Theories of the Japanese (Nihonjinron. As with all Japanese emic concepts, the exact meaning of the term Nihonjinron in English is open to discussion. It has been translated as: ‘theories of Japanese culture’ (Lie, 2001, p. 246); ‘discussions of the Japanese’ (Yoshino, 1992, p. 2); and ‘Japanese character studies’ (Graburn and Ertl, 2008, p. 3). Its literal translation: ‘theories on/of the Japanese’, is commonly used as Nihonjin literally means Japanese and xxx literally means theory (Sugimoto, 2003, p. 4; Kowner, 2002, p. 169; Xxxxxxx, 2008 p. 327). However, many analysts doubt the validity of this theorisation (Sugimoto, 2010, p. 4) because it is ‘written in Japanese by Japanese for Japanese’ (Ivy, 1995, p. 2) and whether or not the Japanese behave in the way that this theorisation suggests has received little empirical investigation by Nihonjinron advocates (Sugimoto, 2010). Befu (2001, pp. 78-79), therefore, regards Nihonjinron as a prescriptive model for behaviour which reflects how the Japanese should behave rather than how they actually behave. I am using the term narrative to describe Nihonjinron following in the footsteps of Xxxxxx (2005) in her discussion of a Japanese company. This is because I believe that Nihonjinron is a narrative which the Japanese draw upon to represent themselves both domestically and internationally (Xxxxxx, 2005) especially during periods of rapid economic and social change (Xxxxx and Sugimoto, 1995). Such a narrative is represented through traditional mediums including school textbooks (Kubota, 2014) (see chapter 5) and relatively less-traditional contemporary mediums including anime (cartoons) and manga (comics) (see chapter 7). However, I want to stress that this narrative would seem to confuse ‘cultural ideals with social reality’ (XxXxxxx, 2014, p. 110). I also use the term ideology because it is mentioned by a number of scholars when discussing Nihonjinron such as Befu (2001); Kowner (2002); and Xxxx (1986). Befu (2001) believes that ‘the role of Nihonjinron is manifested as the civil religion of Japan’ which he believes could be even more prominent than Shintoism (ibid. p. 112). Xxxx (19869) refers to it as an ‘ideological tapestry’ with disparate threads. Kowner (2002 p. 170) states that Nihonjinron has ‘emerged as hegemonic ideology an “industry” whose main producers are intellectuals and whose consumers are the masses’. This is because it is produced by the thinking elites (Yoshino, 1992; Xxxxx and Sugimoto, 1995; Oguma, 2002) to support conservativ...
