" the > land is passed on to a single heir, typically the oldest son, and > other children must either depend on the heir's generosity or, more > commonly, go off and fend for themselves, the Japanese case. ... (3) feeds an out-of-sight, out-of-mind attitude that > creates the apparent paradox of enduring households coupled with > relatively thin and shallow kinship relations." This is exactly what the movie put forth. It's curious that the Japanese are touted for their material progress when on a human level they are very unhappy, isolated people. > [Original Message] > From: John McCreery <john.mccreery@xxxxxxxxx> > To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: 4/18/2006 11:14:59 PM > Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Growing Old the Hard Way: China, Russia, India > > On 4/19/06, Andy Amago <aamago@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > I wonder how much of family taking care of the elderly is mythology. I saw > > Tokyo Story on Saturday, 1953 movie, Japanese. It was one of those nothing > > happens movies but it was quite the study in Japanese family life. I was > > surprised. In 1953, and I suspect it's worse now, there was a big > > disconnect between generations and not much bonding within families. The > > parents in the movie lived long distances away from their grown children, > > and did not know their grandchildren. The parents go to visit their grown > > children, and they are treated politely, lots of bowing, but clearly they > > are a burden. > > Finally, a topic on which I can offer some useful information! Be > warned that what I'm about to say is far from definitive. It is hard, > infact, to imagine how anyone's opinion could be definitive in a world > as complex and as rapidly changing as the one we we inhabit. Still, > while doing a Ph.D. in social anthropology I learned a lot about this > topic and have kept up sporadically ever since. > > First, a global perspective: For most of human history, the majority > of human beings have been peasants or the lords, masters or priests to > whom they paid taxes. For both groups obtaining, holding and passing > on land has been family priority No. 1. What we are likely to think of > as "traditional family values" reflects this situation, in which the > basic social contract between parents and children is, on the one > hand, we raise you and give you the property you need to survive and > carry on the family line; on the other, the children's position, we > owe you and promise to take care of you in your old age. > > From this perspective, the critical consequence of modernization has > been the shift for the bulk of urban populations to paid > employment--jobs--instead of real estate as the primary source of > livelihood. Add that in most cases the jobs in question cannot be > handed down from parents to children, and the social contract > described above breaks down. Parents can raise and educate their > children; but adult kids are actively encouraged to move out, to find > their own jobs, to become independent. Culture lags; we continue to > say that children should love and care for their parents, but the > economics of modern life and the values of consumer driven economies > that focus on personal gratification no longer support these values. > > That said, to understand how this generic process works out in > particular times and places, it helps to dig into the details of the > traditional family values in question. A number of interesting > variations predictably reflect the ways in which family property was > or was not divided among the children under the old > peasant-agriculture-based economic regime. Consider, for example, > three possibilities: (1) land is divided equally among sons and > daughters, a practice common in Southeast Asia; (2) land is divided > equally among sons--daughters must marry out, with their share, if > any, becoming a dowry, the traditional pattern in China; and (3) the > land is passed on to a single heir, typically the oldest son, and > other children must either depend on the heir's generosity or, more > commonly, go off and fend for themselves, the Japanese case. (1) is > associated with bilateral kinship (treating relatives on both sides > equally) and a relatively strong position for women. (2) results in > recurring fragmentation of family assets but sustains strong networks > of largely patrilineal, lineage and clan relationships like those for > which overseas Chinese business families are famous. As daughters and > brides, women are in a weak position. As mothers and grandmothers they > can become formidable through the control they exert over sons and > grandsons. (3) feeds an out-of-sight, out-of-mind attitude that > creates the apparent paradox of enduring households coupled with > relatively thin and shallow kinship relations. > > Adding to the complexity is, of course, the fact that material wealth, > in real estate or other forms, is a magnet that holds families > together. Conversely poverty eliminates the magnet, driving family > distintegration. > > And one further caution: In all of these societies, but especially so > in China, the folklore that surrounds traditional family values is > filled with tales of ancestors who, while poor, worked hard, overcame > their poverty, and created the estates that make maintaining kinship > ties worthwhile. The same folklore is also filled with tales of > wasters, typically sons, who grow up wealthy and soft, turn to sex, > drugs and other enjoyments, and destroy what their ancestors built. > > Cheers, > > John > > -- > John McCreery > The Word Works, Ltd. > 55-13-202 Miyagaya, Nishi-ku > Yokohama 220-0006, JAPAN > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, > digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html