communication between them may be seriously impeded.
Studies of Japanese social norms have revealed the following general
features: articulate codification of the norms; strong tendencies toward a
face-to-face, or "primary group" type of intimacy; an emphasis upon
hierarchical status positions; concern for the importance of status;
elative permanence of status once established; and "behavioral reserve" or
discipline. These will be discussed in order.
articulate codification of rules
During the long Tokugawa period of centralized feudalism, Japanese
patterns of interpersonal behavior underwent an elaborate
institutionalization. The Shogunate attempted to fix the position of each
class with respect to the others and established written rules of behavior
for its members. The family system had developed historically along
patrilineal lines, and during Tokugawa times such patterns of relations
between kin were proclaimed as an official social code. After the Meiji
Restoration, the samurai class in control of the nation maintained these
formalized rules and even elevated them to the status of an idealized
spiritual expression of the Japanese ethos. The reason for this enhancement
of the Tokugawa code after the Restoration lay in the need to preserve and
strengthen national discipline and unity as a practical policy in
industrialization and other aspects of modernization. Thus, Japan moved
into her modern era in possession of a system of rules of social behavior
based on feudal and familial principles.
It is necessary to note that this system of codified rules was
consistently adhered to in actual behavior by only a minority of the
population: the samurai and nobility. The remainder of the population
followed the rules in part, or only in "public" situations where the
pressure for conformity was strong. In the decades subsequent to the
Restoration a generalized version of the code was adopted by the developing
business and official classes, and this is the situation which continues to
prevail in Japan today (although since the Occupation a considerable
liberalization of social behavior can be found in all classes and groups).
Since the student subjects of-the research project were persons from upper-
and middle-class groups socialized in prewar and wartime Japan, we can use
the gross aspects of this social code as a backdrop for the interpretation
of their behavior. The strength and the influence of this code were
enhanced further by the fact that up to the period of the Occupation, no
large migration to Japan of Westerners had occurred. In this situation
relatively few Japanese were presented with the need to learn the modes of
interaction of other societies—particularly the more "open" type of the
Western nations. This isolation was intensified during the militarist-
nationalist epoch of the 1930s and 1940s, in which the social code was
given renewed emphasis as a counter-measure against liberal trends. The
codified norms— on or ascribed obligation; giri or contractual obligation;
chu or loyalty to one's superior; ninjo or humane sensibility; and enryo or
modesty and reserve in the presence of the superior—were incorporated in
the school curriculum as ethical doctrine, and exemplified in a multitude
of cultural expressions.
primary associative qualities
An important aspect of Japanese social norms may be described in
Western sociological terms as that of "primary association." Emphasis upon
personal qualities, obligations between subordinate and superior, and
distinctions based on age or sibling birth-order are features suited to the
atmosphere of a small, highly interactive social group, like the family or
a feudal manor. It goes without saying that in the modern mass society of
Japan these rules have not always been observed, but the fact is that to an
extraordinary degree the Japanese have succeeded in organizing present-day
society into small, cell-like groupings, in which highly personalized
relationships are governed by an explicit code of behavior. Even in
impersonal situations, as in labor organizations, rules of primary
associative type have been used at least symbolically as models for
interaction and responsibility.
hierarchy
If Japanese social norms present an image of society in the character
of a primary group, it is at least a hierarchically organized primary
group—one in which there are explicit gradations of status from superior to
inferior. The family is ideally organized on patrilineal-patriarchal
principles, with the father as dominant, the eldest son superordinate to
the younger, and so on. Primogeniture was the law of the land until the
Occupation period, and, even though no longer so, it is still followed in a
great many cases.
Japanese business firms, government bureaus, and many universities and
schools are organized in ways reminiscent of this familial model; or their
organization may be more closely related historically to feudal or lord-
vassal principles. In such cases the employee and the employer, chief and
underling, or teacher and pupil occupy positions which carry with them
defined and ascribed rights and duties, in which the superior generally
occupies a paternalistic and authoritarian role. The term sensei means
teacher, or mentor, but its wide application to people outside of the
teaching profession suggests its connotation of benevolent but stern
authority and superiority. Likewise the term oyabun ("parent-status" or
"parent-surrogate"), while strictly appropriate only for certain types of
economic groups, is often applied to any highly paternalistic superior.
concern for status
All this would imply, of course, very considerable preoccupation with
matters of social status. It is necessary or at least desirable for every
Japanese to know his own status in the interaction situation, since it is
in status that one finds the cues for reciprocal behavior. To put this in
sociological terms, there exists a very close tie between status and role:
the role behavior expected of one in a given status position is clearly
defined and there are relatively few permitted alternatives or variations
from the pattern (when alternatives are present, they, too, are often very
clearly defined). Thus the behavior of a person of a given status in a
social relationship, can constitute familiar and unmistakable cues for the
appropriate behavior of a person of another status.
Concern with status is evidenced further by the incorporation into the
Japanese language of a multitude of forms expressing varying degrees of
politeness, levels of formality and respect, and subservience or dominance.
This type of language dramatizes status differences between persons by the
use of such devices as honorific suffixes, special verb endings, and
differing pronouns. To mention only the most commonly used forms for
designating the second person singular, there are anata, omae, kimi,
kisama, and temai. The proper use of each of these forms depends upon the
relative status of the speaker and the particular situation in which the
conversation or interaction takes place. Status in language depends upon
age, sex, and class differences, as well as on the degree of intimacy and
the extent of formal obligation existing between those communicating.
relative permanence of status
Once status positions are clearly defined, the parties holding these
statuses are expected to occupy them for very long periods—often throughout
life. A superior, for example one's professor, retains strong symbolic
hierarchical precedence throughout the life of both parties, even when the
student has become a professional equal in productivity, rank, and pay.
Subtle changes in status of course occur, and we do not wish to make too
sweeping a generalization. However, as compared with the fluid patterns
typical of Western society, Japanese society-possesses considerably more
orderly and predictable allocations of status—or at least the expectations
of this.
behavioral reserve and discipline
A "tight" social organization based on concern with status and
hierarchy is by necessity one in which social behavior tends to be governed
more by norms, or public expectancies, and less by free or idiosyncratic-
response to a given situation. At the same time, a system of this kind
requires institutional outlets in the event that obligations, duties,
status relationships, and the like, for one reason or another, may be
unclear or not yet defined. The Japanese have utilized, for this purpose,
the concept of enryo, loosely translatable as “hesitance” or "reserve." The
development of this pattern in Japanese culture is of particular importance
for our problem here.
The original meaning of enryo pertained to the behavior of the
subordinate in hierarchical status relations. The subordinate was expected
to show compliant obsequiousness toward the superior: he should hold his
temper, check any aggressive response to frustration (and of course, bide
his time). This pattern of behavior may be manifested by Japanese when they
interact with persons of their own or any society whom they regard as
superior in status. Whenever the presumption is that a superior person
occupies the "alter" status, enryo is likely to be observed by "ego".
Now, as Japan entered the stage of industrialization, with its
Страницы: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15
