Cipango - French Journal of JapaneseStudiesEnglish Selection
1 | 2012

The Invention of “Folk Crafts”: Yanagi Sōetsu andMingei“Nihonjinron” in the Museums of Paris: design andJapanese identity
Des « nippologies » dans les musées : Design et identité japonaise à Paris
Coralie Castel

Electronic version
URL: https://journals.openedition.org/cjs/227
DOI: 10.4000/cjs.227
ISSN: 2268-1744
Publisher
INALCOElectronic reference
Coralie Castel, ““Nihonjinron” in the Museums of Paris: design and Japanese identity”, Cipango - French
Journal of Japanese Studies [Online], 1 | 2012, Online since 24 May 2013, connection on 08 July 2021.
URL: http://journals.openedition.org/cjs/227 ; DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/cjs.227

This text was automatically generated on 8 July 2021.

Cipango - French Journal of Japanese Studies is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License.

“Nihonjinron” in the Museums of Paris: design and Japanese identity“Nihonjinron” in the Museums of
Paris: design and Japanese identity
Des « nippologies » dans les musées : Design et identité japonaise à Paris
Coralie Castel

EDITOR'S NOTE
Original release: Coralie Castel, « Des « nippologies » dans les musées », Cipango [Enligne], 16 | 2009, mis en ligne le 18 novembre 2011, consulté le 13 juin 2013. DOI:
10.4000/cipango.389.
1

Three exhibitions on Japanese design recently took place in Paris as part of celebrations
to mark the 150th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between
France and Japan. From 30 September 2008 to 11 January 2009 the Musée du Quai
Branly presented The Mingei Spirit in Japan: From Folk Craft to Design. From 22 October
2008 to 31 January 2009 the Japan Cultural Institute in Paris (Maison de la culture duJapon à Paris, hereafter MCJP) presented Wa: The Spirit of Harmony and Japanese Design
Today. And finally, from 12 to 21 December 2008 the Museum of Decorative Arts (Muséedes Arts décoratifs) in Paris hosted the Kansei: Japan Design Exhibition.

2

These three exhibitions were organised independently, without any consultation
between the institutions. The Musée du Quai Branly exhibition was developed jointlywith the Mingeikan in Tokyo or Japan Folk Crafts Museum. The MCJP exhibition wasorganised by the Tokyo headquarters of the Japan Foundation. And finally, the Museumof Decorative Arts exhibition was orchestrated entirely by the Japanese Ministry of
Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) and the Japan External Trade Organisation(JETRO). All three exhibitions were thus produced by Japanese people, partly in the caseof Quai Branly and almost entirely for the other two.

3

In his book L’exposition à l’œuvre1 (The Exhibition at Work), the sociologist Jean Davallon
argues that the organising of an exhibition stems from a fixed agenda and is

Cipango - French Journal of Japanese Studies, 1 | 20121

“Nihonjinron” in the Museums of Paris: design and Japanese identity

underpinned by a specific world view. As a medium, exhibitions do not merely show theobjects; they also, and above all, indicate how we should view the objects, relying in theprocess on “communication strategies”. The same idea underpins the thinking ofanthropologist Benoît de l’Estoile, who recounts the history of France’s “museums of
the Others” in Le goût des autres (A Taste for the Others): 2
Because the act of exhibiting implies the spatial and sensory (and in particularvisual) translation of explicit or implicit standpoints, it provides an embodiment ofworld views. Museums are both the expression of artistic, scientific and politicalmovements that develop outside of the museum and a place for producing anddisseminating representations, which in no small measure help to define reality
and provide frameworks for interpreting and deciphering it.
4

Drawing on this observation, I assigned myself the task of examining how the
aforementioned exhibitions portrayed Japan, despite them being held in three separate
museums with differing objectives in terms of intercultural dialogue, promoting
Japanese culture and boosting trade. In practical terms, I propose to examine theimages of Japan overseas that were presented in Paris during the winter of 2008.

5

Ethnographic analysis of the exhibitions initially focused on a detailed examination of
the exhibition space itself. The exhibits, scenography and explanation panels allprovide visitors with information; what is more, brochures, maps and other written
documentation distributed to the public clarify the exhibition’s message. The views of
the French-side organisers also served to reveal certain biases in the exhibitions.
Finally, the press releases sent out by the organisers and the resulting press coverage
provided an opportunity to assess how the organisers’ messages were perceived andrelayed.

6

Onsite analysis of each exhibition highlighted the disparate nature of the exhibits: thecoexistence of varying types of objects created a sense of confusion that was further
intensified by the rather discreet scenography. Nonetheless, what consistently emerged
was “one” single Japan presented as being homogeneous. What are the leitmotifs thatenabled the exhibitions to establish a consistent identity? Do they replicate a recurrent
mode of discourse applied to Japan and by Japan to itself?

Musée du Quai Branly and the “mingei spirit”
7

The Musée du Quai Branly’s mission is to illustrate the diversity of world cultures via
exhibitions that place a heavy emphasis on the aesthetic appreciation of the exhibits.
The Mingei Spirit in Japan: From Folk Craft to Design exhibition focuses on Yanagi Sōetsu 柳
宗悦 (1889-1961) and the movement he launched in the 1920s for the discovery andreappraisal of Korean and Japanese crafts. While the exhibition was organised under
the guidance of Germain Viatte, curator at the Musée du Quai Branly, the majority ofexhibits came from the Mingeikan, the museum founded by Yanagi in 1936.

8

The scenography of the exhibition space is extremely understated. The display cabinet
bases are white and the exhibits presented on neutral stands. On the walls, asmattering of labels summarises Yanagi Sōetsu’s approach. The neutral final result does
not suggest any specific bias on behalf of the Musée du Quai Branly compared to the
Mingeikan.

Cipango - French Journal of Japanese Studies, 1 | 20122

“Nihonjinron” in the Museums of Paris: design and Japanese identity

Fig. 1: A display case at the Mingei exhibition, Musée du quai Branly, 2008

Fig 2: Items of clothing presented at the Mingei exhibition are showcased for their design

A card gives the approximate date they were made but no other information. Musée du quai Branly,
2008.
The objects featuring in the ﬁrst display case hail from a wide variety of places and eras: a 1952 plateby the English potter Bernard Leach, who lived in Japan, sits side by side with Chinese and Koreanbowls and trays dating from the sixteenth to the nineteenth century, a sculpture from the Jōmon
period (tenth century B.C.) and even a twentieth-century funeral urn from Okinawa.
9

The next display contains three distinct sets of exhibits: “Japanese Folk Crafts” presents
Japanese lacquerware, pottery and clothing from the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries; a few steps further on, “Folk Crafts from Japan’s Periphery” displays Korean
and Okinawan objects made between the sixteenth and the twentieth century; andfinally, “Yanagi Sōetsu’s Early Associates” features ceramic items made during the
1930s and 1940s by mingei-influenced artists.

10

A large circular room at the end of the exhibition gallery highlights the work of “Three
International Artists in Japan” who were active between 1930 and 1950: the German
Bruno Taut (lacquerware), the American artist Isamu Noguchi (lamps, furniture,terracotta ware), and the French designer Charlotte Perriand (furniture). The “Yanagi
Sōri and the Design Issue” space features the most celebrated works of the designer –the son of Yanagi Sōetsu – created between the 1950s and 1970s: the Butterfly stool,
created in 1956, is showcased separately. A coffee table on the way out displays acollection of “bamboo objects”: anonymous pieces from the Edo period sit side by sidewith works by Bruno Taut.

