EST spine 0.5”

MONEY, TRAINS, AND GUILLOTINES

William Marotti

ART AND REVOLUTION IN 1960S JAPAN

ASIA-­PACIFIC:­CULTURE,­POLITICS,­AND­SOCIETY

Editors: Rey Chow, Michael Dutton, H. D. Harootunian, and Rosalind C. Morris

­Money, Trains,­and GuilloTinesarT and revoluTion in 1960s Japan

william marotti

Duke­university­Press Durham and London 2013

©­2013­Duke­University­Press

All­rights­reserved

Printed­in­the­United­States­of­

America­on­acid-­free­paper­♾

Designed­by­Amy­Ruth­Buchanan

Typeset­in­Chaparral­Pro­by­­

Tseng­Information­Systems,­Inc.

Library­of­Congress­Cataloging-­in-­

Publication­Data­appear­on­the­last­

printed­page­of­this­book.

Duke­University­Press­gratefully­

acknowledges­the­ucla­Paul­I.­and­

Hisako­Terasaki­Center­for­Japanese­­

Studies,­the­ucla­Division­of­Social­

Sciences,­and­the­ucla­Department­of­

History,­which­provided­funds­toward­­

the­publication­of­this­book.

Duke­University­Press­gratefully­

acknowledges­the­support­of­the­­

Association­for­Asian­Studies,­which­

provided­funds­toward­the­publication­­

of­this­book.

For my parents

Color plates appear after page 138Acknowledgments ix  Chronology of Select Events xiii

Introduction 1

part iArt against the Police:­Akasegawa­Genpei’s­1,000-Yen­Prints,­the­State,­and­the­Borders­of­the­Everyday 9

1.­The­Vision­of­the­Police 152.­The­Occupation,­the­New­Emperor­System,­and­the­Figure­of­Japan 373.­The­Process­of­Art 74

Contents

part iiArtistic Practice Finds Its Object:­The­Avant-Garde­and­the­Yomiuri Indépendant 111

4.­The­Yomiuri Indépendant:­Making­and­Displacing­History 1175.­The­Yomiuri Anpan 152

part iiiTheorizing Art and Revolution 201

6.­Beyond­the­Guillotine:­Speaking­of­Art / Art­Speaking 2077.­Naming­the­Real 2458.­The­Moment­of­the­Avant-Garde 284

Epilogue 317

Notes 319  Select Bibliography 393  Index 405

This­book­was­a­long­time­in­coming:­it­began­with­a­paper­in­1993­after­a­chance­encounter­in­the­University­of­Chicago­library­stacks,­building­even-tually­ into­a­doctoral­dissertation,­and­then­assumed­ its­final­ form­after­additional­years­of­revision­and­research.­ Along­the­way­I­have­benefited­from­the­generosity­of­so­many­people­over­so­many­years­that­I­begin­these­acknowledgments­with­a­profound­intuition­of­its­ultimate­inadequacy.­I­have­incurred­any­number­of­debts­in­writing­this­work.­Not­obligations,­but­rather­responsibilities,­for­which­this­work,­and­these­insufficiently­brief­words,­are­but­a­small­gesture­toward­their­fulfillment.­I­wish­to­acknowledge­my­deep­appreciation­for­the­many­people­who­so­generously­gave­of­their­time­and­support­in­bringing­this­book­to­fruition.­Their­inclusion­in­the­following­is­an­insufficient­gauge­of­my­gratitude.­ I­ would­ first­ like­ to­ thank­ the­ many­ artists,­ critics,­ and­ experts­ who­granted­access­to­private­collections,­who­extensively­gave­of­their­time­and­opinions,­and­who­patiently­answered­my­endless­questions.­In­the­process,­

