| |||||
МЕНЮ
| Cultural Valuesp> Interpersonal relationships contrast on the basis of the role of the individual and group interaction. Japanese patterns are characterized by formality and complementary relationships that stress the value of dependence or amae. Amae is the key to understanding Japanese society. The concept of amae underlies the Japanese emphasis on the group over the individual, the acceptance of constituted authority, and the stress on particularistic rather than universalistic relationships. In the homogenous, vertical society of Japan the dominant value is conformity to or identity with the group. The Japanese insist upon the insignificance of the individual. Symmetrical relationships focus on the similarities of individuals; complementary relationships exploit differences in age, sex, role and status. There are many ways in which the Japanese publicly acknowledge a social hierarchy-in the use of language, in seating arrangements at social gatherings, in bowing to one another and hundreds of others. Watch Japanese each other and the principles will become quite apparent. Notice who bows lower, who waits for the other to go first, who apologizes more: (1) younger defers to older; (2) female defers to male; (3) student defers to teacher; (4); the seller's bow is lower than the buyer's; and (6) in a school club or organization where ranks are fixed, the lower ranked is, of course, subordinate. These features of interpersonal relationships lead to an emphasis on the public self in the United States and on the private self in Japan, Americans being more open in the demonstration of personal feelings and attitudes than the Japanese. Let us look to this question in detail. JAPANESE INTERPERSONAL NORMS Numerous studies by social scientists of national character or culture have appeared in recent years, initially as a response to the need for knowledge of enemy countries in World War II. Most of these studies have is asked a substantive question: what is the nature of the behavior shared by all, or a majority, of the members of a national society? Once this shared behavior is "discovered," its written description becomes an outline of the national culture of that country. This approach has been extensively criticized on the grounds that the behavior of the members of any complex society is so variable that any attempt to describe the shared items results in superficial generalization. Critics have also pointed out that descriptions of national cultures frequently consist of statements of norms only, and do not denote actual behavior. At this point in the account of our own research it is necessary to raise questions about the nature of national cultures. However, we shall not attempt to claim that our answer to these will be valid for all members of the Japanese nation. We do claim validity for our own subjects and are also willing to guess that much of what we say will apply to the majority of Japanese men who were socialized in prewar and wartime Japan in families of the middle and upper income brackets. We shall not claim that our subjects necessarily behaved in the manner suggested, for the description itself pertains to norms or principles and not to behavior. In a subsequent section we shall provide a description and analysis of the behavior of our subjects with reference to these norms. This procedure implies the concept of a "cultural model": essentially a highly generalized description of principles, shared by a large number of people and maintained in the form of personal values. To some degree these principles or norms constitute guides or rules for behavior: sometimes followed literally, sometimes not, but always available as a generalized protocol for use by the individual in finding his way through social relationships and in judging the acts of others. The first half of the model we shall construct pertains to the
patterns of interpersonal relations in the two societies, Japan and Studies of Japanese social norms have revealed the following general features: articulate codification of the norms; strong tendencies toward a face-to-face, or "primary group" type of intimacy; an emphasis upon hierarchical status positions; concern for the importance of status; elative permanence of status once established; and "behavioral reserve" or discipline. These will be discussed in order. articulate codification of rules During the long Tokugawa period of centralized feudalism, Japanese
patterns of interpersonal behavior underwent an elaborate
institutionalization. The Shogunate attempted to fix the position of each
class with respect to the others and established written rules of behavior
for its members. The family system had developed historically along
patrilineal lines, and during Tokugawa times such patterns of relations
between kin were proclaimed as an official social code. After the Meiji It is necessary to note that this system of codified rules was
consistently adhered to in actual behavior by only a minority of the
population: the samurai and nobility. The remainder of the population
followed the rules in part, or only in "public" situations where the
pressure for conformity was strong. In the decades subsequent to the primary associative qualities An important aspect of Japanese social norms may be described in hierarchy If Japanese social norms present an image of society in the character
of a primary group, it is at least a hierarchically organized primary
group—one in which there are explicit gradations of status from superior to
inferior. The family is ideally organized on patrilineal-patriarchal
principles, with the father as dominant, the eldest son superordinate to
the younger, and so on. Primogeniture was the law of the land until the Japanese business firms, government bureaus, and many universities and
schools are organized in ways reminiscent of this familial model; or their
organization may be more closely related historically to feudal or lord-
vassal principles. In such cases the employee and the employer, chief and
underling, or teacher and pupil occupy positions which carry with them
defined and ascribed rights and duties, in which the superior generally
occupies a paternalistic and authoritarian role. The term sensei means
teacher, or mentor, but its wide application to people outside of the
teaching profession suggests its connotation of benevolent but stern
authority and superiority. Likewise the term oyabun ("parent-status" or concern for status All this would imply, of course, very considerable preoccupation with
matters of social status. It is necessary or at least desirable for every Concern with status is evidenced further by the incorporation into the relative permanence of status Once status positions are clearly defined, the parties holding these
statuses are expected to occupy them for very long periods—often throughout
life. A superior, for example one's professor, retains strong symbolic
hierarchical precedence throughout the life of both parties, even when the
