Transnational Flows and Movements

Kritika Kultura Global Classroom Series Transnational Flows and Movements in the Making of Nation and Region in EastAsia February 11, 2013 Ateneo de Manila University Caroline S. Hau Center for Southeast Asian Studies, Kyoto University About the Lecturer Caroline S. Hau is the author of Necessary Fictions: Philippine Literature and the Nation 1946-1980 and On the Subject of the Nation: Filipino Writings from the Margins, 1981-2004, both published by Ateneo de Manila University Press. She is editor of Intsik: An Anthology of Chinese-Filipino Writing and (with Kasian Tejapira) Traveling Nation-Makers: Transnational Flows and Movements in the Making of Modern Southeast Asia. Abstract In this lecture, I will look at how biographical, network, and translingual approaches may fruitfully be deployed for the study of transnational flows and movements and their impact on nation- and regionmaking in East Asia. “Travel” is a key concept and framework of analysis in the study of politics and ideas in Southeast Asia, particularly in the theorizing of nationalism, communism/socialism, cosmopolitanism, and Islamism. Cross-border flows and movements are often discussed as a high-level abstraction, however, and overlooks the fact that people cross borders as individuals. In crossing borders, these individuals do so as part of networks, while engaging in translation. Moreover, meanings of concepts get reinvented as they pass from one language to another, as part of what Lydia Liu calls “translingual practices”. A bographical approach can help us understand Asianist, Comintern, and nationalist activism and movements of the past century. KK Global: Hau Introduction Caroline S. Hau and Kasian Tejapira Cross-border circulations of people and ideas have been the object of increasing scholarly attention and debate in recent decades as discourses and practices of globalization have made substantial inroads in the academic and popular imagination. To some extent, this interest in transnational mobility is a logical outcome of a world of “flows,” a world “fundamentally characterized by objects in motion,”1 propelled by advances in transportation and communication; diffusion of technology and ideologies; largescale movements of capital, labor, tourists, commodities and cultural artifacts; expansion of mass education; creation of transnational public spheres and institutions; and relocation of production facilities “abroad.” Far from being merely a description of current empirical realities, this scholarly focus also has a normative import in its critique of the limitations of the nation-state as a collective agent; as a geopolitical, economic and cultural system; and as a unit of study and analysis. The sheer volume and speed of flows, it is said, have eroded the sovereignty and capabilities of the nation-state, rendering its borders far more permeable than is popularly assumed and opening it to the world far beyond the reaches and control of the territorially rooted state.2 As an intellectual framework, the nation-state has been criticized for promoting an intellectual parochialism that downplays or ignores the long history and ever-growing breadth of interactions among societies within and beyond its borders.3 Nation-states have also been criticized for imposing repressive, territorialized, and homogenized identities on the fluid, polyglot condition of existence of much of the world before, and since, the advent of the inter-state system.4 Not surprisingly, terms such as “cosmopolitanism,” “deterritorialization,” and “postnationalism” have gained purchase by off ering themselves as theoretical alternatives to the constraining fixities and rigidities of nationcentred categories, perspectives, and policies. Almost all of these terms rely in part on the idea of travel, not only as a metaphor but as a literal means of realization: for example, some definitions of cosmopolitanism presuppose movement across space as the pre-eminent form of encounter and exchange with different peoples and cultures,5 while Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari’s concept of deterritorialization6 has been used in discussions of cultural dislocation, as ties between culture and place are weakened by globalization.7 The challenges of European integration — including the lowering of barriers in trade, the movement of workers and capital, and the partial surrender of national sovereignty in the name of legal harmonization (in conformity with the acquis communautaire, or body of European Union laws) — are the central concern of Habermas’ essays on the “post-national constellation.”8 Migrants and diasporic communities have received special attention as exemplary articulations of the “transnational moment.”9 In the wake of the events of 11 September 2001, profiling of Muslim radical activists has routinely highlighted their “deterritorialized” 2 KK Global: Hau backgrounds: “they may be born in a country, then educated in another country, then go to fight in a third country and take refuge in a fourth country.”10 In Southeast Asian studies, flows and movements have had a central place in the construction of the field as well as the characterization of the area. Elasticity has been a hallmark of the field, since “Southeast Asia” at different times encompassed different boundaries according to specifi c cartographic, scholarly, and geopolitical demands.11 Its defi nition has been partly shaped by external actors and references. Western travelers and scholars understood it as the region lying between the better-known civilizations of India and China. The Chinese saw it as a site of trade, immigration, and activism. The Japanese considered it a resource-rich and geopolitically strategic part of its co-prosperity sphere. The British and their allies mapped it as a regional theater of the Pacific War. Th e Americans treated it as the southern bulwark of anti-Communist “Free Asia” and the third party in the post-war triangular trade system involving the United States and Japan. The neighboring dialogue partners (China, Japan, South Korea, India, Australia, and New Zealand) of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations view it as the hub of regional cooperation and regionmaking in the name of an “East Asia Community.” Moreover, scholars of Southeast Asia have long theorized the region, particularly its premodern and colonial histories, as a contact zone within a larger global context of economic, cultural, and intellectual fl ows and movements, with travels to, from, and through the region by traders, laborers, pilgrims, tourists, colonial officials, scholars, activists, soldiers, and immigrants playing important roles in the history — and theorizing — of the area.12 Concerns with excavating the “bedrock” of an “original” Southeast Asian cultural substratum beneath “foreign infl uences,” with ideas of agency through “localization” and other concepts of selective and creative appropriation, and with the writing of “autonomous history” all reflect a critical awareness of the difficulty, if not impossibility, of studying Southeast Asia as a self-contained and self-enclosed unit.13 This leitmotif in Southeast Asian studies resonates with the paradigm shift in international scholarship that has sought to overcome the constraints posed by nation-centered studies by calling for transnational, comparative, and cross-cultural analyses, and for careful consideration of cross-border “networks and synchronisms” across space and time.14 Shaped by the historical experience of decolonization and the strategic imperatives of the Cold War, nation-centered studies have tended to privilege national(ist) narratives to the exclusion of other theoretical alternatives, while area studies have sought to defend their institutional existence by upholding the feasibility of “Southeast Asia” as a unit of study and analysis through discussions of the regional distinctiveness of its processes of hybridization, localization, and translation of “foreign infl uences.”15 The call for a broader perspective is both the product of a post-Cold War epoch, with its new geopolitical, spatial, economic, social, and cultural arrangements that stress — and capitalize on — a broader geographic expanse of commonalities and differences among peoples across the world, and an attempt at clearing a 3 K. or activist.”25 The understandable frustration with the narrowness of national studies has. or on contemporary transnationalism and connections between migrant or diasporic communities and their real and imagined homelands.17 scholars such as Kenneth Pomeranz.23 The salience of understanding a “world of regions”24 resonates with the current trend toward regionalism (institution-building) and regionalization (economic integration) in Europe and. with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations playing the role of institutional hub for community-building in the name of “East Asia. missionary. Research inspired by cross-cultural and cross-border frameworks has tended to bracket off the nation-states and concentrate on early and colonial histories to produce “prehistories” of contemporary globalization. and spatial reach and limits of interconnections and interactions among countries within a “region” and between the “region” and the world. and nationalism.26 Leaving nation-formation and the nation 4 .20 rather than the polarizing “clash of civilizations”21 thesis that gained currency following the events of 11 September 2001. and R. circulations. encounter and engagement. these multidirectional material. who is often also merchant. as a key agent of economic. come at a price. or their parts) to off er new insights and ask new questions about industrialization and other issues. and interactions across space and time. Relatively little sustained attention has been paid to the question of how nation-states themselves were constituted out of. migrant. Ashin Das Gupta. or truncate these flows. in East Asia.22 World-regional approaches to economic history have highlighted the systemic nature. and crisscrossed by. densities. and collective action that mediate between the global and the local. political. more recently. cultural. student. and Michael Pearson have drawn on archival research to theorize the “Indian Ocean” as an economic and cultural unit and explore the ways in which trade and other contacts linked peoples and knitted communities across broad expanses of sea and land that included Southeast Asia. appropriate.KK Global: Hau critical space for thought and writing that would be “more self-generative and less over-determined by cold-war history. and intellectual flows and exchange.18 Attention has focused particularly on the sea lanes that enabled longdistance trade. Inspired by Fernand Braudel and Immanuel Wallerstein. the emphasis has generally been on hybridity and pluralism. how shared as well as diff ering visions of community may arise out of contacts among people from diff erent “territories” within a given space.N.19 Where civilizational discourses have come into use. and what implications these questions have for rethinking commonsensical understandings of national identities. analysis. rechannel. Chaudhuri. how various nationalists and nation-making projects sought to tap into. Andre Gunder Frank. Bin Wong have criticized the Eurocentrism of social and political theories and employed “two-way” or reciprocal comparisons (between geographical units such as Europe and China. the formulation of which has come to encompass both Northeast and Southeast Asia. effectively eroding country boundaries while heuristically positing “regions” as units of study. cultural. however. particularly in the emergent field of world history and global history in which Southeast Asia is now nested as a sub-region. and intellectual flows. Special attention has been accorded the traveler. nation-states.”16 This call has been answered by nuanced research. but of space (say. in fact.” Drawing on the analogy of religious pilgrimages. We also hope to offer a number of perspectives — whether local. national. and other consumer items) within and beyond Southeast Asia.29 The contributors grapple with the notion of “travel” beyond one that is paradigmatically defined as elite. through. or recreational movement across space. from. and thereby complexify the use of the nation as a unit of analysis in Southeast Asian studies.27 The ten essays in this book seek to fill the gap in current scholarship by viewing the “national” politics of Southeast Asia in terms of the historical flows and movements of activists. in structuring the experience of travel and the visions and projects that travel helps enable. Communist. Critical interest in local. The central organizing concept of this book is “travel” (which need not be defined as physical movement of people. and cultural projects. and across Southeast Asia enabled forms of identification and activism among different political actors in ways that promoted thinking. and other movements in the region. as discussed by Lorraine Paterson and Onimaru Takeshi in this book) as well. and their ethico-political opposition to universal ideals of hybrid cosmopolitanism. and through Southeast Asia. male. and cultural artifacts. scientific. and on the trajectories of nationalist. They are concerned with the political salience of “travel” in. Travel has been central to the theorizing of nationalism. and global flows might unsettle or reinvent long-standing or modern concepts not only of personhood and identity but of forms of belonging and community-making. films. In the case of nationalism. their parochialism and homogenizing impulses. political. heroic. Communism. and making nation during much of the twentieth century. Shanghai. Anderson talks about Creole government offi cials whose travels. to. Islamic. regional. brought them into contact 5 . historical timing). complicate and revise nation-centered studies of political movements by showing how flows in. feeling.28 and its transformative effect on individual lives and their intellectual. or global — from which to understand the various political projects engendered by encounters and exchanges that bring people and ideas together in a given space and across boundaries. bourgeois. regional. three of the most important political movements and ideologies in the region. since the term encompasses circulations of ideas and discourses enabled by inflows of goods and commodities such as books. in which devotees from diff erent places of origin come together in the act of traversing and worshipping in sacred spaces. ideas. theorized solely in terms of their constraints on research. European. Benedict Anderson has argued in favor of the interpretive force of “journeys” and their ability to turn administrative units into meaningful “fatherlands. We are interested in how auto/biographies of local. and Islam. and with the question of how biographical accounts of “travel” might contribute to a more nuanced understanding of the modern history and politics of nationness in Southeast Asia. more specifically.KK Global: Hau form largely unexamined and unexplored has meant consigning nations and nationalism to the category of an ideological ruse.30 We consider the salience not only of time (or. religious. and global flows can. delimited within the territories of their colonies. regional. ”31 Th e spread of print capitalism provided the technological and linguistic cement to bind territory with homeland-as-nation. but by the Creoles’ consciousness of the “shared fatality of trans-Atlantic birth. usually but not necessarily among communities of exiles and emigrants. Internationalism is an essential component of the Communist movements in Asia. and friendship. a worldwide fraternal community based on revolutionary solidarities.KK Global: Hau with fellow Creoles. Hong Kong. include Pak Yonghyo and An Kyong-su of Korea.33 This network was active from the late nineteenth century until World War II and would. An important component of the theorizing and mobilizing of these movements took place.35 Th e Third International. outside the colonies. Sun Yat-sen of China. but also extending to southern China and as far as Japan. and claims to. the Highest Stage of Capitalism” (1916) was one of the earliest attempts to link the anti-imperialist liberation struggles in the “East” to proletarian world revolution. While travel within the administrative bounds of a territory helped define the scope and reach of the nationalist imagination. anti-colonial and nationalist movements themselves were not confined strictly within the boundaries of the colonial state. long-distance exchange. whose Far Eastern Bureau was headquartered in Shanghai. and Siam.38 Nguyen Ai Quoc (H. and Rash Behari Bose of India. and activist-exiles centered in Th ailand. even as its serial logic endowed the nation form and nationalism with a modularity that enabled it to travel. is anchored in “shared practices of cultural circulation” and powered by the belief in. Activists also traveled to obtain international sympathy and aid for anti-colonial movements. founded in 1919. who along with Tan Malaka was a key “regional facilitator” 6 .i Châu of Vietnam. Th e connectedness generated by these journeys is determined not only by the particular routes traveled.34 Lenin’s “Imperialism. This global “socialist ecumene. at various times. relied on traveling activists such as H. Canton. as in the case of the Philippines32 and Vietnam (see the chapters by Paterson and Resil Mojares) and to some extent Indonesia. Its Second Congress in 1920 explicitly addressed the colonial and national questions and encouraged collaboration with revolutionary nationalism. Chí Minh and Tan Malaka to help midwife the birth of some of the radical movements in Asia during the interwar period (see the chapter by Onimaru). traders. and be adapted.37 Christopher Goscha has shown how Vietnamese nationalist and Communist revolutionaries relied on pre-existing regional networks of Vietnamese migrants.36 In the 1920s and early 1930s. Chí Minh). Inukai Tsuyoshi and Miyazaki Toten of Japan. Shanghai. around the world. the Comintern. Phan B. Pan-Asianism capitalized on the sense of crisis created by Western encroachment in Asia and by the imperatives of cooperation and solidarity in bringing about social transformation across the region. and beyond the purview of their colonial states. this international component of anti-colonialism took shape in the early years of the twentieth century around a pan-Asianist regional network (see the chapter by Mojares) linked by regional hubs such as Tokyo.” as Susan Bayly has called it. sought to tap the political passions of anti-colonial nationalist movements to build a world party of Communists. In Asia. Burma. but simultaneously spiritual and temporal. movement. for example.43 On the international front. and “ziyara” (visits to shrines) give us some idea of the complex and subtle ways in which travel. and ideological terms (see the chapters by Caroline Hau and Kasian Tejapira)39 to challenge. Terms such as “Hajj” (pilgrimage). for example. or concurrently. entailed not simply physical. the state. 7 . military. but was rather nationalist. Siam. and Laos. US colonial rule laid the foundations for the development of Muslim ethno-religious identity among Moro Filipinos through contacts established among Muslims of different ethnic groupings within the institutions of public and tertiary education. “hijra” (emigration).KK Global: Hau (to use Onimaru’s term) of the Comintern’s Far Eastern Bureau. however. among other regions. and the Philippines drew on the support of the Chinese Communist Party in financial. Travel also had political implications. and attempt to capture. This integration politics may account for why the separatism of the Moro National Liberation Front was not specifically Islamic. and increased opportunities for travel have been instrumental in creating global activist networks while also enabling Muslim political participation in their “home” countries. was instrumental in the creation of the Communist parties of Vietnam. and the Islamic resurgence of the 1970s — with the transnational Islamic political movement of the Society of Muslim Brothers (Jamaat al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun) gaining mainstream status in the Middle East in the 1980s42 — would come to shape the politics of the splinter group Moro Islamic Liberation Front. Vietnam. was often undertaken in connection. with offi cial institutions as well as philanthropic associations in Saudi Arabia.41 In the Philippines. the Egyptian government provided some 200 scholarships for Muslim Filipinos to study abroad. Maoist movements in Th ailand. Motives for travel were diverse but by no means mutually exclusive: the rihla. as traders and intellectuals followed the trade routes that brought Islam to Southeast Asia. Travel also figures prominently in the religious doctrine and practices of Islam. Cambodia. Malaysia. “rihla” (travel for learning and other purposes). simultaneously generating awareness of their membership in a universal community while also strengthening their sense of their diff erences from each other. mass education. as a form of social and political action. with trade. Between 1955 and 1970.” some of which threatened to undermine the existing authority and prestige not only of the ruling elites but of local Islamic leaders and organizations. as Muslim returnees brought back with them new ideas and practices or else sought and forged new conceptions of religious community “at home. travel has shaped the character of the separatist movements that challenged the Philippine state. Kuwait. These travels brought pilgrims from different cultures and societies into contact with each other.40 New communication technologies. notably through contacts among Muslims in universities in Manila. In the post-war period. the translation and circulation of Islamic texts. a number of Organization of the Islamic Conference member-states have provided financial aid to promote Islamic activities and foster pan-Islamic awareness and solidarity. which nevertheless had to contend with local resistance to its attempts to purify Islamic rituals. Mindanao. and Egypt. not only Philippine. Indonesian. The economic historian Kaoru Sugihara has cogently shown that between 1883 and 1913. national.44 Using routes created by trade. militant Islamic groups have made Afghanistan.46 Moreover.48 Th e salience of region as a unit of study and analysis that is larger than specifi c countries but smaller than the planet becomes clear when we consider that the patterns and density of flows and connections are unevenly spread out across space. regional. and regional identifi cations 8 . and Malaysia their bases for military operations and training camps. when the nation-state was in the process of formation in Southeast Asia. national. and education. which includes both Northeast and Southeast Asia and is linked to South Asia. particularly in the region that we now call East Asia. following September 11. Syria. where jihadi thought had made inroads into the social movement. turning Islamism’s cross-country. but could accommodate sub-regional. Islamic holy sites and travel routes — notably Jerusalem — were sometimes shared with other religions such as Christianity.47 Nationalist.”51 Moreover. the movement has relied on informal social networks rather than formal organizations to pursue collective action. The late nineteenth century was not only characterized by large-scale migration of Chinese and Indians to Southeast Asia (as discussed by Hau and Khoo Boo Teik in this book).45 The revolution that established an Islamic republic in Iran and the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in 1979 provided important crucibles for Islamist awakening and activism (see the chapter by Shiraishi Takashi). and other regions. and Southeast Asia. Characterized as much by intellectual and organizational cross-fertilization as by tensions and contestations. and Malaysian. challenged state interpretations of Islam. so that the types of identification enabled by these routes were not necessarily confi ned to identification with the universal umma or with local Islamic communities. Th e Salafi movement.KK Global: Hau and the United Arab Emirates serving as major sources of funding and organizational support. cross-cultural features into an international policy concern. Communist. Th e fluidity of social and ideological projects — as well as these projects’ role in creating and strengthening national (self-)identifi cation. China. Pakistan.50 Its articulation of nationalism and Islam would branch off into different political paths as Marxism influenced activists such as Haji Misbach and other advocates of “Islamism and Communism. Africa. and Islamic activisms are by no means exclusive categories. which began among students studying in Lebanon. Latin America.49 prefiguring economic integration in the post-Cold War era. labor migration. the US-led global “war on terror” trained the spotlight on Islamist movements and their global. intra-Asian trade grew at a rate that outstripped trade within Europe. but also “foreign” Arab and Chinese — is especially evident in the fi rst fi fty years of the twentieth century. but transcontinental and transoceanic contacts — not just between European metropole and colonial Asia but in particular among the colonies and countries within the region during the later nineteenth to early twentieth centuries — played a crucial role in the economic modernization of Japan. The Sarekat Islam was the first nationalist political organization in Indonesia. and local networks. Thai. these intellectual and political struggles are themselves shaped by flows and movements of people and ideas. 