好的，以下是您提供的 H-Net 書評全文翻譯成中文：
人文與社會科學書評（H-Net Reviews in the Humanities & Social Sciences）
書名：Akiko Hashimoto，《漫長的敗北：日本的文化創傷、記憶與身份》（The Long Defeat: Cultural Trauma, Memory, and Identity in Japan）
出版：牛津大學出版社，2015年。208頁。精裝本 $99.00。ISBN 978-0-19-023915-2。
書評人：Dustin Wright
發表於 H-War（2015年11月）
委託人：Margaret Sankey（美國空軍大學）
日本在記憶與再軍備之間
橋本明子（Akiko Hashimoto）的這本傑出著作，出現於日本政府正逆著多數民意，重新詮釋其和平憲法，允許自衛隊參與進攻性的國際軍事行動之際。當年夏天，全國數以千計的年輕人走上街頭，抗議這些修憲行為，以及首相安倍晉三的整體施政。戰爭記憶在圍繞日本再軍備的辯論中，成為所有立場都依循的重要根據。
橋本是長期任教於匹茲堡大學的社會學家，她的研究幫助讀者理解：在一個對戰爭記憶充滿「衝突性、多聲性公共論述」的國家，日本如何仍能維持一種名義上的和平立場，即便它身處軍事緊張的地緣政治熱點之中（第14頁）。
文化創傷與戰後日本
透過廣泛的社會學與歷史方法，橋本清晰、去行話化地分析了戰後持續至今的思想與政治爭鬥，尤其涵蓋1990年代至2010年代。「今天，」橋本寫道，「我們生活在一種新興的『記憶文化』中，記憶國家過去，已成為當下生活不可或缺的事」（第5頁）。這種記憶文化透過多種媒介產生，包括教科書、博物館、漫畫、紀念儀式與電影，而這些都在書中有所呈現。
本書對於關心社會與國家如何處理「文化創傷」的讀者特別有價值。橋本借用 Jeffrey Alexander 的定義：當集體成員感受到自身遭受了「在群體意識上留下不可磨滅痕跡的恐怖事件」，即構成文化創傷（第4頁）。像全面戰爭這樣的災難性事件，即使和平到來後，仍會長久徘徊，留下需要克服痛苦的創傷人口。《漫長的敗北》正聚焦於理解這種「戰後克服」的過程。
記憶不是「真相」，而是身份的協商
導論章對學界如何理解歷史記憶提供了背景。橋本指出，「記憶敘事並不提供最終真理」，而是「一種溝通載體，揭示講述者在協商自我身份時的依附與焦慮」（第21頁）。
在第二章，作者大量使用日本主要出版機構（如《讀賣新聞》（中右）、《朝日新聞》（中左）、以及保守的月刊《文藝春秋》）所收錄的戰爭見證資料。日本的戰爭回憶出版數量龐大，橋本為英語讀者整理並分析這些資料，對研究日本戰爭記憶是一大貢獻。1990年代已有學者翻譯普通日本人的戰爭經歷（如 Frank Gibney 與 Beth Cary 的《戰爭：日本人記憶太平洋戰爭》（1995）、以及 Cook 夫婦的《戰爭中的日本：一部口述史》（1992）），這些作品主要著重保存，而非分析記憶過程。橋本的研究則更深入。
她指出，許多回憶中包含一種「傳記修補」（biographical repair）——「一種詮釋性的重構，掩蓋難以啟齒的部分，跳過難以傾聽的部分」（第27頁）。這解釋了為何許多子女不會逼問父親戰爭故事，或為何許多人從不談及自身的戰爭經驗。這不是健忘，而是一種「不願知道」，因為一旦得知父親曾殺害平民，整個家庭敘事將不可逆轉地改變。
英雄、受害者與加害者的敘事
第三章探討日本人如何面對並詮釋戰爭中的英雄、受害者與加害者。給任何戰時個體貼上單一標籤都很困難，因為到1945年夏天，許多人可能同時兼具三者身份。1990年代的歷史反思為國家提供了新的契機去正視這些不同的戰爭敘事。同一時期，戰爭與殖民受害者——尤其是「慰安婦」——開始發聲並要求賠償。這些「加害者敘事」的爆發，隨後觸發了民族主義者「修復國家形象」的努力（第66頁）。