Cipango - French Journal of Japanese Studies, 1 | 20123

“Nihonjinron” in the Museums of Paris: design and Japanese identity

11

Generally speaking, and even within the display cases themselves, the exhibition
juxtaposes objects hailing from a wide variety of geographical locations and eras. They
also represent a variety of genres: the presence of anonymous objects reflects a
conservation-oriented approach, while other objects, whose authors are showcased,
stem from an art-oriented approach.

“The spirit of harmony” at the Japan Cultural Institutein Paris
12

As an institution, the Japan Cultural Institute in Paris partly depends on the JapanFoundation, whose headquarters are based in Tokyo. It regularly organises exhibitions
on a variety of themes in accordance with its mission to promote Japanese culture.

13

The exhibition Wa: The Spirit of Harmony and Japanese Design Today features very
different objects to those seen at Quai Branly. Visitors enter via a white corridor
displaying objects that illustrate the concept of “wa” 和, presented as a “traditionalview of harmony”: the objects are described as “combining antagonistic properties”.
This category includes a sake barrel, a bubble-shaped humidifier and an electric piano.
Fig 3: Exhibits from the first gallery of the Wa exhibition at the MCJP, 2008

14

This corridor leads to a vast, dimly lit room featuring walls draped with black cloth andpieces of white fabric suspended from the ceiling. The leaflet lists 160 items describedas providing a representative panorama of the everyday objects used by Japanesepeople today. The majority of these objects date from between 1980 and 2008, althougha few older celebrated works, such as the Butterfly stool seen at Quai Branly, are also on
display.

15

The objects are displayed in cases measuring approximately 1.2 metres high and whose
width takes up virtually all the space, forming corridors in which visitors circulate. The
first six rows, as well as the two platforms at the back, display objects grouped together
by functional category. In order, the twelve functional categories are: “tableware”,“bath items”, “home appliances and small electronic devices”, “digital technology”,“toys”, “stationery”, “miscellaneous domestic articles”, “clothing and accessories”,“packaging and bags”, “vehicles”, “furniture”, and finally, “lighting apparatus”. The
final three display cases present objects divided according to six “keywords”
transcribed into Roman letters and then translated: kawaii (cute), kurafuto (craft), kime

Cipango - French Journal of Japanese Studies, 1 | 20124

“Nihonjinron” in the Museums of Paris: design and Japanese identity(fineness of the grain), tezawari (touch), minimaru (minimal), kokoro kubari(thoughtfulness). According to the brochure these words reflect “concepts, sensations
or tastes that are particularly present in Japanese design”. Each of the functional
categories and concepts is introduced in a very brief text placed at each end of thedisplay cases. For example, the paragraph explaining the notion of kokoro kubari begins
as follows: “In the eyes of the Japanese, thoughtfulness is a virtue as well as a kind of
wisdom that enables people to live together in society harmoniously and pleasantly”.
Finally, a “discovery space” set back from the main room provides visitors with theopportunity to handle a certain number of objects, including a guitar, some notebooks
and a basket.
16

In the brochure’s own words the exhibition is characterised by its desire to present avaried collection ‘representing the multitude of objects’ used by the Japanese everyday. This results in the coexistence, in the same room, of musical instruments, scalemodels of cars, pens and a competition swimsuit. Certain objects are the work of
famous designers (such as the Hiroshima chair by Fukasawa Naoto), while others comefrom less well-known agencies. The collection seems rather random.
Fig. 4: One of the “press visuals” from the Wa exhibition at the MCJP

Three of the six objects shown here are food-related

The Museum of Decorative Arts and the Kansei
sensibility
17

The Museum of Decorative Arts regularly hosts design exhibitions. According to thebrochure the Kansei exhibition, jointly organised by the METI 3 and JETRO 4, united the“private, public and academic sectors in a joint push for industrial competitiveness”.
The exhibition’s mission is thus to promote the manufacturing of Japanese-designed
goods.

18

The Kansei exhibition space is divided into three sections within the Nave of themuseum. A large hall in the centre contains nine LED screens broadcasting animatedimages borrowed from illustrated scrolls of the Tale of Genji. Two vast sculptures occupy
the space from floor to ceiling: “Ikebana”, created by the Japanese school of floral art
Ikenobō, is a structure made from chopsticks; “Scène de Nō” (Noh Stage) is an
installation by the designer Kita Toshiyuki which can be dismantled and transported.
The presence of large banners bearing calligraphy for the characters “kansei” 感性, as
well as a translation of the word (sensibility), completes the venue’s impressive feel.

Cipango - French Journal of Japanese Studies, 1 | 20125

“Nihonjinron” in the Museums of Paris: design and Japanese identity

19

The left-hand gallery of the Nave proposes an exhibition of 104 objects displayed
without cases on white platforms of varying heights. The objects are grouped into threethemes – “expression”, “movement” and “heart” – each illustrating “kansei values” andlinked to four sub-concepts. The themes and concepts are given in Japanese, in kanji or
hiragana, before being romanized and then translated. For example, one of the panels
reads: “動作, dōsa, movement”.5

20

Just as at the MCJP, the objects exhibited reflect a wide variety of usages and values:
from animal-shaped elastic bands to fizzy drink cans, furniture, crockery, jewellery andmobile phones, the exhibition covers all manner of “everyday items”. All of these arerecent creations (2000s); however, certain purportedly “traditional” models (kettle, tea
ceremony whisks, etc.), which are not contemporary design pieces, are also present.

21

The opposite gallery is separated into six rooms, four of which present a “master”
artisan (in printing, leatherwork or dyeing) and his or her works; the remaining two
are dedicated to the works of Japanese graphic designers. Some of the artists arethemselves present in the rooms.

22

Here too, the exhibition contains an extremely diverse selection of objects. Those in thefirst gallery are at least as eclectic as those seen at the MCJP; the presence of art
installations alongside a presentation of the work of craft workshops further
accentuates the diversity of the items exhibited.

A wide spectrum of objects
23

The overall coherence of each exhibition is not immediately apparent. And yet, let us
remember, every exhibition carries a message: what view of Japan did the organisers
hope to project by selecting such a wide spectrum of objects? Is it possible to identify alink between them?

24

The objects exhibited at the MCJP, presented as being representative of what modernday Japanese people use, are in reality not all for domestic or everyday use. Amongst
the crockery, mobile phones, school notebooks and lamps are a sake barrel, a tenori-on(digital musical instrument) and even a reproduction of a park (Moerenuma in
Sapporo) designed by the sculptor Isamu Noguchi: it contains several pieces of playequipment and is represented at the exhibition in the “toys” category using
photographs.

25

In the Kansei exhibition, chairs rub shoulders with watches, a bike, plastic bottles, atherapeutic robot for the infirm, and a four-stringed guitar, all of which are recent
creations. Although the aim is to demonstrate the vitality of modern design, theinclusion of a bamboo tea whisk, a fan and Shintō amulets also introduces a supposedly“traditional” dimension.

26

The Quai Branly exhibition also juxtaposes objects from a variety of places and periods.
The display method chosen merges contemporary and old under the label mingei.

A silent scenography27

The overall impression of a mixture of objects is further heightened by the
scenography of the exhibitions: indeed, the juxtaposition of objects is accompanied by
few explanations and where given they are difficult to access.

