Earticle

This research is about the memory of the end of the war between Japan and China. Why people in Japan and China commemorate the end of the war on August 15, 1945? At the state level, Japan and China dealt the issue of the end of the war on the diplomatic normalization process. And the final report, the Joint Communiqué of the Government of Japan and the Government of the People's Republic of China, declared that they ended the "abnormal relations" on September 29, 1972, which failed to be remembered as the day of end of the war. In order to find the meaning of the end of the war, this research traced the negotiation process of 1972 Joint Communique. At the starting point, one of the main issue of the negotiation was how to phrase of the end of the war. However the phrase was changed to the end of abnormal relations. Also, there were differences on views over the reflection on the war and responsibility of the war, but the leaders of the two countries reached the compromise not to discuss about the conflict issues. In a nutshell, the 1972 Joint communiqué was finalized with strategic ambiguity. That is why people remember the Joint communique as 'the normalization treaty', not 'a peace treaty'. The war ended, and that was declared, but the war on the war memories is still ongoing.

The purpose of my research is to examine the mechanism in which official/ national "History" was invented in South and North Korean during the period from the liberation of 1945 to the 1950s. Such "History" was often invented by controlling peoples' historical memories and revising historical descriptions. On August 15, 1945, radio broadcast informed Korean and Japanese people of the end of World War II. While Japanese recognized the end of war as a defeat, Korean perceived it as the liberation from the Japanese colonial rule. Since then, Koreans have been holding the annual mass events in commemoration of the liberation on August 15 both in North and South. Such mass events illuminate the Korean recognition of WWII, Japanese colonialism and international relations. This paper examines the mass events on August 15 by focusing on the following three aspects. First, my paper will clarify how the U.S.S.R. and the U.S. defined the meaning of August 15 in Korea by intervening in the mass events initiated by Koreans. The Soviet army governed the Northern Korea from August 1945 and the U.S. army occupied the Southern Korea from September 1945. Both occupation rules continued until the establishment of two separate governments in the peninsula in 1948, and greatly influenced the historical memory production in North and South. Second, it will show the changing process of North Korean historical description of August 15. It will discuss how historical memories were controlled and how the official/national history was produced in North Korea. Third, my paper will examine how the painful memories have been constructed in the commemorative memories on August 15 and how the painful memories have been concealed since the establishment of South Korean government in 1948. I will argue that the collective memories have been produced through the oblivion of other memories. My study will demonstrate how our historical memories are controlled, and how official "History" is invented. It will hopefully provide a common base for dialogue in order to overcome the conflicts on historical issues in East Asia.

This paper examined memories of Korean residents in Japan's 8.15(August 15th). Following would be served for an illustration. First, most of anti-Japan activists were aggressive and nationalist. With that, they were expressing glee and joy. Second, since August 15th 1945, many of people who were part of Korean residents in Japan's organization had a trouble with grasp of the situation but they surely awared that its meanings. Third, Korean residents who were historian in Japan's recollection was detailed. Also, it was all based on its situation that they have faced with. On the other hand, liberation in KIM Seok-beom's novel was not only somewhat but duplex recognition. In reality, Korean labor in Japan was joblessness with joyment of liberatiom and then struggling for return. Also, it comes out strike, attack, negotiation. Meanwhile, August 15th could not the liberation for those of suffered from the hardships of life and negotiating policies through the war. Either, there could be differences among them. Since the liberation in 1945, for those of Korean residents in Japan who chosen to return to Korea, liberation was decisive action guide for homeward. They are freshen up their life throughout return. This is the form of how Korean residents in Japan facing with 8.15. Till now, people who had aggressive statement and memories were all related with activities in liberation in Korean residents in Japan's memory. As time went by, they started to aware the necessity of ethnic unity by harmony and reformation. In the society of Korean residents in Japan, most of people denied to being subject and began to take a stand as Korean residents in Japan. Furthermore, to solve problem which was homecoming and countermeasure, many of Korean residents in Japan's organization started to establish.

