何か20分間のメッセージをまとめなくてはならなくなった。これまで書いたものを利用して(赤字)一応前半部分(10分)を書いてみた。
I am a Japanese psychiatrist and psychoanalyst
with my training at the Menninger Foundation and I would like to present a
couple of materials in this Podcast.
First I would like to introduce myself and my work, especially
transcultural issues in the context of psychoanalysis. Then I will mention
briefly about my clinical research on dissociative disorders. My career as a psychiatrist began upon my
graduation from the University of Tokyo Medical School in 1982. While I was in
a training program in psychiatry, I took an interest in psychoanalysis, which
was being very actively promoted by a group of Keio University in Tokyo under
the compelling leadership of Dr. Keigo Okonogi. Dr. Okonogi was one of the most
prominent psychoanalysts in Japan, and a disciple of Dr. Heisaku Kosawa. Dr.
Kosawa was a pioneer of a psychoanalytic movement in Japan. In the fall of 1987, I moved to the United States
hoping to achieve my goal of becoming a fully trained psychoanalyst. I then joined
the residency program at the Menninger Clinic in Topeka, Kansas and completed
it in 1993, when I was formally accepted to the Topeka Institute for
Psychoanalysis (TIP). Fortunately,
the TIP gave candidates many opportunities to read about different types of
theories. Some of them struck a chord with me, others bored me, and some I
found to be questionable. During my training at
the TIP, several topics particularly interested me, and one of them was shame
and social phobia.
As I recall, shame was a topic that had preoccupied
me since my training as a psychiatrist. Traditionally, Japanese psychiatry has
a special concern for so-called anthropophobia (fear of human beings), a
pathological form of intense shame in the presence of others. To be honest, I
consider myself shame-prone and bashful, and thought that my studies of this
condition would not only reduce my patients’ suffering from this condition, but
would also help me better understand myself.
The conventional view held by Japanese
psychiatrists is that anthropophobia is a condition unique to Japanese society
that can be found only rarely in Western countries. I thought that I would be
in a culturally advantageous position to study anthropophobia when I moved to
the United States. However, when I arrived in the United States, I realized
that a new wave of interest in pathological shame was already there, especially
in the form of a condition called social phobia in DSM-III. Although social
phobia is very close to Japanese-type anthropophobia, I believed there to be
subtle differences between them, as they have different cultural roots. I
decided to elaborate on this topic to advance my study on shame. In 1994, I
wrote an article entitled “Shame and social phobia: A transcultural viewpoint,”
which was published in the Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic (Okano, 1994).
In this article I stated that Shame is given different meanings in various cultural contexts. In Japan, shame-prone and self-effacing behavior tends to be given positive functional value and is actively promoted by society. In the United States, society tends to prohibit such shame-prone behavior and the show of one’s vulnerability, while encouraging the visible demonstration of one’s power and capacity. I believe that these different meanings given to shame reflect different values of secretiveness in these two societies. I concluded the paper by suggesting an alternative view of shame that encourages flexibility rather than an exclusively positive or negative value of secretiveness.
I recall the time when I wrote this article 26 years ago, at the age 38, I was in the middle of a transcultural struggle in the United States. I was graduating from the Menninger School of Psychiatry, getting formally accepted to the TIP, but was not quite sure if I could make it in this country. However, I was beginning to have a sense that I was teasing out my own ways of being a trans-cultural clinician.
Then I kept thinking about this issue of shame with a belief that shame-proneness is something that I need to live with for the rest of my life and this is one of the tools that I would use to understand human mind in a transcultural context. Longtime afterward I put together a paper called Passivity, non-expression and the Oedipus in Japan that I published in the international journal of PA in 2018. In this paper I associated the issue of shame in the context of Oedipus, a key and central issue in the Freudian psychoanalysis. In this paper I stated that the Japanese mentality is often characterized by its secretiveness and non-expression in various social contexts. The essence and knowledge of traditional art and craftsmanship at the highest levels is kept esoteric and should not be propagated to the general public, as truly essential and valuable points could not be verbally expressed or revealed. This basically echoes what wrote 26 years ago. Then I stated that this issue invites us an important question about the Oedipus in Japan. Is our secretiveness a way of avoiding Oedipal confrontations with others? Is it defeat or a higher tactic? Then I stated that in Japanese society, the Oedipal dynamic exists in a rather convoluted way due to the passive and secretive nature of the Japanese people.
In this article I stated that Shame is given different meanings in various cultural contexts. In Japan, shame-prone and self-effacing behavior tends to be given positive functional value and is actively promoted by society. In the United States, society tends to prohibit such shame-prone behavior and the show of one’s vulnerability, while encouraging the visible demonstration of one’s power and capacity. I believe that these different meanings given to shame reflect different values of secretiveness in these two societies. I concluded the paper by suggesting an alternative view of shame that encourages flexibility rather than an exclusively positive or negative value of secretiveness.
I recall the time when I wrote this article 26 years ago, at the age 38, I was in the middle of a transcultural struggle in the United States. I was graduating from the Menninger School of Psychiatry, getting formally accepted to the TIP, but was not quite sure if I could make it in this country. However, I was beginning to have a sense that I was teasing out my own ways of being a trans-cultural clinician.
