11–20 of 35 posts
I read this from my chair in an office in Tokyo, and found it to be pretty dramatic and kind of silly. There are definitely cultural differences, but I don't feel like this article does a good job of representing them. Some of the linguistic points are a bit misleading too.
When reading any of Pico Iyer's drivel about Japan, remember that he can't read or speak the language: "And the virtues of when I got to Japan, finding that I was essentially an illiterate. I can't read — I can't — to this day, I can't read or write Japanese." http://www.dailygood.org/story/1092/the-art-of-stillness-pic... "He’s a big proponent of his own ignorance, saying he doesn’t choose to learn more than a smatt…
A nitpick, but you could tell them apart even if they weren't written differently (such as when speaking).
When reading any of Pico Iyer's drivel about Japan, remember that he can't read or speak the language: "And the virtues of when I got to Japan, finding that I was essentially an illiterate. I can't read — I can't — to this day, I can't read or write Japanese." http://www.dailygood.org/story/1092/the-art-of-stillness-pic... "He’s a big proponent of his own ignorance, saying he doesn’t choose to learn more than a smatt…
> A single verb in Yasunari Kawabata’s short novel Snow Country is translated in 29 different ways because what we would render as “I think” can in Japan mean “I remember,” “I long for” or 27 other things. Ugh. That might be correct in the sense that a translator could defend their choice in using a certain English word or another, but that's also correct for most words in literally every language spoken on Earth.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not a bad day, just a pet peeve: I find the "Japanese is so exotic and mysterious and different" trope in general and Pico Iyer's writing about the topic in particular insufferable. I mean, if you're going to pontificate about Japanese literature on the world stage, is it really too much to ask that you read some of it? Languages are complicated, translation between two languages is even more complicated. Does Japane…
I'd like to chime in on 9nGQluzmnq3M's side here -- I had exactly the same reaction for exactly the same reason. It does Japan's complex culture a complete disservice to wrap it up in a neat package of "exotic" and "ineffable." You wouldn't accept an analysis of fine wine, a new medication, or graphics cards from someone who didn't bother to learn about them, so why is an analysis of an entire culture from an equally…
Heads I win, tails you lose!
When reading any of Pico Iyer's drivel about Japan, remember that he can't read or speak the language: "And the virtues of when I got to Japan, finding that I was essentially an illiterate. I can't read — I can't — to this day, I can't read or write Japanese." http://www.dailygood.org/story/1092/the-art-of-stillness-pic... "He’s a big proponent of his own ignorance, saying he doesn’t choose to learn more than a smatt…
> A single verb in Yasunari Kawabata’s short novel Snow Country is translated in 29 different ways because what we would render as “I think” can in Japan mean “I remember,” “I long for” or 27 other things. Ugh. That might be correct in the sense that a translator could defend their choice in using a certain English word or another, but that's also correct for most words in literally every language spoken on Earth.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not a bad day, just a pet peeve: I find the "Japanese is so exotic and mysterious and different" trope in general and Pico Iyer's writing about the topic in particular insufferable. I mean, if you're going to pontificate about Japanese literature on the world stage, is it really too much to ask that you read some of it? Languages are complicated, translation between two languages is even more complicated. Does Japane…
I'd like to chime in on 9nGQluzmnq3M's side here -- I had exactly the same reaction for exactly the same reason. It does Japan's complex culture a complete disservice to wrap it up in a neat package of "exotic" and "ineffable." You wouldn't accept an analysis of fine wine, a new medication, or graphics cards from someone who didn't bother to learn about them, so why is an analysis of an entire culture from an equally…
In this particular case, the article reads to me like someone sharing their emotions and feelings, achieved by contempaling some minutiae of experience in Japan. Does that explicate an experience that generalizes? Apparently not, but this certainly seems like a different matter.
Put a bit extremely, the article is also a pretty terrible recipe for turducken. I doubt many would flay the article for this failing, but the point is that judging an article or opinion's failings says just as much about the reader's personal expectations as it does anything else.
Pretend for a moment that the article was written in the form of a poem. I seriously doubt it'd be getting the same kickback for "lack of objectivity." I would guess this is because we culturally learn to approach written language with different expectations, based on the form of its presentation. Heck, I'd not be surprised to even see some interesting anthropological theses on this very phenomenon.
