The Age of Emperor Akihito [1 ed.] 152753832X, 9781527538320

Table of contents :
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements
Section I: Rhetorical and Argumentation Analyses of Texts
Introduction
Chapter One
Chapter Two
Chapter Three
Chapter Four
Section II: A Collection of Emperor Akihito’s Speeches 1989-2019
The Emperor's Accession Address (January 9, 1989)
1990 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan
1991 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan
1992 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan
1993 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan
1994 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan
1995 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan
1996 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan
1997 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan
1998 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan
1999 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan
2000 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan
2001 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan
2002 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan
2003 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan
2004 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts
2005 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts
2006 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts
2007 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts
2008 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts
2009 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts
2010 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts
2011 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts
2012 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts
2013 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts
2014 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts
2015 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts
2016 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts
The Emperor's Address at the state banquet in honor of South KoreanPresident and Mrs. Roh Tae Woo (May 24, 1990)
His Majesty the Emperor's Address at the State Banquet
at Dam Palace (May 23, 2000)
Message from His Majesty the Emperor: “Together with the Afflicted by
the Tohoku-Pacific Ocean Earthquake” (March 16, 2011)
Message from His Majesty the Emperor: “The Duties of the
Emperor as the Symbol of the State” (August 8, 2016)
Address by His Majesty the Emperor on the Occasion of
the Memorial Ceremony for the War Dead (August 15, 2018)
His Majesty's Answers to the Question by the Press on the Occasion
of His 85th Birthday 2018, and the Activities of the Emperor
over the Past Year (December 20, 2018)
Address by His Majesty the Emperor on the Occasion of the
Commemoration Ceremony of the thirtieth Anniversary of His Majesty
the Emperor's Accession to the Throne (February 24, 2019)
Remarks by His Majesty the Emperor on the Occasion of the
Ceremony of His Abdication at the Seiden (State Hall),
April 30, 31st Year of Heisei (April 30, 2019)
References
Appendix

Citation preview

The Age of Emperor Akihito

The Age of Emperor Akihito: Historical Controversies over the Past and the Future Edited by

Takeshi Suzuki

The Age of Emperor Akihito: Historical Controversies over the Past and the Future Edited by Takeshi Suzuki This book first published 2019 Cambridge Scholars Publishing Lady Stephenson Library, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2PA, UK British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Copyright © 2019 by Takeshi Suzuki and contributors All rights for this book reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. ISBN (10): 1-5275-3832-X ISBN (13): 978-1-5275-3832-0

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements .................................................................................... ix Section I: Rhetorical and Argumentation Analyses of Texts Introduction ................................................................................................. 2 Takeshi Suzuki Chapter One ............................................................................................... 11 A Critical Media Analysis of the Korea Herald: A Controversy over the Emperor’s Remarks Takeshi Suzuki Chapter Two .............................................................................................. 31 A Generic Analysis of Apologetic Discourse: Emperor Akihito’s Speech and President Roh’s Reply Takeshi Suzuki Chapter Three ............................................................................................ 54 A Rhetorical Analysis of the Ceremonial Address: President Roh before the Japanese Diet Takeshi Suzuki Chapter Four .............................................................................................. 64 A Pragma-Dialectical Analysis of Queen Beatrix’s Speech and Emperor Akihito’s Reply Takeshi Suzuki and Frans H. van Eemeren Section II: A Collection of Emperor Akihito’s Speeches 1989-2019 The Emperor's Accession Address (January 9, 1989) ............................... 82 1990 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan ......... 83

vi

Table of Contents

1991 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan ......... 83 㻌 1992 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan ......... 84 㻌 1993 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan ......... 84 㻌 1994 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan ......... 84 㻌 1995 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan ......... 85 㻌 1996 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan ......... 85 㻌 1997 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan ......... 86 㻌 1998 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan ......... 86 㻌 1999 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan ......... 87 㻌 2000 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan ......... 87 㻌 2001 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan ......... 88 㻌 2002 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan ......... 88 㻌 2003 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan ......... 89 㻌 2004 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts ......................... 89 2005 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts ......................... 90 㻌 2006 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts ......................... 90 㻌 2007 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts ......................... 91 㻌 2008 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts ......................... 92 㻌 2009 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts ......................... 92 㻌 2010 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts ......................... 92 㻌

The Age of Emperor Akihito

vii

2011 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts ......................... 92 㻌 2012 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts ......................... 93 㻌 2013 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts ......................... 93 㻌 2014 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts ......................... 94 2015 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts ......................... 94 2016 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts ......................... 95 The Emperor's Address at the state banquet in honor of South Korean President and Mrs. Roh Tae Woo (May 24, 1990) .................................... 96 His Majesty the Emperor's Address at the State Banquet at Dam Palace (May 23, 2000) .................................................................. 98 Message from His Majesty the Emperor: “Together with the Afflicted by the Tohoku-Pacific Ocean Earthquake” (March 16, 2011)...................... 101 Message from His Majesty the Emperor: “The Duties of the Emperor as the Symbol of the State” (August 8, 2016) ........................... 103 Address by His Majesty the Emperor on the Occasion of the Memorial Ceremony for the War Dead (August 15, 2018) ............... 106 His Majesty's Answers to the Question by the Press on the Occasion of His 85th Birthday 2018, and the Activities of the Emperor over the Past Year (December 20, 2018) ................................................. 107 Address by His Majesty the Emperor on the Occasion of the Commemoration Ceremony of the thirtieth Anniversary of His Majesty the Emperor's Accession to the Throne (February 24, 2019) .................. 111 Remarks by His Majesty the Emperor on the Occasion of the Ceremony of His Abdication at the Seiden (State Hall), April 30, 31st Year of Heisei (April 30, 2019) ........................................ 114

viii

Table of Contents

References ............................................................................................... 116 Appendix ................................................................................................. 120

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Materials from several of my previously published works have been used in the writing of my book. I am pleased to credit each of the publications in which these materials have appeared. I am grateful to my co-author and others that have given their permission to use the materials in this book An earlier version of Chapter One appeared as “A Media Analytic Approach to the Study of Japanese Apologetic Discourse: A Case of the Korea Herald,” in (ed.) Naomi Sugimoto, (1999). Japanese Apology across Disciplines. NY: Nova Sciences Publishers, pp. 185-206. An earlier version of Chapter Two appeared as “A Rhetorical Analysis of Japanese Apologetic Discourse: A Rhetorical Genre,” in (ed.) Naomi Sugimoto, (1999). Japanese Apology across Disciplines. NY: Nova Sciences Publishers, pp. 155-183. An earlier version of Chapter Three appeared as “President Roh at the Japanese Diet: Korea-Japan Partnership in the Asia-Pacific Age,” in East and West: The Journal of the Language and Culture Institute at Asia University 9, (1991), Tokyo, 1-15. An earlier version of Chapter Four was co-authored with Frans H. van Eemeren, and appeared as “‘This Painful Chapter’: An Analysis of Emperor Akihito’s Apology in the Context of Dutch Old Sores,” in The Journal of the American Forensic Association: Argumentation and Advocacy 41, (2004), 102-111.

SECTION I RHETORICAL AND ARGUMENTATION ANALYSES OF TEXTS

INTRODUCTION

A social controversy is an extended rhetorical engagement that critiques, resituates, and develops communication practice bridging the public and personal spheres. The loci of such controversy include participation in governance, distribution and use of economic resources and opportunities, assumption of personal and collective identities and risks, redress of common grievances, assignment of rights and obligations, and the processes of social justice. ̿̿Kathryn M. Olson and G. Thomas Goodnight1

In an address to the nation on June 8, 2016, Emperor Akihito, the 125th direct descendant of Jimmu, Japan’s mythical first Emperor, stated that he was beginning to feel that his declining health was making it harder for him to fulfill his official duties. The Japanese people were shocked. At that time, Japanese law had no provision for abdication, thus requiring politicians to craft legislation to make it possible. After heated debates among the relevant parties, on May 19, 2017, the Japanese government approved a one-off bill that would allow Emperor Akihito to step down from the Chrysanthemum throne in what would be the first abdication in two centuries. On June 9, 2017, the Japanese Diet accordingly followed suit, enacting a special single-use law that would allow Emperor Akihito to abdicate due to his advanced age, thus paving the way for Crown Prince Naruhito to ascend the Imperial throne. On April 30, 2019, Emperor Akihito’s abdication was made reality. On the following day, May 1, Crown Prince Naruhito, the eldest son of Emperor Akihito ascended the throne, ushering in a new era of Reiwa, or the time of “Beautiful Harmony,” and bringing a close to the era of Heisei, or the time of “Achieved Peace,” which started in 1989. Given this major change, I firmly believe it to be necessary to reflect upon the meaning of the thirty years of Heisei during which the Japanese people had experienced no war for the first time since the Meiji Restoration and the beginnings of Westernization in 1868. Whereas there is a great deal of literature on the historical role played by Emperor Hirohito, there is a little on the role played by Emperor Akihito (See Table

The Age of Emperor Akihito

3

1). It is, hence, time to consider the age of Emperor Akihito for three reasons. First, the post-war period, especially in the early years, was indeed overshadowed by the wartime history of Japan. Given that, the audience for the Japanese Emperor’s statements has often been both domestic and international. Second, it is necessary to understand within what contexts the words and deeds of the Japanese Emperor should be considered. He is a constitutional monarch, and he has a constitutional limit on his right to speak publicly about political issues. Without ascertaining these constraints, therefore, it is hardly possible to understand the meaning, implications, direction, and value of his activities. Finally, examining the constitutionally prescribed role of the Emperor as national symbol can help us understand contemporary Japanese society. “The ability to create a sense of community, and thus the possibility of social and political life as we know it,” Mark V. Porrovecchio and Celeste Michelle Condit (2016) argue, “depends on the human capacity for communication” (p. 1). As the Japanese monarchy is the oldest continuous monarchy in the world, it is one of the wellsprings of such a sense of community for Japanese people. Table 1: Chronology of key events related to Emperor Akihito and Empress Michiko x Dec. 23, 1933: Prince Akihito born as the elder son of Emperor Hirohito and Empress Nagako, who are posthumously called Emperor Showa and Empress Kojun. x September 1939: World War II begins. x May 1944 to November 1945: Prince Akihito evacuates from Tokyo due to the war. x Aug. 15, 1945: Emperor Showa tells the nation by radio of Japan’s surrender in the war. x Nov. 10, 1952: Prince Akihito officially becomes crown prince. x March 30-Oct. 12, 1953: Crown Prince Akihito visits Europe and the United States, attends the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II in place of his father.

4

Introduction

x April 10, 1959: Crown Prince Akihito and Michiko Shoda, the elder daughter of Hidesaburo Shoda, who later became president of Nisshin Flour Milling Co., marry, making the groom the first crown prince and later the first emperor to be married a commoner. x Feb. 23, 1960: First son, Prince Naruhito, born. x Nov. 30, 1965: Second son, Prince Akishino, born. x April 18, 1969: Daughter, Princess Nori, born. x July 17-19, 1975: First visit by the couple to Okinawa Prefecture, three years after its reversion to Japan from U.S. control. They narrowly escape a firebomb thrown at them at the Himeyuri war memorial by leftist activists. x Jan. 7, 1989: Upon the death of Emperor Showa, the crown prince ascends to the throne and the couple assume the titles of emperor and empress. The era name changes to Heisei the next day. x Nov. 12, 1990: Enthronement ceremony is held. x July 10, 1991: Visit areas affected by a volcanic eruption of the Fugen peak of Mount Unzen in Nagasaki Prefecture. x Oct. 23-28, 1992: Visit China, first trip to the country as Japanese emperor. x April 23-26, 1993: Visit Okinawa, first trip to the prefecture by an emperor. x Oct. 20, 1993: On her 59th birthday, Empress Michiko collapses, becomes unable to speak for months due to psychogenic aphasia. x Feb. 12, 1994: Visit Iwo Jima, a fierce battleground in the Pacific during World War II, to pay tribute to the war dead. x Jan. 31, 1995: Visit Hyogo Prefecture after the Great Hanshin Earthquake on Jan. 17.

The Age of Emperor Akihito

5

x July 26-Aug. 3, 1995: Visit memorials in atomic-bombed cities of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, as well as Okinawa, on 50th anniversary of the end of World War II. x July 3-12, 1997: Empress Michiko is hospitalized for shingles. x Jan. 18, 2003: Emperor Akihito undergoes prostate cancer surgery. x June 27-28, 2005: Visit Saipan to honor the souls of war dead on the 60th anniversary of the end of World War II. x March 16, 2011: Emperor Akihito sends a message of hope by video five days after a massive earthquake and tsunami in northeastern Japan triggered a crisis at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant. x March 30-May 11, 2011: Visit disaster-hit areas in the northeast and shelters around Tokyo for seven weeks in a row. x Feb. 18, 2012: Emperor Akihito undergoes heart bypass surgery. x Nov. 14, 2013: The Imperial Household Agency decides to switch to cremation for the emperor and empress rather than burial, which has been the tradition for 350 years, following a proposal by the couple. x April 8-9, 2015: Visit Palau to pay tribute to war dead on the 70th anniversary of the end of World War II. x Aug. 15, 2015: Emperor Akihito states “deep remorse” over World War II for the first time at an annual memorial ceremony for the war dead. x Jan. 26-30, 2016: Visit the Philippines, pay tribute to the war dead. x Aug. 8, 2016: Emperor Akihito releases video message expressing desire to abdicate and pass the throne on to Crown Prince Naruhito. x June 9, 2017: Special legislation to enable Emperor Akihito to abdicate enacted.

6

Introduction

x September 2018: Visit areas affected by torrential rains in prefectures of Ehime, Hiroshima and Okayama. x April 30, 2019: Emperor Akihito steps down in an abdication ceremony, becoming the first Japanese monarch to do so in about 200 years. (Japan Times, 2019) Consequently, this book has two purposes: the first, to scrutinize historical controversies over the past and the future of Japan in the age of Emperor Akihito. A closer look at several episodes will reveal how rhetorical and argumentative analyses of public discourse provide a deeper understanding of contingent historical situations (Section I). The second is to present the collection of public discourse uttered by Emperor Akihito (Section II), which can be a valuable source for rhetorical analysis. For instance, Message from His Majesty the Emperor on March 16, 2011, “Together with the People Afflicted by the Tohoku-Pacific Earthquake,” was only the second time in the history of Japan for the Emperor to speak directly to the general public. The first time, of course, was Emperor Hirohito’s war-ending speech on August 15, 1945. Specifically, in Section I, I will emphasize controversies in the age of Emperor Akihito. Each chapter provides a different aspect of the historical controversy. Chapter One, “A Critical Media Analysis of the Korea Herald: A Controversy over the Emperor’s Remarks” is an example of the intersectional nature of controversy. Controversies are necessarily meant to be debated, compared, and interpreted by different players. Although it is uncommon for the audience to hear neutral, or even well-balanced, views of both sides of a controversy from a single source, media nevertheless often function as an intersection of debates, so much so that that even the most concerned audience must rely on their mediated messages for understanding historical background, arguments for and against the proposed solution to a problem, and evaluations and reactions. In this regard, an analysis of the Korea Herald as an English-language daily in South Korea present a unique opportunity to take its international audience into account, thus, providing an essential framework for understanding the historical controversy over Emperor Akihito’s apology. Chapter Two, “A Generic Analysis of Apologetic Discourse: Emperor Akihito’s Speech and President Roh’s Reply” is an instance of the interactive nature of controversy. In controversies, there are exchanges of ideas, values, perspectives, and, above all, arguments. The status of Emperor is highly sensitive in Japan, particularly given the twentieth

The Age of Emperor Akihito

7

century history of war waged in the name of Akihito’s father Hirohito, who passed away in 1989 (Suzuki, 2017). Though revered as a manifest deity and supreme ruler before and during World War II, Emperor Hirohito was subsequently transformed into a figurehead as a reflection of Japan’s wartime deeds. Emperor Akihito has only served as monarch in this more limited role. An analysis of Emperor Akihito’s Speech and President Roh’s Reply on May 24, 1990, at an imperial banquet will present a unique opportunity to examine the case of cross-cultural rhetorical performance. G. Thomas Goodnight (1991) is right in arguing that a controversy develops communication practice by bridging the personal and public spheres. While the private sphere is sometimes charged with emotional language and arguments, or even resentments, the public sphere can make exchanges of more reasoned and rational ideas and arguments between the participants.㻌 Chapter Three, “A Rhetorical Analysis of the Ceremonial Address: President Roh at the Japanese Diet,” is an example of the invitational nature of controversy. In controversies, many related issues and arguments are invited to be addressed. During his three-day state visit to Japan, Rho not only attended the state banquet sponsored by Emperor Akihito, but also served as the first president of South Korea to make a speech before the Japanese Diet, and he did so with a forward-looking posture. While clearing the wartime past per se was not a goal of the two nations, both did want to step forward together into the future. As of 2019, though the Korea-Japan relationship is often described as worse than ever due to a number of wartime entangled issues under the Moon Jae-in administration (see, e.g., Evans, 2019), this chapter might serve to reframe for a global Korean audience the potential of a hopeful future and partnership with Japan, as well as re-ground a Japanese audience in the complicated history between the two peoples. Chapter Four, “A Pragma-Dialectical Analysis of Queen Beatrix’s Speech and Emperor Akihito’s Reply” on May 23, 2000, concerns the dialectical nature of controversy. In controversies, participants are often forced to face a tough reality and attempt to transcend it rhetorically through joint efforts. Dutch Queen Beatrix’s speech and Emperor Akihito’s subsequent reply are a perfect example. Even though there are positive and negative sides to all social and historical relationships, rhetoric should be employed as a means of problem-solving, rather than a means of problem-causing. This chapter illustrates what roles topical potential, adaptation to the audience’s demands and expectations, and presentational devices at the speaker’s disposal can play in a critical moment of historical

8

Introduction

controversy. In Section II, rather than rhetorical and argumentative analyses, I will present Emperor Akihito’s public discourse, manifest in a collection of his speeches and question-and-answer sessions. It should be noted, because the Japanese Emperor is constitutionally barred from making any political statements, he cannot say anything explicitly pertaining to mundane political decision-making. However, such a constraint does not mean that his rhetoric cannot carry weight in influencing Japanese society. As Thomas B. Farrell (1991) argues, “rhetoric derives its materials from the real condition of civic life, the appearances of our cultural world. At the same time, this activity makes room for disputation about the meaning, implications, direction, and value of cultural appearances” (p. 184). In fact, the Emperor’s august words can serve to heal the nation’s wounds in times of crisis, such as the 2011 Northeast Japan Earthquake, or bring them joy, as in such a ceremony as his birthday appearance. Therefore, it is worth reading the collection with this in mind so that we may better understand the psychological structure of the Japanese people. Moreover, although it is beyond my focus in this book, just as American presidents have formed a rhetorical genre (e.g., Campbell & Jamieson, 2008), so too may the Japanese Emperors form an analogous genre within the framework of constitutional monarchy. I hope that my project will pave the way to develop rhetoric as epistemic, or a way of knowing, for scholars of Japanese Studies both in Japan and beyond. In closing this introductory chapter, I want to thank many people who have contributed greatly to this work. History Department Chair Laura Hein who kindly invited me to Northwestern University and the Buffett Institute for Global Affairs which generously provided me with a lot of help to complete this project. Patrick Sanguineti whom I first met at the University of Cambridge, gave me critical insights and suggestions for the improvement of my original manuscripts. I also want to thank Robert C. Rowland at the University of Kansas for inspiring me in a number of ways regarding how to “struggle” with rhetorical analysis. James House at Meiji University carefully checked the final manuscript with me. I also would like to thank Frans H. van Eemeren of the University of Amsterdam for co-authoring with me concerning the Dutch Queen’s speech and the Emperor’s reply. Above all, I want to thank G. Thomas Goodnight at the University of Southern California for providing a context for discussion of many of rhetorical problems, especially those of controversies and public discourse. All of these scholars have contributed greatly to this work, and the

The Age of Emperor Akihito

9

finished product is as much theirs as it is mine—though I alone claim any of its short comings.

Note 1

Olson, K. M., & Goodnight, G. T. (1994), p. 249.

10

Introduction

References Campbell, K. K., & Jamieson, K. H. (2008). Presidents Creating the Presidency: Deeds Done in Words 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. “Chronology of key events related to Emperor Akihito and Empress Michiko.” (2019, April 30). Japan Times News. Retrieved May 21, 2019 from https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2019/04/30/national/chronology-ke y-events-related-emperor-akihito-empress-michiko/#.XOP9HaZUvs0 Evans, C. (2019). “Serious Threat to Japan-Korea Relationship,” nippon.com. Retrieved January 22, 2019, from https://www.nippon.com/en/column/g00640/a-serious-threat-to-the-jap an-korea-relationship.html Farrell, T. B. (1991). “Practicing the Arts of Rhetoric: Tradition and Invention,” Philosophy and Rhetoric 24, 183-212. Goodnight, G. T. (1991). “Controversy,” In Donn W. Parson (ed.), (pp. 1-13). Argument in Controversy: The Proceedings of the 7th SCA/AFA Conference on Argumentation, Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association. Olson, K. M., & Goodnight, G. T. (1994). “Entanglements of consumption, cruelty, privacy, and fashion: The social controversy over fur.” Quarterly Journal of Speech 80, 249-276. Porrovecchio, M. V. & Condit, C. M. (2016). “Introduction,” Contemporary Rhetorical Theory: A Reader 2nd ed. NY: Guilford Publications, pp. 1-13. Suzuki, T. (2017). The Rhetoric of Emperor Hirohito: Continuity and Rupture in Japan’s Dramas of Modernity. Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

CHAPTER ONE A MEDIA ANALYSIS OF THE KOREA HERALD: A CONTROVERSY OVER THE EMPEROR’S REMARKS TAKESHI SUZUKI

The question of clearing negative legacies of Japan's military expansion before and during World War II was one of the most contested issues among the Japanese people in 1990. Wartime atrocities of the "Great Empire of Japan" left a deep wound in the minds of the Korean people, and still existed as the source of a delicate, yet potentially volatile, problem in the diplomatic relations between Japan and South Korea. As South Korean President Roh Tae-woo orchestrated his visit to Japan, he requested that an imperial apology be extended to Korea regarding Japan's thirty-five-year colonial rule over the Korean Peninsula that ended in 1945. Despite the fact that Emperor Hirohito delivered his apology in 1984, Korean officials had requested a more explicit apology for Japan's wartime deeds. Although Toshiki Kaifu, the then Japanese Prime Minister, promised to give such an apology, the issue created a heated debate among Japanese government officials over how far Emperor Akihito should go in apologizing, since the postwar constitution of Japan limits the Emperor to a symbolic role, thus, keeping him from playing any political role.1 At the same time, the Akihito apology controversy became of great concern to the Korean people, since "many Koreans--and other Asians--believe that Japan, unlike Germany, has never shown true remorse" ("Korea, Japan at odds," 1990, p. 8). Some Korean diplomats reportedly said that, given Roh's sinking popularity and continuing political problems at home in those days, it was particularly difficult for him to make the trip without the assurance of Akihito's apology ("Korea,

12

Chapter One

Japan at odds," 1990). It was necessary for Roh to resolve the apology issue on the occasion of his impending visit to Japan, since he wished to accelerate technological transfers from Japan to South Korea and step up efforts to rectify the bilateral trade imbalance. Thus, Japan and Korea were at serious diplomatic odds over whether the Japanese Emperor should apologize for his country's deeds. In what follows, a critical analysis of editorials that appeared in the Korea Herald on Akihito's apology, is conducted in an attempt to elucidate how this newspaper saw the delicate political problem. In this era of instant and universal communication, all communication is inherently mediated by some apparatus. As communication is the process by which shared meaning is created, social opinions are largely influenced by mass media, and vice versa. Therefore, this criticism would provide an opportunity to examine the Korea Herald as a channel of communication in terms of its influence upon information and people. Specifically, the four editorials that dealt with the apology will be examined: "Unequivocal apology" (May 13, 1990), "Obstacle to Korea-Japan ties" (May 17, 1990), "Renewal of Korea-Japan ties" (May 24, 1990), and "Akihito's 'deepest regret'" (May 26, 1990). These four comprise all editorials on the subject that appeared in the Korea Herald during the period between May 7, 1990, when the Japanese government started preparing the statement and May 26, 1990, when Roh was returning home from his historical visit to Japan. Prior to Roh's visit, officials of the two sides met several times in Tokyo and Seoul to find solutions satisfactory to both sides. The series of four editorials, accordingly, can be viewed as a complete set of texts on the Akihito apology controversy.

