 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
SnowFire
|
 |
New York City, NY
Jan 1970
time: 00:32
|
|
The caste system instituted by Toyotomi Hideyoshi and continued by the Tokugawa bakufu is what kept Japanese society stagnant and "ground in the mud". Bushido had little to do with it.
I suppose there's blame to be spread around, and I agree that the Tokugawa shogunate is certainly MORE to blame. And certainly not all of Bushido is "bad" or supported the system. Unfortunately, enough of it is tarnished to have helped the Tokugawa continue longer than they should have.
Japanese armies had been fighting with guns since shortly after first contact with Europeans, some three centuries before the Meiji era. Oda Nobunaga was one of the first to make extensive use of muskets, wielded by common conscripts, and this tactic led to his great success and helped him start the reunification of Japan. The use of guns was not something that was introduced by the Meiji army. They did have a technological advantage (rifles) though, IIRC.
Hehe. I do know Japanese history, and even played that dreadful old Nintendo game "Nobunga's Ambition" where your musket-armed troops were quite important. That said... well, you kinda get at it yourself when you mention how Oda did so well. Too many Samurai were obsessed with their own sword skill or personal valor; IIRC, there were several attempts by the Samurai to ban guns, so their superior training could be as valuable as it once was. Mind you, this isn't particularly a moral failing as it was a tactical one.
By the Meiji era, the Samurai who revolted were generally the most hard-core old schoolers; they often disdained guns personally at the very least, and saw them as at best a neccessary evil for fighting. This was, of course, a recipe for disaster, since as you pointed out, the Imperial Army had upgraded to Civil War style rifles, that killed from an even greater distance than before... and I do think that their rifles were better, or at least more common, than the rebels.
The samurai were hardly a monolithic group that can be painted as either good or evil. I don't see how you can judge an integral part of Japanese society that existed for centuries and went through many profound changes throughout Japanese history. It would be as silly as claiming all Indians are evil because the Pawnee were ruthless bastards.
Actually, I'm not certain if I would call the samurai evil either. "Pathetic" I think might be a better term. From what I've read in terms of the way things were in the late Tokugawa era, the Samurai were doing about as well as Outer Party members in 1984- constantly broke, and in fear & terror of the upper government that they were so dependent on for power, even as it took away all their cash. In some ways, this is even less romantic- I'm not saying that Samurai were invincible black-hearted villains with cool hairdos.
Here, let me dig it up... yeah. I still have David Lu's "Japan: A Documentary History" which I used for my classes at college, and the first part of Volume 2 on Modern Japan heads right into the decline of the Samurai. It starts off with an example bannerman on a stipend of 300 koku of rice, and just fufulling the servants he was required by law to have (1 armor carrier, 1 spear carrier, 2 stablemen, etc.), he barely has any money left- and then he has to give money to the shogunate, as well as feed his other servants. You end up running a deficit just covering the bare essentials. Not to mention your often required visits to the Imperial Palace to make sure you aren't getting too uppity, when you can't be at home governing. Who do you think is going to make that up? (Later on, there's more sources on high taxes on the farmers. Gee, I wonder why.)
Sure, blame the bakufu for most of Japan's problems. They were more "evil," I guess. Still, the samurai don't deserve this treatment*.
Edit: Drake, since you're in Japan, you might have seen this already, but since I know you're trying to learn the language, you might find this amusing.
http://www-unix.oit.umass.edu/~thoureau/japanese.html
*Bearing in mind that I haven't seen the movie yet, and they still might do a wonderful job and win me over. I'm just saying that I'm hesitant, considering that it will be hard to do properly.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Dis
|
 |
Las Vegas, Nevada
Feb 2000
time: 21:32
|
|
This movie was bad azzzzzz!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
There, now I got that out.
This is a real sword movie- not the steaming pile of crap that was Kill Bill vol 1.
