Shame of the Chihuahua (and more cyberstalker news)

From this morning's newspaper. See kitaryunosuke's response here. Photograph courtesy of Aiful.

How much is that chihuahua in the window? The one with the 29% sting?

TOKYO NOTEBOOK  by Richard Lloyd Parry

Neurotically pampered dogs are a daily sight in Tokyo these days, and of all the breeds none is more popular, or more horrid, than the Chihuahua. They are bad enough in their natural state, mincing along behind their owners with that infuriating jiggly walk. Dress them up, as many Tokyo pet lovers do, in dog coats, dog hats and dog sunglasses and they become even more loathsome. So it is satisfying to report the shame that has been heaped upon the Chihuahua, which has gone from being an icon of simpering cuteness to a symbol of thuggishness and usury.

The story begins with a series of commercials which became one of the most popular in Japan’s television history. In episodic, Nescafe Gold Blend-style, they tell the story of a middle-aged man whose life is transformed by his love for a white Chihuahua. The creature is named Qoo-chan, after “Kuu”, the Japanese word for the noise which Chihuahuas make. In the course of the ads, he purchases the hound, outfits him in a morning suit, and adopts his mate and litter of pups. All of these expenses are made possible by the company behind the ads, a “consumer loans” firm called Aiful.

Qoo-chan triggered a wave of Chihuahua-buying and a spike in business for Aiful who plastered their mascot on posters and credit cards. Until last month, when it became clear that the company is less of a Chihuahua, than a growling, slavering Rottweiler.

Having borrowed money at staggeringly high interest rates, customers who fell behind in their repayments were finding themselves harassed over the phone by debt collectors. How much is that doggy in the window, the famous old song goes. In the case of a Chihuahua bought with an Aiful loan, the answer turns out to be about 750 quid, at up to 29.2 per cent interest a year.

“Consumer loans provider”, it became clear, is dangerously close to being a euphemism for loan shark. The publicity has reflected horribly on Aiful, of course, but it has had an unexpected side effect – the bottom has fallen out of the Chihuahua market.

The price of a Qoo-chan has dropped by 100 pounds a pooch. Chihuahua owners report being treated with coldness and suspicion when they walk their pets. A few years ago, the fad dog was the Siberian husky which lost its novelty value after a few months. A Japanese friend of mine remembers visiting her local dog pound, where abandoned huskies sat miserably in cages awaiting their visit to the extermination chamber.

Is this the fate that awaits Qoo-chan and his breed in the aftermath of Chihuahuagate? I can almost hear the cries of the hideous pariah Chihuahuas, scavenging Tokyo in packs in the rags of their designer outfits: Kuu! Kuu! Kuu!

                              *                              *                              *

I may need the services of a guard Chihuahua myself after the impressive reaction to my column last week about Ryunosuke Kita, a Japanese blogger who has been calling for my public execution. Mr Kita, you recall, painstakingly translates articles from British newspapers into Japanese, accompanied by character analysis of their authors. In my case, these include the observation that I am “a rotten devil foreign reporter”, a “low-class foreigner”, as well as being “the private parts of The Times”.

Mr Kita quickly posted my article about him online and within hours, I was the object of what Japanese internet users refer to as a “matsuri”. The word means a Shinto festival, a holiday occasion when the local community turns out to dance and carouse. In an internet matsuri, a community of netizens bombard a website – in this case, my Times Online weblog - with anonymous expressions of vituperation.

Some were in extremely salty Japanese, but many contributors made admirable efforts to vent their fury towards me in English, with mixed results. “Are not you of a bite of the journalist to general person's Brogar?” asked one disgruntled reader, a question which frankly floored me. “Though the British heard it is humorous in the gentleman,” said another, “when the Japanese sees your sentences, everyone shocks.”

Others sent through little cartoons, ingeniously constructed out of punctuation marks, depicting animals blowing raspberries at me. One netizen signed off a list of criticisms with the spine-chilling Japanese oath, “Pu pu pu pu!” But the most terrible indictment of all came from a man who identified himself as a lifelong fan of British music of the 1960s. So incensed was he by my reporting that he has vowed never to listen to the Beatles or the Rolling Stones again.

