China Law Blog

Fascinating! Actually, Roland Barthes wrote an entire book about this, "The Empire of Signs" (1970). In Beijing, as in most Chinese cities, there is a clear centre, not only symbolic but material, real. In Japan by contrast, as noted by Barthes, there is no emphasis on any great focal point by which to judge all other standards. Take the city of Tokyo for example: there is no real centre, and not even the Emperor's Palace has any real overbearing entity, but instead "a silent and non-descript presence, avoided and unconsidered." This observation led Barthes to reflect on the ability of signs in Japan to exist for their own merit, retaining only the significance naturally imbued by their signifiers - the wearing of white gloves by taxi drivers for example, as you say, or the placing of money on a tray when paying for a bill or when receiving change, the ritual of the tea ceremony, the delicate wrapping of a gift, and even the carefully crafted aesthetics of the lunch box.

Dan, I agree with you that North American culture has more in common with Chinese culture in this sense, than it does with Japanese culture. Barthes suggested, quite famously, that in Japan "sexuality is in sex, not elsewhere; in the United States, it is the contrary; sex is everywhere, except in sexuality."

This is probably less true of Japan today though, than it was in 1970 - sex sells commodities in Japan too, of course, and is everywhere.

Barthes also noted that in Japan, the arranging of flowers is treated as a special art concerned more with gesture than with anything else, just as the main point of giving a gift lies not with what it contains, not with the gift itself, but with the exquisite package and wrapping that encloses it. The wearing of white gloves, and the opening of the taxi door, are acts of gesture, of ritual.

The Chinese also rely on gesture as a way of regulating social relationships - drinking toasts at banquets, pouring tea for elders and for guests, etc. But is it probably nevertheless a fair generalisation to say that the Chinese favour pragmatism over ritual and gesture, and they are certainly less interested in rules, and are more willing to improvise and to experiment. I've lived and worked in both countries, and from my own personal observations, I would say that the Chinese are generally more dynamic, willing to skirt around or to subvert rules in order to acheive results (whereas the Japanese are quite anal when it comes to following rules and regulations). But this tendency not to follow rules, and to improvise, to go with the flow, like water, also makes life in China a little more chaotic and unpredicatable - which can also be at times, problematic.

I'd agree with the last point re: taxi drivers. When I was in Tokyo last year, I was amazed at the friendliness (and cleanliness) of the Tokyo taxi driver (and car). Not to mention the technological niceties as wide-screen GPS, etc. The taxi didn't smell, never had to look at the driver to help us with our luggage in the trunk, etc. (Maybe we were just lucky?)

China, and in many cases, New York City, is the complete opposite. Drivers aren't very friendly (in terms of proactively helping with luggage, saying hello, acknowledging when I say something, etc..).

The only two things I would say that NYC has over China are: gigantic trunks and not as much smell.

Just one more thing: I should clarify something - when I agreed with Dan that North American culture has more in common with Chinese culture than it does with Japanese culture, I wasn't meaning to imply that North American societies are chaotic and unpredictable - certainly not to the same extent that China is. Merely that North Americans are much less anal about following rules and adhereing to set and stringent codes of gesture. Also, like the Chinese, Americans like to contruct grand focal points with which to compare themselves to others. The Chinese, like many Americans, tend to assert themselves by building the world's biggest and best of everything. American cities, like Chinese cities, are full of highrise buildings, and the people of both cultures enjoy staging grand spectacles and glitzy shows, almost everything is constructed or performed on a grand scale. Compare American and Chinese cities to Japanese cities. Tokyo has very few highrise buildings, and surprisingly no real outstanding grand architectural icons to sport - despite its impressive wealth. Small, more intimate, compartmentalised spaces are preferred over large grand ones - decentred, the aesthetic of the lunchbox prevails.

In what ways could Japan be compared with formal British society? I see some similarities but not sure how deep they go.

I read Fallows' article a few days ago and was pretty impressed with his observations and comments.

I arrived at Tokyo yesterday on a business trip and as soon as I got off the plane, I started to compare Tokyo with US and Chinese cities. One of my Australian colleague said to me about the Japanese when we walked on the street today: "All these people follow the rules and orders, unlike in China." He then paused, and continued: "And that's their problem." I mentioned Fallows's article and his observations. We all laughed.

I came back to the hotel and read Dan's blog. I just found it's amazing.

By the way, I always felt that at certain level, Chinese are much more alike American, in terms of individualism, than Japanese or Korean.

With respect to MAJ's comment about chaotic/unpredictable, would anyone care to venture a guess as to the origin of the expression "a Chinese fire drill?"

Chinese and US managers also have alot in common. When their businesses do well, they reward themselves and give empty praise to employees. When things go bad, they still reward themselves and fire as many of the rank and file as possible.

Like the commentators above, I much enjoyed Fallows' observations and for the most agree with them. However, what makes Sino-Japanese comparisons so tricky is what might be called the "time-space conundrum". Is "the way" of doing things an idiosyncrasy of the people who populate the insular landmass called "Japan", and "a way" of doing things likewise a particular trait of the 1.3 billion folks on the mainland?

Or might we distinguish Japan and China by a timeline of development instead? For example, the Japanese have had taxis and private jets en masse since the 1950's, whereas in China these forms of transport have only really proliferated over the past twenty years. The new Beijing taxis are beginning to approximate Japanese standards, even if they're not quite there yet. As for the chaotic and unpredictable nature of urban life in China, this might be led back to administrative incompetence, rural-urban migration, inferior infrastructure, and other factors. Japanese urbanization in the postwar era did not occur at the same pace or on the same scale; plus, urban management was already highly developed during the Tokugawa period, when Japan boasted two of the most populous cities on earth. Ultimately, the Sino-Japanese comparison can go on indefinitely because it is pleasantly vague. Just about any example can be thrown in the mix to prove something or other; yet the "time-space conundrum" remains.

I find Mark Anthony Jones' Sino-US parallel interesting: identification with certain elite "centers", whether they be political (Beijing/DC), academic (the New England and Beijing Ivy Leagues), or economic (Shanghai / NY), instills a certain pride in the populace as a whole, even if the majority experiences the shortcomings and inequalities of greater society and is quite removed from these elite centers. I would say that in Japan and Germany, people take greater pride in a rule-abiding ethos than in any elite centers; it is the spirit of doing things "right", even if what is "right" is contingent to historical change. To most Germans and Japanese, I think, clean cities and universal education take precedence over glitz and top-ten rankings.