But I do love all the sword movies that are coming out now. A byproduct of the success of Lord of the Rings I guess. Japanese culture is cool, and samurai culture is cool. So of course I loved this movie. It's nice to see a movie without all the annoying american actors. Well except for one 
As for Tom Cruise. Well it would be nice to see a major american movie bold enough to cast only foreigners, but I doubt that's going to happen. I can be accepting that there has to be at least one lead american in the movie. And I like Tom Cruise. I think some of you are judging him on some of the crap movies he's done like Top Gun and Cocktail. Only after I seen Born on the Fourth of July have I begun to like him. Although his performance in this movie wasn't that great. But it was adequate enough to get the job done.
This movie was done by the same guys who did Glory- another excellent movie. If you have not seen it, I do recommend it.
I'm going to say this is my favourite movie of all time. Although I often say that. Often when I just walk out of a movie, I'm still hpyed up and talk very favourably of most movies. After a few months goes by, the enthusiasm drops off, and I don't rank a movie as high. I had this happen after Gangs of New York- though I still am tempted to get that dvd as well. Another movie with hand to hand and melee combat . I love those types of movies. And I especially love bow and arrow use in movies as well. But I'll definately be getting this DVD I think.
As for the ending- I feel it was okay. It wasn't a big cop-out like I expect out of hollywood. I don't have any complaints about the ending.
In fact, if you weren't on the edge of tears in the end of that movie you are inhuman . I felt like bawling right ther in the theatre. Of course I lack the ability to actually produce tears, but I did find myself welling up and very emotional. When those gatling guns opened up- woowee, very emotional scene.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
 |
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999
time: 21:32
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
quote:
I'm leary of the movie, simply because it sounds like it'll be romaniticizing Bushido & the whole samurai class, something that kept Japan ground in the mud for centuries. |
The caste system instituted by Toyotomi Hideyoshi and continued by the Tokugawa bakufu is what kept Japanese society stagnant and "ground in the mud". Bushido had little to do with it.
|
The social stratification of the caste system predates Hideyoshi by centuries - well before the Heian jidai, however, there was enough instability and local isolation that various upstarts could achieve a degree of social mobility by force.
Romanticizing bushido is all one can really do, as it is AFAIK a term created in the 19th century to romanticize a non-existent ethos that was more mythical than even chivalry in the west.
quote:
quote:
The great glory of the Meiji era was those impetous Samurai running their revolutions, and then getting brutally shot down by the Imperial army made up of common people with guns that shot 'em all before they could get in sword range. |
Japanese armies had been fighting with guns since shortly after first contact with Europeans, some three centuries before the Meiji era. Oda Nobunaga was one of the first to make extensive use of muskets, wielded by common conscripts, and this tactic led to his great success and helped him start the reunification of Japan. The use of guns was not something that was introduced by the Meiji army. They did have a technological advantage (rifles) though, IIRC.
|
Nobunaga was in fact the first to deploy muskets en masse in firing lines, at the battle of Nagashino in 1576.
quote:
quote:
I was reasonably okay with romanticizing the Indians in Dances with Wolves, but the Samurai deserve it a lot less. |
The samurai were hardly a monolithic group that can be painted as either good or evil. I don't see how you can judge an integral part of Japanese society that existed for centuries and went through many profound changes throughout Japanese history. It would be as silly as claiming all Indians are evil because the Pawnee were ruthless bastards. |
By the Meiji ishin, samurai were not even a coherent social class. This was a deliberate and constant goal of the bakufu, who wanted to severely limit the potential military power of all non-fudai daimyo, and even to limit moderately the fudai. By the middle of the Edo jidai, the vast majority of those who could claim samurai descent were living as small free farmers, craftsman, and small shopkeepers, so it's completely inaccurate to lump them in with daimyo in general, or fudai in particular.
Last edited by MichaeltheGreat on 10-12-2003 at 13:23
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:32.
Apolyton Time is 00:32. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
08-12-2003 05:21
|