ACknowledgments

ac

kn

ow

le

Dg

me

nt

s

x

and­with­gratifying­frequency,­moments­of­unexpected­and­unforeseeable­dialogue­ arose,­ sparks­ arising­ from­ the­ experiences­ of­ events­ some­ four­decades­or­more­ago.­My­immense­gratitude­to­Akasegawa­Genpei,­Naka-nishi­Natsuyuki,­Tone­Yasunao,­Imaizumi­Yoshihiko,­Shinohara­Ushio,­Katō­Yoshihiro,­ Yoshimura­ Masunobu,­ Toyoshima­ Sōroku,­ Kudō­ Hiroko,­ Ma-suzawa­Kinpei,­Yoshino­Tatsumi,­Yamada­Satoshi,­Ishiguro­Kenji,­Yo­shida­Yoshie,­ Hirata­ Minoru,­ Takeda­ Atsushi,­ Jacqueline­ Paul,­ Hashimoto­ To-shiko,­Uehara­Seiichirō,­Kominami­Yūichirō,­Murai­Hidemi,­Mikami­Kan,­Kara­Jurō­and­the­members­of­Karagumi,­Ōno­Kazuo,­Ōno­Yoshito,­Maro­Akaji,­Satō­Makoto,­Saitō­Ren,­Shinfune­Yoko,­Motofuji­Akiko,­Sasame­Hiro-yuki,­Kuniyoshi­Kazuko,­Oikawa­Hironobu,­and­Ishii­Tatsurō.­At­this­time­I­would­also­like­to­acknowledge­that­by­convention,­and­with­ambiguity,­Japanese­ names­ are­ given­ in­ Japanese­ order­ (surname­ first­ then­ given­name)­for­those­individuals­working­and/or­writing­primarily­in­Japanese,­even­if­their­residence­is­outside­of­Japan.­ I­would­like­to­extend­especially­warm­thanks­to­the­many­friends­and­colleagues­ whose­ kindness,­ criticisms,­ and­ forbearance­ have­ aided­ the­work­ in­ manifold­ ways­ over­ the­ years:­ Ikeda­ Koichi­ and­ family,­ Igarashi­Akio,­Ochi­Toshio­and­Shikimura­Yoshiko,­Uchino­Tadashi,­Umemori­Nao-yuki,­Umemori­Junko,­Kuroda­Raiji­(KuroDalaiJee),­Fujiyama­Naoki,­Mori-yama­Naoto,­R.­Jeff­Carlisle,­Mary­Coffey,­Chris­Connery,­Alan­Cummings,­Peter­ Eckersall,­ Daniel­ Foote,­ Sean­ Gilsdorf,­ Bernard­ Green,­ Gail­ Her-shatter,­Heather­Hindman,­Tom­Lamarre,­Alexandra­Munroe,­Bill­Mihalo-polis,­Michael­Molasky,­Chris­Nelson,­Rob­Oppenheim,­Lawrence­Repeta,­Wes­Sasaki-­Uemura,­Amanda­Seaman,­Robert­Sukle,­Stefan­Tanaka,­Bert­Winther-­Tamaki,­Tomii­Reiko,­and­Igarashi­Yoshikuni.­ I­would­add­to­this­list­a­special­mention­to­my­colleagues­at­ucla:­in­particular,­ Herman­ Ooms,­ Fred­ Notehelfer,­ Miriam­ Silverberg,­ Ra’anan­Boustan,­Andrea­Goldman,­and­Peter­Stacey.­I­benefited­from­the­aid­and­tolerance­of­a­number­of­graduate­and­undergraduate­assistants,­including­Nobuko­Anan,­Emily­Anderson,­Tanya­Barnett,­Paige­Holt,­Lita­Martinez,­Kelly­McCormick,­Alice­Phan,­Kevin­Richardson,­Ken­Shima,­Sarah­Walsh,­and­ Justin­ Jack­ Wilson.­ Also,­ a­ particular­ thanks­ to­ our­ thriving­ gradu-ate­cohort­of­ recent­years,­who­have­encountered­bits­of­ the­manuscript­in­a­variety­of­forms;­and­beyond­ucla,­to­Miriam­Wattles,­Bert­Winther-­Tamaki­(again),­Mimi­Long,­Greg­Levine,­Noriko­Aso,­and­the­many­mem-bers­of­the­Japanese­Arts­and­Globalizations­research­group,­who­helped­foster­ an­ interdisciplinary­ discussion­ space­ that­ I­ am­ happy­ to­ continue­from­its­new­ucla­base.

ac

kn

ow

le

Dg

me

nt

s

xi

­ I­ owe­ much­ to­ my­ mentors­ and­ colleagues­ at­ Chicago.­ In­ addition­ to­fostering­a­special­intellectual­space,­my­mentors­Harry­Harootunian­and­Tetsuo­Najita­supported­my­explorations­in­this­unexpected­topic.­The­late­William­Sibley­was­a­source­of­encouragement,­and­a­model­for­sensitivity­to­language­and­translation.­Moishe­Postone’s­scholarship,­critical­theory­courses,­and­workshops­encouraged­and­sharpened­analytical­precision.­To­this­I­must­also­add­thanks­to­William­Sewell­and­the­other­members­of­Chi-cago’s­Social­Theory­Workshop,­to­Norma­Field,­Nōtō­Hiroyoshi,­and­Okui-zumi­Eizaburō;­to­the­members­of­my­extended­graduate­cohort­at­Chicago;­at­nyu,­to­Marilyn­Young,­Tom­Bender,­Rebecca­Karl,­Ellen­Schrecker,­Csaba­Békés,­Mario­Del­Pero,­Phillip­Deery,­and­the­faculty­and­fellows­of­the­Inter-national­Center­for­Advanced­Studies­(Project­on­the­Cold­War);­at­Colum-bia,­to­Carol­Gluck,­Kim­Brandt,­and­the­fellows­of­the­Expanding­East­Asian­Studies­(ExEAS)­program;­and­to­my­colleagues­and­reading­group­members­at­Tokyo­University.­ I­would­like­to­thank­the­generosity­and­expertise­of­Kubota­Maho,­Shi-raishi­Masami,­and­scai­the­bathhouse;­the­inimitable­Yamada­Satoshi­and­the­Nagoya­City­Art­Museum;­the­staff­at­the­National­Research­Insti-tute­for­Cultural­Properties­(Tōbunken);­Fujii­Aki­and­the­Tokyo­Contem-porary­Art­Museum­(MoT);­the­archivists­at­nacP;­Toshie­Marra­and­the­librarians­at­ucla;­Nagasaki­Yumi,­Nagasaki­Yukiko,­and­Gallery­58;­Doryun­Chong,­Gwen­Farrelly,­MoMA,­and­the­Walker­Art­Museum;­The­Yomiuri­News­Photography­Center;­the­Wayne­State­University­Walter­P.­Reuther­Library;­The­Asahi­Shinbun;­and­The­Mainichi­Shinbun.­ My­effusive­thanks­as­well­to­my­editors,­Reynolds­Smith,­Ken­Wissoker,­and­Jessica­Ryan;­the­Duke­University­Press­staff;­and­the­anonymous­first­reviewer­of­the­book.­ This­work­would­not­have­been­possible­without­the­support­of­the­Japan­Foundation,­ the­ Japan­ Arts­ Foundation,­ the­ Paul­ I.­ and­ Hisako­ Terasaki­Center­for­Japanese­Studies­at­ucla,­the­ucla­Department­of­History,­and­the­ucla­Social­Sciences­Division.­ My­father,­Arthur­Marotti­(of­Wayne­State­University­and­the­grammar­police),­ has­ been­ a­ critic­ and­ confidant­ throughout­ the­ long­ process.­ My­mother,­Alice­Marotti,­contributed­her­eagle­eye­(from­birding)­to­the­final­proofreading.­ Most­ important,­ I’d­ like­ to­ thank­my­ lovely­ perpetual­ editor,­partner,­and­teammate,­Judy,­who­has­read­more­versions­of­this­work­than­anyone­should­ever­have­to.­And­much­love­to­my­children,­Alex­and­Gabriel.