教育與戰爭責任
那麼，日本人究竟知道多少關於戰爭的事，特別是關於日本的侵略？國外經常認為日本教科書完全忽略侵略與暴行，或大眾對1945年前的歷史一無所知。第四章對此進行了修正。橋本檢視日本廣泛使用的歷史與公民教科書，發現其對戰爭的關注程度各異，包括是否承認日本的責任。雖有差異，但橋本總結：「兩類教科書最終傳達的道德訊息都是：日本國家在歷史關鍵時刻魯莽行事，給人民帶來巨大失敗」（第93頁）。
戰爭作為國家權利幾乎總是被譴責。這種教育塑造了不帶愛國色彩的氛圍。橋本提供的數據令人震驚：僅有15%至33%的日本人（依調查不同）表示願意為國而戰，愛國心在74個國家中排名第71；僅11%至13%的高中生對國旗與國歌感到自豪，而美國為54%至55%，中國則為48%至50%（第114-115頁）。這也解釋了為何有成千上萬的日本青年走上街頭抗議安倍政府的再軍備計畫，某種程度上正反映了日本學校中普遍的「和平教育」。
不過，橋本提醒我們，這種教育也有模糊化日本戰爭罪責的效果。將苦難歸咎於政府或軍事工業，常常免除了普通國民的責任（更不必說美軍對平民的轟炸與原子彈攻擊）。她寫道：「那些伴隨和平誓言的敘事，往往使加害者的角色模糊——殖民者、軍事侵略者、戰犯，還是『普通士兵』？不清楚這些人究竟是『我們』還是『他們』」（第72頁）。
德國比較與「歷史問題」的三條路徑
最後一章中，橋本簡要比較了日本與德國的戰後和解，並提出「戰敗國的道德復原」。她認為，英雄、受害者、加害者三大敘事，對應於解決「歷史問題」的三種途徑：
-
民族主義路徑 ——透過強化國家與民族士氣來克服過去；
-
和平主義路徑 ——否認國家擁有開戰權，以此作為一種贖罪；
-
和解主義路徑 ——採取更「世界主義」的形式，促進與鄰國的關係改善。
書的結尾梳理了這三種方式，至少讓讀者確信：日本並未忽視「歷史問題」。
書評總結
橋本為理解日本戰爭記憶奠定了新的基礎。未來學者可以承接她的方法，進行更具地方性的研究。例如：在沖繩，記憶還受到與美軍基地抗爭的現實所塑造，那裡「戰後」或許仍是理論性的概念。再如，日本擁有全球近三分之一的和平博物館，橋本在其中幾所進行的田野調查，證明中央政府與大機構並未壟斷戰爭記憶，這一點未來研究仍可深化。
註
[1] 橋本曾將第四章擴寫為論文，特別聚焦於兒童記憶在教育與流行漫畫中的呈現。參見：Akiko Hashimoto, "Something Dreadful Happened in the Past: War Stories for Children in Japanese Popular Culture," The Asia-Pacific Journal 13, no. 30 (2015年7月27日)，http://www.japanfocus.org/-Akiko-Hashimoto/4349/article.html。
要不要我幫您把這篇翻譯與前面 Fukuoka 的書評翻譯整合在一起，做成一份「《漫長的敗北》中文書評彙編」？
H-Net Reviews in the Humanities & Social Sciences
Akiko Hashimoto. The Long Defeat: Cultural Trauma, Memory, and Identity in Japan.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015. 208 pp. $99.00, cloth, ISBN 978-0-19-023915-2.
