― Obi ― On tolerance and human dignity (English)

The fashion brand VALENTINO was criticised for a photo produced to promote its own brand.
As a result, the image has been removed with an apology from the company, but the criticism and online public opinion sympathetic to the condemnation have continued to grow since then.

I would like to start by saying that I fully approve of this expression. And I express my grave concern about the current trend.
Since I posted my defence and affirmation on Twitter, I have received a lot of criticism and vitriol, which may make it difficult for people to understand what I mean.

The conclusion of this article, which I will explain later, is that tolerance is an invaluable asset to humanity, and that the process by which people lose it without realising it is reminiscent of the tragic events of humanity.

There are many things that go with this, so I will try to describe each of them in a few words.

Tolerance

First of all, tolerance cannot be forced on others. It is a question of whether we can and do exercise it ourselves.

The reason I brought up tolerance in the first place is that it requires a rigorous logic to understand and demonstrate for oneself the significance of tolerance.

There is a famous psychological test called the "Anne and Sally Task", which I would like to use as an example. Think of it as a simple logic quiz, not as a psychological test.

Sally and Anne are playing with a stuffed animal.
Sally puts the stuffed animal in the toy box, puts the lid on it, and Sally leaves the room.
Sally puts the stuffed animal in the toy box and puts the lid on it.
When Sally comes back and tries to take the stuffed animal out, where will she look first?

The question is: What is the correct answer?
I won't try to tell you what the correct answer is or what the meaning of this question is.

Tolerance is the attitude of assuming and positively allowing for the existence of other points of view and beliefs.
I would like to point out two occasions in history when this attitude has featured prominently.
One is the time of the cultural development of diversity, including philosophy, and the other is the time of the momentum of repression.

To briefly summarise the implications of each, the former was a time when people recognised that there was room for thinking about what they saw and did not see from the point of view of others. We can see elements of this in the development of philosophy in ancient Greece, and in the ideas and sayings of the Roman Empire, whose achievements were taken over by the ancient Greeks (the comparison with Eastern philosophy is too long to go into here).
What is important is that it is not just a logical assumption of the visible and invisible of others, but also a way of thinking that extends to allow for the existence of other people's judgements, lives and creativity.
In times of cultural development, when many citizens enjoy and seek out art and literature, the importance of the ideas of others and their freedom tends to be implicitly shared.

The latter can be seen as a screaming "remember" in times of suppression of religion, thought and free expression of many citizens, or when the execution of thinkers began.
They are often found on the verge of or in the midst of disastrous wars or periods of cultural oppression (the Reformation, the French Revolution, the Second World War, etc.).

So, what do foreigners see in the background of Japanese attitudes towards Japanese culture and dress?

Different views for foreigners

　When a foreigner enters a Japanese house, they do not know that they are going up on the ground.
　They don't know which side of the kimono to put in front because they don't know how to wear it.
　You don't know how to put on a kimono. You don't know why some people laugh when you say "I'm fine" or why some people assume that "Japanese people" are fine.

It's a different way of seeing things. If you see the same cartoon in another country and you feel that the touch is different, it's because you don't know how the cartoon is perceived in that country.

But how is it that we can share cartoons, films, clothes and architecture without knowing each other?
It is because people in the past have made a great effort to use reason, the power to understand what we do not know.

The idea that "reason is a quality common to all human beings" became the inspiration for human rights, and courage was shared because it was defined as a human right to have feelings, to create stories, and to have the intelligence to understand them.
This was the beginning of cultural exchange between people from all over the world in modern times.

Japan's use of Japanese words and the blending of Japanese and Western influences are a result of the adoption of foreign philosophies and cultures.
Japonism and the export of Japanese art and luxury goods on a large scale before the war were also the result of foreign acceptance.

The freedom to express the fresh impressions and inspired images that people had when they came into contact with other cultures, and to do so in their own way, provided the basis for the many cultures that we now share and enjoy.

We live today without usually being aware of this.

