Index• Organizer’s Greeting

・・・

P.4

• Part1：Keynote Speech

・・・

P.6

• Part2：Discussion

・・・

P.14

2

●Introduction
MC: We would like to start the Open Forum 2019,“Beyond Diversity: Impact of Inclusive Society to
Unlock Creative Potential.”
The Tokyo Metropolitan Government has set its
vision to become an international city of arts andculture taking Tokyo 2020 as an opportunity. One of
the elements for the city to attract people, especiallyfrom the creative community, is diversity andinclusion. This is also the most relevant theme that is being discussed in various cities aroundthe world today.
Diversity is becoming a familiar word; however, inclusion has not yet gained such ecognitionin Japan. Oftentimes we hear the two words “diversity and inclusion”, combined and used
together; however, the words present a slightly different meaning.
In today’s forum we would like to define the word “diversity” as a community consisting ofpeople, visible or not with different features or characteristics. On the other hand, inclusion is
not only recognizing the diversity of people but also accepting people of difference andunlocking their latent creativity.
Why is it that a society that has diversity and inclusion gives life to creative power? We arehere to ask such a question to understand the essence of creativity and lead Tokyo to become
an international city full of creative power in 2020 and beyond. That is the purpose of thisOpen Forum.
Today we have two parts. In the first part we will have Mr. Iwao Nakatani, who is a board
member of the Arts Council Tokyo and also Chairman of Mitsubishi UFJ Research andConsulting makes a key note speech. In part 2, we’ll focus on discussions. We’ll have Mr.
Peter Anders, Director of Goethe-Institut Tokyo, Mr. Shinji Kajitani, Director of the Universityof Tokyo, Center of Philosophy, and Director Ms. Ritsu Yoshino from the Asian Cultural
Council Japan Office, and as a moderator, we will have Mr. Takashi Serizawa, Executive
Director of P3 art and environment, and discussion will explore new possibilities for Tokyo to
become an international city full of creativity leading up to 2020 and beyond.
First, on behalf of the organizer, Mr. Katsunori Miyoshi Director General of Arts Council Tokyo,
would like to give an opening remark.

3

●Organizer’s Greeting
Katsunori Miyoshi: Thank you all very much foryour the participation. My name is Katsunori
Miyoshi and I am serving as Director General ofArts Council Tokyo. There may be some people
in the audience who have heard of Arts Council
Tokyo for the first time. I’d like to take thisopportunity to briefly explain our organization.
Arts Council Tokyo was established in 2012;
therefore, we are in the seventh year. It has been modeled after Arts Council England, which
was inaugurated 70 years ago, in 1946. Around that time, towards the end of World War II,
the way forward was the biggest issue. Keynes, the economist, had two thoughts. First, inorder to stabilize the world economy and prevent further disastrous wars, he recommended
the establishment of international monetary and currency systems. Although it turned out tobe slightly different from the concept of Keynes, the IMF was established.
The other idea was to establish an arts council in order to enrich the lives of British people
through arts and culture. Keynes who proposed the establishment of the organization
became the first president. We could say that it was his last work done, as he passed awayright after the establishment.
Over time, in 2000s, the fact that social change is not solely driven by economy but also
creation of values gained increasing recognition. In 2012, when Arts Council Tokyo wasinaugurated, the former chairman of Shiseido, Yoshiharu Fukuhara said “ Now is the time toleverage the power of culture backed by the wisdom and history of people” with suchexpectation.
Now as Arts Council Tokyo, we believe in two aspects for the aim of arts and culture. Firstly ,that arts and culture help people live a human life. Secondly, we consider making the city
comfortable, not only by pursuing the convenience of people but by developing a community
where people can communicate face to face. Thus we believe that these are the two missions
for Arts Council Tokyo, people-building and community-building.
I would now like to speak about this forum. The title is “Beyond Diversity: Impact of Inclusive
Society to Unlock Creative Potential.” I would like to briefly introduce the speakers we haveinvited today to discuss this very difficult topic.

4

First, Mr. Iwao Nakatani who is a specialist in
economics and serves as a board member of Arts
Council Tokyo, will give us the keynote address. As
our board member he has been giving us various
valuable inputs and has shown us the directions
forward.
In the panel discussion, Mr.Peter Anders Director of
Goethe-Institut Tokyo has joined us today. He has
experience working at various Goethe-Instituts all around the world therefore, I think he will
give us his input based on a global view. Our second panelist Prof. Shinji Kajitani is serving
as the Director of University of Tokyo Center for Philosophy that aims to realize “inclusion”
which is exactly today’s topic. The third person is Ms. Ritsu Yoshino the Director of Asian
Cultural Council Japan Office, which is supporting international cultural exchange among
Asian countries, and between Asia and the United States.
Our moderator will be Mr.Takashi Serizawa. He is leading P3 art and environment, which is
conducting activities related to reciprocal formation processes between people, society,humanity and the environment. He willingly took this role as moderator, and I’d like toappreciate all the speakers, who have accepted our offer.
Lastly, I’m convinced that this forum will provide you the opportunity to think about humans,
community and organizations. I hope you will enjoy the program. Thank you very much.

5Part 1: Keynote Speech●Speaker
Iwao Nakatani
Board member of Arts Council Tokyo /Chairman, Mitsubishi UFJ Research and Consulting Co., Ltd.
Born in Osaka in 1942. Graduated from the Department of Economics at
Hitotsubashi University in 1965. Holds a Ph.D in Economics from Harvard
University. Currently serves as a Chairman of Mitsubishi UFJ Researchand Consulting Co., Ltd, Chairman of Fushiki-an and Chief Director of theFushiki-juku, an executive development program exclusively designed for
global business leaders in Japan.
His publications include “AI Shihonshugi ha jinrui wo sukueruka-unmeishi
kara yomitoku- [Could AI capitalism save mankind? A look into history ofcivilization]” (NHK Publishing, Inc.,2018), “Shihonshugi wa naze jikai shita
no ka [Why did capitalism self-destruct]” (Shueisha International Inc.,
2008);
and“NyumonMacro
Keizaigaku[Introduction
tomacroeconomics]” (Nippon Hyoron sha co.,Ltd, 2007).

6

●Keynote Speech
Coordinator: Thank you very much. For
Session 1, we’d like to start the keynote
address. We invite Mr. Iwao Nakatani who is theboard member of Arts Council Tokyo andChairman of Mitsubishi UFJ Research andConsulting Company.
Iwao Nakatani: Good afternoon. Thank you forhaving me today. As introduced earlier, my areaof specialty is economics; therefore, today’s
topic is very inclusive and difficult for me to tackle, but as Mr.Miyoshi gave me this opportunity,
I will try my best to deliver a presentation so that you can bring back something out of it.
I will be discussing about three main points today.
Firstly, about inclusive society. The opposite term of inclusion is exclusion. The shift fromexclusion to inclusion has been occurring in societies since the beginning of modern age.
This historic trend of shifting from exclusion to inclusion is one point I’d like to mention today.
Secondly, suppose that as a result of this historical trend, an inclusive society is established.
With the arrival, will the whole world or society be able to unlock the creative potential?
My view is that if we continue viewing the world based on efficiency or rationality, we cannot
expect creativity to be promoted. I would like to explain this from a philosophical point of view.
As we have Professor Kajitani who is a specialist in philosophy here today as a panelist thus
I feel a bit nervous but anyway I will talk about that as the second point.
Thirdly, then what kind of policy stance and position should Tokyo take in order to create an
inclusive society? What kind of a stance in policymaking will be appropriate? I would like togive you my personal view.
With that, today I will address as first point: history; second point: philosophy; and the third
point: policies to promote arts and culture.