本稿の目的は、1950年代における職場と地域を拠点として大衆的に展開された「記録運動」を「平和運動」の視点からその歴史的意味を再考し、とりわけ記録運動が表わした「個人と共同体」あるいは「芸術と政治」の間の前例のない「密着」を可能にした、この時代の固有な条件を探求することである。1950年代は「記録運動」の時代であると同時に、「基地反対運動」が全国的な規模で行なわれた時代でもある。そして、運動としての記録と基地という現実が出会うところで「反戦と平和」それから「基地反対」を主題にした数多くの記録物が生産された。その中でも、「私」の記録から出発した生活記録と基地周辺の住民による手記などで見るように、この時代の記録運動は何より当事者としての「私」を理想的な主体として見なしていた。また、基地反対運動という現場に向かって走り出した芸術家たちの様子は、この時代の記録運動が個人と集団との関係のみならず、芸術と政治の密着が実現されたことを示している。私的な記録が平和や反戦のような公の理念と直結させる想像力という問題を考える時、「基地」の存在を見逃すことはできない。というのは「私から世界への飛躍」、「透明な共感の共同体」そして「悲劇の交換可能性」といった1950年代の記録運動が内包していた想像力は、貧困と基地という普遍的で圧倒的な現実なしには生まれることができなかったと考えるからである。その意味で、基地は単なる時代的条件のような曖昧で抽象的な背景ではなく、1950年代の記録運動を支えた論理や真理を可能にした不可欠な条件であったといえよう。

This study examines statements regarding stories of return in their historical context rather than from the standpoint that they are war stories. It explores the consciousness reflected in the stories’ evolution from the 1970s onward, and the influence of contextual circumstances. It also analyzes Itsuki Hiroyuki’s book, “Door of Youth” as a subtext to explore internal factors that led to the stories’ spontaneous emergence. Like recollections of the bombing of Hiroshima, stories of return serve as a mechanism for the representation of “non-peaceful situations” in Japan. While the stories are discussed in a nationalist discourse since they entail the “consciousness of war victims,” their relevance and reemergence following the Japanese earthquake in 2011, alongside a claim that national unity for the sake of reconstruction is reversed pacifism, is questionable. Stories of return disguise victimhood nationalism as pacifism and are not structured simply as narratives of “war vs. peace.” In other words, one cannot claim from an anthropological perspective that stories of return, which emerge in times of economic or environmental crisis, reveal the “antiwar- pacifism” characteristic of World War II. Rather, the research reveals that the stories reflect individual realities and “life-pacifism” that fear societal collapse due to violent events.

本論文は、引揚げ体験記をめぐって論じられている言説を、戦争体験史という通史的な観点ではなくて同時代的文脈から考察している。分析の方法としては、1970年代が機転となって変化されている引揚げ体験談が、日本人たちのどのような意識を表して、当時の時代状況を反映しているのか、窺ってみた。それに、引揚げ体験記の自発的な出現の様相を理解するために、五木寛之の時代小説『青春の門：堕落篇』を分析してみた。引揚げ体験記は、広島や長崎の原爆被害描写と共に日本における「非平和的な状況」を象徴している。そのため「戦争の犠牲者意識」を高める言説として論じられてきた。しかし、2011年の東日本大地震以後、国家的な超非常状況のなかで再び刊行されている引揚げ体験記は、再建をめざす民族的な団結が反戦・平和主義という言説に絡み合って膾炙しているのはなぜなのか、疑問が浮かぶようにもする。それは、引揚げ体験記が犠牲者意識民族主義を平和主義化している次元での「戦争対平和」という単純構図をなしていないことを示唆することでもある。つまり、経済や環境の崩壊のように、危機意識に触れ折りにふれ「我々の戦後はまだ終わっていない」と唱えながら登場する引揚げ体験記は、過去の第二次対戦をなめて形成された経験に基づいた反戦・平和思想だけを語ることではない。却って、極めて個人的な現実認識を反映しながら、暴力状況による日常の崩壊を憂える「生活・平和主義」的な意味を内包しているのが分かる。