Then I kept thinking about this issue of shame with a belief that shame-proneness is something that I need to live with for the rest of my life and this is one of the tools that I would use to understand human mind in a transcultural context. Longtime afterward I put together a paper called Passivity, non-expression and the Oedipus in Japan that I published in the international journal of PA in 2018. In this paper I associated the issue of shame in the context of Oedipus, a key and central issue in the Freudian psychoanalysis. In this paper I stated that the Japanese mentality is often characterized by its secretiveness and non-expression in various social contexts. The essence and knowledge of traditional art and craftsmanship at the highest levels is kept esoteric and should not be propagated to the general public, as truly essential and valuable points could not be verbally expressed or revealed. This basically echoes what wrote 26 years ago. Then I stated that this issue invites us an important question about the Oedipus in Japan. Is our secretiveness a way of avoiding Oedipal confrontations with others? Is it defeat or a higher tactic? Then I stated that in Japanese society, the Oedipal dynamic exists in a rather convoluted way due to the passive and secretive nature of the Japanese people.
In this paper, I demonstrated a rather radical dichotomy between two
cultures, western society where activity is valued versus Japanese society where
passivity has some positive and paradoxical value. In the context of oedipal issue, I compared to people manifesting phallus while in Japan people hiding
it or pretending having phallus, or even not having a phallus. In this paper I
stressed the paradox of passivity: passivity and non-action is paradoxically powerful
and meaningful. I stressed that the difference is palpable in our direct social
context. For example, overt shows of
affection, such as hugging and kissing, as well as verbal expressions such as
“I love you” or “I’m proud of you,” strike them generally as too blatant and
conspicuous, sometimes to the point of being empty and ritualistic. However, in the background of this feeling
of bashfulness and awkwardness is a belief that is ingrained in the Japanese
mind: what is most essential and important does not reveal and manifest itself.
In other words, their passivity and non-expression are both defensive and
tactical.
I then delineated this paradox manifested in
different contexts. First I picked up the issue of Ajasé complex in comparison
with Oedipus complex. Ajasé complex was presented by Heisaku Kosawa, who laid the foundation of psychoanalysis in
Japan, visited Freud in Vienna in the 1930s, where he presented him a paper
entitled “Two Kinds of Guilt Feelings.” The paper explained his theory of the
Ajasé complex, which he contrasted with Freud’s Oedipus complex. According to
Kosawa, there is a type of guilt in the Japanese mind that is quite different
from the guilt based on the fear of punishment represented by the Oedipus
complex. Freud apparently believed that the Oedipus complex could be seen
universally across all cultures. However, assuming this story still primarily
reflects the Western Judeo-Christian mentality, the question arises: can it be
similarly found in the East? The notion of the “Ajasé complex” is one response
to this crucial question. It is not the father’s punishment that produces
feelings of guilt, but the forgiveness of the mother. The Ajasé complex: A
Japanese version of the origin of guilt? One study reported the story of
Oedipus to be “the most famous in Western civilization”. Although in different contexts, the theory of
Ajasé and Steiner’s idea of a solution to the Oedipus complex are considered
alternatives to resolution through the father’s show of power and threat.
The next issue that I picked is Amaé. Dr.Takeo Doi a Japanese psychiatrist and psychoanalyst, proposed the concept of amaé in his 1971 work, The Anatomy of Dependence (Doi 1971/ 1988), based on his transcultural experience in the United States. Amaé, according to Doi, is a special type of dependency on others that preserves harmony with them.Doi also explains that although it is close to love, amaé does not involve the sexuality or ambivalence that typically characterize the Oedipal period. He refers to the idea of “passive object love” proposed by Ferenczi (1931), which was further discussed by Balint (1968). Passive object love is expressed as a desire to be loved by others, which, according to Doi, is the type of love closest to amaé. In a relationship based on amaé, the issue of passivity and non-expression is involved in the following way. Usually, the amaé need is expressed passively and non-verbally by an individual with an expectation of others noticing it and acceding to it voluntarily. In Japanese society, people tend to feel each other’s amaé needs and satisfy them spontaneously in order to maintain peaceful social relations.
The next issue that I picked is Amaé. Dr.Takeo Doi a Japanese psychiatrist and psychoanalyst, proposed the concept of amaé in his 1971 work, The Anatomy of Dependence (Doi 1971/ 1988), based on his transcultural experience in the United States. Amaé, according to Doi, is a special type of dependency on others that preserves harmony with them.Doi also explains that although it is close to love, amaé does not involve the sexuality or ambivalence that typically characterize the Oedipal period. He refers to the idea of “passive object love” proposed by Ferenczi (1931), which was further discussed by Balint (1968). Passive object love is expressed as a desire to be loved by others, which, according to Doi, is the type of love closest to amaé. In a relationship based on amaé, the issue of passivity and non-expression is involved in the following way. Usually, the amaé need is expressed passively and non-verbally by an individual with an expectation of others noticing it and acceding to it voluntarily. In Japanese society, people tend to feel each other’s amaé needs and satisfy them spontaneously in order to maintain peaceful social relations.
If I think back, the contrast between the
culture based on activity and passivity is rather hyperbolic and simplistic. If
you stretch your imagination, it was like discussing universe made of ordinary
matter and the anti-universe made of antimatter. But I still feel that Japanese
mentality is quite unique and still least understood among western people and
there is much to glean from in the psychoanalytic context.