Comments

[Chihuahua]

_..　　　　　　　　　 　 　 　 ,,.-'ヽ
ヽ "ﾞｰ-､、　　 　　　　 　／ :　:!
　i ､ :.　ヽヽ_,,.....､,,,....._;/ ,;' 　 ;,.!
　 i.,　 ..;;;ヽ　　　　　　 ヾ ,,;_ , /
　　ヾ_:::,:'　　 　　　　　 　 -,ノ
　　ヾ;. 　　,　 　 　　 　　,　､;,
　　　 ;; 　　(:::)　,　...　､, (:::);:
　　　 `;. 　 　　　　C)　　 ,; '
　　 　,;' 　　　 '.､ -‐-ノ ,;'､　　　＜ Pu pu pu pu
　　　;'　　　 　　　　　　　 ;:
　 　 ;:　　　 　　　　　　　　';;

[bugiewugie]

I think, Chihuaha's tale translates to 'according to Chihuaha News, an 'estimated' 400000000 chihuahas will be exported upriver via transitional college??? to - can't make it out-somewhere - in a similar way as our near cousins, calves, who will again start being crated off to Europe after many years(see RSPCA).
We plead you won't let us be treated like animals and turned into burgers.'

-The above's just one translation of Chihuahaese, so it might not be 100% acc: I wasn't paid by any Chihuahan Soc, nor anyone with a dogged political motive to provide this translation.

[Himajin]

Maybe you can apply for “Guiness Book of Records” certification as to the longest list of comments to follow a blog page. It’s unfortunate that a lot of them appear to be unpleasant and plain wrong-headed. As to what-started-it-all, I think your Diane Arbusque piece on Kita was fine, but I wish you focused your attention on a more serious issue of a thriving indigenous cottage industry, short of a political movement, in rewriting history (especially with regard to Japanese aggression and atrocities of the 1930’s and 40’s) and demonizing our neighbours (Koreans and Chinese). A number of “mainstream” publications are effectively house organs of this industry, and some otherwise respectable monthlies carry articles by these forgers (or spin doctors, to give them a modish name) of history. By “mainstream” I mean their ads are carried by respectable broadsheets and their books and magazines are on prominent display at major bookstores. A group of them tried, with limited success, to have boards of education accept their version of history textbooks which airbrushes anything that puts the Japanese army in a bad light (e.g. “comfort women”) and which is imbued with jingoistic ideology. It’s miles away from the seedy corners of blogsphere occupied by Kita-san and his ilk.

It’s difficult to think how there can be anything honourable or benign about the Japanese military advances of the 1930’s and 40’s or how the Chinese or Koreans can be blamed for their sufferings inflicted by the Japanese. Unfortunately Japan now has a small army of David Irvings to peddle an utter rot that it was done to liberate the Asian peoples from the yokes of Western colonialism or as self-defence and that Koreans and Chinese were so degenerate that they had it coming to them.

Although these David Irvings are hopefully not funded by the government, some senior government ministers voice their sympathies with them. So it’s not just Yasukuni Shrine, its vile ideology and Tojo et al. Our neighbours can hardly be blamed for feeling unhappy and insulted.

Himajin

[Honesty]

Ms./Mr. Himajin,

I have enjoyed your posts and am impressed with your rich vocabulary and colorful rhetoric exhibited therein.
With all due respect, however, I disagree with you at this time on some of your comments.

You suggested that there were a group of Japanese "forgers (a prime example of inflammatory wording)" at work in "rewriting" history and "demonizing" (here is another) Korean and Chinese people.

It is not as easy or plain to elucidate history as it seems or you think it is, especially when it comes to wars of the scale and duration of the W.W.II, because there are so many involved and so much at stake that make it virtually impossible to do so (e.g. protection of national interests, consideration to domestic politics and post-war foreign policy, to name a few.) "Stories" told, "facts" presented and "history" written by the winning side of a war are hardly an entire view of the true history. Personally I have a belief that it takes a few generations or more for the true history to emerge, particularly in a case like this.

In my opinion, most of what those people you call "spin doctors" have been trying to do is not so much to "rewrite" history, but to shed light on facts and interpretation thereof that have been forgotten, ignored or misunderstood by many, in quest of the true history to hand over to next generations, which I assume we the Japanese all agree on. They seem to have presented their view of the history, let us say, "Japanese aggression and atrocities of the 1930's and 40's" with supporting evidence. If you disagree with them, you can always and anytime offer a counter-argument along with evidence to back it up. I do not think that it is fair to dismiss their efforts simply by calling them "forgers" or "spin doctors." As for your "demonizing Koreans and Chinese" remark, which is quite disturbing to me, I hope that you are just overexaggerating.

