Click to expand...
You have a good point, I think.

It isn't quite anti-Democratic. As employees of the government, you don't have a right to do something like that without expecting repurcussions. That would be like being an employee of a company, and openly deride it wherever you go. You won't be an employee of theirs for long. You shouldn't expect to be.

Yeah, there's something to be said about civil expression and protest. But there might have been better avenues of protest. I don't know, I wasn't there, so I can't judge, but it is not, by far, a cut-and-dried situation, I think.

I think a lot of Japanese feel the birth as the Japanese happy.
Patriotism is not a nationalism.
The person who thinks so is foolish.
it is easy to understand nationalism.
however it is so defficult to understand what real patriotism is...
Click to expand...
Thank you! That's what I've been saying all along.
 
Thank you caster51 san, for that really nice reply !! It was nice in the volume of content from you, yourself (rather than simply a link) and it was nice in how it was laid out. . . the argument was well made !!

Yes, I am, legally (as my profile clearly states) a citizen of the USA. Nevertheless, I have outgrown the thinking of 'love within the borders.' (caster51, if you cannot fully, and emotionally, follow this idea, please tell me, and I will explain more--it is important NOT to rush here, to be able to fully understand each other...let's take our time)

In full honesty, I do not think more of the USA, simply due to having lived in Japan for a time. Again, I have outgrown that frame of mind. (and yes, I am purposely using the verb 'outgrow' due to my understanding being that there is a mode of understanding which moves upwards out of the more 'tribal-based' mode) I think in the mode of humankind. Where I am, is my country. Where I am, is my home--it is still this one and same planet (the only home we have in the universe).

I would no more sing the National Anthem implemented by the American Government at large, than I would that of Japan, Iran, The Republic of the Congo, or Brazil. If the UN had an International Anthem, depending on the thrust of meaning, I might well sing that, and salute that flag. (a thing which is a representative of the idealism of the group that created it)

I hope for the profit of humankind--the world upon which we all live. I follow the suggestion of the ramen commercial, and the organization 'Doctors Without Borders.'

Now, as regards democratic-like thinking, (the exact wording in my earlier post) I will very strongly argue that that IS lacking in Japan. (of course in many other parts of the world too !) Regardless of what ideology those teachers had embraced, when the government at large decided to re-install a National Anthem (and it is important to also keep in mind that it had not been a requirement when surely most of those teachers had sought those jobs) it would have been more democratic-like to allow all peoples to choose to sing or not to sing--period.

I disagree with the view that the government owns the school system, as 7-11 holdings owns the convience store chain and the old Ito Yokodo chain. The government is there to set guidelines for the educational program, to help the educational program (prefectures and some private schools) financially, but should not consider itself to be stipulating rules of conduct to the prefectures as seen through pressure to secure its wishes. . . all the way down to the very principals of the individual school, as, in fact, it is doing. I hold this mode of thinking to be the far lesser productive one.

I do not feel that 'AI KOKU SHIN' quite fully fits the English, 'patriotic' or 'patriotism.' I do not reason that 'patriotism' is fully divorceable from 'nationalism.' A pine tree and a chrysanthemum are quite different, yet they both work on photosynthesis (so the question is, 'what is photosynthesis?') they are both rooted into soil (so 'what is soil?'). This analogy would explain the sameness and difference of these two phenomena--'patriotism' and 'nationalism' as is the order in which they most logically, historically appear to have developed.

The thing to do, then, would be to investigate the elements which are the same--the 'grounds' and the 'workings' of these two otherwise differently figured concepts. (it has been done on another thread of old...I cannot find it now.)

caster51 san, please excuse me. I wanted to write this in easier English, but somehow could not. I'm sorry. Please do ask if there are any areas you do not follow exactly. In short, I understand the first point being made in your post (first 2 paragraphs) and reason that that style of thinking is old, and should be discarded. I reason that the second point in that post is correct in essence, but is in need of fuller and deeper thought and presentation. I disagree with the concept presented in your other post. I maintain that the essential grounding of the idea is at fault due to the degree of its unproductiveness and lack of fuller consideration.
 
caster51 said:
It is a mere ideology of ant-Japan.
there are so many Zainichi teachers who refused to sing.
They are basically civil servants.
Click to expand...
caster,
The way you wrote above, one might think you meant that the majority of teachers who refused to stand or sing were Zainichi. Is that what you implied? If so, please prove it. Since the number of teachers in Japan are non-Zainichi Japanese, it only follows that most of the rebels were regular ol' Japanese citizens who just didn't like the old-world nature of the song lyrics, referring to the Emperor as a god.

It is not possible to political act by the ideology.
if they were the Japanese and stayed Foreign country for 3 years, they would realize how they were stupid.
Click to expand...
I have no idea what you meant by the first statement here, but as I read it, it is dead wrong by pure definition. What did you mean?
 
it only follows that most of the rebels were regular ol' Japanese citizens who just didn't like the old-world nature of the song lyrics, referring to the Emperor as a god.
Click to expand...
There is a dissenter even if the national anthem is changed.
It is a problem of the interpretation.
My interpretation is kimi is Japan.
Nobody might think the emperor to be a god in modern people.
The person who was born at prewar days might revive the brainwash like flash back.
however these teacher were born after war.
it has nothing to do with Interpretation.
To begin with, Kimigayo is a song at the wedding for a couple
so, Interpretation will be changed by positibe mind
We cant change my family name , even though my ancester was criminal.
if they were dirty, we should make them a pride, that is, more wanderful country.
why does not a teacher say like this " let's make Japan as a wonderful country where these are respected more by other country"
then what can you contribute to the world, Japan ,your friend....