Cipango - French Journal of Japanese Studies, 1 | 20126

“Nihonjinron” in the Museums of Paris: design and Japanese identity

28

Visitors are provided with few explanations at the MCJP. Aside from a few lines at theentrance under the title “Wa: harmony”, and the brief wall labels introducing eachcategory, the display cases give no indication as to the function or origins of theobjects. Only a number refers visitors to a brochure distributed at the entrance andwhich provides further explanations. However, the brochure is a 40 x 60 cm document
folded in eight and featuring photographs of the 160 exhibits with the name of theobject, the date it was made, the name of its creator and its function. The font chosen issmall and the printing in shades of blue, while the order of the objects occasionallydiffers from that seen in the exhibition. Needless to say, reading the brochure in thedim exhibition space is no easy task. Furthermore, confusion seems to exist as to theboundaries of the exhibition space: certain items are displayed without cases, notably
an oven and a washing machine, and are frequently touched by visitors, who arequickly called to order by museum attendants.

29

Signage at the Musée du Quai Branly is not any clearer. Let us remember that theobjects are displayed together without distinction, against a white background andunder neutral lighting. They are placed at different heights within the display cases.
The labels specifying their name, the date they were made and their origin are
extremely brief and are placed at the foot of each display case. They carry numbers
which in turn can be found on a diagram placed on the floor, in the centre of thedisplay case. The diagram reproduces the layout of the objects in order to link theobject with the relevant label. This system renders the information featured on thelabels, already brief, even more discreet and difficult to access, as reading it involves
bending down. Differences in period, geographical origin or approach (conservationoriented, art-oriented) are not apparent. Three tiny 10-inch screens showing a series ofphotographs complete the scenography. A few paragraphs describing the life andintellectual views of Yanagi Sōetsu appear on signs but their contents also appear
virtually word-for-word in the small four-page, A5-format brochure. This brochure also
carries an interview with Germain Viatte, the only text to place the Folk Crafts
Movement in a historical context from the Meiji modernisation to the 1930s. No
information is given as to the purpose of the objects.

30

In contrast, the scenography of the first gallery of objects at the Museum of Decorative
Arts creates a luxurious impression. Lighting is abundant and the objects are displayed
without cases on shiny black-and-white stands. The exhibition space is adorned withwhite calligraphy on black panels which highlights and explains the concepts used.
Each object is numbered and given a Japanese title, a date and an origin. However, theobjects’ use is not explained in the exhibition itself. For this information visitors mustrefer to an extensive 53-page brochure, which carries all the exhibition texts inaddition to explanations from the organisers. For each exhibit a colour photographaccompanies a paragraph explaining the object’s use and its connection to theassociated concept. The sheer quantity of information provided for each object meansthat visitors are highly unlikely to refer to it systematically.

Cipango - French Journal of Japanese Studies, 1 | 20127

“Nihonjinron” in the Museums of Paris: design and Japanese identity

Fig. 5: Description of animal-shaped rubber bands

These objects are presented in the catalogue in the category mottai. Kansei exhibition, Musée des Artsdécoratifs, 200831

Moreover, Japanese writing, whether syllabaries or Chinese characters, is omnipresent
in all three exhibitions, and particularly at the Museum of Decorative Arts. The“concepts” that define the objects are calligraphed in the brochure and on the large
vertical panels that hang in the exhibition space. This display technique is used
repeatedly throughout the exhibition: each object is associated with a Japaneseconcept, which is calligraphed and then romanized before possibly being translated
and finally explained.
Fig. 6: Presentation of the “value” karoyaka

The brochure associates it with the concept of kokoro. Kansei exhibition, Musée des Arts décoratifs,
2008
32

However, this Japanese writing is incomprehensible to the vast majority of French
visitors, for most of whom it represents a “silent” script that is more of an obstacle tounderstanding than a supplementary source of information. Its role is primarily toensure the visual unity of the exhibitions.

33

The confusion of genres and lack of accessible information combine to create an
impression of uniformity between the exhibitions, an impression that is supported by
the rhetoric employed. The exhibitions continually refer to the entire Japanese
population, and reference to a supposedly characteristic “spirit” is recurrent. The
MCJP’s press release describes harmony as “a Japanese virtue par excellence” – andthus shared by all Japanese people – that pervades all Japanese-designed goods. The
MCJP’s aim is to show what “the Japanese” use on a daily basis. This habit of referring
to all Japanese collectively is particularly evident in the case of the Museum of
Decorative Arts: for example, kansei is embodied in the sculpture Scène de Nō (NohStage), intended to illustrate “the sensibility of the Japanese, who consider the Nohstage to be a profoundly sacred space”. The concepts set out in this exhibition are

Cipango - French Journal of Japanese Studies, 1 | 20128

“Nihonjinron” in the Museums of Paris: design and Japanese identity

expressed even more bombastically and stress that these notions are shared by all
Japanese people. For example, the word hyōjō 表情 is tortuously described as “what theJapanese refer to as the “expression” of an object”.
34

Next I propose to examine the objects themselves and the way they are presented: howis this feeling of unity brought about? What clues point to this?

In search of a common message
Partial unity: the materials
35

The first source of unity in the exhibits is provided by the materials used to make them.
The space dedicated to bamboo objects at the Mingei exhibition is revealing. It features
pieces of furniture, in particular stools, and combines anonymous items from the Edo
period, bought by Charlotte Perriand, with creations by Bruno Taut. The unifying
element in this space is thus bamboo, which “seems to embody the archetypal Japanesematerial for foreigners”6 and unites the objects through its Japaneseness. Similarly, theJapaneseness of objects at the other two exhibitions also seems to stem from thematerials in which they were crafted. For example, the MCJP displays a coat “madefrom rice”, a lacquered speaker, a basket in lacquered stainless steel and crockery madefrom kimono fabric cast in resin; while the Museum of Decorative Arts displays, among
others, a bag made from rice straw, a lacquered telephone and paper lanterns: so many
natural materials that are reminiscent of Japan. This phenomenon is echoed in the
scenography: the information signs at the Mingei exhibition seem to be made fromwashi paper and the pieces of fabric hanging from the ceiling at the MCJP have also
been designed to resemble this type of paper.

36

Japaneseness also seems to be visible in the use of food-related objects. The prevalenceof objects belonging to this genre is striking: bowls, soy sauce bottles, rice cookers,
teapots, kitchen knives, radish graters, tea whisks, sake cups, cutlery, chopsticks, and soon. The essence of Japanese identity would appear to be linked to what the Japanese eat
and how they eat it. Food-related objects thus provide the perfect medium forconveying the exhibitions’ message (Figs. 3 and 4).

37

Through the materials used, which constitute partial sources of unity, and thereferences to food, the Japanese identity of the objects is shaped by elements that makereference to nature; in other words, their identity is presented as being natural.

Shared references to a Japanese “spirit”
38

The exhibitions echo each other on several points, including the theme of a timelessJapan, the use of the Japanese language to convey specific concepts, and the emphasison harmony as a value responsible for the quality of Japanese design. All of these point
to a “spirit” that appears to reside in the Japanese “heart” or kokoro 心. The brochures
and press releases display a real convergence in their discourse on these themes.

The timelessness of Japanese culture
39

At the Musée du Quai Branly, this timelessness is emphasised from the moment visitors
enter the exhibition through the juxtaposition of objects from a variety of periods.