Anyway, winding back the meta-levels a bit, I do get where the author is coming from, myself having lived in Japan for ten years. It's possible to find poetry or meaning in certain minutiae of daily experience, and when thinking in Japanese I certainly do interpret, feel, and use silence differently than when my brain goes into English mode.
Think for a moment about the "magic" of watching a Good ol' American Superbolw game with your friends and family, or how about drinking at Ye Olde pub down the road with yer mates. The experience is singular in a way to the particular culture it's in, and after accumulating many memories of this experience, it's common for those memories to achieve some "special" emotional quality that's diffilut to transfer to others who haven't done the same. I read the original article as an attempt to share some similar kind of feeling.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd like to chime in on 9nGQluzmnq3M's side here -- I had exactly the same reaction for exactly the same reason. It does Japan's complex culture a complete disservice to wrap it up in a neat package of "exotic" and "ineffable." You wouldn't accept an analysis of fine wine, a new medication, or graphics cards from someone who didn't bother to learn about them, so why is an analysis of an entire culture from an equally…
I certainly get the sentiment. However, my reaction to 9nGQluzmnq3M's coment is mainly this: Why judge an article or opinion on what it's not instead of what it is ? In this particular case, the article reads to me like someone sharing their emotions and feelings, achieved by contempaling some minutiae of experience in Japan. Does that explicate an experience that generalizes? Apparently not, but this certainly seems…
To me, I'm judging the article based on what it's claiming to be.
He starts it with a faux linguistic analysis including numbers, faux cultural comparisons, and an analysis of the Japanese language -- which he professes not to know.
> I read the original article as an attempt to share some similar kind of feeling.
The way he opened his article and continued trying to pick at linguistics is what kept me from feeling that kind of thing. His own credentials and the location of the article also contributed to that.
If it were a personal blog and he were talking about subjective feelings, that's one thing -- but when he is writing an article on lithub and starting with numbers and apparently scholarly linguistic analysis, that's a completely different thing to me.
Edit to add: And one other point is that this is all to publicize a book of his called "A Beginner's Guide to Japan," which sounds very authoritative.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The breathless retelling struck me as unreliable as well, but I can concede that 思う has slightly different meanings based on context— just like any English word with a thesaurus entry or used in idiom. 思う/Omou is interesting because my brain shuffled it into the same spot as the Spanish creer (to believe) and both have a counterpart that is (roughly) more about thought process: kangaeru(JP)/pensar(ES) The similarity…
"Believe", in a faith without proof sense, is shinjiru 信じる in Japanese. As in English, this is a lot stronger than mere thinking. Omou is used a lot in Japanese as a politeness marker of sorts: instead of stating flat out that the moon is green cheese ( tsuki ha guriin chiizu desu ), you soften the statement a bit saying that you think it's green cheese ( tsuki ha guriin chiizu da to omoimasu ). When translating to E…
I'm not saying it's one-to-one, just the same kind of issue and you'll see very similar conversations about both. Therefore, it feels familiar and not astounding per Iyer.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd like to chime in on 9nGQluzmnq3M's side here -- I had exactly the same reaction for exactly the same reason. It does Japan's complex culture a complete disservice to wrap it up in a neat package of "exotic" and "ineffable." You wouldn't accept an analysis of fine wine, a new medication, or graphics cards from someone who didn't bother to learn about them, so why is an analysis of an entire culture from an equally…
I certainly get the sentiment. However, my reaction to 9nGQluzmnq3M's coment is mainly this: Why judge an article or opinion on what it's not instead of what it is ? In this particular case, the article reads to me like someone sharing their emotions and feelings, achieved by contempaling some minutiae of experience in Japan. Does that explicate an experience that generalizes? Apparently not, but this certainly seems…
I think that's an uncharitable take. We all get that TFA is trying to be poetic, but poetic sentiments can be profound or shallow, and if someone finds this article shallow (as I do myself) that doesn't mean they're attacking it for being poetic.
Also, suggesting the commenter might be having a bad day doesn't come off at all the way I think you intend.