7

Firstly I would like to give you my view on thehistorical trend of shifting from exclusion to
inclusion. There are discussions around thestart of the Modern age but let’s define ithere as the arrival of Columbus at theAmerican continent. The prominent view of
the 500 years of history after the start of themodern era, I believe, is the control of the
non-West by the West. The attitude of theWest towards non-West society embodies
exclusion. With the help of religion, the West
tried to control the non-West under the call of civilization, backed by the notion of European
values being universal to assimilate the non-West into the West. In my opinion that wasexactly the logic of exclusion.
As a result, the world shifted towards capitalist society . What is the essence of the logic ofcapitalism? To maximize one’s own interests through the exploitation of others and that thisis thought to be the social justice. We can say that this logic of exclusion formed our modern
society. Of course there have been many positive things brought about as a result thus I am
not saying whether this was good or bad, but it is important to have such perspective whenlooking into the history of the world.
Having said that, modern era proceeded promoting the logic of exclusion but gradually somedifficulties started occurring showing the impasse of this direction. This represents what ishappening in today’s society. We can discuss this from different viewpoints as various issuesof modern era have been originating from this very logic of exclusion.
One of the most typical example is the destruction of the global environment. Based on the
logic of capitalism, economic entities or business firms allowed themselves to use nature
without paying the cost since nature cannot be valued in monetary terms. Principle of themarket mechanism is that one must pay the cost to transfer the ownership of the goods which
are valued, but with nature this doesn’t function. With nature, for example the air you inhaleor water etc. things that are considered as public goods, one will not able to own them withcost thus the ownership cannot be transferred . This is why you cannot price nature, however
without a price, one may think it can be used free of charge. As a consequence, the resourcesfrom nature have been abused which lead to such serious deterioration of the global
environment.
Recently there has been a very intensive discussion that by the end of this year or the end of
next year, a new geologic age may be approved by the geologic society. The newly proposed
epoch is called “Anthropocene” and dates from the commencement of significant humanimpact on the Earth's geology and ecosystems.

8

The thing is, after the Industrial Revolution, many substances which the Earth’s ecosystemcannot restore where newly-generated. The most fearful one is radiation. Radiation cannot
be absorbed by nature as well as plastic. Once produced, most of the plastic materials cannot
be resolved by this planet. For example, you may have heard on the news that off the coastof Thailand some whales were found dead and when cut open, we found many plastic bagsin their abdomens which disabled them to absorb nutrition.
Although it is invisible to us, deep under thesea, deposited plastic materials have piled up
and the marine creatures are victimized. As I
mentioned earlier, when geologists research
into the geological layers hundreds of years
later, they will find the deposited nonabsorbable materials, such as plastic andradiation, accumulated on the seabed. This is
the new geologic age. In the logic of capitalism,
nature is available free of charge but it is clearthat this is no longer sustainable. This issue is not only about the natural environment. Earlier
I talked about how the West has exerted control over the non-West. Various undeveloped
lands have been modernized, urbanized and consequently the nature diminished. As
geographical frontiers reduced significantly, developed capitalist countries were no longer
able to leverage undeveloped frontiers for their growth which lead to their economic
slowdown.
Another surprising fact is the inequalities in the world. The combined assets of top 8 wealthypeople, Bill Gates and others, are equivalent to the assets of the bottom 3.6 billion of theworld’s population. Just eight people and their asset value equals the assets of 3.6 billion
people combined. This level of inequality cannot be justified.
I would also like to touch upon the combination of AI, the genetic engineering, gene analysis
etc. those new technologies utilized to modify human bodies. Recently we heard about theresult of the genetic engineering in China. Apparently, the research team succeeded increating a baby that will never contract AIDS. It is horrifying how technologies can re-createhuman. This means that till today we were discussing economic inequalities, but in the future,
we may have to deal with biological inequalities. Wealthy people will take advantage ofgenetic engineering technology while the majority of people will be unable to access suchtechnological innovations thus biological inequality will occur.
The modern society made significant growth due to the logic of exclusion which enabled us
to live in this civilized world rich in culture. However apparently, we can no longer continue
going forward with this logic. Therefore, inclusion, which is the opposite concept of exclusionmust be revisited and introduced in rebuilding the world. This is how society has shifted over
the years.

9Recently there have been many media
news regarding “inclusion” examples. I
am sure you are familiar with the case of
Ms. Ardern, Prime Minister of New
Zealand. She has given birth to a baby
through her common-law marriage, took
six-months’ maternity leave as a prime
minister. Accusing her for serving animportant role, unofficially married,taking six months’ leave, are no longer
acceptable. In New Zealand, people
seemed to be even celebrating her
decision. The values, such as saying No to women raising a child and serving as a prime
minister at the same time, is outdated.
I’ll give you another example. Ochanomizu University, a women’s university, decided toaccept transgender students from next year. In this case, transgender means that person is
officially registered as male but feel and recognize oneself as female and university decided
to accept them. This is simply one sign of the Japanese society becoming more inclusive.
The Science Council of Japan announced that social inclusion must be at the core of any
cultural policies and this is in line with the global trend. Global trend doesn’t mean that wehave already achieved an inclusive society, however, it shows the overall direction that theworld is shifting towards. If we discard the idea that it isn’t a problem to exploit nature, andrather appreciate, respect and revive nature, this may unlock their potential creativity. We
may be able to enjoy their benefits again. Similarly, marginalized people who have been
discriminated or been oppressed before, once invited to the center, their creative powers may
put to light .
I have explained about the society moving from the logic of exclusion to the idea of inclusion.
Now, coming back to the theme of today’s forum, does inclusive society unlock creative
potential? To be honest, I don’t know. It is true that if we achieve an inclusive society,marginalized people will have the opportunity to bring out their creativity, but is this enoughto say that the society has become more creative?
This leads to my second point. We tend to believe that one and only Truth exist, and we canslowly reveal this by a scientific approach. In other words, an idea that every phenomenon
can be scientifically elucidated exist.

Perhaps I can call this idea a naturalistic view of the world. For example, physicist
acknowledge the existence of the expansive universe and that Earth occupies a fraction of10

that space, which leaves us humans living on this Earth a miniscule existence. Such view ofthe world makes us nihilistic as it implies that living beings have no meaning nor significance.
This may also be called scientism. Earlier I talked
about the idea of universalism in Europe. Belief
that everything can be explained by science is acontemporary form of universalism. In ancient
Greece, Aristotle believed that the universe
consists of Goodness, Truth and Beauty.
However, in the current world one believes that
only Truth can be validated and Goodness andBeauty cannot. We cannot refer to a certain data
to prove Goodness or Beauty thus putting these aside and believing in only what can beproved, is called the naturalistic view of the world. In that case, where do we find a place for
Art ? I feel that in the 20th century, art and culture were to an extent, confined in this scientificview of the world and in my opinion this should be corrected.
Over the past 20 years, I have run a private academy called Fushiki-juku, where people study
liberal arts, and one of the books we studied is “Why the World Does Not Exist” by Markus
Gabriel. It is world’s best seller and there he argues that it is wrong to believe that there is
one and only True universe which we live in. Rather, each and every one of us should
continue questioning ourselves these issues that cannot be validated such as Why do we
live? What is beauty ? He suggests that we must interact with others and become creative.
Unless we embraced this new view of the world, no matter how inclusive a society becomes,
we cannot achieve a creative world. That is the second point that I wanted to highlight.
Before going into the third point I would like to speak about
one painting which Some of you may have seen. It is called“Sessan Doji “by Shohaku Soga. The Sessan Doji on the tree
branch is the former life of the Buddha and he/she wasroaming the mountains seeking enlightenment when the blue
demon read the first half of the poem “The colors of theflowers are so beautiful and fragrant–like a person’s beautyor the interesting things in this world. My life is like that. Who
can say it won’t long last forever without change? No, nobody
can. It ends at last.” Sessan Doji thought the poem isamazing and that if he can hear the latter half, he would beenlightened at last. Thus asked the blue demon to let him
hear.
“Sessan Doji (Sessan Doji Offering his Life to an Ogre)”(c. 1764), Soga Shohaku, Keisho-ji Temple, Mie.