What is deadly about the interpretation of art, moreover,

even philosophically responsible interpretation, is that

in the process of conceptualization it is forced to ex-

press what is strange and surprising in terms of what

is already familiar and thereby to explain away the only

thing that would need explanation.

—Theodor W. adorno, “Looking Back on

Surrealism”

Everyday life, policed and mystified by every means, is

a sort of reservation for good natives who keep modern

society running without understanding it.

—Guy debord, “Perspectives for Conscious

Alterations in Everyday Life”

The basic substance of art has become the protracted

discourse in words and material, echoed back and forth

from artist to artist, work to work, art movement to art

movement, on all aspects of contemporary civilization

and of the place of creation and of the individual in it. . . .

In a word, art has become the study and practice of cul-

ture in its active day- to- day life.

—harold rosenberG, “Educating Artists”

Artists are incorrigible. If it isn’t magnificently splendid, we don’t like it. According to

my plan, that thing would have been at least five meters high; it would have had to be

tempered glass, as lovely as the Crystal Palace. Moreover, at the very moment of its

operation it would fragment into splinters. . . . But I was ill, weak, and with no status

commanding that kind of money. It was rather like an ill person’s delusion. There was

no way I could make some tempered glass thing five meters high and two meters in

length. And as far as fooling a glass shop into thinking I was rich, there was no way

that anyone was going to buy it, since I’d be requesting illegal delivery to the [Imperial]

plaza. I was racking my brains over this. . . . There was nothing I could do, alas, so the

next day, the night on the eve of emperor’s birthday, I sat down in a daze at the moat by

Nijūbashi. Mercury lights dimly lit the fog. Right- wing students roved about, looking to

be the first arrivals for the celebratory palace visit. I was utterly exhausted. Aimlessly

casting my eyes over the students, I noticed that in the darkness, their outfits stood

out like black mourning garments.

IntroduCtIon

int

ro

Du

ct

ion

2 The arTisT, criTic, and ediTor iMaizuMi yoshihiko Thus­recorded­his­dejected­visit­to­the­Imperial­Palace­on­the­night­of­April­28,­1961,­mourning­his­inability­to­install­a­giant­glass­guillotine­in­the­adjacent­Outer­Garden­(Kōkyo-­gaien).­His­dream­reenvisioned­the­classic­anarchist­direct­action­of­regicide­in­the­form­of­a­fantastic­artwork­adequate­to­the­epochal­task­of­executing­the­now­symbolic­emperor—a­symbolic­execution,­in­fact,­that­might­sever­the­supracorporeal­connections­of­the­emperor­sys-tem­after­the­Second­World­War.1­ Less­ than­two­years­ later,­ the­artist­Akasegawa­Genpei­would­embark­upon­a­more­effective­attack­on­symbolic­authority,­with­his­monochrome,­single-­sided­photomechanical­reproductions­of­the­b-­series­1,000-­yen­note.­The­work­would­arise­amid­enthusiastic­discussions­of­the­possibility­of­di-rect­action­through­art—the­possibility­that­practices­emerging­from­art­might­contribute­to­or­achieve­revolutionary­results.­Discovered­in­a­police­surveillance­of­a­Waseda­University­student­group,­the­League­of­Criminals,­Akasegawa’s­works­would­land­him­in­Tokyo­District­Courtroom­701­in­1966,­a­venue­for­prosecutions­of­corrupt­prime­ministers,­Red­Army­members,­and­the­like.­He­was­prosecuted­under­an­1895­statute­against­“currency­imi-tation”­(mozō),­and­his­conviction­in­1967­relied­on­obscenity-­related­case­law­allowing­the­state­to­freely­criminalize­expression.­Appeals­to­the­High­and­Supreme­Courts­affirmed­the­lower­court’s­ruling­and­the­state’s­duty­to­interpret—and­correct—“commonly­held­social­ideas,”­shakai tsūnen,­in­the­interest­of­social­hygiene.­ The­gap­between­artists’­investigations,­and­dreams­of­revolution,­and­the­state’s­policing­of­art­and­thought,­reveals­the­politics­of­culture­as­con-frontation.­Such­conflicts­provide­the­opportunity­to­understand­commonly­separated­phenomena,­institutions,­and­experiences­at­a­different­level­of­analysis,­viewing­them­through­their­complex­interrelations­as­revealed­in­the­events,­without­reducing­them­to­this­dimension­alone­or­to­anticipa-tions­of­events­to­come.­In­this­I­follow­Kristin­Ross’s­observation­that­to­re-inscribe­the­activism­of­the­1960s­into­conventional­sociological­categories­is­to­elide­the­very­politics­of­that­activism,­which­specifically­targeted­the­maintenance­of­those­separations.2­ This­book­is­an­investigation­of­the­politics­of­culture­and­the­everyday­in­postwar­Japan,­viewed­through­an­analysis­centered­on­transformations­in­avant-­garde­artistic­production­and­performance.­Around­1960,­revolu-tionary­forms­of­activism­and­critique­emerged­to­challenge­official­forms­of­politics­and­daily­life.­In­Japan,­despite­massive­strikes­and­widespread­