Cipango - French Journal of Japanese Studies, 1 | 20129

“Nihonjinron” in the Museums of Paris: design and Japanese identity

Presented in this manner, the Folk Crafts Movement appears to draw inspiration from a“spirit” presented as having travelled down through the ages and being visible inobjects rooted in Japanese culture, regardless of their period. In fact, this impression iscreated by the use of the term “rediscovery” to describe Yanagi Sōetsu’s attempt topromote folk crafts: the use of this word suggests that Yanagi merely brought back to
the fore a character (“spiritual” in this case, according to the brochure) that had always
distinguished these objects and had simply been forgotten. Finally, the area dedicatedto Charlotte Perriand emphasises this continuity between crafts and design by quoting
the designer’s words on the subject of mingei: “the spirit of truth that pervades theseworks is an eternal spirit”.7
40

Similarly, at the MCJP the repeated use of expressions such as “today as in the past”,“since long ago” or “traditional” is striking: they appear in each explanatory text –despite them being brief – and stress the continuity between past and present. The
objects and their production methods “retain something of these bygone crafts”. The
main concept in the exhibition is that of “wa”, or “harmony”. This concept derives its
legitimacy from its old age, particularly as it is often used to refer to Japan, appearing
in words such as washi (Japanese paper) and wakotoba (sic, Japanese words): 8 the press
release reminds visitors that wa first appeared in 604, in the first “Constitution” of
Shōtoku Taishi. Modern design is defined by the phrase: “Manufacturing in Japan:
when the past enters the future”. Finally, according to the same press release, thescenography designed by the Japanese agency Tonerico “perpetuates the tradition” of
the Japanese home by proposing a “minimalist architecture of space”. 941

As for the Museum of Decorative Arts exhibition, it presents the notion of kansei as
having been born with the Tale of Genji in the year 1000 and which, having travelled
down through the centuries unaltered, has reinvented itself in contemporary design as
a “collection of Japanese traditions shaped over time”: it is this that justifies thecoexistence in the same space of illustrations from illuminated scrolls and objects fromthe 2000s. These illustrations presented using modern technology (large LED screens)show animated images in a style that brings to mind the old cinematic film. The style ofcalligraphy, known as reisho, seen on the panels and in the brochures is archaistic andnon-standard. The anachronistic visual effects are designed to strengthen the
exhibition’s message, the aim being to show that kansei was “handed down from Genji’sera”, and “has survived throughout the generations until today”. The unchanging
nature of Japaneseness thus appears to be one of the main points on which all three
exhibitions agree.

The Japanese language as key
42

Reliance on the Japanese language represents a further similarity between the three
exhibitions, all of which promote concepts presented as being specifically Japanese anddifficult to translate. This phenomenon begins with the exhibition titles, which feature
Japanese words followed by a colon (:) introducing an explanation that is notnecessarily, or not merely, the exact translation of the Japanese term. The title of theexhibition is thus presented from the outset as untranslatable. In order to introduce its
classification of the exhibits into six “Japanese” concepts, 10 the MCJP’s exhibition
brochure states that “just like words, objects reveal our sensibility”. Similarly, theMuseum of Decorative Arts presents the terms that convey the “kansei” design

Cipango - French Journal of Japanese Studies, 1 | 201210

“Nihonjinron” in the Museums of Paris: design and Japanese identity

sensibility as being uniquely Japanese notions expressed by “words peculiar to theculture and everyday life of the Japanese”. These words are particularly numerous:
with four concepts associated with each of the three themes, a total of fifteen Japanesewords are presented as the keys to understanding Japanese design (cf. table 1).
43This exhibition also stresses that the fifteen concepts conveying the essence ofJapanese design are expressed in purely Japanese words, or “yamato kotoba […], as
opposed to kango, or Sino-Japanese words borrowed from classical Chinese”.

44

The use of words that are incomprehensible to visitors creates the impression that theconcepts themselves are unfathomable. The two are intimately linked: the general
curator of the Kansei exhibition hopes that “by the end of the exhibition, the French
public will have discovered a new approach to Japanese design and learned a new word:
kansei”. Japanese design is presented as being the product of an exclusively Japanesesensibility, an understanding of which can only be achieved by employing the Japanese
term.
Table 1: classification of objects by theme and keyword for the Kansei exhibition

表情hyōjō動作dōsa心kokoroExpression

Movement

Heart

MAIN THEMES

かげろう
Kagerou

KEYWORDS ASSOCIATED WITH

もったい

しつらえる

MottaiShitsuraeru

To go from shadow to
To arrange
light

Fundamental

にしき

しなる

もてなし

NishikiShinaru

Motenashi

BrocadeTo bend

Hospitality

value

THE
THEMES

たたずまい
Tatazumai

はぶく

かろやか

Habukuthe

Karoyaka

AppearanceToeliminatesuperfluous

きめ

おる

むすび

Kime

Oru

MusubiGrain

To fold

Knot

Light

A conventional image of a “spiritual” Japan“Harmony”
45

Presenting Japanese design in this way via concepts that are impenetrable to nonJapanese speakers projects the image of an elusive Japan: sensitive and spiritual, any
understanding of it is necessarily intuitive. This Japanese “spirit” visible in the exhibits
is characterised by the theme of “harmony”, or wa.

Cipango - French Journal of Japanese Studies, 1 | 201211

“Nihonjinron” in the Museums of Paris: design and Japanese identity

46

Harmony is promoted as being a uniquely Japanese concept in all three design
exhibitions and in particular at the MCJP, which takes the term as its title. The MCJP
defines it as one of the “most highly prized values for Japanese people”. As we saw
earlier, the press release quotes the opening line of the 604 Constitution in an effort tosupport this claim: “Harmony is to be valued and avoidance of wanton opposition is tobe honoured”. This historic line refers to a notion of social harmony, yet theexhibitions associate it with the idea of aesthetic harmony. Indeed, this conception of
wa enables a fusion of old and modern elements, or even industry and crafts, and ispresented as being responsible for the characteristic high quality of Japanese design.
The exhibition’s scenography is inspired by the same idea, with the organisers
describing the understated black-and-white exhibition space as “extremely Japanese”,
in that it is characterised by “beauty, order and harmony”.

47

The Museum of Decorative Arts exhibition also mentions harmony, describing it as “anelement of Japan’s spiritual and traditional culture” and a spirit of fusion that
distinguishes Japanese design. As for the Musée du Quai Branly, although it does not
explicitly stress the term, the idea of a fusion and symbiosis between folk crafts andmodern design once again underpins its message, allowing the museum to feature theworks of famous designers alongside folk objects.
The “heart” as the home of an essence48

The essence of the “spirit” portrayed in the three exhibitions resides in the “heart” of
the Japanese people. This notion of kokoro was promoted in the eighteenth century by
so-called “national studies” or kokugaku. The result of a backlash against Chinese
influence, this search for a native Japanese essence led – through reinterpretations ofeighth-century texts such as the Kojiki or the Man’yōshū – to the emergence of theconcept of kokoro as an intuitive understanding of things, with rational understanding afeature of Chinese logic.

49

This “heart” is present more or less explicitly in all three exhibitions: it can be found in
the “kokoro kubari” of exhibits at the MCJP, conveyed through the “thoughtfulness” ofthe designer towards the user. According to the Kansei brochure, to understand an
object’s design one must perceive “the movement that takes place in the gesture orheart”11 of the creator: hence the concept of dōsa or “movement”.

50

When touching an object “it is not rare for the user to begin to feel an emotion”: kokoro
is an emotion that passes between creator and user. In its description of a reed-shaped
lamp, the brochure states that “for the Japanese, seeing the pale beige Eulalia grass
gently swaying in the breeze evokes autumn and creates a feeling of transience withregards the passing of time”. The Kansei exhibition’s repeated use of yamato kotoba torefer to “representations that are perceived by the five senses” and which, according to
the brochure, are written solely in the hiragana syllabary and not with Chinesecharacters, also stems from the concept of kokoro, the purity of which is associated with
its native origins.