The demon said, I’m too hungry. The former Buddha said, “Okay, if you let me hear the latter
half, I will be enlightened and after this I will not regret even if I pass away.”11

Then the demon said “Then I will teach you.” and read out the second half. “I pass over the
deep mountain called Ui (Kyoto) today. No more shallow dreams; no more wanton
drunkenness.” The former life of the Buddha became naked and he/she is about to jump onto
the demon to be eaten by him. This painting fires my imagination and is one of my favorites.
I cannot bear the thought that this can be analyzed based on naturalistic world view or ascientific world view. Do you all like this as well?
In fact, the previous drawing is modeled after anotherpainting called “Shashin Shiko Zu” which is contained asa National Treasure at Horyu-ji Temple in Japan. Veryhungry tigers are drawn and the mother tiger is about toeat the child tiger. Buddha thought it’s too pitiful for thechild tiger to be eaten, so he is offering himself. This
painting that came from India portraits mercy, love, of
Buddha which is the same theme with the previous
paining. There is a gap of around 1,000 years between
these paintings which means in 1,000 years, the“Shashin Shiko”, the Indian painting with very vivid colors
transformed into that kind of Japanized image as“Sessan Doji “ .

“Shashin Shiko Zu” from Tamamushi Tabernacle (c. Asuka Period: mid 6th - beginning of 8th), Horyu-ji Temple, Nara.

Final point is, what is Japanese culture?
Professor Funabiki from Tokyo University ishere today which also makes me feel nervous
but I will continue. In Japan, the Jomon
culture of thousands of years ago remains
deeply rooted at present. In other words, thisJomon era culture formed the foundation ofJapanese culture. There, exotic culture fromoverseas have been imported, and over many
years have been absorbed and digested,leaving only the good things to be localized into the Japanese culture. I think that there you
can see a so-called dual structure in Japanese culture. As you can see in “Shashin Shiko” to“Sessan Doji” for example, such strong Indian painting transformed into a very typicalJapanese image taking over 1,000 years. Masao Maruyama, who is one of the intellectual
leaders of Japan after the war, frequently mentioned that the Japanese ideological history is
the process of accepting the universal view from around the world and modifying it. Thismeans that the based on the foundation of Japanese culture which is very persistent,

12whatever come from overseas, how exotic they may look, are localized and transformed intoa good thing. This concept being a characteristic of Japanese culture is a well-known
argument.
Taking all the points I have mentioned into consideration, I would like to give a simple
recommendation on the approach that Tokyo should take in promoting arts and culture.
Tokyo should become the mirror that reflect the world, accepting and including everything.
Later, over a long time, those cultures will be filtered and transformed into values. I believe
this is the role Tokyo can play. In fact, the city of Tokyo already has many things from allaround the world, for example, various kinds of restaurants from far countries, their culinary
culture had been transformed into delicious cuisine in Japan. We are used to this process
and it is applicable to culture as well. The strong cultural foundation gives Tokyo the capacity
to accept and absorb difference from all over the world and transform them into values. I
think this is the approach Tokyo should take in order to promote arts and culture in this city.
With this conclusion, I would like to finish my presentation. Thank you very much for yourkind attention.

13

Part 2: Discussion●SpeakerPeter Anders, Director of the Goethe-Institut Tokyo
Peter Anders, who majored in Theater, Film and Media studies has been working
at the Goethe-Institut since the 1990s. Initially he worked as head of the departmentof fine arts at the headquarter in Munich. Subsequently he became the director of
the Goethe-Institutes in Cameroon, Brazil (Salvador da Bahia) and Bulgaria.
Between 2007 and 2011 he was the program leader of the Goethe-Institut for Africa(South of the Sahara) with an office in Johannesburg (South Africa). From May
2011 until January 2016 he served as director of the Goethe-Institut Beijing andcountry director for China. Since February 2016 he is the director of the GoetheInstitut in Tokyo.
Shinji Kajitani
Director of the University of Tokyo Center for Philosophy
Born in 1966. Completed his Ph.D. at Human- and Environmental Studies of Kyoto
University. His main research field is phenomenology, cultural studies and medical
history. His main works are: Basic Problems of the Phenomenology of Hermann
Schmitz (Kyoto University Press, 2002), and What Does It Mean to Think? – anIntroduction to Philosophy for People ages 0 to 100 years (Gentosha, 2018). He is
recently conducting the project of philosophy dialogue.

Ritsu Yoshino, Director of the Asian Cultural Council Japan office
Ritsu Yoshino involved in the opening of the 21st Century Museum ofContemporary Art, Kanazawa (Japan) from 1999 and worked as curatorialassistant until 2005. From 2005 to 2009, she was an exhibition coordinator at
21_21 DESIGN SIGHT (Tokyo, Japan) for The Miyake Issey Foundation. From
September 2009, she started working at the Asian Cultural Council (ACC), where
she is currently director of the ACC Japan office.

●Moderator
Takashi Serizawa Executive Director of P3 art and environment
Born in 1951 in Tokyo. After graduating from the Mathematics Course in the Facultyof Science at Kobe University and from the Architecture and Building Science Coursein the College of Engineering at Yokohama National University, Serizawa wasinvolved in research related to ecological land-usage planning as a member ofRegional Planning Team Assoc., Inc. In 1989, he founded “P3 art and environment.”
He successively served as general director of the Tokachi International
Contemporary Art Exhibition “DEMETER” (2002), secretary general of the Asahi Art
Festival (2003 to 2016), curator for Yokohama Triennale 2005, general director of the
Beppu Contemporary Art Festival “Mixed Bathing World” (2009, 2012 and 2015), anddirector of the Saitama Triennale 2016 (2016)14

●Discussion
Coordinator: For Part 2, we are going to have a
discussion. I would like to introduce the speakers.
Mr. Shinji Kajitani, Director of University of Tokyo
Center for Philosophy; Mr. Peter Anders, Director of
the Goethe-Institut Tokyo; Ritsu Yoshino, Director of
Asian Cultural Council Japan Office; and as themoderator we will have the Executive Director of P3
art and environment, Mr. Takashi Serizawa.
Moderator, Takashi Serizawa: Good afternoon and very nice to meet you all. I will serve as
moderator for today’s session. Mr. Kajitani, Ms. Yoshino, Mr. Anders, thank you for being
here.
First, I would like to revisit the purpose of the forum. We all heard the objective explained at
the beginning and I believe Mr. Nakatani’s exciting and insightful presentation gave us a goodidea of what this forum is trying to achieve, what we are here to think about. So, if I may, I
would like to recapture Mr. Nakatani’s presentation. Our traditional ways of doing, so called
capitalistic way, have tended to draw a line between what’s inside and outside and turned
away from what’s outside as it didn’t concern us. We tended to focused on enriching what
was inside by coldly exploiting from the outside.
However today, we are seeing limitations to this current approach. Mother earth, our planet
and human society are fatigued and this brings us to this idea of inclusion rather than
exclusion becoming very important. I believe that’s what Mr. Nakatani pointed out in his
presentation. I am involved in modern art, and I started to hear about this importance of social
inclusion in the arts world these ten years. However as the terminology is difficult , I was
always hoping that there would be an easier, softer word to explain the idea.
The important thing is, rather than excluding others, not only accepting diversity but making
the most of those differences and living together. Of course, this is nothing new, but we areliving in an era that requires us to revisit and recognize this idea.
In Mr. Nakatani’s presentation he talked about how the naturalistic view of the world needs
to be modified and overcome. Personally, I thought that was a very important message.
Perhaps later in the discussion we will be able to talk more about that.
The word “inclusion” perhaps made today’s audience feel that we will cover a very difficult
topic, but I hope today’s forum will help you to think of it as your problem and internalize thediscussion. Everywhere around the world we are seeing states placing priority on their own
interests and I believe going too far on this will lead to exclusion. As we heard earlier,inequalities are growing wider and wider, to a point it’s unbelievable.