Stage I: The Editorial of May 13, 1990, “Unequivocal Apology” The first editorial, "Unequivocal apology," plays an introductory role for its readers regarding the imperial apology controversy. To begin with, the Korea Herald has been one of the two leading English Dailies in South Korea since 1977.2 It has to take its plural readership into consideration, since it is not a translation of the Hangul language newspaper. Its current circulation is two hundred eighty thousand strong, 60% of which is sold domestically, and 40% in one hundred and forty-eight foreign countries. The readership of this newspaper is generally made up of the educated

A Media Analysis of the Korea Herald

13

classes in Korea and in the other countries where it is sold. Of its domestic readers, for instance, about 10% are students, 15% military, and 10% foreigners. Therefore, the Korea Herald is written not only for Korean readers but also for international readers, including Japanese. As an introduction, the first section of the editorial summarizes the situation well: "How far the Japanese emperor should go [in] apologizing for Japan's 35-year colonial rule of Korea will be of great concern to Koreans during President Roh Tae-woo's visit to Tokyo late next week" ("Unequivocal apology," 1990, p. 8). As Karlyn Kohrs Campbell (1972) indicates, "rhetorical discourse is public, addressed to others" (p. 3). She further argues that rhetoric deals primarily with social questions which the individual cannot solve him/herself; he/she requires others to share his/her attitudes, his/her way of looking at things, and who are willing to commit themselves to similar cooperative action. At this juncture, it is assumed that the editorial is calling for a cooperative action between Koreans and its international readers. Since Koreans’ concern about the apology controversy is already high, it is natural for the Korea Herald to stimulate interest among its readers abroad, particularly the Japanese. Then, the second section of the editorial provides a historical review of Japan's wrongdoing. It points out Japan's annexation of the Korean Peninsula between 1910 and 1945, and it argues: “This marks a difference between Korea and other parts of Asia in terms of what Japan did. And this is why Koreans will be watching how Japan makes amends for what it did in the past to destroy this country's sovereignty” ("Unequivocal apology," 1990, p. 8). Hence, this historical reference serves as grounds for Korean people to comment on Japan's behavior. The third section describes in more detail how Japan humiliated and mistreated Korean men and women. According to Hideki Kajimura (1977), in the decades following the 1910 annexation, the Japanese government not only forced Koreans to adopt Japanese names and worship the Emperor but also shipped hundreds of thousands of them to Japan to work as laborers in its coal mines and factories. During World War II, Japan even conscripted Korean men to fight for the emperor, and sent Korean women to work as prostitutes in the troops' quarters (Howard, 1996). This section concludes the historical review by declaring that "[t]heir atrocities have left deep wounds in Koreans, not to mention their deprivation of Korea's sovereign rights" ("Unequivocal apology," 1990, p. 8). As such, the negative legacies of Japan's colonization period still exist as “trauma” on the part of Korean people. The fourth section condemns the late Japanese Emperor Hirohito's

14

Chapter One

apology as coming far short of satisfying the Korean people. While hosting a state banquet for former President Chun Doo Hwan in 1984, he referred to the annexation and ensuing rule as the "unfortunate past" and "indeed regrettable" without mentioning the physical suffering Koreans experienced ("Unequivocal apology," 1990, p. 8). A Korean Foreign Ministry official, for instance, believed that the statement of apology by Akihito should not only include an expression of regret for the wrongdoing but state who committed what to whom ("Invitation of Akihito," 1990, p. 1). Some Koreans even felt that what the Japanese regretted was "that they lost the war" ("Korea, Japan at odds," 1990, p. 8). In the next section, the editorial explains why the Koreans wanted Akihito's "unequivocal apology" despite his symbolic status under the present Constitution of Japan: Now, [the] Japanese are reportedly saying that the present emperor is only a symbol of their country, not a living god, as his father was once regarded. They are making this point in urging their government not to involve the imperial family in diplomatic problems. But the emperor represents Japan as its constitutional monarch. His authority is awesome in that regard. ("Unequivocal apology," 1990, p. 8: emphasis added)

Here the editorial reverses the argument by stating that if the emperor is still sacrosanct to Japanese people, then the Korean people demand an apology from that authority for the wrongful deeds of the Japanese. In fact, Lee Hong-koo, a special assistant to Roh, asserts that only the emperor’s own words were likely to satisfy most Koreans, since "[e]verything was done in the name of the emperor" ("Korea, Japan at odds," 1990, p. 8). The Chosen Ilbo newspaper stated in its editorial: “Kaifu is doing a very good job, his popularity is going up, but when it comes to the historical legacy, he is irrelevant. [...] That is the view of most Koreans” (as cited in "Korea, Japan at odds," 1990, p. 8). In spite of such harsh opinions by most Koreans, the last section of the editorial employs a less inflammatory approach by saying that "Korea is not a country that is looking backward, engrossed in getting even for the past deprivation. Instead, it is forward-looking and open-minded" ("Unequivocal apology," 1990, p. 8: emphasis added). Thus, the Korea Herald chooses to fulfill the persona, or role, of a forward-looking and open-minded citizen of its country. In so doing, any proposal by the editorial would also be forward-looking and open-minded, and anyone opposed to the proposal would be perceived as backward-looking and

A Media Analysis of the Korea Herald

15

narrow-minded.3 Based on the persona described above, the same source suggests that "Koreans feel it as an acute need to improve relations with their closest neighbors including Japan, amid the global developments, in search of co-prosperity" ("Unequivocal apology," 1990, p. 8). Clearly, the Korea Herald is trying to perpetuate a forward-looking posture. In sum, the first editorial, "Unequivocal apology," provides historical information necessary to understand the apology issue, and reveals underlying conflicts in the minds of the Korean people. Its purpose is to convince its Korean as well as foreign readers that a new era of friendship between Japan and Korea could not be achieved without achieving a common understanding of the past.

Stage II: The Editorial of May 17, 1990, “Obstacle to Korea-Japan Ties” The second editorial, "Obstacle to Korea-Japan ties," is intended to create conflict by comparing Korean and Japanese arguments regarding the apology issue (1990, p. 8). On the one hand, leaders of Japan's ruling party opposed an apology by Emperor Akihito because of constitutional restrictions on the involvement of the emperor in politics ("Akihito's apology," 1990). In fact, Japan's constitution stipulates that the cabinet must give advice on and approval for the emperor's actions in matters of state, such as on ceremonial occasions and at the reception of foreign officials. But it does not specify the emperor's role on such occasions ("Akihito's apology," 1990). On the other hand, the Korean government was increasing diplomatic pressure on Japan so that it would take a "progressive attitude" on the question ("Seoul presses," 1990, p. 1). Under such circumstances, intense rhetoric arises from the conflict. As Campbell (1972) states, "Rhetoric arises out of conflict--within an individual, between individuals, or between groups. The basic conflict involves the perception of a problem--a gap between existing conditions and desired change, or between current policies and practices and proposed goals" (p. 9). For that reason, the situation calls for rhetoric to bridge the perceptual gap between what Korea would desire and what Japan could offer. The beginning of the editorial quoted below illustrated the Korean point of view: “It is most unfortunate that Korea and Japan have lately been bogged down in a delicate, yet volatile, diplomatic feud over the issue of making an apology for Japan's occupation of Korea

16

Chapter One

before and during World War II” ("Obstacle," 1990, p. 8). In the second section, the editorial uses even more emotional language such as "chronic," "resurging," "stubbornness," "self-righteous," and "ego" for describing Japan's attitude toward the subject ("Obstacle," 1990, p. 8). Clearly, the emotional tone of the editorial is largely influenced by the political atmosphere between the two countries, and such a tone is intended to increase the interest of both its domestic and international readers. In the third section, the editorial presents the Koreans' established position that Akihito should express repentance about Japan's thirty-five-year colonial rule over Korea: The standing position of Korea, and for that matter most Asian nations which suffered a similar fate, has been that the Japanese should offer apologies for their historical crimes and misdeeds committed before and during the Pacific War in order to wipe the slate clean for entering upon new and friendly relations. ("Obstacle," 1990, p. 8)

There is no question that this is the key argument in the second editorial. Nevertheless, this position is not as rigid as it appears in the sense that it utilizes the "to wipe the slate clean" metaphor. Generally, any analysis of metaphoric arguments is concerned with the implications seen as strengths and with limitations seen as weaknesses.4 In terms of the strengths, the "to-wipe-slate-clean" metaphor provides three insights within this particular context. First, "what is already done cannot be undone." Even if Japan tries to ignore the historical fact, it remains as it is written on the slate. Second, the metaphor suggests that Korea and Japan could erase what is written at present once both sides reach an agreement to do so. Finally, on the clean slate, the two countries can write something that posterity would be proud of. In terms of the weaknesses, however, the metaphoric appeal is limited to those people willing to adopt the forward-looking posture toward the Korea-Japan relationship. This single metaphor alone, in other words, is too weak to overcome the presumption held by a hostile Korean audience whose collective wartime memory is still vivid. Since it is quite difficult, if not impossible, to conduct diplomatic negotiations on the delicate issue between Korea and Japan, both sides need to look at the problem with a new perspective which the metaphor suggests. In his article, "To wipe the slate clean," Kim Young-won (1990) identifies two difficulties inherent in any summit-level meetings between

A Media Analysis of the Korea Herald

17

Korea and Japan: For one thing, a Korean President is both head of state and chief executive, whereas in Japan, the head of state is the emperor and the chief executive is the prime minister. For another, both Japanese and Koreans are notorious for their insistence on appearance, pomp and circumstance, as perhaps any full-blooded Orientals ought to be. (p. 8)

Given the difficulties associated with Korea-Japan diplomacy, the "to wipe the slate clean" metaphor provides the two countries with the paradigm offering a solution to the emotionally committed issue of imperial apology (See, for an analysis of the transcendental capacity of the Emperor's rhetoric, Suzuki, 2017). In the fourth section, the editorial requires Japan to change its attitude toward Korea. It argues that "whenever the occasion arose, its chauvinistic and haughty elements made no bones about thinking and feeling otherwise" ("Obstacle," 1990, p. 8). The next section elaborates on this point by demonstrating that such an attitude had given rise to frequent controversies between the [Asian] governments and peoples with regard to the so-called attempts at whitewashing the historical record on that score and to fears of the sun of old imperial Japan rising again over the horizon of Asia and the Pacific. ("Obstacle," 1990, p. 8)

Thus, regarding the imperial controversy, Japan's stubbornness is still closely connected with war memories in the mind of other Asian peoples. In the sixth and seventh sections, the editorial attempts to criticize Japan's attitude toward Korea by alluding to the late Emperor Hirohito's apology. To start with, it contends that "[t]he ongoing squabble over an apology would have been forestalled" had he "spoken in clearer terms than an airy expression of regret about the unfortunate past" to the visiting Korean President in 1984 ("Obstacle," 1990, p. 8). Furthermore, the editorial refutes Japan's constitutional limits argument that the emperor should be "a figurehead above the political and diplomatic affairs of state" ("Obstacle," 1990, p. 8). The editorial argues that if this is indeed the case, "Akihito ought to have been ruled out of the picture altogether from the beginning" ("Obstacle," 1990, p. 8) by pointing to Japan's self-contradiction concerning the imperial apology. The eighth section maintains that Koreans are "not interested so much in the rhetoric or the manner of apology as [in the] honesty and sincerity of

18

Chapter One

this rite" ("Obstacle," 1990, p. 8). Hence, the ninth and last section concludes the second editorial by demonstrating a need for a change in the Japanese way of thinking: “A bold reorientation in the thinking and profile of the Japanese nation toward full candor, openness and humility is necessary to place Korea-Japan relations on a solid bedrock” ("Obstacle," 1990, p. 8). In the final analysis, the purpose of this editorial, "Obstacle to Korea-Japan ties," is not only to present Korea's view that Japan should offer an apology as Prime Minister Kaifu had already accepted, but to indicate that the emperor should do so in order for such an apology to be sufficient to "wipe the slate clean."

Stage III: The Editorial of May 24, 1990, “Renewal of Korea-Japan Ties” The third editorial, "Renewal of Korea-Japan ties," primarily discusses Japan's possible future actions, rather than the imperial apology itself (1990, p. 8). One possible explanation is that "[t]he prolonged tug of war between Korea and Japan over the issue of Japanese Emperor Akihito's apology for Japan's colonial rule over Korea finally ended" on May 23, 1990 "as the Tokyo government conveyed the last version of the emperor's statement to Seoul via its Ambassador to Korea Kenichi Yanagi" ("Issue of Akihito," 1990, p. 1). Given the completion of the imperial apology text, the focus of the problem already shifted from the content of the text to future actions stemming from it. The first section of the editorial mentions the international situation which is "in flux, calling for timely and effective readjustment of our foreign policy to meet the new requirements and challenges" ("Issue of Akihito," 1990, p. 1). It points out that "Korea-Japan relationships are also in need of improvement and renewal" ("Issue of Akihito," 1990, p. 1). Thus, the editorial employs a strong analogy that, given the recent inexorable trend of the international situation, it is natural that Korea and Japan follow the trend to meet the new requirements and challenges. In the next section, the editorial specifically emphasizes the need to improve Korea-Japan relationships, referring to the "to wipe the slate clean" metaphor used in the second editorial: The vociferous polemics and friction proceeding the visit were caused by the necessity to wipe the slate clean for evolving fresh and better ties of

A Media Analysis of the Korea Herald

19

bilateral friendship and cooperation, free from the dismal memories and legacies of the unfortunate past. ("Renewal," 1990, p. 8)

Thus, the focus of this editorial is no longer to state why Japan should apologize "for its old crimes and injustices done to the Korean people" but to propose how Japan should and could "dispose of the unhappy relations between the two counties" ("Renewal," 1990, p. 8). In the fourth section, the editorial argues that Japan should compensate Korea for the past not merely by uttering words but by taking actions: The apologetic and compensatory stance of Japan toward Korea should and could be proven by a consistent policy put forth by the Tokyo government in the future. Specific words of apology are important. Actions to match them are more important. ("Renewal," 1990, p. 8: emphasis added)

Thus, adopting a "tough" or realistic tone, the third editorial advocates that Japan carry out policy changes toward Korea. At this point, Campbell (1972) explains that "rhetorical discourse is practical": ... [rhetoric] is designed to communicate feelings and information for a purpose, to evoke a concrete and relevant response from an audience to the rhetorical situation. Rhetoric, then, is characterized by its instrumentality, its intent to produce further behavior. (p. 3)

Accordingly, the following sections of the editorial specifically outlines three vital policy areas where Korea wants Japan to take action ("Renewal," 1990, p. 8). First and foremost, it indicates that Japan should change its domestic policy concerning the status of Korean residents in Japan. Most of them are the offspring of Koreans who were taken to Japan for labor and other mobilization purposes during World War II while their country was under Japanese colonial rule ("Koreans in Japan," 1990). When the war ended, there were some two and a half million Koreans in Japan. Some returned to Korea, but six-hundred-thousand of them decided to stay (Kajimura, 1977). They had jobs or businesses in Japan, or no one to return to in Korea. Many were second-generation and spoke Japanese better than Korean, others had married Japanese (Kita & Maclntyre, 1990). Despite such an inauspicious beginning, these Korean descendants were required to register as aliens and have their fingerprints taken at the age of sixteen in Japan. The Korean government had repeatedly called for the abolition of this and other discriminatory measures being imposed on

20

Chapter One

Korean residents in Japan ("Koreans in Japan," 1990). The fifth section of the editorial even charges angrily that "Japan has long been blamed for its anachronistic policy of discrimination against aliens in Japan in general and Korean expatriates in particular" ("Renewal," 1990, p. 8). In the next section, the editorial forcefully promotes a righteous solution to the situation, viz., Japan's reorientation in terms of the perception of its historical responsibility toward Korea: Since most of the Koreans residing in Japan were victims of Japanese imperialism and colonialism prior to and during World War II, they deserve special consideration and treatment as a legitimate part of the Japanese community. ("Renewal," 1990, p. 8)

Actually, in order to facilitate Roh's smooth visit to Japan, Korea and Japan already agreed to exempt third-generation Korean residents in Japan from the fingerprint regulation. The Korean News Review reports that "[e]limination of the most controversial of the so-called four vicious rules imposed upon Korean expatriates in Japan, considered a palpable symbol of discrimination against Koreans, averted continued confrontation for the immediate future" ("Korea-Japan Talks," 1990, p. 34). But the same source continues and indicates: The representatives of the two governments apparently met each other halfway on all four main points at issue which also included reentry permits and deportations of Koreans. The results were largely disappointing for most of our Korean compatriots in Japan, who have cried out for remedying the persistent segregative treatment meted out by the Tokyo government to Koreans either openly or covertly. ("Korea-Japan Talks," 1990, p. 34)

Thus, hammering out a solution to the longstanding Korea-Japan dispute hinges upon Japan's perceptual reorientation and response to its historical responsibility. Consequently, Koreans hope that President Roh's visit could, and should, be an occasion to give them a new trust in their further productive relations. Second, the editorial suggests a foreign policy change on the part of Japan, i.e., an economic partnership with Korea. The editorial considers Japan to be "an industrial giant of the world" which is "in a position to do more to redress the lopsided trade heavily in its favor and to increase technology transfers to help in the development of Korean industries"

A Media Analysis of the Korea Herald

21

("Renewal," 1990, p. 8). The editorial does not directly request Japan's economic compensation for Korea's emotional wound, but instead argues that Japan's sincerity and honesty would be proven by such actions so as to match "specific words of apology" ("Renewal," 1990, p. 8). Should the Koreans give the highest priority to the economic and trade issues, the Japanese might regard their request for an imperial apology as a bargaining chip to achieve their pragmatic desires, rather than as the country's sovereign issue. Lastly, the editorial claims Japan's international policy initiative as the third action to be taken. Acknowledging Japan's presence in East Asia, it argues that "[Japan's] attitude toward the Soviet Union and China is an important factor for regional stability and prosperity. Tokyo's policy toward Pyongyang should be calculated so as not to tip the balance of power on the Korean Peninsula against Seoul and disturb the security of Korea" ("Renewal," 1990, p. 8). In presenting the series of requests, the editorial develops a spatial order, namely, domestic, bilateral, and international. By deploying such an organization, the editor could demand that Japan "consistently" take those future policy initiatives if Japan holds a really "apologetic and compensatory stance" toward Korea. In the final analysis, the purpose of the third editorial, "Renewal of Korea-Japan ties," is to propose that Japan's future action is the only criterion to judge its attitude toward its history and its international responsibility. The last paragraph reiterates: “The two neighbors must settle the old score now to stop ruminating and quarreling over the past. Korea and Japan now ought to respond to the call for closer and productive cooperation in the unfolding era of the Asian and Pacific community” ("Renewal," 1990, p. 8).

Stage IV: The Editorial of May 26, 1990, “Akihito’s Deepest Regret” The last editorial, "Akihito's 'deepest regret,'" presents an evaluation, or rhetorical interpretation, of Emperor Akihito's apology to Korea at the May 25, 1990 banquet for President Roh. Hence, this editorial serves as a conclusion to the apology controversy. The first section states that President Roh's "historical visit to Japan" marks "the start of an epoch in the long and entangled relations between the two neighboring countries" ("Akihito's," 1990, p. 8). The same section hopes for "a mature and

22

Chapter One

productive Korea-Japan partnership for the future," and praises Roh for braving "some objections and many risks to undertake this momentous summit diplomacy" ("Akihito's," 1990, p. 8). This stance is taken to preempt any criticism that Roh might only be concerned with increasing his political popularity. Regardless of the result Roh gains from the visit, the editorial suggests that his action is at least successful in terms of making a difference "in the long and entangled relations between the two" ("Akihito's," 1990, p. 8). Such an argument is necessary, since there is a strong opinion among some Koreans that Roh should not visit Japan officially. The second section of the editorial emphasizes that "President Roh's positive approach to Japan was well reciprocated," and that the trip rounds off "a series of dynamic and extensive diplomatic ventures that have taken Roh to many parts of the globe" ("Akihito's," 1990, p. 8). Thus, the editorial argues that Roh's decision should also be appreciated in both the bilateral and international contexts. In the third section, the editorial addresses the Korean concern over the issue of "how Japan would express repentance over its wrongdoing in Korea to admit that Japan inflicted suffering on the Korean people" ("Akihito's," 1990, p. 8). It explains the essence of Emperor Akihito and President Roh's addresses at a state dinner on May 24, 1990. Akihito states: "I think of the suffering your people underwent during the unfortunate period (the 1910-1945 Japanese colonial rule of Korea), which was brought about by my country, and cannot but feel the deepest regret" ("Akihito's," 1990, p. 8). And the editorial admits that the Emperor thus "clearly mentioned [in his address] Japan as the one that inflicted damage and suffering on the Korean people, simultaneously expressing his desire not to see the unfortunate past repeated" ("Akihito's," 1990, p. 8). Then it cites President Roh's response to Akihito's speech: "Our two nations must forge a new era of friendship and cooperation based on a proper historical perspective, putting the mistakes of the past truly behind us" ("Akihito's," 1990, p. 8). In the subsequent section, the editorial offers its rhetorical interpretation of Akihito's apology. Its position was that considering the constitutional limitation, Akihito's speech was acceptable, if not sufficient, in the situation: By diplomatic practice, the emperor's expression of "deepest regret" can be accepted as form of apology showing repentance. This can be so interpreted in view of the emperor's position symbolizing Japan and its

A Media Analysis of the Korea Herald

23

people as well as the legal restrictions on him. Yet, there also are arguments saying it falls far short of a genuine apology. ("Akihito's," 1990, p. 8: emphasis added)

It is surprising to discover that this is the only evaluation of Akihito's apology in the last editorial. In later sections, the editorial no longer talks about Akihito's apology per se, but only discusses the past, present, and future of the relationship between the two countries. In the seventh section for example, the editorial talks about what happened in the years since Korea was liberated from Japan and the twenty-five-years since Japan normalized official relations. It says that "[t]here has been a lingering enmity between the peoples of the two nations," and adds that "[t]he widespread ill feeling among many Koreans toward Japan is rooted in their bitter memories" ("Akihito's," 1990, p. 8). It states that Japan's behavior "resulted in the deaths of many innocent Korean citizens," and that "Korea would not be a divided nation now if it had not been occupied by Japan" ("Akihito's," 1990, p. 8). As we can see, most of the space is devoted to the summary of what the Korea Herald has talked about in the apology controversy. Had the editorial presented a more explicit evaluation, it might function as a conclusion. As Campbell (1972) asserts, "rhetorical discourse is problem solving" (p. 2). She argues that "[w]hat constitutes a problem may be described loosely as the difference between what is wanted and what exists, or more formally as the discrepancy between one's personal goals, or values, and the existing structure, procedures, and conditions" (1972, p. 2). To solve the existing problem, rhetoric thus should give an evaluation and ask the readers to feel as the rhetorician does. Campbell explains: In this sense rhetoric is properly termed advisory, for directly or indirectly it always gives advice, takes a position, evaluates, and judges. Rhetoric is never simply the transmission of information; rather it is an interpretation of information. (1972, p. 2: emphasis added)

Nevertheless, the last editorial of the Korea Herald does not view Akihito's apology so positively that it could end Koreans' historical misgivings toward Japan. In contrast, most Japanese dailies chose to take a far more positive position. For instance, the Japan Economic Journal provides a more positive evaluation of the imperial apology. It reports:

24

Chapter One This time Roh said he was satisfied with Emperor Akihito's words. "Our nations," the president said, "must now forge a new era of friendship and cooperation based on a proper historical perspective, putting the mistakes of the past truly behind us. It is significant that Your Majesty has shown deep concern about this matter." ("Roh visit opens," 1990, p. 7)

Thus, this English edition of a Japanese Weekly takes Akihito's sincerity toward the two nations’ shared history at face value, citing Roh's similar statement as evidence to prove the point. Nor does the last editorial of the Korea Herald view Akihito's apology so negatively as to cancel it out. On the contrary, most Hangul papers holds a far more critical view. For instance, the Joongang Daily News, one of Korea's major independent newspapers, severely chastises the readership saying that "the Korean people cannot accept Akihito's remarks as a frank apology. Furthermore, we cannot read or sense an honest feeling of apology in their heart" (as cited in "Japanese apology," 1990, p. 2). The question is, from the rhetorical point of view, whether we should consider the last editorial to be an inadequate solution to the problem. That, however, seems to be rather a hasty evaluation. As explained previously, in Stage III the editorial already declared that "[s]pecific words of apology are important. Actions to match them are more important" ("Renewal," 1990, p. 8). Hence, without verifying succeeding actions to be taken by Japan, the editors could not make a final judgment about Akihito's apology. Moreover, neither an extremely positive nor negative evaluation would fail to set up a new beginning for the two countries. Namely, if the tone of the last editorial were too positive, it would offend most of its Korean readers. On the other hand, if too negative, it would disappoint most of its Japanese readers. Editors of the Korea Herald, thus, are forced to use an open-ended proposal, i.e., "the emperor's expression of 'deepest regret' can be accepted as a form of apology" ("Akihito's," 1990, p. 8: emphasis added) if, and only if, followed by Japan's sincere and concrete actions. Accordingly, in the eighth section, the editorial advocates a new beginning of the Korea-Japan relationship: “All this notwithstanding, the peoples of the two nations are now willing to let bygones be bygones in hopes of establishing a good-neighbor relationship in quest of the common goals of freedom and democracy, peace and prosperity” ("Akihito's," 1990, p. 8). In the ninth section, the editorial contends that not only Japan's leaders but also its people should change their present attitudes, saying that "there is a tendency among many Japanese to look down on Koreans. This

A Media Analysis of the Korea Herald

25

attitude is reflected in their social discrimination and unbounded prejudice against some seven-hundred-thousand Koreans living in Japan" ("Akihito's," 1990, p. 8). Such a criticism, however, begs evidence. Moreover, most young Japanese are simply ignorant about the history between the two countries: As it has been frequently pointed out, the standard Japanese secondary school textbook has about half a page on the occupation of Korea, while an equivalent Korean textbook has sixty pages (e.g., Tsutsui, 1990).5 In the next section, the editorial emphasizes that "[u]ntil Japan lives up to its words, the abundance of cordial remarks and friendly gestures showered on President Roh will be mere lip service" ("Akihito's," 1990, p. 8). Then, it offers that Japan's future actions are the only criteria for the evaluation of the words expressed by Emperor Akihito and Prime Minister Kaifu: “To what degree these words are proven in deeds will determine whether we can set an example of neighborly relationships for the whole world to see” (1990, p. 8). Thus, the editorial deploys a strong appeal to the two countries to heed their international responsibilities. In the last section, the editorial suggests that the unfortunate past is not merely a hurdle to clear but the foundation to provide lessons for a future: A forward-looking posture is the name of the game in the maturing partnership between Korea and Japan in the unfolding Pacific era. Lessons of the unpleasant past must be turned to our advantage to enrich and inspire endeavors to build a bright future together. (1990, p. 8)

Although the editorial uses the word "forward-looking" which appeared in the first editorial, it implies "forward-watching" this time. While using such a realistic tone toward the subject, the editorial successfully leaves room for future friendly bilateral relations between South Korea and Japan, even though there will be "tough" negotiations. In conclusion, the textual analysis of the last editorial, "Akihito's 'deepest regret'" reveals Korea’s complex reaction to Emperor Akihito's apology. It is necessary, but insufficient, to "wipe the slate clean." As a consequence, we should view the last editorial as a reaction, or performance, toward Akihito's apology, not as a critical assessment of it. It should be treated as what the post-structuralists have termed text. As James W. Chesebro (1989) points out, "an initial foundation for the post-structuralist perspective begins with a distinction between a work and a text. In this view, a work is a physical object, whereas a text is any kind of response to or experience derived from the work" (p. 2: emphasis

26

Chapter One

original). Therefore, as Roland Barthes (1987) maintains, "the work--in the best of cases--is moderately symbolic (its symbolic runs out, comes to a halt); the Text is radically symbolic: a work conceived, perceived and received in its integrally symbolic nature is a text" (p. 119: emphasis original). In the final analysis, the purpose of the last editorial, "Akihito's 'deepest regret,'" is twofold: first, to reveal what Korean people conceived, perceived, and received from the Akihito apology; and, second, to leave room for future bilateral relations between South Korea and Japan. Assuming, as Chesebro argues, all texts are ideological constructions, we must look at the editorial as an original work which creates a new setting and context for assessing the original work (which is, in this case, Akihito's apology).