56 The ten essays in this book also seek to redress the imbalances in current research on travel. they question current theories that construct the nation as a bogeyman of cultural stasis and repressive entrapment in order to contrast it to the freedom and transformative agency of cosmopolitan mobility. were very much a part of life even during the years when earlier phases of globalization were supposedly interrupted by the two world wars. Anti-colonial nationalist movements in Asia sought in pan-Asianism an ideology and logistical support system that would activate and promote revolution across the region through mutual cooperation and aid (see the chapters by Mojares and Khoo). Their lives exemplify the fact that flows and movements (or. and internationalism53 (see the chapters by Onimaru. and intellectual exchanges enabled thereby. nationalism.ng. ideas. and cultural transformation. Th ey are also techniques of production and circulation of activists.54 These contaminations have been productive. whether to imagine community or to undermine. We hope to add historical depth to the current privileging of travel in globalization discourse while also providing correctives to the tendency of globalization discourse to discount the effi cacy of nations and states as domains of socio-political and cultural imagination and transformation. economic.. discussed by Peter Zinoman in this book. and by the claims of particularistic communities and belongings that they can neither uncritically embrace nor completely repudiate. need not be rooted only in the experiences of displacement and discrimination typical of so-called diasporas. defend. eight were born in the late nineteenth to early twentieth centuries and were active at a time when the nation-state was still being imagined and formed in Southeast Asia. This book looks at nation-making in light of fl ows and movements of people and ideas. Southeast and Northeast Asia) continue to highlight the importance of nation-states alongside markets as twin engines of region-making. but their scope and influence are unevenly spread and felt across time and space. they have historical breadth and communicative reach. which has tended to privilege the unidirectional 9 . they nevertheless look to and rely in part on nation-states to effect their visions of social. given the absence of a world order capable of enforcing universal norms and regulations without exceptions on a supranational level.e. cultural. antiimperialism. As such. but may be found as well in the experiences of being “thrown together” and displaced that are constitutive of “national” space and time. Of the ten people featured in this book. in the case of the Vietnamese man of letters Vu Tr. or transform it. not least in the hybrid political imaginaries that they created. Th ey show that the provenance of political struggles. Hau. and Kasian Tejapira). and knowledge.52 Communist movements in Southeast Asia are characterized by the intimate but fraught connection between anti-colonialism. symbols. Their visions are often consciously and unconsciously delimited by the assumed boundaries of the nation-state.KK Global: Hau as well.55 Political movements are human organizations and networks. and the political. flows without literal movement). things.ng Ph. While their bounds often exceed those of the territorial states. Indeed. Recent efforts at institution-building in East Asia (i. political. W. the former — but to pinpoint the political possibilities and. Biographies are forms of literary. and those who cannot.” they give short shrift to the political implications of traveling-in-dwelling (especially when no physical journey is undertaken). as pioneering studies by Craig Reynolds. though. just as important. intellectual. While mindful of the ways in which travel is marked by class. travel experiences.57 which are endowed with the agency of unsettling or undoing the boundaries that cordon off one culture from another. It considers travel’s embeddedness in specifi c locations and the political. the geopolitical and experiential particularities of these personal histories — means that they are not readily assimilable to the larger sociopolitical order and the narratives that they legitimize. while also documenting the agency of individuals who make their histories and cultures. Alfred McCoy. and. Biographies encode not just forms of organizing societies and the larger world. limits of the kinds of cosmopolitanism and particularism engendered by the historical dialectic between roots and routes in Southeast Asia. the latter has arguably been a theoretical reaction to. C. and negotiations among individual subjects and between these subjects and the economic. and Christoph Giebel have shown. they may even interrogate the assumptions of the general order. rather than simply affi rmations or celebrations of them.61 Moreover. At the same time.60 These inscriptions of lives offer pathways for marking out concrete encounters.KK Global: Hau physical movement of people from the peripheral South to the metropolitan North. and artistic projects on behalf of which travel is conscripted. This book’s intention is neither to romanticize travel nor automatically attribute resistance to the act (whether coerced or not) of staying “at home” — indeed. or do not travel physically but who nevertheless lay claim to universalist ideas. those who need to find work abroad. but are themselves acts of political 10 . the “diff erential specificity” of these lives — that is. Anthony Milner. those who choose to or were forced to return from their travels rather than settle elsewhere. and agency. They do not give equal attention to the cosmopolitanism of those who travel between “peripheries” or within a region. cultural.59 Th ey offer insights into the historical and cultural processes into which individuals are inserted. Watson.58 and be in turn reshaped by. political. or the ways in which the boundedness of “home” may shape. and intellectual structures of authority within and across which they operated. choose not to. and religious expression that can be productively studied for the ways in which they use narratives to give shape and meaning to particular lives. gender. race. political. interactions. discourses of cosmopolitan hybridity oft en take as their primary example the South-to-North travels (hence their privileging of migrancy and diaspora). and culture. and compensation for. in the case of marginalized groups. The contributors adopt a biographical approach to illuminate the ways in which the nation is constituted out of concretely embodied fl ows and movements. biographies also have political functions. Biographies are arenas of dispute over meaning. intentions. In their celebration of the transformative possibilities of “dwelling-in-traveling. those who are exiled. and action to readers (see the chapter by Paterson). the larger narratives. usually of nation and history.66 A more contemporary example of the political uses of biography can be discerned in current studies of Islamic radicalism. that interpret and organize political life. in writing about his travels. Tan Malaka. nor do they assume that these individuals are autonomous subjects endowed with the will and freedom of thought that automatically resist the strictures of colonial and postcolonial authority. the better to brand them as alien. as Craig Reynolds has forcefully argued. postulated the Malay reader of autobiographies.72 The contributors are not interested in cataloguing the heroic accomplishments of their subjects.65 Moreover.i Châu. Phan B.62 In Malaysia. or imagining alternatives to.KK Global: Hau interpretation that are instrumental in creating.68 In the Philippines. name as “reputation”) filling in for the absence of “traditional” sources of prestige such as aristocratic titles.63 Hikayat Abdullah. emulation. with its combination of travel and autobiography. Mohamed Salleh bin Perang of Johor was one of the first Malay authors who. along with Marxist discourse. which rely on biographical analysis to construct “profiles” of Muslim activists and identify the bonds of kinship and friendship that link one activist to another and to the larger community of believers in the politically loaded language of “terror networks. or Tunku Abdul Rahman.” Revolutionary biographies in Vietnam off ered models for anti-colonial and nationalist self-identifi cation. They are more interested in analyzing the possibilities 11 . biographies have been a favored form of elite and middle-class selfexpression. the activity of piecing together the fragments of Jit Poumisak’s life was an incontrovertible means by which the youth movement took shape in Th ailand.71 Focusing on the marginalized and the obscure has been one way of expanding the biographical canon of the nation.”67 For much of the twentieth century. producing accounts that expose rather than simply reinforce the foundational fictions of the nation and attest to the irreducible plurality of political projects undertaken in the name of the nation. The subjects of this book are not exemplary Southeast Asian political travelers such as Jose Rizal. rather than consider the likelihood that Jit’s political education. memoirs.69 In Indonesia. was instrumental in creating “Malay” political culture through its redefinition of “Malay” in terms of race rather than rajah-based authority. or autobiographies.64 Biographies serve as “author functions” that construct and delimit the discourses by which these individuals and their politics are read and interpreted. autobiographies offer insights into collective debates about the nation70 and off er means of making sense of the significant or traumatic periods in Indonesia’s history. It is easier for the Thai state to attribute Jit Poumisak’s progressive ideas to external “foreign” sources. biographies have played a preeminent role in producing and legitimizing national narratives (as well as counter-narratives) that mediate the creation of a collective. was a home-grown phenomenon mediated by translations that were circulating within Th ailand itself. whether “public” or “people. inspiration. nor have they been subjects of full-length biographies. with the publicity implied by the graphic display of name and reputation (resonating with the precolonial Malay conventions of nama. who served as the hub of the Comintern network in Shanghai. and very little of his correspondence with family and friends is extant. and politicization of French and European literary and critical texts and cultural ideas in Vietnam. who never traveled abroad. historical contexts within which these activists lived. memorialized the guerrillas’ experiences not. through which his readers learned of. who joined the Indian National Army. advocated a socialist solution to the issues of poverty. nationalities.ng. All of them worked within. made a career out of hiding himself behind numerous aliases. part of the Philippine anti-Japanese movement that incorporated Chinese guerrillas. and their lives. or would eventually go against. at once Vietnamese nationalist and universal figure.ng Ph.m H. Lin Bin). James Puthucheary. foreign control of economy. or.ng Ph. thus lending their lives a fragmentary quality that resists intellectual closure and opening their biographies to contestation over interpretation. cut short by premature death. In all ten cases. and work circumvent the easy. artistic. the particular constraints of their historical. the prevailing politics and political mood and assumptions of the time. addresses. the contingent. and cultural locations.ng Thái and Vu Tr. in autobiographies.KK Global: Hau and limits of individual agency.73 While some wrote about themselves. Though one of the triumvirate of national heroes in the Philippines. often against. but in a three-volume novel-epic (the third volume of which was completed by his wife and fellow activist. Th e Thai Communist Ruam Wongphan’s posthumous reputation underwent political transmutation as it — and the songs and poems that drew on the Party-as-Mother motif he articulated in his farewell letter to his mother — outlived his death and the demise of the Party. the tenacity of ideas of home and belonging informed or haunted their activism and travel (see the chapter by Odine de Guzman). sensibilities.ng Th ái became famous for his failed attempt to assassinate the governor of Indochina in Canton in 1924.ng. For one thing. social.74 The Ukrainian Hilaire Noulens. and community that organized politics and political life in their time (see the chapter by Yamamoto Hiroyuki). Ph. the anti-colonial nationalist politics of the period.m H. and linked themselves to. as his comrades did. Some took a principled stand on political issues that went against. acted as the conduit of a “provincial cosmopolitanism” that depended on the selectively filtered circulation. portions of their political or intellectual activities — notably those of Hilaire Noulens — were conducted in secrecy. and for the ways in which his short life and dramatic death provided an exemplary revolutionary biography. and the conditions of success and failure of their respective political. and post-offi ce boxes. and religious projects. Th e Hakka writer Du Ai. as in the case of Ph. others did not or could not. appropriation. belonging. Yet their life experiences also challenged and reinvented these ideas in ways that invoked while also exceeding ideas of nation. and interethnic inequalities in Malaysia that prefigured the New Economic Policy 12 . celebratory rhetoric of autonomy and cosmopolitanism of current theories of travel. The voracious reader Vu Tr. Mariano Ponce did not write much about himself. The ten individuals in this book lived in ways that exceed the neat summaries and syntheses of conventional biographies. failed act of anti-colonialist terrorism against the visiting French governor general of Indochina by a group of Chinese anarchist-inspired Vietnamese nationalists in semicolonized Canton. they made a leap of faith and embraced a revolutionary separatist cause. Moving to Hong Kong and Yokohama. a devoted and tireless pioneering publicist and key organizer of the international network of the early Philippine nationalist movement. focused.75 Executed for masterminding the Bali bombings in 2002. in the transnational context 13 . Lorraine Paterson reconstructs the intricate cultural political afterlife of Ph. Resil Mojares tells the life story of Mariano Ponce (1863–1918). a progressive organization that has sought Partylist representation in the Philippine Congress as part of its mission to improve the work conditions of Filipino workers abroad. and Central Asia to the Middle East and North Africa on his radical politics. in 1924. Th e leastknown and rather modest and reserved among the “great triumvirate” of the Propaganda Movement. and thereby won the inter-nationalist solidarity and support as well as personal friendship of such luminaries as Sun Yat-sen.” Ponce played “the patient administrator” and constant spokesperson of the movement through its two-decade-long wax and wane. which also included Jose Rizal “the apostle” and Marcelo del Pilar “the militant politician. Connie Bragas-Regalado worked as a domestic helper in Hong Kong and eventually headed Migrante International. Th e Sino-Thai journalist K. and yet managed to stay a remarkably centered and composed.m H. intelligence. and even course by anchoring himself in a stable sense of “home” as origin and destination. who dwelt in turbulent traveling through faraway lands and seas in quest of the best possible political model and order for his nation.ng Thái (1893–1924). Ponce worked hard to procure and arrange the transnational flows of funds and arms. he gradually reconciled himself to the defeat of the Philippine nationalist revolution under US Occupation and finally returned home to take part in an assimilated regime of self-rule under US tutelage. Bali contributed to the development of the Malay language and literary culture and to the propagation of a multicultural Sabah nationhood different from the racial politics practiced in other parts of Malaysia. South. spending more than half his adult life abroad. and its contribution to the early formation of modern Vietnamese nationalism.KK Global: Hau but proved unable to temper the racialist assumptions behind the NEP’s affi rmative action policies. Disheartened by setbacks in his convoluted mission. with the outbreak of the nationalist revolution back home. Imam Samudra wrote a short autobiography that clearly revealed the influence of active Islamic political networks from Southeast. Th en. and expertise to his comrades-in-arms in the Philippines by joining the Pan-Asianist network of exiled nationalists from various Western colonies and semi-colonies. China. the drowned icon of patriotic martyrdom. he and his cohorts first unsuccessfully pursued a reformist assimilationist politics on behalf of the colonized Philippines in metropolitan Spain. A proud gentry product of Enlightenment culture and politics sown in a remote overseas corner of the crumbling Spanish empire. Mojares ends his chapter with a thoughtful refl ection on the self-described “nomadic life” of his subject. Taking as her point of departure a single. a population of around 24 diff erent nationalities. and his supposedly self-sacrificing revolutionary martyrdom was represented as a common motif in the imagination and construction of both the Vietnamese national community and the transborder anti-imperialist fraternity of Sino-Vietnamese and other nationalities.ng Th ái’s heroic/terrorist act (e. intimately intertwined involvement of transnationality in the formation of nationhood in East and Southeast Asia. political statements. and extra-territoriality. Saigon.” which provides the nationalist role models for their Vietnamese readers to emulate. Haiphong. Yunnan. Amoy. and political borders and an imported international literary genre of semi-fictional/historical biography.g. reception and interpretation. Taking advantage of the “gray zone” condition of pre-World War II.KK Global: Hau of blurred ethnic/racial. Like an archeologist excavating traces of a long-lost and mysterious life underground. Manila. Ph. four telegraphic addresses. including Ph. three police forces. the concessional space of the attack. archival. contextual. fleshing out the Comintern career of Noulens by palpably invoking the Communist international network in which the political project of socialist revolution overlapped with those of national liberation and took shape within. funds. Chí Minh.ng Thái. and intertextual historical description and analysis of the composition and publication. 14 .m H. ten post office boxes. Chí Minh and Tan Malaka. circulation and prohibition. Hong Kong. three administrative bodies. at least four houses. Onimaru Takeshi digs up the Shanghai Metropolitan Police’s intelligence files and reconstructs the clandestine activities of Hilaire Noulens (1894–1963). and Calcutta.ng Thái’s personal and political background. as “revolutionary romance. Batavia. and historiographical accounts of Ph. Rangoon. three passports. and the nature of his demise). instructions.” and whose real names and nationality were never confirmed by his police captors in his lifetime. Onimaru highlights the importance of agency in anonymity.m H. his personal contact with H.m H.m H. translation and transformation of biographies of foreign and indigenous heroes and heroines. propaganda material. Singapore.ng Thái’s disguise.ng Thái’s prestigious Chinese grave in Canton. turned the port city into the transnational communication hub of the Comintern’s regional network that linked together seven national Communist parties in East and Southeast Asia and directed an incessant flow and circulation of agents. who had “a lot of aliases. What eventually emerges from her carefully crafted account is the much deeper and wider.m H. Then Paterson proceeds to lay out a complex and multifaceted textual. and evolved out of. the number of perpetrator(s). Noulens and a score or so of his multinational comrades.. French concessional space in Canton and Shanghai was posited vis-à-vis the sacred national space of Ph. cultural. She teases out the many factual contradictions in the various popular and journalistic. Bangkok. Eschewing conventional biographies that foreground the personalities of their subjects. the top liaison officer of the Comintern’s Far Eastern Bureau in Shanghai in the early 1930s. including H. semi-colonized and cosmopolitan Shanghai with three territorial sections. the manner of Ph. and eight bank accounts. Keelung. the infrastructure and political technologies used by the worldwide colonial empires in the service of predatory capitalism. with which an anti-national. manuals. and intelligence reports from Moscow via Berlin to Tokyo. which is opportunistic and unsupervised. and putative oppositions of global cultural politics on the study of its national equivalent. as is evident in Vu Tr. these guerrillas were part of a translingual political project that took shape under the historically unique circumstances of inter-imperialist rivalry and war and the international Communist movement from the early twentieth century to World War II.ng Ph. argues Zinoman. diverse and selective. not discriminating between high and low culture. Working together with their local Hukbalahap comrades and various ethnic and tribal people in Japaneseoccupied Philippines. decontextualized and ill-defined. selective anachronism.ng Ph.ng Ph.. i. rather than those of his better-known but atypical contemporary compatriots such as H.ng’s reading of modern French literature. Peter Zinoman unearths what he calls “provincial cosmopolitanism” as an arguably dominant and characteristic mode of capture of transnational metropolitan cultural fl ows in local colonial cultural politics that was probably typical of most colonized intellectuals with narrow parameters of life experience but a sweeping breadth of cultural horizons.ng’s numerous instances of citing. Chí Minh and Phan B. He highlights in systematic detail the peculiar character of Vu Tr. Made possible by the geographical distance.e. Chinese and Philippine.KK Global: Hau By choosing to focus on the complete works of a lesser-known and self-made-in-Vietnam interwar writer.ng. as practiced by overseas Chinese guerrillas. idiosyncratic and tendentious. organizational. romanticists. referencing. and scandalous writers of obscene works as fraternal “realist” victims of legal persecution and public condemnation.i Châu. which shows the deep and intimate entanglements between anti-colonial Chinese nationalism and Philippine radical nationalism.ng Ph. and fictional embodiments of revolutionary cosmopolitanism in the life stories of the authors Du Ai (1914–93) and his wife. Vu Tr. marked by strategic instrumental localization. regardless of the larger literary trends and career trajectories that obtained in their original context. partial and knowingly ignoring. and Du Ai and Lin Bin’s co-written novel Fengyu Taipingyang (Storm over the Pacific). as well as blending various literary genres or styles together all at once. 15 . and cultural unfamiliarity between the colonies and the metropolis. and translating foreign authors and works. warns against any facile imposition of European classifi catory system. temporal unevenness. his functional transformation of transnational metropolitan literary reputation and categories for local colonial purposes. and the temporal abbreviation and collapsing of different historical periods. Hau investigates the biographical. Caroline Hau’s subject matter is the role of revolutionary cosmopolitanism in the formation of dual nationalism. exhibits a characteristic provincial cosmopolitan appropriation of colonial modernity. to be used as an impressively exotic and intimidatingly aural instrument of strategic and tactical self-defense against critics and enemies. Lin Bin (1922–2008). eclectic but unsystematic. mottled and diffuse. unorthodox and anachronistic. As a self-defi ned Vietnamese “realist” who neglected most standard French realist writers but aligned himself instead with a host of French naturalists. broad but shallow. Vu Tr.ng (1912–39). who had the uncommon experience of overseas travel and study. familiar preconceptions. the history of the Wha Chi guerrilla forces. and incarnation. Kasian revisits the life. Singapore. and tactics toward ruralization. The lyrics of a politically innocuous pop song lead Kasian Tejapira to reconstruct the genealogy of the “Party-as-Mother” metaphor in Th ailand. a charismatic ethnic Lao Phuan from Suphan Buri province and a student at Thammasat University and Chulalongkorn University who joined the Th ai Communist Party and was among the fi rst Thai Communists to be trained in China. one who attempted to make history out of them. democratic socialist. Khoo presents Puthucheary as an embodiment of many of these fl ows. After undertaking political and organizational work among ethnic Tais in the Yunnan area of Southern China. friendship and betrayal. Puthucheary (1922–2000).KK Global: Hau framed by the reach and limits of translation and forged in the community of fate without guarantees. a leading ethnic Indian left wing inter-nationalist. educate. with its overtones of Party-as-Mother. her aim is to capture and rediscover that rare and long-lost historical moment of intimacy and intercourse between lovers.” Khoo Boo Teik begins his account of the political life and critical thought of James J. Ruam’s work in the countryside was part and process of an important shift in the Thai Communist Party’s policy. with a breathtakingly sweeping and vertiginous panorama of the complex transnational infl ows and outflows as well as internal flows that swirled around and congealed into the historical matrix that was Malaysia. As an immigrant product of British colonialism-driven mass migration from India to Malaya who grew up in a plural society. Against the grain of erasure by time and popular forgetfulness. written in jail prior to his summary execution by the military government. kinship and rejection in the difficult and uncertain wartime conditions. peasantization and minority ethnicization. His farewell letter to his mother. through love and suspicion. whose anti-British imperialist struggles spanned colonial India. comrades. and kin that were the internationalist Chinese Communist fl ows and the Philippine nation. strategies. and national chauvinism. an unequal and unevenly developed colonial economy with ethnic division of 16 . The survival. militarization. Ruam returned to Th ailand to work among. provided a potent metaphor — in marked contradistinction to the Sarit regime’s self-identification with patriarchy — for the nurturing intimacy that the Party sought to create with its members. but in a substantively apolitical form. of the metaphor parallels the refashioning of Ruam Wongphan’s posthumous reputation from committed revolutionary to “democracy” martyr — both poignant testaments of an “afterlife subsequent to and in spite of (or perhaps precisely because of ) the collapse of both the revolution and the Party. and postcolonial Malaysia during and aft er