15

Again, even in our daily lives, we see advancements in science and technology. For example
our daily use of devices such as smartphones allows us to quickly search whenever we comeacross something we don’t know without giving much thought.
Going back to earlier topic, last month in China twin girls were born as a result of clone
technology as well as genome engineering. Perhaps many of you haven’t had the chance to
see the sci-fi film “Gattaca” but similar phenomena is happening in today’s world, scienceand technology creating even more inequality, discrimination, and exclusion as a result.
I think we need the time to stop, think and discuss about these topics rather than simply
pursuing the mission of Tokyo becoming an international city of creativity. That is theunderlying idea for the title of this forum.
We have three speakers from different sector such as arts and culture and philosophy andeach of them is engaged in very fascinating jobs. Therefore, as an introduction I would liketo now ask each of the three speakers to talk about their ideas of inclusion, what it means to
be inclusive. I believe we are starting with you, Ms. Yoshino please start.
Ritsu Yoshino: Hello. First of all, thank you very muchfor inviting me to be here. When I hear the word inclusion,
I must admit I wonder what I am supposed to say as it isa very difficult topic. However as I’ve been given thisopportunity to speak in front of you today, I would like tointroduce the activities of Asian Cultural Council, andalso talk about our mission, why we are engaged in suchactivities.
We are called the Asian Cultural Council and were formed in 1961 in the US by John D.
Rockefeller III. He used his own private funds to establish this council, and we now haveoffices around the globe in order to accomplish his original aims. The headquarter is in New
York, and we have offices in Tokyo, Hong Kong, Taipei and Manila, and in each locations
we run the foundation.
Before going into Mr. John D. Rockefeller III’s vision for the establishment of the organizationin 1961, I would to talk about what we do. We provide individual fellowship to people in thearts sector or artists which gives them opportunities to come in contact and interact withdifferent cultures.
1963 was the year the organization kicked off and I would like to introduce his quote when
explaining the initial aim of the foundation. “The supreme worth of the individual” Thisimplies that each and one of us is different and we need to recognize the value in thatdifferences.

16

He believed that knowledge and respect for other cultures will lead to knowing, understanding
and respecting the individuals. In other words, “Through knowledge and respect for othercultures we are able to appreciate the peoples themselves.”
That’s where we started and this is the mission of the Asian Cultural Council. We are here to“advance international dialogue, understanding, and respect through cultural exchanges that
nurture the talents of individual artists and scholars in Asia and the US.”As I mentioned before, we provide fellowship opportunities, for example scholarships for
conducting research. In the US and countries in Asia, in order to gain opportunities to be
trained or to conduct research in countries other than their own, we provide long-term
fellowship to artists and scholars in the areas of arts and humanities. We do have otherprograms, such as grants for organizations, travel grants and others, but as a matter ofprinciple these fellowships are given to individuals so that they can immerse themselves inother cultures, absorb and think about the differences.
We cover the US as well as 25 countries and regions in Asia. ACC Japan here in Tokyo
sends people to the US and other countries in Asia. We cover very extensive areas in artsand humanities such as: archaeology, architecture, art history, arts administration, crafts, arts
critic, and many more. This also represents diversity. Rather than being confined in one
profession or area, we want our grantees to be connected with wider people from different
areas, thus we extend support to people from diverse fields.
Providing financial support is the basic activityof the council, but we are aware that the processof “knowing” cannot be supported solely byfinancial assistance and we need to extend thescope of our assistance. We have offices indifferent countries, so those staff will provide
support for traveling, including visa assistance,
finding residence, giving advices etc. For
instance, our staff will support scholars orexperts sent to their countries and save theirtime to find residences or meet people. We place importance on these processes. We believe
it is important that the we extend not only one-off support for a certain period such as threemonths or six months but to continue communicating, building friendship and ties with thosepeople . We call the people who receive assistance grantees and continue to build the
network. People who received grants back in 1963 when it started, are still part of the network,and our past grantees support to our new grantees by giving advices or introducing people.

Since our establishment, over the years we have had over 4,000 grantees in the world,
including US and various other countries and they are all connected. This connection was17not only when they first received the grant, but the grantees continued to be engaged andexpanded their network. Not just artists, scholars and experts who are our grantees but the
ACC headquarters have directors who are the supporters. Regardless of the differences ofthe position, directors and grantees are all connected in this one network which is anothercharacteristic of the council.
This connects with today’s topic. Earlier I talked about the initial idea of John D. Rockefeller
III in founding the organization. Reading through books on our program, I found another quote.
Traditionally Americans have viewed international relations primarily in political andeconomic terms, with comparatively little attention given to the cultural dimension. Thishas been true whether one considers academia, press coverage of world events, orformal governmental relationships. The result is that our world outlook has tended to bebound by our own culture instead of being broadened by a sensitivity to other cultures.
This remains largely so today.
Earlier, Mr. Nakatani said that we tend to rely on science, data, and numbers that govern ourworld. Rather than following such an approach, we must place importance on somethingthat’s different from just science and data and numbers, so I think that’s expressed throughthis quote.
I would like to introduce one more quote. Here he talks about interdependence. The sentence
was actually written in 1975, and at that time, perhaps the word was used rather in theinternational relations context but he said “Interdependence as a word and a concept hasentered our awareness in recent years, but can there ever be effective interdependence
without the tolerance, the respect, and the admiration that comes from a sensitive
understanding and appreciation of other cultures?”
So now, this is the last part of my presentation, I
would like to briefly introduce the activities of ACC
through this short video, which we created last year.
You will see pictures of our 4,000 grantees in the
background. That concludes my presentation, thankyou very much.
Moderator Serizawa: We’ve learned today that
ACC has been connecting Asia and America through exchanges over many years. I felt the
openness of USA but on the other hand, now they have a dispute over building a wall on theborder.
Apparently the social division is progressing in USA today and given that background ACC's
mission is ever more important. Next, Prof. Kajitani, could you please take the floor?