Conclusion The analysis of the editorials of the Korea Herald on Akihito's apology has explored the relationship between text and its performance. Specifically, it shows that there is a symbiotic relationship between social opinions and mass media. In Stage I, for the benefit of its readership, the editorial talks primarily about the past history between Korea and Japan to provide background information. In Stage II, given Japan's constrictive political atmosphere, the editorial supports Korea's standing position of demanding from Akihito a more explicit apology for Japan's wrongful deeds. As we can see from Stages I & II, the Korea Herald is largely influenced by the rhetorical situations, and provides responses required. On the other hand, in Stage III, when the finalized text of Akihito's war apology is conveyed by the Japanese government, the editorial focuses upon the future actions which Korea desires Japan to take. Based upon a chronological order of past, present, and future, the editorial of Stage IV accepts Akihito's apology only temporarily, warning that Korean people must wait and see what Japan's follow-up would be, since such future actions are considered as the only proof of Japan's sincerity in Stage III. Thus, in Stages III and IV, the Korea Herald possesses control over how to evoke a concrete and relevant response from an audience to the rhetorical situation. Especially in Stage IV, it keeps the evaluation of the original text, namely, Akihito's apology, tentative and defined the rhetorical situation, suggesting how a target audience, namely, Japan, should react in the future. This demonstrates how much power the mass media possesses to shape social opinions in this era of communication.

A Media Analysis of the Korea Herald

27

In conclusion, Barthes (1987) is correct to presume that text should be approached as "a methodological field" within which we should view the original text (p. 118). As argued previously, it necessarily creates a new symbolic orientation for assessing an original work. The Korea Herald as a channel of communication has successfully defined, or redefined, the rhetorical situation requiring both an explicit apology from Akihito and future follow-up actions from Japan. The editors' decision, however, to leave the judgment of Akihito's apology open-ended and to let it depend upon Japan's future policy initiatives shall and should be evaluated by this media-organ's self-established criteria.

Notes 1

The Constitution of Japan Chapter 1, The Emperor, stipulates as follows: Article 1. The Emperor shall be the symbol of the State and of the unity of the people, deriving his position from the will of the people with whom resides sovereign power. Article 2. The Imperial Thorn shall be dynastic and succeeded to in accordance with the Imperial House Law passed by the Diet. Article 3. The advice and approval of the Cabinet shall be required for all acts of the Emperor in matters of state, and the Cabinet shall be responsible therefore. Article 4. The Emperor shall perform only such acts in matters of state as are provided for in this Constitution and shall not have powers related to government. The Emperor may delegate the performance of his acts in matters of state as may be provided by law. Article 5. When, in accordance with the Imperial House Law, a Regency is established, the Regent shall perform his acts in matters of state in the Emperor's name. In this case, paragraph one of the proceeding article will be applicable. Article 6. The Emperor shall appoint the Prime Minister as designated by the Diet. The Emperor shall appoint in the Chief Judge of the Supreme Court as designated by the Cabinet. Article 7. The Emperor, with the advice and approval of the Cabinet, shall perform the following acts in matters of state on behalf of the people: Promulgation of amendments of the constitution, laws, cabinet orders and treaties; Convocation of the Diet; Dissolution of the House of Representatives; Proclamation of general election of members of the Diet; Attestation of the appointment and dismissal of Ministers of State and other officials as provided for by law, and of full powers and credentials of Ambassadors and Ministers; Attestation of general and special amnesty, commutation of punishment, reprieve, and restoration of right; Awarding of honors; Attestation of instruments of ratification and other diplomatic documents as provided for by law; and Performance of ceremonial functions.

28

Chapter One

Article 8. No property can be given to, or received by, the Imperial House, nor can any gifts be made therefrom, without the authorization of the Diet (Japan, 1993, pp. 229-30). 2 The author conducted a telephone interview with the Tokyo office of the Korea Herald in order to obtain the information mentioned here in 1990. 3 Campbell (1982) explaines that persona is the "role(s) adopted by the rhetor in making the case" (p. 24). Such rhetor's views of history, nation, and politics may reveal the philosophical position or perspective from which he/she speaks. See, also, Linkugel (1982). 4 See, for instance, McMillan & Cheney (1996). 5 Here the author has no intention to evade the responsibility to teach and let the student discuss historical facts.

A Media Analysis of the Korea Herald

29

References "Akihito's apology would be unconstitutional: LDP officials." (1990, May 15). Korea Herald, p. 1. Barthes, R. (1987). "From Work to Text." in (ed.) Rick Rylance. Debating Texts: Readings in the 20th Century Literary Theory and Method. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press, pp. 117-22. Campbell, K. K. (1972). Critiques of Contemporary Rhetoric. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company, p. 3. Campbell, Karlyn Kohrs. (1982). The Rhetorical Act. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company. Chesebro, J. W. (1989). "Text, Narration, and Media." Text and Performance Quarterly 1, 1-23. Howard, K. (1996). True Stories of the Korean Comfort Women. London, UK: Cassell Academic. "Invitation of Akihito to Seoul hinges on 'apology.'" (1990, May 17). Korea Herald, p. 1. "Issue of Akihito apology cleared away." (1990, May 24). Korea Herald, p. 1. Japan: An Illustrated Encyclopedia. (1993). Tokyo: Kodansha. "Japanese apology." (1990, May 27). Korea Herald, p. 2. Kajimura, H. (1977). Chosenshi [The History of Korea]. Tokyo: Kodansha. Kim, Young-won. (1990, May 22). "To wipe the slate clean." Korea Herald, p. 8. Kita, K., & Maclntyre, D. (1990). "Koreans in Japan." Unpublished paper in the Japan Economic Journal. "Korea, Japan at odds over apology." (1990, May 16). Korea Herald, p. 8. "Korea-Japan Talks." (1990, May 5). Korean Newsreview, p. 34. "Koreans in Japan remain outsiders." (1990, April 27). Korea Herald, p. 5. Linkugel, W. A. (1982). "The Rhetorical Persona: Marcus Garvey as Black Moses." Communication Monograph 49, 50-62. McMillan, J. M., & Cheney, G. (1996). "The Student as Consumer: The Implications and Limitations of a Metaphor." Communication Education 45, 1-15. "Obstacle to Korea-Japan ties." (1990, May 17). Korea Herald, p. 8. "Renewal of Korea-Japan ties." (1990, May 24). Korea Herald, p. 8. "Roh visit opens new era." (1990, June 2). Japan Economic Journal, p. 7. "Seoul presses for clear-cut Akihito apology for past." (1990, May 16). Korea Herald, p. 1. Suzuki, T. (2017). The Rhetoric of Emperor Hirohito: Continuity and

30

Chapter One

Rupture in Japan's Dramas of Modernity. Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Tsutsui, M. (1990). "Kankoku no kyokasho ni miru nihon" (Japan viewed through Korean school textbooks). in Hon no mado [The window of books]. January 20 Tokyo: Shogakukan, pp. 26-29. "Unequivocal apology." (1990, May 13). Korea Herald, p. 8.

CHAPTER TWO A GENRE CRITICISM OF APOLOGETIC DISCOURSE: EMPEROR AKIHITO’S SPEECH AND PRESIDENT ROH’S REPLY TAKESHI SUZUKI

In what follows, the 1990 social controversy over Japanese Emperor Akihito’s apology issue will be reviewed first in order to understand the historical background. Next, Emperor Akihito's apology and South Korean President Roh's reply will be scrutinized as a joint effort intended to respond to the rhetorical situation that they were faced with.1 Finally, based upon the critical analysis, some practical and theoretical implications will be outlined and discussed.

The Controversy over Emperor Akihito’s Apology and President Roh’s Visit to Japan The Constitutional Limits upon the Emperor To understand the complex nature of the controversy, it is necessary to explain two unique features about Akihito's apology and Roh's reply at the banquet.2 First, under the new Constitution of Japan promulgated in 1946, Akihito could perform only symbolic, rather than political, roles. It is reflective of the wartime political structure that the Emperor should be kept from being involved in any mundane political decision-making. Conservative Japanese politicians were particularly reluctant to let him make political statements since the post-war constitution defines the Emperor as "the symbol of the state and of the unity of the People" and forbids him from playing any direct political role (Japan, 1993, p. 229).

32

Chapter Two

This constitutional limit causes a delicate problem as to whether, or to what extent, the Emperor should offer an apology to the South Korean president. Given the abstract nature of the definition, there is no ultimate law referring to the Emperor as the head of state, nor have scholars managed to finalize the meaning of the elusive term "symbol" (Chang, 1990, p. 32). Further, the Constitution stipulates that the Cabinet must give advice and approval for the Emperor's actions in matters of state, such as ceremonial occasions and receptions for foreign officials, but it fails to specify his role on such occasions ("Akihito's apology," 1990). Thus, the constitutional limit created a complex situation with regard to the text of the imperial apology. As a result, the apology text conveyed by Tokyo to Seoul was the product of weeks of tough negotiation between the two governments. They worked out "a compromise solution to the issue by both making concessions" ("News analysis," 1990, p. 2). In addition, although President Roh was Akihito's actual audience at the banquet, his apology was really addressed to the Korean public since Roh was its representative. Thus, Akihito was required not merely to apologize for Japan's past wrongdoings but to satisfy his "target audience." In fact, Roh's three-day state visit beginning May 24, 1990, evoked the specter of Japan's militarist past, and posed a delicate situation for its new Emperor Akihito as the two Asian economic powers attempted to forge a viable partnership. Prior to Roh's visit, the South Korean government demanded the assurance that Akihito would express his country's responsibility for and repentance pertaining to its past atrocities against the Korean people. Although Prime Minister Toshiki Kaifu prepared a statement professing his regret over the colonization period, most Koreans were of the opinion that he was irrelevant because the historical fact remained that everything had been done in the name of the monarchy, which Kaifu was not a true representative of ("Korea, Japan at odds," 1990).

The Negative Legacy of the “Great Empire of Japan” Why did the Koreans insist that they should hear an apology from "the symbol of Japan," the Emperor? There were two reasons for their request. First and foremost, if the Emperor was still sacrosanct to the Japanese, the Korean people believed that they should demand an apology from that authority. The Korea Herald argues:

A Genre Criticism of Apologetic Discourse

33

Now, Japanese are reportedly saying that the present emperor is only a symbol of their country, not a living god, as his father was urging their government not to involve the imperial family in diplomatic problems. But the emperor represents Japan as its constitutional monarch. His authority is awesome in that regard. ("Unequivocal apology," 1990, p. 8: emphasis added)

Thus, the Korean people could easily reverse the Japanese constitutional argument that the Emperor was too sacred to become involved in any mundane political affairs. In fact, Lee Hong-koo, special assistant to Roh, argues that only words from the Emperor were likely to satisfy most Koreans, since "[e]verything was done in the name of the emperor" ("Korea, Japan at odds," 1990, p. 8). With the "Great Empire of Japan" as a slogan of Japan's wartime imperialism in Southeast Asia (Suzuki, 2017), the Emperor System was designed to function as a structure of authority by military fascists. An indigenous religion is a particularly important source of symbolism and appeals to authority in any culture. In Japan, Shintoism is very important precisely because the religion plays a crucial role in defining a common cultural identity. The symbolic construction exploits the Emperor's "divine position," and uses the power of religious and state affiliation to foster a number of myths designed to influence the self-image and loyalty of Japanese citizens. In addition, during Japan's occupation from 1910 to 1945, the Korean people were forced to speak Japanese and adopt Japanese names. By the end of World War II, some two million Koreans had been brought to Japan, many forcibly, and made to work in munitions plants, to serve as soldiers of the Imperial Army, and to serve as prostitutes for Japanese troops (Kajimura, 1977). Therefore, as the Korea Herald contends, "[Japanese] atrocities have left deep wounds in Koreans, not to mention their deprivation of Korea's sovereign rights" ("Unequivocal apology," 1990, p. 8). The second reason for the Korean request was that whereas the authority of the Japanese Prime Minister was less than that of the South Korean President, the authority of the Emperor was considered as equal to that of the president. Hence, the apology provided by the Emperor was more likely to ease Korean frustration than Kaifu's. Kim Young-won (1990) identifies two difficulties inherent in any summit-level meetings between Korea and Japan:

34

Chapter Two For one thing, a Korean President is both head of state and chief executive, whereas in Japan, the head of state is the emperor and the chief executive is the prime minister. For another, both Japanese and Koreans are notorious for their insistence on appearance, pomp and circumstance, as perhaps any full-blooded Orientals ought to be. (p. 8)

Thus, the ethos factor plays a significant role in summit-level meetings between Korea and Japan. The Prime Minister's apology would not carry enough weight to express Japanese sincerity if it were not accompanied by remarks of an apology from the Emperor. Under these circumstances, Roh was required to provide a reply in front of Akihito, and the Korean people were paying serious attention to Roh's reply. Thus, Roh was expected not only to acknowledge the apology but to "heal the nation's wound." The dual purpose of Roh's reply to Akihito's apology made the situation extremely complex in preparing and providing the apologia and its reply.

Different Reactions from Different Audiences It is striking that the interpretation of Akihito's apology varied so much from Japanese to Korean media. The interpretation of one English-edition Japanese weekly was that it could end Koreans' historical misgivings toward Japan. The Japan Economic Journal reports that Roh's visit "paved the way for the two countries to put the past behind them and enter a new relationship for the next century": This time Roh said he was satisfied with Emperor Akihito's words. "Our nation," the president said, "must now forge a new era of friendship and cooperation based on a proper historical perspective, putting the mistakes of the past truly behind us. It is significant that Your Majesty has shown deep concern about his matter." ("Roh visit opens," 1990, p. 7)

Thus, this English Language weekly in Japan takes Akihito's sincerity at face value, citing a similar comment from Roh. On the other hand, major Korean independent newspapers regard Akihito's apology so negatively that his remarks risked being negated completely. The Joongang Daily News, for example, chastised its readership:

A Genre Criticism of Apologetic Discourse

35

[...] the Korean people cannot accept Akihito's remarks as a frank apology. Furthermore, we cannot read or sense an honest feeling from what he said [....] we do not want such a rhetoric flourish, but call on Japanese to keep a feeling of apology in their heart. (cited in "Japanese apology," 1990, p. 2)

Hence, the domestic newspaper concludes that Roh's visit failed to influence the Korean people positively, and contested that continued efforts were necessary for the Japanese attitude to show improvement. Whereas Akihito's statement was not something the Korean public could accept as an apology, Korean officials declared that the apology issue had been resolved by Akihito's remarks. Korean officials stated that they appreciated the apology and repentance expressed by the Emperor. For instance, Kim Chong-wil (1990), special assistant to the President for diplomatic and national security affairs, comments: "Akihito's statement clearly mentioned his country as the one that inflicted the damage and suffering on the Korean people. Considering the restrictions on him, I think the Emperor showed maximum sincerity" ("Maximum sincerity," p. 35). Thus, the Korean government considered Akihito's apology to be acceptable. Korean officials accepted Akihito's remarks as an apology although there was no direct mention of the war, or Japan's colonization of the Korean Peninsula. Nor did Akihito's statement contain any direct words of apology such as Kaifu's. Actually, Kaifu (1990) states: "I am deeply repentant and extend a frank apology about the fact that the Korean people suffered unbearable hardships and sorrow because of the activities committed by my country" ("Akihito's voices," p. 1). Given the diversity in terms of audience reaction, Akihito and Roh's rhetorical act merits consideration in terms of strategies, outcomes, and cultural-ethos. Especially, since their rhetorical act is viewed as "the joint creation of rhetor and audience, emphasizing the audience's active, participatory role" (Campbell, 1982, p.2). Central to the discussion is what joint-efforts are demonstrated by Akihito and Roh, how they are interpreted by different audiences and why, on this historically entangled issue. Through an analysis of the apology controversy, I hope to demonstrate the cross-cultural and historical implications of the apologetic discourse.

36

Chapter Two

Akihito’s Rhetoric as an Apology to the Korean People The body of Akihito's speech is composed of two major sections whose first section included an apology, according to the Japanese side’s understanding (Akihito, 1990). To begin with, Akihito (1990) mentions the history between Korea and Japan: "The Korean Peninsula and Japan, since ancient times, have maintained close contact as close neighbors" (p. 4). This reference to the old favorable relationship is designed to appeal to the feelings of both Koreans and Japanese. Such a beginning is needed since they have been bogged down in a delicate, yet potentially volatile, diplomatic feud over the making of an apology. Here it is clear that there is inter-textuality between Akihito's apology and his late father Hirohito's remarks in 1984. Before providing his own words of apology, Akihito (1990) goes on to quote his late father Hirohito: However, while looking back upon the history of long, fruitful exchanges between the Korean Peninsula and Japan, I recall what was stated by the late Emperor Showa: "it is indeed regrettable that there was an unfortunate past between us for a period in this century and I believe that it should not be repeated again." (p. 4: emphases added)

With regard to the apology issue, the Hirohito statement serves as a basis for the phrasing of Akihito's okotoba, or "august words." Hirohito's remarks have been a target of harsh criticism by the Korean people because of their ambiguity. In 1984 while hosting a state banquet for former South Korean President Chun Doo-hwan, Hirohito referred ambiguously to the annexation and ensuing rule as fukouna kako, or the "unfortunate past" and makotoni ikan, or "indeed regrettable" without mentioning the physical suffering Koreans experienced. As Newsweek (1990) reports, "Many Koreans took Hirohito's comment as further proof that the Japanese dismiss their suffering with imperial disdain" ("Era," p. 16). Hirohito's statement did little to placate South Korean sensitivities, thereby, influencing and forcing constraints on Akihito in his apology. In fact, the Korean government had requested that "the statement of apology by Akihito include not only an expression of regret for the wrongdoing but a reference to who committed what to whom" ("Invitation," 1990, p. 1). Some Koreans even felt that what the Japanese regretted was that they had lost the war ("Korea, Japan at odds," 1990, p. 8), and so asserted that Akihito should go further in apologizing for Japan's occupation of Korea than his late father had. As Korean Ambassador to

A Genre Criticism of Apologetic Discourse

37

Japan Lee Won-kyung argues, therefore, that the Korean Government could not accept any Hirohito-style apologetic remarks ("Seoul will continue," 1990, p. 1). Yet, ironically, it is just such a constraint that forces Akihito to quote his late father. Without mentioning Hirohito's remarks, Akihito would run the risk of rendering his father's words obsolete, or suggesting that the late emperor was less than sincere in expressing his "regret." At the same time, this allusion is likely to ease the criticism from the Japanese hard-liners claiming that "the apology issue between Japan and South Korea had already been settled in the past" (Shibata, 1990, p. 3). Following the citation of Hirohito's remarks, Akihito (1990) provides his own comments on the "unfortunate period": I think of the sufferings your people underwent during this unfortunate period, which was brought about by my country, and cannot but feel the deepest regret. (p. 4: emphasis added)

Thus, Akihito expresses "his deepest regret," while clearly mentioning that "his country" inflicted suffering on the Korean people during Japan's colonial rule over Korea. Obviously, Akihito accepts the Korean demand to identify the wartime agent of action and victim, i.e., who committed what to whom, in his apology. To end the first section, Akihito (1990) discusses "the revival of Japan-Korea friendship": Having gone through such an era, the relationship between our two countries has been restored to normality, thanks to the staunch enthusiasm of those people in both countries, in all circles and at all levels, who have wished for the revival of Japan-Korea friendship, and we now witness friendly and cooperative relations in all fields. (p. 4)

Thus, he concludes the historical argument by showing a forward-looking perspective. Such a perspective is necessary not only in that any proposal based upon such a perspective would be perceived as forward-looking and open-minded, but also in that anyone opposed to the proposal would be perceived as backward-looking and narrow-minded. Given the diplomatic feud over the making of an apology, the implications are so important as to create a milestone in the history of Japan and South Korea. As far as historical arguments are concerned, however, Akihito presents no political statement nor personal apology. The phrase referring

38

Chapter Two

to the "unfortunate period" is tsuuseki no nen, or "the deepest regret." Although it is interpreted as "the deepest regret" in the English transcript prepared by the Japanese Government, the word tsuuseki3 invites criticism from Korean People because of its obscurity in Korean literature.4 For instance, Lee Jung-keel (1990), correspondent for South Korea's Yonhap News Agency, asserts that the Emperor could have used "easier-to-understand words" in expressing his feelings: The expression is "rather old" and Koreans today rarely use the Chinese character (for tsuuseki) in their publications at home. [...] Those who learned the Chinese characters will understand the meaning, but the so-called younger Hangul generation will not. ("Apology draws," p. 2)

In the second major section, Akihito (1990), as the symbol of Japan, hopes that Japan and South Korea would play an important global role for peace and prosperity: I earnestly hope that the people of our two countries will further deepen their mutual understanding, make the relations between the two countries increasingly mature, and jointly respond to this challenge. (p. 4)

Then, Akihito (1990) discusses the future friendly relationship between Japan and South Korea: "I feel particularly reassured to see active exchanges between young people, who are to take over responsibility in the coming age, and the emergence from these exchanges of a new friendship to unite the two countries" (p. 4). To conclude his address, Akihito (1990) emphasizes the significance of Roh's state visit to Japan as "a foundation for such a new relationship between our two countries into the 21st century" (p. 4). Thus, Akihito's address, structured chronologically, in the first section focuses upon their past history, and in the second section upon the future Japan-Korea relationship. The organizational pattern successfully contrasts the past with the future between the two countries.

Roh’s Rhetoric of Reply to the Apology Roh's reply to Akihito's address is a functions: first, as the head of state of for Akihito's apology; and, second, to forge a new era of friendship (Roh,

rhetorical endeavor to serve twin South Korea, to show appreciation advocate that the two nations now 1990). The first task is far more

A Genre Criticism of Apologetic Discourse

39

difficult to accomplish than the second: yet, it is a precondition for the other. At the outset, Roh (1990) attaches special significance to the occasion by mentioning the name of Japan's new era, Heisei: It is a great pleasure for me to visit Japan at the opening of the new Heisei era with your ascension to the throne. And I consider it of utmost significance that today, I have this historic opportunity to get to know Your Majesty and personally congratulate you on your becoming emperor. I pay tribute to Japan for having risen from the ashes of war and rebuilt itself into a peaceful and prosperous nation that is the envy of the world. I am convinced that the Heisei era will see peace, prosperity and fellowship enhanced not only in Japan but also throughout East Asia and the whole world. (p. 4: emphasis added)

As expressed in his address, Roh identifies the name of Japan's new era, Heisei, as the transitional moment for South Korea and Japan. Specifically, there are two implications in his strategy. First, the use of era names, or gengou, 5 is the symbolic representation of national sovereignty. In Southeast Asia, it was formerly the custom of weaker countries to reckon years according to the era of whatever major countries they were under the control of at the time. Stronger countries, therefore, were proud of their era system as evidence of their independence (Nippon Steel Human Resources Development, 1997). Hence, any mention of the nation's era name could be considered as recognizing the superior power of such a nation, or at least as recognition, for its authority and independence. Second and more importantly, Roh's reference to Heisei is an identification of shared cultural knowledge with the Japanese people since it is closely associated with the imperial throne. In the latter half of the nineteenth century, the Japanese Diet decided that each emperor's reign would constitute one era although the practice has come under criticism from time to time since then.6 The year in which an Emperor ascended to the throne would be the first year of a new era that would continue until his death.7 For instance, the last era named Showa, which literally meant "Enlightened Peace," began in 1926 and ended in its sixty-fourth year, 1989. Although Akihito had been Emperor since the death of his father Emperor Showa, on the 7th of January 1989, he had to wait until the 22nd of November 1990 to be officially enthroned. The day, decreed as sacred

40

Chapter Two

by the Taiho legal code adopted from China nearly 1,300 years ago, marked the end of the long mourning period. Just as the late Emperor served as a symbol of Japan's dark militarist past and then as a revered totem of its miraculous rebirth, many Japanese saw Akihito as an incarnation of a new era (Weisman, 1990). In this regard, Heisei, which literally means "Peace Achieved," could function as a condensation symbol for both nations to achieve a new era of peace and friendship. In short, there is always the sincere hope and desire to realize the intended message in each era name represented by its short two-character symbol. David Zarefsky and Victoria J. Gallagher (1990) explain that condensed symbols are different from referential symbols in that the condensed symbols designate no clear referent but condense into a symbol a host of different meanings and connotations which might diverge if more specific referents were attempted.8 Roh (1990), then, echoes Akihito's historical comments: "From time immemorial to the present, the two countries of Korea and Japan have had close contacts as neighbors" (p. 4). This is an appeal to the emotions of the Korean and Japanese people since he wants to alter the situation following the thirty-five years of Japan's colonization and the twenty-five years of normalized official relations. In handling the war responsibility issue, Roh (1990) utilizes a strategy to contrast the old with the modern age: We have shared many good things together but in more modern times, we experienced a painful phase also. Compared with the long history of neighborly and amicable association, however, the dark period was a relatively short one. (p. 4)

Here, the "dark period" metaphor implies that when the Sun rises, a bright period would come after the dark hours even in the history of South Korea and Japan. To proceed into the most sensitive part, Roh (1990) employs a less inflammatory approach: It is not possible to erase or forget historical facts. Nevertheless, we must not remain bound up in memories. Our two nations must now forge a new era of friendship and cooperation based on a proper historical perspective, putting the mistakes of the past truly behind us. (p. 4)

Thus, Roh mentions that "what is already done cannot be undone," and argued that a new relationship could and should be achieved in order to

