History of Relations of Asian Countries

Uchiyama Shoten: Rethinking Interwar
Sino-Japanese Intellectual Exchange
By Andrew T. Kamei-Dyche

AuthorAndrew T. Kamei-Dyche

Jun’ichirō Tanizaki Visits a Bookshop
It is early 1926, and the influential writer Jun’ichirō Tanizaki (18861965) is visiting Shanghai. Eager to meet Chinese intellectuals, hehas been advised by friends to visit Uchiyama Shoten, a Japanesebookstore (Photo 1). The store is an active place, with tables where
Chinese and Japanese customers enjoy reading and discussing
topics over tea. Upon meeting the proprietor, Kanzō Uchiyama(1885-1959), Tanizaki is surprised to learn how many young Chinese
frequent the shop for Japanese books, through which they can follow
the newest trends in science, art and literature in Japan and theWest. This amazes Tanizaki, who has previously tended to see theChinese through romanticized stereotypes. Uchiyama introduces him
to some of the local writers, including Tian Han (1898-1966) and
Guo Moruo (1892-1978), and they attend a party together.
Tanizaki’s experiences, which he enthusiastically wrote about(“Shanhai Kōyūki”, Josei, May, June, and August 1926), were notexceptional. During the 1920s and 1930s, many Japanese writers,
thinkers and artists visited China, and sought to meet their Chinesecounterparts. Shanghai was an especially lively center of SinoJapanese intellectual exchange. Yet today this is not widely known,another casualty of what might be called the long shadow of war.

Photo 1: Public domain

Uchiyama Shoten in the late 1920s

54 Japan SPOTLIGHT • January / February 2020

The Long Shadowof War: Historical
Problems
Historians spend a lot oftime contemplating war.
Although military historyis less popular among
academics than in
decades past, manyscholars study the cultureof countries at war, or
their economic systems,
or their ideologies. War
itself remains a major partof historical studies, andthis is not surprising: wars
are devastating, traumatic
events that can transformevery part of the societies involved. Moreover, the aftershocks of amajor conflict can echo down the generations, as anyone studying
international relations in East Asia today can attest.
What we are less aware of, however, is that this also works in theother direction: after a war occurs, our perspective of everything thatcame before changes dramatically as we seek the causes of that war.
Historians of Japan used to discuss the interwar era largely in termsof sensō e no michi, the “road to war”. While this is a valid approach
to history, it can also push us to only focus on events and people
connected to the later conflict, or alternatively, to assume thateverything is connected. Yet history is more than a countdown to thenext war. It is essential to understand the people of an era on theirown terms, and not just through the lens of a conflict that occurred
later. If we forget this then we risk distorting our understanding of
the past.
In the case of Sino-Japanese relations, conventional wisdom holds
that during the 1920s and the 1930s relations between Japanese andChinese intellectuals broke down. This was seen as a consequence ofthe deteriorating relationship between the Chinese and Japanesestates, due to the latter’s pursuit of expansionistic policies. However,this was not in fact the case. Japanese and Chinese intellectuals
maintained active relations through the course of the era. Neither
were these relations sanitized and devoid of politics: rather, many
intellectuals discussed politics forcefully, but they were also capableof seeing each other as individuals whose values and ideologies were
not necessarily synonymous with those of their governments.

The Problem of Sources
Another reason why this active intellectual exchange is not wellknown is that studying it requires collecting together sources that are
not easily accessible or reprinted. Scholars of literature andphilosophy in Japan often depend upon canonical collected works(zenshū ) of major figures, which may leave out minor writings suchas travel accounts or descriptions of networking with foreigncolleagues. Further, as historian Joshua Fogel observes, many
Japanese intellectuals wrote selectively about their travels in China,
or not at all (The Literature of Travel in the Japanese Rediscovery of
China, 1862-1945, Stanford University Press, 1996, p. 250). As aresult, Japanese readers today may be aware of Chinese students
coming to Japan at the start of the 20th century, but they are far lesslikely to be aware of Japanese visiting China in the following
https://www.jef.or.jp/journal/

History of Relations of Asian Countries

decades.
A striking example is Lu Xun (1881-1936), arguably the single
most influential modern Chinese writer and today the subject of agreat amount of Japanese research. There was very little written in
Japanese about him in the late 1920s and early 1930s, but mostJapanese intellectuals were aware of him and eagerly sought to meet
him when they visited China. This case neatly demonstrates thedifficulties of historical research, and the gaps between what iscommonly thought about an era and what that era was really like. We
know that at that time Japanese and Chinese intellectuals enjoyedmeeting each other, and exchanging works and ideas. We also knowthat Shanghai was a center of such intellectual exchange, and thateveryone interested in it knew to visit Uchiyama Shoten – whichbrings us back to bookstores.