World War II. Hau sketches the subsequent demise and afterlife of revolutionary cosmopolitanism and dual nationalism in the ideologically hostile and racially exclusivist Philippines after World War II under anti-Communism. kith. pluralist. and their recent partial redemption by the polycentric left in a more inclusive. and localization. career and death of Ruam Wongphan (1922–62). and integrationist manner. and organize the Thai peasants in the countryside. an intimacy coded in the religious and ideological idioms of conversion. virtue. and economic nationalist. resinicization. post-Communism. KK Global: Hau labor, and a communally segmented cultural, linguistic, and educational environment, Puthucheary fought valiantly and persistently for more than two decades, both armed and unarmed, in jail and at large, for the political and economic independence as well as political and social democracy of India, Malaya, and Malaysia in turn, only to see his hopes dashed, his ideas and projects ending up time and again in defeat, futility, or perversity, be it the INA (Indian National Army), the PAP (People’s Action Party), or the NEP (New Economic Policy). His repeated political failures in the face of overwhelming flows notwithstanding, as a public intellectual he never succumbed to the ruling fallacies and consistently mounted a hardhitting and well-rounded critique of both the deceptive hegemony of the ruling elite and the flawed counter-hegemony of the Communist insurgency with exceptional clarity and sensitivity, reasserting in full the problematique of ethnicity, class, and state that is essential to the understanding of Malaysian chronic communalist antithesis and recurrent political economic dilemma. Yamamoto Hiroyuki invites us to contemplate the inspiring if disenchanting lifelong search for the best possible bangsa or nation of the multilingual migrant Sino-Thai Buddhist Peranakan-turned-Malay Muslim writer, poet, and journalist Tenh Beng Chuan, aka K. Bali (1927–99), an intellectual champion of “bangsa Sabah” and “bahasa Sabah” (Sabah nationhood and Sabah language) among the ethnically diverse, Malayspeaking peoples of North Borneo in post-war Malaysia. Born in Kelantan in 1927 to a Hokkien-speaking Chinese father and a local-born Siamese mother, Kote, as he was called by village folks, grew up a Buddhist among Malay Muslim children and classmates and dreamed of “bangsa Malaya,” a single, unified Malay-speaking nation free from colonial rule where people transcended class and ethnic diff erences à la Indonesian nationalism. When forced instead into a Chinese ethnic minority status and designated school system under “bangsa Melayu” by the rise of UMNO’s Malay nationalism and the resulting ethnic polarization after World War II, K. Bali decided to move to the Malay Muslim-majority south of Thailand, so as to convert to and practice Islam as well as to live, work, study, and write as a Malay there. Ousted from Thailand some years later for his political article in a local Malay newspaper, he eventually settled in North Borneo/Sabah, where he devoted his talents for Malay prose and poetry to a collective project of making Sabah his new chosen bangsa and bahasa along with fellow Peranakan journalists and politicians, only to witness again the emergence and enhancement of ethnic awareness and identities in Sabah instead of his dreamt-of trans-ethnic nationhood and identity. Thus, in his 70s, he moved again from Sabah back to his home village in Kelantan to spend the final year of his mobile life. In that sense, K. Bali’s life story is an object lesson in nation-building as actually a trans-local or transnational activity, a continuing journey/exile beyond borders of control, an unending attempt at the making and unmaking of the national, in search of the Never-Never Homeland. Out of a four-decade-long stream of around 10 million overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) from one in every ten middle- and lower-class households in the country to greener pastures around the world, especially in East Asia, 17 KK Global: Hau the Middle East, North America, and Western Europe, Odine de Guzman reconstructs a sociological portrait of the collective experience of Filipino female domestic workers, through the personal and political itinerary of Connie Bragas-Regalado (1954–), a college-educated government employeeturnedcontract domestic worker in Singapore and then Hong Kong as well as single mother of two children, who has become an eminent workers’ rights activist and chairperson of the United Filipinos in Hong Kong, the biggest migrant labor union there, and was chosen as a standard-bearer Party-list congressional candidate by the Migrante Sectoral Party, the largest OFW group, in the 2004 Philippine national election. Making use of the Hegelian master-slave dialectics and Marxist-derived feminist standpoint theory, she posits an OFW standpoint of the Filipino female contract domestic workers, overdetermined as it is by class, race, and gender, from which a myriad of complex and superordinately invisible unequal power relationships between them and the taxing and policing states, predatory international capital, and patriarchal family structures both at home and in the host countries can be visualized, understood, and resisted. Th us, despite the deafening official chorus of praise for OFWs’ presumed economic heroism and self-sacrifice for the sake of nation and family, what remains unseen or unrecognized is that their hard-earned remittances and taxes have made possible the continuing rule of the masters of the Philippine, Singaporean, Hong Kong, and other host states, that their underpaid and undervalued deskilling domestic work has made possible the lucrative skilled jobs and productive labor of their foreign employers out of the home, that their motherly care and responsibility have allowed their wayward and irresponsible husbands to “move to the next house/ life” and leave all family-related burden to them. It was to find ways to break out of this transnational vicious cycle of financially insecure home and overseas contract work, desperate sojourn and unfulfi lling return, which has increasingly trapped even their grown-up children, that Connie Bragas-Regalado and her comrades in the Migrante International network brought the force of their political activism home to bear down on the Philippine state as citizen-members of the sovereign nation. Shiraishi Takashi traces the current transnational fl ows of radical Islam in Southeast and Central Asia through the life story of Imam Samudra (1972–2008), a captured and executed Indonesian jihadist, member of Jamaah Islamiyah (JI) and “architect” of the Bali terrorist bombings in 2002, as told by himself in his autobiography, interview, and police interrogation. As the young Imam Samudra, taking pride in his deeply pious ulama mujahid Muslim blood, experienced a jolting spiritual awakening, was converted to radical Islam, went to Soviet-occupied Afghanistan on a three-year-long training and fighting jihad mission, and came back to continue proselytizing, organizing, and carrying out terrorist activities in Indonesia and Malaysia, one could see him being gradually sucked down deeper and deeper into the undercurrent of anti-modernist, absolutist, and monolithic Salafism along the underground waterway that was the regional Darul Islam, JI, and al-Qaeda network. Haunted by Internet images of atrocities committed by the Israeli and American “Drakula bin Monster” on helpless Muslims, and enchanted by the “entirely new and very new” and “really, really clean” purist moral community of fellow jihadists 18 KK Global: Hau in Afghanistan, Imam Samudra led the austere, devoted, and purifi ed life of a mujahid resister that was purged of all fi tnah (temptation) à la Western modernity, be it the national, the ethnic, the secular, the sexual, the nonreligious language and categories, or even social change itself. And yet, while the process of refi ning culture and self-censorship eventually failed to completely dam the flows of Western modernism as the banished, unholy national categories and even English words seeped into his own language and way of thinking unawares through the back door, it did manage to narrow down his language and understanding of the social world, and resultant scope and choice of action on that world so much so that his itinerary and fateful destiny is almost predetermined. Anthony Reid reminds us that “timing — when to be absent, when to be actively present, when to be jailed, when to speak out, when to die” is a crucial element in the making of reputations.76 With the exception of Ponce and Ph.m H.ng Thái, almost all of the subjects of this book found themselves at cross purposes with predominant views of the nation and the actually existing nation-state in their respective domiciles, oft en falling afoul of the authorities that allocated to themselves the right to imagine, speak of, and make the “nation.” We began this book with a number of subjects whose lives and careers were shaped by a form of cosmopolitanism engendered by colonialism, imperialism, and regional and global capitalism, and we discussed the efforts of these traveling subjects to imagine and create a nation out of the ideational and material flows that swept through the territories they inhabited and traversed. We end the book with Imam Samudra, a man who came of age in Indonesia, now a nationstate, but spent the better part of his life trying to destroy and replace it with a state organized by a different vision of cosmopolitan community, but one that is nevertheless contaminated by received notions of nation and its territorial boundaries. The reputations of the subjects of this book would undergo the permutations induced by changing times and mores, political and economic contexts, and intellectual trends. But in all cases, their life stories speak across the years to their biographers, whose evolving research agendas have led them to re-interpret, even rewrite, these biographies in ways that necessitate a rethinking of the rules, premises, and conditions by which the subject (in both senses of topic and person) of the nation is defined, contested, and reinvented. The chapters show how “travel” and its contingent and uneven processes of translation, circulation, and exchange defined the trajectories of these ten individuals’ political thought and action, even as their political inclinations and activism helped set the intellectual and geographical itineraries they would cover in their lifetimes. With these biographies, we highlight the ways in which nation-making is deeply informed by, and in turn shapes, specific patterns and densities of local, regional, and global flows, movements, and networks across modern Southeast Asia. Traveling Nation-Makers hopes to illuminate some of the pathways by which people in this region worked, with varying degrees of success, to realize their intellectual, aesthetic, and political visions and projects over the last tumultuous century. 19 ” see Arjun Appadurai. 221. 36. 139–57. 2001). trans. Lane (London: Athlone. Appadurai (Durham: Duke University Press. 6 Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari. and Cristina Szanton Blanc (New York and London: Routledge. 2002). See also chapters 1 and 2 of Nations Unbound: Transnational Projects. Robert Hurley. Linda Basch. Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. ed. 9 Khachig Tölöyan.” in Cliff ord. eds. 2001). ed. “The Nation-State and Its Others: In Lieu of a Preface. 1997). On the idea of “flows. The Black Atlantic: Modernity and Double Consciousness (Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Jonathan Xavier Inda and Renato Rosaldo. p. 8 Jurgen Habermas. 4 On the nation-state’s propensity for sweeping ethnic diversities into “fi xed and closed sets of cultural categories. 2 For a balanced account. Mark Seem.. “Grassroots Globalization and the Research Imagination. vol. pp. and Helen R. 1994). 1993). 5 This is evident in Ulf Hannerz’s “global cultural flow chart” in Cultural Complexity: Studies in the Social Organization of Meaning (New York: Columbia University Press. 7 See. The Postnational Constellation: Political Essays (Cambridge: MIT Press. Th e Anthropology of Globalization: A Reader (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. 1 (1991): 3. 1992). 3 An exemplary formulation is Paul Gilroy.” Diaspora 1. especially chapter 1. and James Clifford’s assumption that “discrepant cosmopolitanism” involves displacement and transplantation in his influential essay “Traveling Cultures. The Retreat of the State: Th e Diff usion of Power in the World Economy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Nina Glick Schiller. for example.” see Scott Lash and John Urry. Routes: Travel and Translation in the Late Twentieth Century (Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 5. 1993). p. 12. Anti-Oedipus. 1984). 1996). Postcolonial Predicaments and Deterritorialized Nation-States. 1996).” in Globalization. p. see Susan Strange.KK Global: Hau Notes 1 Arjun Appadurai. 1 of Capitalism and Schizophrenia. p. Economies of Signs and Space (London: Sage. 20 . edu/people7/Roy/roy07-con5.” Journal of Southeast Asian History 2 (1961): 72–102. A more nuanced account can be found in Brynjar Lia. 5. 16 Devleena Ghosh and Stephen Muecke. “Indian Ocean Stories. 1450–1680. 1: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century (New York and London: Academic Press. ed. Southeast Asia in the Age of Commerce. 1 (Mar. “Globalization and Islam: A Conversation with Olivier Roy. for example. vol. 15 See. in Laurie Sears. “On the Possibility of an Autonomous History of Modern Southeast Asia. 2: Mercantilism and the Consolidation of the European World-Economy 1600–1750 (New York: Academic Press. 2 (2000): 25. p. p.html>.” UTS Review Cultural Studies and New Writings 6. 1995): 10–6. 14 Denys Lombard. 1995). (Ithaca: Southeast Asia Program.. The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean World in the Age of Philip II. rev. 11 On the making of “Southeast Asia” as a “place-name. vol. 2007. Knowing Southeast Asian Subjects (Seattle: University of Washington Press. We thank the anonymous reader of this book for this cogent reminder. See also the essays. Emmerson. <http://globetrotter. Immanuel Wallerstein. The Modern World-System. 2: Expansion and Crisis (New Haven: Yale University Press. 1984): 1–21. 1730–1840 (San Diego: Academic 21 . 2 (May 1995): 419–46. vol. 1999).berkeley. 2008). especially the introduction. 13 For a useful overview and critique of historical writing on early Southeast Asia.. History. Reynolds. 1993). “‘Southeast Asia’: What’s in a Name?” Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 15. Hau and Kasian Tejapira Life of Al-Qaeda Strategist Abu Mus’ab Al-Suri (New York: Columbia University Press. “Networks and Synchronisms in Southeast Asian History.KK Global: Hau 10 Harry Kreisler. “A New Look at Old Southeast Asia. Cornell University. and Oliver Wolters. The Modern World-System. 3: The Second Great Expansion of the Capitalist World-Economy.” Institute of International Studies. originally published in 1949. 1 (Mar.” Journal of Southeast Asian History 26. 2 vols. 2007). 1974). John Smail. 144. and The Modern World-System.” see Donald K. Berkeley. ed. 17 Fernand Braudel. vol. trans. University of California. 1980).” Journal of Asian Studies 54. Sian Reynolds (Berkeley and London: University of California Press. 12 Anthony Reid. Architect of Global Jihad: Th e Caroline S. see Craig J. Culture and Region in Southeast Asian Perspectives. Leif Manger. 2005). 1500–1800: Studies in Social. 22 On the Hadhrami diaspora. eds. 22 . Huntington. 1998). 1997). 1996). the essays in Peter J. Christopher Hutton. 2002).. The Indian Ocean (London: Routledge. 1987). The Global World of Indian Merchants 1750–1947: Traders of Sind from Bukhara to Panama (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Civilizations in World Politics: Plural and Pluralist Perspectives (London and New York: Routledge.. India and the Indian Ocean (New Delhi: Oxford University Press. Europe. 1989). 2000). 21 Samuel P. for example. Ashin Das Gupta and M. Michael N. Examples include Lynda Shaffer’s discussion of the impact of India and Southeast Asia on Chinese economic. Katzenstein. and Khua Khun Eng. Politics. 2009). Pearson. and technological development in “Southernization. 2003). Cheng Ho and Islam in Southeast Asia (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.. “Before Parochialization: Diasporic Arabs Cast in Creole Waters. Trade in Southeast Asia (Leiden: KITLV Press. eds. Where China Meets Southeast Asia: Social and Cultural Change in the Border Regions (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.KK Global: Hau Press. Ulrike Freitag and William Clarence-Smith. 20 See. and The World of the Indian Ocean. and The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order (New York: Simon & Schuster. cultural. Scholars. ReOrient: Global Economy in the Asian Age (Berkeley: University of California Press. Trade and Islam in Southeast Asia. 2000). see Tan Ta Sen. 1997). see Claude Markovits. 3 (1993): 22–49. and Statesmen in the Indian Ocean. Bin Wong. On the role of the “Chinese” Muslims in the spread of Islam in Southeast Asia. Huub de Jonge and Nico Kaptein. there is a rich literature: Engseng Ho. 19 See K. eds. Ashgate. 2000).N. Transcending Borders: Arabs. for example. 18 R. Andre Gunder Frank. and Asia Before Europe: Economy and Civilization of the Indian Ocean from the Rise of Islam to 1750 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2010).. ed. Politics. Chaudhuri. ed. 2002). China Transformed: Historical Change and the Limits of European Experience (Ithaca: Cornell University Press. 2010). Hadhrami Traders. 1750s–1960s (Leiden: Brill.N. Th e Hadrami Diaspora: Community-Building on the Indian Ocean Rim (Oxford: Berghahn Books.” Journal of World History 5 (1994): 1–21.” in Transcending Borders: Arabs. The Great Divergence: China. and Grant Evans. Economic and Cultural History (Aldershot: Variorium Collected Studies Series. “Clash of Civilizations?” Foreign Aff airs 72. 1985).. Pearson. Kenneth Pomeranz. 1990). Trade and Civilization in the Indian Ocean: An Economic History from the Rise of Islam to 1750 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. eds. On the Sindhi diaspora. and the Making of the Modern World Economy (Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press. Huub de Jonge and Nico Kaptein (Leiden: KITLV Press. Takeshi Hamashita. 29 Susan Bayly. 32 Resil B. Récits de voyages des asiatiques: Genres. see Arif Dirlik. 96–7. Ajia no naka no Nihon [Japan in Asia]. ed. 25 Takeshi Hamashita. (Tokyo: Tokyo University Press. 2008). Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. ed.” in Southeast Asian Studies: Pacifi c Perspectives. 27 Anthony Reid and Maria Serena Diokno.H. “Completing the Circle: Southeast Asian Studies in Southeast Asia. 1992–3). p. “Transnationalism. 33. revised edition (London: Verso. East Asia and the Global Economy: Regional and Historical Perspectives. Brains of the Nation: Pedro Paterno. and Selden (London: Routledge. and from Asia. conception de l’espace (Paris: École Français d’Extrême Orient. Hamashita.. 24 Peter J. For a theoretical clarification of the role of the “contact zone” — in which different nationalities come together in a given space — in mediating the imagination of the nation. pp. p. 2003). and the National Imaginary.” Cultural Studies 7. 28 Claudine Salmon. “On the Road Again: Metaphors of Travel in Cultural Criticism. Asian Voices in a Postcolonial Age: Vietnam. Ishii Masatoshi. 2000). Umi no teikoku [Empire of the Seas: The Making of a Region] (Tokyo: Chuokoron.” p. ed. Mark Selden and Linda Grove (London and New York: Routledge. Arrighi. Arizona State University. 2003). Pardo de Tavera.” in Th e Resurgence of East Asia: 500. 26 An important exception is Vicente L. Program for Southeast Asian Studies. 6 vols. Mojares. “Introduction: Th e Rise of East Asia in Regional and World Historical Perspective. Katzenstein. 1 (Spring 2004): 11–25. within. See also Cliff ord. 1991). Isabelo delos Reyes and the Production of Modern Knowledge (Quezon City: 23 .” The China Review 4. India and Beyond (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ed. Southeast Asia’s centrality to region-formation is discussed in Takashi Shiraishi. 2005). 1 (1993): 224–39. T. 1996) is a pioneering collection of essays dealing with travels to. The Promise of the Foreign: Nationalism and the Technics of Translation in the Spanish Philippines (Durham: Duke University Press. and Murai Shosuke. 2005). 150 and 50 Year Perspectives. 57. “Traveling Cultures. Reid (Tempe: Monograph Series Press. 2. 30 Janet Wolff. Rafael. mentalités. A World of Regions: Asia and Europe in the American Imperium (Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Another example of a country study that uses a regional lens is Arano Yasunori. China. 2007).KK Global: Hau 23 Giovanni Arrighi. 31 Benedict Anderson. the Press. and Mark Selden. see Abidin Kusno.I. ed. and Tim Rees and Andrew Th orpe. Vietnamese Communism 1925–1945 (Ithaca: Cornell University Press. 1919–1939. Harry G. Thailand and the Southeast Asian Networks of the Vietnamese Revolution. 1982). the Highest Stage of Capitalism (New York: International Publishers. 3 (2009): 329–88. See also Michael Weiner. 3 (2003): 327–39. “Vietnamese Narratives of Tradition. 38 Christopher E. showing how the “Enlightenment” was not simply imported. chapters 16–18. 36 Hu. p. Alexander. Eickelman and James Piscatori. International Communism and the Communist International 1919–1943 (Manchester: Manchester University Press. CT: Praeger. 221.KK Global: Hau Ateneo de Manila University Press. ed. does not address the political imperatives behind Tan Malaka’s travel to Shanghai as well as the relationship between Shanghai and Tan Malaka’s role as regional facilitator of the Comintern’s Far Eastern Bureau. Lenin. 35 V. 26. 1999). 1998). 40 Dale F. p. Shanghai and the Politics of Geographical Imagining. Restoration and Continuation. Asian Voices in a Postcolonial Age. 37 On the impact of travel to Shanghai on Tan Malaka’s political career and ideas. Eickelman and Piscatori (Berkeley: University 24 .” American Historical Review 102. though insightful.” Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography 24. 2008).” in Enduring Socialism: Explorations of Revolution and Transformation. 4 (1997): 1030–51. Imperialism. International Maoism in the Developing World (Westport. “Tan Malaka. 1969). 158–89. but locally produced. p. Th e Comintern: A History of International Communism from Lenin to Stalin (Hampshire and London: Macmillan Press. Kusno’s account. “Comintern in East Asia. See also Caroline S. Migration. and the Religious Imagination. 1996). Exchange and Friendship in the Worlds of the Global Socialist Ecumene. Goscha. pp. 55. 34 Susan Bayly. 1999). pp. 39 Robert J. “Daydreaming about Rizal and Tetchou: On Asianism as Network and Fantasy. See also Bayly.” in Kevin McDermott and Jeremy Agnew. 125–47. 1885–1954 (Surrey: Curzon. 262–4. West and Parvathi Raman (Oxford: Berghahn Books.” Philippine Studies 57. “Transnationalism and the Predicament of Sovereignty. 33 See Prasenjit Duara. “Preface” and “Social Theory in the Study of Muslim Societies. 2006).” in Muslim Travellers: Pilgrimage.nh Kim Khánh. illuminates the interactions between the Propagandist Filipinos working in Spain and those in the colony (including Isabelo delos Reyes). Hau and Takashi Shiraishi. 46 Wiktorowicz. McKenna. See also the essays in Barry Rubin. 231–73. 2010). The Muslim Brotherhood: The Organizations and Policies of a Global Islamist Movement (New York: Palgrave Macmillan. The Society of the Muslim Brothers (Oxford: Oxford University Press. Robert W.” Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 6. 3–40. Quintan Wiktorowicz. pp. p. Islamist Networks: Th e PakistanAfghan Connection (London: Hurst. 43 Thomas M. America and International Terrorism. and State Power in Jordan (Buffalo: State University of New York Press. (London: Pluto Press. Hefner and Patricia Horvatich (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Muslim Politics (Princeton: Princeton University Press. xii–xxii.. ed. chapter 5. 111–46. 46 (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. 3–25. Perceptions of the Haj: Five Malay Texts. 19.” Bijdragan voor Taal-. Abinales. 45 See Mariam Abou Zahab and Olivier Roy. 1998). 42 The classic text on the Islamic revival is Richard P. 2003). pp. “‘Ordinary Muslims’ and Muslim Resurgents in Contemporary Malaysia. pp. 1993). The New Politics of Islam: PanIslamic Foreign Policy in a World of States (London: RoutledgeCurzon. 1996). ix–xiv. and John Cooley. “The Haddj: Some of Its Features and Functions in Indonesia. “Th e Aft ereffects of Hajj and Kaan Buat. See also Michael G. 6. 2 (1975): 178–89. Michael F. and the essays in Eric Tagliacozzo. ed. Patricio N. 44 Chandra Muzaffar. Research Notes and Discussion Papers No. 2001). Hefner. 3rd ed. Eickelman and James Piscatori. 1997). Virginia Matheson Hooker and Anthony Crothers Milner. ed. 1 (1962): 91–154. Islamic Nationhood and Colonial Indonesia: The Umma below the Winds (London: RoutledgeCurzon.KK Global: Hau of California Press. 1986). see also Naveed S. the Muslim Brotherhood. 1984). Robert W. 2009).. Sheikh. 2002). p. Management of Islamic Activism. “Islam in an Era of Nation-States: Politics and Religious Renewal in Muslim Southeast Asia. pp.” in Islam in an Era of Nation-States: Politics and Religious Renewal in Muslim Southeast Asia. 1997). 2003). en Volkenkunde 118. Taufi k Abdullah and Sharon Siddique (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. see the pioneering work by Jacob Vredenbregt. Mitchell. The Management of Islamic Activism: Salafis. Peletz. 2003). Laff an.” in Islam in an Era of Nation-States: Politics and Religious Renewal in Muslim Southeast Asia. 41 Dale F. In Southeast Asian studies. Land-. Hefner and Patricia Horvatich (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Making Mindanao: Cotabato and Davao in the Formation of the Philippine Nation-State (Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press. Narifumi Maeda. “Islamic Resurgence: A Global View (With Illustrations from Southeast Asia). 1990). Muslim Rulers and Rebels: Everyday Politics and Armed Separation in the Philippines (Berkeley: University of California Press. Movement and the Longue Durée (Stanford: Stanford University Press. 