A Genre Criticism of Apologetic Discourse

41

put old mistakes truly behind them. Roh (1990) goes on to acknowledge: "It is significant that Your Majesty, the symbol of Japanese history and the new Japanese nation, has shown deep concern about this matter" (p. 4). Thus, he recognizes Akihito as "the symbol of Japanese history and the new Japanese nation" by accepting his remarks of apology. To conclude the historical discussion, Roh (1990) contends with a forward-looking and open-minded posture, as Akihito employs in his apology: [...,] all of us now should strive together to remove the dark shadow of history and negative residues of the past that have stood in the way of developing our bilateral ties. In that way, we should be able to bequeath wholesome bilateral ties to our posterity. (p. 4)

Thus, Roh chooses to fulfill the role, or rhetorical persona, of a forward-looking statesman. In playing such a persona, any proposal made by Roh also would be viewed as forward-looking and open-minded, and anyone opposed to the proposal would be perceived as backward-looking and narrow-minded, as has been argued above. His use of the forward-looking posture is significant for two reasons. First, it echoes Akihito's use of the same perspective, thus, accepting his invitation. Second, it is far more difficult, though necessary, for South Korea as a former victim of Japan to depict itself as such. At the same time, his attitude was to pre-empt criticisms from Korean conservatives since Roh's impending visit to Japan had been a target for dispute in Korea over whether the Japanese government would meet their demand for an explicit apology. Some Korean diplomats argued that given Roh's declining popularity and continuing problems pertaining to the consolidation of three political parties without public consultation, it was difficult for him to pay an official visit to Japan without the assurance of a clear-cut imperial apology (Suzuki, 1991). Had Roh criticized or rejected Akihito's remarks, he would have committed political suicide since it was his own decision to make a state visit to Japan. In the latter half of the address, Roh (1990) presents his proposals to cope with the twenty-first century which is "now fast approaching in the midst of tremendous upheavals": The burning human desire for freedom and prosperity has rubbed the Cold War structure, drastically reshaping the global political landscape. Freedom

42

Chapter Two and democracy, ideals which both Korea and Japan have been pursuing, have begun to prevail as universal values. (p. 4)

Hence, this line of argument leads naturally to a contention that Korea and Japan should carry out substantial action in the field of international politics. Calling the twenty-first century "the Asia-Pacific age," Roh (1990) repeats the words of Akihito regarding Korea and Japan's increasingly important global role: [...,] the relationship between Korea and Japan is therefore not a matter of importance for our two countries alone. For our two nations ought to combine our efforts to take a leading role in promoting peace and prosperity throughout the Asia-Pacific region, an area which will become the cradle of a new civilization harmoniously blending things East and West. Furthermore, our two nations should together make ever greater contributions to global prosperity and well-being. This, I believe, is our responsibility before humanity and history. (p. 4)

Thus, Roh suggests that the new century represents a transcending paradigm to open the new page of history for Korea and Japan. Here, Roh's reasoning functions as a powerful argument, in the sense that, once the presumption of the two countries' increasingly important global role is granted, an enthymeme is put in place. The enthymeme occurs only when the speaker and audience act jointly to produce it. Lloyd F. Bitzer (1959) explains: Because they are jointly produced, enthymemes intimately unite speaker and audience and provide the strongest possible proof. [...] Since rhetorical arguments, or enthymemes, are formed out of premises supplied by the audience, they have the virtue of being self-persuasive. Owing to the skills of the speaker, the audience itself helps construct the proofs by which it is persuaded. (p. 408)

Given the greater role that the two countries should play for "global prosperity and well-being," both Japanese and Korean people need to convince themselves that the two countries could no longer squabble over the past. In the final section, Roh (1990) makes an allusion to two persons to whom Akihito and Roh are compared:

A Genre Criticism of Apologetic Discourse

43

Looking back, Honshu Amenomori, who was in charge of Japanese relations with the Chosen [the Japanese name for Korea] Kingdom some 270 years ago, had as his motto, "sincerity and good faith." Hyon Tog-yun, his Korean counterpart, built Songshindang, the Hall of Sincerity and Good Faith, in Tongnae and met Japanese envoys there. (p. 4)

Thus, he points to "sincerity and good faith" as characteristics to describe two diplomatic figures of the two countries. Roh (1990) realizes the importance of such qualities since he goes on to say: "I believe the future of Korea-Japan relations will be bright so long as we endeavor together with good faith and trust to build our ties from a global perspective" (p. 4: emphasis added). Finally, Roh (1990) concludes his speech by referring to Heisei once again: "Please join me in toasting the good health, longevity and well-being of their majesties and the boundless prosperity of Japan in the newly-opened Heisei era" (p. 4: emphasis added). Thus, Roh associates the name of the newly opened era with the beginning of a friendly relationship between South Korea and Japan.

Historical Implications Drawn from Critical Analysis As far as historical arguments are concerned, there are three implications which can be drawn from critical analysis. First, the influence of ethos should be taken seriously in attempting to understand intercultural communication, especially, the relationship of rhetoric and persuasion. Namely, the analysis illustrates the important role that ethos-factors played in the apology issue between Akihito and Roh. Concerning the relationship of culture and ethos, Okabe (1989) advocates the concept of "achieved ethos" and "ascribed ethos" (pp. 555-56), which are quite different from the Aristotelian definition of ethos. Achieved ethos is constituted by such qualities as intelligence, competence, and character as the evidence of being potent in communication. Ascribed ethos, on the other hand, is constituted by such qualities as seniority, sex, and family background. It is essential to realize that ascribed ethos has a particular importance in low-context cultures such as Japan or South Korea, while achieved ethos has more significance in a law-context society such as the United States. Context is a concept introduced by Edward T. Hall (1989) to describe the influence of culture on the perception of situational cues in interpreting meaning, 9 and it is the background for the interpretation of the explicit verbal message. In some

44

Chapter Two

cultures the verbal message may not carry as much meaning as the other informational cues in the surrounding context. According to Hall (1989), low-context communication occurs when the majority of the meaning is in the explicit verbal message; spoken or written verbal messages carry the primary meaning. In contrast, high-context communication occurs when a large part of the meaning is implicit or taken from the contextual cues, rather than from the verbal message. High-context communication is more likely to take place in Japanese society, for instance, which is often described as homogeneous in terms of race, language and basic value orientations.10 Okabe (1989) further maintains that a low-context society tends to regard rhetoric as a vehicle to persuade others during public forums, placing greater emphasis on "doing," or individuals' results and achievements (pp. 560-61). That is, the society can be viewed as achieved ethos-oriented. On the other hand, a high-context society tends to view rhetoric as a means of disseminating information or of seeking consensus among community members, placing greater emphasis on "being," or faith and innate commonalty. Namely, the society can be considered to be ascribed ethos-oriented. Richard D. Rieke and Malcolm O. Sillars (1993) define argumentation as the process of advancing, supporting, modifying, and criticizing claims so that the appropriate decision-makers may grant or deny adherence. This audience-centered definition has been supported by a number of American theorists of argumentation. Although ethos does play a part in persuasion in Western society, ideally it plays a role only insofar as it is related to the argument. However, some American scholars point to the primacy of ethos-factor in Japanese argumentation. Lawrence W. Beer (1984), for instance, presents a comparative analysis of Japanese and Western communication patterns. Describing how social structures and values have shaped the communication patterns of the Japanese, Beer (1984) argues that the heavy emphasis on group orientation privileges results in consensual rather than adversarial patterns of decision-making. Also, inhibiting majoritarian decision-making is respect for hierarchy, seniority, men, and family. A consensual mode of decision-making presumes that an argument's validity rests upon the standing of the speaker, rather than on its internal logic. Therefore, Catherine Palczewski (1989) even concludes that in Japan the standing of the speaker is virtually the absolute determinant of the validity of an argument. The above analysis explains why the South Korean request for an imperial apology created a heated debate among the Japanese people. It is

A Genre Criticism of Apologetic Discourse

45

simply awe-inspiring to request the authority11 to utter august words of apology in Japanese society. In addition, those words shall and should be no target for criticism, or even evaluation, after delivery. The second implication is that whereas the Japanese people could easily justify the august words of the Emperor and accept their authority, the Korean people found it difficult to accept his utterance as a sacred apology. The ethos-factor again explains why the joint rhetorical efforts of Akihito and Roh received such different reactions from the Koreans and Japanese. In effect, an ascribed ethos has a powerful influence only within the culture in which the ascribed ethos is created, preserved, and respected. Where there are no normative agreements concerning values, origins, and ideals, totally different reactions could be provided from two different cultures. As a result, the same person's authority could be accepted fully or rejected completely according to the normative agreements of community members. A mere utterance of apologetic remarks could never convince Koreans of the Emperor's sincerity because they simply do not take his ascribed ethos for granted. Although the Japanese people were satisfied with the Emperor's utterance per se, it was natural for the Korean people to demand explicitness and substance in his apology. Moreover, what made things more complicated was that by calling for a stronger and more clear-cut apology from Akihito, the Korean people were being trapped tightly in a paradox. The paradox, as has been revealed already in this essay, was not well understood by the Korean people. That is, under the post-war Constitution of Japan, Akihito as a mere symbol of Japan, not as a head of the state, had the authority to represent Japan, but had no authority to make any worldly political statements. Hence, not only did the request for a genuine apology from Akihito involve him in real-world political matters but it strengthened his genuine authority. The worst outcome would be that the Korean demand would restore Japan's pre-war Imperial System, giving politicians the power to do anything they desired, including resorting to war. Accordingly, Roh's visit could be viewed as only a diplomatic, rather than political, victory. His reply was persuasive only in terms of edifying and exhorting the two countries' diplomatic need to cope with the world trend. Roh, however, accepted too quickly the crafted apologetic remarks of Akihito, for he (1990) "needed a diplomatic victory to offset increasing pressures at home, and so was ready 'to build a new era of friendship and cooperation'" ("Haunted," p. 38). It was unfortunate for Roh that many Koreans were rather dissatisfied with Akihito's apology. According to Asiaweek (1990), "A South Korean newspaper published a survey of May

46

Chapter Two

28 which stated that more than 70% of those polled thought the Emperor's apology was insufficient" ("Haunted," p. 38). There was a possibility, however, that the real significance of Roh's decision to visit Japan would be quantifiable in the future. As the Emperor states, the South Korean president's visit to Japan was almost epoch-making "in the long and entangled relations between the two" (Akihito, 1990, p. 4). Indeed, there were a number of vital policy areas where South Korea desired Japan to take action. Some of them certainly included the improvement of the status of Korean residents in Japan, the increase of technological transfers to South Korea, and an international policy initiative to ease the tension in the Far East ("Renewal," 1990). The final and most important implication of the Akihito-Roh speeches is that the political performance of the Emperor could pose another political controversy for the Japanese people, considering the constitutional limit of his role. The post-war Constitution of Japan, article 4, stipulates that "[t]he Emperor [as the symbol of the State] shall perform only such acts in matters of state as are provided for in this Constitution and he shall not have powers related to government" (Japan, 1993, p. 229). As has been argued, only under the pre-war Imperial Ruling system, could it be demanded of the Emperor as the head of state--that he deliver an apology, or an amende honorable. Yasuo Sugihara (1990), a Japanese historian, indicates that defining the Emperor as the symbol of Japan and restricting him to perform actions in this regard is the "very reflection on Japan's wartime conduct....as the highest legislative body the Diet should have written the law to specify the Emperor's role, or the Congress should have proposed guidelines for imperial diplomacy. They neglected both tasks, and instead let the Emperor come to the fore" (p. 24). The repetition of a politically-concluded bargain like the Akihito-Roh meeting would inevitably increase the stately duties and powers of the Emperor in the future.

Theoretical Implications of the Akihito-Roh Rhetorical Act The rhetorical analysis of Akihito and Roh's speeches has illustrated how apology in this case took different strategies from a Western rhetorical genre called apologia. To begin the discussion, Ware and Linkugel's (1973) four modes of resolution of the apologia can be summarized as follows:

A Genre Criticism of Apologetic Discourse

47

(1) denial, the simple disavowal by the speaker of any participation in, or relationship to, positive sentiment toward whatever it is that repels; (2) bolstering, the speaker's attempts to identify him/herself with something viewed favorably by the audience; (3) differentiation, the speaker's particularization of the charges at hand which moves the audience toward a new and less abstract perspective; and (4) transcendence, the speaker's attempts to move the audience's attention away from the particulars of the charges at hand toward a more abstract and general view of his/her character. (pp. 273-83) According to Ware and Linkugel (1973), denial is an instrument of negation; bolstering is a source of identification. Both strategies are reformative in the sense that they do not alter the audience's meaning for the cognitive elements involved. In contrast, differentiation and transcendence are transformative in the sense that any such strategy affects the meaning the audience attaches to the manipulated attribute. They (1973) also have asserted that since the speech of self-defense must contain both reformative and transformative strategies, there are four "sub-genres" within the genre of apologia which combine one element from each strategy: (1) absolution, combining primarily denial and differentiation strategies; (2) vindication, using essentially denial and transcendental strategies; (3) explanation, highly dependent upon bolstering and differentiation strategies; and (4) justification, based mostly on bolstering and transcendental strategies. (pp. 273-83) Thus, as Vartabedian (1985) contends, "Ware and Linkugel's system provides a clear framework for analyzing any [Western] apologetic effort" (p. 369). Once regarded as a joint effort, Akihito and Roh's speeches are almost an exception to the rule of Ware and Linkugel's system as far as reformative strategies are concerned. Rather than denying the charge, Akihito accepts the historical fact when he (1990) states: "I think of the sufferings your people underwent during this unfortunate period, which was brought about by my country, and cannot but feel the deepest regret"

48

Chapter Two

(p. 4). Akihito clearly hopes to show his sincerity and candidness in the discourse, and it was Roh (1990) who appreciated such an attitude, saying: "[i]t is significant that Your Majesty, the symbol of Japanese history and the new Japanese nation, has shown deep concern about this matter" (p. 4). As for the bolstering strategy, by quoting his late father's rather ambiguous statement, Akihito attempts to identify himself with something viewed unfavorably, i.e., Hirohito, by the Korean audience. The purpose of such a reference is to bolster Hirohito's sincerity, not to bolster Akihito's own ethos, though such a strategy ironically and consequently contributes to Akihito's speech, showing a sharp contrast with Hirohito's comment.12 On the contrary, the Akihito-Roh speeches could be better applied to Ware and Linkugel's transformative strategies. Akihito differentiates the unfortunate period from the normal period when he says, "Having gone through such an era, the relationship between our two countries has been restored to normality." This is an argument from definition. Defining the friendly relationship as "normal," it is implied that they should go back to "normal" and friendly relations from the "abnormal" and hostile relations at that time. Again, it is Roh (1990) who accepts such a view by saying that "[c]ompared with the long history of neighborly and amicable association, however, the dark period is a relatively short one" (p. 4). Thus, they distinguish the wartime period from the neighborly relationship before World War II. Here a key dissociation is employed by Roh. Dissociation is a strategy to break a previous unitary concept into parts for the purpose of rejecting one while accepting the other (Perelman & Olbrecht-Tyteca, 1971). Roh designs this argument to distinguish one historical episode from other historical periods. The transcendence, as a result, needs particular attention as it is related to the Akihito-Roh speeches. It is not Akihito but Roh who transcends the unfortunate period between Korea and Japan when Roh (1990) argues that "[i]t is not possible to erase or forget historical facts. Nevertheless, we must not remain bound up in memories. Our two nations must now forge a new era of friendship and cooperation based on a proper historical perspective, putting the mistakes of the past truly behind us" (p. 4: emphasis added).

A Genre Criticism of Apologetic Discourse

49

Notes 1

The term "rhetorical situation" was invented by Lloyd F. Bitzer. In his article, "The Rhetorical Situation," Bitzer (1968) argues that rhetoric is the result of a rhetor's encounter with, or response to, a situation consisting of an exigence, an audience, and a number of constraints, rather than discourse itself. Specifically, exigence is defined as "an imperfection marked by urgency; it is a defect, an obstacle, something wanting to be done, a thing which is other than it should be," (p. 7). The second constituent, "audience," is defined as "those persons who are capable of being influenced by discourse and of being mediators of change" and "must be distinguished from a body of mere bearers or readers" (p. 8). Finally, the third constituent of rhetorical situation, "constraints," is made up of "persons, events, objects, and relations which are parts of the situation because they have the power to constrain decision and action needed to modify the exigence. Standard sources of constraints include beliefs, attitudes, documents, facts, traditions, images, interests, motives and the like" (p. 6). Thus, Bitzer's situational theory provides a framework for critical analysis of social discourse in that the aim of speech is primarily to solve a problem caused by the exigence, but that an interpretation of the problem and a means to solve it depends on a rhetor. 2 For instance, Olson and Goodnight (1994) argue: "A social controversy is an extended rhetorical engagement that critiques, resituates, and develops communication practices bridging the public and personal spheres. The logic of such controversy include participation in governance, distribution and use of economic resources and opportunities, assumption of personal and collective identities and risks, redress of common grievances, assignments of rights and obligations, and the processes of social justice" (p. 249). 3 Kenkyusha's New Japanese-English Dictionary 4th ed. (1974), for instance, translates tsuuseki into such English words as "great sorrow; deep regret; lamentation" (p. 1893). 4 See, for semantic analyses, "Tsuuseki: ikisatsu to uketomekata." (1990); and "Tsuuseki: dou kaishaku?" (1990). 5 See, also, nengo (another Japanese name for era names) in Kodansha Encyclopedia of Japan. (1983), p. 330. 6 See, for the specific historical process, Gluck (1985). 7 The Japanese Government made an exception to let Emperor Akihito to step down before his death from the throne in 2017. 8 On the distinction between referential and condensation symbols, see also Sapir (1934). 9 See, for a comprehensive discussion of Hall's theory, Leeds-Hurwitz (1990). 10 See, for instance, Kunihiro (1975). 11 See, for a critical discussion of this form of authority, Barthes (1982). 12 The different Korean and Japanese reactions to Emperor Hirohito’s remarks pose a theoretical question with regard to connotative meaning of the text. It is generally considered important recognize the difference between a “polysemous” text and a “polyvalent” text (Ceccarelli, 1998). For example, Celeste Condit (1989)

50

Chapter Two

argues that there is a sensible differentiation between the two terms that change the way critics talk about multiple interpretations. According to her, polysemy is the condition where there is more than one dinotational meanings for a text; polyvalence is the condition where there is shared understanding of denotations of the text, but disagreement about the valuation of these denotations. As explained already, when the Korean people heard Hirohito’s remarks, they are too ambiguous to placate South Korean sensibilities in that it lacks the reference to who committed what to whom even though the Japanese peole assumed his remarks were clear and sincere enough. Thus, there was little shared understanding of donnoations of the text, but there was more than one connotative meanings for a text. On the other hand, the different Korean and Japanese reactions to Emperor Akihito’s remarks are an example of polyvalence.

A Genre Criticism of Apologetic Discourse

51

References Akihito. (1990, May 25). "Let's Deepen Mutual Understanding." Korea Herald, p. 4. "Akihito Voices 'Deepest Regret' for Japanese Colonial Rules." (1990, May 25). Korea Herald, p. 1. "Akihito's apology would be unconstitutional: LDP officials." (1990, May 15). Korea Herald, p. 1. "Apology draws mixed responses from Koreans and Japanese alike." (1990, May 25). Japan Times, p. 2. Barthes, R. (1982). "Center-City, Empty Canter." in (trans.) Richard Howard. Empire of signs. New York: Noonday Press, pp. 30-32. Beer, L. W. (1984). Freedom of expression in Japan: A study in comparative law, politics, and society. New York: Kodansha International. Bitzer, L. F. (1959). "Aristotle's Enthymeme Revisited." Quarterly Journal of Speech 45, 399-408. —. (1968). "The Rhetorical Situation," Philosophy and Rhetoric 1, 165-168. Campbell, K. K. (1982). Rhetorical act. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company. Ceccarelli, L. (1998). “Polysemy: Multiple Meaning in Rhetorical Criticism.” Quarterly Journal of Speech 84, 395-415. Chang, S. (1990, May 26). "The Imperial Okotoba." Korean Newsreview, p. 32. "Era of Bad Feelings." (1990, May 28). Newsweek, p. 16. Condit, C. M. (1989). “The Rhetorical Limits of Polysemy,” Critical Studies in Mass Communication 6, 103-122. Gluck, C. (1985). Japan's modern myth: Ideology in the late Meiji period. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Goodnight, G. T. (1991). “Controversy,” In Donn W. Parson (ed.), (pp. 1-13). Argument in Controversy: The Proceedings of the 7th SCA/AFA Conference on Argumentation, Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association. Hall, E. T. (1989). Beyond culture. New York: Anchor Books. "Haunted by the Past." (1990, June 8). Asiaweek, p. 38. "Invitation of Akihito to Seoul hinges on 'apology': official." (1990, May 17). Korea Herald, p. 1. Japan: An illustrated encyclopedia. (1993). Tokyo: Kodansha. Joongang Daily News, (1990, May 27). as quoted in "Japanese apology." Korea Herald, p. 2.

52

Chapter Two

Kajimura, H. (1977). Chosenshi (History of Korea). Tokyo: Kodansha. Kenkyusha's New Japanese-English Dictionary 4th ed. (1974). Tokyo: Kenkyusha, p. 1893. Kim, Young-won. (1990, May 22). "To wipe the slate clean." Korea Herald, p. 8. Kodansha encyclopedia of Japan. (1983). Tokyo: Kodansha, p. 330. "Korea, Japan at odds over apology." (1990, May 22). Korea Herald, p. 8. Kunihiro, M. (1957). "The Japanese Language and Intercultural Communication." in (ed.) Japan Center for Intercultural Exchange. The silent power: Japan's identity and world role. Tokyo: Simul Press, pp. 56-57. Leeds-Hurwitz, W. (1990). "Notes in the History of Intercultural communication: The Foreign Service Institute and the Mandate for Intercultural Training." Quarterly Journal of Speech 76, 262-281. "Maximum Sincerity." (1990, June 4). Time, p. 35. "News Analysis." (1990, May 27). Korea Herald, p. 2. Okabe, R. (1989). "Cultural Assumptions of East and West: Japan and the United States." in (eds.) James L. Golden, Goodwin F. Bergquist, and William E. Coleman. Rhetoric of Western Thought 4th ed. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, pp. 546-565. —. (1992). "seiji ni okeru benmei no komyunikeishyon" (Political communication of apologia), in Seiji komyunikeishyon [Political communication]. Tokyo: Yuhikaku, pp. 131-132. Olson, K. M., & Goodnight, G. T. (1994). "Entanglements of Consumption, Cruelty, Privacy, and Fashion: The Social Controversy over Fur." Quarterly Journal of Speech 80, 249-276. Palczewski, C. (1989). "Parallels between Japanese and American Debate." A paper presented to the Central States Communication Association Annual Conference, Kansas City, Missouri, April 14. Perelman, C., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1971). The new rhetoric: A treatise on argumentation. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press. "Renewal of Korea-Japan ties." (1990, May 24). Korea Herald, p. 8. Rieke, R. D., & Sillars, M. O. (1993). Argumentation: Critical decision making 3rd ed. New York: HarperCollins. Roh, Tae-woo. (1990, May 25). "Future of Our Relationship Bright: Roh." Korea Herald, p. 4. "Roh visit opens new era." (1990, June 2). Japan Economic Journal, p. 7. Sapir, Edward. (1934). "Symbolism." in Encyclopedia of the social sciences. (ed.) E. R. A. Seligman. New York: Macmillan. p. 492. "Seoul will continue to press Akihito for full apology." (1990, May 17).

A Genre Criticism of Apologetic Discourse

53

Korea Herald, p. 1. Shibata, T. "Okotoba." (1990, May 25). Tokyo Shimbun, p. 3. Sugihara, Y. (1990, June 8). "Tennou o ayamarutachiba ni okanaikotoga sengo no hansei dattanoni..." (The constitutional limit upon the Emperor as the very reflection on Japan's wartime conduct). Weekly Asahi, p. 24. Suzuki, T. (2017). The Rhetoric of Emperor Hirohito: Continuity and Rupture in Japan's Dramas of Modernity. Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. —. (1991). "President Roh at the Japanese Diet: Korea-Japan Partnership in the Asia-Pacific Age." Comparative Studies of Thoughts and Cultures between East and West 9, 114-128. "Tsuuseki: ikisatsu to uketomekata." (1990, May 25). Sankei Shimbun, p. 3. "Tsuuseki: dou kaishaku?" (1990, May 25). Nihon Keizai Shimbun, p. 3. "Unequivocal apology." (1990, May 13). Korea Herald, p. 8. "Use of Eras in Reckoning Years." (1997). (ed.) Nippon Steel Human Resources Development. Nippon: The Land and Its People 5th ed. Tokyo: Gakuseisha. Vartabedian, R. A. (1985). "Nixon's Vietnam Rhetoric: A Case Study of Apologia as Generic Paradox." Southern Speech Communication Journal 50, 273-283. Ware, B. L., & Linkugel, W. A. (1973). "They Spoke in Defense of Themselves: On the General Criticism of Apologia." Quarterly Journal of Speech 59, 273-283. Weisman, S. (1990, August 26). "Japan's Imperial Present." New York Times Magazine, pp. 28-31. Zarefsky, D., & Gallagher, V. J. (1990). "From 'Conflict' to 'Constitutional Question': Transformations in Early American Public Discourse." Quarterly Journal of Speech 76, 247-261.

CHAPTER THREE A RHETORICAL ANALYSIS OF CEREMONIAL ADDRESS: PRESIDENT ROH BEFORE THE JAPANESE DIET TAKESHI SUZUKI

On May 24th, 1990, South Korean President Roh Tae-woo delivered a speech at the Japanese Diet, under the theme of “Korea and Japan—New Relations in a Changing World” (1990, p. 2). Rho’s address before the Japanese Diet can and should be viewed as one of epideictic speaking to illustrate the ontological nature of rhetoric. As Aristotle states, in ceremonial oratory, a need for utterance is already given by the situation, or exigence. The purpose of a speech is primarily to solve the problem caused by the exigence, but the interpretation of this problem and the means to solve it depend upon a rhetor. In the following, therefore, I will elucidate Roh’s address at the Japanese Diet as a rhetorical discourse brought into existence as a response to the situation within the context of South Korea-Japan relations.