古代日本人、詳しく言えば大和皇室の想像力世界の総和と言われる『古事記』・および『日本書紀』神代巻に描かれた体系神話は、上代日本の知識人の文学的な教養や精神文化の真髄が示されている大切な資料である。そこには天皇家の祖先の由来を説明し、しかも尊厳性を示そうとする政治的な意図に基づき当時の中国や古代韓国から伝来した漢籍及び中央と地方の氏族の保有していた様々な自家伝承を原典として活用、または記録者の教養や文筆力によって成立されたものと言える。一方、神話伝承が文献という形に成立するには、古代国家の形成に努めた有力豪族の活躍も現れ、かつ、そのなかには優れた文章力を持っていたいわゆる朝鮮半島から渡来した移住民の活躍をも覗かれる。特に古代日本における文字の活用と記録には韓国系移住民とその子孫の役割が大きい。また、大和朝廷において文字の解読能力や文筆力により、政治的な諮問役割を果たした人もほとんど朝鮮系移住民と言っても過言ではない。しかも、彼らは単なる実務レベルの技能集団にとどまらず、古代大和朝廷の学問と思想、さらに精神世界の形成にも大きな役割を果たしたことがわかる。そのなかに王權神話という観念の根底には日本列島に移住した韓國系移住民の文筆力と様々な漢文典籍を活用した蓄積された彼らの知識と昔の記憶が繁栄されていることも見逃せない。

‘March 11 East Japan Great Earthquake’ is being summarized as an unheard-of ‘Mega-complex Chain Disasters‘ combined with mega-tsunami caused by a mega -quake and its resultant Fukushima nuclear accident. Particularly, the Fukushima nuclear accident is understood as taking on the character of a man-made disaster other than a natural disaster. The Center for Japanese Studies of Korea University has accumulated lots of products by ‘Post 311 and Human Disaster (Calamity) and Safety & East Asia Research Team.’ It’s thought that the background of such products might be attributable to the establishment of common awareness that ‘Disaster’ and ‘Safety’ are not limited to a problem of a certain country only now. ‘The ‘Disaster’-caused extraordinary damage besides contingencies shakes the foundation of a nation, and the victim country comes to struggle for relieving the shock beyond the times, and also comes to devote itself to minimizing the damage. Such a series of efforts might not be limited to modern times. Based on the above short views, this study tried to analyze how the ‘Natural Disaster and Unexpected Change’, which occurred intensively during the period of the Japanese Ritsuryo Court after the 7th century, worked on the transformation of the Japanese Ritsuryo Court. As a result, this study could confirm that the ‘Deikan Earthquake’ whose size is said to be almost the same as ‘311 East Japan Great Earthquake’ also had an immense influence on the transformation of the Japanese Ritsuryo Court after the mid-9th century. In short, Japan after the mid-9th century came to give up the 4 major values, such as ‘Improvement of Ritsuryo Court’, ‘Compilation of National History’, ‘Construction of Capital sites’, and ‘External Views aiming at little Empires of Dongie (tribes of China’s northeastern region).’ It might be hard to deny that fact that there existed ‘Natural Disaster & Unexpected Change’ occurring frequently after the mid-9th century in the background of the change and swift of the national policy.