2000). ed. pp. Unholy Wars: Afghanistan. Southeast Asia and the Middle East: Islam. ed. 25 .” in Islam and Society in Southeast Asia. Thomas Sanderson. For a book-length study of the rise of overseas Chinese nationalism in Indonesia. and the Growth of the Asian International Economy. p.. 2006). p. 1973). Japan Studies in Economic and Social History. Bangsa Melayu: Malay Concepts of Democracy and Community.” Japan Echo (Feb. Noorhaidi Hasan. Th e Modern Muslim Movement in Indonesia. Pogroms. 5. 52 See. Achmadi Moestahal. “Introduction. Sidel. chapters 1 and 2. 1. An Age in Motion: Popular Radicalism in Java 1912–1926 (Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Kaoru Sugihara. see Ariffi n Omar. On the ambivalent relationship between nationalism and Islam in Malaysia. Community and Criminality in Southeast Asia and Australia: Assessments from the Field. 1850–1949. 53 Weiner. 1945–1950 (Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press. 1900–1942 (Ithaca: Southeast Asia Program. 1993). Williams. see Lea E. Cornell University. China. see Natalie Mobini-Kesheh. 49 Ibid. 2006). and Deliar Noer. Riots. 1960).” in Japan. the research by Nelly van Doorn-Harder and Kees de Jong. p. Militancy and the Quest for Identity in Post-New Order Indonesia (Ithaca: Southeast Asia Program. xviii. 1999). See also Hefner. “Comintern in East Asia. and the essays in Confl ict.” Th e Comintern. for example. John T. “Islam in an Era of Nation-States. 51 Shiraishi.KK Global: Hau 47 See. Chapter 7. Th e Hadrami Awakening: Community and Identity in the Netherlands East Indies. 1900–1942 (Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press.W. ed. 26 . 1.” p. (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press). Arnaud de Brochgrave. 2006). C. 1900–1916 (Glencoe. Watson discusses two autobiographies by self-identified Muslim Communists. 50 Takashi Shiraishi.” Th e Muslim World 91. 1990). for example. Cornell University. Hasan Raid and H. On the impact of Indonesian nationalism on. Overseas Chinese Nationalism: The Genesis of the PanChinese Movement in Indonesia. IL: The Free Press. 54 Takashi Shiraishi. 3–4 (Sept. “The Pilgrimage to Tembayat: Tradition and Revival in Indonesian Islam. 2001): 325–54. Laskar Jihad: Islam. 2009). “Aiming to Build an East Asia Community. for example. in his Of Self and Injustice: Autobiography and Repression in Modern Indonesia (Leiden: KITLV Press. DC: Center for Strategic and International Studies. Age in Motion. 2006): 58–63. 48 Kaoru Sugihara. Jihad: Religious Violence in Indonesia (Ithaca: Cornell University Press. ed. Hadhrami identity. 17. and David Gordon (Washington. vol. 59 Stanley Fish. Routes. “Introduction. p. 2001). ix. Mojares. 2004).O’G. William H. ed. p. 1–37. ed. 8. 1995).. p. 58 Cliff ord. Christoph Giebel. University of Wisconsin-Madison. Alfred W. Derrida and Autobiography (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ordinary and Heroic. pp. 56 See the essays in Cheah. 280–5. p. ed. 63 Amin Sweeney. 2. Reputations Live on: An Early Malay Autobiography (Berkeley: University of California Press. 1995). On globalization’s relationship with nationalism and its implications for the concept of “belonging. 57 Cheah. 60 Anthony Reid. 9–16. 18. p. Epstein (West Lafayette: Purdue University Press. 91–2.” in The Postnational Self: Belonging and Identity. Inhuman Conditions. “Introduction: Biography of Lives Obscure. Brains of the Nation.KK Global: Hau 55 See Pheng Cheah’s cogent critique of Clifford and Homi Bhabha’s notions of cosmopolitanism in “Given Culture: Rethinking Cosmopolitical Freedom in Transnationalism. Inhuman Conditions: On Cosmopolitanism and Human Rights (Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 1972): 1–3. 61 Robert Smith.” Indonesia 13 (Apr. xix–xx. Roxana Waterson. See also Benedict R. Anderson’s classic analysis of the Javanese student-activist Soetomo’s memoirs. ed. 61. for example. McCoy (Madison: Center for Southeast Asian Studies. 80–119.” see Ulf Hedetoft and Mette Hjort. and trans. McCoy. and Heroic. Telling History: Autobiography and Historical Imagination in Modern Indonesia (Berkeley : University of California Press.” in Southeast Asian Lives: Personal Narratives and Historical Experience. “On the Importance of Autobiography. 2006).” in Lives at the Margin: Biography of Filipinos Obscure. “Introduction: Analyzing Personal Narratives. “Given Culture. 1991). “Biography and Intention. Waterson (Athens: Ohio University Press. Susan Rodgers. 62 See. Telling Lives. 2. 2007). 1980). 2002). p.” in Contesting the Subject: Essays in the Postmodern Theory and Practice of Biography and Biographical Criticism. Ordinary.” pp.” in Cheah. “A Time of 27 . ed. Hedetoft and Hjort (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. pp. 82–7. pp. Imagined Ancestries of Vietnamese Communism: Ton Duc Thang and the Politics of History & Memory (Seattle: University of Washington Press. pp. KK Global: Hau Darkness and a Time of Light: Transposition in Early Indonesian Nationalist Thought. Hau. p. 66 Reynolds.. 70 C. in A. 18. ed. and Self-Constitution in the Anti-Colonial Text. 69 McCoy. 68 On the importance of auto/biographical practice to representative politics in the modern nation-state. 2000). 71 Watson. 7. Commodifying Marxism: The Formation of Modern Th ai Radical Culture. 1987). Thai Radical Discourse. See also his “Th e Author-Function and Th ai History. pp. 241–70. Reynolds.” Auto/Biography Studies 12. see Marc Sageman. 1981–2004 (Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press.” Kajian Malaysia 9. 1. Subalternity. 7.” Asian Studies Association of Australia Review 10. p. On the Subject of the Nation: Filipino Writings from the Margins. “Post-modern Perspectives on Malay Biography.W. 1990). For a book-length discussion of auto/ biography and politics in the Philippines. Th ai Radical Discourse: The Real Face of Thai Feudalism Today (Ithaca: Southeast Asia Program. chapter 2. The Invention of Politics in Colonial Malaya: Contesting Nationalism and the Expansion of the Public Sphere (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Of Self and Injustice. see Kasian Tejapira. “Introduction. Language and Power: Exploring Political Cultures in Indonesia (Ithaca: Cornell University Press. see Caroline S. 65 Craig J. 1991): 24–38. On the circulation and consumption of Marxist texts in Th ailand. see Betty Joseph. 1 (Spring 1997): 52–70. 2001).” in Anderson. Also of interest is Milner’s critique of Wang Gungwu. p. 1927–1958 (Kyoto: Kyoto University Press. 1975). and Leaderless Jihad: Terror Networks in the Twenty-first Century (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 2008). 64 Anthony Milner. 72 28 . Self and Biography: Essays on the Individual and Society in Asia (Sydney: Sydney University Press for the Australian Academy of Humanities. Watson. Milner. 2004). 2004). Cornell University. Understanding Terror Networks (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 1995). 2 (Dec. pp.” in Reynolds. 1 (1986): 22–8. 15. “Jit Poumisak in Thai History. pp. 23–5. Of Self and Nation: Autobiography and the Representation of Modern Indonesia (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.” Lives at the Margin.C. “Representation and Representative Politics: Reading Female Insurgency. 67 On the application of biographical study and “social networks” theory to the study of militant Islam. and annotated by Encarnacion Alzona (Manila: Jose Rizal National Centennial Commission. who was fl uent in Spanish and Tagalog and taught himself English. Malaysia and Singapore) (Monmouth. Phan B. Thai Radical Discourse. and Ranjit Gill. 1961). Anthony Reid. 1978). was exiled by the Americans to Guam in 1901. see. 83 (Athens: Ohio University Center for International Studies. Marr. Southeast Asia Series No. 1999). 75 For an important corrective to the paucity of biographical narratives of border-crossing women political activists. 2009. Reminiscences. and Mabini and the Philippine Revolution (Quezon City: University of the Philippines.i Châu. and died shortly after he returned to the Philippines in 1903.KK Global: Hau Some of these political travelers have written or authorized auto/biographical essays and books. Jose Rizal. ed. trans. 76 We are indebted to Anthony Reid for this quotation and for encouraging us to expand some of the ideas in this paragraph. see Cesar Adib Majul’s biography of the “Brains of the Philippine Revolution. Overturned Chariot: The Autobiography of Phan Boi Chau. 1991). 74 For an early example of a home-grown intellectual and political actor who laid claim to the ideals of the Enlightenment and the French Revolution..” in Reflections from Captivity. Chí Minh’s “Prison Diary. Apolinario Mabini. trans. and Sanh Th ong Huynh (Athens: Ohio University Press. Reynolds. 3 vols. SHAPS Library of Translations (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Phan B. 29 ..i Châu’s “Prison Notes” and H. Mabini. trans. 1990).” Apolinario Mabini (1864–1903). Wales: Merlin Press. for example. 2006). Vinh Sinh and Nicholas Wickenden. trans. From Jail to Jail. ed. personal communication. Among the works available in English. Tan Malaka. Life as the River Flows: Women in the Malayan Anti-Colonial Struggle (An Oral History of Women from Thailand. 9 Sept. see Agnes Khoo. 73 Cf. Christopher Jenkins. 1964). David G. and annotated by Helen Jarvis. Revolutionary (Manila: National Heroes Commission. pp. Khanh Tuyet Tran. 13–8. 1960). Malaysia’s First Prime Minister and His Continuing Participation in Contemporary Politics (Singapore: Sterling Corporate Services. Of Political Bondage: An Authorized Biography of Tunku Abdul Rahman. 3 (2009) 329–88 © Ateneo de Manila University 30 . but not on the part of Rizal. A chance encounter in the late 1880s between José Rizal and Suehiro Tetch� offers one snapshot of an early link in the “Asianist” network.KK Global: Hau CARoLINE S. It also looks at the historical trajectory taken by Asianism. and the different kinds of “social daydreaming” and projects encoded by subsequent scholarly and popular accounts of the Rizal-Suehiro meeting. No. Keywords: AsiAnism • networK • fAntAsy • rizAl • JApAn • politicAl novel PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57. HAU TA k A S H I S H I R A I S H I Daydreaming about Rizal and Tetch� On Asianism as Network and Fantasy This article views the historical phenomenon of “Asianism” through the critical lenses of network and fantasy. The article explains how and why that link gave rise to fantasies about Asianist solidarity on the part of Suehiro as seen particularly in the comic travelogue Oshi no ryok� (1889). and Mariano Ponce (seated). 1) and Suehiro Tetchō (fig. 211). 7). Elsewhere we have addressed the question of Asianism’s relevance for current efforts at community building in the name of “East Asia” (Shiraishi and Hau 2009). not on the part of Rizal. Shin 2005. 2. We will then explain how. and a call for solidarity of the peoples and countries of “Asia” in anticolonial and anti-imperialist endeavors against the Eurocentric and European-dominated international order (Aydin 2007. We seek to account for how and why that link gave rise. 73–74). some of these publications have raised questions about the ideationality (or. This encounter offers one snapshot of an early link in the network. “streams” (nagare) (Ajia shugi sha tachi no koe Understanding Asianism as Network Asianism has two major ideational components: one consists of civilizational discourses on “Europe” and “Asia”. despite his insights. the kinds of metaphors that historians of ideas routinely use to make sense of the plurality of voices and perspectives within Asianist thought and practice have not been particularly useful in helping us understand Asianism as an historical phenomenon. More than sixty years would pass before another type of Asianism emerged in the postwar period. metaphors such as “waves” (nami) (Gotō 2007. In this article. Hotta 2007). Yet. del Pilar. at least one person in Rizal’s Filipino circle of friends. Fig. the other a critique of the double standards by which Europe claims the universality of the Enlightenment’s ideals 31 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57. “streams” (Dennehy 2007. and activists came to link up with a number of people in Suehiro’s Japanese circle and began working together in an effort to realize the collective fantasy of “Asian” solidarity. 251–52). Takeuchi makes two important points about Asianism. Second. to be more precise. one that would draw on historical memories of the Rizal-Suehiro meeting and Meiji Asianism in order to rework the Japan-as-leader rhetoric of the wartime era in support of an altogether different set of political fantasies about the “close friendship” between Filipinos and Japanese. 293–94). Asian Division Fig. 93) are common. owing to its variegated nature. Reflecting on the ongoing regional project of East Asia community building. 3 (2009) 330 HAU & SHIRAISHI / ASIANISM AS NETwoRk AND fANTASy 331 . Southeast Asian Collection. 1. and “embryos” (Iwamoto 1968. colleagues. at least on the part of Suehiro.” One is its network quality. 2). We will discuss these two features by focusing on a chance encounter in the late 1880s between José Rizal (fig. interestingly. “seeds” (Szpilman 2007. Suehiro Tetch� Source: National Diet Library 2004a I and values while in reality practicing Eurocentric racism and exclusions. José Rizal (left). we turn our attention to two major but critically overlooked features of that historical phenomenon known as “Asianism. 225). it should not be understood as a monolithic construct. who worked together for La Solidaridad Source: Library of Congress. First. its understanding of Asia visà-vis Europe is best understood as a “mood” (mūdo) that pervades Japanese discourses of different “official” ideologies. words like “strands” (Beasley 2001. The leading postwar Japanese literary critic Takeuchi Yoshimi famously declared that myriadness (sensa-banbetsu) is the defining characteristic of Japan’s Asianism (Takeuchi 1998.1 And still others have sought to draw lessons from the history of Asianism and explore their relevance and implications for present-day regionalism and regional studies (Saaler 2007. there has been a resurgence of scholarly interest in Asianism as discourse and historical phenomenon. the lack thereof) of the current “East Asia Community” (Higashi-Ajia kyōdōtai) (Matsumoto and Nakajima 2008).KK Global: Hau n recent years. and Sun 2007). In Japanese-language scholarship. 99). In English-language scholarship. Others have attempted to draw parallels between the current regional project and the prewar attempt on the part of Japan to create a regional bloc in the name of “East Asia Community” (Tō-A kyōdōtai) (Koyasu 2008. 1–2. to fantasies about Asianist solidarity but. Marcelo H. in less than ten years’ time. “threads” (Hotta 2007. and the other is the strong element of fantasy that informs and animates Asianist thinking and practice. No. In the first group. 3. 1999. virtual. single case studies of one particular person’s ideas have lent nuance and complexity to individual exponents of Asianism. there is great merit in the task of identifying different phases or variants in the development of pan-Asianist thought. 12) have been used. money) and concerted action for their respective political projects. the active mutations of ideas that reshape not only the ideas themselves but also the contexts of speaking and doing through which people comprehend and use these ideas. and “generations” (sedai) (Ajia shugi sha tachi no koe 2008. Some such as Toyama Mitsuru believed in Japanese leadership.or China-centered phenomenon. 3 (2009) . but also the thoughts and actions of numerous individuals living and moving across borders. or simply a set of “ideas” articulated by a number of intellectuals or officials. network theory offers a corrective to the dangers of studying Asianism as if it were a Japan. other (and far more) wildly divergent fantasies were not. Miyazaki T�ten Source: National Diet Library 2004b Fig. and even sexual contacts. but for others ideas were not what mattered but rather material aid (in the form of arms. for example. Asianism cannot be explained adequately if we look only at official policies and institutions because. 2001). or some combination thereof. Equally important. 4. since it was a far more widespread and general phenomenon and involved not just Japanese intellectuals and bureaucrats. Asianism can best be understood and studied as a network formed through intellectual. if not revolutionized. they overlook the role of fantasy—understood in both its senses as an imaginative stand-in for reality and as a symbolic mode of apprehending reality—in animating these ideas and structuring their reception across time.3 The network approach to the study of intellectual and political Asianism in fact allows us to circumvent some of the conceptual failings that beset history-of-ideas approaches to Asianism. Two recent studies have tracked the evolution of Japanese (pan-)Asianist discourse through the vicissitudes of domestic and international politics. As for the second group. institutional. For some Asianism was a way of thinking about how different but not inferior “Asia” is compared with Europe. they tend to exclude thoughts and actions that do not fit neatly into the categories. Eri Hotta (2007) identifies three major “threads” of pan-Asianist thinking: the “Teaist” pan-Asianism exemplified by Okakura Tenshin’s “Asia is one” thesis. 32 HAU & SHIRAISHI / ASIANISM AS NETwoRk AND fANTASy 333 332 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57. and the meishuron (“Japan as leader”) pan-Asianism. same culture” (dōbun dōshu) solidarity with China but characterized by divergent positions. the “Sinic” pan-Asianism based on “same letters. fall. but the metaphors they rely on to suggest connections between ideas arising from different eras serve only to confuse readers. 340–41) would argue. These metaphors tell us nothing about the reinventions of these ideas. But while attempts at classifying Asianism into various categories and phases are useful (and are probably unavoidable for heuristic purposes). 11). No. as Hashikawa (1980. and revival of political pan-Asianism. Cemil Aydin’s (2007) comparative study of pan-Islamic and pan-Asianist thought identifies six moments in the changing power configuration and legitimacy of the Eurocentric international system and its attendant discourses and their contributions to the rise. which provided the ideological cement for Japanese imperialist policy in the 1930s. while others like Miyazaki Tōten thought that Japan itself would be radically transformed. there were some like Okakura Tenshin who stressed the superiority of Asian cultural or spiritual values as a counterpoint to Western material superiority. Some thought Asia could be remade in Japan’s image. but others such as Konoe Atsumaro were more interested in establishing a partnership between Japan and China for mutual self-defense. training. but others like Umeya Shōkichi did not. by revolutions in Asia (Uemura 1987. physical. Inukai Tsuyoshi Source: National Diet Library 2004c 2008. or else an empty signifier that functioned to mask or rationalize Japanese imperialism. Neither can Asianism be studied only in terms of either Japan-centered intellectual history or imperialist history. emotional. 1996. while some Asianist ideas ended up being institutionalized as official policy.KK Global: Hau Fig. As metaphor and method.2 Among so-called pan-Asianists in Japan. Yu Kil-chun. Most of the historical works on Asianism are reconstructions and descriptions of network(ing): of people forming tightly-knit (alongside loosely-knit) groups and working together for specific goals under specific circumstances. Japanese revolutionary rōnin Miyazaki Tōten (fig. contact established between at least two human beings) can appear and disappear over time and space. Sun Yat-sen. photographic plate between pp. The hopes and dreams of a new social order and a new world that they articulated could not be completely contained or accommodated by the political and social frameworks established by their respective states.KK Global: Hau Fig. 4). the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries were an age in motion—people were moving about. No. the Philippines. At certain historical moments and under specific political. An “Asianist” network began to take shape from the late 1870s. when “new politics” and political movements had begun to emerge in Japan. a certain node attracts many links and becomes a hub. not just from colony to metropole. 5).4 The cartographic term “Asia” provided one hanger upon which different kinds of political fantasies about transforming the political order in one’s country with the help of one’s fellow “Asians” could be laid out. and communicational circumstances. These movements brought people into contact with each other: a Filipino like Mariano Ponce. 2 and 3 There are other advantages to analyzing Asianism in terms of networks. Filipino nationalist Mariano Ponce met Sun at Inukai’s party (fig. Networks are governed by the two laws of growth and preferential attachment. Koreans. a time of great political and intellectual ferment. and so on (Ponce 1965. Miyazaki also introduced Sun to Hirayama Shū and then to Inukai Tsuyoshi (fig. which in turn tends to attract more links. from Asia to Europe. c. Links can be cut or a network can become ever more complex as more and more links are added. and Phan Boi Chau—who end up 33 334 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57. Japanese. but within Asia as well. and Cambodians. Miyazaki 1993). 3. would move to Hong Kong and Japan and later visit Indochina. Sun got to know some of the Chinese students (ryūgakusei) based in the Kantō area (cf. 3 (2009) HAU & SHIRAISHI / ASIANISM AS NETwoRk AND fANTASy 335 . Korea. Vietnamese. Hubs are people at the right place at the right time—like Inukai Tsuyoshi. Through Miyazaki. 5. 1899 Source: Ponce 1965. and vice versa. Moreover. economic.. For example. and other areas in this part of the world. Mariano Ponce (standing) and Sun Yat-sen in Yokohama. meeting and talking to Chinese. Siamese. A network is dynamic because links (i. 40). and Ponce in turn introduced Sun to Korean reformists Pak Yonghyo (see note 40). An Kyong-su. 3) met Sun Yat-sen while Sun was staying with his good friend Chen Shaobai in Yokohama. Mariano Ponce.e. China. fresh from his sojourn in Europe. with whom he discussed (through “brush conversation” [bitan] in literary Chinese) the possibility of enlisting the help of Chinese revolutionaries to purchase arms and ammunition for his planned A Chance Encounter José Rizal met Suehiro Tetchō on board the S. which aimed to encourage Vietnamese students to go to Japan. after the success of the Chinese Revolution and the establishment of the Republic of China. 3 (2009) . allows us to see Asianism in synchronic and diachronic terms of multiple agents.e. in ways that create the potential for people within the network (who may not necessarily know each other) to link up with each other. But Phan Boi Chau also worked with Inukai and Miyazaki to bring Vietnamese youth to Japan for training in 1905. 6) traveled to Japan from Vietnam. or else are shunted aside or repressed. For instance. He moved to Siam. He had been abroad since he was 21 years old. in other words. Belgic. sometimes competing. he went to China and established the Vietnam Restoration League in Canton (Guangdong). Some of his associates remained in Siam and set up a branch of the society there. nor a linear path or teleology in the development of ideas. and had traveled through Spain. in the level of political (or even personal) commitment. linking people in ways that allowed many of these people (and their ideas and programs of action) to “travel” across and between “official” and “nonofficial” channels. and practices without rigidly fitting them into categorical boxes. Some of them would be sent by Nguyen Ai Quoc to study in the Soviet Union during the 1920s (for details see Furuta 1995.S. Through Chinese scholar-journalist Liang Qichao he met Inukai. All that a network requires is a minimum motive—not necessarily ideational. No. but personal. and Inukai in 1932) and the emergence of new hubs can account for the rise to prominence of specific Asianist ideas and policies and the sidelining or eclipsing of others. Germany. the mixed language(s) used in this network precludes any easy transfer or exchange of ideas. An important feature of the Asianist network is that it flourished as an interface between state and society. and even financial—for a link to be created. a network approach allows us to see the ideological fluidity of Asianism. and five of the nine founding members of the Revolutionary Youth League that Nguyen Ai Quoc (Ho Chi Minh) established in 1925 had been brought to China through this study program. After 1919 this branch brought promising youths from Vietnam to study in Siam. territorial boundaries. and entails instead a fair amount of imaginative/intellectual labor based on “freely translated” extrapolation and gap-filling guesswork. expand and become institutionalized. 80. and fantasy making. in 1905 Phan Boi Chau (fig.. on 13 April 1888. A network shows the connections between people across territorial and ideological boundaries who have very different ideas (and often no elaborated theory) of Asianism. which left the port of Yokohama at 11:15 a. Furthermore. people of sometimes different political persuasions) across time and space. Inukai introduced him to the Tōa Dōbun Shoin (East Asian Common Culture Academy). on the link between Phan Boi Chau and Ho Chi Minh. and complicated by elements of projective and introjective identification. or with those who are not necessarily Asianists. who in turn introduced Phan Boi Chau to Sun Yat-sen. institutions. wishful thinking. a Japanese school in Shanghai (see note 20).KK Global: Hau uprising against the French (Phan Boi Chau 1999. “Introduction. France. In 1911. 6. The death of a hub (for example. ideas. More. ideas grow and evolve. A network approach offers us a picture of how different. Ponce in 1918. connecting communities of links (i. and Phan Boi Chau was forced to leave Japan. A network.” 19–20). professional. and political and communicative spheres. Austria. where he set up a farm and tried to find funding for activities against the French. let alone equal intensity. A network does not imply any uniformity of ideas nor consistency. 