Roh’s Unique Rhetorical Situation In an attempt to describe, interpret, and evaluate rhetorical events, critical methodologies have been developed to assist critics’ efforts (Glaser & Frank, 1982). One such method is Lloyd F. Bitzer’s (1968) “rhetorical situation theory.” From this perspective, rhetoric is the result of a rhetor’s encounter with a situation consisting of an exigence, an audience, and a number of constraints. To identify the “rhetorical situation” which Roh faced, let me utilize Bitzer’s critical terminologies. According to Bitzer (1968), exigence is “an imperfection marked by urgency; it is a defect, an

A Rhetorical Analysis of Ceremonial Address

55

obstacle, something wanting to be done, a thing which is other than it should be” (p. 7). In the case of Roh, the exigence was clearly that he was the first South Korean head of state to address the Tokyo assembly, no less than forty-five years since Korea was liberated from Japan’s harsh colonization, and twenty-five years since the two countries normalized official relations. In fact, though his predecessor Chun Doo Hwan had made a state visit to Japan in September 1984, he did not speak at the Japanese Diet due to sharp opposition from the Japan Socialist Party and the Japanese Communist Party (“Let’s work together,” 1990). Tension regarding Roh’s visit were doubtless high as well. Thus, perhaps the most difficult task Roh had was how he should aim at putting an unhappy past behind the two East Asian neighbors and form a new era of friendship. Truly, Roh’s visit was rightly said “[to have been] centered on the concept of forming ‘future-oriented’ relations between Seoul and Tokyo” (“President Roh’s visit,” 1990, p. 2). Bitzer (1968) defines the second constituent of rhetorical situation, the audience, as “those persons who are capable of being influenced by discourse and of being mediators of change [and who] must be distinguished from a body of mere hearers or readers” (p. 8). Basically, Roh had two target audiences in mind as he delivered his speech at the Diet: the first and foremost audience was the Japanese parliament, implicitly followed by the powerful Japanese business community. He had seriously wanted Korea and Japan to be partners to shape an Asia-Pacific community in keeping with the current global trend of regional integration. The further cementing of Korea-Japan cooperative ties would positively influence their external policies, especially in Northeast Asia (“President Roh’s visit,” 1990). Behind such a proposal lay the awareness that “Korea needs help from Japan particularly in economic fields. […] The intensity may differ, but Japan also needs help from Korea, as it is now striving to secure political influence in the international community commensurate with its economic clout” (“President Roh’s visit,” 1990, p. 2). Finally, the third constituent of rhetorical situation, Bitzer (1968) argues, is constraints, which are “made up of persons, events, objects, and relations which are parts of the situation because they have the power to constrain decisions and actions needed to modify the exigence. Standard sources of constraints include beliefs, attitudes, documents, facts, traditions, images, interests, motives and the like” (p. 8). There was one more important constraint for Roh in addition to those addressed above. That is to say, Roh’s impending visit to Japan had become a target of the Korean people’s dispute over whether the Japanese government would

56

Chapter Three

meet his demand that Emperor Akihito offer an apology for Japan’s colonization of the Korean Peninsula from 1911 to 1945. Roh once stated, “Koreans expected a ‘clear apology’ from Emperor Akihito,” and that “most Koreans did not know whether Emperor Akihito’s late father, Hirohito, actually was offering an apology in 1984 when he said, ‘It is regrettable that there was an unfortunate past between the two countries,’ without specifying the assailant and victim” (“Korea, Japan,” 1990, p. 8). Some Korean diplomats argued that, given Roh’s declining popularity and the ongoing political problems pertaining to the consolidation of three political parties without public consultation, it was difficult for him to pay an official visit to Japan without the assurance of a clear-cut apology from Emperor Akihito. Consequently, Tokyo obliged and sent the apology text to Seoul, the product of weeks of tough and anxious negotiation between the two governments, prior to his visit. They worked out “a compromise solution to the issue by both sides making concessions” (“News analysis,” 1990, p. 2). It is already apparent thus far that there were a number of elements which made Roh’s address at the Japanese Diet unique. In the next section I will offer a rhetorical analysis of his address at the Diet to elucidate how it reshaped the narrative surrounding the relationship of the two nations and became a mediator of change.

An Analysis of Roh’s Speech at the Japanese Diet The historical address on Korea-Japan relations was, indeed, President Roh’s response to the pressing need to participate in the global trend of regional integration already manifest in Europe by the late 1980’s. Hence, the following analysis is an attempt to appraise the discourse primarily in terms of the significance which Roh attached to the occasion and the efficacy with which his proposed actions fulfilled his political capability. At the outset Roh begins with a salutation, stating that he is the first Korean head of state ever to speak at the Japanese Diet. Roh (1990) stresses the importance of the occasion, especially because his appearance is “a consequence of many insightful leaders in the cause of future Korea-Japan relations … over a turbulent history” (p. 5). Thus, Roh argues that he is delivering his message at the Japanese Diet not by accident, but as a result of efforts made by his and the Diet members’ predecessors. Following this initial reference to the occasion at hand, the structure of Roh’s speech (1990) can be divided into three major sections: situation, framework, and actions to be taken. In the first section, Roh talks

A Rhetorical Analysis of Ceremonial Address

57

primarily about the international situation surrounding Korea and Japan. Initially, Roh rightly assumes that “now is the time for the two nations to display genuine mutual respect and understanding, and become next-door neighbors in spirit as well as geographically” (p. 5). His turn of phrase, “Now is the time for…,” is key, in that it indicates his positive, forward-looking posture. Roh (1990) subsequently expresses his “frank view” that in spite of “a new world order emerging to replace the Cold War structure, [the world] is still shrouded in the mist of uncertainties,” and that such uncertainties “also plague the future of the world economy” (p. 5). This line of argument leads naturally to a call to action, particularly within the fields of bilateral trade and world politics. Therefore, he acknowledges that “[w]e greatly appreciate Japan’s endeavor to meet its noblesse oblige (=superior advantages that bind it to being more generous to others)” (p. 5: parenthesis is mine). He goes on to indicate that “[t]he Republic of Korea is also vowing to fulfill its international responsibilities commensurate with its new status and capabilities” (p. 5). In his aforementioned statements, the implied argument is that Japan and South Korea should further strive to meet their international responsibilities. Then, Roh (1990) offers Korean-unification as the most pragmatic and necessary goal for the region to contribute to the well-being of the world: The peace and unification of the Koran Peninsula is not only the Korean people’s own paramount goal, but [also] a most important way to contribute to the well-being of this region in particular and the world at large. (p. 5)

Here Roh is presenting his idealistic principles; using the “god terms,” peace and unification; to reorder the hierarchy of concerns in the Northeast Asian region. In this context, we should consider the words “peace” and “unification” as “god terms,” as they are employed specifically to convey an ultimate, positively-charged value. As Karlyn Kohrs Campbell (1972) explains, “In rhetorical discourse a god term functions as an organizing principle that orders into a hierarchy of relationships. The term symbolizes an ultimate value reflected in attitudes and actions or a fundamental principle unifying patterns of beliefs” (p. 68). A “devil term,” on the other hand, embraces a universal value that is generally regarded as bad or unfavorable. For instance, Makiko Tsutsui (1990) notes that “the Korean Peninsula is one of the most strained areas in the world, and even now over a million armed

58

Chapter Three

forces are confronted around the north latitude 38 borderline” (p. 29). Thus, there is no question that to Korean people, “peace” and “unification” are “god terms” (For further discussion of “god terms” and “devil terms,” see Weaver, 1953; Burke 1969). Next, Roh (1990) argues that few other countries have been as tormented as Korea over the last century by using such “devil terms” as “invasion,” “war,” and “confrontation” (p. 5). He tells us that Seoul is determined to do everything in its power to achieve a single Korea: “We are resolved to strive to realize the peaceful unification of the Koran Peninsula without fail before the present century is out” (p. 5: emphasis added). At the end of the first section, Roh (1990) loosely draws on the then-ongoing process of German unification as added motivation and inspiration for the unification of the Korean Peninsula, stating that, “In view of the rapid changes now sweeping the world, as well as our people’s ardent wish for unification, a turn in inter-Korea relations would quickly lead to national integration” (p. 5). However, Roh makes it clear that Koran reunification has widespread ramifications beyond the case of the two Koreas, bluntly stating that “Our bilateral relationship is now no longer the concern of our two [Korean] nations alone but is also the basis and focal point for Asia-Pacific cooperation” (p. 5). Thus, in this section, Roh makes the case for reunification as a positive not only for the Korean peoples, but also for Japan, the region, and the greater international community. The second section of Roh’s address (1990) concerns the proposal he asserts that Korea and Japan should adopt for the future. Touching upon “a fragile peace” preserved by a balance of power, Roh argues: “The time has now come for Korea and Japan to begin earnest joint efforts to promote peace and prosperity in Northeast Asia” (p. 5). Specifically, he refers to a six-nation “Multi-national Northeast Asian Peace Conference,” about which he spoke previously before the United Nations General Assembly in late 1988. He points out that in view of current world trends, such a scheme to develop a regional organization is essential: “I think it a mandate of our time to develop an Asia-Pacific community in keeping with the current trends toward regional integration in this increasingly multipolar world” (p. 5). According to him (1990), Korea and Japan have already had sufficient time over the quarter-century since their relations were normalized to cement and shape “mutually beneficial interdependence” (p. 5). At the same time, Roh (1990) insists that “Korea’s development will

A Rhetorical Analysis of Ceremonial Address

59

also help strengthen the economy of East Asia as a whole” (p. 5). From such a “broad perspective,” Roh calls for continuing expansions and strengthening of trade and economic cooperation between South Korea and Japan. Specifically, the top priority should now be placed upon rectifying the chronic bilateral trade imbalance, and the secondary priority upon accelerated technology transfer and scientific cooperation. In defending these arguments, Roh (1990) suggests that Japan need not be overly concerned about increased competition as a result of its technological transfer for two reasons. One is that increased exports from South Korea have always led to increased imports from Japan on a similar scale. The other is that people traveling between the two countries have also contributed to their bilateral ties “in the political, economic, social, cultural, and other fields” (p. 5). Hence, as an industrial giant, Japan's further investment in South Korea would serve not only to meet its own international responsibilities, but also benefit the region, and even Japan itself, in the long run.㻌 The third section (1990) concerns the most important idea in his address: namely, re-orientating the perception of “history” between Korea and Japan, largely given the serious disconnect between the historical truth and the perceptions of many Japanese. The truth is that Japan forcibly colonized the Korean Peninsula before and during World War II. As part of this process, the Japanese government not only forced Koreans to adopt Japanese names, speak Japanese, and worship the Emperor, but also forcibly relocated several million Koreans to Japan as laborers; or army conscripts (Kajimura, 1977). The reality, however, is that many young Japanese are often unfamiliar with history, mostly because their standard secondary school textbook provides only half a page on the occupation of Korea; Most young Koreans, on the other hand, are well aware of the history because the equivalent Korean textbook devotes about sixty pages to the same period (Tsutsui, 1990). It is also important to note here that it is not just because of the coverage in textbooks that they know, but also because of the trauma or scars that their families and the older generation continued to suffer from to the present day. This again touches on the idea of national discourse—there was almost no way for young Koreans not to know about what Japan did, not simply because their textbooks covered it, but more importantly because the history of surviving colonization and the war became a big part of the Korean national identity.㻌 Proceeding to the final section, Roh (1990) points out that “there still remains a psychological barrier that hinders the evolution of genuine friendship between our two people” (p. 5). He also maintains that their

60

Chapter Three

mutual understanding and recognition of their shared past must be founded “on the basis of truth so that a bright future can be ensured for our bilateral relationship” (p. 5: emphasis added). Hence, it should be pointed out that Roh attempts to frame his arguments not solely in terms of Japan fixing its perception, but rather as a mutual effort between the two peoples. He is forced to ease the tension between truth and Japanese perceived reality with regard to the historical dispute. To do so, he employs what is known as a stipulative definition to orient the audience to his target subject matter. We can think of this rhetorical strategy as “a declaration of a meaning that is intended to be attached by the speaker to a word, expression, or symbol and that usually does not already have an established use in the sense intended” (Merriam-Webster, 2018). In this case, Roh provides his own definition of history: Even God cannot change what happened in the past. However, history is a question of how we interpret and understand things past. This means that depending on how we do it, now we have an opportunity to break off the shackles of the past and clean up negative residues of what went on in bygone days. All that is required is the courage and effort of all of us. (p. 5: emphasis added)

Thus, Roh defines history successfully as a transcendent paradigm to illustrate why we can attach a new meaning to the past depending upon what we do now and in the future. He attempts to suggest that “now” is the fulcrum for the future between Korea and Japan. Specifically, Roh (1990) demands improvements in the legal status of the 700,000 so-called zainichi Koreans who “have come to live in Japan by a quirk of history. Together with the Japanese, they went through the horror of the war, and after the war they participated in the reconstruction and development of their host country” (p. 5). He then identifies their current status as a negative legacy of the war: “Only when they become able to live in this land as good neighbors of the Japanese and without artificial inconvenience, will both our peoples feel genuine friendship to each other” (p. 5). What then should we do? To wipe out the “psychological barrier,” Roh contends: “Japan has now become a new country, much different from what it used to be. When Japan fully opens up a history and [sic] the world, it will be able to present a new image, especially to Asians” (p. 5). Finally, Roh (1990) concludes his address by imagining a future unified world : “Let [us] work together to forge the 21st century into an age

A Rhetorical Analysis of Ceremonial Address

61

in which young Japanese from Tokyo will be travelling to Seoul via an undersea tunnel beneath the Koran Straits to join their Korean friends on a journey to Beijing, Moscow, Paris and London on a tour of friendship to link continents and make all humanity one family” (p. 5). Thus, throughout his address, Roh has utilized “god terms” and “devil terms” effectively as organizing principles to shape a future for South Korea and Japan, having come to terms with their shared, conflicted past, as valuable allies working together for the benefit of each other, the region, and the world,

Conclusions and Implications Based upon the critical assessment of Roh’s address, there are two conclusions to be outlined. First, Roh achieved extraordinary success in terms of attaching significance to the rhetorical situation. The tone of all his remarks is indeed positive and forward-looking. For the immediate audience at the Japanese Diet and other individuals sharing the speaker’s beliefs, the address could even be considered as a masterpiece of future diplomatic principles; it reveals fundamental goals which we should pursue in the Northeast Asian region, one of which certainly includes Korean unification. For such an audience, the address provides an opportunity to consider the need for and meaning of peace in the context of the contemporary post-Cold War trend. His sheer desire to build cooperative ties between the two countries now makes sense, by ordering the situation, proposal, and necessary actions into a coherent structure, utilizing ultimate value terms. Thus, this rhetorical act validates his address as appropriate, justified, and intelligible. Roh’s address, however, is far less satisfactory in terms of the efficacy with which his proposed actions fulfilled his political capabilities. True, his decision to pay an official visit to Japan initiated some positive dialogue in Korea-Japan relations. For instance, after the “apology summit” between Roh and Kaifu, the Ministry of Education in Japan decided to “begin teaching the history of Japan-Korea relations” (“Japan will teach,” 1990, p. 5). Also, the Foreign Ministers of Korea and Japan agreed to develop a policy to replace the required fingerprinting system with a new system for people from former Japanese colonies within two years (“Fingerprint rule,” 1991, pp. 1 & 4). But Roh accepted too quickly the crafted remarks of Akihito’s apology, for he “needed a diplomatic victory to offset increasing pressures at home, and so was ready to ‘build a new era of friendship and cooperation’”

62

Chapter Three

(“Haunted by the past,” 1990, p. 5). Unfortunately, many Koreans were still dissatisfied with Emperor Akihito’s apology to the Korean people. According to Asiaweek, “A South Korean newspaper published a survey of May 28 which stated that more than 70% of those polled thought the emperor’s apology was insufficient” (“Haunted by the past,” 1990, p. 38). In addition, Roh failed to write out a prescription for rectifying a chronic trade imbalance and accelerating technological transfer between the two countries. Of course, it was difficult for anyone to form an instant consensus about such scenarios, since most Japanese bureaucrats consider these actions to be primarily “private” matters. Consequently, Roh’s victory was diplomatic rather than economic in nature. In the final analysis, Roh’s address is clearly successful in terms of edifying and exhorting South Korea’s and Japan’s diplomatic need to cope with world trends. This address can be viewed as a part of his future diplomatic strategy to mark a stepping stone for global peace. As Ch. Perelman and L. Olbrechts-Tyteca (1969) argue, the speaker [who is] engaged in epideictic discourse is very close to being an educator. Since what he[/she] is going to say does not arouse controversy, since no immediate practical interest is even involved, and there is no question of attacking or defending, but simply of promoting values that are shared in the community. […] [He/she] is so to speak, the educator of his[/her] audience, and if it is necessary that he[/she] should enjoy a certain prestige before he[/she] speaks, it is to enable him[/her], through his[/her] own authority, to promote the values that he[/she] is upholding. (p. 52)

In reality, a number of favorable chain-reactions succeeded Roh’s historical visit to Japan. For example, Roh established diplomatic ties with the Soviet Union in the following month. In September 1990, the leaders from North Korea and South Korea held a historic meeting for the first time after 40 years of political and military tension (“How to eat,” 1990). However, as a new page of history has just opened, the real significance of Roh’s address can be realized only when his proposals and visions are achieved in the future. Therefore, though its full significance can only be realized once his vision is achieved, this speech has served as an important call to action which has positively shaped Korea-Japan relations, the global position of Korea as a whole, and should be looked back on today as a meaningful benchmark in the ongoing tensions between the two nations.

A Rhetorical Analysis of Ceremonial Address

63

References Bitzer, L. F. (1968). “The Rhetorical Situation.” Philosophy and Rhetoric 1, 1-14. Burke, K. (1969). A Rhetoric of Motive. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, especially pp. 183-198. Campbell, K. K. (1972). Critiques of Contemporary Rhetoric. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company, Inc). “Fingerprint rule to end for Koreans.” (January 11, 1990). Japan Times, pp. 1& 4. Glaser, S. R. & Frank, D. A. (1982). “Rhetorical Criticism of Interpersonal Discourse: An Exploratory Study.” Communication Quarterly 30, 353-358. “Haunted by the past.” (1990, June 8). Asiaweek, p. 38. “How to eat a bowl of rice.” (1990, September 20). Newsweek Japan edition, p. 32. “Japan will teach history of relations with Korea.” (1990, May 31). Korea Herald, p. 5. Kajimura, H. (1977). Chosenshi [The History of Korea]. (Tokyo: Kodansha). “Korea, Japan at odds over apology.” (1990, May 15). Korea Herald, p. 8. “Let’s work together for future, Roh proposes in address to Diet.” (1990, May 26). Japan Times, as cited by M. Asano & H. Kizuka (1991). In World Events ’91. Tokyo: Kinseido, pp. 79-80. Merriam-Webster. (2018). “Definition of stipulative definition.” Retrieved December 14, 2019 from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/stipulative%20definition “News analysis.” (1990, May 27). Korea Herald, p. 2. Perelman, Ch., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1969). The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press. “President Roh’s visit keyed to future tie with Japan.” (1990, May 27). Korea Herald, p. 52. “Roh 1st Korean to address Diet.” (1990, May 26). Korea Herald, p. 2. Roh, T. (1990, May 26). “Excerpts from Diet Speech—Korea and Japan: new relations in a changing world.” Korea Herald, p. 5. Tsutsui, M. (1990, January 20). “Kankoku no kyokasho ni miru nihon” (Japan viewed through Korean school textbooks). In Hon no mado [The window of books]. Tokyo: Shogakukan, pp. 26-29. Weaver, R. (1953). The Ethics of Rhetoric. Chicago: Henry Regnery Company, especially pp. 211-232.

CHAPTER FOUR A PRAGMA-DIALECTICAL ANALYSIS OF QUEEN BEATRIX’S SPEECH AND EMPEROR AKIHITO’S REPLY TAKESHI SUZUKI AND FRANS H. VAN EEMEREN

Emperor Akihito’s first official visit to the Netherlands was seen as the highlight of the Japanese Imperial Couple’s four-nation European tour in 2000. There are two reasons for this view. First, Japan and the Netherlands were celebrating four centuries of ties that started in 1600 when the Dutch ship Liefde [Love] ran ashore at Usuki, Oita Prefecture. The other reason, however, is not as positive as the first: the relationship between Japan and the Netherlands had been damaged badly in the Second World War and among the Dutch anti-Japanese sentiment still lingered because of Japan’s wartime aggression. During the war, in the region that is now Indonesia, an estimated 14,000 Dutch soldiers and civilians were held captive by the Imperial Japanese Army. Although various events commemorating the four-hundredth anniversary of bilateral ties were scheduled during the Imperial Couple’s visit to the Netherlands, some Dutch people continued to be haunted by Japan’s colonization of the Dutch East Indies during World War II. A number of them had filed lawsuits seeking financial compensation over their treatment while in captivity.1 Given these conflicting reasons for attaching importance to the Imperial Couple’s visit, argumentative analysis of Queen Beatrix’s commemorative speech and Emperor Akihito’s apologetic one at the Royal Reception provides an opportunity to view how this conflict is managed in an important intercultural exchange. The analysis reveals culture-specific variations of argumentative practices in which different kinds of uses are made of the available argumentative means, particularly in regard to the

A Pragma-Dialectical Analysis of Queen Beatrix’s Speech and Emperor Akihito’s Reply

65

conceptions and uses of the Greco-Roman notion of ethos. In communication where people genuinely strive cooperatively to achieve a resolution of their differences, argumentative discourse involves a process of advancing, supporting, modifying, and criticizing claims so that a critical judge may grant or deny adherence (Rieke & Sillars, 1993). In this sense, apologetic discourse can be viewed as argumentative discourse that is aimed at finding a viable way of resolving the issue to the satisfaction of the parties concerned, so that they can avoid prolongation of the conflict or, worse, escalation into catastrophe. In the following, we analyze two crucial speeches made on the occasion of the Imperial visit against the historical background just explained. First, we sketch a general theoretical perspective on apologetic discourse. Second, we explain how argumentative discourse, including apologetic argumentative discourse, can be analyzed as a form of strategic maneuvering. Third, we analyze the strategic maneuvering in the Dutch Queen’s speech and the Japanese Emperor’s speech at a State Banquet in the Dam Palace on May 23, 2000. Fourth, we examine the Dutch people’s reaction to the Emperor’s apologia. Specifically, in an attempt to understand the relationship of rhetoric and efforts at reasonable persuasion in intercultural communication we concentrate on the role of ethos. We conclude our contribution with some general observations about the difference between apologetic discourse in the sense of the Occidental communicative action type traditionally known as apologia and apologetic discourse in a different sense that is culturally accepted in Japan.

A General Theoretical Perspective on Apologetic Discourse When discussing apologetic discourse we must, to begin with, distinguish between the speech act of apologizing and the more encompassing communicative action type of apologia. The illocutionary point of the speech act of apologizing is making excuses to the listener or reader for something negative that the speaker or writer feels responsible for. The speech event called apologia is a conventional action type in the Western cultural discourse tradition that generally entails a comprehensive public defense of something said or done that the speaker or writer is responsible for. Interestingly, such defenses are not part of the Japanese cultural tradition. Since the 1970s, American rhetorical critics have written a great deal

66

Chapter Four

about the generic boundaries of apologetic discourse (Butler, 1972; Ware & Linkugel, 1973; Kruse, 1981; Vartabedian, 1985; King, 1985). In their ground-breaking essay B.L. Ware and Wil A. Linkugel (1973) argue that an apologia is a speech of self-defense, a response to “an attack upon a person’s character, upon his[/her] worth as a human being,” and that “[t]he questioning of a [wo]man’s moral nature, motives, or reputation is qualitatively different from challenging his[/her] policies” (p. 274). Sherry Devereaux Butler (1972) examines apologia in terms of speakers’ endeavors to “repair their ethos,” which has been part of Western rhetorical tradition (p. 282). In essence, Ware and Linkugel (1973) assert that the apologia is “a custom of Occidental culture firmly established by Socrates, Martin Luther, Robert Emmet, and thousands of lesser [wo]men” (p. 273, emphasis added). Thus, rhetoric and argumentation scholars have made clear that apologia is an argumentative practice that is part of a firmly established tradition in Western culture. Specifically, Ware and Linkugel (1973) indicate four modes commonly available to be used in an apologia: (1) denial, the simple disavowal by the speaker of any participation in, or relationship to, positive sentiment toward whatever it is that repels; (2) bolstering, the speaker’s attempts to identify him/herself with something viewed favorably by the audience; (3) differentiation, the speaker’s particularization of the charges at hand, which moves the audience toward a new and less abstract perspective; and (4) transcendence, the speaker’s attempts to move the audience’s attention away from the particulars of the charges at hand toward a more abstract and general view of his/her character (pp. 273-83). According to Ware and Linkugel (1973), denial is an instrument of negation; bolstering is a source of identification. Both strategies are reformative in the sense that they do not alter the audience’s meaning of the cognitive elements involved. In contrast, differentiation and transcendence are transformative in the sense that any such strategy affects the meaning the audience attaches to the manipulated attribute. Ware and Linkugel have asserted that since a speech of self-defense must contain both reformative and transformative strategies, there are four “sub-genres” of apologia that combine one element from each strategy: (1) absolution, combining primarily denial and differentiation strategies; (2) vindication, using essentially denial and transcendental strategies; (3) explanation, highly dependent upon bolstering and differentiation strategies; and (4) justification, based mostly on bolstering and transcendental strategies (pp. 273-83).

