Transcript The multiple factors that influenced the establishment of

The multiple factors that influenced
the establishment of the first Society
for the Prevention of Cruelty to
Animals in Japan
Tetsuji ISEDA
Nagoya University, Nagoya, Japan,
[email protected]
Outline
•
•
•
•
Foundation of Tokyo SPCA
Research questions
Previous studies
Factors: personal efforts, Buddhism
reformation and intellectuals
• Background conditions
• Discussion
Foundation of Tokyo SPCA
• 1899 An article by Tatsutaro Hiroi “Does
anybody shed his tears over cattle and
horses?”, in Taiyo (a magazine for general
readers)
• The article pointed out the miserable status
of cattle and horses for carts and coach in
Tokyo and calls for action.
Foundation of Tokyo SPCA
• 1902 Society for Prevention of Cruelty to
Animals (Tokyo SPCA) was founded in
Tokyo by Tatstutaro Hiroi, Seiran Ohuchi
and others
• Over 60 intellectuals signed the prospectus
of the society.
• It was the first animal protection
organization in Japan.
Foundation of Tokyo SPCA
• Activities
–
–
–
–
–
monthly meetings
publications
roadside policing (was not legally authorized)
pleas to the municipal office of Tokyo
protests to Ueno Zoo
• Contemporary newspapers referred to Tokyo
SPCA without explanation, which suggests that
the existence and purpose of the society was wellknown to the public then.
Research Questions
• Why did the SPCA founded then?
• What are the factors that prepared the
foundation?
• relevant to a more general question: what
are the factors to take into account in
thinking about animal ethics in a
multicultural setting.
Previous Studies
• There are a few previous studies of this
society.
– Yoshida 1964 and Nakamura 2005 discusses Tokyo SPCA as
a part of Buddhism reformation movement.
– Ozaki et al 1982 emphasizes the individual effort of Hiroi
(all the studies agree on this) and response of intellectuals
– Imagawa 1996 regard it as a movement by intellectuals to
civilize general public
– Chikamori 2000 regard it as a result of institutionalization of
care for pain, introduced from England.
Previous Studies
• Are these studies valid?
• Are these factors compatible?
• Is there not something missing?
Factor 1: Hiroi’s personal
efforts
• Hiroi was a pastor of Lutherian church at the time of his
paper, but converted to Unitarian after the establishment of
Tokyo SPCA.
• He was a dog lover and came across the idea of SPCA by
finding a report by Boston Humane Society in the library.
• He was the only person who kept being active throughout
the four decades of Tokyo SPCA.
• There are many evidence and testimonies that he was
essential to the establishment and maintenance of the
society
Factor 2:Buddhism
reformation movement
• Hiroi was a poor 24 years old with no connection; he
would have not been able to launch a movement without
help
• Seiran Ohuchi was a leader of Buddhism reformation
movement, and he played a key role in bringing
intellectuals from various fields (religious activists,
educators, journalists, university professors) into the SPCA
movement.
• Other than Ohuchi, Gicho Sakurai (Buddhist monk and
editor of Chuo-Koron) and Beiho Takashima (Buddism
activist and writer) were also key figures in Tokyo SPCA.
Factor 3: response of
intellectuals
• If Buddhism reformers were the only people
involved in the SPCA, it would have been a
much less significant movement.
• The success and publicity of the society was
insured by attracting intellectuals from
various fields (religion, academism,
journalism, education etc.)
But is this the whole story?
• So what the studies say seems to be valid partial
stories.
• remaining questions
• But why did Buddhists suddenly become
interested in animals?
• Why were the intellectuals anxious to join the
Tokyo SPCA? Does the “institutionalization of
care for pain” explain?
=>We need another look at background motives...
Backgrounds of Buddhism
reformers
• Buddhism generally tell people not to kill animals,
but Buddhism is not a commandment based
religion like Christianity, especially for general
followers.