You also wrote:
1. "It's difficult to think how there can be anything honourable or benign about the Japanese military advances of the 1930's and 40's..." -Even I, identifying myself a rather liberal find it astonishing to see any fellow Japanese put it the way you did.
2. "...how the Chinese or Koreans can be blamed for their sufferings inflicted by the Japanese" -Certainly, they can not be, but you made it as if we the Japanese were doing it, which is just not true.
3. "...Koreans and Chinese were so degenerate that they had it coming to them" -Again, who said such a thing?
4. "...an utter rot that it was done to liberate the Asian peoples from the yokes of Western colonialism or as self-defence" -It was certainly not an objective, but on the other hand it seems true that, as a result or a benign side-effect, it inspired, encouraged and helped in some cases the Asian (south-east and south) people to stand up, fight for their independence, and eventually win it. As regards a war as self-defense which some people maintain, I see some valid points there, too, and think that such an aspect of it should not be denied totally.

We all want the true history and want to learn from it. You will agree with me on this.
If so, why don't we keep the door open for discussions for the benefit of us and our children?

Honesty

[Himajin]

Thank you, Honesty san. I didn’t mean to do a soapbox oratory, but I guess I got carried away. I just wanted Parry san to refocus his attention from the bizarre trivialities (as in clothed pooches and Kita-san) to more serious political/social issues. I also guess that my tone was a bit too strident for many people’s tastes. Apologies to all those who were offended. Sumimasen.

I do agree about the need to have a long term view about the history. In one of his more famous quotes, the Chinese premier Zhou Enlai said “It’s too early to tell” when asked what he thought of the French Revolution. Maybe he’s right. But that surely does not mean we should suspend our judgement. Being a Popperian of a sort, I fully accept that I could be and probably am wrong on some, if not all, of the things I feel strongly about.

I’m not sure if it’s the done thing to name specific publications here, but since you ask who are making all those horrid comments, I can cite “WILL”, “SAPIO” and “Shokun!” as the three most prominent publications to carry revisionist tirade and (especially in the case of the first two) hate-mongering against our neighbours. Their ads are carried, among many others, by the Nikkei, a respectable broadsheet. Back copies of these will satisfy all but the most jaded about the ugly side of Japanese “journalism”. (I happen to subscribe to the Nikkei; that’s how I came to know them.)

Those writing for the aforementioned mags are generally called “rightwing” and “conservative”. But I think these days words like “rightwing”, “leftwing”, “liberal” and “conservative” have become so generic that they do not carry much meaning, and if they did it’s misleading. I try not to use such words myself. I would characterize the revisionist clique (“forgers” being too strong a word, as Honesty san pointed out) as frustrated revanchists. “Frustrated” because even the most fanatically deluded of them realise that it is no longer possible to re-annex Korea and subjugate other Asian peoples, which I suspect they would have liked to do. Why else would they go on about the benign Japanese rule and the supposed benefits of civilization that Japan brought to those peoples? (Speaking about the “benefits of civilization”, I wonder if it has ever occurred to those people that Japan would have been an illiterate society had it not been for its proximity to China and Korea. Think Papua New Guinea.)

I was bemused when I came across an old chestnut about Japan somehow contributing to the post-war “liberation” of Asian peoples. I think the unintended “benign side effect” as you sum up is the most one can say about this issue. But I don’t think we Japanese can be proud of it. Here are a few points to consider:

