![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Bibliographic Data: Ketelaar, James Edward. Of Heretics and Martyrs in Meiji Japan. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990.
Main Argument: Arguing that heretics and martyrs are in fact the same, and that "the heretic as martyr provides, that is, a position from which to carry out a critique of the formulation and possibilities of law in operation within a given society" (ix), Ketelaar argues that despite violent persecution in the early Meiji period, "Meiji Buddhists succeeded…not merely in refiguring Buddhism from the heretical to the martyred; they also succeeded in producing a 'new Buddhism' (shin Bukkyô) that in fact has come to be viewed as a bastion of 'true Japanese culture'" (x).
Historiographical Engagement: Ketelaar has read quite a lot of theory--Kant makes more than a few salutary appearances--and he is arguing with several Japanese historians, most notably Tsuda Sôkichi. The book also bears the traces of Gluck's Japan's Modern Myths and of Harootunian's Things Seen and Unseen.
( Two sides of the same coin )
Critical assessment: This is an interesting and sophisticated book, with a welcome dose of critical theory and an interesting topic. Ketelaar's work refutes several commonplace assumptions about Meiji Japan and fills in some gaps notably overlooked by other scholars such as Carol Gluck. There are a few points where he doesn't clarify whether he's adopting his sources' terminology or not, the most notable begin his persistent habit of calling Theravada Buddhism by the now-deprecated term "Hinayana," and having read more recent scholarship I wonder whether at times he might not be better served by talking about Buddhisms, plural. But this is, overall, an excellent little book.
Further reading: B.D. Victoria, Zen at War; Helen Hardacre, Shinto and the State
Meta notes: I was expecting more actual heretics. Also, if you're going to have a black and white photo on the cover of your book, it needs to be a good one.
Main Argument: Arguing that heretics and martyrs are in fact the same, and that "the heretic as martyr provides, that is, a position from which to carry out a critique of the formulation and possibilities of law in operation within a given society" (ix), Ketelaar argues that despite violent persecution in the early Meiji period, "Meiji Buddhists succeeded…not merely in refiguring Buddhism from the heretical to the martyred; they also succeeded in producing a 'new Buddhism' (shin Bukkyô) that in fact has come to be viewed as a bastion of 'true Japanese culture'" (x).
Historiographical Engagement: Ketelaar has read quite a lot of theory--Kant makes more than a few salutary appearances--and he is arguing with several Japanese historians, most notably Tsuda Sôkichi. The book also bears the traces of Gluck's Japan's Modern Myths and of Harootunian's Things Seen and Unseen.
( Two sides of the same coin )
Critical assessment: This is an interesting and sophisticated book, with a welcome dose of critical theory and an interesting topic. Ketelaar's work refutes several commonplace assumptions about Meiji Japan and fills in some gaps notably overlooked by other scholars such as Carol Gluck. There are a few points where he doesn't clarify whether he's adopting his sources' terminology or not, the most notable begin his persistent habit of calling Theravada Buddhism by the now-deprecated term "Hinayana," and having read more recent scholarship I wonder whether at times he might not be better served by talking about Buddhisms, plural. But this is, overall, an excellent little book.
Further reading: B.D. Victoria, Zen at War; Helen Hardacre, Shinto and the State
Meta notes: I was expecting more actual heretics. Also, if you're going to have a black and white photo on the cover of your book, it needs to be a good one.