51

Although the kokoro seen in these exhibitions relates to aesthetic considerations, it also
evokes the physical dimension of the heart as an organ. It is the physical place where
the “Japanese spirit” takes shape. Indeed, the Musée du Quai Branly carries on the workof Yanagi Sōetsu by striving to “show the beauty of everyday objects and their spiritual
dimension”, which reveals “the spirit of the people”. Kansei is a “rich sensibility”, aCipango - French Journal of Japanese Studies, 1 | 201212

“Nihonjinron” in the Museums of Paris: design and Japanese identity

kind of “philosophy” on which the exhibition attempts to “lift the veil”. The MCJP’s
brochure also presents this spirit as being extremely mysterious, questioning “why at
first glance we perceive a design as being typically Japanese, without knowing exactlywhy”.

Contextualising the message behind the three
exhibitions
52

Both the Wa and Kansei exhibitions were designed by Japanese people; as for the Quai
Branly exhibition, although organised by a French institution, it originated in theJapanese museum that supplied the exhibits along with their inherent message. When
all is said and done, the messages relayed by the three exhibitions resemble each otherand are based on the same arguments. Where does this discourse fit in to the panoramaof images of Japan produced by the Japanese themselves?

The influence of “Nihonjinron”
Tried and tested references
53

All three exhibitions are consistent in disseminating the idea of an ahistorical Japan, aJapanese language that alone is capable of conveying exclusively Japanese concepts,
and a Japanese “spirit” characterised by the notions of harmony and heart. These
references echo the theories put forward in so-called “Nihonjinron” 日本人論, in which
the same arguments can be found.

54

A body of culturalist works written by the Japanese about themselves, Nihonjinron are
defined by Jacqueline Pigeot as “essays that, since the war, the Japanese have devoted
to analysing their unique national characteristics, their society and their culture”. 12This genre, which is identified and labelled as such in bookshops, emerged after the
war and experienced a boom in the 1960s, spurred on by the post-war economic
miracle. It should been noted, however, that similar literature in terms of both formand content has existed since the beginning of the twentieth century. 13

55

Still buoyant today, this genre comprises thousands of titles: Harumi Befu has
identified diverse forms running the entire gamut of literature from scientific studies
through to popular essays: books, academic papers, magazine and newspaper articles
combine to constitute a mass cultural phenomenon.14 Befu has also established atypology of the main ideas upon which these treatises on the Japanese rely. It
transpires that they are identical to the ones I identified in the three Paris exhibitions.

56

First of all, the ahistorical nature of the Japanese essence is a central tenet of
Nihonjinron discourse. Any historical rough patches are passed over in silence. Pigeot
quotes authors such as Umesao Tadao and Nishio Kanji, whose literature “preaches
Japanese immutability”.15

57

Secondly, a language-based argument emerges which Befu deems to be inevitably at theheart of Nihonjinron texts, for the fundamental Japanese traits they highlight are
expressed in Japanese using concepts that are purportedly difficult to translate 16.
Driving this argument of uniqueness through language is the idea that Japanese isspoken only by the Japanese, and by all Japanese: Befu describes this as the perfectisomorphism between linguistic area (native Japanese speakers), land (inhabitants of

Cipango - French Journal of Japanese Studies, 1 | 201213

“Nihonjinron” in the Museums of Paris: design and Japanese identity

the country) and culture. The resulting suggestion is that the logic of the Japanese
language differs from Western languages and, consequently, that its speakers’ patternof thinking must also be fundamentally different.17
58

Finally, the essence of Japanese identity, according to Nihonjinron discourse, is intuition
and is correlated with the use of themes such as harmony and the heart. Pigeot
describes harmony as a “dogma” around which Japan’s social structure, as depicted in
Nihonjinron, is organized.18 As for kokoro being the cradle of the essence of Japaneseculture, Befu describes it as an immanent notion, a “substance” in the quintessence ofJapan and which reflects a feeling of nostalgia for a pure and original Japan. 19

59

Given that these exhibitions draw on Nihonjinron rhetoric, they may be described as
adopting the same approach. Nihonjinron have a uniform structure and paint a
conventional picture of Japanese culture: a uniquely Japanese paradigm is identified(environmental, linguistic or psychological, for example) which subsequently allows
the author to give an “impressionistic” description of various aspects of Japaneseculture rather than a dialectic presentation.20 The same process underlies the three
exhibitions, which construct similar discourses on Japan using concepts established asparadigms: mingei at Quai Branly, wa at the MCJP and kansei at the Museum of
Decorative Arts.
The prescriptive method60

Although the homogeneous character of the exhibitions is presented as stemming fromthe objects exhibited, it is simply the product of a scenography and rhetoric that draw
on Nihonjinron discourse and bring together a miscellaneous collection of objects.

61This rhetoric is supported by standardised turns of phrase and a strenuous hammeringhome of the museums’ arguments. At the MCJP, variations on the theme of “harmony”
appear in every sentence; the rhetoric of symbiosis and fusion (of values,
manufacturing processes, etc.) proves to be fertile ground for most of the articles
written by the curators and also features in the press release. The Musée du Quai
Branly hinges its explanations (of the scenography and brochure) on the semantic
fields of anonymity, spirituality and the folk. As for the Kansei exhibition, the large
number of texts used to support the exhibition’s message renders the standardised
wording particularly obvious: keywords such as sensibility, spirit, nature, tradition andphilosophy abound in the brochure. They are occasionally combined in phrasing thatverges on abstruse: take the earlier example of dōsa, described as the “movement thattakes place in the gesture or heart [of the creator]”; or “aesthetic sense [is] developed
within a culture that is intensely present”. Furthermore, the paragraphs describing theexhibits systematically employ the related Japanese concept and are thus particularly
repetitive. The exhibition brochures do not appear to be designed to be readextensively by visitors. Accordingly, repetitive and standardised wording serves a
communicative purpose: whatever passage is read, the essence of the exhibition’s
message is sure to be conveyed.

62

However, the exhibitions, and thus the accompanying texts – at least in the case of Wa
and Kansei – were developed by Japanese institutions. The Museum of Decorative Arts
exhibition was entirely orchestrated by the METI and is part of a wider initiative –launched in May 2007 and entitled “Kansei Value Creation” – to promote Japaneseindustry overseas. The Museum of Decorative Arts does not appear to have been

Cipango - French Journal of Japanese Studies, 1 | 201214

“Nihonjinron” in the Museums of Paris: design and Japanese identity

involved in the process of developing the Paris exhibition. As for the MCJP, it usuallypresents exhibitions that have either been developed internally in Paris or partly inadvance by the Japan Foundation. However, in the case of the Wa exhibition, theJapanese headquarters were responsible for virtually all decision-making, since Wa is a
“travelling exhibition” designed to be presented in several countries. All of theexhibition curators were therefore Japanese and even the scenography, which isusually entrusted to a French agency, was on this occasion developed by a Japaneseagency. From the objects selected to their transportation and contact with thecompanies who made them, every detail was managed by the Foundation’s Tokyo
headquarters. The texts used in exhibitions are generally based on a Japanese outline
provided by the Foundation, which leaves the French team the task of translating,expanding and adapting the content to the French public. However, on this occasion
the MCJP was instructed to merely translate the texts, which were also considerably
shorter than usual.
63

All of this reflects what Befu describes as the characteristically “prescriptive” nature of
Nihonjinron.21 Indeed, Befu posits that the phenomena catalogued in Nihonjinron and thetheories they give rise to are presented as observations, whereas in reality they
represent a “positive ideal”: the Japanese described in these treatises and theirassociated characteristics become normative standards. The same view is expressed by
Pigeot, who asserts that the Nihonjinron that stress social consensus are less “objects foranalysis” and rather “incantations” (formules conjuratoires) repeated without
explanation.22 The Japanese institutions organising the exhibitions stipulated the imageof Japan that was to be disseminated in France. The Japan Foundation expressed a clear
desire to allow the objects to “speak for themselves” in order to reveal an intuitive
Japan, similar to the one portrayed in Nihonjinron, and to impose it on the Parisianpublic.