LONG DEFEAT
Reviewed by Dustin Wright
Published on H-War (November, 2015)
Commissioned by Margaret Sankey (Air University)
Akiko Hashimoto's excellent book, The Long Defeat: Cultural Trauma, Memory, and Identity in Japan, comes at a moment when the Japanese government is, against the wishes of a majority of the population, reinterpreting the country's paci-fist constitution to allow the Japanese Self-Defense Forces to join military coalitions for offensive mil-itary expeditions. This summer, thousands of young people throughout the country have rallied to protest against these revisions as well as against the overall administration of the current prime minister, Shinzō Abe. Memories of the war inform all sides of the debate surrounding the push to remilitarize Japan. Thanks to Hashimoto, a longtime sociologist at the University of Pitts-burgh, readers will come away from her book with a greater understanding of how a nation with such "a conflictive and polyphonic public discourse" on the memory of the war has been able to maintain a nominally pacifist stance de-spite existing in a geopolitical hotbed of military tension (p. 14).
By drawing from a wide body of sociological and historical methodologies, Hashimoto offers us a clear and jargon-free assessment of the intellec-tual and political battles that continue long after the war ended, particularly in the years spanning the 1990s through the 2010s. "Today," writes Hashimoto, "we live in an emerging 'culture of memory' where remembering the national past has become vitally relevant for living in the present" (p. 5). The culture of memory can be pro-duced through multiple mediums, including text-books, museums, manga, ceremonies, and films, all of which make appearances in Hashimoto's work.
The book will be of great value to those who are interested in understanding how societies and states grapple with "cultural traumas," a concept Hashimoto borrowed from Jeffrey Alexander, who defined such traumas as those that occur "when members of a collective feel they have been subjected to a horrendous event that leaves indelible marks upon their group consciousness" (p. 4). Cataclysmic events and moments like total war linger in the air long after peace is achieved, leaving behind a traumatized population that yearns to overcome the anguish. Understanding this process of overcoming the war is a major fo-cus of The Long Defeat.
The introductory chapter provides a useful background into historical memory as it has been understood in academia. Hashimoto argues that "memory narratives do not render definitive truths," but are rather "vehicles of communica-tion that reveal the attachments and anxieties of the narrators in negotiating their self-identity" (p. 21). For chapter 2, much of the author's data come from war testimonials collected and published by Japan's prominent publishers, including the largest newspapers, the center-right Yomiuri Shimbun and the center-left Asahi Shimbum, as well as monthlies like the conservative Bungei Shungủ. Given that there is such an immense pub-lic record of war testimonials published in Japan, we are indebted to Hashimoto for her labor sift-ing through these collections. That she brings these sources to an Anglophone audience is a sig-nificant contribution to the field of Japanese war memories. In the 1990s, scholars translated the war experiences of everyday Japanese, though these projects were less concerned with under-standing the process of war memory and more concerned with preservation. These important collections included Frank Gibney and Beth Cary's Senso: The Japanese Remember the Pacific War (1995) and Haruko Taya Cook and Theodore Cook's Japan at War: An Oral History (1992), both of which were produced out of a moment when many were recognizing that the war generation was getting older and disappearing, a fact driven home by Emperor Hirohito's death in 1989. Na-tional dailies like the Asahi solicited letters from their readers to share their war experiences or the stories they heard from family (the transla-tions of which became Senso). Some of these let-ters, and the testimonies that Hashimoto has translated, often suggest that many people pur-sued some level of "biographical repair," which
she defines as a "hermeneutical reconstruction that glosses over what is difficult to talk about, and passes over what is difficult to listen to" (p. 27). This helps to explain why many children might not have pressed their fathers to tell stories about the war, or why so many people never talked of their own war experiences. It was not amnesia, but rather a desire to not know, because you understand that once you learn that your fa-ther killed civilians, everything that follows will be irrevocably changed.
Chapter 3 tells us how many in Japan have grappled with and perceived the heroes, victims, and perpetrators of the war. It can be a difficult task to assign any one label to a person who lived through the war; by the summer of 1945, many people could have been considered all three. It is the pause for historical reflection in the 1990s that opens up a new moment for the nation to reflect on these various war narratives, which is why Hashimoto chose to begin her study with this time period. It was also during this decade that surviv-ing victims of Japan's war and colonization of Asia -most notably, but not limited to, the military's "comfort women" began to voice their experi-ences and demands for restitution. The explosion of these "perpetrator narratives" subsequently in-formed the nationalistic "attempts to rehabilitate national image" that followed (p. 66).