int

ro

Du

ct

ion

3

protest,­the­ruling­party­used­a­Diet­majority­and­riot­police­to­renew­the­U.S.-­Japan­Security­Treaty.­After­this­display­of­force,­the­ruling­party­sought­a­new­legitimacy­and­a­means­to­assuage­and­co-­opt­the­defeated­opposition­by­promoting­a­depoliticized­everyday­world­of­high­growth­and­consump-tion­and­a­dehistoricized­national­image­in­preparation­for­the­Tokyo­Olym-pics­in­1964.­ Among­those­activists­who­emerged­to­contest­this­new­politics,­a­diverse­group­of­young­artists­worked­to­repoliticize­daily­ life­ through­ interven-tionist­art­practices.­Their­critical­focus­and­organizational­strategies­antici-pated­many­of­the­more­commonly­known­practices­of­activists­in­the­late­1960s,­both­in­Japan­and­around­the­globe.­At­the­same­time,­their­practices­appear­to­have­arisen­out­of­a­particular­local,­playful­art­practice­that­en-gaged­with­the­takeoff­point­for­Japan’s­high-­growth­economics­at­the­level­of­daily­life.­I­examine­the­advent­of­this­art-­based­activism­in­Japan­in­the­late­1950s­and­early­1960s­in­its­complex­relation­to­an­internationalized­art­world,­mass­culture,­domestic­protest­movements,­and­evolving­forms­of­state­practice­and­surveillance.­I­then­reflect­upon­the­significance­of­this­history­for­understanding­the­1960s­as­a­global­moment­and­the­particular­role­of­art­and­performance­in­these­transformations.­ In­this­book­I­provide­a­broadly­historicized­reading­of­these­artistic­prac-tices­and­the­processes­within­which­they­are­bound.­Examining­the­path­to­ these­ moments­ of­ conflict­ reveals­ a­ wider­ politics­ of­ culture­ in­ Japan­after­ the­ Second­ World­ War,­ embedded­ in­ a­ larger­ set­ of­ social­ practices­and­political­confrontations.­Such­complexities­were­recognized­by­the­par-ticipants­in­the­events,­who—in­the­paradigmatic­activist­experience­dur-ing­the­global­moment­of­the­1960s—found­their­daily­lives­bound­up­with­issues­of­political­protest­and­violence,­law­and­the­Constitution,­state­au-thority­and­legitimacy,­the­cold­war,­American­hegemony,­neoimperialism,­and­Fordist­capitalism.­Much­like­Henri­Lefebvre­and­the­Situationists,­who­identified­an­ongoing­“colonization­of­daily­life,”­artists­in­Japan­discovered­hidden­forms­of­domination­in­the­everyday­world­and­imagined­ways­in­which­their­own­practices­might­reveal,­or­even­transform,­such­systems­at­their­point­of­articulation­in­people’s­daily­existence.3­Also­like­the­Situa-tionists,­ artists­ in­Japan­were­among­ the­earliest­ to­ identify­ this­ central­arena­for­criticism­and­struggle­in­the­1960s.4­ Such­activism­arose­in­its­particular­form­and­time­from­a­remarkable­confluence­of­circumstances,­hopes,­and­playful­experimentation­vividly­en-acted­in­a­yearly,­unjuried­art­exhibition­in­Tokyo,­the­Yomiuri Indépendant.­Described­by­a­participant­as­a­“crucible”­for­artistic­activity­of­a­“white­hot­