18

Shinji Kajitani: My name is Kajitani. Thank you verymuch for the invitation. I don’t think I have been given
many opportunities to talk about this exact topic.
Philosophy is the area of my research but setting thataside, I would like to talk about the “philosophy dialogue”
which has been my main area of interest. We do thistypically in schools or local communities or in
repopulating rural villages. “Philosophy dialogue” is oneof the methodologies for communication, and I would like to explain how philosophy plays arole.
Philosophy is about “asking” “thinking”, and dialogue is about “conversing” “listening”. The“philosophy dialogue” consist of ask, think, converse, and listen. Usually when you “think” onyour own you are having a dialogue with yourself asking questions and answering to it andin a “dialogue” you are thinking together with others. Basically the difference is whether you
are doing it by yourself or with others but what is common is that “having a dialogue” is about“thinking”. The important thing is to “question”. To have questions in your mind, to think, totalk about them which means to verbalize your thought and listen to other people’s ideas.
I have been doing this for about past five years, and wherever I go to attend a school session,
have similar experiences. You may think that Japanese people are too shy to talk but actually,
Japanese people like talking and are not really bad at it. So, why do we think that we can’t
talk well or hesitate to participate in conversations and often only talkative people lead thesession? Before going into these questions I would like to touch upon the rules of thephilosophy dialogue.
As the rule 1, you can say whatever you like. That is very important, but in daily conversation,
there are actually many things that you are not supposed to say, or if you say something you
will be laughed at or be scorned. People fear such possibilities and say nothing. It may seem
like reading the atmosphere but in fact the fear for a negative attitude towards what you say
make one remain quiet. This is why rule 2, to never say negative things towards one’s idea
become very important.
The rule 3 is, its Ok to simply listen. Sometimes when we are forced to say our opinions wejust give an off-the-cuff opinion. I think it’s better to say nothing if that is the case. There is a
way to participate in the dialogue just through listening.
The rule 4 is to ask, which is quite difficult. As I mentioned, “questioning” is the first definitionof philosophy, but questioning each other urge thinking. This is not about negating otherpeople’s opinions but to show that you have different opinions, you can ask questions. If you
think it sound different from your opinion, you can ask “ why do you think so? “. However, weare not good at it because when you do so in daily life, most of the time that person get

19

offended. This fear that if you question you may upset others enable you to do so. Also, when
you are persistent in asking questions, one may feel uncomfortable. Therefore, we can saythat our daily conversations consist of half-listening and no questioning.
The rule 5 is that you must talk based on your own experience rather than knowledge. People
tend to pretend to be very versed in the topic which makes the knowledgeable persons always
leading the conversation and others not participating in the dialogue.
The rule 6 is that you don’t need to draw a conclusion. There tend to be a person who wants
to act as the coordinator in the conversation and wants to always keep the discussion focused.
The rule 7 is that you can change your opinion. People tend to get upset when one changes
opinion but as dialogue is the process of thinking, it is natural that your opinion changes.
The last rule 8, is that you don’t necessarily have to understand. You are allowed not tounderstand. Realizing the fact that you don’t understand means that you are having questions
and this is food for thought.
The rules I just mentioned seems like acommon sense, but if you look in to the rulesof our daily conversations its actually the
opposite. I feel this particularly when I go toschools. All the rules I just mentioned isprohibited in schools and if you say what you
want the teacher will be angry. I believe there
are only three things accepted to say in
School : correct things, good things and things
that are in line with teachers’ expectation andanything outside of this is negated by the teacher by being scolded or ignored. This is not an
exaggeration.
I would like to go back to the topic of inclusion. Where can we find “others” including people
from different cultures or backgrounds? Taking schools as example, hierarchy is developedby evaluating students and I believe that is already the system of exclusion . If you are not agood student, you are excluded and if you are further down the hierarchy, you may be asked
to leave the school.
As such, in my eyes school is the system of exclusion and seems to me like an epitome ofsociety. What is being done in the entire society is principally done at schools. People
evaluate and classify people such as good or no-good and excluded when judged no-good.
It’s not only about excluding LGBT or people from different cultures or people with disability
but also before that, at school exclusion is already starting by judging whether you have agood or bad school records, characters etc. Thus I have a question about focusing only on

20

LGBT, foreigners and disability as the marginalized ignoring this baseline. To change this, I
think the school education has to transform fundamentally, but I know it’s very difficult.
Moderator Serizawa: Thank you very much. I am relieved to hear you mention that we don’t
have to wrap up the dialogue as it means that this rule is applicable to this discussion as well
today. Next, could we ask Mr. Anders. Are you ready?
Peter Anders: Thank you very much for theinvitation. I have learned that I might be one of themarginalized foreigners here thus allow me to give
you my brief insight into the topic by relating it to thecurrent situation in Germany. Rather than talking
about Goethe-Institute, which you probably know, it
may be more of your interest if I speak about
migration and questions of exclusion which are very
virulent in Germany and in Europe as a whole at the
moment.
I thought my role here is quite different from others in participating in this forum, and in mycase, as an expat in a foreign country, it is nevertheless a very privileged one. I was sent by
my company to fulfill certain duties. I am well-paid. I have caring colleagues. I have afascinating job, which is facilitating cultural and artistic relations, and I have a wonderfulpartner. Japan is the sixth country where I am doing this, so I believe that there might besomeone here even in the room who is more German than I am myself, who has spent inGermany almost not even half of his life.
So where is my home? The German sociologist Armin Nassehi, helps me to answer thisquestion, and I quote, “home is where you do not need to explain that you are there.” Although
we in Europe are facing a rise of nationalism and racism based on the pretension that one’s
own habits and own way of life, what normally makes us feel home, is in danger. It’s easy toblame the others, the foreign workers, the migrants, that they exploit the social system, thatthey are bringing diseases, that they are a threat on our values, such as women’s equality orsame-sex marriages.
Interestingly enough, our pride for pluralism ends there with the color of the people. We
expect the migrant to acculturate and to search and find home, but we neglect that we haveto give home. The comfort zone seems to be restricted.

21

The discourse of home is booming in times of uncertainties with fear of the consequences ofglobalization and digitalization. As such time of high complexity where Western concepts arechallenged, we are at the same time confronted with a reduced and homogeneous mode of
thinking, or fake news and others. Having listened to Prof. Nakatani, I am wondering if thepower of binary codes, of algorithms and molecular biology are rather risking to establish
universally-readable systems, as a consequence, explosive pace of technologicaldevelopment may be placing an unparalleled power into the hands of the few global
corporations. These questions are also raised within a new research and art program of thehouse, of the culture, of the world in Berlin which is called “The New Alphabet”.
I quote from its concept: “Faced with this destabilization of the existing systems of order andcategorization, and with the dynamization of the living world, the requirements of knowledge
production are shifting dramatically and might ask for social action. The crisis of Western
societies urged the representation of an inclusive society, which is aware of the demand of
new forms of social dialogue, which the post-colonial discourse can help bring about. New
forms of resistance and alternative modes of thinking and living are required, and in thissituation, artistic appropriation, recoding counteract the functionalization of language andcodes with poetic and sensual variations.”
Cultural policy must lay the ground for structures which are used as common platforms, such
as – and I stay within our context and lead to Berlin –the Exil Ensemble at the Maxim Gorki
Theater for professional artists who have been forced to live in exile. These young performers
continue to pursue their professions by developing their own projects and evenings ofperformances in a special studio. They appear in the normal Gorki productions, performances,and they engage with master classes. Shermin Langhoff, the director of Gorki Theater inBerlin, has emphasized the inclusive approach, and I quote, “We commit ourselves to belobbyists of history, lobbyists of those who were kept silent, and lobbyists of the desperate.”
To build up sustainable structures is the key for success of an inclusive creative leeway
following the action plan for diversification of the cultural sector in Berlin, which was presented
in 2016 and to which I refer here in my following remarks. Action is based on the following
arguments.
First, diversity is a nucleus of the successful brand of Berlin’s cultural landscape and keeps
high economic potential. Studies have shown that 74 percent of the visitors to Berlin haveargued to choose Berlin as the destination because of its cultural and artist scenes.

