I need to think, and I need to write, and I need to articulate. Otherwise I may end up in this mesh of tangled half-sparks, and remain essentially dead in them.
What is the point of so many thoughts unspoken.
I have become lazy and I have taken a lot of thinking for granted. I must pick up the pen. I need to write and stop wallowing in the death of non-production. Ok, not non-production. Non-reflection.
I’m taking a postgrad module on culture this sem, covering what culture is how it came to be, the many changes and transitions of societal relations which have cumulated into this point of human history. That’s a general gist. And I love this class in the sense of how it really pulls back the veil of the foundations of human relationships in modern society now, the driving forces behind how we now live, what we have come to prioritize, how we view other people. There is a lot we don’t really think or talk about today as we go through the motions of life in this state of semi-consciousness, but it is so relevant. I feel like I’m transported back in time and space every class, going backwards in history to learn what were new ideas then, and seeing that train of continuity in how it meets with life today. We are fascinating people, and we had a great deal of geniuses. Also, Prof is a time machine.
Today, we talked through Kokoro by Natsume Soseki and we had an interesting discussion on the tensions between the traditional and the modern which was a big deal in the age of transition, the Meiji Restoration, in Japan. Traditional and modern ideals were represented by the three main characters – Sensei, K and the narrator. (Loads of spoilers coming up so don’t mind me)
In short, we concluded that K very obviously embodied the traditional, ascetic Japanese ideals in the form of a purer-than-Pure Land strand of Buddhism. Sensei, on the other hand, represented the conflicted nature of having modern inclinations to an extent, and not having much tradition to go on or retain, in part due to his family’s betrayal and being cheated out of his inheritance. He thus develops this modern cynicism and “selfish” pragmatism in being wary of others and keeping on his guard all the time. His testament, which is somewhat self-aware, also reflects his development as a modern persona. (Apparently, self- consciousness and self-awareness are not the same thing! We are all self-conscious but we may not all be self-aware. Mindblowing.) His eventual suicide, following the trend of K and General Nogi with the passing of the Meiji emperor, seems to be one that puts the nail in the coffin in establishing him as the selfish modern individual rather than redeeming him in any way (since his decision was borne out of guilt rather than of honor or integrity). The story thus ends with Sensei’s testament, and the narrator fleeing to Tokyo to go to Sensei rather than to remain with his own dying father, who is also a representative of the old Japanese mindset, though less religious and intense compared to K. The narrator’s “choice” in that sense, seems to therefore be one of modernity, although he does attempt to mitigate his experiences and person with that of his family throughout the book before his escape to Tokyo.
Confucian ideals get thrown into the mix here, especially those bearing on the familial unit (filial piety etc.) being a kind of community building block? They also seem to be the first to crumble in this story at least, considering how the parents here are either absent, unsympathetic and unable to fully understand their children. Only the narrator is shown to negotiate with the expectations of his parents as a good son. Sensei didn’t have the opportunity; neither was it a concern of K in light of his pursuit to Enlightenment.
The modern individual, now moving away from the familial obligatory unit, seemed to be the new emphasis in a culture which was more community driven. We considered the (false but interesting) dichotomy of the Individual and Community and whether or not theories of collective individualism as posited by folks like Raymond Williams could be applied/was relevant to such a context. Here are my thoughts on the subject, especially for Williams (since I did the presentation on him lol):
Williams was concerned with solidarity as the model for collective individualism and advancing the community’s consciousness to engage with the ever-changing times. This means respecting the individual and his specialised skill, and allowing for different ideas to a certain extent, so that the system is updated and does not go stale/remain status quo. He was also addressing for such a solidarity with regards to culture, I believe, and so was concerned that the modernization of media and communications contributed to that elevating culture. I think Williams idea of the structure of service (ie the class hierarchy where everyone is reduced to their function and the status quo is upheld) may kind of resemble the traditional Japanese/Confucian ideals of roles and obligations according to the family unit (sorry, I keep coming back to the family as if it encapsulates all of Japanese and Confucian mores. It doesn’t, but that’s all we talked about today so. Pretty sure this can be applied to the other tenets of the Japanese/Confucian cultures tho). The social hierarchy of the Japanese/Confucian culture also consists of certain roles and obligations assigned accordingly. “Social mobility” occurs through the whole marriage and baby thing, I assume, but in general, this is the system which is maintained. This is the consistent status quo. It feels like a bit of a parallel to me, although Williams’ class hierarchy and Kokoro’s family hierarchy play on social structures in very different senses of the word.