A Pragma-Dialectical Analysis of Queen Beatrix’s Speech and Emperor Akihito’s Reply

67

Furthermore, William L. Benoit and Susan L. Brinson (1994) define five apologetic strategies: (1) denial–an expanded version of Ware and Linkugel’s category–or repudiating an accusation or shifting blame to another source; (2) evasion of responsibility, or claiming a lack of responsibility because the misdeed was a result of someone else’s actions (provocation), or a lack of information (defensibility), was an accident, or was committed with good intentions; (3) reduction of the perceived offensiveness, in six varieties, three of which (bolstering, differentiation, and transcendence) derive from Ware and Linkugel’s work and to which Benoit and Brinson add minimizing the offensiveness of the unpleasant act, attacking the accuser to lessen the impact of the accusation, and offering to compensate the injured party; (4) mortification, or admitting the wrongful act and asking forgiveness; and (5) correction, or vowing to correct the problem and to avoid similar crises in the future (p. 77). Japanese authors have written very little about the apologia, chiefly because they have a unique rhetorical tradition. Generally, Westerners tend to regard rhetoric as pertaining to the vehicles for persuading an audience in a public discussion, placing great emphasis on the individual results and achievements, whereas the Japanese tend to view rhetoric as pertaining to the means of disseminating information or seeking consensus among community members, placing greater emphasis on innate commonality and faith (Okabe, 1989). Hence, when things go wrong public penitence for transgressions is the more commonly required form in Japan; people expect their leaders to admit responsibility ("Art of Apology," 1991). As an example of the Japanese practice we can refer to the five pharmaceutical firms who were accused in 1996 of distributing HIV-contaminated blood products and apologized for their actions while agreeing to accept a court-mediated compromise in a nearly-seven-year legal battle with infected hemophiliacs (“Drug makers apologize,” 1996). The president and executives of Green Cross Corporation, one of the five firms involved, even threw themselves on the ground as an expression of their deeply felt apology. Roichi Okabe (1992) explains: Over fifteen years ago the Lockheed Scandal devastated the Japanese political scene. An accused politician, when questioned by the press, was reported to say simply, “It is all my fault,” then remained silent as if he believed in the proverb, “Silence is the wisdom of fools.” Then years later, in 1991, when the so-called “bubble economy” burst, a number of presidents and chairpersons of Japanese banks and security firms resigned to take responsibility for the problem. Many readers might remember that

Chapter Four

68

during the press conference the bankers and financiers made no apologia or excuses but bowed their heads and offered stereotypical remarks such “I am sorry to bother the public.” Furthermore, the Ministry of Finance, supposedly responsible for supervising the financial industry, also evaded accountability when faced with this situation by saying that the Ministry bore a responsibility to keep secrets. (p. 131: our trans.)

Okabe (1992) concludes: In Japanese culture, people allow leaders to say, “I am sorry to bother the public,” “It is all my fault,” “I regret,” or remain silent. They are satisfied as long as the leaders bow their heads and resign. The Japanese could not easily understand why “apologia,” an American style political communication, is important in order to repair their ethos when the leaders’ credibility is challenged. (pp. 131-32: our trans.)

Hence, the expectation of “bowing out” conditions Japanese views on apologia, while Western culture has a more defensive apologetic tradition that does not necessarily involve resignation. Thus, cultural factors play a significant role in developing apologetic traditions in a society. In the West, apologetic discourse can be a self-defense that is by nature offensive and amounts to claiming: “There is nothing for me to be ashamed of, so don’t accuse me anymore!” In Japan, the alternative to apologia may take the form of a defense that is an act of self-sacrifice and amounts to implying: “I have taken full responsibility and already resigned, so don’t accuse me or my company anymore!” Unfortunately, rhetoricians and argumentation scholars have not explored the latter form of Japanese apologetic discourse, much less the intercultural meeting of Japanese and Western apologetic traditions. We believe that this essay provides a special opportunity to examine the interaction between a Japanese public figure as a speaker and a Western audience, i.e. the Dutch people. Such an analysis presents a case study of how Japanese apologetic discourse that is optimally adapted to a Western audience for the occasion is received and evaluated by such an audience.

Strategic Maneuvering In Argumentative Discourse As we have argued earlier, the tradition of apologia in the West has been based upon the rhetorical notion that apologetic discourse is argumentative discourse concerned with reasonable persuasion pursued in public forums.

A Pragma-Dialectical Analysis of Queen Beatrix’s Speech and Emperor Akihito’s Reply

69

The prototype of argumentative discourse is a speaker symbolically using language to create an understanding and to form, strengthen or change a standpoint or an attitude on the part of the audience. In that sense, the two speeches examined here also are argumentative. Argumentative discourse can only be analyzed well by starting from a clear and well-articulated theoretical perspective. Our analysis uses the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation (van Eemeren & Grootendorst, 2004; van Eemeren, 2018). Frans van Eemeren and Peter Houtlosser (2002) have observed that in putting forward argumentation to defend their position, arguers at the same time attempt to resolve a difference of opinion in a reasonable way and to resolve the difference to their own advantage. To do justice to this observation, they propose a method in which dialectical insights pertaining to the reasonable conduct of a critical discussion are combined with rhetorical insights regarding the ways in which adherence can be gained (van Eemeren, 2010). This method starts from the idea that people who try to resolve a difference of opinion must maneuver strategically in order to reconcile by pursuing their rhetorical aims with a dialectical standard of reasonableness. At every stage of the process of resolving a difference of opinion by means of an argumentative discourse that can be analyzed as a critical discussion, whether the argumentative moves concerned take place in the confrontation stage, the opening stage, the argumentation stage, or the concluding stage, certain dialectical goals are sought which always have their rhetorical analogue. If the dialectical goal is, for instance, defining the difference as clearly as possible, then the analogous rhetorical aim will be defining the difference in such a way that it can be handled most effectively by the party concerned. Van Eemeren (2010) distinguishes among three dimensions that, alone and in combination, can be instrumental in shaping the strategic maneuvering that takes place in argumentative discourse. The first is to choose from the “topical potential” available at a certain point of any given stage. Which moves the arguer must make are never fully determined in advance; there always remains a certain amount of freedom that is dependent on the circumstances. The second is to adapt to the audience’s demands and expectations. Some moves will be more readily acceptable to an audience than others and the arguer who wants to succeed will take this into account. The third is to exploit the presentational devices at the speaker’s disposal. The way in which the moves are brought forward contributes, of course, to their effectiveness or lack of effectiveness. According to van Eemeren (2010), all three dimensions of

70

Chapter Four

strategic maneuvering need to be taken into account in a full-blown analysis of argumentative discourse (pp. 93-127).

Queen Beatrix’s and Emperor Akihito’s Speeches Starting from the general perspective on apologetic discourse and the observations concerning strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse articulated previously, let us now analyze some crucial parts of the speeches of the Dutch Queen and the Japanese Emperor. Queen Beatrix begins her speech with some words of welcome to the Emperor and the Empress, and then narrates the story of the development of the unique ties between Japan and the Netherlands, in which a fleet of five ships “sailed out to find a new passageway to the treasures of Asia” just before 1600. In the middle of her speech the Queen (2000) comes to wartime history: The European expansion that led the Dutch to the Far East also resulted in a long-lasting presence of the Netherlands in the East Indies. As a consequence, in the last century our countries came in touch with each other in a very different—and dramatic—way. The Second World War brought a rupture between our two peoples. A great number of Dutchmen—civilians as well as servicemen—became the victims of this rupture. Many of them lost their lives; others bear the marks of their experiences with them forever. The people of Japan were also severely affected by the horrible effects of this bitter conflict, in particular in the last terrible days of the war. (Beatrix, 2000: our trans.)

Thus, Queen Beatrix differentiates between the period of war between the Netherlands and Japan and the long prior period of friendship. By telling a pleasant and romantic story about the development of the special relationship between the two countries, she creates a most positive context for the difficult issue of the wartime events. According to van Eemeren and Houtlosser’s (2002) theory, this is a matter of topical selection but also, due to its narrative approach, of choice of presentational device. It is also well-adapted to the audience because the problem part is embedded in a context of shared history that is agreeable to the Dutch and the Japanese alike. The Japanese treasure the remaining signs of Dutch presence in Japan and the Dutch, particularly those who spent an important part of their lives in Asia, like to be reminded of those good old days of Dutch enterprise, particularly when the reminder comes from the Queen.

A Pragma-Dialectical Analysis of Queen Beatrix’s Speech and Emperor Akihito’s Reply

71

The Queen (2000) goes on to argue that we should face the past: The memories of the suffering that was brought about in those days of war do not fade; they come back all the time. That is why it is good not to avoid confronting the past, although it takes courage to face this painful chapter in our shared history. Our view of the future, however, should not be darkened by the past. As a wise man once said: “The function of history is not just to remember, but to give meaning to the future.” (Beatrix, 2000: our trans., our italics)

The Queen’s topical selection when talking about the wartime period facilitates a response by the Emperor that offers a perspective for the future rather than just reflecting on the painful past. Several audiences must be taken into account, ranging from the Japanese and the Dutch in general to those Dutchmen in particular who suffered from the Japanese occupation. Queen Beatrix adapts to these audiences by emphasizing the two people’s great shared history. The Queen’s strategic maneuvering manifests itself most clearly in her use of a book metaphor that conveys several important messages: (1) however painful the wartime chapter may be, history is as it is and it is better not to look away from it but to reflect upon its meaning; (2) the painful wartime chapter is only a part of a more encompassing book and it would be wise to read the other chapters as well; (3) after the lessons from the painful wartime chapter are learned, they can be used for writing new chapters in the future. In this way, Queen Beatrix sets the stage for Emperor Akihito’s response. After also emphasizing the long, uninterrupted four-hundred years of bilateral ties between Japan and the Netherlands, the Emperor (2000) creates room for an unimpeded joint future by extending a Western-style apologia: It truly saddens me that after such a history had unfolded between us, the two countries had to engage each other in the last World War. It grieves our hearts to think that so many people were victimized in their respective ways during that war and that there are still those who continue to bear unhealed scars from it. (Akihito, 2000: our trans., our italics)

In Benoit and Brinson’s (1994) terms, the Emperor admits the wrongful act and asks forgiveness by way of mortification. It is necessary for the Emperor to make such a statement since in wartime everything was done in the name of the late Emperor, his father Hirohito. Then the Emperor

72

Chapter Four

was not only the symbolic center of the great family nation, but also the ideological center of the Great Empire of Japan. Both the Dutch and the Japanese are aware of this historical predicament, so that the Emperor’s move is well-adapted to his audience. By adopting the Western tradition of apologia, Emperor Akihito makes a crucial strategic move on the level of audience adaptation and the choice of presentational devices. Next, Emperor Akihito employs correction, the act by which an accused vows to remedy the existing problem and to avoid similar crises in the future: We believe that all of us should make unyielding efforts to foster peace so that such events will never be repeated. Also, on this occasion, we cannot but recall anew the efforts of many people who have endeavored to strengthen the relationship between our two countries for such a long time since the end of the war until now. In particular, we shall never forget that there are people in your country who, while still bearing the scars of war, continue to have great hopes for the future of the relationship between our two countries. (Akihito, 2000)

A striking strategic aspect of Emperor Akihito’s topical selection is that he concentrates here emphatically on the future, when the impediments to a friendly relationship stemming from the wartime will have been overcome. Because overcoming these impediments to a good relationship and re-establishing a good relationship is exactly what the people he is addressing want, this is a good way of adapting to the audience. As his presentational device to achieve his aim, the Emperor makes use of the analogy that is drawn implicitly in the previous paragraph between the suffering of the Dutch people and the Japanese.

The Dutch Reception of Emperor Akihito’s Apologetic Words Generally, the Dutch welcomed Emperor Akihito’s speech despite the unfortunate past concerning World War II. The Daily Yomiuri, an English-Language Daily in Japan, (2000) reports: “The Emperor’s remarks were intended to acknowledge the mixed emotions still felt by some Dutch people about Japan. The remarks also reflected his wishes that the two nations further promote friendly bilateral relations in a forward-looking manner, according to observers” (“Emperor declares grief,” May 25, p. 1).

A Pragma-Dialectical Analysis of Queen Beatrix’s Speech and Emperor Akihito’s Reply

73

According to Het Reformatorisch Dagblad, a hard-line Protestant Dutch newspaper, (2000) these remarks were well received by former inhabitants of the Japanese camps. The paper quotes the retired Roman Catholic bishop R. Bär, who spent the war in a camp on Java: “Now a period is really over. We have bowed for years in the direction of Tokyo to the old Emperor. This new Emperor is a conciliator and he comes to us.” To Empress Michiko Bär had said: “The fact that you are here proves that things progress” (“Koningin,” May 24, 2000: our trans.). The Japan Times (2000), another English-language Daily in Japan, notes similar responses: “Leaders of two groups representing Dutch victims of Japan’s occupation of present-day Indonesia welcomed a speech on Tuesday night by the visiting Emperor voicing grief and sadness over the conflict between Japan and the Netherlands during World War II” (“Speech welcomed,” May 25, p. 2). Rudy Boekholt, chairman of the Indies Platform that consists of 18 groups representing Dutch people who returned from the region after the war, is one of those reported to have appreciated the Emperor’s speech. Thus, most reactions basically echoed the favorable response to Akihito’s remarks. The Dutch quality newspaper NRC Handelsblad (2000) concludes: The carefully prepared statements that were made by the imperial couple about their personal involvement in the suffering of the victims had worked. The political declaration given by the late Japanese Prime Minister Obuchi after Prime Minister Kok’s visit to Tokyo had paved the way. A clever diplomatic job has been done on both sides. (“De keizer,” May 26, 2000: our trans.)

All the same, there were also some suppressed but fierce protestations over the Emperor’s speech. Het Reformatorisch Dagblad (2000) observes: “These gestures were not sufficient for all victims. […] They want to receive compensation for the suffering imposed on them.” (“Koningin,” May 24, p. 5, our trans.). And the Japan Times (2000) reports: “Ben Bouman, head of The Hague-based Foundation of Japanese Honorary Debts, representing Dutch victims of Japanese internment camps in the former Dutch East Indies, called the speech ‘remarkable,’ saying the Emperor seldom makes such a statement” (“Speech welcomed,” May 25, p. 2). However, Bouman said, Japan still needed to pay “fair and substantial” financial compensation. He went on to argue, “For us, it is still important that Japan pay material debt,” and that “Immaterial compensation has already been paid” (“Speech welcomed,” May 25, 2000, p. 2).

74

Chapter Four

Characteristically, the reaction of the Dutch protest groups to Akihito’s apologetic remarks employs dissociation (Perelman & Olbrechts-Tyteca, 1971, pp. 411-59; van Rees, 2003, 2009). This strategy consists of breaking a previously unitary concept into parts for the purpose of rejecting the one (which represents the old concept) while accepting the other (which introduces a new concept). By dissociating immaterial and material satisfaction, the protest groups distinguish between the diplomatic and the pragmatic importance of the Emperor’s remarks. While they appreciate the sincerity of Akihito’s statement they continue to demand financial compensation for wartime misdeeds.

Conclusion Several additional factors contributed to the undeniable success of the two speeches. First, there is the clever coordination of the efforts by the Japanese and the Dutch to fully restore friendly ties between the two countries. This coordination could be observed between the Prime Ministers, when Mr. Obuchi and Mr. Kok did their preparatory work. In the speeches analyzed here, that coordination is carried forward between the two heads of state. Since Japan and the Netherlands are both constitutional monarchies, both people could understand the significance of exchanges between their constitutional monarchs. For the Dutch it was important not only that the Emperor apologized but also, particularly for the victims of the Japanese occupation, that as hostess the Queen welcomed him at the state banquet.2 Further, the Queen’s speech created the right atmosphere and set the stage for Akihito’s apology with the metaphor of calling it a “painful chapter”, which said, in effect: “Let’s face this painful chapter in our shared history that still hinders a full development of our friendly relationship.” In this way, even the order of speaking was exploited to achieve the desired effect. No wonder that the leading Dutch newspaper NRC Handelsblad (2000) concluded: “A clever diplomatic job has been done on both sides.” In order for an apologetic discourse to function as a convincing argument, it must be accepted and appreciated by the apologee within the context of the two parties’ rhetorically coordinated efforts and be accepted and appreciated by those to whom it is addressed. Second, our analysis clearly illustrates the important role played by ethos in gaining acceptance among the Dutch people for Emperor Akihito’s apologetic discourse. Relevant here is Okabe’s (1989) distinction between “achieved ethos” and “ascribed ethos” (pp. 555-56). The later

A Pragma-Dialectical Analysis of Queen Beatrix’s Speech and Emperor Akihito’s Reply

75

differs from the Aristotelian definition of ethos, which treats ethos as a result of the speech achieved during the discourse.3 According to Okabe, “achieved ethos” is promoted by such qualities as intelligence, competence, and character as determinants of the speaker’s potency in communication. “Ascribed ethos” is constituted by such qualities as seniority, sex, and family background, which exist independent of how the communication develops. Although the Emperor’s achieved ethos may have played a role, his ascribed ethos as Emperor of Japan and son of the late Emperor Hirohito,4 in whose name the Japanese had acted during the war, more importantly helped the Dutch people to appreciate the august words of Akihito as not only sincere but also authoritative. In this way, instead of relying on the Occidental tradition of attempting to “repair one’s ethos” by using logos and pathos when one’s character is under attack, Akihito follows the Japanese cultural tradition. Finally, Akihito’s apologetic discourse highlights the special status of the Emperor in Japanese society. As the symbol of this society, he doesn’t have the option of resigning because there is no substitute for the Emperor; instead, he must provide a rhetorical solution to the problem at issue. In the Japanese culture, apologetic discourse can be defined as an endeavor to "shoulder the full responsibility" by showing sincerity and regret. This is why Japanese leaders who are in a position to do so choose so easily to express their repentance or remorse by resigning rather than by offering an apologia. In the old Japanese feudal society, whose prime values were self-respect, self-sacrifice, and self-responsibility, seppuku was in fact the ultimate means by which samurai took responsibility.5 The assumption in Japanese culture is that a person who is responsible for a significant failure is expected to quit his or her position and thus fade from prominence, so that someone more suitable can succeed. By the same token, resigning often symbolically signifies death in regard to responsibility. Thus, resigning may function as a defense mechanism in that it allows one to escape from further accusations. Otherwise, one would face having the difficult and contradictory task of proving competence after having been proved incompetent. In Japan, where the standing of speakers or writers, i.e., their ascribed ethos, is virtually the absolute determinant of the validity of their argument, people whose ethos is under attack are disqualified from appealing to logos and pathos. As a consequence, social mores usually rule out the possibility of offering an apologia from the beginning. On the other hand, if persons with unassailable ethos apologize for their own or their subordinates' wrong deeds, this is almost automatically accepted and

76

Chapter Four

highly valued. If the speaker's ascribed ethos is taken for granted as supreme, as in the Emperor’s case, he could function by himself as the mode of persuasion. In other words, in the Japanese apologetic discourse, who speaks takes precedence over how the person speaks or even what the person says. Karlyn Kohrs Campbell (1982) makes an important point in this regard in emphasizing the interconnectedness of social, political and ethical aspects of the study of rhetoric: As a discipline, rhetoric is the study of the art of using symbols. It provides theory, application, experimentation, and critical analysis. It studies the social use of words by people in groups, the political use of decisions, and the ethical use of words to justify belief and action through cultural validation because it uses these materials. (p. 15)

As a rhetorical form of discourse, the Japanese speech act of apologizing involves more straightforward, yet profoundly complex, strategic maneuvering than Western apologia. Although in the Japanese context the rhetoric of self-defense becomes apologetic, not every apologetic discourse is self-defensive in the sense of the Western tradition of apologia. When specimens of apologetic discourse stemming from different traditions are compared, their cultural backgrounds need to be exploited as an analytic framework for understanding the messages that are conveyed. Because the social and ethical meaning of words, and their political impact, may differ from culture to culture, any attempt to understand intercultural communication should examine discourse within its cultural context.

Notes 1

See, e.g., Nobuko M. Kosuge (2000). Kosuge talks mainly about British POWs, but she also discusses other European POWs, including the Dutch soldiers. Civilians are not discussed. 2 Although it is outside the scope of this essay, it is interesting to compare the Dutch people’s reaction to that of the Korean people to the Emperor’s similar apology to South Koran President Roh Tae-woo at the 1990 imperial state banquet. The Korean people did not only not appreciate the Emperor’s apology, but also criticised their President’s decision to make a state visit to Japan. Kim Young-won (1990) identified two difficulties inherent in any summit-level meetings between Korea and Japan: “For one thing, a Korean President is both head of state and chief executive, whereas in Japan, the head of state is the emperor and the chief

A Pragma-Dialectical Analysis of Queen Beatrix’s Speech and Emperor Akihito’s Reply

77

executive is the prime minister. For another, both Japanese and Koreans are notorious for their insistence on appearance, pomp and circumstance, as perhaps any full-blooded Orientals ought to be” (p. 8). Given the difficulties associated with Korea-Japan diplomacy, the "to wipe the slate clean" metaphor provided the two countries with the paradigm offering a solution to the emotionally committed issue of imperial apology. (For an analysis of the transcendental capacity of the Emperor's rhetoric, see Suzuki, 2017). 3 Aristotle (2007) argues, “[There is persuasion] through character whenever the speech is spoken in such a way as to make the speaker worthy of credence; ... And this should result from the speech, not from a previous opinion that the speaker is a certain kind of person” (pp. 38-39). As Kennedy (2007) notes, “Aristotle does not include in rhetorical ethos the authority that a speaker may possess due to position in government or society, previous actions, reputation, or anything except what is actually said in the speech” (p. 39). 4 See also Suzuki (2017). In Western persuasion ethos ideally plays a part only insofar as it is related to the argument that is advanced. Some scholars point to the primacy of ethos in Japanese argumentation. Lawrence W. Beer (1984) argues that due to the heavy emphasis on group orientation, Japanese people privilege consensual rather than adversarial decision-making. Because consensual decision-making presumes that the validity of an argument is in the first place based on the standing of the speaker, Palczewski (1989) even concludes that in Japanese argumentative practice the standing of the speaker is the absolute determinant of validity. 5 See, for an analysis of seppuku, Smith (1990).

78

Chapter Four

References Akihito. (2000, May 23). “His Majesty the Emperor’s address at the State Banquet at Dam Palace on 23rd May 2000.” The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved March 12, 2003, from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/gaikoku/gaikoku-h12-04.html Beatrix. (2000, May 23). “Her Majesty the Queen’s speech delivered during the dinner on occasion of the state visit of the Emperor and Empress of Japan and Her Majesty the Queen and His Royal Highness Price Clause of the Netherlands on May 23rd 2000.” Amsterdam, the Netherland. Aristotle. (2007). On rhetoric: A theory of civic discourse, 2nd ed. (Trans) Kennedy, G. A. NY: Oxford University Press. “Art of Apology.” (1991, August 12). Time, pp. 12-13. Beer, L. W. (1984). Freedom of expression in Japan: A study in comparative law, politics, and society. New York: Kodansha International. Benoit, W. L., & Brinson, S. L. (1994). “AT & T: ‘Apologies are not Enough.’” Communication Quarterly 42, 75-88. Butler, S. D. (1972). “The Apologia, 1971 Genre.” Southern Speech Communication Journal 37, 281-289. Campbell, K. K. (1982). Rhetorical Act. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Eemeren, F. H. van (2010). Strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse: Extending the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Eemeren, F. H. van (2018). Argumentation theory: A pragma-dialectical perspective. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. Eemeren, F. H. van, & Grootendorst, R. (2004). A systematic theory of argumentation. The pragma-dialectical perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Eemeren, F. H. van, & Houtlosser, P. (2002). “Strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse: A delicate balance.” In F. H. van Eemeren & P. Houtlosser, Dialectic and rhetoric: The warp and woof of argumentation analysis. Dordrecht etc.: Kluwer Academic, pp. 131-159. Kennedy, G. A. (2007). A note in Aristotle. (2007). On Rhetoric: A theory of civic discourse, 2nd ed. NY: Oxford University Press, p. 39. Kim, Young-won (1990, May 22). “To wipe the slate clean.” Korea Herald, p. 8. King, R. L. (1985). “Transforming Scandal into Tragedy: A Rhetoric of Political Apology.” Quarterly Journal of Speech 71, 289-301.

A Pragma-Dialectical Analysis of Queen Beatrix’s Speech and Emperor Akihito’s Reply

79

Kosuge, N. M. (2000). “Japan towards Reconciliation: The Case of Anglo-Japanese Reconciliation.” A Paper presented at the IPRA 18th General Conference, Tampere, 5-9 August. Kruse, N. W. (1981). “The Scope of Apologetic Discourse.” Southern Speech Communication Journal 46, 278-291. Okabe, R. (1989). “Cultural Assumptions of East and West: Japan and the United States.” In J. L. Golden, G. F. Bergquist, & W. E. Coleman (eds.), Rhetoric of Western Thought 4th ed. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, pp. 546-565. Okabe, R. (1992). “seiji ni okeru benmei no komyunikeishyon” (Political communication of apologia). In Seiji komyunikeishyon. [Political communication]. Tokyo: Yuhikaku, pp. 131-132. Palczewski, C. (1989). “Parallels between Japanese and American Debate.” A paper presented to the Central States Communication Association Annual Conference, Kansas City, Missouri, April 14. Perelman, C., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1971). The new rhetoric: A treatise on argumentation. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press. Queen Beatrix. (2000). “Speech delivered by Her Majesty the Queen during on occasion of the state visit of the Emperor and Empress of Japan and Her Majesty the Queen and His Royal Highness Prince Claus of the Netherlands.” Rees, M. A. van (2003). “Indicators of dissociation.” In F. H. van Eemeren, J. A. Blair, C. A. Willard & A. F. S. Henkemans (eds.), (pp. 887-892). Proceedings of the Fifth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation. Amsterdam: Sic Sat. —. (2009). Dissociation in argumentative discussions: A pragma-dialectical perspective. Dordrecht etc.: Springer. Rieke, R. D., & Sillars, M. O. (1993). Argumentation and critical decision making 3rd ed. CA: HarperCollins Publishers. Smith, A. R. (1990). “Mishima’s Seppuku speech: A Critical-Cultural Analysis.” Text and Performance Quarterly 10, 1-19. Suzuki, T. (2017). The rhetoric of Emperor Hirohito: Continuity and rupture in Japan’s dramas of modernity. Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Vartabedian, R. A. (1985). “Nixon’s Vietnam Rhetoric: A Case Study of Apologia as Generic Paradox.” Southern Speech Communication Journal 50, 273-283. Ware, B. L., & Linkugel, W. A. (1973). “They Spoke in Defense of Themselves: On the General Criticism of Apologia.” Quarterly Journal of Speech 59, 273-283.

