War Memory, Nationalism and Education in Postwar Japan: The Japanese History Textbook Controversy and Ienaga Saburo's Court Challenges

by Yoshiko Nozaki

The controversy over official state-approved history textbooks in Japan, which omit or play down many episodes of Japan’s occupation of neighbouring countries during the Asia-Pacific War (1931-1945), and which have been challenged by critics who favour more critical, peace and justice perspectives, goes to the heart of Japan’s sense of itself as a nation. The degree to which Japan is willing to confront its past is not just about history, but also about how Japan defines itself at present, and going forward. This book examines the history textbook controversy in Japan. It sets the controversy in the context of debates about memory, and education, and in relation to evolving politics both within Japan, and in Japan’s relations with its neighbours and former colonies and countries it invaded. It discusses in particular the struggles of Ienaga Saburo, who has made crucial contributions, including through three epic lawsuits, in challenging the official government position. Winner of the American Educational Research Association 2009 Outstanding Book Award in the Curriculum Studies category.

Genres: Japan

220 pages, Paperback

First published February 1, 2006

Reviews

[K · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5/5 rounded down.
First, some of the good points of the book. The author provides a great overview in English of not only the history textbook controversy but also the greater social movements surrounding it. I also appreciate the balance of coverage given to both Saburo's own agency and the greater social movement he was a part of. The organisation of every chapter is clear, starting with several questions to be addressed and ending with a concise summary that also connects with the next chapter.
Then, what the author did not do very well. Although I do agree with the arguments presented in the book (among them the idea that historical narratives cannot be detached from its author's worldview), I feel as if the author could have been more even-handed in her treatment. Her account was convenient, indeed too convenient: Ienaga Saburo and his allies were forever the underdog, grassroot activists fighting against a political system that was almost always, almost entirely dead set agaisnt them. No political parties were ever mentioned as publicly supporting the lawsuit, despite ensuring coverage of controversial historical issues being an essential part of several left-wing party platforms such as the Japanese Communist Party. Furthermore, although their opponents, the nationalist right wing, was carefully broken down into various feuding factions, the greatest disagreement within Ienaga's camp presumably concerned only matters of strategy, a seemingly untenable proposition considering its diverse composition.
In my own opinion, despite the need to construct coherent narratives, historians should still strive to ground their analysis in as much fact as possible, especially where its inclusion would be unconvenient. As the book quoted the writer Honda Katsuichi, history can be written with both a 'standpoint' and 'factual rigour'. The field is history after all, not literature, and I think the reader can forgive a few less-than-perfect strokes in their stories.

[stephanie]

rec: prof. gluck. (it's finally out!!)