(no subject)
Tetsuo Najita and J. Victor Koschmann, Conflict in Modern Japanese History: The Neglected Tradition (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1982).
I really enjoyed this volume on a number of levels, though I didn't find it terribly cohesive (probably not inappropriate for a volume about conflict). Part I on the Tokugawa/Meiji period is fantastic, taking a look at the various uprisings and discontented populous - probably most interesting was the essay on the millinarian bent of the ishin.
The 2nd half ... well, dealing with Meiji/Taishō issues. I thought the essays a lot less compelling than those in the first section, though when we look at these essays as compared to much of the thought going around contemporaneously (where the '30s are a sharp break with the previous period(s)), it's very useful.
Constantly reference volume; a useful counterpoint when put back in its historiographical context; rather underwhelming when we consider the materials available to us today (however, books like this were really needed in the '70s/'80s to combat overly simplified notions of 'how things were'). It's certainly successful in uncovering a number of aspects of the "neglected tradition."
I really enjoyed this volume on a number of levels, though I didn't find it terribly cohesive (probably not inappropriate for a volume about conflict). Part I on the Tokugawa/Meiji period is fantastic, taking a look at the various uprisings and discontented populous - probably most interesting was the essay on the millinarian bent of the ishin.
The 2nd half ... well, dealing with Meiji/Taishō issues. I thought the essays a lot less compelling than those in the first section, though when we look at these essays as compared to much of the thought going around contemporaneously (where the '30s are a sharp break with the previous period(s)), it's very useful.
Constantly reference volume; a useful counterpoint when put back in its historiographical context; rather underwhelming when we consider the materials available to us today (however, books like this were really needed in the '70s/'80s to combat overly simplified notions of 'how things were'). It's certainly successful in uncovering a number of aspects of the "neglected tradition."