• Buddhism in Japan has become so-called “funeral
Buddhism”: monks do almost nothing other than
funerals and related rituals (protection by the
feudal government of Edo era)
Backgrounds of Buddhism
reformers
• After the modernization of Japan since
1860s, Buddhism lost governmental
supports and needed revitalization for
survival.
• Buddhist monks themselves got dissatisfied
with the status of Buddism as “funeral
buddhism”
=> Buddhism reformation movement
Backgrounds of Buddhism
reformers
• Animal protection movement had some obvious
attractiveness for the reformers
• Non-killing of animals is supposed to be an
important precept of Buddhism; no Buddhist could
disagree with animal protection.
• Reformers come from various sects, and often
worked with Christians (especially Unitarians),
advocating “New Buddhism”. sect-specific or
religion-specific issues were not suitable for their
movement.
Backgrounds for intellectuals
• There were reasons for Japanese ruling
class to launch animal protection measures.
• One urgent issue was the pressure from
resident aliens (mainly merchants at
Yokohama and Kobe, two major
international ports of the time)
Backgrounds for intellectuals
• English newspapers issued in Yokohama,
such as Japan Weekly Mail, repeatedly
accused Japanese of ill-treatments of
animals
• Especially the treatment of cattle and horses
in urban area shocked foreigners, resulting
in many correspondences on English
newspapers.
Japan Weekly Mail, May 2nd, 1891, (vol. 15,
no. 18) p.515-516 "cruelty to animals in Japan"
• "but if the cruelty practised towards horses in Tokyo be not
characteristic of Japanese methods, there is surely all the
more reason to correct it, since it not only offends Japanese
feeling, but will certainly earn for the country an evil
reputation. Foreigners judge the disposition of the nation
by the evidences most plainly thrust upon their attention,
and will naturally conclude that if a remedy the efficacy of
which has been amply proved by European experience is
not employed in Japan, the reason must be that Japan has
no consciousness of the disease."
Backgrounds for intellectuals
• There are evidence that these papers were
widely read by Japanese intellectuals and
governmental officers.
• The most important international issue at
that time for Japanese government was the
revision of disadvantageous treaties; one
key issue was to let other countries
recognize that Japan has been civilized.
Backgrounds for intellectuals
• With such backgrounds, accusation of cruelty to
animals could be a serious threat for Japanese
government and intellectuals.
• A Japanese newspaper reported that after an article
in Japan Weekly Mail on coach horses Tokyo city
police soon issued an order to companies to take
more care of horses. (Yomiuri Shinbun, 1890,
May 5)
Limitation of the movement
• Thus, it seems that the motive of the movement
was not compassion with animals for most of the
participants.
=> this explains the limited nature of their movement
• The movement did not spread much further than
its original members.
Limitation of the movement
• Tokyo SPCA supported meat-eating strongly.
vivisection was never taken up as an issue (as far
as we can tell from their publications)
=> this also supports the view that the purpose of
movement was not helping animals but to be
recognized as a civilized country; meat-eating and
experimental science were symbols of civilization,
rather than the opposite.
Limitation of the movement
• Tokyo SPCA was criticized for its
ineffectiveness from resident aliens
(newspapers of Yokohama and Kobe)
• Resident aliens finally decided to form their
own society;
• Japan Human Society in Tokyo (1914)
• There were also organizations mainly run
by foreigners in Yokohama and Kobe
Discussion
• No simple story does the justice to the
process of how Japanese people started to
care for animals; it seems to be a result of a
complex combination of religious and
political background conditions.
• It even had an aspect of cultural invasion
from “civilized” countries. (pressure from
the outside)
Discussion
• Still, it introduced a new common sense
into Japan that it is not appropriate to show
cruelty to animals in public.
=> had a substantive effect on people’s
perception on human-animal relationship.
Concluding remarks
• To understand the change in human-animal
relationships, sometimes we need to take
into account wider context. Otherwise we
misunderstand the nature of the change.
• Establishment of Tokyo SPCA is a good
case to the point.