Bookstores & the Intellectual WorldIn the late 19th and early 20th centuries, bookstores were a majorpart of the intellectual landscape. All across the industrialized, andparts of the industrializing, world, bookstores flourished. For
educated urbanites, bookstores provided intellectual nourishment in
the form of books and opportunities to network with their fellow
readers. It was not surprising that bookstores could turn into salons
where students, thinkers and artists would regularly gather. Suchsalons could be found in London, Paris, Tokyo, and other major
cities.
Shanghai was no exception. A thriving cosmopolitan city, in theinterwar era it was also the heart of the Chinese literary world, withmany writers, publishers, and of course, hundreds of bookstores. In
the words of Chinese literary scholar Leo Ou-fan Lee, “For Shanghai
writers the most important pastime, aside from going to the movies,
was going to the bookstores” (Shanghai Modern: The Flowering of a
New Urban Culture in China, 1930–1945, Harvard University Press,
1999, p. 120). Many of those writers knew Japanese, and the cityalso had a “Japantown” (Photo 2). Shanghai was therefore an
excellent location for a Japanese bookstore. Uchiyama Shoten,
however, was to become something quite special: the primary

Photo 2: Public domain

Hongkou Japantown area of the International Settlement in Shanghai in the interwar era

meeting spot for Japanese and Chinese intellectuals.

Uchiyama Sets Up Shop
Uchiyama Shoten was originally founded by Kanzō Uchiyama’s
wife Miki in 1917, shortly after the couple moved to Shanghai.
Originally they sold Christian books from their porch, but soon
expanded their offerings and acquired space for a proper bookstore.
The rapidly-expanding bookstore gained a large Japanese andChinese clientele, and soon became the largest Japanese-ownedbookstore in China. As it expanded, it also transformed, becoming by
1923 a full-fledged intellectual salon. Local intellectuals went there tomeet their colleagues, and when Japanese intellectuals, who had
been coming to Shanghai since the end of the 19th century, began
visiting the city in ever greater numbers, the bookstore served as aperfect locale for them to meet their Chinese counterparts.
Uchiyama Shoten became a center for Sino-Japanese intellectual
exchange, as well as an essential waypoint for Japanese intellectuals
visiting China, ranging from Zen Buddhist popularizer Daisetsu
Suzuki (1870-1966) to publisher Shigeo Iwanami (1881-1946).
There they could meet Chinese intellectuals like the aforementioned
Tian Han, Guo Moruo, and of course, Lu Xun. The salon culture
included meetings of the Chinese Drama Research Society, and themonologue or “comic chat” (mandan) group, the latter of which wasa particularly good way for visitors to meet resident intellectuals. The
mandan group became nicknamed “Shanghai customs” because it
was considered a required experience for Japanese intellectuals
visiting the city. Masamoto Ozawa, an editor of the International
Review at the Japan Foreign Affairs Association, began to patronize
Uchiyama Shoten in late 1935, and later recalled days spent in lively
conversation among friends both local and foreign (Uchiyama Kanzō
Den: Nicchū Yū kō ni tsukushita Idai na Shomin, Banmachi Shobō,
1972, p. 126). The salon also became well-known for its excellent
tea, which was perhaps not surprising because Miki Uchiyama hailed
from Uji and was skilled at traditional tea preparation.

Uchiyama: Mediator & Friend
Successful intellectual exchange needs more than a locale; itneeds a mediator, a person able to facilitate that exchange in athoughtful and respectful manner. Key to the success of Uchiyama
Shoten as a site of intellectual exchange was the role of the
proprietor, Kanzō Uchiyama, as just such a mediator. He had
developed a deep admiration for Chinese culture, and was bothered
by what he perceived to be Japanese ignorance of contemporary
China. He went on to produce many books attempting to explain
aspects of the country, the most famous of which, Ikeru Shina no
Sugata (Gakugei Shoin, 1935) carried a preface by Lu Xun.
Uchiyama was familiar with most of the young Chinese writers, butalso had a wide network of Japanese contacts, making him wellsuited to introducing Chinese and Japanese intellectuals to eachother. His openness, candor, and easygoing nature also likely
contributed – even intellectuals from different camps who did not get
Japan SPOTLIGHT • January / February 2020