101–2).m. who end up working together even when they disagreed with each other. Rizal was then 27 years old. Phan Boi Chau Source: Trường Việt Ngữ Hồng Bàng 2006 rule. see Phan Boi Chau 1999. some of whom it sent to China for political training under Phan Boi Chau. Switzer- 34 HAU & SHIRAISHI / ASIANISM AS NETwoRk AND fANTASy 337 336 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57. But the Ðông-Du movement broke down after the conclusion of the Franco-Japanese Agreement of 1907. Sun in 1925. which was under French colonial Fig. His aim was to promote the ÐôngDu (Visit the East) movement. By the 1920s the number of Vietnamese who had made their way to China via Siam reached the 100 mark. and how some ideas gain more purchase over others across time. In the years ahead. a mere ten months before Rizal’s execution in December. Setchūbai (Plum Blossoms in the Snow. a study tour of America and Europe. 1894). Como el japonés no hablaba más que japonés.” Inasmuch as Oshi is the only one of Suehiro’s works that provides an extended account of. 1609/2007). 35 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57. especially Rizal “the national hero. 216). and its emphasis on personal chemistry and the growing emotional intimacy between two men thrown together by the vicissitudes of traveling to the “West. Rizal did not make any money from his writing. 1889). A little over a year earlier. in his time perhaps second only to Fukuzawa Yukichi in popularity and influence. 34. he published one more novel. Twelve years older than Rizal. where he stayed for forty-six days before boarding the Belgic. Suehiro traveled to France and Italy. Upon reaching San Francisco. and then sailed back to Japan after passing through Aden (in present-day Yemen). he had published his first novel. and Italy. No. Particular attention will be given to Suehiro’s comic travelogue. The chance encounter between Rizal and Suehiro on board the Belgic has left a firsthand paper trail for future scholars and students of Rizal. for which purpose he had booked himself a passage aboard the English steamer. In Rizal’s writings there is only one extant reference to Suehiro.000 copies printed were held up at customs. Noli me Tangere (1887). I served as his interpreter up to our arrival in London] (Rizal 1931. after being imprisoned as a Radical and director of an independent periodical. The importance of Oshi no ryokō lies in its illumination of the affective dimension of the relationship between Rizal and Suehiro. Suehiro Tetchō was a celebrated man of letters. In contrast. in time to witness the furor created by his novel. containing the two aforementioned political novels. Suehiro’s encounter and travels with Rizal. Rizal wrote: “hice conocihice miento con un japonés que venía á Europa. two political novels (seiji shōsetsu). That same year. He was a journalist for the Chōya Shimbun and a political activist in the Freedom and People’s Rights Movement (Jiyū Minken Undō). we will analyze the textual accounts of their encounter by Rizal and Suehiro. he moved on in February 1888 to Japan. In a letter to Mariano Ponce dated 27 July 1888. cited in and translated by Anderson 2005.” But the fictionalizing impulse of the comic travelogue as a literary genre raises. Commonsensical assumptions about Oshi’s depiction of Suehiro and Rizal’s joint travels must contend against the generic conventions of the kokkeibon (humorous works). scholars have had to rely on the text for glimpses of the “human” side of both men. Oshi no ryokō (Mute’s Travels. He had been twice imprisoned for writing articles critical of the government. the Suehiro archives have yielded no less than five major references: a comic travelogue. después de haber estado preso por Radical y ser director de un periódico independiente. with their propensity for comic exaggeration. Nanyō no daiharan (Storm over the South Seas. as well as later interpretations by subsequent generations of scholars. in Berlin. Ahead of him lay a seat in Parliament and an untimely death from cancer of the tongue in February 1896. El Filibusterismo (1891). Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas (Events in the Philippine Islands. 1889). Colombo (Ceylon). Oshi no ryokō. In London Rizal worked on his annotations (1961) of Spanish colonial official Antonio de Morga’s early seventeenth-century book. and an omnibus. le serví de intérprete. a compilation of notes on his trip to France. The royalties from his two bestselling political novels. and faced exile and execution. and concrete details about. were enough to finance his first trip abroad. 1891) and Arashi no nagori (Remains of the Storm. he became embroiled in the tenancy problems in his hometown of Calamba. since the Noli was banned and most of the 2. and Shanghai. and Philippines-Japan relations. Kōsetsu-roku (Stork Prints on Snow. 3 (2009) HAU & SHIRAISHI / ASIANISM AS NETwoRk AND fANTASy 339 338 . hasta nuestra llegada á Londres” [I made the acquaintance of a Japanese who was going to Europe. who is not mentioned by name. 1887). What is remarkable about this paper trail is how little there is of it in the Rizaliana archives. He returned to Manila in August 1887. Hong Kong. Ō Unabara (The Big Ocean. 1886) and Hanama no uguisu (Nightingale among Flowers.KK Global: Hau land. which has been almost entirely overlooked by critical studies of Suehiro’s writings. and then sailed to Liverpool before parting in London. and had found it expedient to leave the Philippines after only six months. Suehiro. Since the Japanese spoke only Japanese. at the British Museum. 1891). How do we account for the disproportionality of textual references to that encounter by the parties involved?5 Put in another way. the two men traveled together by train to New York. Oshi is animated by the twin impulses to mimesis and fantasy typical of the betterknown writings of Suehiro. the question of the book’s mimetic relationship to reality. rather than resolves. why should the chance meeting and subsequent joint odyssey of these two men figure so much in Suehiro’s writings and so little (at least relatively speaking) in Rizal’s? In the following sections. From Hong Kong. ” For Ikehata. draw on historical facts. 53–60).”7 Nanyō. in order to “solve the contradictions between the Filipinos’ and Japanese’s interests” (ibid. is “devoid of any factual description of that country’s [the Philippines’s] natural setting or daily life. one that reveals “Rizal’s hope to have independence for the Philippines” and the other “Tetcho’s desire to have an expanded territory for Japan.. Shimizu’s (2007) study identifies two conjoined but potentially contradictory strains of thinking in Nanyō. Suehiro’s messages are made inseparable. The SuehiroRizal encounter not only reveals the nature of early Asianist links that would grow. Moreover..e. 49) rightly point out that Suehiro had never been to the Philippines. according to Ikehata (2003. 3 (2009) HAU & SHIRAISHI / ASIANISM AS NETwoRk AND fANTASy 341 . 117–19. 26).) cites Kōsetsu-roku 36 340 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57.” This contradiction is resolved in Suehiro’s fiction through recourse to the discourse—or rather. as springboard for propagating national independence in Asia. of which Suehiro’s novel is studied as an example. reflecting his understanding of the situation as presented by Rizal. for a recent example. 24–26. representing Japanese society’s common interest in the Philippines at that time” (ibid.” Ikehata (2003. it also illuminates the emotional connections and fantasies that are an important but much-overlooked component of the Asianist network. Shimizu 2007. fiction—of “kinship ties. he [Suehiro] does give a fairly accurate picture of the problems that confronted Philippine society at the time. 1) do these renditions of the Rizal-Suehiro relationship encode? What kinds of dreams and desires did they help shape and regulate. Ikehata and Shimizu’s readings of Nanyō highlight one of the most fundamental elements of Japanese thinking about territorial expansion to the South Seas: the “fantasies and dreams” (ibid. 14).” most notably in Suehiro’s “description of one possible scenario wherein Japanese colonists seize the opportunity presented by the rising unrest among the Filipinos to wrest power from the Spaniards. especially Nanyō no daiharan. 65). in less than a decade. they [i. Thus the revolution.”6 Discourses on Japanese expansion to the South Seas. Japan. Shimizu (ibid. better-known writings about the Philippines. The Japanese creation of Manchukuo has merited special attention as a case study in competing utopian visions. Suehiro as well as two others. No. 17) arguing that “[t]o a large extent.. such as Japanese migration to the Philippines and Japanese intermarriage with Filipinos. Ikehata 2003. pan-Asianist thought—an essential component of empire building (see the classic works by Yamamuro 1993 and 2001. Manchurian empire building took place in the realm of the imagination.. however. Both Setsuho Ikehata (2003. as part of a broader argument about the development of nanshin-ron or discourses on Japan’s southward advance (Yanagida 1942. into a network.” She also argues that “Suehiro departs from other expansionists because his interest goes beyond promoting Japanese trade and colonialism.KK Global: Hau What is remarkable about this text. liberation and independence of the Philippines are imagined by Tetcho as the inevitable steps toward returning to the true mother country. Suganuma Teifu and Yamada Bimyo] freely expanded their own fantasy and imagination not only for the Philippines but also for Japan. however. 24) and Hiromu Shimizu (2007.) that informed and animated these Japanese writings about the Philippines attest to the irreducibly imaginative nature of nanshin-ron and find their most exemplary articulation in the form of fiction writing. What kinds of “social daydreaming” (to borrow a felicitous phrase from Stites 1989. 24). while serving as the main conduits for the transmission of Rizal’s ideas about Spanish colonialism and Philippine independence that would appear eventually in Nanyō and its sequel.” Shimizu (ibid.) goes one step farther in arguing that “With very limited knowledge about the Philippines. it is Suehiro’s encounter with Rizal and their ensuing conversations that sparked Suehiro’s interest in the Philippines. with Louise Young (1998. This emphasis on the imaginative dimension of nanshin-ron resonates in turn with the current scholarship on the Japanese empire in the first half of the twentieth century. scholarship that considers ideology—in particular. Ikehata (ibid. Subsequent scholarly and popular accounts of the Rizal-Suehiro connection also endow the Rizal-Suehiro meeting with meanings well beyond the horizon and contexts of the original encounter. see Duara 2003. is how the twin impulses can produce insights into the two men’s relationship that are at variance with the kind of political thinking that runs through (and colors critical studies of) Suehiro’s later. 25) reads Nanyō as demonstrating the “clever incorporation of expansionist ideas. 60) argues that “Tetcho resorts to the idea that Takayama=Rizal is a direct descendant of a Japanese feudal lord. and what activities and projects did they enable (as well as discourage)? Personal Affiliation and Textual Filiation in Suehiro’s Political Novels Some of the best studies of Suehiro’s writings on Rizal and the Philippines have focused on the political novels. Saniel 1998. About to be arrested and imprisoned. Discussing the foreword. but he was unsuccessful.e. a double of a liberalist Tetcho who shows sympathy and solidarity for Rizal and a nationalist Tetcho who insists on Japan’s expansion to the South Sea[s. “wet (my) sleeves”] and secretly told myself that this gentleman and the lady are like characters in a novel written by an able man of sentiment.” Lanuza and Zaide’s assertions are obviously based on Jimbō Nobuhiko (1962. and graceful and touching. While there is no doubt that Suehiro’s conversations with Rizal moved him and provided him with ideas for his novel.” Like Ikehata. imputing a one-on-one relationship between Nanyō and the Noli and between Takayama and Rizal nonetheless creates great difficulties for scholars because the process of literary inspiration and creation is not a simple case of transcribing reality (in this case. and the gentleman told me that he had recently heard from her. He made me feel sorrow and indignation. and a seasoned political activist and bestselling novelist.ful. In other words. Textual filiation in this case is a matter of personal affiliation.” and attributes this modeling to the fact that “Tetcho was deeply affected by Rizal’s personality. whose article “Rizal and Tetcho” makes the same claims. The gentleman sadly told me: [“]This lady is from Manila and my fiancée. Caesar Lanuza and Gregorio Zaide (1961. One day. Shimizu (2007. . in December. This originary inspiration is the basis for subsequent scholarly claims about the “resemblances” and “similarities” between the two men’s fictional creations. I asked about her. And yet. [“]Because I [the Manila gentleman] stayed abroad and could not tell her when I would be able to go home. Suehiro’s foreword to Nanyō shows that his conversations with Rizal did not permit the easy relay of ideas and intentions from Rizal to Suehiro..[”] A few months later..” This mimetic impulse can be traced largely to a much-quoted passage from the Foreword of Suehiro’s Nanyō (Suehiro 1891. nunnery].. This gentleman secretly plotted to achieve the independence of this archipelago. she looked Japanese. 191). of real-life conversations). Nanyō]. I also cried [tamoto wo uruoshi. which policies and about the resistance of the people of the archipelago.” and that Ō Unabara is “similar to Rizal’s El Filibusterismo.” Assumptions about the one-way transfer of ideas from Rizal to Suehiro run through some of the scholarly and nonscholarly accounts of Nanyō. No. claim that Nanyō “resembles” the Noli me Tangere in “plot and characterization. and saw a picture of a woman. I could not bring her with me when I fled the country. say. 190) writes that Nanyō “was apparently modeled after Rizal and his fiancée Leonor Rivera. he fled abroad. His conversations with Rizal may have given him the kernel of ideas for his novel. In fact. and give it the title Nany� no daiharan. lit. One day it occurred to me to write a political novel that develops [fuen shi] the facts pertaining to this gentleman and the lady. 190. he also represents a nationalist Tetcho in one way or another. 62). One of the recurrent concerns of these accounts is with identifying resemblances and parallels between Suehiro and Rizal’s novels as well as Nanyō’s protagonist Takayama and Rizal. After all Suehiro was twelve years older than Rizal. I [the author] met the gentleman and asked after his sweetheart at home. 58) also notes that Suehiro was “unaware of the reality of the land and the people there. I visited the place where he was staying. Takayama is a double of Rizal and Tetcho or. It may easily be guessed that even though their acquaintance lasted for a short period. with her complexion. KK Global: Hau as containing Suehiro’s description of “the intimate scene when Rizal saw him [Suehiro] off later.” But Shimizu’s (ibid. He told me about how the Spanish gov- ernment plundered the riches of the archipelago through its colonial Suehiro’s conversations with Rizal are said to have “inspired” Suehiro to write Nanyō. Hearing that.[”] The [Manila] gentleman looked very sad. 35) raises two pertinent questions: Was it perhaps because Rizal was not a master of Japanese nor was Suehiro a master of any of the Western languages Rizal spoke. because he had little knowledge about the Philippines except for those provided by Rizal. Jimbō (ibid. they were spurred by each other. Josefa Saniel (1968. but his own skills as a novelist meant drawing on his own knowledge and experience of writing political novels to construct his fictional world. She was beauti- 37 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57. i. she left home and entered the temple [i. with bright eyes and white teeth. 60) nuanced discussion points to multiple interpretations rather than a definitive reading of the novel: “[w]hile [Nanyō protagonist] Takayama in the novel is Rizal. 3 (2009) HAU & SHIRAISHI / ASIANISM AS NETwoRk AND fANTASy 343 342 .. as if unable to bear the sorrow. . for example. 1–2): I visited the West last year and came to know a gentleman from Manila .e. For while there may Anderson reminds us that Suehiro’s popularity as a writer is rooted in the ability of his novels and writings to speak of (and speak to) the collective fantasies of his Japanese readers. respectively. are reproduced in Suehiro’s Takayama Takahashi and Seiko Takigawa. It was just what Blumentritt was doing in Austro-Hungary. for they were both fiction writers? The difficulty of imputing a one-on-one relationship between texts and characters is evident in Saniel’s (ibid.e.. 35–36) discusses parallels in the love stories. 35). promote and/or protect his interest. the same argument could easily have been made about the Noli and. imprisonment. perhaps more tastefully appointed. .) own essay. Whereas studies of nanshin-ron focus mainly on the producers of fantasies. she also points out the differences in plot and characterization. Anderson highlights the point of view of the consumers. one might say. episodes from Rizal’s biography with those from Noli me Tan- gere? .) notes the similarities in Takayama and Ibarra’s efforts to “work for the liberation of their country from colonial oppression. Where Capitan Tiago ingratiates himself with both civil and ecclesiastical authorities of the Spanish government in order to be “resemblances” and “parallels” between the Noli and Nanyō. are [sic] repeated in Seiko’s father. and that they thought about securing the disinterested help of Japanese volunteers and the protection of the Japanese state. The fact that the novels’ differences are as important as the similarities raises questions about the nature of textual filiation. Endowing his Filipino protagonist with a Japanese name (as was the literary convention of the time) and Japanese ancestry was a literary strategy by which Suehiro sought to make his “private sympathies broadly popular” through the creation of a character with whom 38 HAU & SHIRAISHI / ASIANISM AS NETwoRk AND fANTASy 345 344 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57. is in Bion Ward. and of his compatriots’ eagerness to throw off the Spanish yoke. Takigawa is planning to liberate his country from Spain. as evident in the absence of any references in Nanyō to friar abuses and the divergent (one happy and one tragic) endings of the novels.. Saniel (ibid. and escape of the protagonists. a significant difference exists between Capitan Tiago and Takigawa.) offers the following interpretation: Quite likely Rizal told Suehiro of his immediate personal plans. destruction by fire of houses. However. Or was this combination of episodes a product of Rizal’s or KK Global: Hau Suehiro’s imagination. who locates Suehiro’s Philippine novels within the context of Suehiro’s entire body of works and comes to the conclusion that “actually. incidents of police raids. But even as she focuses on the “episodes and points” of Nanyō that “bear some resemblance” to the Noli (ibid. He reminds us that Ō Unabara was “written before the Sino-Japanese war that opened the era of Japanese imperialist expansion. If he wishes to show his readers that Filipino patriots had blood connections to early Japanese victims of persecution. the hero who is a Filipino striving for Philippine independence from the Spaniards is of the same mold.. 218). 113). The sympathies of the former political prisoner were visibly engaged. offers a different take on Suehiro’s novel. he was trying to make his private sympathies broadly popular. revolution on Takayama’s part.” Using his trademark comparative juxtaposition. these acts of Noli-Nanyō textual filiation may come up against different acts of textual filiation such as the one by the literary historian Iwamoto Yoshio (1968.” while also underscoring the differences (i.” Even Suehiro’s ideas of southward movement cannot be understood in any simple way and apart from literary questions of audience and readership.” the final section of which is devoted to an extended comparison between the Noli and Nanyō: Rizal’s Crisostomo Ibarra and Maria Clara as each an only child of affluent families. Moreover. Even in Ōunabara (The Mighty Ocean) (1894). Maria Clara’s supposed father Capi- tan Tiago—who is a wealthy merchant of Manila and who lives in a vul- garly furnished home in Binondo. reforms on Ibarra’s) in the ways in which the two characters addressed this issue. and also before the insurrections of Martí and Bonifacio. the death of the principal characters’ fathers. for example. Saniel (ibid. 3 (2009) . “Jose Rizal and Suehiro Tetcho. Anderson (ibid. and the arrest. No. the protagonists who act as expositor for Tetchō in many of his novels are very much the same. Spanish literary giant Benito Pérez Galdós’ Doña Perfecta (1876). .caused misconceptions or misunderstanding of facts resulting in Sue- hiro’s combining in his introduction to Nany� no Daiharan previously quoted. Benedict Anderson (2005. whose home. say. Takigawa. 309–13) shows that Suehiro’s stated positions on Asian affairs do not dovetail neatly with the territorial expansionism of nanshin-ron. The political novels’ status as “fiction” afforded their authors some degree of protection from libel suits and government persecution.). thereby allowing readers to share in the experiences recounted by the novels. The word “play” (gi) has been added to the author’s byline on the frontpiece of the 39 HAU & SHIRAISHI / ASIANISM AS NETwoRk AND fANTASy 347 346 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57. the first of Suehiro’s writings to refer to Rizal. one would have expected more attention to be paid to Oshi no ryokō (Mute’s Travels. these novels allowed their authors to refer to and comment on the politics of the day while providing a convenient site for working through their ideas and promoting their respective advocacies. What accounts for the fact that Mute’s Travels has not been accorded as much attention as Suehiro’s political novels about the Philippines? There is evidence that Suehiro himself thought of the book as a “play” in the double senses of comic drama and activity for amusement. the political novel itself is constituted out of these twin impulses to fantasy and mimesis. Since neither Suehiro nor Rizal kept a diary of their travels together. believed that the key to the revival of Asia lay in reforms modeled after those of the European powers and called for the alliance of Japan and China to defend Asia from European imperialist aggression. Even as fantasy is central to Suehiro’s novels about the Philippines. Meiji political novels (seiji shōsetsu) are considered the “first literary products of a new Japan” (Iwamoto 1968. objects. the preoccupation with the question of how Suehiro’s texts connected to the “reality” of his meeting and friendship with Rizal. who knew even less about the Philippines than the author did. 248–49. Oshi is the only work in which Rizal appears as a “character” in 242 (roughly 60 percent. 84). 3 (2009) . after all. persuasion (or manipulation). although Rizal is not mentioned by name but is called the “Manila gentleman” (Manira shinshi) throughout the book. its strong presence in the novels raises rather than resolves the question of the political novel’s mimetic relationship with “reality. and Dumas père that were translated into Japanese. covering the first two volumes) out of the 394 pages that make up the three-volume book. It is.” The mimetic impulse is palpably felt in the novels’ claim to verisimilitude in their descriptions of people.8 The “Manila Gentleman” in Oshi no ryok� (Mute’s Travels) Given that scholarly interpretations of Suehiro’s Philippine novels are grounded in a keen awareness of the importance of Suehiro’s chance meeting with Rizal and the role of their short friendship in shaping Suehiro’s fiction. Suehiro also called for nonintervention in the Korean crisis in the 1880s and opposed the Sino-Japanese war in 1894. the seiji shōsetsu were nevertheless deeply rooted not only in Japanese literary tradition but also in the political situation of Meiji Japan (ibid. 7). But other than a book by Caesar Lanuza and Gregorio Zaide (published in 1961) and two articles in English by Kimura Ki and Jimbō Nobuhiko (published in 1962). effects that go beyond our commonsensical ideas about the “work” or function of literature as expression. The vital presence of fantasies has important effects on the relationship between text and context. While Suehiro freely fantasized about fictive kinship between Japanese and Filipinos and the “voluntary” request by Filipinos for Japan’s protection against European imperialist powers in his Philippine novels.KK Global: Hau Tracing their lineage to the political novels of Bulwer-Lytton. only Oshi provides readers and scholars with a fictionalized “firsthand” account of that encounter and details of their travels together. could identify and sympathize. and settings. The mimetic impulse also directs readers and scholars to Suehiro’s “politics” in real life.9 At the same time. To some extent. 