Where I feel Williams’ essay “cannot” be applied to the text is in how this collective individualism he posits is for the common purpose of advancing community consciousness. He articulates this as the clear common goal of a good community and culture and with that singular goal in mind, the model of solidarity would act as the most effective vehicle to attain it. However, in Kokoro, I consider the whole change of culture and the embracing of Western education/values/mindsets as an alternative, new way of thinking which confronts the Japanese tradition and the meaning/mores behind it. The introduction of a new Western/modern mindset brings about that self-awareness (?) upon the otherwise default Japanese way of doing things, and that distills the different cultures and perspectives down to contrasting values/priorities.With an alternative mindset number 2, there is a new goal for collective individualism – to modernise the country against any foreign threat (perhaps something quite similar to Williams in safeguarding the future). Comparatively, the goal of traditional Japanese communal identity was one that propagated the “right”, “correct” way of doing life according to Japanese values. So now there are two very different potential goals for the community to work towards, and I think that is what complicates the transition and the tensions of traditional/modern, as well as the means of getting there (individual/community). It is not even about the means of whether the individual/community/collective individualism is the “best” way of getting somewhere, it’s more like a “where are we heading towards now?” What does it all stand for? And again, is there a way of “modernity” that retains traditional Japanese values/not explicitly Western? Kokoro itself seems to represent the modern quite negatively in that subtle way, through that mode of selfish individualism, the manipulation, the abandoning of kin. It is arguable that characters like old Ojosan (Sensei’s wife) are modern as well, although less credited for it, and they manage fine/more “morally” (?) in their circumstances. It’s just perhaps a tad overlooked and difficult to analyse because of all the writers’ misogynistic lens and just the whole vibe of women aren’t as intelligent/somehow sentient than the men. But yes, are there no redeeming features of this modernity and individualism? Hmm. Kind of wished there was a bit of representation there (haha such a diva consumer ungh).
Stuff that was mentioned in class that I liked/found interesting:
- In response to Sensei’s bromance with K as one that was more “passionate” and committed than with Ojosan, the idea that it was probably less about the Greeky kind of intellectual homo attraction (again similar wrt the premise of women knowing nothing) and more about the idea of an intellectual friendship and brotherhood embodied in Confucian ideals.
- That there was no model/template/predecessor wrt BGR in 1912 and that all this opposite sex interaction took a lot more guesswork than what we do now (which is saying something, given the amount of guesswork we still do). They were truly clueless about women and about romance and nothing prepared them for any of this.
- We can’t have self-awareness without the foreknowledge of some things. Everyone was self-conscious, but they were only self-aware to a limited extent because they had so little to go on. I think it’s the kind of thing you can only gain with experience and hindsight and a lot of trial and error. Self-awareness is thus the mark of the modern man. The previous generations may not have as much self-awareness as the current generations in that sense (they just went about life) because there were some ideas that hadn’t been thought of.
- That the “rights of Man” which we so hold as an indisputable, evident truths (cues Declaration of Independence) were most definitely not evident in the 18th century. No peasant or commoner then would ever think such a thing and demand his rights from the lords and rulers. So if “self-evident” truths take a while to be self-evident, well it gives us something to think about.
I’m going to backtrack a little to K again. So throughout the lesson, the Prof was going on about how a lot of his religious and ascetic dedication would be lost on us/difficult to understand, I guess especially in referring to how K’s feelings for Ojosan clash with his super Buddhist beliefs and his ultimate suicide (which hints at being an honor suicide alongside General Nogi’s), and he kept saying that it’s hard for us to get it in our modern secular minds where a lot of the local Buddhism we might be exposed to is one that is more folklorean and ritualistic rather than one which affects the practical living of life. For K, there is no dualism between his religious beliefs and his practical lived life; they are one thing, and each affects the other.
