Social Relations—Japan

Know this topic well? Help others and get FREE products!

Japanese social relations are organized around values of interdependence and reciprocity that guide the creation and expression of human interactions. Often, these values are expressed via the establishment and reproduction of reciprocal obligations through which coworkers, family members, friends, and acquaintances build relationships over time. These interdependencies and obligations are established and expressed both in terms of individual relationships (for example, with friends, family, and coworkers) and in terms of relationships to particular groups or organizations to which one belongs (such as school, company, and community). At the core of Japanese notions about social interaction is the idea that long-term relationships are maintained through a combination of emotional bonds, practical bonds, and symbolic actions, such as gift giving, that mark and represent the continuation of the relationship. Reciprocity and interdependence are involved in both vertical relationships between subordinates and superiors and horizontal relationships among peers.

Obligations in Japan are often organized around concepts that index either an asymmetrical or symmetrical relationship between individuals. Asymmetrical obligations can exist either as a part of the innate character of a relationship, as with the parent-child bond, or from feelings of gratitude and indebtedness that arise out of the benevolent or beneficial actions of another, such as feelings of indebtedness a student has towards his or her mentor. Asymmetric obligation is usually associated with the concept of on (literally, "kindness," "favor," or "blessing"), which indexes a feeling of gratitude on the part of the debtor towards the donor for having received some benefit. Although on can come to exist in any relationship, as an innate quality it is most closely associated with the debt of gratitude a child owes to his or her parents and, by extension, ancestors for having been brought into the world and raised. The implication with on is that the debt incurred is asymmetrical: the debt a child owes to a parent and ancestors, or a student owes to a mentor, can never be satisfactorily repaid, because the feeling of gratitude does not normally lapse. The debtor desires, and may be expected, to express his or her gratitude by continually making efforts to repay at least part of this endless debt. The importance of on for understanding social relations in Japan is that rather than being understood as a discrete instance that occurs during the course of a social relationship, on operates as a symbolic representation of the relationship itself and the inherent asymmetry of the benefit received.

On is a form of obligation that is closely intertwined with emotional bonds associated with love, friendship, and appreciation, and thus generally carries a positive connotation. Reciprocal obligations, on the other hand, while constituting a basis for securing social relationships, are not always perceived in a positive way. Japanese people live within webs of reciprocal obligations; some of these obligations are incurred without actually desiring to enter into a relationship— for example, through a benefit received by a family member or simply by being related to someone through common membership in family, company, school, or community. It is not unusual for an established relationship, particularly when it is not desired by one or both parties, to be described in terms of being a burden, in that each exchange requires an eventual response, and once engaged in the relationship, it is difficult to break it off without offending the other party. This sort of burdensome obligation is usually expressed as giri (literally, "duty," "obligation"), which refers to feelings associated with loss of autonomy that result from being indebted to another. The debtor returns the favor not out of a feeling of gratitude, but out of a desire to be rid of the debt (although, particularly if it involves family or work relationships, this may not be possible) and guilt about possibly not satisfactorily carrying out one's reciprocal obligation.

The concepts of giri and on are difficult to separate. The character of obligation in a relationship may change over time; a relationship that is initially based upon on may become burdensome and, thus, become understood more in terms of giri by one or both parties. As noted above, among the most noted areas in which individuals are viewed as having on is in the relationship with parents. Simply for having been brought into the world, one owes an enormous debt of gratitude to one's parents. This is responded to through the actions associated with filial piety, including heeding parental wishes and demands, caring for them in old age, and continuing to care for them after they die through rituals associated with ancestor veneration. However, it is not unusual for younger Japanese to describe this debt to one's parents in terms of giri rather than on, indicating that the repayment is required, but does not necessarily actually involve gratitude. In many cases, a person's interpretation of the debt owed to parents (or others) involves an ambiguously defined combination of giri and on and ambivalence about how and when the debt should be repaid. This, of course, allows for considerable room in interpretation and expression by both parties as they manipulate the social and symbolic capital associated with the obligations connected with a relationship.

In Japan, interdependence (sometimes referred to as dependency) has been represented in scholarly literature largely in terms of the concepts of amae, amaeru, and amayakasu. The term amae, as it was made famous in the work of Japanese psychologist Takeo Doi, refers to passive dependence (or sometimes love) and is manifested through the desire to be indulged by the individual who is the object of amae. Typically, the term is used in describing the behavior of a child toward his or her mother, and normally this form of indulgence relationship is viewed positively (although the term amae ko can be used to refer to a spoiled child). Doi argues that the concept of amae is not limited to the mother-child bond, but is, in fact, central to how Japanese form social relationships.

Doi paints a very broad and asymmetrical—dependence oriented—picture of the amae relationship, one that has been refined by other scholars, such as the anthropologist Takie Lebra. Lebra points out that the seeking of indulgence (amaeru) is complementary; it must be enacted along with a reciprocal granting of indulgence (amayakasu)—which can involve both the active solicitation and passive acceptance of another's wish to be indulged. Amaeru and amayakasu thus can be understood in terms of complementary roles that people assume in the process of building and maintaining relationships with each other. As people interact, they engage and manipulate the expression of these roles, usually in terms of selfinterest: a person who is good at amaeru is able to accept and appropriately respond to the amayakasu desire expressed by another, and vice versa. A person may, for example, choose to use the feelings associated with amae to get into his or her boss's good graces by reacting to and accepting the desire of the boss to behave in a paternal manner and nurture his or her subordinates (amayakasu). The amaeruamayakasu relationship is interdependent and mutually beneficial, but it may be concluded when one or both parties no longer perceive the benefits of the interdependence.

Concepts such as amae, giri, and on are important elements in how Japanese people establish, develop, and maintain emotive and social bonds. However, each of these concepts conveys multiple meanings and interpretations. Rather than being identifiers of Japanese social relations, they are tools that Japanese people use in creating and interpreting those relations. Each of these concepts not only describes elements of social relations in Japan, but also identifies tools that people employ and manipulate as they interact with each other.

Doi, Takeo. (1970) The Anatomy of Dependence. Trans. by John Bester. Tokyo: Kodansha.

Hashimoto, Akiko. (1996). The Gift of Generations: Japanese and American Perspectives on Aging and the Social Contract. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Kondo, Dorinne. (1990). Crafting Selves: Power, Gender, and Discourses of Identity in a Japanese Workplace. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Lebra, Takie Sugiyama. (1976) Japanese Patterns of Behavior. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.

Long, Susan O., ed. (1999) Lives in Motion: Composing Circles of Self and Community in Japan. Ithaca, NY: Cornell East Asia Series.

Nakane, Chie. (1970) Japanese Society. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Smith, Robert J. (1974) Ancestor Worship in Contemporary Japan. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

——. (1983). Japanese Society: Tradition, Self, and the Social Order. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Traphagan, John W. (2000). Taming Oblivion: Aging Bodies and the Fear of Senility in Japan. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

This is the complete article, containing 1,421 words (approx. 5 pages at 300 words per page).