They pass out leaflets in the graduation ceremony.
They force not to sing to the student.
if i dont like to sing this song, I would sing other song without attension
the national anthem and the national flag do not have a guilty at all.
name of Nippon does not have a guilty at all.either.

patriotism is not ony contribution to a home country.
If the fame of the country goes up by contributing to the world, i think it is also one of patriotism.
 
Last edited:
caster,
Your interpretation of Kimigayo ("kimi is Japan") is all yours. I will never tell you you are wrong, because that is your opinion.

However, you wrote that "To begin with, Kimigayo is a song at the wedding for a couple". My Japanese wife is absolutely stunned at this. Where did you ever get this idea? She has never heard of anyone ever playing it at a wedding.

The English translation goes as follows:
May the reign of the Emperor continue for a thousand, nay, eight thousand generations and for the eternity that it takes for small pebbles to grow into a great rock and become covered with moss.

or this translation...

May our gracious Emperor reign,
Till a thousand, yea ten thou-sand years shall roll,
Till the sand in the brooklet grows to stone,
And the moss from these pebbles emeralds make!.

So, it is clear that only those who are very fond of the Emperor or who strongly believe in him as a deity would feel such respect over the song. But to play it at a wedding!!??!?!?

Granted, if people still adhered to the meaning of "kimi" as sweetheart (as Wikipedia states, if you can believe that source) back in the Heian period, them it might have some relation to celebrations like weddings, but only way back then. The lyrics changed, and so did the meaning of "kimi" to "our lord".
 
caster51 said:
why does not a teacher say like this " let's make Japan as a wonderful country where these are respected more by other country"
then what can you contribute to the world, Japan ,your friend....
Click to expand...

I see the fundamental elements of the above idea, as being the truer essence of 'love of country' as I have highlighted in an earlier thread on this same matter. The upper end, is not for Japan, as a single politico-economic singularity, but for the world. (we are focusing on Japan here, but of course it would be the same for every entity, worldwide.)

caster51 said:
They pass out leaflets in the graduation ceremony.
They force not to sing to the student.
if i dont like to sing this song, I would sing other song without attension
Click to expand...

Yes, that is the point I had made earlier. . . It is more along the lines of democratic-like thinking to allow each person to choose his or her way without any pressure. That means, no original pressure from the government to sing it, as well as no pressure from opposing groups to not sing it. The fairness of the individual freedom here is more productive as a social bonding agent due to the fact that it weakens the boundries between in-group and out-group.

Caster51, I think, in those last comments, the English word 'guilty' is not what you really wanted. What might have been the Japanese word intended?

The last three lines, I fully and whole heartedly agree with. . . the goal is the world !!

And yes, the intention of the originator of that song, possibly being lost. . . we have to primarily take it as it was intended to have been used when it had been used for that reason. The world scene is different today, so there is room for different interpretation, but as I think Glenski is getting at, possible interpretation arguments are moot.

( I want to point out, for the record, that I can say much of the same for the American Anthem too. . . but we are discussing Japan here.)
 
My Japanese wife is absolutely stunned at this. Where did you ever get this idea? She has never heard of anyone ever playing it at a wedding.
Click to expand...
君が代 - Wikipedia
君が代初演奏(1870)
can you understand it?
I think your wife can undestand it.
she just did not know it
then Meiji gervenment added another interpretation..
I was taught in elemntary school.......so on by teachers
Kimi maight mean "you" ,"nation" or Emperor....
I think it depends on you how you interpretat...
I dont want only one interpretation, that is , emperor
I think that there may be various interpretations


and a teacher should teach it, kimi is the things which you love

Ou Japan,
Till a thousand, yea ten thou-sand years shall roll,
Till the sand in the brooklet grows to stone,
And the moss from these pebbles emeralds make!.

i think it is better interpretation


長い間歌われ続けて来た結果いつの間にか「わが君は」が
「君が代は」に変化してしまいました。ここで「君」が誰を指すのかについ
ては意見が分かれます。「君」で天皇を指す例は確かに多いのですが、結婚
式などで歌われていたことを考えますと、むしろ民衆の間ではその場にいる
宴席の主人公を指すと考えられていた可能性が高いと思います。（結婚式な
らその夫婦、天皇の前でなら当然天皇、静御前の場合は形式的には頼朝です
が、心情的には義経だったのでしょう）
 
Last edited:
caster51 said:
a teacher should teach it, kimi is the things which you love
Click to expand...

I very seriously doubt that there would be any effective reality behind such an effort. No, a teacher should not teach what it means, just a wise master answers by a counter question. . . 'Why does it have to have meaning?'
 
Last edited:
'Why does it have to have meaning?'
Click to expand...

because someone misunderstads and make a political issue with some purpose ...

i think ordinal ppl does not care about that.

so am I
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

COVID-19 Coronavirus: situation in Japan
46 47 48
Replies
1K
Views
176K
salyavin
C
Japan's Conspiracy (1)
9 10 11
Replies
257
Views
98K
Weegoabrame
W
  • Poll Poll
Is it time for US Force to leave Japan?
17 18 19
Replies
459
Views
94K
Kreator san
K
What are they teaching the children?
2
Replies
39
Views
7K
korean_turtle87
K
G
  • Poll Poll
Is Japan really a democracy?
6 7 8
Replies
198
Views
76K
Levi Ackerman
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…