Freedom of imagination

We are.
We imagine because we don't know each other, or perhaps we should say we are human.
Creations based on imagination have the power to transcend national and ethnic boundaries.
It is a common human language that has the power to spread beyond national, cultural and ethnic boundaries.

Japonism, the boom in Japanese culture that spread to the West after the spread of human rights, also developed into the famous artistic influence of Impressionism, which in turn influenced Japanese art and literature. The power of free, echo-like impressions was transmitted.

The Japanese may recall the eclectic mix of Western and Japanese dress of the Taisho period. On the other hand, modern Japanese people are using their imagination to create stories and music based on the world of the time.

This cultural movement followed the development of the industrial revolution after the Meiji Restoration, but it was the maturation of a culture that arose among the people before the economic wealth of a society that upheld human rights began to spread among its citizens, and before the great wars that the framework of the state caused.

Incidentally, the inspiration for Japonism came from the ukiyo-e woodblock prints used as wrapping paper for ceramics sent abroad.
Would you say, "Use it as dust paper"?
Or would you say, "A picture is a picture, don't use what it depicts without permission from your imagination"?

An attitude that does not allow freedom of imagination

This leads to the following
After an outright condemnation that leaves no room for freedom of the imagination, i.e. for ideas to take shape, it creates the possibility that if a Japanese person does something similar, it can be tolerated by reading the context of the expression.
The people who condemned it may see it and remain silent, unaware of the contradiction going on in their minds.

In other words, a situation could arise where the Japanese forgive, but the foreigner does not.

This development may or may not be seen as a problem by some, but where does the problem lie?

Outright condemnation is not a conclusion that can be drawn from a discussion based on shared themes of fairness and cultural preservation.
Nor is there anything in the myriad of accusations levelled by individuals against others to suggest that the logic of "one is good and one is bad" is justified.
In other words, the problem is that we may end up with illogical theories as public opinion.

Walking around on what looks like a Obi. (even though it most certainly is) does not mean that you are locking people up, hiding factual records, or burning people.
The idea of a person from a different culture who treats something in a way that is not in keeping with their own traditions should be seen as an idea in itself, rather than as a domestication of tradition.

Because it is our potential.
We must not trample on that potential.

This commercial is a theatrical expression, but are we finally entering a realm that does not allow them?

The link between Japan and the West through reason and tolerance

It is needless to say that since the spread of the idea of human rights based on reason, innumerable cultural exchanges have taken place, whether in clothing, painting, works of art or learning. We have no time to explain this, so we won't.
In the Taisho era, the earthquake led to an increase in demand for functional clothing, but the blending of Japanese and Western styles also gave rise to new forms of art, such as the Tobi coat and the Hakama and boot set.
There was also a global exchange of art and entertainment, such as literature and music, as well as tableware, food and drink, and many other things directly related to daily life.
The idea that "all men are equally endowed with the new faculty of reason" was a testimony to the dignity and courage of each individual, and this point of view led to the Paris Exposition and to the world-wide movements for equal suffrage and peace.
It is all connected.

One of the main reasons for the crushing of this was the imposition of rules based on ethnic and cultural categorisation, in other words intolerance.

Disconnected by war

The idea of human rights encouraged each citizen to be exposed to learning and to cultural exchange with other countries. This was because they believed that all people are equally capable of reason and work. In other words, it was a way of making people aware that in the past, when equality had not been recognised, people had easily hated and judged others who were like them, and had killed them in wars.
But from the point of view of national leadership, national interests and power struggles, interaction with other nations was of no more value than making money.

This goes back to the Reformation of the 16th century in Western Europe.
Each of the divided churches recognised the legitimacy of the struggling national powers. This had the effect of equating the expansion of congregations with the competition for power.
The seclusion of the country from the rest of the world in the sixteenth century is probably the most memorable event of the period, but the tragedy of the persecution of the Christians and the enslavement of the Christians during that period gives many people the sense that it is a history that is difficult to reconcile.
From a Western perspective, this is because there were two sides to the story: the religious who were serious about spreading their religion, and those who wanted to collect slaves and spread colonialism in the areas where their religion began to have an influence.
Some were distressed by the horrific oppression in the New World and argued for the dignity of the same people, while others advocated the principles that would become the basis of international law in an attempt to stop the endless cycle of warfare caused by the expansion of power. But they were not powerful enough to stop it.

