OK, I profess no Japanese knowledge, but I thought I heard it was “hara-kiri” when spoken, and “seppuku” when written. Confirm, deny?
ETA: This seems to suggest that what I just wrote is wrong, although it links to a Wikipedia article which does relay that information (and may have been where I first came across it some time ago.)
Yes, it’s harder to get information from real life, but “historical” novels make thing sound so much funner.
Yes, this is correct, especially after seppuku was used as a form of capital punishment. It’s apparently extremely painful, and not matter how much the person wants to do this, the body would revolt.
Deny. It’s said seppuku and not harakiri.
Oddly enough, Japanese aren’t as fascinated with the concept as Westerners, so it doesn’t often come up in casual conversations.
I think we could blame the US/Japanese TV movie of Shogun for most of the suicide talk here.
Thank goodness the reactors were not built by an American company, 'cause then I’m sure we’d see 80-year-old GE retirees plunging off their Florida balconies like pine needles on a leftover Christmas tree.
Thank you for the snark. My remark was intended as a joke; clearly it missed the mark.
Roddy
<hijack>
Has there been any (publicly known) seppuku since Mishima Yukio’s after his failed coup d’état in 1970?
</hijack>
As has been noted Japan has a fairly high suicide rate. People kill themselves for all sorts of reasons (ultimately because they don’t want to go on living).
There are lots of reasons to not want to go on living, none of which are especially unique to Japanese culture. For instance, I can imagine a Japanese officer in WWII killing himself because (a) he had been fed propaganda about how badly he’d be tortured, etc. by the foreign devils if captured; (b) he wanted to give up but feared his family would be treated badly if it was learned he surrendered; (c) he knew he might be on the hook for war crimes charges; (d) he just couldn’t imagine living in an occupied Japanese society radically different from anything he’d ever known. None of these have much (or all) to do with “honor” or “shame” or “atonement.”
Similarly, look at this:
Is that a shame/honor suicide to make a statement? I’d say – not clear it is at all. If a disgraced American pol or exec killed himself sometime after his life’s career ended in a flaming wreck (this happens not infrequently), we’d put it down to depression, desperation – but not some symbolic atonement. We’d think of it as a very personal decision driven by a number of contributing factors and predispositions, not the obedience to some cultural mandate.
apparenly so, this may have been a ‘responsibility’ act.
At a guess, his judo training may have given him more of a bushido mindset than your average powerplant worker, but that’s a WAG.
Hey, Huerta88… How could you not feel that whoosh?
Certainly not seppuku by any stretch, but it’s sounding like a number of guys have continued to work in the nuclear plants, absorbing what must be fatal doses of radiation, out of a heroic sense of responsibility. I’m sure if the same thing happened in America there would be brave guys sticking it out amidst the radiation as well, but it wouldn’t surprise me if the psychology of it were slightly different in America vs. Japan.
Nitpick: Actually, that particular respondent is saying that he/she could understand suicide in that case.
But aside from that “reading-equivalent-of-a-typographical-error,” your points in this thread are all spot on.
Personally, I think TEPCO’s hands are very dirty in this incident, and if it gets even worse before it gets better I wouldn’t be shocked if someone involved took their own life down the line somewhere, but it is definitely not “likely.” And the possibility of mass suicides is, as you said, absolutely zero.
Okay, I buy that a tsunami occurring at all is “entirely predictable.” What I do not buy is that the size of this tsunami was predictable given that it was launched by an earthquake that rates in the neighborhood of 9 on the more popular rating scales.
Yes. I think I could saythe same thing. 
Thank goodness the reactors were not built by an American company, 'cause then I’m sure we’d see 80-year-old GE retirees plunging off their Florida balconies like pine needles on a leftover Christmas tree.
[/QUOTE]
But not if they don’t read historical novels.
Roddy, My apologies. It was my post which clearly missed the mark, in that I had intended it to agree with you. My assumption was that you were joking.
So yes, it was a snark, but not addressed at you. Should have put a wink.