1. Japan itself was a colonial power, although a bit of Johnny-come-lately, colonizing Taiwan, Korea, parts of north-east China and bits of islands that it got from Germany as a post-war settlement after the World War One. Its anti-colonial credentials aren’t that strong, to say the least.
2. “Imperial Edict of Declaration of War” does not mention the lofty goal of ridding Asia of colonialism or even allude to it. After one strips out the archaic imperial waffle, it just says that Brits and Yanks are causing so much nuisance by providing support to the pig-headed Chinese government that Japan has no alternative but to declare war on these two nations as a self-defence measure. Maybe the Emperor did not have good spin doctors; a Japanese Mandy would have come in handy. It would not have hurt to play to the gallery by including some pieties about the evils of colonialism, although it’d be rank hypocrisy coming from a colonial power. (I must confess that it’s the first time I read the Edict in full; and I think it’s very interesting for what it says and what it does not say. I recommend it to anyone interested in these issues; the stuff is not only fascinating but also clearly out-ranks Kita-san and his ilk! By the way, it’s easy to see how this Edict can be – and probably is – the Holy Scripture for the revisionists.)
3. It is difficult to imagine the Japanese political and military establishment – ossified bureaucrats that they were – espousing a Che Guevarist idealism about helping the oppressed. I am sure that there were a number of dreamers or proto-neocons outside of the government, but they did not set government policy.
4. It’s arguably the commonest form of logical fallacy to assume that something that preceded an event caused it. Zillions of testimonials on some quack medicine attest to the people’s weakness for this kind of fallacy.
5. Let’s for the moment assume that Japan had stayed put, did none of its mischief and adhered to the Little-Japanism advocated during the pre-war years by Mr. Ishibashi, briefly a prime minister in the post-war period. Would Asian countries still be under the yokes of Western colonialism? Of course, it’s one of those “what if” questions that no serious historian would probably try to answer. I am not a serious historian and my own guess is that it might have taken a little bit longer to achieve independence, but Western colonialism was on the decline anyway from several other causes – with or without Japan, viz Suez Crisis.
6. Let’s also ask if the independence was delivered on a plate to Asian peoples, somewhat like manna from heaven. Of course not. There were struggles, mostly violent, by the peoples to achieve independence from their Western masters, Vietnam being probably the most prominent example. I believe to speak patronisingly about Japan delivering independence to those peoples is deeply offensive to the memory of those who gave their lives for the cause – apart from being wrong.
7. Let’s, for argument’s sake, assume that there was some sort of link between the wars that Japan waged and the subsequent independence of Asian peoples. I think causing or contributing to something and taking credit for it is a different matter. Assume I broke into a house to burgle and shot dead its occupant who happened to be a paedophile who was terrorizing local children. Am I a hero?

When I wrote “It’s difficult to think how there can be anything honourable or benign about the Japanese military advances of the 1930’s and 40’s”, I thought that it’d be one of my least controversial comments. Honest (no pun intended), I couldn’t think of any. But I may have missed something. For the edification of myself and others who are similarly misinformed, some examples of the “honourable or benign” bits would be most appreciated. As a Japanese, it’s good to know that there were some redeeming virtues in our military.

Lastly, as much as I enjoy these lively exchanges, and notwithstanding my handle name, I have a day job and after Golden Week I fear won’t be able to contribute much further. Once I am free and have time on my hands, I’d like to explore these issues in more detail. In the meantime, gambatte, all!

[Analyzer...]

I am wondering how many Japanese can read these English articles correctly, and also I am wondering how many Japanese actually read Mr.Parry's works related to Japanese historical issues.

Mr.Kita seems to claim many mass medias distort true stories (especially relates to Japan and Japanese history). He also seems to claim correspondents includes Mr.Parry write articles without on-the-spot coverage and only with their imaginations. But I can't ever find their any reasonable and compelling evidence for this claim yet. By contrast, his activities on his blog are exactly what he claims. He seems to mail to Times and claims what Mr.Parry writes about chihuahua, e.g. chihuahua's value and boom have declined, is wrong. As for my research, it is obvious that chihuahua boom was there and their value were exactly high. This was also reported by Japanese papers. You can also confirm chihuahua's boom by checking Japan Kennel Club, Inc site and seeing the numbers of dogs registration. Except for this, I can see other misunderstands, too. About this chihuahua claim, Mr.Kita depends on a comment posted on his blog. I wonder if he have reconfirmed the legality for that comment...

I feel his translation is basically correct, but his translated Japanese are very awful. He means to use provocative words in order to give bad impressions for foreign correspondents to Japanese subscribers. For example, he translates "them" to "こいつら" or translates "Huh, Well," to "あっそう", "(って)どうよ？" and so on. It is doubtful for me that he really has an authority to blame foreign correspondents, Chinese and Koreans.