55

History of Relations of Asian Countries

along with each otherbecame salon regulars.
All this made Kanzō
Uchiyama and his store
salon ideally situated toserve as mediator and siteof intellectual exchange
for Lu Xun when hearrived in Shanghai in theautumn of 1927. The twomen in fact became closefriends (Photo 3). At times
Lu Xun, as a leftist writer,
was in danger from theauthorities, and Uchiyama
helped protect him.
Uchiyama Shoten was asafe haven for Lu Xun to
Lu Xun and Kanzō Uchiyama, early summer 1933
send and receive works
and correspondence, andUchiyama routinely smuggled books and other items in and out of
the country for his friends. This proved helpful for getting thewritings of Chinese intellectuals out of China, and Japanese writings
into China for the Shanghai readership. Uchiyama Shoten thus
provided Lu Xun with protection and a communications network,
which were conducive to engaging in intellectual encounters. At thesame time, Uchiyama played the role of mediator, introducing Lu
Xun, now a central figure in the Uchiyama Shoten salon, tonumerous Japanese intellectuals who were eager to meet him.
Examining some of these encounters can help us to understandmore about Sino-Japanese intellectual exchange during this era.
Photo 3: Public domain

Lu Xun’s Encounters with Japanese (I):
Varied People, Varied Perspectives
Through Uchiyama and his salon, Lu Xun encountered numerous
Japanese intellectuals from a variety of callings and politicalpersuasions. While many left no accounts of their meetings, theaccounts of other members of the salon, and sources such as
memoirs and photographs, can enable us to reconstruct elements ofthese encounters. Lu Xun did not record in his diary the names of all
the Japanese he met, but nearly all of those he did were introduced
to him by Uchiyama, while most of the others he met at an inn
chosen by, or a party hosted by, Uchiyama. We know, for instance,that in 1931 alone Lu Xun met Mitsuhara Kaneko, Nyozekan
Hasegawa, Daisetsu Suzuki, Takanobu Murofushi, Fumiko Hayashi,
Itaru Nii, Saneatsu Mushanokōji, Yoshirō Nagayo, and more, throughUchiyama (Seisuke Numano, Rojin to Nihon, Bungeisha, 2004, p.
84). Uchiyama also helped orchestrate the most famous encounter
between Lu Xun and a non-Japanese, George Bernard Shaw, in early
1933.
Most of Lu Xun’s encounters with Japanese intellectuals did not
become as famous as his meeting with Shaw, but in addition to their
56 Japan SPOTLIGHT • January / February 2020

great number these encounters are noteworthy for their variety. Lu
Xun met a wide range of intellectuals, including not only influential
writers, but also artists and teachers. For example, there was
Uchiyama’s younger brother, Kakichi, a woodcut artist and teacher
who was one of the figures most responsible for Lu Xun’s interest in
woodcuts. When visiting Shanghai in the summer of 1931, Kakichitaught a woodcut class to Chinese students at Lu Xun’s request. Lu
Xun also met with teachers and students from the Tōa Dōbunshoin,
the major Japanese school in China which was established in 1901,
and other schools. A photograph from August 1934 shows Lu Xun
and Uchiyama with Professor Tetsuo Hayashi of the Tōa Dōbunshoin,
and a Professor Inoue from another institution (Photo 4).
The Japanese intellectuals Lu Xun encountered also had a range of
opinions on contemporary issues. For instance, some held strong
opinions concerning Japanese imperial efforts in China. Haruo Satō,a Chinese literary scholar, spoke out in favor, while the writer
Yonejirō Noguchi went so far as to argue that China should welcomecolonization by Japan, a notion Lu Xun found intolerable. This makesa sharp contrast to the writer Nyōzekan Hasegawa, who rejected the
subjugation of one people by another, or Professor Tomi Kōra, adevout Christian and pacifist who rejected violence and war for any
purpose. When she stopped off in Shanghai to meet Lu Xun in
January 1932, Kōra was on her way to seek Gandhi’s support intrying to defuse the looming struggle between Japan and China.

Lu Xun’s Encounters with Japanese (II):Risks & Friendships
Some of Lu Xun’s encounters were risky, such as his association
with leftist activist Takiji Kobayashi, killed by the Japanese special
police in February 1933 and immortalized by Chinese leftists as aclass struggle martyr. Then there was the peculiar case of Wataru
Kaji, a writer of proletarian literature who moved to Shanghai andfirst met Lu Xun in early 1936. Kaji regularly discussed issues with
Lu Xun at Uchiyama Shoten and translated some of his essays, but
his politics were far more radical. An outspoken critic of JapanesePhoto 4: Public domain

Left to right: Kanzō Uchiyama, Prof. Tetsuo Hayashi, Lu Xun, Prof. Inoue, Aug. 23, 1934