오모노누시가 진좌한 미와산에는 옛 부터 태양신에 관한 제사가 지내져왔다. 미와산의 태양신제사는 4세기 경 야마토 분지의 미와산 산기슭 일대의 호족연합 정권(소위 미와 왕조)의 리더였던 천황가가 주도했다고 생각된다. 또한 미와산 및 천황가와의 관계에 대해서, 미와 왕조의 거의 모든 황후는 미와산 일대를 중심으로 하는 호족출신의 여성이며, 궁궐과 무덤 또한 미와산을 중심으로 그 주변에 지어졌다. 고대 미와 왕조는 미와산의 오모노누시를 받들어 모시며 천황가 출신인 무녀가 신탁을 천황에게 전하고 천황은 정치를 실시하는 제정일치 사회였다고 생각된다. 또한 “일본 서기”에 전하는 천황의 영혼에 관한 기사와 다음 천황을 결정하는 기사에서도 천황과 미와산 제사와의 깊은 관계를 엿볼 수 있다. 이 신을 모시는 오미와씨는 미와 왕조에서 카와치 왕조로 이어지는, 이른바 왕조 교체기에 새롭게 등장한 씨족이며, 도래인계 혹은 그와 인연이 깊은 도공 출신이었다. 오미와씨는 미와 왕조 이후 일단 중단된 미와산의 제사 권한을 독점하고자 대륙에서 전래된 뱀신과의 신혼전승을 미와산의 오모노누시 전승과 융합시켜 이 신의 후예라 칭했던 것으로 보인다. 오미와씨는 이러한 제사권한을 가지고 천황가에 봉사하며, 신라 백제 등 한반도의 여러 국가와 야마토 조정과의 외교 군사적 협상에 오랫동안 활약하여 천황의 총애를 받아왔다. 그런데 텐무・지토 천황 시대가 되면서, 이세가 미와산을 대신하여 새로운 태양신 제사장소로 떠올라 오미와 가문의 영광에 그늘이 보이기 시작한다. 그 배경에는 임신의 난에서 승리한 텐무 천황이 강력한 중앙 집권제의 절대 군주제 를 구축하기 위하여 율령제의 도입과 함께 기존의 태양신앙을 검토하고 강화하여, 천황을 태양신의 후예로 신격화하기 시작한 것과 관련 있는 것이다. 이러한 천황가의 이세 위주 정책에 끝까지 반대한 것이 미와노키미타케치마로 이다. 지토 천황의 이세 행차에 대하여 두 차례에 걸쳐 벼슬을 걸고 중단을 청하지만 받아들여지지 않았다. 미와노키미타케치마로의 주청은 유교적 충신의 거울로 칭송받았지만, 그 본래의 의미는 오미와씨 입장에서 제사권의 상실로 이어지는 천황의 이세 행차가 도저히 받아들이기 어려웠던 것에 기인한다.

Mimoroyama, Omononushi that is enshrined, that is Miwa, rituals have been conducted for a long time, it was the old sun god worship. The sun god rituals for Miwa, it is believed that the Yamato basin interior and was done one received by the imperial family of the leader of the (so-called Miwa dynasty) coalition government of the powerful family in the foothills region of Miwa especially four century. As for the relationship between the imperial family and Miwa, the empress of almost all Miwa dynasty is a woman from the powerful family centered on the region of Miwa, temple area, both imperial tomb be placed around the Miwa are. It is believed that Miwa dynasty of ancient, was a society of Saisei match and embraced the Omononushi of Miwa, tells the emperor, such as empress and Saio becomes the sum to be the oracle, Emperor of performing politics. Emperor’s and from the article that determines the coffin of the Imperial Family, spirit to tell the "Nihonsyoki", I ask about the depth of the relationship Miwa ritual and imperial further. Are the families that appeared newly named alternative to Kawachi dynasty from Miwa dynasty, the so-called dynasty change period, brought over human system, or Omiwa, who festival wait for this God was a Workers from pottery production deep relationship to it. The Omiwa said, measure the monopoly of ritual rights of Miwa it left off once Miwa dynasty Thereafter, are fused with Omononushi of Miwa God marriage talk of the snake god and self-continental system legacy, and was referred to as descendants of this God seems. The ties with the imperial family to have the right ritual, between active and long diplomatic and military negotiations with the Yamato dynasty and the countries of the Korean Peninsula, Omiwa said, has received the favor of the emperor. However, when it comes to the age of Tenmu and Zito emperor, and emerged as a new solar field Shinsai Ise on behalf of the Miwa, begin to decline in the glory of Omiwa clan. In the background, Tenmu that won the run of Imshin, in order to build the absolute monarchy of strong centralization, to strengthen review the sun god faith traditional with the introduction of Ritsuryosei, "The son of the Sun," the emperor in other words, would have involved with that began to deification and descendants of the sun god.