int

ro

Du

ct

ion

4

intensity,”­the­exhibition­became­the­center­ for­a­freely­experimental­art­that­increasingly­focused­on­the­signs­and­fragments­of­daily­existence­as­it­transformed­in­the­late­1950s­and­early­1960s,­while­simultaneously­expand-ing­and­exploring­the­potential­of­art­itself.5­A­predilection­for­art­incorpo-rating­junk­or­transforming­junk­into­increasingly­enigmatic­objets­drew­art-ists’­attention­to­the­daily­world—through­its­discards—as­a­vast­network­of­activity,­destruction,­and­proliferation.­While­this­opened­an­immense­and­little-­explored­arena­for­further­investigation,­play,­and­ultimately­critique,­its­attractiveness­paralleled­the­contemporaneous,­weighty­investments­by­the­state­in­promoting­a­depoliticized­everyday­world­as­the­grounding­for­political­legitimacy­and­as­an­inoculation­against­dissent.­The­stage­was­set­for­conflict­between­an­insurgent­cultural­production­and­the­defenders­of­an­official,­quiescent­everyday.­ The­confrontations­within­which­the­everyday­was­embedded,­however,­simultaneously­hearkened­back­to­an­earlier­moment­of­conflict­and­politi-cal­disidentification­during­the­early­years­of­the­Allied­(and­predominantly­American)­Occupation­of­Japan,­one­that­conditioned­the­later­context­and­yielded,­as­one­of­its­fraught­products,­the­Yomiuri Indépendant­exhibition.­A­surge­of­labor­activism­and­peaceful­political­protest­on­the­verge­of­demo-cratically­transforming­the­political­landscape­was­curtailed­by­Occupation­authorities,­preserving­an­old­guard­and­permitting­a­reassertion­of­familiar­forms­of­power­and­authority.­Detailing­these­connections,­I­consider­both­moments­as­contestations­over­the­very­apportionments­of­speech­and­au-thority,­the­“order­of­the­visible­and­sayable”­that­Jacques­Rancière­terms­“the­police.”­This­wider­perspective­provides­the­context­for­examining­the­politics­of­culture­as­a­venue­for­contestation­between­this­police­and­a­poli-tics­which,­in­Rancière’s­terminology,­seeks­to­change­these­apportionments­and­“make­heard­a­discourse­where­once­there­was­only­place­for­noise.”6­It­also­connects­the­politics­of­the­1960s­to­an­earlier­moment­of­nascent­cold­war­politics­in­which­the­terrain­of­political­contestation­within­Japan­and­East­Asia­resolved­in­the­form­of­the­postwar­Japanese­state­and­its­linkage­to­an­American­strategic­posture­yielding­ two­ large­Asian­wars.­ Immedi-ate­strategic­needs­trumped­professed­political­goals­and­gave­shape­to­the­peculiarly­attenuated­cold­war­definition­of­democracy­and­ its­acceptable­forms.­Ultimately­both­moments—the­Occupation­and­the­1960s—are­con-nected­by­a­demand­for­equality­and­real,­instead­of­ersatz,­popular­sover-eignty.­ Given­that­this­political­contestation­addressed­a­present­marked­by­mul-tiple­engagements­with­such­historical­legacies­and­conflicts,­I­have­struc-

int

ro

Du

ct

ion

5

tured­this­book­to­bring­out­the­many­levels­operant­in­this­historical­con-juncture.­I­have­thus­foregone­a­more­conventional­chronological­narrative­in­favor­of­a­thematic­exposition,­in­which­I­make­occasional­horizontal­for-ays­to­the­broader­political­field­and­consider­earlier­historical­moments­at­length­to­reveal­the­potent­combination­of­conflicting­legacies­and­interests­within­which­these­historical­actors­moved­and­the­full­range­of­heterologi-cal­possibilities­with­which­they­engaged.­This­approach,­I­contend,­better­reflects­the­actuality­of­this­historical­experience­than­that­presented­by­the­over-­tidy­separations­ inherent­ in­simple­ linear­narration,­since­historical­actors­themselves­experience­the­past­as­“a­dimension­of­the­present.”7­ This­ book­ is­ divided­ into­ three­ parts,­ each­ unified­ within­ a­ particular­analytical­focus.­The­three­chapters­of­part­I,­“Art­against­the­Police:­Aka-segawa­Genpei’s­1,000-­Yen­Prints,­the­State,­and­the­Borders­of­the­Every-day,”­explore­the­prosecution­of­the­artist­Akasegawa­for­his­single-­sided,­monochrome­prints­of­the­1,000-­yen­note.­In­chapter­1,­“The­Vision­of­the­Police,”­I­illuminate­the­prosecution’s­grounding­in­both­a­late­nineteenth-­century­ordinance­against­the­“imitation­of­currency”­and­case­law­on­ob-scenity­that­authorized­“clinical”­state­interventions­irrespective­of­consti-tutional­guarantees­of­freedom­of­speech­(Article­21).­Both­were­grounded­in­a­revised­notion­of­extralegal,­ imperial­state­authority.­The­negotiated­origins­of­such­authority­are­the­subject­of­chapter­2,­“The­Occupation,­the­New­Emperor­System,­and­the­Figure­of­Japan,”­which­examines­the­cen-trality­of­the­imperial­figure­within­struggles­during­the­Occupation­over­constitutional­law,­state­power,­and­Realpolitik,­shedding­new­light­on­the­turning­point­in­the­politics­of­protest­and­democracy­in­mid-­1946.­Chap-ter­3,­“The­Process­of­Art,”­details­the­specifics­of­Akasegawa’s­confrontation­with­the­state:­the­confiscations­inflicted­upon­his­critical­art­by­the­judicial­process­and­his­own­indirect­route­to­investigating­currency­as­an­outpost­for­hidden­forms­of­domination.­An­inquiry­into­printed­money­as­a­strange­object,­set­against­ideas­of­artistic­originality­and­mechanical­reproduction,­soon­expanded­into­a­criticism­that­identified­currency­with­unconscious­domination­underwritten­by­state­authority­and­based­on­the­imposed­iden-tification­of­state-­printed­currency­as­“real.”­ The­two­chapters­of­part­II,­“Artistic­Practice­Finds­Its­Object:­The­Avant-­Garde­and­the­Yomiuri Indépendant,”­trace­the­crucible­for­Akasegawa’s­and­others’­critical­art­in­the­yearly­exhibition.­Chapter­4,­“The­Yomiuri Indépen-dant:­ Making­ and­ Displacing­ History,”­ locates­ the­ exhibition­ within­ two­critical­moments­for­the­politics­of­culture­and­protest­in­postwar­Japan.­First­was­its­genesis­in­Occupied­Japan­as­the­product­of­a­key­labor­struggle­