22Second, exclusion as an instrument of discrimination is often multilayered and complex. The
Somalian-German student wearing a scarf will face other forms of discrimination than a whitemechanic from Belgium. Attributions ofcultural superiority and inferiority, as wellas racism, have a long history, at least inGermany. And I think this is an importantto think of the difference of diversity thaninternationalization. It’s not just to beinternational, as we have for example indance or in choreography. We have very
international ensembles who are working
together, but this is not what we are talking
about when we are thinking of diversity andinclusion.
And third, special attention is needed to artistic production in the so-called subcultural sector
as their cohesive effect, especially for young people, may not be underestimated.
I already gave you two examples of current projects in Germany ”The New Alphabet”
exhibition and “The Exile Ensemble “which are triggered by the huge change of technological,
political, and social conditions, and I’ll give you a final example.
The German Federal Cultural Foundation has recently rolled out a nationwide program called
360 Degrees – Fund for New City Cultures, with which the foundation, I quote, wants:“…to encourage institutions in the areas of fine and performing arts, music, literature,architecture, New Media and related forms, as well as cross-genre institutions, culturaland art-historical museums, which address contemporary issues in their related field, totake a perspective that encompasses all of society…. “
Funding is awarded to promote diversity in cultural organizations in the area ofprogramming, audience reach, and staff appointments. The Foundation will finance a
position, so-called “agent”, and provide additional project resources for supportive
activities and formats. The agents will, over a four-year period and in cooperation withinstitutions, develop recommendations and measures which can be implemented by theinstitutions to change and diversify their activities themselves and which contribute toshaping a self-confident, immigrant-friendly society, by which all of urban society canbenefit. The agents should possess diversity-related competence, experience in initiatinginteraction between cultural organizations and participants of immigrant background, andrelevant language skills. Their task is to develop and guide the diversity-oriented processof change at their respective cultural institution.

23

Well-renowned institutions such as theHamburg Thalia Theater, the City Libraryin Munich, Rautenstrauch Museum inKöln and others and Dresden, all of them
now have their 360 Diversity Agentworking together on the common groundto an inclusive society, which, and I cometo my conclusion, is part of the strategy
of giving home to those who want to work
for a better quality of life.
Home means not just participating but also representing, and this is one reason why theforeign cultural policy in Germany is a no-passport-driven one, but open to those who want
to share their artistically, politically or socially validated experiences and contributions to thecontemporary German cultural landscape, with artists and cultural stakeholders from andwithin the whole world, with our local project “Goethe Damascus in Exile in Tokyo”. We invitedfour artists from Syria living in exile in Germany. In all cases, they were amazed by theopportunities given to exchange with Japanese artists, sharing knowledge, and not being
stigmatized just as refugees or migrants, but being taken seriously as artists contributing to
the diversification of the world. Thank you.
Moderator Serizawa: Thank you verymuch. As he mentioned, Goethe-Institut
Tokyo invited four artists fromDamascus to Tokyo and this project
was very exciting and stimulating.
Taking Germany into consideration, thecountry seems to be shaken with the
new immigrant policies, howeveragainst this backdrop, the cultural andart sectors, including the Goethe-Institut
are playing a role through their activities
placing importance on diversity andinclusion. That was very interesting. Thank you very much for sharing.
Now, I would like to move on to discussion but we have very limited time. We heard three
speakers talk about their activities and their ideas, so we all seem to place importance ininclusion rather than exclusion and have different approaches in the respective activities.
We’d like to take a step forward to engage in discussions.
First I would like to talk about inclusion in the arts . I have an impression that we assume thatarts and culture embrace inclusivity. We also share the feeling that inclusion enhances
creativity. However, I would like to question this by giving you an example. When we look into24the history of artistic movements, there has been many cases when artists exclude different
ideas of the others and fought over ones correctness. Therefore, I think even in the art world
we cannot assume inclusion.
However thinking one step forward about our own potential creativity, indeed we feel that
inclusion is what gives power to it. Creativity is a topic much talked about however I personallyfeel a bit strange about the use of the word. Especially those from my generation tend toshare an image of “creators” engaging in creative activities with the ability to build the word
according to the perfect blueprints that they have drawn. However, taking the history of lifeon earth which I am personally interested in as an example, 3.8 billion years ago when primal
living organisms started to emerge, did they actually evolve to what we are today 3.8 billion
years later as per the blueprints? No, I think not. I think we have created this world full of
diversity spontaneously rather than by design, with trial and error and ingenuity. I would say
generative creativity, something emerging or something being purified. That’s what makes
sense for me when I talk about creativity.
Recognizing inclusion, in an inclusive society, perhaps the kind of creativity that we think may
also expand on its own. I have no intention whatsoever of placing this idea in the context ofWest versus East, but I think the idea of monotheism embraced in the West and polytheism
being the mainstream in the East, this difference in how we view the world may givedifferences also in how we think about creativity.
I understand this is a very difficult topic, and I don’t expect us to come to any conclusion, butwhen we think of creativity and inclusion, how do you view these two ideas and how do thinkthese are related? That’s what I would like to ask the speakers.
Shinji Kajitani: Well, I would like to speak about theinclusivity of the philosophy dialogue. When the dialogue isconducted based on those rules that I shared earlier, you
can have a very flat and frank dialogue irrespective of one’s
age, grades or profession. Suppose there are five-year-old
child, high school student, working person, as well as
grandparents generation participating in a dialogue, with thisrule, they still can have a natural conversation.
It is difficult to correlate diversity and creativity, but I can explain how to make the dialogue
philosophical. Philosophy enable one to think differently from before which means it is one
way to become creative. However, a dialogue becoming philosophical has nothing to do with
the nature or character of the individuals participating. It also has nothing to do with how
considerate the person is but rather for example, people from different ages tend to havedifferent views so maybe a child may say unimaginable things from the adults’ perspective,
people from different occupation may share different view on things, as well as the students
who have different deviation values in school scores tended to have very different views.

25

Therefore, the dialogue become more interesting with diversity. On the contrary, dialogue
among only good performers at school tend to be uninteresting. Their individual abilities may
be high, but their values are similar therefore, the dialogue tends to be uninteresting. Thus
including the older generation in this, the dialogue become much more fun and interesting.
When we do these activities at schools, I see frequently children with developmental
disabilities or learning disabilities treated as difficult children and usually told to take care ofthem with attention as they are problematic. However, actually when the dialogue isconcerned, having them is almost never a problem. In fact, in most cases their participation
deepens the dialogue. This makes me realize an issue about schools as I don’t think thosechildren are problematic and when the dialogue is concerned there are no difficulties indealing with them. Intellectually, there are no differences with the other children.
Then why are those children treated problematic at school? Children with high learning ability
and children with low learning capacity could have a very good dialogue, which makes me
wonder why do schools system discriminate and exclude the bad performers from the good
performers and separate them so that they stay away from each other? Through the dialogue
process, people with different track records and professions can have a dialogue which
expand ones view very naturally.
It doesn’t necessary have to be in a form of dialogue, but in creating a group or a place withdiversity I think this kind of methodology will be useful. I don’t think that with mere diversity,
meaning various people existing in one place will lead to creativity just as is. It is about how
we can actually bring together those various people. Those rules that I shared will make iteasier to create such space. The rules themselves are very simple but without knowing them,creating such space would be very difficult and at times maybe very unpleasant.
Therefore, I have the feeling maybe art is adequate for creating such space. The beauty ofart is that you don’t have to be always correct. You don’t have to understand. You never knowwhether what you said is good or bad, and you may have to care a little bit about otherpeople’s thinking, but don’t necessarily have to draw conclusions. Hence those rules I
mentioned earlier are easier to be applied in art field which makes it easier to be inclusive.
This is what I feel about inclusion and creativity looking at schools. It’s about creating a space
to bring people with various backgrounds together. This includes not only people fromdifferent culture but also people with differences such as students with various learning skills,
for example.