But what do Japanese really know about the war, and importantly, what do they understand about Japan's aggression? Many outside of Japan often have the impression that Japanese school textbooks wholly neglect to address Japan's ag-gression and violence in the war, or that much of the public resides in complete ignorance of Japan's modern history before 1945. In chapter 4, Hashimoto complicates this standard trope by putting several of Japan's most widely read histo-ry and civic textbooks under the microscope. What we see are varying degrees of attention giv-en to the war, including Japan's own responsibili-ty. Textbooks tend to differ on whether or not the war was one of choice or necessity. Regardless of that distinction, Hashimoto concludes that "the ul-timate moral message taken away in both cases is that the Japanese state acted recklessly at a cru-cial time in history and failed its people monu-mentally" (p. 93). War as a right of the state is al-most always condemned. Despite giving the read-er such an understanding of the powerfully unpa-triotic educational milieu many children experi-ence in Japan, one cannot help but be shocked by some of the figures Hashimoto delivers: only 15-33 percent (depending on the survey) of Japa-nese say they are willing to fight for their country, which ranks 71st among seventy-four nations in level of professed patriotism. Moreover, only 11-13 percent of Japanese high school students take pride in their national anthem and national flag, compared to 54-55 percent in the United States and 48-50 percent in China (pp. 114-115). It is easy to see why so many thousands of Japanese youth have spent this summer protesting in the streets against the Abe government's moves to-ward remilitarization, partly a reflection of the "peace education" that is common in Japanese schools.[1]
Hashimoto is quick, however, to remind us of the other effects of such education, which often blurs Japan's own war guilt. The attempt to blame suffering on the government and military indus-try often absolves the average Japanese citizen of guilt (to say nothing of the US military, which launched horrific air raids and atomic attacks that targeted Japanese civilians). The author writes, "The ritualized pledge for peace that usually ac-companies the narratives often leaves ambiguous the roles of the perpetrators as colonizers, mili-tary aggressors, war criminals, and 'ordinary' sol-diers, no clarifying whether they are meant to be 'us' or 'them" (p. 72).
In the final chapter, Hashimoto briefly com-pares war reconciliation in Japan with that of Germany (another place in which the author has done considerable research for other projects)
and outlines "the moral recovery of defeated na-tions." The three narratives that ride with us throughout the book-heroes, perpetrators, and victims-inform the similarly three different "pathways" that Hashimoto identifies as means through which people have attempted to solve the "history problem," the term Hashimoto uses throughout to describe the ongoing geopolitical tensions regarding Japan's war responsibility. To begin, there is the nationalist approach for over-coming the past by strengthening the nation (and national morale). For those adhering to the paci-fist approach, denying the state the right to wage war is a large measure of atonement. Finally, the reconciliationist approach takes more "cosmopoli-tan" forms and seeks to promote better relations with Japan's neighbors. Concluding the book with an outline and examples of these approaches leaves the reader with a sense of satisfaction that, at the very least, the "history problem" is by no means being ignored in Japan.
Hashimoto has built the groundwork for new ways to understand war memory in Japan. Other scholars might take up the baton and employ her methodologies in more deeply place-specific stud-ies. How, for example, does "the social act of re-membering" and identifying victims, perpetra-tors, and heroes happen in places like Okinawa, where memory is deeply informed by another layer of contemporary struggles against American military bases (in other words, places where the concept of a postwar era arguably remains theo-retical)? Finally, nearly a third of the world's peace museums are in Japan and Hashimoto's in-clusion of fieldwork at a handful of such spaces lends testimony to the fact that the central gov-ernment and large institutions do not have a mo-nopoly on war memories, a fact that future stud-ies can certainly expand upon.
Note
[1]. Hashimoto published an expanded ver-sion of this chapter, with particular attention to children's war memories as portrayed in educational and popular manga. See ""Something Dreadful Happened in the Past': War Stories for Children in Japanese Popular Culture," The Asia-Pacific Journal 13, no. 30 (July 27, 2015), http://www.japanfocus.org/-Akiko-Hashimoto/4349/arti-cle.html.
沒有留言:
張貼留言
注意：只有此網誌的成員可以留言。