int

ro

Du

ct

ion

6

within­a­newspaper­corporation,­tied­into­a­general­pattern­of­cultural­pro-motion­for­distraction­and­historical­amnesia.­Second,­the­exhibition’s­hey-day­in­the­late­1950s­and­early­1960s­coincided­with­what­I­term­the­“Monty­Hall­moment”­of­postwar­Japanese­politics,­when­thwarted­demands­for­democratic­ participation­ were­ traded­ away­ for­ fabulous­ prizes—the­ mo-ment­when­the­state­took­advantage­of­the­economic­expansion­under­way­to­position­itself­as­the­beneficent­guarantor­of­welfare­and­economic­pros-perity.­While­mainstream­protest­was­effectively­disrupted­by­these­tactics,­a­group­of­artists­associated­with­the­Yomiuri Indépendant­developed­an­ex-plosive­art­of­objets,­installations,­and­performance—the­subject­of­chap-ter­5,­“The­Yomiuri Anpan.”­Brought­together­by­the­exhibition,­artists­en-gaged­in­an­anarchic,­playfully­competitive­art­of­provocation­and­formal­experimentation.­They­displayed­a­wide­range­of­perspectives,­concerns,­and­proclivities­but­nonetheless­developed­a­shared­formal­vocabulary­that­in-creasingly­cast­a­critical­ light­upon­the­everyday­world.­This­focus­on­the­everyday­world,­as­well­as­a­developing­consideration­of­the­relation­of­art­and­politics­and­the­possibilities­for­action,­brought­them­into­confrontation­with­museum­officials,­their­sponsor,­and—for­some—the­state.­ The­three­chapters­of­part­III,­“Theorizing­Art­and­Revolution,”­shift­the­analysis­to­the­development­of­an­overtly­political­practice­of­artistic­direct­action­among­a­small­group­of­artists,­through­the­artists’­own­theorizations­of­their­practices­during­several­key­moments.­Chapter­6,­“Beyond­the­Guil-lotine:­Speaking­of­Art / Art­Speaking,”­details­a­moment­in­late­1962­to­early­1963­when­artists­experimented­with­public­agitation­on­trains­and­debated­a­failed­plan­for­erecting­a­giant­guillotine­in­the­Imperial­Plaza.­Reacting­to­the­startling­disappearance­of­mass­activism­after­the­Anpo­demonstra-tions­in­1960,­the­artists­considered­the­prospects­for­artistic­agitation­and­revolution­and­attempted­to­formulate­a­conceptual­discourse­adequate­to­reorient­their­transforming­practices­toward­a­form­of­direct­action.­Chap-ter­7,­“Naming­the­Real,”­examines­Akasegawa’s­reply­to­his­first­police­in-terrogations­and­a­distorting­newspaper­article­in­his­“Theses­on­‘Capitalist­Realism’”­of­February­1964.­Declaring­his­own­commitment­to­the­scientific­observation­of­ the­everyday­world,­Akasegawa­articulated­ a­ complex­cri-tique­of­the­pseudo-­reality­of­money,­identifying­it­as­an­agent­of­hidden­forms­of­domination­supported­by­state­authority­and­by­the­policing­of­commonsense­understandings­of­crime,­of­art,­and­of­currency’s­reality.­The­chapter­then­identifies­the­origins­of­many­of­these­insights­in­the­practices­of­Akasegawa­and­his­compatriots­during­the­prior­year,­including­their­for-mation­of­the­ambiguously­conspiratorial­art­group,­Hi-­Red­Center.­Chap-