64

At the Musée du Quai Branly, on the other hand, although the objects were provided bya Japanese museum, the curators stress their independence from the Mingeikan, bothfinancially and in terms of the exhibition’s design. And yet, as we saw, its message
resembles that of the other exhibitions. The image projected by Japan to the West has
thus been perfected assimilated. This appropriation illustrates the mirror effectprovided by the Other in the construction of Japanese identity.

Japan and the West: an exchange of reciprocal influences
Japanese identity: a mirror construction
65

Japanese-produced discourse on Japan’s cultural identity was thus implemented andtaken up in France by the museums, which in turn communicated it to the public. In
the case of the Musée du Quai Branly, despite having organised the exhibition
independently, what resulted was nonetheless a message guided by and featuring thesame arguments as the two exhibitions produced in Japan. What is more, in the case of
all three exhibitions this message was accepted and disseminated to the general public.
This is particularly obvious in press coverage on the exhibitions, with articles on the
exhibitions employing the same vocabulary used in the press releases. Occasionally thewording is strictly identical, suggesting a simple copy-and-paste of the source material.
However, a special issue of AD (Architectural Digest) devoted to Japanese design
featured views that reveal a real appropriation of Nihonjinron rhetoric: 23

Cipango - French Journal of Japanese Studies, 1 | 201215

“Nihonjinron” in the Museums of Paris: design and Japanese identity

What if the essence of design was well and truly to be found in Japan? Sometimes,
without knowing exactly why, we are able to pick out those objects made in Japan
from a myriad of others from around the world. It is as if, despite intense
globalisation, the eye was able to recognise that “little something” that is eminently
Japanese.
66

Sensibility, intuitive understanding, harmony and timelessness: the same themes
reappear and form the blueprint for the image of Japan constructed in France.

67

To be precise, the Japanese identity put forward in Nihonjinron discourse is bothintended for and validated by overseas dissemination. This definition of the self is only
valid because it is accepted by the outside. This is why, according to Befu, the Japanese
Government expends so much energy propagating Nihonjinron overseas by financing
English translations24 or, in this case, culturalist exhibitions.

68

The exhibitions Wa, Mingei and Kansei simply re-launch an exchange of images between
Japan and the West that predates them in the definition of Japanese identity. It is acomplex game of mirrors that operates on a principle of contact and reaction in both
directions and on a wide historical scale. Japan developed its self-image throughpermanent comparison with foreign countries. Michael Lucken illustrated this fact
through the example of the formulation of artistic concepts at the end of thenineteenth century;25 Laurence Caillet also notes that in order for current theories
produced by the Japanese about Japan to be successful, they must first make a detour
via Western research.26 This movement is illustrated by an article written by a Frenchside curator at the Musée du Quai Branly, published in the journal Mingei in Japan todemonstrate the exhibition’s reception in France.27 The curator ascribes theexhibition’s success to the museum having adapted its content to a French public. In
other words, the Japan presented in the exhibition was a hit because it corresponded toa highly photogenic image of Japan, to which the French public is very receptive: themirror effect is never-ending.
Rejection of foreigners and universalist aspirations

69

This view of Japanese identity embraces two paradoxical and complementary positions.
Being purely Japanese it excludes foreigners, who are incapable of understanding it;
but at the same time, being spiritual in nature, the Japanese essence has a universal
vocation, the aim being to disseminate it as widely as possible throughout the world.

70

Nihonjinron are based consistently, if only implicitly, on comparison and contrast with
the West. Indeed, the message communicated by the three exhibitions is presented asconcerning the entire Japanese population and all other nationalities are excluded fromunderstanding this identity. An anecdote at the Musée du Quai Branly introducing its“bamboo objects” clearly suggests the inaccessibility of Japanese concepts toforeigners: it is said that Yanagi Sōetsu considered the objects bought by Charlotte
Perriand to be in extremely bad taste!

71

This exclusion of foreigners is also visible in the explanation of AD journalists that
understanding the defining characteristics of Japanese design can only be achieved
through “Japanese semantics”. One journalist lists the Japanese concepts side by side
without translating them and muses ironically over their impenetrableness (“Kawaii,
kurafuto, minimaru… only that!”). Further on he writes that “kokoroburaki 28 [is] a virtuethat verges on wisdom”. The Japanese term has not been employed for precision, as thesyllables have been carelessly mixed up. Instead, this use of the Japanese concept seems

Cipango - French Journal of Japanese Studies, 1 | 201216

“Nihonjinron” in the Museums of Paris: design and Japanese identity

to stem from a taste for the exotic. Finally, he concludes that “the mystery of theJapanese item nonetheless remains to be solved”, confirming once and for all the
insurmountable differences between the Japanese and the rest of the world – the main
premise of Nihonjinron.
72

However, this uniquely Japanese essence has a universal raison d’être. The
aforementioned article published in the journal Mingei claims that the exhibition’s
greatest virtue is to have fascinated the public with the “universal message” itcontained: from the “silent words” of the objects emerged a “truth shared with theWest”. The text, written by the Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry as
the introduction to the exhibition brochure, presents the kansei sensibility as a concept“elucidated” by Japan and which is destined to be “spread throughout the world”.
Although the roots of this rhetoric can be traced back to an essentialised Japan, it
nonetheless has international aspirations.

73

When Japanese design is presented as a symbiosis between past and present, or craft
and industry, it establishes itself as a model. The aim is not merely to project an imageof Japan to the outside world, but equally to show that the qualities of this Japan are an
example to follow, in this instance for design everywhere. Similarly, the showcasing ofinternational designers at the Mingei exhibition demonstrates that foreigners moved toJapan in order to draw inspiration from a uniquely Japanese essence that enabled themto elevate their work to a level that transcended borders, and even time itself: this“higher level” is attained thanks to the fusion of values made possible by the concept of
“wa”.

74

An article on the three exhibitions published in the French newspaper Libération raised
these issues, quoting the words of the fashion designer Issey Miyake in its introduction:“Measures can be imagined that would enable us to rebuild the nation based on adesign that has its place all around the world”.29 Design appears to provide the ideal
foundation for the international aspirations of those wishing to promote a Japanese
essence.

Conclusion
75

The three exhibitions Mingei, Wa and Kansei all fall into the framework of, and in fact
themselves constitute, Nihonjinron. The Japan presented at the exhibitions is the same
one theorised about in Nihonjinron literature, while the exhibitions contribute to thepromotion of this Japan abroad. They draw on the same arguments and methods ofpersuasion. Through their being held in Paris in the winter of 2008, the acceptance of
their message and the coverage they received in the media, they illustrated and revived
the image created by Japan in comparison of itself with the West.

76

Germain Viatte summed up the message of the Mingei exhibition in two paragraphs
during a brief interview with an art magazine: he successively mentioned Japan’s
characteristic “spiritual dimension” and his desire to illustrate “the universal nature of
the techniques”.30 The juxtaposition of these two ideas indicates that they provide thebasic framework underpinning the exhibition’s message: Japanese essence anduniversalism. I demonstrated that these ideas in fact constitute two threads running
through the discourses produced by the museums and those who in turn relayed them.