[QUOTE=outlierrn]
apparenly so, this may have been a ‘responsibility’ act.
At a guess, his judo training may have given him more of a bushido mindset than your average powerplant worker, but that’s a WAG.
[/QUOTE]
Interestedly enough, the Japanese language version of the article simply states that he killed himself without mentioning it was a form of seppuku. I did find a Japanese blog which mentioned it. Inokuma apparently cut his abdomen (it did not say how deeply) and then cut his throat.
Something I learned from that blog is that the popular image of seppuku being done in white clothes is incorrect, and that the clothing was a pale yellow, in order to not show the blood as much.
This is an interesting point, and I’d be curious if you could suggest what differences there may be.
My initial thoughts are that this would fit in the same category as “suicide missions” which armies in all societies from the dawn of civilizations have undertaken. I’ve read that in most cases, it has been the loyalty to a group which inspires such sacrifices, rather than serving some greater cause.
Although the desperate kamikaze (more correctly tokkotai tactics at the end of WWII are often thought of as indicators of a completely different mind set of the Japanese, few people reach the same conclusions about the societies of the combatants of WWI in which hundreds of thousands(?) (millions?, sorry WWI isn’t my specialty) were slaughtered by brute force infantry charges against machine gun placements.
Generals have always conducted wars in ways in which the solders died massively, and often without great odds of survival. People regularly vow to fight to the death. Think of the Alamo and countless other examples.
Even outside of war, people regularly place themselves in great deals of danger in performance of duty. The first image I have is the fighter fighters rushing into the World Trade Center on 9/11.
Is there really a difference, or is this just something which people are quick to think that somehow the Japanese are different than you and I?
Oh I knew that, probably should have just quoted your accurate part about Shogun and the effect of various fictional portrayals. Don’t worry, I know the only thing that will have Florida retirees taking the plunge is if the dinner buffet is delayed till 5:35.
Oops. I had a read a number of the comments, and picking one to use as an example, and read that one too quick. Thanks for catching that.
I agree with your position completely. TEPCO screwed up badly but the Japanese nuclear is really good at ducking responsibility for accidents.
Absolutely, massive large tsunamis after large earthquakesnever happen, after all.
Of if they do occur, then six years is far too short of a time to decide to reconsider ones own risk
Absolutely, massive large tsunamis after large earthquakesnever happen, after all.
Of if they do occur, then six years is far too short of a time to decide to reconsider ones own risk
Well, you could, if the link in that post had actually been done so it worked.
I know it’s 4:25, but I HAVE A COUPON!
Fuck. Nothing screws up a good joke than a missed punchline.
Well, I believe the Japanese have been socialized to be somewhat different from me (a white, middle class American) just as there are social and psychological differences between me and an Australian Aborigine or a French person or a poor minority American. I’m not claiming those differences are necessarily huge or that we cannot understand one another’s point of view.
Here are a couple of differences I have noticed from my years of living in Japan:
A tendency to go way out of one’s way to avoid inconveniencing others. CNN had an article the other day mentioning that some people want to flee Tokyo but are choosing not to in case another earthquake should cause their pipes to break and leak into someone else’s apartment, for example. Risking one’s life to fix a nuclear reactor could be seen as the ultimate in making things go smoothly for others, especially if you think you have some responsibility for its failure.
A sense that it’s best to go along with what others are doing and not disrupt the harmony by standing out as different. Seen when a bunch of Japanese people all order the same drink no matter what they might actually prefer. If others are risking their lives it would be really awkward to be the one guy who, if given a choice, chooses not to. It might be easier for an American to say, “I have five kids and I’m taking them to safety, screw fixing the nuclear reactor.”
A more secular viewpoint, in general, than the average American. A church-going American might think Christian values and God’s will should guide the decision of whether to risk death fixing a nuclear plant. The Japanese person is probably going to look more at society’s expectations, and their own fairly secular morality. (Of course there are many Japanese who are devout members of a variety of religions.)
But I certainly agree with you that suicide missions and other self-sacrifice for the good of others are found across cultures.