int

ro

Du

ct

ion

7

ter­8,­“The­Moment­of­the­Avant-­Garde,”­details­Akasegawa’s­response­to­his­indictment­on­November­1,­1965:­rejecting­reductive­characterizations­of­his­act­as­either­conventional­art­or­crime,­he­affirmed­the­potential­of­a­radi-cal­art­to­create­“moments”­disclosing­the­“dictatorial­system­of­‘everyday-ness,’ ”­loosening­the­grasp­of­a­naturalized­capitalist­world­of­“real­things,”­and­allowing­its­transformation­to­become­conceivable.­ While­readers­are­likely­(and­welcome)­to­make­use­of­separate­sections­of­the­book,­the­order­and­structure­are­additive,­each­part­contributing­to­build­a­ fuller­understanding­of­ this­history.­Part­ I’s­ introduction­ to­Aka-segawa’s­ confrontation­ with­ the­ policing­ operation­ of­ the­ postwar­ state­unfolds­the­historic­background­to­this­Kafkaesque­court­encounter­in­an­examination­ of­ the­ state’s­ constitutional­ self-­authorization­ of­ extralegal­intervention­into­the­everyday­world.­The­retention­of­the­“symbolic­em-peror”­legitimized­and­enabled­such­actions­(by­a­set­of­political­actors­and­a­previously­imperial­bureaucracy­surprisingly­little­altered­by­defeat­and­occupation)­by­maintaining­the­image­of­the­familial,­paternalistic­state,­in­effect­conflating­the­Meiji­and­postwar­Constitutions.­The­stakes­for­Akase-gawa’s­intervention­and­the­state’s­suppressive­efforts­are­revealed­to­hinge­upon­the­mundane,­policed­borders­of­the­conventional­categories­and­prac-tices­of­the­everyday­world—an­essential­background­for­understanding­the­artist­and­state­actions­considered­in­the­rest­of­the­book.­ Part­ II­ focuses­ on­ the­ Yomiuri Indépendant­ exhibitions,­ which­ concen-trated­and­nurtured­this­political­art,­and­on­the­many­overlapping­routes­to­engagement­in­its­distinctive­forms­of­play.­Here­too­the­narrative­re-turns­to­an­earlier­moment,­locating­the­origins­of­the­exhibition­within­an­Occupation-­era­politics­of­culture­in­which­war­and­postdefeat­labor­sup-pressions­were­concealed­by­art­sponsorship.­This­history­prefigures­and­was­directly­ at­ issue­ in­ the­ Anpo­ confrontations­ of­ 1960­ and­ the­ subsequent­state­tactic­of­using­the­promise­of­an­improving­daily­life­for­both­depoliti-cization­and­political­legitimacy.­Against­this­background,­part­II­charts­the­unforeseen­emergence­of­a­critical­artistic­practice­focused­on­this­every-day­world,­ locating­Akasegawa’s­art­within­ this­broader­productivity­and­setting­the­stage­for­part­III’s­examination­of­these­artists’­serial­attempts­to­theorize­forms­of­direct­action­out­of­their­evolving­practice.­Part­III’s­detailed­examination­of­the­artists’­own­words­(particularly­those­of­Aka-segawa­ in­the­face­of­ increasing­state­ intervention)­relies­upon­the­prior­explications­of­ state­practice­and­political­ investments­ in­ the­policing­of­the­everyday­world,­while­giving­specificity­to­these­distinctive,­remarkable­voices­of­­dissent.

int

ro

Du

ct

ion

8

­ The­critical­art­activism­that­is­the­subject­of­my­study­charted­and­chal-lenged­the­contemporary­transformations­of­the­everyday­world­as­an­arena­of­unexamined­effects­and­underexplored­political­investments.­By­tracing­the­course­of­this­art­activism,­my­work­analyzes­the­sources,­terms,­and­objects­of­these­critical­practices­in­their­grasp­of­this­world,­revealing­their­contestation­of­an­everyday­life­that­displaced­and­undergirded­the­renewal­of­state­power.­Following­the­seemingly­peripheral­actions­of­this­group­of­artists­thus­demonstrates­the­power­of­this­kind­of­historical­analysis­not­only­to­illuminate­the­central­political­issues­and­struggles­of­postwar­Japan­but­also­to­bring­out­unfamiliar­dimensions­and­interrelations­within­this­history,­demonstrating­the­concrete­details­of­such­relations­at­the­level­of­daily­experience­and­consciousness.­ Artists­ dreaming­ of­ revolution,­ the­ state­ prosecuting­ art­ and­ policing­thought:­these­are­all­moments­in­which­the­politics­of­culture­emerges­as­confrontation.

Introduction

­ 1­ The­glass­guillotine­was­not­ the­only­option­he­considered;­ he­also­ imagined­some­sort­of­chewing­machine­that­would­potentially­gnash­the­emperor­with­teeth­composed­of­sets­of­the­classic­pair­of­worker’s­implements,­the­pickaxe­and­shovel.

­ 2­ Ross,­May ’68 and Its Afterlives.­ 3­ This­was­part­and­parcel­of­identifying­“everyday­life”­itself­as­an­analytical­and­

critical­category,­that­(in­the­words­of­Guy­Debord)­“everyday­life­is­right­here”­(“Perspectives­for­Conscious­Alterations­in­Everyday­Life”).­Rob­Shields­has­as-sociated­Lefebvre’s­concept­of­le quotidien,­“the­everyday,”­with­that­of­the­Sur-realists.­Shield­distinguishes­Lefebvre’s­concept’s­specific,­critical­reference­to­an­alienated­and­banal­life—that­is­nonetheless­the­site­potentially­for­authen-tic­engagement—from­general­references­to­“daily­life”­and­from­critical­but­al-legedly­nondialectical­conceptions­of­the­latter­by­Debord­(Shields,­Lefebvre, Love and Struggle,­66–80).­I­use­the­general­terms­throughout­this­study,­however,­to­render­equivalent­Japanese­terms­and­explore­the­development­of­their­own­evolving,­critical­content­in­specific­circumstances,­discussions,­and­writings.

notes

no

te

s­to

­ch

aP

te

r­1

320

­ 4­ My­concept­of­the­1960s­as­a­global­moment­includes­events­overlapping­the­de-cade’s­numerical­boundaries—that­is,­a­“long­decade­of­the­sixties.”