26

Ritsu Yoshino: In the field, I have theopportunity to see artists bringing themselvesto different environments. I would like to sharewith you a story of one artist in residence
program which I thought was interesting. Thisis about one of those artist-in-residence
programs being implemented in many different
locations, which are expanding. This program,taking place in a town called Shin-Nagata in
Kobe, called Dance Box has been running forthe past ten years. Since it’s a not a big
community, when they first started, the local people were bit puzzled, as they saw thesedance artists which were group of adults dressed in a different way, and the wondered how
those people made a living. As the program continued running , the artists become part oftheir daily locals as they met them at locals bathhouse, shopping arcade etc. The locals
started to understand that these people happens to be called artist and they started to accept
those strange people in their community,.
Once the people start recognizing that these are people who share different values who area bit strange but are doing something interesting, they started to communicate with eachother. The locals would buy some food for the artists when seeing them in the shopping
arcade etc. and like that, the dancers become more and more part of the community. As aconsequence, the residents seem to have started to feel freer. The drycleaner said “ Since I
like dancing, I want to dance” or “ I have an open space, so please use it for your performance”
Like that, these local residents started to unlock their creative sides. There was one child who
refused to go to school, through interacting with those artists, that child established a schoolof their own.
As such, having these artists in the local community, the local residents thought that it is okay
to be different and who they are. This was one of the examples that I was able to learn fromthe program organizer. This episode made me think that artists maybe similar to a virus, justfloating in the air and one day you may simply be infected without realizing it and changed,
so to speak. Again, I realized that one’s creativity has a huge influence on the society togenerate new values, creating new things .
Moderator Serizawa: I see, so artists being incorporated into the community leads to the
dialogue.
Ritsu Yoshino: Right. I think art is about dialogue, expressing one’s self, extending one’s
hand, trying and wanting to communicate and connect with others. Something invisible likespores but with great influence.

27

Moderator Serizawa: Mr. Anders, please share more about the art project you mentioned
earlier, working together with the migrants for creation. I understood that what is critical inthose project is dialogic interaction and that the migrants are not specially treated justbecause they are migrants. Could you please touch upon your view on how being different
and creativity is correlated?
Peter Anders: One of the most intriguing
experiences I had was a project in Johannesburg in
Hillbrow, which is an area you cannot walk into
because of riots and huge social disaster.
I would rather tick the topic of the ideology of theword dialogue. We are always talking about the
dialogue, and it’s a very common ground that wehave to have a dialogue, but we shouldn’t forget that
also historically the dialogue always include communicators with power in the hierarchy. We
must envision this in different approaches and nowadays recaptured by the so-called postcolonial discourse. This also recovers the real views of the dichotomy between the West andother worlds, North and South etc.
Coming back to South Africa, I would like to speak about the special project we did there. We
rented an old small warehouse which was not in use anymore and called for projects of thecommunity and the citizens. We asked for their project proposal and a jury from different
artistic areas chose which project to offer funding. All the other things they had to do on theirown from looking for materials to building the project. They had six months and were given
the means and the opportunities to do whatever they want. We did evaluate but we did not
guide them through a certain process. Indeed there were projects which failed very early.
After four weeks, they spent their money with drinking and smoking, and it was over.
However, there were other projects which were integrated into the communities, and that wasa very successful. It was very reliable because when we are dealing with the issue of theothers we can only achieve it taking people really seriously and working together for theothers. I think we need to let them explore themselves and find their way into the integration.
Moderator Serizawa: Thank you. We started with
the idea of inclusion and creativity. Having a
dialogue can be the fundamental step to cast away
the fear that we are different. If you actually interact
with that person, as Prof. Kajitani mentioned before,
it’s easy to recognize and accept those differences.
We must start from there and I am sure the rulesthat Mr. Kajitani presented earlier can be based on.
Otherwise, we will not be able to stop developing28

an image of others being different based on our stereotype. That’s how I feel after listening
to the three speakers.
Going back to Ms. Yoshino’s example, it reminded me of the program that took place in Beppu
in Oita. There I was involved in the direction of the arts festival several times, and I believe it
was when the first time the festival took place, there was this dance piece which a group ofdancers created. In this project, the dancers were hidden in the city and the audience were
to walk around the city to find them. Interestingly, we happened to realize that in Beppu, it
was very difficult to distinguish whether this person in front of me was a dance performer orjust another elderly man from the local community. Perhaps it had to do with the fact that it
took place in the city of Beppu where public baths are here and there, has a very open
community and drunk middle-aged men or various people doing unique things blend in in thecity. Those audiences who went into the city to look for professional dancers on the street
were a bit befuddled. Even if the person you come across on the street to all appearanceslook like a dance performer, actually he/she is just another local person.
This project really challenged our stereotype, our view on a certain group of people which issimilar or different. What I felt after listening to our three speakers that these fixed ideas andpreconceptions inhibit us from having the very basic dialogue that was supposed to takeplace. I think that’s very much a bottleneck in building an inclusive society.
Shinji Kajitani: I think people can tolerate others thatare “very” different from themselves. For instance,
foreigner etc. I don’t have to stay with him or her all theway, and just have fun together for the moment.
However at school, when there are good and bad
performers in the same classroom, actually they are not
together. In fact, when the student with low learning
capacity is in the classroom not understanding what’s
been taught, it’s almost meaningless to stay in the same class and they may be better off
being in a different place as they could learn something else.
If one did not understand English or Mathematics in junior high, it’s natural that one won’t beable to understand what’s been taught at senior high school, however just because they sit
in the same classroom they are seen as one group while actually they are not together. The
division is happening within one school while already school itself is segregated based upon
the learning ability of the students creating hierarchy groups. That said, I think even among
students with high learning performance or students with low learning capability themselves
are finally not together. However because this segregation is within the school system it isconsidered only about evaluation and not as a huge differences. But gradually people getused to the system and no longer can students with high learning ability put up with students
without.

29

On the contrary when the others are very different making it incomparable to ourselves, we
could accept them. In my opinion those people who themselves are measured by one
yardstick who simply apply the same to measure others, do not take into account coexistence
or inclusion. These people tend to think that when good and bad performers exist in the sameclassroom, it’s natural that bad performers are unable to follow the class. But I think it ispossible to create classes where everyone can understand.
When it comes to Art as a subject I have the feeling this is possible. I don’t think teachers willscold a student with bad drawing skills. But in math, if you don’t perform well you will bescolded by the teacher and become sort of excluded from the class. I feel this is strange
because it is so natural that there are various types of students within schools. I don’t thinksuperiority or inferiority do not need to determine at school and it’s hard for me to understandwhy it’s put such a high priority. For example, that you are better at studying then others or,that you are superior as you passed an exam of a good university etc. Students with suchmentality confined in the same classroom are actually not together.
I believe that once people are able to get together with the others in that level, we will nothave difficulty co-existing with foreigners or people with disabilities etc. I see frequent use ofword “inclusion” mainly meaning paying special consideration in order to be together withforeigners or people with disabilities, but I think if we really want to establish an inclusive
society, we should think about whether or not we are succeeding to include the others close
to you such as your classmates.
Peter Anders: I just wanted to add our experience inGermany. There, inclusive schools and classes went very
well between the students but the problems were theparents. Parents were saying that to have an inclusiveclass, it’s too time consuming or the advancement is too
slow and they do not want their child to be relented.
Also about the dialogue, as you are aware, some artists
may not be good speakers. This is why it is absolutely
necessary to form a place or opportunity like residencies
where one can work together, experience together andcreate together. This is why the Goethe-Institut is focusing
a lot on co-production. Rather than presenting andshowcasing German culture, we invest much more in
residencies and coproducing to bring the people together,to let them work together. I think at this time when we areso challenged by these global affairs this approach is critical.
Moderator Serizawa: Indeed coproduction is important. Now, it seems we are running outof time as we want to secures some time to receive questions and comments from the30