During Japan's period of isolation, its rule spread throughout the world.
But while the endless wars and preparations for war seemed to continue, those who were distressed by the oppression of the new continent and those who thought about international law nurtured the idea of human rights.
This led to revolutions in which the people, who had to suffer the consequences of repeated wars by those in power, called for a state by the people.
After repeated revolutions, the struggle for power between the ruling classes and the parliamentary government based on the citizens coexisted.
This philosophy led to the development of cultural and peace movements on an individual basis, but the continuation of conflicts of interest on a national scale and treaties between nations led to a series of wars, which in turn led to another disastrous period of war.
The pursuit of academic freedom and the accuracy of scientific discoveries, which were regarded as part of human dignity, were transformed into the power of the bomb.

The war has disrupted cultural exchange and the economic activities of the people.
It led to the destruction of the human skull itself, the very space that allows freedom of imagination.

In the lead-up to the war, the enjoyment of other cultures and activities of exchange were cut off in various countries. There was a public outcry of denial and rejection of other cultures.
The situation in each country is different. But one thing can be said.

But one thing is certain: people began to advocate a strict attitude towards other cultures and other peoples as a way of unifying their views, even though they were not talking about their own people or cultures.

Think about it. The basis of cultural exchange with people from other countries was tolerance and acceptance of the ideas of others of the same reason and mind.
A time when the content of culture was communicated in concrete terms was synonymous with a time when individuals were allowed the freedom of their own imagination.
But was there tolerance and concrete cultural exchange when, because of conflicts, people sought to punish those who disagreed with them within the framework of national, ethnic or national culture?

Why are other punishments and intolerance so prevalent?

The kimono culture is by no means familiar to us today.
Second-hand clothes are cheaper, which is good, but new clothes are generally perceived as something to be bought on the spur of the moment, and there is not a massive trend in design.
This doesn't really matter when it comes to this subject. There is no need to force culture on people, "You don't have a culture, you just complain about it".

The problem is that "culture" is repeated in a punitive way, when the culture itself is not being discussed.
The discourse is based on empathy and sympathetic diffusion of blame.
In effect, it represents a situation in which a "pure culture" is being invoked in order to confirm a shared camaraderie.

There is no reflection on the fact that the people who actively participate in this are rejecting the ideas and fresh impressions of people from other countries who have been exposed to a new culture on the basis of as much cultural information as they have seen and heard in their lives.
All there is is condemnation and a sense that you are right to point it out.

This escalates into labeling people as unpatriotic and denying their humanity.
This is because it is an accusation that thrives because it excludes the assumption that there is another's point of view, and in order to continue to justify the accusation, it is necessary to share the accusation and repeatedly check that there is sympathy for the accusation.

In this situation, where there is no room for the "other point of view", there is no one to take responsibility for the accusation.
It leaves no room to imagine that the person who has already been accused might have had a point of view that we do not know.

The hope that was bone

The fact that people from other countries deal with their own culture means that motifs are treated freely and that there is the possibility of ideas arising that Japanese people would not have thought of.
If they are created, the Japanese will refer to them.
There is hope for humanity in this echo.

What all this criticism and condemnation means

This could be the catalyst for a campaign against the silence of Japanese-style motifs.
This could be a catalyst for a movement against silence in Japanese motifs, because it could lead to the perception of something that was not a problem as "something that could cause outrage" for those who create without malice, and to the fear of being seen as racist, which would lead to the avoidance of expression and ideas.
And this self-protective behaviour is not done in a declarative manner.

This is the indirect effect of those who use tradition to denigrate the ideas and concepts held by people of different cultures, apart from their condemnation.

I hereby appeal to you to prevent this and to be tolerant.

This is the thread of hope for human peace and culture that has been spun, however fragilely, since Erasmus, and which can colour the lives of future generations all over the world.