student has become a professional equal in productivity, rank, and pay. behavioral reserve and discipline A "tight" social organization based on concern with status and hierarchy is by necessity one in which social behavior tends to be governed more by norms, or public expectancies, and less by free or idiosyncratic- response to a given situation. At the same time, a system of this kind requires institutional outlets in the event that obligations, duties, status relationships, and the like, for one reason or another, may be unclear or not yet defined. The Japanese have utilized, for this purpose, the concept of enryo, loosely translatable as “hesitance” or "reserve." The development of this pattern in Japanese culture is of particular importance for our problem here. The original meaning of enryo pertained to the behavior of the subordinate in hierarchical status relations. The subordinate was expected to show compliant obsequiousness toward the superior: he should hold his temper, check any aggressive response to frustration (and of course, bide his time). This pattern of behavior may be manifested by Japanese when they interact with persons of their own or any society whom they regard as superior in status. Whenever the presumption is that a superior person occupies the "alter" status, enryo is likely to be observed by "ego". Now, as Japan entered the stage of industrialization, with its
expanded opportunities for individual enterprise and mobility (a process
still under way), social situations became more complicated, more
ambiguous, and more violative of the traditional rules and behavioral
prescriptions. Since at the same time the basic hierarchical, primary-group
character of the norms prevailed, there emerged strong needs for adjustive
behavior. Enryo became the escape-hatch: in the new ambiguity, behavioral
reserve and noncommitment became the frequent alternative, and the Japanese
manifested such withdrawn, unresponsive behavior in the event that a
particular interpersonal situation lacked clear designation of the statuses
of ego and alter. Much the same situation holds when the Japanese is
overseas. Here, too, his behavior is frequently characterized by enryo—
often concealing confusion and embarrassment over his ignorance of the
social rules of the foreign society. Thus the "shyness" or reserved
behavior often found in Japanese on the American campus can be due either
to the fact that the Japanese views Americans, or certain Americans, as
superior people; or to the fact that he is simply not sure how to behave in 2. JAPANESE AND AMERICAN PATTERNS OF SOCIAL BEHAVIOR We may now view these normative patterns from a comparative cultural perspective. A detailed description of the American norms will not be required, since it may be presumed that the reader has sufficient familiarity with them. We shall select those American rules of interpersonal behavior that are "opposites" to the Japanese patterns just described. In a later section we shall discuss cases of similarity. There is among Americans a tendency toward an initial egalitarian
response oil the part of "ego": two persons are presumed to be equal unless
proven otherwise. (The Japanese norms contain an opposite premise: when
status is vague, inequality is expected.) In practice this egalitarian
principle in American interpersonal behavior leads to what the Japanese
might perceive as fluidity and unpredictability of behavior-in interaction,
and highly variable or at least less apparent concern for status. Things
like wealth, public versus private situations, and a host of other features
may all in the American case, influence the behavior of ego and alter in
ways which are not subject to predicate codification, Allowance is made
continually for subtle changes in roles of those interacting, with a strain
toward equalization if hierarchical differences appear. Thus, while in
social situations the Japanese may find it difficult to communicate unless
status differences are clear, the American, in view of his egalitarian
preference, may point to and actually experience status difference as a
source of interpersonal tension and difficulty in communication. Thus the Finally, reserve or discipline is in some cases much less apparent in In American interpersonal behavior the patterns of tact,
obsequiousness, and other forms of retiring behavior are seen continually,
but they are often much more situational and idiosyncratic. Americans lack
a concept with the generalized cultural meaning of enryo; reserve may be a
useful form of behavior for some people, but not others, or in some
situations; it may be associated with status differences, or it may not. Q.: What did you like about America that you didn't about Japan? A.: Well, it's hard to give concrete examples, but mainly I was satisfied with what you might call the smartness of life— the modernness of things. And also the simplicity and frankness of life. You don't have to worry about gimu-giri-on [obligations] over there ... In the United States you have to visit relatives too, but such visits are more personal, more real— more meaningful. Here in Japan they are for the sake of girt and righteousness and all that stuff. Q.: Could you define the term "Americanized" as it is used by A.: Well, to be Americanized means to be indifferent to social position-indifferent to social formality — such as in formal greetings. It concerns points about how one acts socially. This is about human relations — it didn't surprise me but it did
impress me very much to find that relations with others are always on an
equal plane in the U.S. In Japan I automatically used polite language with
seniors so that this just seemed natural— and if I used polite words in people, like high school students, talked to me as an equal, I felt conflicted, or in the dormitory it surprised me to see a boy of 20 talk to a man of 45 as an equal. In Japan, my father and some of my superiors often told me that my
attitude toward superiors and seniors was too rude. Here, though, my
attitude doesn't seem rude— at least it doesn't appear as rude as I was
afraid it would. It is easier to get along with people in America, because
for one thing, Americans are not so class conscious and not so sensitive
about things like status. In Japan, my conduct to superiors seemed rude,
but the same behavior isn’t rude here. For instance here it is all right
simply to say "hello" to teachers, while in Japan I would be expected to
say “ohayo gozaimasu" [polite form of "good morning"] with a deep bow. In A main problem with me is the problem of enryo, or what you call modesty. Even in life in America you have to be modest, but in a different way from the so-called Japanese enryo. But the trouble is that I don't know when and where we have to show enryo in American life. You never can be sure. The good thing about associating with Americans is that you can be friendly in a light manner. Not so in Japan. Japanese are nosey in other peoples' business—they rumor, gossip. It gives you a crowded feeling, after you get back. Of course in Japan friendships are usually deep— it is good to have a real friend to lean on— you know where you stand with your friends; it is the opposite of light associations. I have few American friends— those I have are usually Americans who have been to Japan. I think the reason is that my character is somewhat backward. I don't try to speak first, but let the other fellow open up. Those who have been to Japan know about this and speak first, and that makes it easier to start an association. |
ИНТЕРЕСНОЕ | |||
|