History of Relations of Asian Countries

imperialism, in the wake of Japan’s 1937 invasion Kaji toured China
drumming up support for an anti-war alliance, volunteered for Jiang
Jieshi, and tried to recruit Japanese POWs to his cause, stressing theneed for Chinese and Japanese cooperation against imperialism.
Some of Lu Xun’s encounters led to more enduring relationships.
For instance, there was Hotsumi Ozaki, a well-connected journalist at
Asahi Shimbun’s Shanghai branch now known mostly for his role in
the Sorge Affair. Ozaki joined the Uchiyama salon early on, became
fast friends with Uchiyama and Lu Xun, and was well-known in the
Chinese literary scene. With his colleague Seigi Yamanoue, Ozaki
produced the first Japanese translation of Lu Xun’s The True Story of
Ah Q.
Lu Xun also enjoyed a long friendship with Wataru Masuda, aChinese literature student who had worked with Haruo Satō. Through
Satō, in March 1931 Masuda met Uchiyama, who then introduced
him to Lu Xun. Masuda was a longtime admirer of Lu Xun, and wastranslating his Abridged History of the Chinese Novel. Over several
months Lu Xun met with the student frequently, and helped him
understand the work. The two stayed in touch after Masuda returned
to Japan, and Masuda has since become known as Lu Xun’s
Japanese disciple.

Rethinking Interwar Sino-JapaneseIntellectual Relations
By the outbreak of the Second Sino-Japanese War in 1937,
Uchiyama Shoten had become something of a tourist attraction
among Japanese intellectuals, who saw visiting it and meeting
Chinese counterparts like Lu Xun as a rite of passage. Relations did
not always run smoothly. Some Chinese intellectuals, lacking anequivalent opportunity to visit Japan, disliked the possibility that they
were just entertaining Japanese intellectual “tourists”. There were
writers who were suspicious of all Japanese, even those who were
invested in the community and culture like Uchiyama. At the sametime, there were cases when Japanese writers misrepresented their
Shanghai encounters in Japanese publications, something which
bothered Lu Xun enough that he complained about the problem in a
letter to Masuda.
By and large, however, encounters among Chinese and Japanese
intellectuals were conducted in an atmosphere of mutual respect.
The great numbers and wide range of people involved in theintellectual exchange in Shanghai, especially involving famous
figures like Lu Xun, challenge the notion of diminished SinoJapanese intellectual exchange. Yet today even when Japanese andChinese intellectuals of this era are studied together, there is usually
the assumption of a limited and antagonistic relationship – eventhough the sources indicate that the intellectuals themselves did notsee it that way.
This situation reveals a problem with the tendency to reduce
intellectuals to their nationalities or simplistic political categories, anissue found in both academia and the mass media. The tendency has
been to generalize interwar Japanese intellectuals as apologists forimperialism, and Chinese intellectuals as anti-Japanese socialists,

but this is simply not accurate. There were certainly intellectuals who
fit those descriptions, but there were also many that did not. For
instance, even among Japanese intellectuals who supported
Japanese imperialism, and those who critiqued it, we find a diversityof opinion. The individual and social aspects of intellectual exchange
have been overlooked in a rush to categorize intellectuals in waysthat tell us more about postwar ideology than the reality of theinterwar era.
In Shanghai today, Uchiyama Shoten is remembered as a symbolof international cooperation. This idea sounds encouraging, but it isreally just another example of the same mistake. Intellectuals are still
being reduced to just their nationalities, only in this case in acooperative rather than antagonistic way. What made Uchiyama
Shoten effective, however, was that it could transcend such simple
thinking. Regular participants like Lu Xun were able to distinguishamong individuals, and between their culture and the policies of theirgovernment. In this way they could discuss political and social
issues forcefully while enjoying each other’s company. Uchiyama hadcreated an environment in which Japanese and Chinese intellectuals
could reach out to one another, overcoming the problems faced bymany of their countrymen who held paternalistic views of foreigners
or just saw them as a threat. His success at mediating intellectual
exchange reminds us that intellectuals are human beings, and that
personal social networks are often more important than simple
national frameworks.

Conclusion
Interwar Sino-Japanese intellectual exchange has been
misunderstood because of a lack of conventional historical sources
and the influence of the long shadow of war. The lively culture ofJapanese and Chinese intellectuals in Shanghai, best represented by
Uchiyama Shoten, was all but forgotten after World War II. The
intellectual exchange of the era came to be seen as limited andantagonistic because this was convenient for postwar ideologies.
To better understand the history of intellectual exchange, it is vitalto consider all available sources, not just published collections. At
the same time, considering the places and mediators involved in thatexchange can help us to begin to reconstruct the encounters thatcharacterized it. As discussed, the writer Lu Xun’s encounters withJapanese intellectuals in the late 1920s and 1930s make aparticularly good case study. The role of Kanzō Uchiyama inmediating intellectual encounters among Japanese and Chinese, andthe position of Uchiyama Shoten as a point of contact that enabledthese encounters to occur, reminds us that intellectual exchange has
a fundamentally human element that we cannot afford to overlook.
Andrew T. Kamei-Dyche is a scholar of modern Japanese history, specializingin the history of books and print culture as well as intellectual networks. He
teaches at Saitama University and Sophia University.

Japan SPOTLIGHT • January / February 202057