Nori’s Visit

I think what’s really interesting with regard to Nori’s journey is the extent to which Japanese culture berated his actions, but more so how this reaction was fueled and allowed for via the contextual rules and cultural norms of internet culture. It seems to me that the Japanese rules of online communication are in almost direct opposition to the modes of conduct in actual, person-to-person interaction. Online discussions seem to serve not as a medium that mirrors daily life, but rather as one through which the societal norms and expectations are radically different. I’m unsure how to view this phenomenon, though, and whether it should be considered as a sort of emotional release, as though the official systems of honor and altruism of Japanese public life necessitate some form of mass cultural aggression, and that internet forums serve as a way to express this, or whether the new medium of the internet instead foreshadows some sort of shift in Japanese standards of socio-cultural normativity. Even if the latter were the case, though, this wouldn’t explain the specific reaction Nori was subjected to, for if the internet proves to be some liberalizing wunder-medium then we would see a dramatic lessening of the values that traditional Japanese culture encourages an enforces, not just their expression in other ways. Obviously, I have a hard time placing Nori’s experience upon his release and return to Japan, however I think that it is a really poignant story, and has the potential to speak volumes about the crossing of internet phenomena and real-world (read: political) event

-Julian

nori’s visit

When I first read Nori’s interview and blog I was surprised by how strong he seemed. I think that the experiences he went through (both in Iraq and Japan) would have made me go through years of therapy. I don’t think that I would have been willing to set up a blog and basically allow others to attack me and then try to explain my situation to those harsh critics. It amazed me that he was willing, and even sought, ways of hearing others opinions about himself and trying to change them. While he answered the questions in our classroom I had to remind myself that he was younger than me. He went through a horrible experience in Iraq, came home to a barrage of attacks, and yet he still goes to school and has based a large portion of his life on the interent (both with his blog and the Beppoo website). It’s not that I expected him to stop living his life, but I think it is amazing that he is willing to engage in these activities in a relatively short time since Iraq. He said that he felt that coming to Chicago has allowed him to reflect back on his time in Iraq and reevaluate his life in the past three years. I think this was fairly noticeable. In the classroom he barely wanted to talk about the actual hostage situation and by the Thursday he was willing to talk about the first few days of it in detail. It took a large amount of willpower to be able to recollect his experience and share it with others.

-Lili

Convergence of an Idealist and a Realist

Where does one begin when trying to write about Noriaki? I wish I could say he’s rare, a bit of an anomaly (in Japan, most certainly, but I would go as far as to say the world around) and profound and leave it at that, but that would not do him justice. After our Q and A session in class, an hour plus of walking and talking afterwards, his lecture and the class dinner, I find that I continually have to remind myself that he is only 21 and a university student much like myself. We put him to the test, asking him to analyze his own culture in ways we might never have and to validate actions much bolder than any we may ever take. I am particularly impressed by the fact that even though I find Noriaki to be quite the idealist, I do not believe he crosses across the line and enters the domain of the quixotic. When asked why Iraq? Why depleted uranium? He acknowledged the perhaps inevitability of war, but not the justifiability of harming the innocent–children.

Also, I find his brand of realism intriguing. It seems natural to avoid conflict as well as those who would challenge, contradict and criticize your actions, ideals and stance, but Noriaki actively seeks to know his opposition and to have dialogue with them. At first I could not understand why he was so passionate about seeing things from their point of view or trying to understand them, but I find know that without such dialogue to put our own thinking on trial, we can or may never find the flaws in our own logic nor effectively persuade others.

I saw this attitude reflected in his answer to the question of censorship. Sometimes, it would seem, even the benevolent and “correct” act of censoring words aimed to be derisive and without any obvious edifying points, might be counteractive to the pursuit of the “greater good.” What is thought will be thought regardless of whether or not it is said. Is it not better to have these sentiments—even the worst of them—out in the open where those of us who disagree can attempt to understand them (and, personally, subsequently refute them) the way Noriaki does? I think so.

~Soton