­ 5­ Akasegawa,­Ima ya akushon aru nomi!,­3.­ 6­ Rancière,­Disagreement,­29–30.­ 7­ Fasolt,­The Limits of History,­16.­On­the­constituent­“heresy”­at­stake­in­demo-

cratic­subjectivation­and­historical­narration,­see­Rancière,­The Names of History,­88–103.­See­also­Osborne,­The Politics of Time,­on­modernity­itself­as­a­“form­of­historical­consciousness,­an­abstract­temporal­structure­.­.­ .­totalizing­history­from­the­standpoint­of­an­ever-­vanishing,­ever-­present­present”­(23).

1. The Vision of the Police

­ 1­ Article­60­of­the­Criminal­Code­provides­that­two­or­more­persons­acting­in­con-cert­in­the­commission­of­a­crime­are­all­to­be­treated­as­perpetrators­of­the­prin-cipal­offense.

­ 2­ “Kisojō,”­2–3.­ 3­ Takeuchi,­Matsuo,­and­Hiroshi,­Shin hōritsugaku jiten­1381;­see­also­Nihon­Dai-

jiten­Kankōkai,­Nihon Kokugo Daijiten,­290.­ 4­ The­gizō­code­provisions­(Title­16,­Articles­148,­150,­152,­153)­all­specifically­re-

quire­that­the­counterfeiting­be­done­for­the­purpose­of­using­the­counterfeits­as­money.­Wagatsuma­and­Toshiyoshi,­Roppō zensho,­1412.

­ 5­ Umemori,­“Modernization­through­Colonial­Mediations,”­demonstrates­that­in­the­case­of­police,­prisons,­and­criminal­statutes,­many­of­ these­mechanisms­were­adopted­from­European­colonial­practices­(such­as­those­in­Hong­Kong)­and­thus­amounted­to­willful­“internal­colonization”­by­the­Meiji­oligarchs.

­ 6­ “The­fundamental­principle­of­the­1889­Constitution­was­the­idea­of­imperial­sovereignty,­as­stated­in­Article­4:­‘The­emperor­is­the­head­of­the­Empire,­com-bining­in­himself­the­rights­of­sovereignty.’­In­accordance­with­this­provision,­the­Constitution­dealt­with­the­executive,­legislative,­and­judicial­branches­of­government­ as­ if­ they­ were­ three­ aspects­ of­ the­ unitary­ imperial­ sovereign­power”­(Maki,­Court and Constitution in Japan,­xvi–xvii).

­ 7­ In­Akasegawa’s­language,­“spies”­and­“ex-­spies”­(see­chapter­3).­ 8­ Ross,­May ’68 and Its Afterlives,­2;­Rancière,­Disagreement.­ 9­ See­Shihō tōkei nenpō,­1967,­250–51;­Shihō tōkei nenpō,­1968,­362–63.­ 10­ Sugimoto,­“Bōtō­chinjutsu,”­156.­Other­future­members­of­Hi-­Red­Center­and­

associates­of­Akasegawa­were­connected­to­this­Waseda­University­group,­whose­principals­included­Hiraoka­Masaaki­and­Miyahara­Yasuharu.­The­name­perhaps­references­the­secret­society­the­League­of­Outlaws,­a­progenitor­of­the­League­of­the­Just,­and­the­Communist­League,­for­whom­Marx­drafted­the­Communist Manifesto.­See­Wheen,­Karl Marx,­98–99,­108–13.

­ 11­ Miyahara,­Akai fūsen arui wa mesu ōkami no yoru,­50.­If­police­had­not­already­been­aware­of­the­work­for­other­reasons,­the­League’s­book­likely­would­have­attracted­police­interest­for­its­inclusion­of­a­number­of­conventionally­prohib-

william marotti­is­associate­professor­of­history­at­the­University­of­California,­Los­Angeles.

Library­of­Congress­Cataloging-in-Publication­DataMarotti,­William­A.­(William­Arthur)Money,­trains,­and­guillotines­:­art­and­revolution­in­­1960s­Japan­/­William­Marotti.p.­cm.­—­(Asia-Pacific)Includes­bibliographical­references­and­index.isbn­978-0-8223-4965-5­(cloth­:­alk.­paper)isbn­978-0-8223-4980-8­(pbk.­:­alk.­paper)1.­Arts,­Japanese—20th­century. 2.­Arts—Political­­aspects—Japan—History—20th­century. 3.­Arts­and­­society—Japan—History—20th­century. 4.­Avant-garde­­(Aesthetics)—Japan—History—20th­century. 5.­Politics­­and­culture—Japan. I.­Title. II.­Series:­Asia-Pacific.nx584.a1m37­2013709.52′09046—dc23  2012033715