1889) (fig. there have been no other publications that have taken Oshi seriously as a text. who focused his attention on China. While a short vignette of Rizal appears in the first chapter of Kōsetsu-roku (which appeared in the same year as Oshi and is the first work of Suehiro’s to refer to Rizal by name) and in the foreword of Nanyō. events. or dialogue with other authors or texts or literary traditions. But the incitement to fantasy that scholars view as a defining characteristic of Suehiro’s fiction coexists alongside the countervailing impulse to mimesis. Fantasies invite author and reader alike to review the conditions of possibility for their standards of meaning or else find (and even create) new frames of values. The impulse to fantasy is evident not only in the fictional devices employed by the novels. his own political stance on issues pertaining to Asia was far more “realist” in its awareness of Japan’s limited capability as a “small-country” power. No. 231–39. communication. readers. which drew on the details provided by Oshi to reconstruct the meeting between Suehiro and Rizal. Disraeli. A close reading of his nonfictional writings (Manabe 2006. Suehiro. but most important in the ways in which the givens of “reality” are altered by the novels. confuses the bathtub with the urinal. In Hizakurige the two principal characters are “Edo” scoundrels. their actions and thoughts echoing and amplifying each other. and indulgences in food.” Much of the slapstick humor of the book comes from the Japanese traveler’s inability—no doubt exaggerated for maximum effect—to understand the American and European languages as well as things American and European. To some extent. Yanagida Izumi (1961. This picaresque novel from the late Tokugawa period follows two commoners nicknamed Yaji and Kita as they embark on a pilgrimage to the west along the Eastern Sea Route from Edo (now Tokyo) to Ise (in present-day Mie. so that the byline reads “Suehiro Tetchō sensei gicho” (“play-written by Mister Suehiro Tetchō”) rather than the conventional “Suehiro Tetchō sensei cho” (“written by Mister Suehiro Tetchō”). and women. 1765–1831) great comic travelogue. What makes Oshi different is that it does not cast the Manila gentleman in the same comic role and light as the Japanese. Oshi no ryokō owes its episodic structure and comic style and tone to the kokkeibon (humorous book) tradition of which Hizakurige is a representative work. 3 (2009) . Another important difference between Oshi and Hizakurige lies in Oshi’s differential treatment of the Japanese main character and the “Manila gentleman. No. makes the mistake of ordering steak twice in one meal. territorial expansion. and sloshes bathwater all over his clothes. The episodes in Hizakurige recount the comic figures’ madcap adventures. mood. vol. Oshi’s style. Indeed. The Japanese. no passages from which historians may glean “hard data” on Meiji-era facts and ideas about Japan’s foreign policy.KK Global: Hau Fig. and the ensuing foibles and faux pas that punctuate his trip abroad. and imagined kinship with the Philippines/Asia. Oshi no ryok�. Rather than a friend (and fellow “Japanese”) whom the Japanese gentleman HAU & SHIRAISHI / ASIANISM AS NETwoRk AND fANTASy 349 40 348 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57. 7. But it also marks a significant departure from that tradition because the foibles and adventures of its Japanese protagonist unfold not in the course of his westward journey along the eastern main road within Japan. south of Osaka). There is no discussion of politics in Oshi. they think and act as a pair. 1 Source: Suehiro 1889 book. but on a “pilgrimage to the west” that brings him from Japan to America and Europe along an “eastern seaboard” route that involved crossing the Pacific Ocean from Yokohama to San Francisco. sightseeing. sake. Title page. for example. and theme differ considerably from those of Suehiro’s “serious” political novels. tone. Tōkai dōchū hizakurige (1960). 52–53) states that Oshi is modeled after Jippensha Ikku’s (real name Shigeta Sadakazu. . 2: 10–11). In San Francisco. Although Rizal’s letter tells us that Suehiro spoke only Japanese.” not “Filipinas”) is someone whom the Japanese gentleman takes for “Japanese” but who turns out to be someone “other” than Japanese. upon being told by the latter that he had not. looks into the gentle- man’s face. The Manila gentleman then hands the change to the Japanese. the Manila gentleman informs his fellow traveler that he does not have to pay any customs duties. pu pu pa)—pu-pu-pa being Suehiro’s (1889. 1: 6–7) The Manila gentleman (who. Suehiro 1889. The well-traveled Manila gentleman acquaints the Japanese gentleman with the way things are done in America. The Japanese learns that the Manila gentleman needs to go to England as soon as possible. the Manila gentleman is someone altogether new and unexpected—a stranger. 3 (2009) HAU & SHIRAISHI / ASIANISM AS NETwoRk AND fANTASy 351 350 . I don’t understand English. volume two of Oshi makes a reference to the two conversing in “half uncommunicable English and Japanese: pu-pu-pa” (hanbun futsū no Eigo to Nihongo nite. the Manilan laughed and said that this was because they were the only two “yellow-faced” men on the train (Suehiro 1889. When the Japanese asks how the Manilan figured out that the change belonged to him.g. Since the Japanese protagonist. he decides to travel together with him.” with one language kicking in when the other failed. since the conversationally challenged Suehiro might have had a better reading knowledge of English. Elsewhere the Japanese. Suehiro was known to have studied English before embarking on his travel. the Japanese “has come to know the Manila gentleman very well.. speaks Japanese. having stayed in our country for some time. and besides. and walks away. The Japanese gentleman asks whether the Manila gentleman had bribed the customs officers.” In other words. It is also possible that there were paper exchanges of written English between the two. and says something that the gentleman cannot under- stand. yellow- faced. takes off his hat. and greets him.. is depicted as speaking “ungrammatical English” (bunpo ni awanu Eigo) (ibid. does not want to travel alone.has known all along. What will happen to the Japanese gentleman if he cannot find someone who will interpret for him? And is there anything more to this encounter or does it remain just that: a chance encounter? Oshi provides no other details about their interaction on board the Belgic.. and. [“]Sir.” a dependence underscored by repeated references to the Japanese “following” (literally) the Manilan. The Manila gentleman “speaks English well. the first meeting between them ends with the Manila gentleman walking away after saying he is “Manila. 2: 6) comic onomatopoeic rendering of their conversation. lacking English. It remains for the moment a singular event. the initial encounter as narrated by Oshi does not presage any developing relationship between the two. introduces himself as being from “Manila. I’m glad to have found my countryman. they leave for New York via Denver and 41 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57. 49). and looks around him. 2). Lunching separately. realized that because he himself had tried to bribe the customs officers they had come to him one after another and he had had to pay (Suehiro 1889. 1: 43–50). And so he hurries after the man. After staying in San Francisco for four to five days. not Japanese. No. the Japanese gentleman has come to depend on the “gentleman from Manila. Here is the account of their first encounter: KK Global: Hau The gentleman sits on his luggage. armed with an English-Japanese dictionary (ibid. The hotel owner gives the change to the Manilan. it is likely that Rizal and Suehiro communicated in a mixture of “irregular Japanese” and “ungrammatical English. The reader is held in suspension about the future not only of the Japanese gentleman but the Manila gentleman as well. Almost all of the episodes involving the two characters reinforce the Japanese protagonist’s impression of the Manila gentleman as a “man of deep sincerity” (itatte jitsui no aru otoko) (ibid. (Suehiro 1889. though irregularly” (Suehiro 1889.10 Moreover. Such are his thoughts when a short. Then Oshi surprises the reader by stating that. So this gentleman says. asking: [“]Sensei [Sir]. Like the fictional Manila and Japanese gentlemen. for example. by the time the steamer arrived in San Francisco. and had even translated Thomas Babington Macaulay’s essay on Lord Clive (1840) in 1885. black-haired and properly attired man walks past him. 2: 59. appearing puzzled. it should be noted. 109).[”] Whereupon this man says in irregular Japanese: “I am Manila.” That is to say. Nihonjin arimasen]. in other words—whom the Japanese happens to meet on board a ship. whether for sightseeing or to the restaurant (e. not Japanese” [watakushi Manira. 1: 49). There must be a Japanese on this ship and I have to find him and ask him to serve as an interpreter for me. are you also trav- eling abroad?[”] This man. the Japanese pays his bill and hurries to catch the train. 8). the Manilan “looks carefully at what the gentleman had written and asks. he tells the Manilan that he is unable to go with him to Denver. These two women are prostitutes.. The two men go their separate ways upon arriving in London. all the more reason to pay attention to them. Just look. But they are not ladies. The Manilan makes all the arrangements for the two of them. tells him. The Japanese gentleman often visits the Manila gentleman. who has made so many mistakes in his travels. 3 (2009) . the Manilan asks the steward to bring the Japanese to the rear car so that they can both enjoy the passing scenery of Castlegate (ibid. I think it sufficiently captures the scenery of the Falls. 29–30). I had thought that he was a decent person and was friendly with him.’ And the gentleman says. didn’t you?” “Indeed. 65–69). “If they are poor women. he can more or less guess its value. and even treats the Japanese to dinner (ibid. he sees the Manilan with a female The Manilan. so I don’t intend to talk to him any more. but the Manilan tells him not to worry (ibid. and that’s why I asked you about it. The Manila gentleman thinks that if it is a poem written by the gentleman. we are equal. Then the Japanese notices that other passengers who hitherto had been friendly to him have stopped talking to him.’ Because I know you are not the kind of person who would do something immoral. On one visit. poor women. finds it funny that the Manila gentleman should also suffer the same misfortune as he did. but rather.” “What did the priest say?” “[The priest said:] ‘Even though the Japanese gentleman does not speak English very well.’ he says proudly. He wonders why. The Japanese thanks the Manilan for all his help and tells him that he will give him his address as soon as he settles down. 55–57).” “Ah. 27).” “That is not what ‘poor women’ means. 117–19) KK Global: Hau Chicago on the continental train. Some of the episodes offer glimpses of the Manila gentleman’s sense of humor. When the Japanese man’s money is stolen. the Japanese misses the train. The Manilan invites the Japanese to enjoy the Niagara Falls.” The gentleman hurriedly says. When the Japanese composes a poem. On the train from Ogden to Denver. Since the Japanese does not have much money on him. scratching his head. In another episode that illustrates the Japanese’s unfamiliarity with social codes and linguistic conventions.. No.. no?” “What fun?” 42 HAU & SHIRAISHI / ASIANISM AS NETwoRk AND fANTASy 353 352 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57. So now. I haven’t been friendly with any western [seiy�] women but that lady—” The Manila gentleman interrupts: “You were thoughtless. The Japanese. ‘I can’t do it. but it is unfortunate that you cannot read it.’” (ibid.“The two women with whom you sat at the same table: you talked and exercised with them. many gentlemen exercise with ladies on deck. The Manilan has taken care of all their arrangements. hahaha. “You had fun. It is not polite for this priest to accuse me of immorality. the Japanese falls into conversation with two very friendly white women on the deck of the steamer bound for London. Then the Manila gentleman says laughingly: ‘If it is such an interesting poem. So I also walked behind the women. On the way from Denver to Chicago. but finds the Manilan waiting for him in Omaha. On the way from Chicago to Niagara..” He [the Japanese gentleman] laughs loudly and says. 72–73). a Canadian steals the Manilan’s luggage. and then tells the Japanese to pay. “That priest is a man who says stupid things. I suspected that it [the priest’s snubbing of the Japanese] was because of these women. smiling. ‘What is it?’ ‘This is a Chinese poem that I have just written. you can’t help it. now I understand what that priest meant. as you see. explaining to the Japanese that he had kept only a small amount of money in his luggage (ibid.. he is in a panic. The Manilan then takes a five-dollar coin out of his pocket to settle the bill.” (ibid.. orders a big dinner for them both. But I noticed his unseemly behavior [futsugo senban]. please translate it into English. for about thirty minutes I walked with them on the deck. The chemistry between them is compounded by elements of class belonging and male bonding (as seen in the above exchange on “poor women”) as well as racial solidarity. 3 (2009) .” (O-sei-san. (ibid. solicitude. in the process. lacking the linguistic and social skills as well as travel experience to make his way to the so-called West. Then it occurs to him that the right word is “W. Moreover. Oshi’s self-mocking tone is reserved exclusively for the Japanese character. laughter. It only meant that Rizal’s encounter with Suehiro did not give birth to fantasies on Rizal’s part about Japan. when acute social or public embarrassment loses its amusement value and begins to discomfit the reader. 66–69). In highlighting the eventfulness of the Japanese main character’s travels with the Manila gentleman. transforming itself. but it had to be cut short owing to the “urgency” (alluded to in Oshi) of Rizal’s need to move on to Europe..!” The Manila gentleman lets out a big laugh and tells him where the water closet is located. That no such diary entry records his impressions of Suehiro—for whom he would in turn serve as guide and interpreter— does not mean that his encounter with Suehiro meant little to him (a point we will address in the final section of this article). His romance with Usui Seiko—who had served as his guide and interpreter—had led him to prolong his stay in Japan.11 At the same time. is a cosmopolitan who is at home in the world.. a kind of innocent abroad who elicits laughter (and empathy) from the (largely middle-class) Japanese reader as the reader imagines himself or herself in the position of the Japanese gentleman. a repetition of an earlier incident. is also not named. 159) But the Manila gentleman’s unexpected gift of warmth.” and he screams: “W.) The depth of his feelings for her is evident in a diary entry written on the day of his departure from Yokohama (two pages of which are reproduced in Lanuza and Zaide 1961. by contrast. The Manila gentleman. No. almost reportorial stance on the Manila gentleman brings into sharp relief the highly dramatic and comically exaggerated situations. “Where is gentleman?” The Manila gentleman does not understand. In the same letter to Ponce where he mentions Suehiro. Oshi turns the accidental meeting of these two characters into a socially lifesaving encounter for the Japanese protagonist. Rizal’s fantasies were mainly focused on the Philippines and Europe. the Japanese tells the Manilan that he badly needs to urinate. verging on the slapstick. The Meiji gentleman comes across as a provincial. There is personal chemistry between the two. and tact also functions to shield the protagonist (and the narrative) from the “shock” of extreme comedy. but it is also important to note that they are often the only “yellow-faced” passengers traveling first-class on either ship or train. 55) would have made the feeling of sympathy and fellowship (at least on Suehiro’s part) much easier to express in writing. Rizal’s “Europe” and Suehiro’s “Asia” The fact that Oshi does not lend itself to being read as an example of nanshin-ron may account for its relative obscurity within the context of critical studies of Suehiro’s oeuvres.friend. the Japanese gentleman considers the Manilan a “gentleman” just like himself. Rizal’s trenchant criticism of the exclusionary policies and practices of Spanish colonial rule in the Philippines hinged on his intellectual (and linHAU & SHIRAISHI / ASIANISM AS NETwoRk AND fANTASy 355 43 354 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57. he writes of visiting different parts of Japan “at various times with the interpreter. the evolving relationship between the two does not fit neatly into the kind of nanshin-ron in which Japan is assumed to exercise leadership in “helping” Asia achieve independence while also. Similarities in Suehiro and Rizal’s personal backgrounds (see Shimizu 2007. in the way that Suehiro’s encounter with Rizal acted as midwife for multiple fantasies about Philippine independence and Japan’s territorial expansion.” It is possible to view the Manila gentleman as a literary foil for the Japanese gentleman.C. like Suehiro. a comic figure whose words and actions may invite the wrong kind of laughter. KK Global: Hau He [the Japanese] asks. in which the Japanese gentleman continually finds himself. But there may still be another way to explain why their real-life encounter—biographical traces of which can be discerned in the comic travelogue—fired Suehiro’s imagination while meriting only one casual mention in Rizal’s letters. who helps the Japanese gentleman navigate the social and linguistic codes and conventions of the “West.C. In their final exchange. the twinned sites of his intellectual critique and political activism. Oshi’s matter-offact. Suehiro’s liking for Rizal—evident in the foreword of Nanyō and the first chapter of Kōsetsu-roku—precluded any attempt to turn the Manila gentleman into a mere reflection of the Japanese protagonist. and India on the other. “Two Eastern Fables. I deem it necessary to quote the testimony of an illustrious Spaniard who in the beginning of the new era controlled the destinies of the Philippines and had per- sonal knowledge of our ancient nationality in its last days. No.” as secretary (Mojares 2002.” that he wrote in English and published in Trubner’s Record in July 1889 while he was still in London. common to all races that lived in that [“eastern”] region” (Rizal 1964. and that “the leading idea of both came either from the South.” That his encounter with Suehiro did not generate a slew of “Asianist” fantasies is something that needs to be explained.” that Rizal sought knowledge of. and useful contacts that would help mobilize support for the Philippine cause. and so without knowledge or authority to speak of what I neither saw nor have studied.” It was in “Europe. with an international (European) board of officers and himself. 3 (2009) . He also briefly mentioned the possible Malay origins of the Japanese. on one side. Rizal compared the Philippine and Japanese versions of the fable of the tortoise and the monkey. and argued that the Philippine version (which had “more philosophy. Rizal’s “silence” about Asianist solidarity also stemmed from his understanding of 44 HAU & SHIRAISHI / ASIANISM AS NETwoRk AND fANTASy 357 356 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57. or had its origin from the Philippine Islands. material culture.” such a common civilization was already “extinct” in the present time. how it could be made to signify). As with the Noli.” which involved working through written sources in several languages. But rather than focusing on “Asia” and what it signified (or. for which purpose he had even planned to establish an Association Internationale des Philippinistes that same year. Java. In the British Museum. Rizal’s priority was to recover his country’s past and to put the Philippines on the intellectual map. since Rizal did have a notion of the region as a civilizational construct. the place where he could read.KK Global: Hau guistic) access and claim to the universalist. the same place where Suehiro’s Nanyō protagonist would also discover his ancestral origins in and links to Japan. Rizal writes: Like almost all of you [“Filipinos”]. more diplomatic usage”) one. his country’s past. and authority with which to speak of. Borneo.” “Europe” was the base of his activism. In the dedication page. write. more plainness of form”) was older than the Japanese (“more civilization and. 2002. Europe was where he could do the preparatory work of “call[ing] before you [Filipinos]” the “shade of our ancestors’ civilization” as preparation for studying the “future. Lacking access to the indigenous records in his own country. Asianism was based on an implicit acceptance of “Europe” as a civilizational entity. Rizal located. Mindanao. and annotated Antonio de Morga’s Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas. sufficiently differentiated from those of neighboring Japan and China. 121. and languages. Rizal does not indicate the different places (Madrid/Spain. Rizal traced the origins of the Japanese to the Malays of the “South.. and drew the conclusion that there existed “an extinct civilization. 119). 58). and inclusive ideals of enlightened “Europe.” not “Asia. more important.” while simultaneously deepening his self-identification as a “Malayo-Tagalog” whose living culture was. Rizal’s self-identification as “Malayo-Tagalog” meant that his interest lay more in thinking through the historical specificity of the Philippines and the “Malayo-Tagalog” race and culture. and establish a network of friends. see also Mojares’ fine analysis. In this article. Moreover. But rather than trace the origins of the Nanyō people to the Japanese as Suehiro would do with his protagonist’s ancestry. allowed him to envision a common ancient civilization in the “East”13 that included the Tagalog and the Japanese as well as other “races” in the “region. allies. Paris/France. Rizal also puts “Europe 1889” below his byline in the preface to the Morga annotations. Instead he writes simply: “Europa. An intellectual trace can be found in fact in a short article. so to speak. I was born and brought up in igno- rance of our country’s past. copied by hand. a way of clearing a space for his small country in between the far more visible and relatively well-defined civilizations of China and Japan. 73). at least in terms of scholarship. and afterwards migrated northwards with the people or the race which came from the South to inhabit the Japanese and the Riu-Kiu Islands” (Rizal 1964. As we mentioned at the outset.12 His attempts at recovering his “ancestors’ civilization.” In the dedication page (“A mi pátria”) of the Noli. The fact that Rizal’s political fantasies were tied to Europe cannot be taken as clear-cut evidence of Eurocentric thinking on his part. Rizal set his sights on “Europe. from Sumatra. a self-identified “Malayo-Tagalog. his familiarity with British historiographical and ethnographic accounts of the Malay archipelago (ibid. 61) had led him to a comparative study of Tagalog and Malay customs. progressive. a little over a year after he met Suehiro. Rizal traveled to London. 1886.” And though he posited a civilization “common to all races that lived in that region. Rizal did have a view of the “Far East” as a civilizational whole. and Germany) wherein he worked on the Noli. Notionally speaking. greed and ambition are vices of the strong. whose interests are in the Pacific and who has not participated in the despoliation of Africa. a generalized ignorance that led 45 HAU & SHIRAISHI / ASIANISM AS NETwoRk AND fANTASy 359 358 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57. Hong Kong.” Rizal imagines the possibility of America’s entry into the imperialist scramble. British.” France “has much to do and sees more of a future in Tongking and China. to the south England. and is in addition easier to take. this is contrary to its traditions. y es además más fácil de tomar. when this one [Manila] is no longer Mistress of the Orient. Rizal had long been aware of how little his country figured in the public imagination outside the Philippines. In a widely-cited essay. China will consider itself happy if it is able to remain unified and is not dismembered or partitioned among the European powers that are colonizing on the Asian Continent. North America would be quite a troublesome rival once it joins the profession. y no lo consentirá fácilmente. it would not be allowed to do so freely by the European powers. and over there are [i. etc.” Holland “is sensible and will be satisfied with retaining the Moluccas and Java. It is not impossible. It is true that it has an excess of population. ó se la reparten las potencias europeas que colonizan en el Continente asiático.?”15 Germany confines itself “to the easy conquest of territories that belong to no one. Rizal imagines a situation in which the historical experience of the colonial powers in the region. To the north. Lo mismo le pasa al Japón. Encuéntrase además bajo una diplomática presión europea tal. Shanghai. and “what need has John Bull the merchant to kill himself over the Philippines. he already has] Singapore. and the geopolitical possibilities and constraints that militated against either easy identification or solidarity with the Philippines’s neighbors. The same goes for Japan. 