[Japanese Perspective] The Controversial Figure Mentioned by Yoon, 'Okakura Tenshin'

During the Pacific War Era, Opinions Differ on the 'Denshin Praise Theory'
But Most Agree on the 'Distorted Historical Perception'

This week, we will share the story of Okakura Tenshin, who became controversial after being quoted by President Yoon Suk-yeol in his speech at Keio University. The debate over whether Okakura was an advocate of imperialism or not continues in Korea as well. Today, we will present his life and the academic analyses surrounding him.

Born in 1862, Okakura was an art historian during Japan's Meiji era. This period marked the full-scale modernization of Japan. Okakura lived in the port city of Yokohama and learned English from an English school established by missionaries since childhood. Because of his proficiency in English, after entering university, he worked as an assistant to Ernest Fenollosa, an American art historian of Asian art, helping to collect artworks and paving his path as an art historian. He also led the establishment of the Tokyo School of Fine Arts as a Ministry of Education official and conducted investigations into ancient art, earning recognition for practically establishing the history of Japanese art.

Around the time of the Russo-Japanese War, Okakura began publishing his aesthetics-related books in English to introduce them overseas. Among these was the book currently controversial in Korea, The Awakening of Japan. At that time, Okakura was concerned that Japan might lose its culture as Western art and culture spread through modernization. Therefore, he published several books to promote the superiority of Eastern art over Western art.

The interpretation of the ideas revealed in these books is the root of the ongoing controversy. Even in academic fields such as comparative Japanese studies, evaluations of Okakura differ depending on whether they acknowledge the connection between his statements and Japan’s imperialist policies or not.

Regardless of the evaluations, most scholars agree that Okakura’s statements contain a sense of Japanese superiority and a distorted historical perspective. The evidence lies in his writings. In the aforementioned book The Awakening of Japan, he claims, "The Korean Peninsula was probably our colony during prehistoric times. The archaeological relics remaining in Korea are exactly the same types as those found in our primitive era dolmens." He also explicitly states, "We (Japan) are considering placing Korea, which lies within our ancient territory, within our defensive line."

Furthermore, in The Awakening of the East, he says, "The glory of Europe is the humiliation of Asia," and calls out, "Brothers and sisters, take up the sword," which has been interpreted as inciting or endorsing war.

These statements, combined with the historical context, led to a wave of "Tenshin praise" during the Pacific War period. At that time, he was revered not as an art historian but as a pioneer leading Japanese imperialist ideology. Especially influential was the slogan "Asia is one," which appears in the opening sentence of his book The Ideals of the East.

So why do some argue that he was not an advocate of imperialism? First, they claim that his main emphasis was on the superiority of Asian civilization over Western modern civilization, and that this focus should be considered. Second, they analyze that during the Pacific War, Tenshin’s ideas were exploited more to justify imperialism. For example, The Awakening of the East was never published during Okakura’s lifetime and existed only as a manuscript. Later, his disciples and forces justifying imperialism used it.

However, as mentioned earlier, it is true that his writings already contain parts that justify Japan’s domination over Korea, and phrases like "take up the sword" influenced the encouragement of invasion through war. It seems difficult to deny that his ideology ultimately laid the foundation for aggressive Asianism.

Today, we introduced the story of Okakura Tenshin and the academic evaluations surrounding him. We conclude with the words of Professor Jeong Cheon-gu, who translated Okakura’s book The Awakening of Japan into Korean. In the translator’s note, Professor Jeong wrote:

"Although the book was written with the purpose of informing the Western powers that 'Japan has now awakened,' it shows that true awakening was not achieved contrary to the author’s intention. The author himself, as well as the intellectuals of the time, did not know what it was that needed to be awakened."