本稿では、『雨月物語』の発表以来、国学者として古典研究の学問の道を歩んできた秋成が小説家として虚構と創作の世界に戻ってから書いた『春雨物語』の巻頭に置かれた「血かたびら」の考察を試みた。秋成は、歴史的事件の中心人物を素材としながら、主人公をめぐった様々な史実に対して歴史改変を行った。平城天皇という人物に正史に記録されている史実とは正反対の「善柔」な性格と「直き心」を与え、古代日本における素朴で純粋な精神を追求する人間像を描こうとした。その中、儒教と仏教などの外来精神により変質した欲望の群像らと対立する構造の中で悩まされる君主の姿を見せていた。しかし、儒教と仏教そのものを否定する態度ではなく、人間の思想を支配したり、流行の風潮として流れてしまった儒教と仏教の悪弊に向かわれた批判であった。従って、正史として記されている歴史的史実に対する批判的態度を隠さずに、結局は物語という虚構の世界を借りて歴史的流れの中で生きていかなければならない人間が持った命禄について話そうとしたと思われる。秋成は人間という存在に対する根本的な関心と歴史の史実の中で人間を支配する命禄(運命)というのは何かに対する問いをもって自身の文学作品の中の人物たちを形象化してきたと言える。そのような人間に対する理解、人間たちが生きていく世界観などが彼の作品の中に投影されているであろう。

本稿は、江戸時代以降、日本を訪れた西洋人がどのように歌舞伎を見ていたのか、そして歌舞伎作品のなかから、いかなる理由で忠臣蔵に興味を持つようになったのかについて、彼らの日本滞在記の分析を通じて考察したものである。鎖国時代、歌舞伎を観劇することができた西洋人は、ケンペルやツュンベリー、そして、シーボルトらオランダ商館の関係者に限られていた。彼らの記録には、大坂は娯楽の盛んな都市であり、多くの庶民が演劇（歌舞伎）を身近なものとして鑑賞していたことが記されている。彼らは歌舞伎を、庶民が頻繁に見るものであるにもかかわらず、国民の風俗向上にも、心の糧にもならないものであったと、否定的に捉えていた。開港後に日本を訪れた西洋人には、外交官やお雇い外国人、学者、旅行者などがいた。彼らは、歌舞伎について、卑俗で淫らな印象を持ち、道徳的、教育的ではないことを指摘している。また、内容は史実によっていない荒唐無稽な話であり、文学性の低いものとして捉え、役者の演技も誇張された動きとして批判していた。このような西洋人の歌舞伎への視線は、明治時代になり演劇改良へと進んでいく。政府や劇場関係者は、外国人を観客として想定するようになったころから、西洋人の観点を意識するようになっていった。また、開港後に訪れた西洋人の記録には、復讐心についての言及が増える。当時、頻繁に起きていた外国人への襲撃や桜田門外の変などを接したことから、「忠臣蔵」への関心が高まっていったのである。アメリカが、戦前、戦中、戦争相手としての日本人を把握するために、「忠臣蔵」を用いた一面があるが、それは、西洋人が日本人の価値観を理解する材料として、幕末からの流れを引くものと位置づけることができる。

This paper aims to examine the discourse of death and the world after death in modern Japan through analysis of The Will of Motoori Norinaga. Norinaga has chosen two places for his grave: a temple called Jyukyoji and a place near a temple called Myorakuji in the mountain of Yamamuroyama. This study critically examined the earlier studies which had explained the doubt about the two graves of Norinaga by associating it with Ryobo-sei, double-grave system, which was a grave system at that time. His instructions do not accord with the concept of Ryobo-sei, and if this grave system were a form generally practiced at that time, then it cannot be explained satisfactorily that his family and disciples after his death did not follow his will. It is evident that the grave and the form of funeral he had in mind were unconventional for the common sense of the time. In short, it can be regarded as an expedient for him, who greatly guarded against actions conflicting with the social convention, to keep up his appearances and at the same time to adhere to his principle as a scholar, concerned about the public eye. The will which seems weird at first glance is not self-contradictory at all within his thought, rather, it can be regarded as another expression of his consistent idea condensed. But Norinaga’s will in which divergent positions are entangled with each other has caused confusion later because it was difficult to comprehend his real intention. He used to teach that it is not advisable to think about something invisible. And he said that everyone only goes to Yomi(otherworld) after death, and in front of death, there is nothing for man to do but to mourn. Despite that, does the fact that he chose his grave himself before his death and made thorough preparations for his will tell a change in his idea of life after death in his last years? He never denied his own standpoint to the end. There was an example, however, of Hirata Atsutane who tackled this matter head-on to develope it into a unique theory of afterlife and a doctrine of the immortality of soul. From a different horizon from Norinaga’s, and from the viewpoint that the arena of the intellectual discourse initiated by Norinaga was expanded and reproduced in the later period of modern times of Japan, the will of Norinaga served as a decisive momentum to trigger discourse on afterlife for scholars of Japanese studies.