SECTION II A COLLECTION OF EMPEROR AKIHITO’S SPEECHES 1989-2019

THE EMPEROR’S ACCESSION ADDRESS ON JANUARY 9, 1989

Having previously succeeded to the Imperial Throne in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution of Japan and the Imperial House Law, I now perform the Ceremony of the Enthronement at the Seiden and proclaim my enthronement to the those at home and abroad. On this occasion, I pledge anew that I shall observe the Constitution of Japan and discharge my duties as symbol of the State and of the unity of the people, always wishing for the well-being of the people, in the same spirit as my father, Emperor Showa, who during his reign spanning more than sixty years, shared joys and sorrows with the people at all times, and ardently hope that our country, through the wisdom and unceasing effort of the people, will achieve further development and contribute to friendship and peace in the international community and the well-being and prosperity of mankind.

NEW YEAR GREETINGS BY HIS MAJESTY THE EMPEROR OF JAPAN 1990-2016

1990 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan I have passed the year, remembering the late Emperor Showa and performing my duties from day to day, with the well-being of the people in mind. This year, which began with His passing, has been an eventful and moving one. In greeting the New Year, I intend to discharge my responsibilities, wishing for ever improving life of the people and continuing contribution of our country to the peace and prosperity of the world in humility as a member of the international community.

1991 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan The past year started with the first anniversary of the passing of Emperor Showa and ended with various functions related to the Enthronement Ceremony. I am grateful that all those functions were carried out smoothly with the cooperation of a large number of people. The past year, as we look back upon it, has indeed been an eventful one, at home and abroad. At home, there were also a number of natural calamities, and I regret very much that more than 90 people lost their lives, owing to local downpours, typhoons and a tornado. I wish the New Year may be a happy and peaceful one for our people and for the people of the world.

84

The Emperor’s Accession Address on January 9, 1989

1992 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan Looking back upon the past year, I find it has been an eventful year throughout the world, with great changes. I sincerely hope that these great changes occurring in the world will proceed in peace in a direction beneficial to all people. At home, I regret to say, many lives were lost and agriculture and forestry suffered heavy damage, owing to the calamities caused by the eruption of Mt. Unzen, local downpours, a long spell of rain, and typhoons. I wish the New Year would be a happy one for the people of our country and for the people of the world.

1993 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan The past year has witnessed regional fightings accompanying many casualties at various places in the world and, to my regret, cannot be termed a peaceful year. In our country the number of victims of natural calamities has been reduced to the lowest so far last year. It can be attributed to the favorable natural condition, but owes in large measure to the efforts of the people concerned, for which I am deeply grateful. I am worried, in the meantime, that there may have a large number of people who had to suffer much from the severe economic condition. I am praying the New Year would be a happy one for the people of our country and for the people of the world.

1994 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan The past year has been one beset with disasters. Amid severe economic circumstance, we were visited by a cold summer and experienced in addition such disasters as earthquakes and torrential rains and flooding. More than 400 people are dead or still unaccounted for. It is my deepfelt hope than those who suffered pain or damage will soon recover.

The Age of Emperor Akihito

85

It is highly regrettable that throughout the world many people are still victims of local conflicts. On the other hand, it is gratifying to note signs of muvement (sic) in the right direction, as in the case of Cambodia. I wish that the New Year may prove to be a happy one, for the people of our country and of the world.

1995 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan As this new year begins, it is my earnest wish that for the people of Japan and of the world, it may turn out a happy year. Fifty years ago, the Japanese people saw the end of a most terrible war, and since then have carried out the difficult task of postwar rehabilitation, and continued to make every effort to improve relations with all countries of the world. In this pivotal year, looking back upon the past, remembering the victims of the war while at same time mindful of the toil and trouble of all those who laboured to achieve today's prosperity, anew I pray for peace for all world.

1996 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan Soon a year will have elapsed since we were struck by the most terrible disaster since the war, the great Hanshin Awaji Earthquake that brought deep sorrow to so many people. During this past year the victims who had to suffer the death of relatives and friends or bear the pain of losing their homes, have striven hard to cope. Now that the weather is getting colder and colder, I am worried about the health of those victims who are still living under severe conditions, especially the elderly. I sincerely hope that the devastated area will be restored without delay and that the people may know some ease and comfort in their lives. Since last year marked the fiftieth anniversary of the end of the war, various memorial events and ceremonies were held. For all of us, I think it was a deeply meaningful year, being an occasion to mourn the war dead,

86

The Emperor’s Accession Address on January 9, 1989

to deepen our understanding of past history and to renew our desire for peace. In early summer we had a prolonged wet period, which was worrying since it brought back to mind the cold summer of three years ago. But luckily the weather changed for the better and I am happy that in most regions the harvest was good. It is my ardent wish that the new year will be a happy one for the Japanese people as well as for all the people of the world.

1997 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan It truly pains my heart to think of those people, held hostage at the Japanese ambassador's residence in Peru, who still today are forced to spend such difficult times, unable to celebrate the New Year with their families. I continue to hope that all the hostages will be set free safe and sound, at the very earliest moment possible. Many events occurred during the past year, and there are still many problems to be solved for the betterment of the people's lives. I sincerely hope that a bright future may be built, as we look back over the year that we have passed, making of it sustenance for tomorrow. May the coming year be a happy one for the people of Japan as well as for all the people of the world.

1998 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan Last Year was a milestone marking the 50th year since the putting into effect of Japan's Constitution and the 25th year since the reversion of Okinawa. It was thus a year of looking back on the course of our country's past. With the holding of the Kyoto Conference on Prevention of Global Warming, it was also a year of turning attention to the future of the planet earth, from the environmental point of view. Under the severe economic conditions, I worry that the lives of the people will face many difficulties in the time ahead, but I expect that the Japanese people, helping one another and together with the people of the world, will strive their utmost to build the better future.

The Age of Emperor Akihito

87

At the beginning of the new year, it is my heartfelt wish that this will turn out to be a very good year for the people and I pray for the happiness of one and all.

1999 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan Last year marked its start with the happy and youthful celebration of the Nagano Winter Olympics. I believe that the hearts of a great many Japanese people still retain the memory of the remarkable performances of our athletes. However, due to developments in the economic situation and the occurrence of natural disasters, the people suffered an increase of severe difficulties in their daily lives, and this thought deeply preoccupies my heart. Throughout the world also, natural disasters on a very large scale and the severe economic situation brought sufferings including deaths upon so many people. Under such conditions, I feel it is becoming more and more important to further cooperation, transcending national boundaries, in various fields such as world economy and the global environment. It is my hope that the various peoples of the world will value highly the mutual links that bind then, and cooperate with one another. At the same time, I hope that our people will support one another in hard times and work together with the aim of making a better future of all. It is my ardent wish that this new year will be a happy one, both for the people of Japan and all the people of the world.

2000 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan During the past year, the severe economic circumstances have persisted in Japan and have variously influenced the lives of the people. Moreover, it is a great sadness that in several parts of the world large scale natural disasters and regional conflicts have claimed the lives of many people. As we enter this new year, it is my hope that the people of Japan may join in a spirit of mutual help to overcome present difficulties, and together with the people of the world put all their efforts into pursuing peace and building a sound and wholesome future.

88

The Emperor’s Accession Address on January 9, 1989

I pray that the final year of the twentieth century will be a bright and happy one for all people, both in Japan and throughout the world.

2001 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan Now we have entered the 21st century. In the new year, I would like to continue to reflect on what we lived through in the 20th century. Our country at present has numerous tasks such as the measures to cope with the aging of the society or to bring about economic recovery, and I can well imagine that people's daily lives are beset with many difficulties. I believe that, by surmounting these difficulties, we can construct a society more sound and spiritually rich. It is my hope that each and every one of our people will cherish their mutual ties and will help one another, striving toward a better future for all. I also count on our people to cooperate with all the peoples of other countries to grapple with and solve global problems such as peace and the environment. I pray that this will be a happy year for our people and for all the people of the world.

2002 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan Last year, the tragic incident of a simultaneous series of terrorist attacks occurred, resulting in more than 3,000 people dead or missing, including 24 Japanese. Due to this incident, economic conditions in all countries, including the United States and Japan, are deteriorating even more. I feel that, in order to maintain the stability and peace of the world, it is essential that friendship and cooperation among countries be further strengthened. Today Japan is faced with various difficult problems, but remembering that the wisdom and efforts of the people overcame the postwar hardship, I am confident that the people will certainly surmount these difficulties.

The Age of Emperor Akihito

89

I hope that this year will see signs of bright prospects for the people of Japan and of the whole world.

2003 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan We are greeting a new year in the midst of a severe economic situation. As we look back, exactly fifty years have passed since the New Year right after the Peace Treaty came into effect. Bearing in mind the great efforts the people have made during the past 50 years in building the Japan of today, I hope that we can unite in utmost efforts to pursue a better future. I can well imagine that there are various hardships and difficulties in the people's life, but I sincerely hope that this new year will be better, even a little, for each and every one.

2004 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts I am deeply grateful that so many people showed concern for me when I was ill and also that they celebrated with me my reaching seventieth birthday. Last year, people suffered damage from cold-weather, and also localized torrential downpours, typhoons and earthquakes, while severe economic and social conditions continued to prevail in Japan. Overseas, there were tragic incidents in which many lives, including Japanese, were lost. I can well imagine that there are many who have been enduring hardship and spending painful days. In this coming year, it is my hope that all of you will make every effort, helping one another, for people's own happiness and the further development of our country. I sincerely hope that this year will be a bright one for the people of Japan and the rest of the world.

90

The Emperor’s Accession Address on January 9, 1989

2005 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts Last year various regions of Japan were struck by natural disasters, afflicting many people. I am deeply concerned for the victims of these disasters as the harsh cold of winter is hitting them. In addition, economic conditions in Japan have yet to fully recover and I am aware that this is causing hardship for people. Overseas, it is most regrettable that many lives have been lost due to conflicts. Natural disasters abroad have also seen many lives sacrificed, in particular, the earthquake that struck at the end of the year and the subsequent tsunami which inflicted tremendous damage on the neighboring countries. It has been reported that a huge number of people have lost their lives or are missing. This disaster is truly heart-rending. I am reminded of the tsunami that hit Okushiri Island and surrounding areas in Hokkaido as a result of the Hokkaido-Nansei-Oki Earthquake twelve years ago, and of the Sanriku-Oki Earthquake and tsunami that occurred in the year of my birth, and is said to have resulted in more than 3,000 people lost or missing. This year marks the tenth anniversary of the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake. I think it is important that we learn from the past natural disasters in order to create a society with a high degree of security. At the start of the new year, wishing for the people's happiness, I sincerely hope that everyone will make utmost efforts to help one another, and together with the people of the world, strive for a peaceful world and happiness for all.

2006 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts Last year marked the sixtieth anniversary of the end of the War. Three million and one hundred thousand Japanese people died in the last war and many foreigners were also victims. We will never forget the people who lost their lives in the War and bear in mind that the Japan of today is built on the sacrifice made by those many people. The heavy snowfall that started towards the end of the year is causing growing damage in various regions, and it is truly regrettable that more than twenty people lost their lives. I am deeply concerned for the welfare

The Age of Emperor Akihito

91

of the people who are still living hard lives away from home in places that suffered damages due to natural disasters. I also hope that the people who were able to return to their homes in Miyakejima and those who have not been able to return to the island alike will stay in good health. I pray that the new year will bring happiness for each and every one of you, and I sincerely hope that everyone will help one another and strive their utmost to build an even better society.

2007 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts I am deeply saddened that last year as many as 150 people lost their lives in natural disasters including heavy snowfalls, torrential rains, typhoons, and tornadoes. My heart goes out to the people of Niigata Prefecture and Fukuoka Prefecture who are spending another winter living in temporary housing as a result of the earthquakes in those areas. There were also regions where salty winds from typhoons caused great damage to rice crops, and my thoughts are with the people of the farming communities affected. At the start of the new year, I pray for the happiness of the people of Japan and the world. It is my sincere hope that all of us work together to pursue a society in which people can live in mutual trust.

2008 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts Last year, there were earthquakes in Ishikawa Prefecture and Niigata Prefecture, and my sympathies go out to those affected who are facing hardships as they live through the harsh winter in those regions. Although there were fewer natural disasters such as heavy rains, it was regrettable that a number of incidents came to light undermining the people's sense of security in their daily lives. It is my hope that the new year will bring happiness to each and every one of you, and that efforts will continue to be made to build a society in which people all over the world can live in mutual trust.

92

The Emperor’s Accession Address on January 9, 1989

2009 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts Last year, although no typhoons hit Japan directly and there were fewer victims from natural disasters compared with other years, it was tragic that the Iwate-Miyagi Nairiku Earthquake and the earthquake with its center in the north of Iwate Prefecture caused extensive damage in the mountainous regions and claimed lives. With Japan's harsh natural conditions, I think it is imperative for everyone to further deepen the awareness of the importance of disaster prevention. Since autumn 2008, the impact of the global financial crisis has also been felt in Japan and it concerns me that many people are facing hardship due to worsening economic conditions. I sincerely hope that, by gathering together people's wisdom and by cherishing mutual ties and helping each other, everyone will work together to overcome these latest difficulties. This year, it is twenty years since my accession to the throne and fifty years since our wedding, and many thoughts come to mind as I contemplate the years that have passed. Together with the Empress, I hope to continue to strive for the country and the people.

2010 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts Last year, many people faced hardships due to the continuing severe economic conditions, and my heart goes out to them. In this new year that we are greeting, I hope that everyone will help one another and support each other to overcome the challenges they are facing. I also hope that they will work together with the people of the world in pursuit of peace and do their utmost to build a better future. It is my hope that the new year will be a good year for the people of Japan and the people of the world.

2011 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts Last year, due to the long spells of intense heat in many parts of the country and the continuing severe economic conditions, people faced various hardships in their lives, and my heart goes out to them.

The Age of Emperor Akihito

93

I hope that people will cherish their family and community ties and support one another to overcome these challenges they are facing. I also hope that they will work together with the people of the world and do their utmost in pursuit of peace and stability. It is my hope that the new year will be a good year for the people of Japan and the people of the world.

2012 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts Last year, it pained me greatly to see that many lives were lost to natural disasters, the Great East Japan Earthquake in the spring and torrential rains in many places in the summer and in the autumn. My heart also goes out to the people who regrettably can no longer live in the places they used to live because of the radioactive contamination caused by the nuclear plant accident. Last year was a truly distressing year. However, it has been heartening to note that, even under such conditions, the people were helping each other and many people were working hard to support the victims. This year, our country has to make various plans towards reconstruction and decide on guidelines for the future. At the same time, it is expected to be a year in which our country has to tackle many difficult challenges, including the disposal of the debris from the disaster. It is my sincere hope that people will bring together their wisdom and that those involved in the various tasks can work under safe conditions. Our country is now going through difficult times because of the earthquake and other factors, but I hope that the people's hearts will always be with the afflicted, and that everyone will persevere and work together to build a brighter tomorrow. It is my hope that the new year will be a good, peaceful year for the people of Japan and the people of the world.

2013 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts A second winter since the Great East Japan Earthquake has come around. At the dawn of the new year, my heart goes out to the afflicted people, those who cannot return to the places they used to live because of radioactive contamination and those who have to spend the cold harsh winter in temporary housing. I sincerely hope that, in the future, the

94

The Emperor’s Accession Address on January 9, 1989

experience of the damage caused by the earthquake and tsunami will be fully utilized in disaster prevention education and town planning so that the country moves towards assuring safety and security in the lives of the people. Our country is now going through difficult times because of the earthquake and other factors, but it is my wish that the people's hearts will always be with the afflicted, and that everyone will support one another to overcome the various challenges. It is my hope that the new year will be better, even a little, for the people of Japan and the people of the world.

2014 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts A third winter since the Great East Japan Earthquake has come around. At the dawn of the new year, my heart once again goes out to the afflicted people, those who cannot return to the places they used to live because of radioactive contamination and those who have to spend the cold harsh winter in temporary housing. Last year, too, many people were confronted with various difficulties and I am sure they faced many hardships. In this new year, it is my hope that the people of Japan not forget the plight of those who are facing hardships and try to share even a little of their burden, and help and comfort one another at all times. I also hope that they will work together with the people of the world in pursuit of peace and do their utmost to build a better tomorrow. In this season of deep snow, I want to ask people to take great care not to have any accidents in removing snow from the roof. It is my hope that the new year will bring happiness to the people of Japan and the people around the world.

2015 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts Last year many lives were lost to natural disasters such as heavy snow, torrential rains, and the volcanic eruption of Mt. Ontake, and my thoughts go out to those who lost their loved ones and their homes in those disasters.

The Age of Emperor Akihito

95

This is the fourth winter since the Great East Japan Earthquake, and it pains me to think that there are still so many people who cannot return to the places they used to live because of radioactive contamination and so many who face the prospect of a cold, harsh winter in temporary housing. These conditions have made me reflect on the importance of people becoming concerned about and involved in disaster prevention in their respective regions and being prepared to protect their own localities. This year marks the 70th anniversary of the end of World War II, which cost many people their lives. Those who died on the battlefields, those who died in the atomic bombings in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, those who died in the air raids on Tokyo and other cities-so many people lost their lives in this war. I think it is most important for us to take this opportunity to study and learn from the history of this war, starting with the Manchurian Incident of 1931, as we consider the future direction of our country. It is my sincere hope that the new year will bring happiness to the people of our country and the people around the world.

2016 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts As last year was the 70th anniversary of the end of World War II, it was a year in which many of us spent much time thinking about the war. In welcoming the new year, I would like to renew my prayer for peace both for our country and our people. It will soon be five years since the Great East Japan Earthquake, and it pains me to think that there are still people who cannot return to the places they used to live and those who must endure the hardships of living in temporary housing. I hope that these people will take good care of their health through the cold winter, and that further progress will be made in the recovery of the afflicted areas. Our country Japan is indeed blessed with beautiful nature, but at the same time, we are prone to natural disasters. It is my sincere hope that each and every Japanese cultivate an awareness of disaster prevention and continue to look out for each other and be prepared to protect themselves at all times. May the new year bring happiness to the people of our country and the people around the world.

THE EMPEROR’S ADDRESS AT THE STATE BANQUET IN HONOR OF SOUTH KOREAN PRESIDENT AND MRS. ROH TAE WOO ON MAY 24, 1990

Your Excellency has come to pay a visit to this country with Mrs. Roh Tae Woo in spite of the heavy pressure of affairs of state. It is a matter of great significance and cause of utmost pleasure to me to be able to receive as a state guest Your Excellency the President, who has led your country to its remarkable development. I wish to offer my heartfelt welcome to Your Excellency and your party. The Korean Peninsula and Japan, since ancient times, have maintained close contact as the nearest neighbors. Even during the Edo period when Japan kept its doors closed to the outside world, Japan continued to receive Korean missions and all the Japanese people cordially welcomed them. However, while looking back upon the history of long, fruitful exchanges between the Korean Peninsula and Japan, I recall what was stated by the late Emperor Showa: "It is indeed regrettable that there was an unfortunate past between us for a period in this century and I believe that it should not be repeated again." I think of the sufferings your people underwent during this unfortunate period, which was brought about by my country, and cannot but feel the deepest regret. Having gone through such an era, the relationship between our two countries has been restored to normality, thanks to the staunch enthusiasm of those people in both countries, in all circles and at all levels, who have wished for the revival of Japan-Korea friendship, and we now witness friendly and cooperative relations in all fields. To all those concerned, I should like to express my profound respect. Both Japan and the Republic of Korea have now come to be expected to play important roles for the peace and prosperity of the world. I earnestly hope that the people of our two countries will further deepen their mutual understanding, make the relations between the two countries increasingly mature, and jointly respond to this challenge.

The Age of Emperor Akihito

97

I feel particularly reassured to see active exchanges between young people, who are to take over responsibility in the coming age, and the emergence from these exchanges of a new friendship to unite the two countries. This new friendship will be the groundwork for the two countries to join forces in making a significant contribution to the future of mankind. I believe that Your Excellency's current visit will lay a foundation for such a new relationship between our two countries that will continue into the 21st century. I understand that Your Excellency will also visit the Kansai area. Fortunately, this is the season of fresh, pleasant greenery. It is my ardent hope that Your Excellency will find your stay in this country agreeable and meaningful. May I now propose a toast to the good health and happiness of Your Excellency the President and Mrs. Roh Tae Woo, and to the further prosperity of the people of the Republic of Korea.

HIS MAJESTY THE EMPEROR’S ADDRESS AT THE STATE BANQUET AT DAM PALACE (MAY 23, 2000)

Your Majesty, Your Royal Highness, It is a pleasure for the Empress and myself to visit your country at your invitation and to have another opportunity to meet Your Majesty and Your Royal Highness. I am very grateful for Your Majesty's most gracious words of welcome. May I also express my sincere appreciation to Your Majesty for all the considerations that you have been showing us in regard to this visit, despite the illness of your father. His Royal Highness Prince Bernhard, The Empress and I sincerely hope for the steady recovery of His Royal Highness Prince Bernhard. I first visited the Netherlands in 1953, eight years after the last World War ended. I still remember fondly that Her Majesty Queen Juliana and His Royal Highness Prince Bernhard invited me to a luncheon at Ter Horst and extended their warm hospitality. Your Majesty visited Japan in 1963 on a State Visit, and since then the Empress and I have had numerous opportunities to meet Your Majesty and have spent some memorable moments together. Your Majesty, you have been always thoughtful; You have thought about the future of the friendly relations between Japan and the Netherlands, being mindful of the feelings of the Dutch people, and you have shown us numerous courtesies throughout the years. For all this, we are deeply grateful. This year many events are taking place in both countries to commemorate the 400th Anniversary of Japanese-Dutch relations. Our relations began when "De Liefde", one of five Dutch ships that had departed from Rotterdam in 1598, drifted ashore in Japan in 1600, after a voyage fraught with difficulties. One of its crew members, Jan Joosten, stayed in Japan and served the shogun Tokugawa Ieyasu. There is still a place in Tokyo named after him to this day. Shortly thereafter, Ieyasu issued a "Shuinjo" to your country, which permitted trade with Japan. Subsequently, Japan adopted a policy of isolation and closed our borders to foreign countries, which lasted for more than 200 years.

The Age of Emperor Akihito

99

However, even during that time, our exchanges with the Netherlands were never interrupted. The Tokugawa Shogunate was kept abreast of the overseas situation by the Dutch Government through the Dutch Trade House on Deshima in Nagasaki. Trade between Japan and the Netherlands also continued. A number of physicians assigned to the Dutch Trade House provided information about Japan to Europe. They also played a role in providing Japanese doctors and scholars with knowledge of European medicine and science. Thus some of the fruits of the European civilization reached Japan by way of the Netherlands. The exchange between the two countries during this period is deeply interesting, as the knowledge from Europe that was introduced through a small outpost, Deshima, contributed to laying the foundations of our country in the period to follow. Even after Japan established diplomatic relations with other Western countries in the latter half of the 19th century, a number of Dutch engineers such as Van Doorn, Escher and De Ri j ke, prominent in such fields as the construction of ports and irrigation facilities as well as riparian improvements, were invited to Japan and played important roles as government advisers. As can be seen from such examples, Japan continued to learn from the Netherlands in many areas and the friendly ties between our two countries continued unchanged. It truly saddens me that the two countries had to engage each other in the last World War after such a history had unfolded between us. It grieves our hearts to think that so many people were victimized in their respective ways during that war and that there are still those who continue to bear unhealed scars from it. We believe that all of us should make incessant efforts to foster peace so that such events will never be repeated. Also, on this occasion, we cannot but recall anew the efforts of many people who have endeavored to strengthen the relationship between our two countries for such a long time since the end of the war until now. In particular, we shall never forget that there are people in your country who, while bearing with the scars of war, still have great hopes for the future of the relationship between our two countries. I am truly delighted that today, fifty-five years after the end of the war, Japan and the Netherlands have achieved very close ties in diverse fields of human endeavor. Our two countries work together to address such important international issues as assistance to developing countries and the protection of the global environment. The Netherlands is one of our most important European partners in investment, trade and other economic activities. We also enjoy very active people to people contacts in a

100

His Majesty the Emperor’s Address at the State Banquet at Dam Palace (May 23, 2000)

multitude of areas. Dutch culture, exemplified by such thinkers as Erasmus and Grotius and painters such as Rembrandt, Vermeer and Van Gogh, has always fascinated and enchanted the Japanese. Every year as many as four million people visit the "Huis ten Bosch" in Nagasaki modeled after the scenery of the Netherlands. The many events that are taking place in commemoration of the 400th Anniversary of JapaneseDutch relations will also contribute to the furtherance of mutual understanding between our two peoples. It is my sincere hope that the peoples of both countries will continue their efforts to achieve mutual understanding, bearing correctly in mind the overall history of the long interchanges between the two peoples, and that, looking towards the 21st century, they will work together for the peace and prosperity of the world. May I propose a toast to the continued health of Your Majesty and Your Royal Highness and to the happiness of the people of the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

MESSAGE FROM HIS MAJESTY THE EMPEROR: “TOGETHER WITH THE PEOPLE AFFLICTED BY THE TOHOKU-PACIFIC EARTHQUAKE” (MARCH 16, 2011)

I am deeply saddened by the devastating situation in the areas hit by the Tohoku-Pacific Ocean Earthquake, an unprecedented 9.0-magnitude earthquake, which struck Japan on March 11th. The number of casualties claimed by the quake and the ensuing tsunami continues to rise by the day, and we do not yet know how many people have lost their lives. I am praying that the safety of as many people as possible will be confirmed. My other grave concern now is the serious and unpredictable condition of the affected nuclear power plant. I earnestly hope that through the all-out efforts of all those concerned, further deterioration of the situation will be averted. Relief operations are now under way with the government mobilizing all its capabilities, but, in the bitter cold, many people who were forced to evacuate are facing extremely difficult living conditions due to shortages of food, drinking water and fuel. I can only hope that by making every effort to promptly implement relief for evacuees, their conditions will improve, even if only gradually, and that their hope for eventual reconstruction will be rekindled. I would like to let you know how deeply touched I am by the courage of those victims who have survived this catastrophe and who, by bracing themselves, are demonstrating their determination to live on. I wish to express my appreciation to the members of the Self-Defense Forces, the police, the fire department, the Japan Coast Guard and other central and local governments and related institutions, as well as people who have come from overseas for relief operations and the members of various domestic relief organizations, for engaging in relief activity round the clock, defying the danger of recurring aftershocks. I wish to express my deepest gratitude to them. I have been receiving, by cable, messages of sympathy from the heads of state of countries around the world, and it was mentioned in many of

102 A Message from His Majesty The Emperor: “Together with the People Afflicted by the Tohoku-Pacific Earthquake” (March 16, 2011)

those messages that the thoughts of the peoples of those countries are with the victims of the disaster. These messages I would like to convey to the people in the afflicted regions. I have been told that many overseas media are reporting that, in the midst of deep sorrow, the Japanese people are responding to the situation in a remarkably orderly manner, and helping each other without losing composure. It is my heartfelt hope that the people will continue to work hand in hand, treating each other with compassion, in order to overcome these trying times. I believe it extremely important for us all to share with the victims as much as possible, in whatever way we can, their hardship in the coming days. It is my sincere hope that those who have been affected by the disaster will never give up hope and take good care of themselves as they live through the days ahead, and that each and every Japanese will continue to care for the afflicted areas and the people for years to come and, together with the afflicted, watch over and support their path to recovery.