Cipango - French Journal of Japanese Studies, 1 | 201217

“Nihonjinron” in the Museums of Paris: design and Japanese identity

However, more generally speaking, discourse on the universal nature of the Japanesemodel appears to be a constituent part of culturalist theories.
77

This process is not a neutral one. According to the philosopher Bernard Stevens it canbe problematic in that it revives the theme of Japan’s “overcoming of modernity”,
which carries an “ideological slant” he deems dangerous. 31 Indeed, he recalls how
during the 1930s and 1940s Kyoto School philosophers used this theme to justify ultranationalism and imperialism. The search for Japanese specificity was accompanied by a“reinterpretation of Hegel’s philosophy of history” in which Japan was placed in “theultimate position in the advent of the Spirit”. Here the “spiritual vocation” was merely
a pretext; the universalist plan, on the contrary, was entirely concrete in that it aimed
to put each nation back in its rightful place, with Japan at their head. This “overcomingof modernity”, the title of the famous 1942 symposium, today expresses itself in what
Stevens terms a “new Asiatism”. What makes it disturbing is the way it has beenhijacked by neo-nationalists, for whom Japan’s economic strength is correlated withthe universal vocation of Japanese culture.

78

Accordingly, although caution appears to be necessary regarding the potential politicaland ideological implications, Stevens concedes that the idea of a universal Japanese
essence nonetheless remains welcome in certain fields, such as aesthetics. My analysisof the exhibitions Mingei, Wa and Kansei shows how design represents an ideal means ofdeveloping this rhetoric.

79

Culture as an intangible essence is presented here as being embodied in tangible
objects. Retracing the selection process sheds light on the “world view” that underpins
and transcends these objects. Stevens’ historical contextualisation thus serves as awarning: the manipulation of Japanese identity/otherness described here has
implications that extend well beyond the museums’ doors.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Press
AD. Architectural Digest, no. 79, special issue « Art, archi, photo, design… Inspiration Japon »(Art, Architecture, Photo, Design… Japanese Inspiration), November 2008, Paris.
BOUCRELLE, Virginie, 2008, « Kansei, la nouvelle valeur du design » (Kansei, the New Design Value),Planète Japon, no 13.
FÈVRE, Anne-Marie, 4 November 2008, « France-Japon, relations d’harmonie » (France and Japan, aHarmonious Relationship), Libération.
GEOFFROY-SCHNEITER, Bérénice, November 2008, « Le Mingei ou la beauté dans l’ordinaire… » (Mingei
or Ordinary Beauty), L’Œil, no 607, (last accessed on 17/12/2009).
SHIRAHA, Akemi白羽明美, March 2009, “Ke buranrī bijutsukan tenrankai hōkoku. Furansu, Paritokubetsu-ten o oete” ケ・ブランリー美術館展覧会報告 — フランス・パリ特別展を終えてCipango - French Journal of Japanese Studies, 1 | 201218

“Nihonjinron” in the Museums of Paris: design and Japanese identity(Report on the Musée du Quai Branly Exhibition. End of the Special Exhibition in Paris, France),
Mingei民藝, no. 675, March 2009, pp. 50-54.
Official press releases
Kansei, online press release: (last accessed on 4/12/08).
Wa: The Spirit of Harmony and Japanese Design Today: printed press release.
Exhibition catalogues
Japan Foundation, 2008, Wa: The Spirit of Harmony and Japanese Design Today, exhibition catalogue(Maison de la culture du Japon à Paris, Paris, 22 October 2008-31 January 2009), Tokyo, the JapanFoundation.
Musée du quai Branly, 2008, The Mingei Spirit in Japan, exhibition catalogue (Musée du quai
Branly, Paris, 20 September 2008-11 January 2009), Paris, Musée du quai Branly / Actes Sud.
Free leaflets
The Mingei Spirit in Japan, (s. l.), Musée du quai Branly, 2008.
Wa: The Spirit of Harmony and Japanese Design Today, (s.l.), Maison de la culture du Japon à Paris,
2008.
Kansei, Japan Design Exhibition, (s. l.), (s. n.), 2008.
Secondary material
BEFU, Harumi, 2001, Hegemony of Homogeneity: an Anthropological Analysis of Nihonjinron, Melbourne,
Trans Pacific Press.
BENEDICT, Ruth, 1946, The Chrysanthemum and the Sword, Boston, Houghton Mifflin.
BUTEL, Jean-Michel, « #005 Exposition: L'esprit Mingei au Japon - Musée du quai Branly (#005 The
Musée du quai Branly Exhibition The Mingei Spirit in Japan) », podcast, (last accessed on
25/05/2009).
CAILLET, Laurence (ed.), 2006, Ateliers, no 30: « Ethnographies japonaises » (Japanese
Ethnographies), Département d’ethnologie de l’Université Paris X Nanterre.
CHAPPUIS Romain, 2008, « La japonité selon Jeanne d'Arc » (Japaneseness According to Joan ofArc), Critique internationale, no 38, p. 55-72.
DAVALLON, Jean, 1999, L’exposition à l’œuvre. Stratégies de communication et médiation symbolique (TheExhibition at Work. Communication Strategies and Symbolic Mediation), Paris, L’Harmattan.
DOI, Takeo 土井健郎, 1971, Amae no kōzō ｢甘え｣の構造, Tokyo, Kōbundō, French translation by E.
Dale Saunders: Le jeu de l’indulgence. Étude de psychologie fondée sur le concept japonais d’amae (TheGame of Indulgence. A Psychological Study Founded on the Japanese Concept of Amae), Paris,
L’Asiathèque, 1982.
GONSETH, Marc-Olivier, HAINARD, Jacques, KAERH, Roland (eds.), 2002 Le musée cannibale (The Cannibal

Museum), Neuchâtel, Musée d’ethnographie.
HOBSBAWN, Eric, RANGER, Terence, 1983, The Invention of Tradition, Cambridge, Cambridge University

Press.
IVY, Marilyn, 1995, Discourses of the Vanishing: Modernity, Phantasm, Japan, Chicago, University of
Chicago Press.

Cipango - French Journal of Japanese Studies, 1 | 201219

“Nihonjinron” in the Museums of Paris: design and Japanese identity

L’ESTOILE, Benoît de, 2004, « Quand l’anthropologie s’expose » (When Anthropology Exhibits Itself),

Critique. Revue générale des publications françaises et étrangères, n o 680-681, vol. 60, Jan-Feb. 2004,
p. 5-15.
L’ESTOILE, Benoît de, 2007, Le goût des autres. De l'Exposition coloniale aux arts premiers (A Taste for the

Others. From the Colonial Exhibition to Primitive Arts), Paris, Flammarion.
LUCKEN, Michael, 2001, L’art du Japon au vingtième siècle (Japanese Art in the Twentieth Century),
Paris, Hermann.
OGUMA, Eiji小熊英二, 1995, 単 一 民俗神話の起源Tan'itsu minzoku shinwa no kigen / The Mythof the Homogeneous Nation, Tokyo, Shin’yōsha.
PELLETIER, Philippe, 2004, Japon – Idées reçues (Clichés on Japan), Le cavalier bleu, 2004