3 (2009) . which know fully well that the appe- tite is excited by the first mouthfuls. militates against further colonial infringement on the newly federated republic. the French spirit does not shine in eagerness for colonization.) realpolitik in the region. it has Russia. No. she is under so much European diplomatic pressure that she will not be able to think about external affairs until she is rid of it. whose seas and coasts bode ill for the Dutch expeditions. The reason for such an optimistic view of the independence prospects of the Philippines is that the colonial powers are unlikely to find any compelling rationale for (over)extending themselves to the Philippines. which covets and spies on it. may think some day about overseas possessions. (ibid. but nevertheless dismisses the prospect as unlikely: Perhaps the great American Republic. (ibid. and in case it should openly make an attempt. which has even brought in[to Japan] its official language. que se le entra hasta en el idioma oficial. al Sur la Inglaterra. His optimistic view of Philippine prospects for independence (and misreading of American intentions) stands in stark contrast to his pessimistic view of China’s and Japan’s prospects: La China se considerará bastante feliz si consigue mantenerse unida y no se desmembra. The British had given the Philippines back to the Spaniards after occupying Manila for only two years in 1762–1764. Furthermore.KK Global: Hau Thus.) Rizal’s political imagination does not see “Asia” (let alone Asian solidarity) as offering any alternative critique or power base from which to address or intervene in the current (and future) geopolitical configuration in the region. and Dutch colonial powers in the region. but Korea attracts it more than the Philippines. que no podrá pensar en el exterior hasta librarse de ella. which will not be easy. Verdad es que tiene exceso de población. German.14 Rizal (1889–1890) presented his own “political fantasy” of the region by sketching a possible future scenario in which a “federal republic” of the Philippines will be established without being swallowed up by the French. and besides. “Filipinas dentro de cien años” (The Philippines a century hence). Moreover. Sumatra offers it more of a future than the Philippines. nor do the territories of the States have a plethora of inhabitants. because the example is contagious.e. Tiene al Norte la Rusia. But neither is the Panama Canal open. coupled with the risk of overextension and the relative insignificance (at least vis-à-vis these powers’ existing colonies and colonial policies) of the Philippines’s contribution to the enrichment and glory of these colonial powers.. pero la Corea le atrae más que Filipinas. and Harrison manifested something of this sense in the Samoan question. que lo codicia y espía. His celebrity status as a leading writer and the wide readership he commanded as a journalist and leader of the opposition were instrumental in getting him elected (representing Ehime Ward). Suehiro had to rely on a series of interpreters in his travels through America and Europe. as well as in the name of. along with China. and the Meiji restoration in 1868 were part of the regional backdrop against which he had come of age. turn out to be a political blessing in disguise because its geopolitical “smallness. His somewhat hurried tour of America. Suehiro’s travel through British-colonized Asia (Ceylon. and Russia—in the region. France. the British cavalierly planned to “lease” Yokohama as a naval base.KK Global: Hau to constant misrecognition of his nationality by people whose countries he had visited. the society had built an academy in Shanghai. and Hong Kong) as well as Shanghai on his way back from France to Japan was an eye-opening experience that served to deepen his concern with Japan’s vulnerability in a Eurocentric and European-dominated international order. however. 3 (2009) . as well as European intellectual production. the Japanese gentleman also decided to rearrange his schedule so that he could accompany the Manila gentleman across America. Suehiro Tetchō’s involvement in the people’s rights movement meant that he. and Japanese. 89). among which was Shin’asha (Society for Promoting Asia). As a veteran activist who had been imprisoned for his vocal opposition to the government’s efforts in previous years to thwart the establishment of a constitutional government. Oshi tells us that. but who were united in their common dream of “Asia’s” liberation from European colonial and imperialist domination. from where he sailed back to Yokohama. which was put under 46 HAU & SHIRAISHI / ASIANISM AS NETwoRk AND fANTASy 361 360 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57. he was already active in organizational efforts to promote cultural and commercial intercourse in Asia. he threw himself back into the politics of unifying the opposition. and in his travels across Europe he would have frequently seen for himself the visible signs of European appreciation of things Chinese. Indian. too. like Rizal. Singapore. did leave him with the strong (and prescient) conviction that America would emerge. along with sixty-one others from his network of people’s rights activists and without the benefit of much campaigning. he became even more concerned about the real threat of European imperialist aggression against Japan and about Japan’s ability to retain its independence (Manabe 2006. but his efforts had come to naught. in the event of war between Britain and Russia in the Far East. may precisely assure its survival as an independent country in a region dominated by competing colonial/imperial powers. the “invisibility” of the Philippines—which he had made it his own intellectual project to redress through his writings—would. his encounter with Rizal and his study tour resulted in a different site and form of political engagement. the Meiji oligarchs who had visited Europe (for example.16 Not content to rely on the Meiji oligarchs’ understanding of the political systems in the “West. in anticipation of the promulgation of the constitution in March 1889.22 Since the late 1870s.17 On his return to Japan in February 1889. but was again unsuccessful. Renamed Kōa Kai (Society for Asian Development) in 1880. had attempted to bring the motley crew of antioligarchy opposition forces together into a unified party. which was critical of the aggressive policy of the West and the stagnant condition of Asia. saw the “West” as a place he could learn from—hence his decision in 1888 to embark on a study tour of its political institutions. In London Suehiro happened to have come across a British Navy report in which he learned. as Japan’s most important trading partner. By the time Suehiro met Rizal. Unfolding within such moments of high emotional and ideological tension on Suehiro’s part.19 Already well aware of the tensions between Japan and the European powers—especially Great Britain.18 In France he relied on a Japanese friend to act as interpreter as far as Marseilles. Because he did not speak any European languages fluently. that.”20 This solidarity was founded on an alliance of “gentlemen” who were forced to communicate with each other in the labored pu-pu-pa of several (often “irregular”) second or third languages. which had had artistic influences on the development of European visual and decorative arts. Itō Hirobumi had spent time in Germany) to study its constitutions and governments were in the process of drafting the Meiji Constitution.” its relative obscurity and insignificance compared to the civilizations of China. in the first national parliamentary elections of 1 July 1890 (Iwamoto 1968. No. Suehiro had supported a number of “Asianist” associations. fueling fantasies not of speaking in or from. Ironically. and Japan. 282). “Europe” but against “European imperialism” through solidarity in and with “Asia. Suehiro. Around the time that Suehiro began his study tour.” Suheiro was deeply interested in seeing for himself how the constitutional system of government worked in Europe and the United States.21 supplemented with gestures and pointing. the Taiping rebellion of 1850–1864 in China. in his own long-term view. because Rizal was in a hurry to get to Europe. Events in the region such as the Sepoy mutiny of 1857 in India. for Rizal. to his horror. India. customs. the authors wax poetic and indulge in a bit of extrapolation: Now that the story of Rizal’s sojourn in Japan during the spring of 1888 has been told. Yanagida’s study. reprinted and misused after more than fifty years in order to pave the way for and justify the Japanese policy of colonizing the Philippines” (Shimizu 2007.. Unlike his colleague Fukuzawa Yukichi. 66). 55–57) Rizal in Japan contains a three-page summary of some of the key episodes of Oshi along with more elaborate details on Rizal’s romance with O-Sei-san (Usui Seiko).23 The Society (which later changed its name to Ajia Kyōkai [Asia Association] in 1885) had envisioned setting up branches of the academy in different parts of Asia (e. Korea.. The groundwork for this would be prepared by the “revival” of Asia through institutional reforms modeled after those in Europe.25 It was not the relatively well-known Suehiro but his more obscure contemporaries Suganuma Teifu and Yamada Bimyo whose writings would be “rediscovered. Both of them. Suehiro sought an answer to Japan’s “small country” status in a dream of “Asian” solidarity. he became ever more convinced of the need for an alliance between Japan and Qing China (ibid. Like Rizal’s. India. and the kindness. though the plans ultimately were not pushed through.26 Politics of Friendship in America’s “Free Asia” While Suehiro’s fictionalized account of his travels with Rizal occupies nearly two-thirds of his comic novel. he was already calling for a Sino-Japanese alliance as a geopolitical counterweight to Europe. Such political stances. too. and his happy moments with O-Sei-san. Oshi itself has merited little serious discussion in studies of Suehiro’s writings. (ibid. Yanagida’s influential argument concerning ideas of southward expansion and a shift in Suehiro’s novels from preoccupation with domestic affairs to concern with external affairs would be taken up—as well as debated and crit- 47 HAU & SHIRAISHI / ASIANISM AS NETwoRk AND fANTASy 363 362 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57. understanding and love that they showed him was something that he must have treasured to his dying day. 1968. gladdened the heart of Rizal at a time when he needed it most. We have not found evidence of the reprinting of Suehiro’s Philippine writings in the 1930s and 1940s. which went against the grain of Japanese official policy. 282)—the only other independent state that mattered in that region—as a form of (self-)defense against (and eventually liberation from) European imperialist encroachment in the region. and languages of each country. Rizal could not but have remembered his memorable days in Japan. In the concluding section of the epilogue. Although his treatment of Suehiro’s novels on the Philippines is limited mainly to plot summary (see also the discussions in Yanagida 1961. 239). Siam.24 This alliance—which would not be based on the assumption of a Sinocentric (nor Japan-centric) Asian civilization—was expected to expand in the near future to include such countries as Korea. Annam. Suehiro’s political stance on Asia is revealing of his awareness of Japan’s limited capability as a “small country” power. Suehiro was a “realist” when it came to his understanding of Japan’s position in the region. and the lovely samurai’s daughter. however. Caesar Lanuza and Gregorio Zaide’s (1961. 91). on the Meiji political novels (see Yanagida 2005) to provide biographical details about Suehiro and discuss Suehiro’s connections with Rizal. their companionship no doubt gave him the courage and fortitude to carry on the heavy load he bore. the scholar of Meiji cultural history Yanagida Izumi published his Kaiyō bungaku to nanshin shisō (Literature of the Seas and Ideas of Southward Expansion). he opposed Japan’s going to war against Qing China in 1894. Unlike Rizal. not long after Japan occupied the Philippines. did not spark a revival of interest in Suehiro’s political novels on the Philippines. Like Rizal. 63) the supervision of Suehiro (Iwamoto 1968. Annam. O-Sei-san. in their own way. In 1942. however.. This book drew on his pioneering research. All three were written and published as contributions to the commemoration of the centenary of Rizal’s birth (1961) and. all three draw on Oshi mainly to reconstruct details of Suehiro’s chance meeting with Rizal. For certainly. we find only three texts that discuss Oshi. 1967. for the most part. Upon his return to Japan in 1889. Tetcho Suehiro. As early as 1881. would relegate his memory and writings to the margins in decades to come.g. In the postwar period. in the quiet solitude of his prison cell in Fort Santiago a few days before he was executed.KK Global: Hau icized—by subsequent studies of Suehiro (from Iwamoto 1968 to Manabe 2006). the Filipino people certainly owe a debt of gratitude to at least two Japanese contemporaries of their national hero— the gifted man-of-letters. 2005). and Persia (Manabe 2006. 3 (2009) . India) in order to study the conditions. published in the 1930s. Suehiro’s concern with forging a Japan-China alliance led him to assume a noninterventionist stance in the Korean crisis in the 1880s. No. and gave him “the courage and fortitude” to carry on his political work. Adeva had begun the research and then asked the authors. He was so adept at it that he was able to write a few ideas in Kanji characters” (ibid.) Lanuza and Zaide’s book on Rizal’s Japan trip. There is no mention of the most recent war. Lanuza and Zaide (ibid. Japan) to The Rizal Centennial (1861). friendship with Suehiro. In it he writes: “That this period [Rizal’s sojourn in Japan] is fondly remembered by the people of the Philippines is a matter of the deepest gratification to the Japanese” (Kimura 1962. “Owing to his Godgiven talent for understanding foreign languages. impressions.28 The book is introduced on the flyleaf as a “contribution of The Philippine Reparations Mission (Tokyo. Furthermore. there is no talk of Filipino collaborators—especially those who flourished after the war—being made to pay for their crimes against “the Filipino people. Dr. Rizal was able to learn enough rudiments of Japanese after only a few weeks of conscientious study..29 Where Japan is at least obligated to compensate the Philippines for the damages it inflicted during its occupation. 21–22). it is equally if not even more evident in the essays of Kimura Ki and Jimbō Nobuhiko. v–vi) state that the idea for a book on Rizal’s visit to Japan was originally suggested by Philippine Ambassador to Japan Manuel A.27 Even though Lanuza and Zaide rely on Oshi for their narrative of Suehiro and Rizal’s first meeting aboard the Belgic. understanding and love” “gladdened” Rizal’s heart. and who published their own articles about Suehiro and Rizal a year later in 1962.” The centenary of Rizal’s birth conveniently provides an occasion for rebuilding the relations between the Philippines and Japan. Lanuza and Zaide’s book obliquely refers to Japan’s obligatory debt while simultaneously softening the blunt talk of yen and pesos with the diplomatese of “debt of gratitude” of the “Filipino people” to the “good” Japanese. it is not the Japanese gentleman who owes a debt of gratitude to the Manila gentleman for helping him throughout their travel together.. These bilateral relations. “I am Manila. “[b]ecause of his innate talent and his previous training in European style painting. He goes on to say that “In Japan. it is the “Filipino people” who now “certainly owe a debt of gratitude” to Suehiro and Usui. More. and which allows other forms of capital flows such as official development assistance and foreign direct investment to follow or accompany war reparations. can now be restored through war reparations. Lanuza and Zaide’s book lovingly depicts Rizal as a gifted polymath. is similarly concerned with stressing the fact that Rizal had “true and good” Japanese friends. Kimura Ki’s article on Rizal and Suehiro was first presented at the International Congress on Rizal in December 1961 and subsequently published in the Mirror: The Saturday Magazine on 27 January 1962. who were among the Japanese whom Lanuza and Zaide thanked for their help with the research.” and then quotes Lanuza and Zaide’s sentence about the “Filipino people’s debt of gratitude” as proof that “[t]hese two Japanese proved to be true and good” (ibid. No. In transforming Rizal’s singular gift of friendship to Suehiro into bilateral “debt. Lanuza and Zaide’s effort to flesh out the details of Rizal’s trip to Japan is but one contribution to the by-then already corpulent body of research and writing on Rizal.” the book imagines as well as initiates a serial chain of “reciprocal” acts on which the postwar relations between the Philippines and Japan can be based.. Typical of hagiographical writings on Rizal. which came out just seventeen years after the end of the Pacific war. in their zeal to proclaim Rizal’s mastery of the Japanese language. to complete the research and write the book. 18).” If a strong element of wishful fantasy is at work alongside a willful blindness in Lanuza and Zaide. that is. Kimura’s article. who were also at work on the topic. and love affair with O-Sei-san is clearly meant as a contribution to the postwar mending of “bilateral” relations between the “peoples” of the Philippines and Japan.KK Global: Hau Lanuza and Zaide’s account turns the gift of friendship recounted in Oshi into debt of gratitude. and the meishuron (“Japan-as-leader”) type of 48 HAU & SHIRAISHI / ASIANISM AS NETwoRk AND fANTASy 365 364 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57. By going back many decades to find an example of “good Japanese” like Suehiro and Usui who are relatively free of the contamination of wartime Asianism. he was able to master the technique of Japanese brush painting” (ibid.” In their acknowledgments. 23). the Lanuza and Zaide book blithely skips over more recent and fraught memories of “friendship” between Filipinos and Japanese: Rizal in Japan is deafeningly silent on the politically contentious issue of Filipino collaboration with the Japanese during the occupation. they appear to have conveniently overlooked or disregarded the Manila gentleman’s first quoted sentence in Nihongo. 3 (2009) . monetary and other compensations paid by Japan to cover the damage and injury caused by its “occupation” of the Philippines. destroyed by the war. Rather. not Japanese. whose “kindness. The authors even implant the “memorable days” and “happy moments” of Rizal’s sojourn in Japan into Rizal’s head a few days before Rizal’s execution. Adeva and the Rizal Centennial Commission. Rizal found two true friends. . of Philippine independence assumes that independence is a gift from America. .).d. In his letter (quoted in Fajardo n.” The “granting” by the U. Kimura (1961.” To some extent. look at this active port. the differences in Kimura’s and Jimbō’s fantasies about Rizal and Suehiro may be a function of their different career trajectories. This bilateral love affair is more accurately a ménage à trois involving a third party—America. but owing to poor health he saw action in 49 HAU & SHIRAISHI / ASIANISM AS NETwoRk AND fANTASy 367 366 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57.—’ said Rizal. By his own account. But for me. Suddenly Rizal said. Kimura’s historical excavation of preimperialist Japanese connections to Asia offers the Suehiro-Rizal encounter as an historical forerunner of the postwar bilateral “friendship” between Japan and the Philippines.KK Global: Hau Bataan for only a few days. the most humane of the Japanese invaders. he has Rizal sketching on the deck as the steamer approached San Francisco: “‘Yes.. a lieutenant colonel in the Japanese imperial army. I have not my country.”32 Jimbō would parlay his “acts of compassion and benevolence” (to quote the certificate of recognition awarded posthumously to Jimbō by Pres. text reproduced in Nagoshi 1999. who “like the Filipinos . he appears to have spent most of the war not in the battlefields but in the Philippine National Library. You must be happy to have your own country. he seemed to marvel at the national strength of America” (ibid. 21) states that “[e]ventually. By contrast. Manuel Roxas would save Jimbō’s career: one of his first acts as the first president of the postwar Philippine Republic was to write a letter to Chiang Kai-shek to appeal for the release of Jimbō. the Filipinos won absolute and complete independence for themselves granted by the American people. whose main claim to fame was that he saved future-president Manuel Roxas’s life. Instead. and negates the preceding clause “the Filipinos won absolute and complete independence for themselves. Jimbō was a man of action. and studied English literature at Waseda University.” Jimbō (1962. Rizal and Suehiro catch glimpses of the American Indians. Instead.” Where Kimura attempted to rein in his Asianist fantasies by resorting to the convoluted sentence constructions discussed above. “Everybody has his own nation.” and continued with gloomy face. 20). Kimura Ki was born in 1894. “in pan-Asianist discourse that legitimized it. 182) reads Rizal’s relationships with Suehiro in homosocial (“Tetcho at once fell in love with Rizal”) and national allegorical terms (“It can be said a historical interest [sic] and a strange fate for the close relations of our nations that a certain Japanese and a certain Filipino associated with closet [sic] friendship and swore eventual cooperation to make each of their countries to be firmly independent”). .” which posits independence not as a gift to be bestowed but rather as a goal that had to be attained through struggle and sacrifice. Rizal was always kind and considerate not only to his own countrymen but to all and especially to the people of the Orient” (ibid. and scholar of Meiji cultural history. and universalist. but “especially [kind and considerate] to the people of the Orient. Jimbō in effect allows his fantasies to pass for “history.”31 This convoluted logic is also repeated in the final sentence of the article. Kimura constructs a sentence that manages to suggest diplomatically that Rizal is nationalist.” Kimura’s fantasy of Asianist solidarity under America’s non-Communist (and capitalist) umbrella in “Free Asia” finds its most bald-faced articulation in Col. Mindful of the wartime association of pan-Asianism with the Japan-led anti-“West” Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere. and even published a novel about Lenin. In turn. Roxas writes that “[h]e [Jimbō] was. American-led “Free Asia. pointing at the going and coming of boats or launches.S. 3 (2009) . literary critic. 186. when he returned to the Philippines as a businessman with the right political connections. translator. 59) into a profitable career in the postwar era.. Kimura argues that “[t]his book [Oshi] shows that Dr. Jimbō allows his imagination to run wild. Asianist. He joined the Japanese Fabian Association as well as Japan’s Labor and Peasant Party. but this postwar friendship is nested within the context of the Cold-War. in an extended passage. then being held as prisoner-of-war in Taiwan on suspicion of war crimes. But Jimbō’s view of America is not entirely one of unalloyed acknowledgment of its national strength. all at the same time. of my acquaintance. essayist. Jimbō Nobuhiko’s article “Rizal and Tetcho. Unlike Kimura. 186).33 In his article. Fidel Ramos in 1995. in which Kimura (ibid. 32) had volunteered for the army and served in the Philippines. and to which you can render service. he casts Suehiro and Rizal as pioneers of “freedom. to the extent of creating dialogues between Rizal and Suehiro that are not substantiated by any archival or textual sources. Because the article appeared in the Historical Bulletin. No. had the racial sufferings [sic]” (presumably inflicted by the Americans). reading biographies of Rizal and poring over references to Rizal’s relations with Japan. An extremely prolific31 author. Jimbō’s fantasies are not held in check by any fidelity to known facts and to textual verification. In his “reconstruction” of an episode aboard the Belgic. publicist. Japan defeated China and the international standing of Japan had rapidly risen. there have been certain native culture before. but Jimbō’s. “Japan will win against China.” And then Tetcho referred to the first period of Meiji era. and lead them to know everything. 190) possibly gained in Japan. I can’t say what happened. but it was ruined by Spain like the Imperial Inca. Sino-Japanese War finally broke out.. “high-pitched with excitement. As he talked about the feudal clan administrations.). Mindanao Island. unique traditions. I have been fighting for liberty. presumably still brimming with envy and admiration for Japan. his voice was high- pitched in excitement. and Rizal came to be looked up as the national hero” (ibid.the Philippines. Siberia. many of my friends were exiled from Tokyo. I feel a chill when I think of it. but Japan also faced a risky situation. So. for you saw my country when nationalism had just begun to rise. and North China]. Your country is absorbing only good things from European civilization and pile them on the stable. he would have been the happiest man in Japan for his respectable great foreign friend had become the national hero of the Republic of the Philippines” (ibid. he freely shuttles from one era to another. and manages to turn Suehiro into a fervent supporter of the emperor system while alluding to America’s decision (after intensive debate) to restore the emperor system after Japan’s defeat. Here. if Tokugawa Shogunate did not return power to Emperor. so that Japan could be regarded as a true independent nation. the Philippines became independent. and how “[t]he Japanese spirit must have struck the bottom of his heart” (ibid. Rizal could not help feeling envy as well as respect for Tetcho. in stressing Suehiro’s and Rizal’s credentials as “freedom” 50 HAU & SHIRAISHI / ASIANISM AS NETwoRk AND fANTASy 369 368 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57. “How is Suehiro getting along? Japan did rise at last as he told me before. Suehiro’s “inspection” of Korea. I think you must have taken everything in Japan fine. At the same time. How slow and foolish! The people had a consciousness for family but no ideas for a nation of their own!” “And Spain took advantage of the weak point of your people. unique traditions”! Later on he writes of “Japanese nationalities and her national prosperity and military power” making “a deep impression” on Rizal. Jimbō goes on to imagine the following scene: Two years after this tour [i. Seeing him.34 Having established that the mutual admiration society of the two men is based on their joint endorsement of Jimbō’s reading of what is going on in Japan and the Philippines then and now. 192).” (ibid. France helped Tokugawa Shogunate and Eng- land was at the back of Emperor. goes on to “worr[y] about the then state of his country. “In the restoration age. Jimbō ends his article with a final fantasy: “If Tetcho were alive today. The unequal treaty was abolished. against absolute government. “I envy you and your country. 188). Japan was laying foundation for one of the world powers. The situation of the Phil- ippines of those days was similar to those of Japan when she was once approached by the Portuguese. Then Rizal.” He looked back upon the happy days which he had spent with Tetcho. and concluded.” In fact.. saying: “We must acquire much more knowledge..e. With Japan to thank for Rizal’s posthumous status as hero. 187) The voice. but the Philippines was not. No.. Rizal was informed of this news at Dapitan. The train has already run in Japan and the military men are trained under very strict discipline. 