audience. Lastly, I would like to wrap up. As today’s forum is hosted by Arts Council Tokyo I
would like to connect today’s discussion to Tokyo. We all seem to be on the same page about
the importance of inclusion but more specifically, how can Tokyo change itself so that it canbecome a more vibrant and creative city. If you have any ideas or suggestions, please sharethem with us.
Peter Anders: I think it’s very important to give power to the minorities, such as migrants,
LGBT etc. Bring them into positions to do and develop their own projects and their own
contact because what they need is a platform for representation. We can provide thestructural support which is necessary.
Moderator Serizawa: Thank you very much.
Ritsu Yoshino: I completely agree with what was said. We have people with diverse values
and the first step is for everyone to recognize the fact that there are people with different
values. From there we can move on to realizing inclusion. Probably school should be a place
to teach us this but as I just learned from Mr. Kajitani, it seems it is difficult in school. Schools
tend to force only one set of values on children but on the contrary different values areintertwined in society. When it comes to Art, different values crossover and are always
changing and shifting. Therefore, a society must acknowledge that different values coexist
an those values are also shifting.
Shinji Kajitani: In Tokyo, as there are a lot of things available, I feel that the city as a wholeis creative. However as it’s huge and too many people are living here you can avoid
interactions with different others and spend time only among your friends with similar values.
Therefore on an individual basis, it’s rather difficult to be inclusive.
For example, in rural areas, you can’t get away with interacting with different others. Even if
the neighbors seem different from you, you have to pay an effort to get along well with them.
However, in Tokyo, you don’t have to do this. This is a big difference. Having a big populationand having the freedom to do what you want is at the same time benefit of living in Tokyo,
but because of this I don’t think inclusion can happen spontaneously. Therefore, as I’ve been
saying such place to get together is necessary and hoping that education can achieve this,but in reality school tend to be very monothetic. I’m hoping that the transformation can startfrom schools.
Ritsu Yoshino: As Mr. Anders mentioned earlier, not only public institutions such as GoetheInstitut and others, but also community centers or private sector organizations like ourfoundations and similar, these various actors could play roles in making structural support.

31

Moderator Serizawa: Thank you. I see, so
creating many of those places in schools is
important. That reminded me of one episode.
A friend of mine has been teaching at a
private arts’ graduate university and he told
me that the recently majority of the art
students are non-Japanese and most of them
are from China. It was interesting to knowthat which subject motivated the students
from China to study at this arts university wasinterested in things like Anime or manga butat the same time so called underground artists such as Shuji Terayama or Tatsumi Hijikata
were particular areas of their interest to study in Japan.
When I thought about the reason, in China they had the Cultural Revolution and that one
particular time in history, different ideas, the underground art movements were completely
eradicated This kind of dictatorship naturally create an era in which certain sets of ideas arecompletely excluded from the mainstream and in Asia including the Southeast Asia, many
countries that have experienced such dictatorship.
Perhaps Japan followed a different course. It’s not that underground art movement was
encouraged, but at the same time, it was not excluded. It’s interesting that we have such ahistory and environment. So excessive inclusion, when we think of that, I think for Tokyo andfor Japan to be viable, to survive in this world, I think that may be one approach.
So as a strategy for the city, I think it’s very important that we try to practice and execute thisidea of inclusiveness and inclusion to the very extreme. That’s my opinion.
So, I think since we have many people in the audience, it’s a good opportunity to open thefloor to the audience. I must apologize that we will only be able to take one or two questions.
So, if you have a question or comment you would like to share, please raise your hand.
Question: It was a very interesting session. Thankyou very much. I am working in a company, andvarious values and diversities are understood
including myself. I also agree that conceptually it
will generate good chemistry and encourage
innovation. We understand that, but for example,
we have bad chemistry with some people and I
wonder how would you describe the inclusiveness
Aufheben, when it comes to liking or disliking
people and inclusion?

32Moderator Serizawa: Are there any people who want to respond to that comment? I thinkit’s difficult.
Shinji Kajitani: I think it may apply to art as well, but when you do a dialogue, of course in agroup we don’t always have only people with good personality but strangely you stop thinking
about the person in front of you having a bad character. Whatever opinions you hear, you
wouldn’t have a negative feeling. Also, I’m getting old too but I tended to talk very softly andpolitely when talking to elderly people however, through a dialogue we acknowledge one
another as equals which enable me to really enjoy conversation with them. As such, maybe
the situation around you, the company as a setting is what is making you feel about theperson that way.
Moderator Serizawa: According to Mr. Kajitani’s experienced it seems you would notencounter such situation where you dislike specific person if you have a dialog based on theroles, so there, you may be able to find hints.
Shinji Kajitani: For example, try your conversation within your company based on theserules. Maybe the performance will drop, but you may feel more comfortable at your workplace.
Question: Thank you very much. Okay. I will try to do dialogue rather than discussion. Thankyou for your input.
Question: Thank you very much for theexciting
discussion.
Mr.
Nakatani
recommended Tokyo to become thelooking glass of the world. It’s a difficult
proposal but I like it as I agree that to bringchange we need to take extreme measures.
The discussion by the four speakers wasinteresting but perhaps it may have been
better if they’ve touched upon a very basic
question: why is inclusion so difficult? It isbecause inclusion brings fear in people as
the idea of having something different from you threatens your life and your safety. That’s at
the baseline of this discussion. This is why we see Japanese people tsking when seeing
many Chinese tourists in Ginza.
I understand completely that dialogue is important in addressing these situations. But why is
it important? That’s because we need to overcome the fear against people who we aresupposed to include. Without this fear, there wouldn’t need to be discussing the issue of
migrants. Because the fear exist, dialogue comes in place as a way to overcome it. If we do
not acknowledge the existence of this fear, the discussion would not mean much. I believe
Mr. Kajitani wanted to point out that if we stop there we will not go anywhere so we need to33

apply the a specific approach having these dialogues, and we were able to hear other good
examples.
There is this fear of inclusion at the starting point, and as a result of this fear, people tend to
exclude those who are different to keep their life and safety. However it is apparent that if we
continue that, the society will not be creative thus to overcome this fear we should havedialogue. I think that’s what this discussion was all about.
That’s why I thought it is important to emphasize that baseline otherwise the participants will
simply agree that inclusion is important and we must try to embrace it and bring back a nicestory.
Peter Anders: Thank you very much for this comment. I totally agree that it starts from thefear for the others. The problem is that stereotyping the others will not mend your fear. Indeed
the fear comes from ones’ own insecurities. Due to changes happening around us such as
digitalization and climate change, we are always confronted with new experiences and crises.
Blaming the others, blaming those who are different for this is a very easy way to
exclude.Therefore, I think it’s really important to look at ourselves, to look at what am I afraidof and why am I afraid and what makes me so insecure? Is it about my own pension? Is it
about my own future? Is it about my own family? All these social questions must be overcome
to fear-less.
Moderator Serizawa: I think we’ve alreadygone over the time. We are not underpressure to reach any conclusion or to try tosummarize the conversations we had. Today
we started with a keynote speech by Mr.
Nakatani, and then we had the three
speakers on stage to have a discussion. I
think we are reaching towards the point
where we need to do something. Since we’ve
entered this new era, we have always had
this sense of urgency. Somewhere in thecorner of our minds we were always feeling the necessity to see substantial change.
Hopefully, today’s symposium gave the opportunity for each one of you to think about this
topic. Thank you very much.
MC:Thank you also to all the speakers. Please give them a big round of applause. Thank youvery much.

34