[PRD]

I have to say that my favorite part of Mr. Kita's post was where he sneered at you for failing to point out that the Aiful president was a dastardly Korean, and then went on to talk about how much he likes the Washington Times. Wonder if he's ever heard of who runs that paper?

Fun stuff all around. Thanks for the reading matter!

[Honesty]

Mr./Ms. Himajin,

Thank you, Mr./Ms. Himajin, for your rather lengthy "soapbox oratory" this time. I guess you got carried away again. You never know how much I enjoy these "lively exchanges" of ours and learning experience therefrom. For me your posts are like a reservoir, short of a treasure chest, full of resources of the English language.

Thanks for the names of the publications. While I am more intrigued by you being so "hate-mongering" against what you call the "revisionist clique" and the reason why (perhaps you are related to our neighbors one way or another, or you want to cling onto the conventional view of the history for some reason, or you want to be or to be seen as an innocent, benevolent, humanitarian/peace-activist), I would like to know who are making all those "horrid comments" and what exactly he/she is saying in those publications. For the "edification" of myself and others who are similarly uninformed, detailed information (name of publication, issue, author, and pages, exact quotes you regard as horrid comments) would be most appreciated. I understand that you are a busy person with a day job, but remember this holds true for most of us including myself. Besides, since you have already read those horrendous articles (you may own some of those yourself), it should not take much time to locate them and forward the information to us.
I also would like to note that the fact that its ads are carried by a respectable broadsheet does not warrant the status of being a mainstream, let alone respectable, publication. Respectable broadsheets carry the ads of second-rate weekly and monthly magazines all the time. By the way if you hate so much the "revisionist clique"and the "ugly side of Japanese journalism" for that matter, I suggest you switching your subscription from Nikkei to Asahi, which I guarantee you, would serve your needs (emotional ones in particular) far better.

Thanks for abandoning the term "forger." Now you use other terms "revisionist" and "revanchist" instead. "Forger", "Spin doctor", "Revisionist", and "Revanchist" That's fine, as I care less by now about the word game you are playing here, and whatever term you use you imply certain degrees of hatred against them anyway, which is apparently groundless, as you still have failed to provide us with any rational argument (except for weak logical fallacies and what-ifs regarding the "liberation" thing) against them or even to identify their arguments. By the way, I love your account of "frustrated" revanchists, which is so amusing to me, probably to other audience here and those "frustrated revanchists" themselves, too. I, on behalf of all of the amused, give you kudos. When and if I get a chance to meet with or write a letter or an email for that matter to any of those "frustrated revanchists" (please let me know their names for that purpose), I will ask him/her if he/she wants or is even interested in "re-annexing Korea and subjugating other Asian peoples" which "you suspect they would have liked to do." I suspect that they would immediately shrug off such a question as a nonsense or might get offended or possibly get angry at me for giving him/her a ridiculous question. Would you like to bet on that, Sir/Madam?
You go on to ask "Why else would they go on about the benign Japanese rule and the supposed benefits of civilization that Japan brought to those peoples?" and I answer "I don't know. Why don't you go ask them for yourself? (instead of dwelling in your dreams and imagination)" Ranting and whining here would not do any good, would they?

Thanks for kindly enlightening us on the "origin" of our "civilization." Incidentally, I've just wondered, too, if it has ever occurred to you that Britain would have been an illiterate society had it not been for Egypt (and some other Middle Eastern countries) and its proximity to Germany (and some other northern European countries). Speaking of the glass house? I know, you just want us to act just like the arranged fiancee in the comedy "Coming to America." Prince Akeem (Eddie Murphy) of an African kingdom of Zamunda asks her "What do you like most?" and she answers "Whatever you like most, Your Highness." He asks again "What do you want to be?" and she replies "Whatever you want me to be, Your Highness." Then he, apparently bemused, tells her to raise one of her legs and bark like a dog, and the fiancee, with her leg up in the air and a funny posture, goes "bowwow! bowwow!" in a tone of voice exactly opposite to what one of those Aiful Chihuahuas would utter. I bet you would love that, but no thanks for us.

Well, it seems I just got carried away, myself too. I am going to have to stop here and go to bed now (have a business meeting tomorrow with a gentleman from one of the mothers of your civilization), but I will get back to you later for the rest. So, entschuldigen Sie mich. Sehen Sie Sie spaeter und gute nacht.

Honesty