MESSAGE FROM HIS MAJESTY THE EMPEROR: “THE DUTIES OF THE EMPEROR AS THE SYMBOL OF THE STATE” (AUGUST 8, 2016)

A major milestone year marking the 70th anniversary of the end of World War II has passed, and in two years we will be welcoming the 30th year of Heisei. As I am now more than 80 years old and there are times when I feel various constraints such as in my physical fitness, in the last few years I have started to reflect on my years as the Emperor, and contemplate on my role and my duties as the Emperor in the days to come. As we are in the midst of a rapidly aging society, I would like to talk to you today about what would be a desirable role of the Emperor in a time when the Emperor, too, becomes advanced in age. While, being in the position of the Emperor, I must refrain from making any specific comments on the existing Imperial system, I would like to tell you what I, as an individual, have been thinking about. Ever since my accession to the throne, I have carried out the acts of the Emperor in matters of state, and at the same time I have spent my days searching for and contemplating on what is the desirable role of the Emperor, who is designated to be the symbol of the State by the Constitution of Japan. As one who has inherited a long tradition, I have always felt a deep sense of responsibility to protect this tradition. At the same time, in a nation and in a world which are constantly changing, I have continued to think to this day about how the Japanese Imperial Family can put its traditions to good use in the present age and be an active and inherent part of society, responding to the expectations of the people. It was some years ago, after my two surgeries that I began to feel a decline in my fitness level because of my advancing age, and I started to think about the pending future, how I should conduct myself should it

104

Message from His Majesty the Emperor: “The Duties of the Emperor as the Symbol of the State” (August 8, 2016)

become difficult for me to carry out my heavy duties in the way I have been doing, and what would be best for the country, for the people, and also for the Imperial Family members who will follow after me. I am already 80 years old, and fortunately I am now in good health. However, when I consider that my fitness level is gradually declining, I am worried that it may become difficult for me to carry out my duties as the symbol of the State with my whole being as I have done until now. I ascended to the throne approximately 28 years ago, and during these years, I have spent my days together with the people of Japan, sharing much of the joys as well as the sorrows that have happened in our country. I have considered that the first and foremost duty of the Emperor is to pray for peace and happiness of all the people. At the same time, I also believe that in some cases it is essential to stand by the people, listen to their voices, and be close to them in their thoughts. In order to carry out the duties of the Emperor as the symbol of the State and as a symbol of the unity of the people, the Emperor needs to seek from the people their understanding on the role of the symbol of the State. I think that likewise, there is need for the Emperor to have a deep awareness of his own role as the Emperor, deep understanding of the people, and willingness to nurture within himself the awareness of being with the people. In this regard, I have felt that my travels to various places throughout Japan, in particular, to remote places and islands, are important acts of the Emperor as the symbol of the State and I have carried them out in that spirit. In my travels throughout the country, which I have made together with the Empress, including the time when I was Crown Prince, I was made aware that wherever I went there were thousands of citizens who love their local community and with quiet dedication continue to support their community. With this awareness I was able to carry out the most important duties of the Emperor, to always think of the people and pray for the people, with deep respect and love for the people. That, I feel, has been a great blessing. In coping with the aging of the Emperor, I think it is not possible to continue reducing perpetually the Emperor’s acts in matters of state and his duties as the symbol of the State. A Regency may be established to act in the place of the Emperor when the Emperor cannot fulfill his duties for reasons such as he is not yet of age or he is seriously ill. Even in such cases, however, it does not change the fact that the Emperor continues to be the Emperor till the end of his life, even though he is unable to fully carry out his duties as the Emperor.

The Age of Emperor Akihito

105

When the Emperor has ill health and his condition becomes serious, I am concerned that, as we have seen in the past, society comes to a standstill and people’s lives are impacted in various ways. The practice in the Imperial Family has been that the death of the Emperor called for events of heavy mourning, continuing every day for two months, followed by funeral events which continue for one year. These various events occur simultaneously with events related to the new era, placing a very heavy strain on those involved in the events, in particular, the family left behind. It occurs to me from time to time to wonder whether it is possible to prevent such a situation. As I said in the beginning, under the Constitution, the Emperor does not have powers related to government. Even under such circumstances, it is my hope that by thoroughly reflecting on our country’s long history of emperors, the Imperial Family can continue to be with the people at all times and can work together with the people to build the future of our country, and that the duties of the Emperor as the symbol of the State can continue steadily without a break. With this earnest wish, I have decided to make my thoughts known. I sincerely hope for your understanding.

ADDRESS BY HIS MAJESTY THE EMPEROR ON THE OCCASION OF THE MEMORIAL CEREMONY FOR THE WAR DEAD (AUGUST 15, 2018)

On this Day to Commemorate the War Dead and Pray for Peace, my thoughts are with the numerous people who lost their precious lives in the last war and their bereaved families, as I attend this Memorial Ceremony for the War Dead with a deep and renewed sense of sorrow. Seventy-three years have already passed since the end of the war, and our country today enjoys peace and prosperity, thanks to the ceaseless effort made by the people of Japan, but when I look back on the sufferings and tribulations of the past, I cannot help but be overcome with deep emotion. Looking back on the long period of post-war peace, reflecting on our past and bearing in mind the feelings of deep remorse, I earnestly hope that the ravages of war will never be repeated. Together with all of our people, I now pay my heartfelt tribute to all those who lost their lives in the war, both on the battlefields and elsewhere, and pray for world peace and for the continuing development of our country.

HIS MAJESTY’S ANSWERS TO THE QUESTION BY THE PRESS ON THE OCCASION OF HIS 85TH BIRTHDAY 2018, AND THE ACTIVITIES OF THE EMPEROR OVER THE PAST YEAR (ON DECEMBER 20, 2018)

Question This is the last year Your Majesty celebrates Your birthday as the Emperor. The days that Your Majesty, together with Her Majesty the Empress, have carried out Your duties will soon come to a closure, and the throne will be succeeded by a new generation of the Imperial Family. Could You tell us Your current thoughts and share with us any messages You would like to convey to the people of Japan? Answer As I look back over the past year, I cannot forget the natural disasters that struck with even greater frequency than in previous years. Many people lost their lives, while many others lost the basis of their livelihoods due to disasters such as torrential rains, earthquakes, and typhoons. I learned about each disaster in the papers and on television and then saw the actual state of damage with my own eyes on my visits to some of the afflicted areas, and the catastrophic destruction caused by the force of nature was beyond my imagination. I would like to offer my sincere condolences to all those who lost their lives and hope that those affected by the disasters will be able to return to their former lives as soon as possible. I remember that the first time I travelled to a disaster-afflicted region was in 1959, when I visited, as a representative of Emperor Showa, the areas struck by the Ise Bay Typhoon. We are now coming to the end of the year, and the day of my abdication in the spring of next year is approaching. Ever since ascending to the throne, I have spent my days searching for what should be the role of the

108 His Majesty’s Answers to the Question by the Press on the Occasion of His 85th Birthday 2018, and the Activities of the Emperor over the Past Year

Emperor who is designated to be the symbol of the State by the Constitution of Japan. I intend to carry out my duties in that capacity and shall continue to contemplate this question as I perform my day-to-day duties until the day of my abdication. The international community after World War II was defined by an EastWest Cold War structure, but when the Berlin Wall came down in the fall of the first year of Heisei (1989), marking the end of the Cold War, there were hopes that the world might now welcome a time of peace. However, subsequent global developments have not necessarily gone in the direction that we desired. It pains my heart that ethnic disputes and religious conflicts have occurred, numerous lives have been lost to acts of terrorism, and a large number of refugees are still enduring lives of hardship today throughout the world. Those were the conditions that Japan faced as we walked the path in the post-war years. I was 11 years old when the war ended, and in 1952, at the age of 18, my Coming of Age Ceremony was carried out followed by the ceremony of Investiture as Crown Prince. That same year the San Francisco Peace Treaty was formally implemented, marking Japan’s return to the international community, and I remember welcoming the foreign ambassadors and ministers newly arriving in Japan one after another. The following year I attended the Coronation of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom, and I spent about six months before and after the Coronation visiting many countries. In the 65 years since then, thanks to the efforts made by the people of Japan, our country has taken steady steps forward in the world and has come to enjoy peace and prosperity. In 1953, the Amami Islands were returned to Japan, followed by the Ogasawara Islands in 1968, and Okinawa in 1972. Okinawa has experienced a long history of hardships, including what happened there during the war. I have visited the prefecture 11 times with the Empress, starting with the visits that I made in my days as Crown Prince, and have studied the history and culture of Okinawa. We are committed to continue to care for the sacrifices that the people of Okinawa have endured over the years, and that commitment will remain unchanged in the future. Japan then entered the Heisei Era, during which we reached the milestone years of the 50th, 60th, and 70th anniversaries of the end of World War II. I have believed it is important not to forget that countless lives were lost in

The Age of Emperor Akihito

109

World War II and that the peace and prosperity of post-war Japan was built upon the numerous sacrifices and tireless efforts made by the Japanese people, and to pass on this history accurately to those born after the war. It gives me deep comfort that the Heisei Era is coming to an end, free of war in Japan. I shall not forget the trips that the Empress and I made to Saipan for the 60th anniversary of the end of the war, to Peleliu Island in Palau for the 70th anniversary, and to Caliraya in the Philippines the following year, to pay our respects to those who lost their lives in the war. I am grateful to each of those countries for welcoming us with warm hospitality. Natural disasters also left an indelible impression on my mind. Many disasters struck Japan in the Heisei Era, from the eruption of Mt. Unzen’s Fugen Peak in 1991, the Earthquake off Southwest Hokkaido and the ensuing tsunami that hit Okushiri Island in 1993, to the Great HanshinAwaji Earthquake in 1995 and the Great East Japan Earthquake in 2011. These disasters have claimed numerous lives and affected countless people, and I have no words to describe the deep sadness I feel when I think of this. At the same time, I have been heartened to see that, in the face of such difficulties, the spirit of volunteering and other forms of cooperation is growing among the people and that the awareness of disaster preparedness and the capacity to respond to disasters are increasing. I am always touched by the sight of people coping in an orderly manner when disasters strike. The Empress and I have also considered it an important duty of ours to care for those with disabilities and others faced with difficulties. Sports for the disabled began in Europe for the purpose of rehabilitation, but it has always been our hope that, extending beyond those origins, they will grow into something that disabled persons themselves enjoy doing and that people enjoy watching as well. It moves me deeply to see that people are now enjoying the Paralympics and also the National Sports Games for the Disabled, held annually in Japan. This year marked 150 years since the beginning of Japanese emigration overseas. Over the years many Japanese people who emigrated have continued to work hard, with the help of the people in their newly settled countries, and they have come to play important roles in the societies there. Thinking of the efforts of those people of Japanese ancestry, we have

110 His Majesty’s Answers to the Question by the Press on the Occasion of His 85th Birthday 2018, and the Activities of the Emperor over the Past Year

made a point of meeting with them as much as possible when visiting those countries. Meanwhile, many foreign nationals have come to work in Japan in recent years. When the Empress and I visited the Philippines and Viet Nam, we met individuals who were making efforts towards their goals of working in Japan one day. Bearing in mind that the people of Japanese ancestry are living as active members of society with the help of the people in their respective countries, I hope that the Japanese people will be able to warmly welcome as members of our society those who come to Japan to work here. At the same time, the number of international visitors to Japan is increasing year by year. It is my hope that these visitors will see Japan with their own eyes and deepen their understanding of our country, and that goodwill and friendship will be promoted between Japan and other countries. In April next year, the Empress and I will celebrate the 60th anniversary of our marriage. The Empress has always been at my side, understood my thoughts, and supported me in my position and official duties as I performed my duties as the Emperor. She also showed great devotion towards Emperor Showa and others related to me and raised our three children with deep affection. Looking back, it was soon after I embarked on my life’s journey as an adult member of the Imperial Family that I met the Empress. Feeling a bond of deep trust, I asked her to be my fellow traveller and have journeyed with her as my partner to this day. As I come to the end of my journey as Emperor, I would like to thank from the bottom of my heart the many people who accepted and continued to support me as the symbol of the State. I am also truly grateful to the Empress, who herself was once one of the people, but who chose to walk this path with me, and over sixty long years continued to serve with great devotion both the Imperial Family and the people of Japan. Finally, I will abdicate next spring and a new era will begin. I am sincerely thankful to the many people who are engaged in the preparations. The Crown Prince, who will be the Emperor in the new era, and Prince Akishino, who will be supporting the new Emperor, have each accumulated various experiences, and I think that, while carrying on the traditions of the Imperial Family, they will continue to walk their paths, keeping pace with the ever-changing society. As the year draws to a close, it is my hope that the coming year will be a good year for all the people.

ADDRESS BY HIS MAJESTY THE EMPEROR ON THE OCCASION OF THE COMMEMORATION CEREMONY OF THE THIRTIETH ANNIVERSARY OF HIS MAJESTY THE EMPEROR'S ACCESSION TO THE THRONE (FEBRUARY 24, 2019)

On the occasion of the thirtieth anniversary of my reign, I would like to offer my deep gratitude to the government of Japan and to the people both in Japan and overseas for the congratulatory messages I received. As I look back on the great number of events that have gone by since I ascended the throne thirty years ago, I am deeply moved to be able to mark this day today blessed by the many felicitations from people both in Japan and overseas. During the three decades of the Heisei era, Japan has been free of war for the first time in modern current history, supported by the strong desire of the people for peace. However, the thirty years was by no means an uneventful time as our country encountered many unanticipated challenges. As the world entered a cycle of climate change, Japan, too, has been struck by innumerable natural disasters. Our country also faced a great deal of social phenomena never experienced before due to the demographic changes arising from the aging population and the declining birthrate. As an island nation under comparatively favorable circumstances, our country has been able to cultivate a distinctive culture. Today, in this globalizing world, however, I believe that Japan needs to open up to the world further, establish its own place in that world with wisdom, and build relations with other countries with sincerity and good will. Ever since ascending the throne as Emperor and to this day, I have spent my days praying for peace in the country and for the happiness of the people and thinking about my role as the symbol of the State. However, this path of seeking the ideal role of the Emperor as the symbol of the State as designated by the Constitution of Japan, has been an endless one.

112

The Occasion of the Commemoration Ceremony of the thirtieth Anniversary of His Majesty the Emperor's Accession to the Throne

It is my hope that those who will succeed me will continue to seek the ideal role of the symbol of the State in the next era and the era after that, and that they will continue to add and complement to the role of the Emperor as the symbol of the State. I consider myself most fortunate to have always been able to perform my duties as the Emperor with the help of the people. The work that I have carried out was only made possible with the approval and support of various government organizations. I have been able to fulfill my duties thanks to the people of Japan, whose symbol of unity I take pride and joy in being, and the cultural level of this country which has been nurtured by the people of Japan over many years, from the past to the present. Throughout the past three decades, our country has been fraught with many natural disasters, and the people who had the misfortune of living in those disaster-stricken communities encountered and had to endure much grief, which they have done so bravely. At the same time, across the nation, people have shared in the sorrow of those communities as if it were their own and stood by their fellow citizens in various ways. These are among my most unforgettable memories during my reign. I would like to take this opportunity today to also express my gratitude to the people of other countries who showed great concern when Japan was in the midst of suffering and sorrow. Countless countries, international organizations and regions gave us their gracious and kind assistance. To those people I offer my deepest heartfelt gratitude. Soon after the start of the Heisei era, the Empress composed a moving waka poem: Tomodomo ni Tairakeki yo o Kizukan to Morohito no kotoba Kuniuchi ni mitsu. “Together with you We’ll forge a peaceful era” So say [to] the people Ah, now the country is filled And blessed by these words. The Heisei era began with a period of deep mourning for the demise of the late Emperor Showa. As such, the words in this poem were by no means loudly proclaimed. But to this day, we remember and hold precious the messages that we received from across the country at the time, filled

The Age of Emperor Akihito

113

with the quiet but firm determination to “build a peaceful Japan together with the Imperial family.” I would like to express my deep gratitude to the people who organized this ceremony today to commemorate the thirtieth anniversary of my accession to the throne. Finally, once again, I pray for peace and happiness of all the people in Japan and around the world.

REMARKS BY HIS MAJESTY THE EMPEROR ON THE OCCASION OF THE CEREMONY OF HIS ABDICATION AT THE SEIDEN (STATE HALL), APRIL 30, 31ST YEAR OF HEISEI (APRIL 30, 2019)

Today, I am concluding my duties as the Emperor. I would like to offer my deep gratitude to the words just spoken by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe on behalf of the people of Japan.1 Since ascending the throne 30 years ago, I have performed my duties as the Emperor with a deep sense of trust in and respect for the people, and I consider myself most fortunate to have been able to do so. I sincerely thank the people who accepted and supported me in my role as the symbol of the State. I sincerely wish, together with the Empress, that the Reiwa era, which begins tomorrow, will be a stable and fruitful one, and I pray, with all my heart, for peace and happiness for all the people in Japan and around the world.

Notes 1 The Emperor here referred to remarks by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe on behalf of the People of Japan, on the occasion of the Ceremony of the Abdication of His Majesty the Emperor at the Seidan (State Hall) on April 30, 2019. Abe stated that “I make these remarks with the greatest respect. Your Majesty the Emperor will abdicate the Imperial throne today in accordance with the provisions of the Special Measures Law on the Imperial House Law Concerning the Abdication of the Emperor and Other Matters. Across the thirty years of the Heisei era, under the idea that peace will be achieved both within and outside the nation, we have walked a path together with Your Majesty. During this time, Your Majesty, wishing for the peace and stability of the nation and for the happiness of the people, has engaged in each of Your Majesty’s official duties wholeheartedly and fulfilled Your Majesty’s responsibility as a symbol of the State and of the unity of the people. Japan, while enjoying peace and prosperity, also faced a number of hardships, including a series of major natural disasters. At such times, Your Majesty, together

The Age of Emperor Akihito

115

with Her Majesty the Empress, walked alongside the people of Japan, encouraging disaster victims in a close and friendly manner and giving the Japanese people courage and hope towards tomorrow. Today, the day of Your Majesty’s abdication, as we look back on the time that has passed and turn our thoughts to the heart of Your Majesty, who has always experienced joys and sorrows together with the people of Japan, our feelings of profound respect and appreciation are brought home once again. We will take deeply to heart the path walked by Your Majesty over the years. As we do so, we will also engage in our very best efforts to create a bright future for a Japan that is peaceful and brimming with hope, a Japan in which we take pride. I wish in the strongest terms for Your Majesties to remain in good health for many years to come. I express my sincere gratitude to Your Majesties and my best wishes for the Imperial Household to flourish further.” (Prime Minister of Japan and His Cabinet. Retrieved May 15, 2019 from http://japan.kantei.go.jp/98_abe/statement/201904/_00003.html)

116

References

References “1990 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan.” (1990). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved May 21, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/e-okotoba/01/gokanso/shinnen-h02.html “1991 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan.” (1991). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved May 21, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/e-okotoba/01/gokanso/shinnen-h03.html “1992 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan.” (1992). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved May 21, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/e-okotoba/01/gokanso/shinnen-h04.html “1993 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan.” (1993). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved May 21, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/e-okotoba/01/gokanso/shinnen-h05.html “1994 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan.” (1994). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved May 21, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/e-okotoba/01/gokanso/shinnen-h06.html “1995 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan.” (1995). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved May 21, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/e-okotoba/01/gokanso/shinnen-h07.html “1996 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan.” (1996). The Imperial Household Agency. Retreived May 21, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/e-okotoba/01/gokanso/shinnen-h08.html “1997 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan.” (1997). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved May 21, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/e-okotoba/01/gokanso/shinnen-h09.html “1998 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan.” (1998). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved May 21, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/e-okotoba/01/gokanso/shinnen-h10.html “1999 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan.” (1999). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved May 21, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/e-okotoba/01/gokanso/shinnen-h11.html “2000 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan.” (2000). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved May 21, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/e-okotoba/01/gokanso/shinnen-h12.html “2001 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan.” (2001). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved May 21, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/e-okotoba/01/gokanso/shinnen-h13.html

The Age of Emperor Akihito

117

“2002 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan.” (2002). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved May 21, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/e-okotoba/01/gokanso/shinnen-h14.html “2003 New Year Greeting by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan.” (2003). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved May 21, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/e-okotoba/01/gokanso/shinnen-h15.html “2004 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts.” (2004). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved May 21, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/e-okotoba/01/gokanso/shinnen-h16.html “2005 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts.” (2005). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved May 21, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/e-okotoba/01/gokanso/shinnen-h17.html “2006 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts.” (2006). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved May 21, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/e-okotoba/01/gokanso/shinnen-h18.html “2007 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts.” (2007). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved May 21, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/e-okotoba/01/gokanso/shinnen-h19.html “2008 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts.” (2008). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved May 21, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/e-okotoba/01/gokanso/shinnen-h20.html “2009 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts.” (2009). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved May 21, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/e-okotoba/01/gokanso/shinnen-h21.html “2010 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts.” (2010). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved May 21, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/e-okotoba/01/gokanso/shinnen-h22.html “2011 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts.” (2011). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved May 21, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/e-okotoba/01/gokanso/shinnen-h23.html “2012 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts.” (2012). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved May 21, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/e-okotoba/01/gokanso/shinnen-h24.html “2013 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts.” (2013). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved May 21, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/e-okotoba/01/gokanso/shinnen-h25.html “2014 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts.” (2014). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved May 21, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/e-okotoba/01/gokanso/shinnen-h26.html

118

References

“2015 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts.” (2015). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved May 21, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/e-okotoba/01/gokanso/shinnen-h27.html “2016 His Majesty the Emperor's New Year Thoughts.” (2016). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved May 21, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/e-okotoba/01/gokanso/shinnen-h28.html “A Message from His Majesty The Emperor: ‘Together with the People Afflicted by the Tohoku-Pacific Earthquake.’” (2011, March 16). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved February 12, 2019, from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/e-okotoba/01/address/tohokujishinh230316-mov.html “Address by His Majesty the Emperor on the Occasion of the Commemoration Ceremony of the thirtieth Anniversary of His Majesty the Emperor's Accession to the Throne” (2019, February 24). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved February 52, 2019, from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/page/okotoba/detailEn/42#152 “Address by His Majesty the Emperor on the Occasion of the Memorial Ceremony for the War Dead.” (2018, August 15). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved Feruary 12, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/page/okotoba/detailEn/30#130 “The Emperor's Accession Address on January 9, 1989.” In Picken, S. D. B. (1994). Essentials of Shinto: An Analytic Guide to Practical Teachings. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group, p. 80. “The Emperor's Address at the state banquet in honor of South Korean President and Mrs. Roh Tae-woo.” (1990, May 25). The Daily Yomiuri, p. 1. “His Majesty the Emperor's Address at the State Banquet at Dam Palace.” (2000, May 23). Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan. Retrieved February 12, 2019, from http://www.mofa.go.jp/j_info/japan/ev0005/address.html “His Majesty's Answers to the Question by the Press on the Occasion of His 85th Birthday 2018, and the Activities of the Emperor over the Past Year.” (2018, December 20). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved February 12, 2019, from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/page/kaiken/showEn/25 “Message from His Majesty The Emperor: “The Duties of the Emperor as the Symbol of the State.” (2016, August 8). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrieved Februray 12, 2019, from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/page/okotoba/detailEn/12

The Age of Emperor Akihito

119

“Remarks by His Majesty the Emperor on the Occasion of the Ceremony of His Abdication at the Seiden (State Hall), April 30, 31st Year of Heisei.” (2019, April 30). The Imperial Household Agency. Retrived May 4, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/page/okotoba/detailEn/46#155

APPENDIX SPEECH OF EMPEROR NARUHITO

Address by His Majesty the Emperor on the Occasion of the Sokui-go-Choken-no-gi (First Audience after the Accession to the Throne) at the Seiden (State Hall), May 1, 1st Year of Reiwa (2019) I have hereby succeeded to the Throne pursuant to the Constitution of Japan and the Special Measures Law on the Imperial House Law. When I think about the important responsibility I have assumed, I am filled with a sense of solemnity. Looking back, His Majesty the Emperor Emeritus, since acceding to the Throne, performed each of his duties in earnest for more than 30 years, while praying for world peace and the happiness of the people, and at all times sharing in the joys and sorrows of the people. He showed profound compassion through his own bearing. I would like to express my heartfelt respect and appreciation of the comportment shown by His Majesty the Emperor Emeritus as the symbol of the State and of the unity of the people of Japan. In acceding to the Throne, I swear that I will reflect deeply on the course followed by His Majesty the Emperor Emeritus and bear in mind the path trodden by past emperors, and will devote myself to self-improvement. I also swear that I will act according to the Constitution and fulfill my responsibility as the symbol of the State and of the unity of the people of Japan, while always turning my thoughts to the people and standing with them. I sincerely pray for the happiness of the people and the further development of the nation as well as the peace of the world.

Speech of Emperor Naruhito

121

Reference “Address by His Majesty the Emperor on the Occasion of the Sokui-go-Choken-no-gi (First Audience after the Accession to the Throne) at the Seiden (State Hall), May 1, 1st Year of Reiwa.” (2019, May 1). Retrieved May 21, 2019 from http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/page/okotoba/detailEn/47#156