本稿は、本居宣長『遺言書』の分析を基に、近世後期において霊の行方や死後世界をめぐる言説がいかに始まったかを考察したものである。宣長の遺言によると、彼は自分の墓を菩提寺である樹敬寺と山室山の中にある妙楽寺付近の二カ所に指定した。基本的には、樹敬寺で世間通りに仏教式の葬送をすること。しかし、遺体は夜中に密かに妙楽寺の方へ埋めて、翌日の樹敬寺本堂までは空送をするように、といった内容の指示である。この二カ所の墓に対し、従来は両墓制に従ったまでのことだと説かれてきたが、本稿ではそれが両墓制の概念とは結び付かないことを指摘した。また、このような墓や葬送の仕方が当時の一般的な習慣だったとすれば、彼の死後、遺言通りには実行しなかったことが説明できない。つまり、遺言の指示が当時の常識からみても破格なものであったことは確かである。それは、世間に反する行いを常に警戒していた宣長が、社会的な面目を保持しながら、同時に自分の学問的信念を貫くための方便だったと考えられる。一見して異様に思われる遺言は、少なくとも彼の思想の中ではまったく矛盾せず、むしろ彼の一貫した思想が凝縮されたものと捉えることができる。ところで、この遺言はそもそも宣長の死後世界観が抱えていた難問を露呈したものでもある。彼の立場は明快で、見えないものについては考えない、もしくは考えられないということであった。そして、人は死んだら皆例外なく黄泉国に行く、だから死に直面して人はただ悲しむ他ない、と常にいっていた。にもかかわらず、生前に墓の場所や葬儀に関する遺言を徹底的に準備したのは、彼の死後世界観の変化を意味するのだろうか。彼が自分の黄泉国説を否定するようなことは最後までなかった。だが、まさにこの問題を発展させて独自の死後世界観と霊魂不滅思想に展開したのが平田篤胤である。篤胤は師説を否定し、宣長の霊が永眠するところは黄泉国ではなく、自ら定めた山室山の墓であると主張した。これ以降、宣長とは別な次元ではあるものの、宣長によって開かれた知の場が幕末から明治にわたって広く再生産された点からして、宣長の遺言は国学における死後世界論を呼び起こす決定的なきっかけとして位置づけられよう。

1880年代に入ってからの日本の教育は、個人の自立と私的利益の追求といった、實學主義·主知主義的な教育思想に基づいた近代教育の普遍的価値よりは、德育に重点をおき、憲法によって保証されている国体、即ち、天皇に充実な臣民の育成を指向していた。国民に封建的·伝統的な忠誠心を強要する教育は、結果的に狹隘で排他的な国家主義思想を強制的に注入することによって、擬似家族主義的国家教育に吸収される臣民養成のイデオロギーを指向する。このような、国内の政治状況の急激な変化や皇道主義イデオロギーを中核とする国体思想の形成、愛国心の培養を最高の教育理念としていた1880年代の教育環境の変化のなかで、1885年伊藤内閣の初代文部大臣の座についた森有礼は、皇道主義教育思想から一歩踏み出し、國家主義教育の体制づくりに全力を注いだ人物として注目されている。本稿は、森有礼の教育理念を中心に、彼の推進した国家教育の実体を考察することによって、1880年代の国民教育の実体に迫りつつ、それが1890年代以降の日本の近代教育にいかなる意味を持つのかを明らかにするものである。これは、近代日本の国民教育の形成における森有礼という、ある意味で日本人ばなれした独特な存在について改めて考察する契機を提供し、また、森の天皇制イデオロギーを内実化することで達成した国家主義教育体制が、明治後期に台頭する帝国主義思想の形成を考えるうえで、些細なヒントを与えてくれると思うからである。