Japón Visto Por Unamuno By Fernando Blanco Cendón

Other critiques
Aside from those two dominating views against Japan, there were other more marginal arguments against the admiration and emulation of Japan. This was the case defended by Unamuno, famous Spanish writer and philosopher, who at the time was closer to the regenerationism and socialism, even though later he would support Franco’s regime believing it to be some sort of authoritarian regenerationist. The views Unamuno had of Japan have been briefly studied in a conference paper titled Japón visto por Unamuno by Fernando Blanco Cendón. Acording to Blanco Cendón, Unamuno saw Japan as a counterexample of his own individualistic and subjective philosophy. His reasons for disliking the Japanese were the idea of Japan collectivist and
objective country opposed to his own individualistic and subjective self . Ironically, in his subjectivity, Unamuno had some very accurate thoughts about the image of Japan in Europe. He was closer than most to understand that the Japan he disliked, was not the real Japan, but the image crafted ‘by those westerners that are insist in taking it as an exemplification of their -also western- doctrines’ .
Parallelisms in racial and religious discourses
The parallelism of the religious and racial responses to Japanese modernity are striking.
Both discourses parted from a very similar premise: that religion or race were inherently linked to modern civilization. The different answers given by the discourses were also very similar in nature. In the same way that some racial discourses explained the Japanese success by saying that the Japanese were a recessive race that was simply good at copying knowledge, the Catholic discourses defended that Japan was superficially emulating Christianity and argued that they were incapable of more because of their faith. In the alternative and more positive responses too, some resemblances can be found. One of those is the need to portray Japan as a country closer to whiteness or Christianity and separated from other Asian countries. The racial discourses attempted to separate Japan from Asia and tried to link it to more developed regions like northern Europe, while the religious discourses defended that the Japanese were closer than ever to evangelization. Another common element that can be seen across the anti-Japanization discourses was the use of particularities as a proof of the falsehood of the Japanese civilization. This was a technique used by almost every article written about Japan. Denouncing the way woman were treated in Japan, for example, was used by Clavanara to denounce the falsehood of the Japanese civilization. ‘the situation of the Japanese woman is a symptom that denounces a disastrous moral state, a society that carries within the mortal germ of vice and injustice’ he wrote. Another of the most common example was the criticism of Jiu-Jitsu as a barbaric practice. This practice was used by Unamuno to criticize the Japanese , but also by many other newspapers and publishers. El Guadalete, a monarchic and conservative newspaper, reported on a particularly nasty Jiu-Jitsu match, and related this ‘brave savagery’ to the Japanese civilization . These similarities
open ground for further research and raise the question of whether these two discourses were in dialogue and being mutually influenced. Indeed, it is very likely that given the dispersion of the discourses there was some interaction and dialogue. The political identification of the discourses with the conservative right wing is also something to consider.
Politics, Japanization and anti Japanization discourses
It is also striking how, after the Russo-Japanese war, while in Spain and other countries discourses of Japanization were taking place, according to Kowner Japan started to be perceived under a particularly negative racial light . The of two opposing views of Japan did not coexist in isolation. In fact, part of the anti-Japanese discourses turned towards the emulators of Japan. National politics played a major role in the development of this debate.
Unsurprisingly, the discourses against Japanization were articulated around Anti-liberal conservative and catholic circles. That doesn’t mean there weren’t some exceptions like a member of the liberal-democratic party who supported the Russians during the war because they were part ‘of our race’ . However, and particularly in the case of the catholic views, the anti-Japanese views were more restricted to the group than the pro-Japanese. Meaning that while some Catholics and right wing activists could be found among the Japanophiles, it was much more difficult to find progressive and left wing individuals detracting the emulation. For example, there were some Catholic Japanophiles like Juan Lucena de los Ríos who denounced the appropriation of the image of Japan by antireligious groups who wanted to use it as a symbol of atheism . He defended that the Japanese were not in any way atheists and could not be used as a proof of laic superiority . But it is very unlikely that there were many liberal and members of left wing parties denouncing Japan as a false civilization due to their religious affiliation.
In the same way that the regenerationists used the Japanese prestige to defend and justify their policies, the conservatives and Catholics used the anti-Japanese discourse to dismiss and criticize the liberals and the left. This is especially clear in the way they defined and constructed the ‘enemy’ in their articles. Although this anti-Japanization discourses appropriated and used anti-Japanese theories, their comments and conclusions were directed towards their political opponents. Within the discourse, some specific political terms were linked to the idea of admiration and emulation of Japan with negative connotations. Some common terms were ‘liberals’, the ‘freethinkers’ or ‘atheists’. This was direct mention of the Spanish admirers and emulators of Japan. El correo iberico for example, denounced how according to the ‘freethinkers’, Japan was the demonstration that ‘it is possible to be very civilized and powerful without being Christian. In other words, that Christianity is useless, even to be cultivated’ . These articles defend why Japan could not be in any way relevant, using religious or racial theories with some examples of barbarism. Another good example of this is Claravana’s article on Japan, where he identifies Japan as a liberal symbol and criticizes it using some specific data, like the state of woman . Finally arriving to the conclusion that Japan was a false civilization, and that therefore, the ‘liberals’, ‘atheists’ or ‘freethinkers’ were either wrong, or outright evil for defending and even proposing to emulate such a country.