And you know what, K is literally the most relatable figure for me in the book. At first, I identified more with the clueless narrator who just graduated and was pressured into finding a job to bring honor to the family lolol the Asian narrative is strong. Then I identified with young Sensei who was clueless about the state of his inheritance in his naivety and was cheated out of it. But at the end of the day, I see too much of myself in K and it’s not the prettiest picture, but I also feel that K maintained his integrity to the last, which atm is more than I can say for myself. The theology which causes him to be so torn is beside the point. The point is, when it comes to it in this irreconcilable fashion, he goes with his faith, to the extent of death. In Western, “secular” senses, maybe it’s crazy, but it’s not that far off in the Asian pugilistic codes of honor and discipline. In fact, I think there’s a measure of that in the Western church as well, just that perhaps it was older. So obviously K’s worldview is vastly different from the modern one, but the traditional worldview isn’t dead or passive, to be mauled by modernity’s secularism. Or at least, I’m of the opinion that it shouldn’t be if their keepers rigorously revise and maintain these values in modern forms. Isn’t that where the different creeds of elders worked to refine theology and Protestants challenge the overarching traditionalistic cast of Christianity through examination of Scripture and reflection/observation from real life? Ok, probably going off tangent a little. My point is, religion/tradition is also quite a large narrative that K somehow fails to use to reconcile/engage with real life and the onslaught of modernity. (Then again, he doesn’t even seem to use it well regardless of modernity oops) He embodies perhaps one way of practicing/representing traditional culture, and a very extreme one to the extent that Sensei feels that he has to make him more human.
At the end of the day, it was K’s legalism which resonated with me. I can see so much of myself in K, and when he falls in love with Ojosan and confesses that to Sensei, that is truly his most vulnerable point and Sensei twisted the blade into him by using his own meaning in life (his faith) against him. All I can say is, there are definitely points in my life where I’ve been vulnerable to people in this way and being the sometimes legalistic-inclined, holier-than-thou person that I am, the comfort and reassurances from my fellow pilgrims is truly Godsent, and I can only imagine the damnation K must feel when Sensei used his theology against him. K wouldn’t even be mad at Sensei; he would be too busy hating himself. And so for all of K’s legalism and yes his holier-than-thou vibes which he was radiating with in full force to Sensei as well, he was still that much admirable in retaining his integrity as far as possible to his knowledge, while Sensei realises that he is just like the damned Uncle who cheated him of everything and compromised his own integrity. Sensei also emitted holier-than-thou vibes, believing that what he does for K in trying to make him more human and in giving in to K during their conversations is him being the bigger and more mature person. There’s a tragedy there for Sensei somehow. And I’m sad because I resonate with that compromising of integrity too. Isn’t it sad how I seem to resonate with all the bad parts of the characters lol.
I really liked this book. The guilt that Sensei cannot escape is also just a reminder of how much we all need Jesus.
The end.
(Disclaimer – I am by no means any kind of expert on Japanese culture and tradition, Buddhism or Confucianism. Definitely no intentions to discredit any body of belief but if I have misrepresented anything, please let me know and I’ll correct it! Thanks!)
Is it slightly narcissistic to have a disclaimer as though I have a readership at all and that people take me seriously? hmmm. Ah wells.
Okay, I have written. I hope it wasn’t boring but I’m just glad I got out a hopefully coherent body of words.
In other less brainy news, I bought three new Pusheen shirts! which are all for home wear and so cannot be applied to CNY which is sad but YAY PUSHEEN.
All this was also articulated with my new baby blue typewritery keyboard. I don’t even register the typing noise it makes (it is quite loud) but everyone else who goes past my room complains that I’m so noisy and I sound really hardworking. Which is not a bad thing. It’s so nice and bouncey wheeee.
I also did my hair. This is obviously important.
Ok I feel better. Byeee.
Marble Fragments 