PIGEOT, Jacqueline, 1983, « Les Japonais peints par eux-mêmes » (The Japanese as Portrayed by
Themselves), Le débat, no 23, p. 19-33.
RAISON, Bertrand, 1989, L’empire des objets (The Empire of Objects), Paris, éditions du May.
SABATA, Toyoyuki鯖田豊之, 1972, Nikushoku bunka to beishoku bunka肉食文化と米食文化 (Meateating Civilisation, Rice-eating Civilisation), Tokyo, Kōdansha.
STEVENS, Bernard, 1995, « Ambitions japonaises, nouvel asiatisme et dépassement de lamodernité » (Japanese Ambitions, New Asiatism and Overcoming Modernity), Esprit, n o 213, July
1995, p. 5-29.
SUZUKI, Hideo鈴木秀夫, 1978, 森林の思考・砂漠の思考Shinrin no shikō, sabaku no shikō (Forest
Thinking, Desert Thinking), Tokyo, Nippon Hōsō Shuppan Kyōkai.
TIPTON Elise K., CLARK John (eds.), 2000, Being Modern in Japan: Culture and Society from the 1910s to the
1930s, Honolulu, University of Hawai’i Press.
UMESAO, Tadao, 1983, Le Japon à l’ère planétaire (Japan in the Planetary Era), translated by René
Sieffert, Paris, Publications orientalistes de France.
UMESAO, Tadao, 2001, “Keynote Address: the Comparative Study of Collection and
Representation”, in Umesao Tadao, Japanese Civilization in the Modern World, XVII, Collection and
Representation, Senri Ethnological Studies, no. 54, pp. 1-14.
VLASTOS, Stephen, 1998, Mirror of Modernity: Invented Traditions of Modern Japan, Berkeley,
University of California Press.
YOSHIDA, Kenji, 2001, ‘“Tōhaku” and “Minpaku” within the History of Modern Japanese
Civilization: Museum Collections in Modern Japan’, Japanese Civilization in the Modern World, XVII,Collection and Representation, Senri Ethnological Studies, no. 54, pp. 77-104.

NOTES
1. Jean Davallon, L’exposition à l’œuvre. Stratégies de communication et médiation symbolique (TheExhibition at Work. Communication Strategies and Symbolic Mediation), Paris, L’Harmattan,
1999.
2. Benoît de L’Estoile, Le goût des autres. De l’Exposition coloniale aux arts premiers (A Taste for the
Others. From the Colonial Exhibition to Primitive Arts), Paris, Flammarion, 2007.
3. METI: Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry.
4. JETRO: Japan External Trade Organization.

Cipango - French Journal of Japanese Studies, 1 | 201220

“Nihonjinron” in the Museums of Paris: design and Japanese identity

5. See the list of concepts and their translations further on in this article.
6. Quote taken from the wall text displayed in the “bamboo objects” area.
7. Extract from an introductory speech given at an exhibition in Tokyo at the department store
Takashimaya in 1941.
8. The term wakotoba appears in the documentation for this exhibition but is unattested inJapanese, unless it is a neologism coined for the occasion. It is most likely a translating error forthe term yamato kotoba, which is written with the same characters.
9. According to the wording of the press release.
10. As a reminder: kawaii (cute), kurafuto (craft), kime (fineness of the grain), tezawari (touch),
minimaru (minimal), kokoro kubari (thoughtfulness).
11. I will return to this vague turn of phrase later.
12. Jacqueline Pigeot, « Les Japonais peints par eux-mêmes » (The Japanese as Portrayed by
Themselves), Le débat, no 23, 1983, p. 19.
13. In particular Iki no kōzō by Kuki Shūzō, published in 1930, in which the author defines a
specifically Japanese notion, iki, as being essential to the traditional aesthetic; Kuki Shūzō, La
structure de l’iki, Tokyo, Maison franco-japonaise, 1984 (for the French translation). Translated
into English by John Clark as Reflections on Japanese Taste: the Structure of Iki, Sydney, Power
Publications, 1997.
14. Harumi Befu, Hegemony of Homogeneity: An Anthropological Analysis of Nihonjinron, Melbourne,
Trans Pacific Press, 2001.
15. Pigeot, op. cit., p. 23.
16. Befu, op. cit., p. 35.
17. Ibid., p. 36.
18. Pigeot, op. cit., p. 30.
19. Befu, op. cit., pp. 32-33.
20. For example, the Nihonjinron of Suzuki Hideo contrasts the forest landscapes of Japan with thedesert landscapes of the West: the former is posited as being the cause of the keen analyticalskills that characterise the Japanese; in contrast, the latter explains the Western ability tosummarise. Suzuki Hideo, Shinrin no shikō, sabaku no shikō (Forest Thinking, Desert Thinking),
Tokyo, Nippon Hōsō Shuppan Kyōkai, 1978, quoted by Laurence Caillet, « Introduction », Ateliers,
no 30: « Ethnographies japonaises » (Japanese Ethnographies), Département d’ethnologie del’Université Paris X Nanterre, 2006, p. 16.
21. Befu, op. cit., p. 78.
22. Pigeot, op. cit., p. 32.
23. Christian Simenc, « La beauté de l’utile » (The Beauty of the Useful), AD. Architectural Digest,
no. 79, special issue on « Art, archi, photo, design… Inspiration Japon » (Art, Architecture, Photo,
Design… Japanese Inspiration), November 2008, p. 68.
24. Befu, op. cit., p. 82.
25. Michael Lucken, L’art du Japon au vingtième siècle (Japanese Art in the Twentieth Century),
Paris, Hermann, 2001, p. 23-27.
26. Laurence Caillet, op. cit., p. 9-34.
27. Shiraha Akemi 白羽明美, “Ke buranrī bijutsukan tenrankai hōkoku. Furansu, Pari tokubetsuten o oete” ケ・ブランリー美術館展覧会報告 — フランス・パリ特別展を終えて (Report on
the Musée du Quai Branly Exhibition. End of the Special Exhibition in Paris, France), Mingei 民藝,
no 675, March 2009, p. 50-54.
28. In reality this should read “kokoro kubari”.
29. Anne-Marie Fèvre, « France-Japon, relations d’harmonie » (France and Japan, a Harmonious
Relationship), Libération, 4 November 2008, (last accessed on 27/11/08).
30. Bérénice Geoffroy-Schneiter, « Le Mingei ou la beauté dans l’ordinaire… » (Mingei or Ordinary
Beauty), L’Œil, no 607, November 2008, (last accessed on 27/11/08).

Cipango - French Journal of Japanese Studies, 1 | 201221

“Nihonjinron” in the Museums of Paris: design and Japanese identity

31. Bernard Stevens, « Ambitions japonaises, nouvel asiatisme et dépassement de la modernité »(Japanese Ambitions, New Asiatism and Overcoming Modernity), Esprit, n o 213, July 1995, p. 5-29.

ABSTRACTS
In 2008-2009 were held in Paris three exhibitions on Japanese design. Although expectations
were different, they referred to “Theories of Japaneseness” (nihonjinron) and a supposed
particularism.
En 2008-2009 ont été organisées à Paris trois expositions sur le design japonais, aux ambitions
différentes. Elles font cependant toutes écho aux thèses des « nippologies » (nihonjinron) etinsistent sur les spécificités japonaises.

INDEX
Chronological index: Shōwa
Mots-clés: arts populaires, culture populaire, mingei – mouvement artistique, Yanagi Sōetsu
(1889-1961), folklore, études folkloriques, musée, nippologie, Nihonjin-ron
Subjects: anthropologie, ethnologie, histoire de l'art, muséolographie
キーワード: minshū geijutsu 民衆芸術, taishū bunka 大衆文化, minzoku 民俗, mingei undō 民芸運動, bijutsukan 美術館, nihonjinron 日本人論, Yanagi Sōetsu 柳宗悦 (1889-1961), jinruigaku
人類学, minzokugaku 民族学, bijutsushi 美術史, hakubutsukan shiryō kiroku gijutsu 博物館資料
記録技術, Shōwa jidai 昭和時代 (1926-1989)
Keywords: anthropology, ethnology, folk art, material culture, Mingei, popular culture, utensils,
Yanagi Sōetsu (1889-1961), museum, museography, nihonjin-ron

Cipango - French Journal of Japanese Studies, 1 | 201222