3 (2009) .” to which Suehiro concurs. even that time while Japan KK Global: Hau was an independent state.” that shines through this exchange is not Suehiro’s. I think it’s our duty” (ibid.” and advocates education to “awake the ignorant. both nations were aiming at wealth of “only good things from European civilization and pile them on stable. Actu- ally. (ibid.). In almost the same breath. But.” “Yes. he criticizes the tyranny of Meiji government and advocates the absorption Jimbō’s attempt to reconstruct the dialogues between Rizal and Suehiro in the language of meishuron Asianism results in an inversion of logic (recalling Roxas’s characterization of Jimbō as the “most humane of the Japanese invaders”) that allows Japan to claim credit for helping the Philippines attain independence: “Through the Second World War. but Japanese government is very oppressive to the people.” said Tetcho and told about those days.. I am planning to first visit Southeast Asia. power as a tacit given. nonsocialist/capitalist] Asia” countries based on America’s gift of “granting” independence to both Japan and the Philippines.KK Global: Hau fighters. a given that was clearly understood but could. largest foreign aid donor. For this purpose. By the mid-1980s.S. As a result. Japan as representative of Asia” (quoted in Suehiro 1995. Before the war. but was instead America’s “junior” partner. from the postwar regional system. Jimbō’s return to the Philippines as a businessman after the war was enabled. It would be easy to dismiss Jimbō’s fantasies as the wishful thinking and fevered imaginings of a former military man bent on mouthing slogans from Japan’s bygone imperial era. 240). But the rhetorical devices that underpin Jimbō’s and to some degree Kimura’s writings were also used in explanations and rationalizations of Japan’s reentry into Southeast Asia in the late 1950s. one in which America was clearly the hegemon of the “Free Asia” regional order. Japan was no longer an aspiring (let alone de facto) hegemonic power.” The type of meishuron Asianism that it promoted explicitly denied Anglo-Saxon preeminence. by Japan’s postwar attempts to restore bilateral relations with the Philippines within the context of the American-led “Free Asia.” In the postwar Asian regional order. it accepted U. Japan had attempted to build a new Asian order through its Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere. Japanese leaders could simultaneously affirm U. Japan would become the largest exporter to Southeast Asia as well as Southeast Asia’s largest investor. Washington encouraged this because it would promote Japanese economic recovery.. Thus. No. while making Japan “the workshop of Asia” (Shiraishi 1997. military. remain unspoken.S.S. so that in negotiating with the US. the American purchase of Japanese goods and services in Japan for the U. and Southeast Asia (see Shiraishi 1997).S. and largest source of tourism (ibid. Japan. This simultaneously “Asianist” and “pro-American” rhetoric proved to be particularly effective in selling Japan’s foreign policy to the Japanese public. 51 HAU & SHIRAISHI / ASIANISM AS NETwoRk AND fANTASy 371 370 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57. that is.-led hubsand-spokes regional security system and a triangular trade system involving the U. 63). Kishi’s brand of postwar meishuron Asianism enables Japan to speak and act on the diplomatic front in the name of “Free Asia” without risking any collision with American first-ism. With China turning communist in 1949 and the U. not only for its security but also for its economic survival. This Asianist rhetoric in fact hinged on Japan’s acceptance of its status as “number two” to America’s “number one. while simultaneously appealing to Japanese nationalist sentiments in an effort to make Japan’s foreign policy more palatable for domestic consumption. Jimbō’s account of the impact of “Western” ideals of freedom and civil rights on Meiji Japan and the Spanish Philippines fits nicely within the Cold-War framework of an alliance of “Free [i. and timber). natural gas. with Japan as “number one.S. This rhetoric did not exclude the U. Japan occupied a central role as a strategic base from which the U. rather.e. formed the conditions of possibility for the articulation of a meishuron or “Japan-as-leader” rhetoric that combined elements of a (largely politically defanged and declawed) Asianism with a largely tacit assumption of American hegemonic power. 3 (2009) .S. in certain contexts. In this sense Japan’s position in postwar Asia was crucially different from that in prewar Asia. could project its hegemonic power onto an “Asia” that excluded (or sought to contain) communist China. largest buyer of raw materials (such as oil. I will not be representing only Japan by itself.S. Japan no longer had access to the mainland market. In this postwar regional system.S. Japan could make up for its dollar gap with the U. but rather.. But the postwar “Japan-as-leader” rhetoric was deployed within the context of a radically different political reality. it is unlikely and indeed impossible for Japan to deny or oppose Anglo-Saxon “first-ism” and challenge American hegemony (see Shiraishi 2000). Japan sought a way out of this confining role by concluding war reparations agreements and normalizing diplomatic relations with Southeast Asian countries in order to regain access to their markets and natural resources.S. This reworking of meishuron rhetoric for domestic consumption is evident in Prime Minister Kishi Nobusuke’s explanation of his intention to visit Southeast Asian countries in 1956: “I have been thinking to visit the US in my capacity as prime minister.” As long as Japan did not (and could not) attempt to remove America’s “light hold on the Japanese jugular” (Cumings 1987. reducing Japan’s dependence on the U. hegemony while claiming Japan’s leadership in Asia. The postwar geopolitical reality of Japan as “number two.S.S. subsequently imposing a trade embargo on China.” coupled with Japan’s strategic centrality to “America’s Asia” and Japan’s dependence on the Southeast Asian markets. Japan in the 1950s was utterly dependent on the U.. only through its special procurement. 176–77). even as it mimicked on an individual level the trajectory taken. 169). But it is also a fact that America’s “Asia” was built on a U. trade and investment. and ended up traveling together for a little over a month through America and on to London. the Philippine official fantasy of bilateral reciprocity between the Philippines and Japan is belied by real imbalances between the two countries in areas as diverse as official development assistance (ODA). Blame has been apportioned liberally to the lack of political will and organizational coordination. No. for that reason. movements of people. has rendered the lines of demarcation between “good” Japanese (“friends”) and “bad” Japanese (“enemies”) far less clear-cut and.). at a temporal and experiential distance inevitable with generational change. see also Ikehata 1989. political indifference and apathy. By contrast. one comic travelogue and two novels—out of that encounter.S. the Americans. and popular culture (see Campoamor 2009). In the Philippines historical memories of the war. 105. which have been the principal theme—as well as the main concern of subsequent critical discussions—of Suehiro’s Philippine novels. as its official representative to Japan to procure arms and ammunition in the war against the Spaniards and. who would go on to organize the first of a series of rebellions aimed at overthrowing the Qing state. Hatano 1988).S. Between Rizal’s visit to Yokohama in 1888 and Ponce’s in 1898. in the postwar regional order.KK Global: Hau If the Japanese official fantasy of “equal partnership” with the U. among them the Cantonese doctor and sometime Hawai’i migrant Sun Yat-sen (Sun Zhongshan/Sun Wen). a “certain degree of unfinished business between the two nations. and cultural and even sexual intercourse. arrived in Yokohama on 29 June 1898 on a mission to obtain Japanese support for the Philippine revolution and to purchase arms for use by the Philippine revolutionary army (for details see Camagay 1999. This chance meeting did not give birth on Rizal’s part to political fantasies about Philippine relations with Japan. Conclusion Rizal and Suehiro met by chance on board a steamship bound for San Francisco. the revolutionary government led by Emilio Aguinaldo would send Mariano Ponce. of these five works the comic travelogue Oshi does not readily fall within the discourses of southward expansion (nanshin-ron). Prior to Ponce’s arrival in Yokohama. But the complexity of the Philippines-Japan postwar relationship. the first of its kind in Asia. as Gonzalo Campoamor (2009. Suehiro produced five major works—in particular. The Katipunan also turned to the Japanese in its attempt to obtain arms for its planned uprising (ibid. these memories still possessed the kind of immediacy that could easily spark anti-Japanese sentiments.” but just what “unfinished business” means (and whose unfinished business it is) is clearly no longer unequivocal. along with Jose Ramos Ishikawa. in which economic opportunism and dependency have replaced military domination and resistance. leading to frequent verbal and sometimes even physical attacks against Japanese tourists and residents in the Philippines. Less than three months before the revolution broke out in August 1896. 250). focused worldwide attention on the Philippines’s independence struggle against the Spaniards and.35 The Qing government’s humiliating defeat would also radicalize a segment of the Chinese population. which happened to visit Manila (Saniel 1998. family lore. as we have argued. Aguinaldo had already met the Japanese businessman (and future cinema impresario) Umeya Shōkichi 52 HAU & SHIRAISHI / ASIANISM AS NETwoRk AND fANTASy 373 372 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57. 84) reminds us. Less than two years later. There remains. The second event. less amenable to politicization. in 1899. Until the late 1960s. By 1896 both Suehiro and Rizal were dead within ten months of each other. against the Americans. Japan’s growing regional presence had generated hopes (not to mention fantasies)36 among Filipino revolutionaries of enlisting Japanese help in their struggle against the Spaniards. two defining events intervened: the Sino-Japanese war in 1894–1895 and the Philippine revolution in 1896. Efforts to politicize these memories in order to turn the bilateral imbalances into a public issue and exert pressure on the Philippine government to push for official redress from Japan have not been particularly successful. is belied by Japan’s subordinate status vis-à-vis the U. This explains the paradox about the Philippines: war memories of Japan still linger in the Filipino public imagination but increasingly. The first event signaled Meiji Japan’s dramatic appearance on the international stage as a regional power. to whom Rizal had written the one letter that referred to Suehiro. continue to appear in public discourse. Rizal’s good friend Mariano Ponce. in 1898. Kongō. for the majority of the population. the revolutionary secret society Katipunan had arranged a meeting with officers of the Japanese naval training ship. But. The two men developed a friendship that was close enough for Rizal to have taken the trouble to see Suehiro off in December 1888 as the latter prepared to sail home. later. and opportunism on the part of political elites on both sides. But less than ten years after Suehiro’s and Rizal’s encounter aboard the Belgic (or some two years after the death of the two men). recounted and passed down the generations through pedagogy. 3 (2009) . 259) argues. To imagine this type of Asian solidarity assumes a logic of fraternization which. Asianist fantasies arose from the chance encounter and lived experience of traveling together with a fellow “Asian. 3 (2009) . Oshi also gestures at something else: at friendship as an opening of one to an-other. a brotherhood literalized through connections of blood. on the one hand. 2002. humiliation.37 Once in Japan. 232. Something that might have happened if Rizal and Suehiro had been alive did in fact happen: for even with Rizal and Suehiro dead. some of their friends and colleagues would in time find each other and establish links in a network that would be enlisted for different kinds of “Asianist” projects and fantasies in years to come. 8) in Hong Kong. Relations of proximity and intimacy could and did (and still can and do) engender distance and difference. informal link would have proved useful in enabling Filipinos like Ponce to establish contact with civilians and bureaucrats in Suehiro’s wide circle of Japanese contacts. liking. common culture. no matter how close the friendship may be. a friend can become an enemy). without any guarantees that such a friendship will be free of the risk of asymmetrical relations (i.38 Inukai then introduced Ponce to the Japanese army chief of staff Gen. his friendship with Rizal provided the experiential basis for a series of thought-experiments on an “Asian” fraternal alliance. In Rizal’s case. The Suehiro-Rizal encounter as event forces us to attend to the role that “structures of feelings”—to use Raymond Williams’s (1977. 9. family. and common destiny. pride. anger. after the Nunobiki Maru debacle. friendship as gift rather than obligation or imperative.40 Had either Suehiro or Rizal been alive at this time.. and distance and difference. Umeya introduced Ponce to Miyazaki Tōten. 1898 Source: Anon. is by definition finite and particularistic. love. 38 a common destiny. Umeya Shōkichi with members of Aguinaldo’s army. Nunobiki Maru Source: Kimura 1981. who then introduced Ponce to the journalist-turned-politician Inukai Tsuyoshi (who most certainly knew Suehiro).. c. Indeed. where the Philippine revolutionary government had gone into exile following the Pact of Biak-na-Bato. 8. to purchase arms and ammunition for the Philippine revolutionary government. as Derrida (1997. changing times and circumstances would spell out the limits of this brotherhood in a particularly bloody way. belief in a common origin did not engender belief in 53 HAU & SHIRAISHI / ASIANISM AS NETwoRk AND fANTASy 375 374 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57. who arranged the purchase of arms and ammunitions and their shipment aboard the Nunobiki Maru (fig. as interplay between proximity and intimacy. Asianism cannot be understood solely as a set of ideas because in many cases anxiety. Kawakami Sōroku and the businessman-cum-politician Nakamura Yaroku. their earlier.KK Global: Hau Fig.e. But. on the other. one “loves” more than the other) and reversibility (i. The fantasies that Asianism nurtures and promotes are not always and necessarily based on ideas of common origin.e. 9). In Suehiro’s case. Circumscribed Fig. and historical migration in Nanyō no daiharan. and passion constitute affective elements of the internalization of “Asia” as a cartographic marker. 132) term— play in promoting (or preventing) regional identification. within the limits of Suehiro’s imagination.39 In Yokohama Ponce would also form a friendship with Sun Yat-sen (via Miyazaki and Inukai). on whom he relied. book cover page (fig.” Forged out of utility but deepened by sympathy. No. whose knee-jerk and rebarbative invocation of Japan’s leadership can only ever constitute a liability and hindrance to current efforts at region making in the name of an “East Asia Community. sexuality. 10 This appears to have had a basis in reality. As our discussion of Suehiro and Rizal and subsequent accounts of their encounter shows. Attempts at pressing Meiji Asianism into the service of meishuron Asianism in the early and late Shōwa years (1926–1989) highlight the differences in the quality of the fantasies and networks that informed and animated the “myriad” Asianisms across the century. 2 history. friendship. “who rendered the most substantial assistance to the Filipino struggle against American imperialism in the Philippines. it indicates a referential shift based on substantive differences in the nature and evolution of the regional system that goes by the place-name of “East Asia” during the prewar and postwar periods. and colored by the emotional components of patriotism. 327–70. and personal chemistry. Sun. He went into exile in the Philippines. Perhaps some people imagine that I am a totally Europeanized Japanese. and charismatic leadership.” the meishuron fantasies of the war years were. are our own. fight for.KK Global: Hau Notes We owe a big debt of gratitude to Benedict Anderson for his encouragement and support (especially his help with some of the translations) throughout the writing process and over the years. See Unno 2005 for an entertaining account of Asianist fantasies in Japan in the 1930s to the 1940s.41 experiences that encode judgments of (as well as subjective engagements with) the world and inform decision and action. because he looks like a Japanese. No. by contrast. professional relationships. and the personal interactions (some of which do involve. the networks formed by everyday and personal interactions and relationships create social experiences that occupy the interstices between what is articulated and what is lived. and Jun Aguilar for his friendship. and Phan Boi Chau thought and behaved in the ways they did. nor were they sufficient in themselves to account for how individuals like Suehiro. that Ponce’s contacts with Chinese activists like Sun were established not in China proper but in Japan. 7 Young’s book. 5 It was Ben Anderson (2005. We also thank Murakami Saki and Morishita Akiko for their help in obtaining some of the historical materials for this article. 6 The feudal lord in question was the Kirishitan (Christian) daimy� Takayama Ukon (born Shigetomi Hikogor� in 1552 and baptized Iustus/Justo). 409) pioneering work. . 9 For a useful discussion of Suehiro Tetch�’s political novels. education. Whereas the political fantasies of Meiji Asianism derived their impetus from the birth of “new politics” and political movements across different parts of “Asia. the official Asianism of the late Shōwa period exposed itself as an Asianism bereft of bite and heart. while the current “East Asia Community” is written as 東アジア共同体 (“Higashi-Ajia ky�d�tai”). in a 4 Mar. a different and better “Asia” and a better world. All errors are our responsibility and all translations. While the prewar and postwar terms are pronounced in the same way. But some of these personal emotions and encounters did inspire and deepen the commitment that motivated some of these people at particular points in history to dream of. Ponce died while on his way to visit his friend Sun Yat-sen in Canton (Guangdong) in 1918. were not always good or productive. see Sun 2007. since. who served as Young’s adviser while she was doing research for her dissertation at Kyoto University’s Institute for Research in the Humanities. intellectual debate. and work toward. 12) has argued. however.”42 The emotions that underpinned these fantasies. gender. Shimizu Hiromu for inspiring us to study Asianism in terms of fantasy-production. 1614. as Jimbō puts it.” 54 HAU & SHIRAISHI / ASIANISM AS NETwoRk AND fANTASy 377 376 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57. which argued that politics animated Meiji culture and political novels animated new literature in the Meiji period. links and connections engender different kinds of social daydreaming and different political projects. “East Asia Community” was written in Japanese as 東亜細亜協同体(pronounced “Higashi-Ajia ky�d�tai”) and abbreviated as 東亜協同体 (pronounced “T�-A ky�d�tai”). the pathbreaking book on Manzhuguo by Yamamuro Shin’ichi. That “Asianist” daydreams were particularly widespread and fervid in Japan may account for why Ponce and others were sent to Japan. 3 4 For a succinct introduction to network science.” as Dery (2005. 8 Iwamoto’s argument amplifies Yanagida Izumi’s (2005. 216) who first noted this “strange” paucity of references by Rizal to his meeting with Suehiro. and yet does not understand Japanese . see Manabe 2006. The shift from kanji to katakana cannot be understood as a simple case of cosmetic change. In reworking the wartime rhetoric of meishuron for postwar Japanese domestic consumption. 3 (2009) . it is telling that the word “Asia” is written in kanji (Chinese) characters in the prewar version and in katakana in the postwar version. who is contemptuous of his mother-language and On the limitations of analyzing Asianism solely from within the disciplinary confines of intellectual by the vagaries and specificities of class. Miyazaki. political inclinations. Ponce. although as an historian of Japan Manabe has hardly anything to say about Nany� and � Unabara. however. propelled by the destructive machinery of colonialism and military conquest. It should be noted. and for gently prodding us to think about Rizal and Suehiro’s “silences” as well as our own. 234–35) wrote: “Here you have your friend Rizal. 1888 letter to Ferdinand Blumentritt. Rizal (1938b. unless otherwise indicated. Liu Hong for his comments and suggestions. who dominated the Takatsuki region in Osaka and was later expelled by Tokugawa Ieyasu from Japan. is marred by its failure to acknowledge its intellectual debt to Kimera (1993). and why “it was the Japanese. dying of illness forty days after he arrived in Manila on 21 Dec. rather. a wonder to all Japanese. race. see Barabási 2003. 1 In the prewar era. a kind of “falling in love”) that generated them or were created by them. . and Burma in the nineteenth century—had a historical claim to that title. From London he sent a total of nine letters that were eventually published as newspaper articles (see the bibliography in Manabe 2006. he and his fellow Propagandists also used the French- invented term “Oceania. But reading his Plum Blossom fu . 11 Oshi’s portrait of a laughing. aimed to train students in the Chinese and/or English languages and to produce businessmen who were proficient in international commerce. 20 We thank Ben Anderson for underscoring the importance of looking at historical contexts of high ideological tension. and the Philippines) that served as major sites of prewar Chinese immigration (see the discussion by Wang 1992. see note 27) well enough to ask the latter to write the calligraphy for the title cover of his bestselling Setchūbai. 14 The essay was published in four installments in the 30 Sept. He took his pen name Tetch� (lit.is ashamed to be taken for a Japanese. South China Sea. playful. She reports instead that he joined the Toho Ky�kai (Association of Eastern Countries) and T�y� Gakkan (Oriental Academy). 1882. 16 As early as Mar. 42–45). and teasing “Manila gentleman” goes some way to correcting the impression of Rizal’s humorlessness that we tend to get from reading his letters and essays. and established the Independence (Dokuritsu) Party. which may account for the rise and decline of Asianist networks and fantasies. In 1884 Suehiro took over the helm of the Ch�ya Shimbun. a man of fortitude.e. The historical flexibility of the boundaries set by such terms can be compared to the Japanese term Nany�. 11). his real first name was Shigeyasu) from the preface of the late Tang dynasty writer Pi Rixiu’s descriptive prose-poem Taohua fu (Peach blossom fu). the two men must have spent time discussing the situations of their respective countries. I suspected that such a man. that same year. But in June 1883. 3 (2009) HAU & SHIRAISHI / ASIANISM AS NETwoRk AND fANTASy 379 . with his guts of iron and heart of stone. or it may have been that the German system was too “absolutist” for his taste. in Suehiro and Rizal’s time. 15 Dec.e. he left the Liberal Party after opposing the editorial policy of the party newspaper Jiyū Shimbun. Rizal’s pessimistic view of Japan’s prospects may have been deepened by Suehiro’s worries about Japan’s ability to retain its independence.” denoting specifically Micronesia. 24 Suehiro’s outlook on China was in part shaped by his educational background. 31 Oct. Rizal’s March 1888 letter to Blumentritt (quoted in note 10) already shows his awareness of Japanese anxiety about the destruction of their “National Character. No. “Asiatic” as in el Continente asiático. Suehiro served for only two months before being called away to take care of the Ch�ya Shimbun and the academy. In 1885 Suehiro began writing political novels. i.” References to “Asia” are mainly in the adjectival form.” see Reid 2004. 1890 issues of the Propaganda Movement’s Madrid-based newspaper La Solidaridad. ” (quoted in Yanagida 1968.. Song Jing: “I have admired Song Guangping as a prime minister. Manabe (2006. which opened in Shanghai in 1884 and was headed by Suehiro. is “at once an ambiguous and a precise term. the key coastal strips of mainland Southeast Asia. “iron guts”. 22 He had come to know a number of Chinese and Koreans during his stint at K�a Kai/Ajia Ky�kai. and just as Suehiro formed a mental picture of the Philippines through his conversations with Rizal so must Rizal have arrived at a judgment of Japan’s diplomatic dilemma in his conversations with Suehiro. Rizal uses the term Oceania to denote islands in the Pacific Ocean with specific reference to the Malay archipelago. 13 Rizal’s use of regional terms varies: apart from “the Orient” (el Oriente) and its delimited variant “Far East” (el extremo Oriente). The academy. as Mark Peattie (1984. Manabe (2006) does not mention Suehiro’s involvement in Shin’asha. 1889. would not have been capable of writing in a mellifluous way. 19 perception of the Russian threat to the north and English menace to the south. written Noli me Tangere. and is now most frequently used in Singapore and Malaysia. and in 55 378 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57. 18 Suehiro did write about his impressions of America and England. 1889.. 17 There is no record that can tell us why Suehiro did not visit Germany—which Rizal (1938a. Trained in the Confucian classics. KK Global: Hau and reminds us that the “Manila gentleman” was modeled after the man who had.” an issue about which Suehiro also felt strongly. and 1 Feb. 242) says that she has been unable to substantiate the connection between Ajia Ky�kai and T�y� Gakkan. why does it not also show up here. devote himself to the study of Malay and Philippine languages such as Mangyan. Indonesia. Many of its students went on to join the T�a D�bun Shoin (East Asian Common Culture Academy). 1889. which talks about one of the four virtuous Tang prime ministers. . 360). and the Chinese term Nanyang. these anxieties were exacerbated by the British archival materials that Suehiro himself had come across while in London. 25 Nany� was reprinted in 1967 as part of the compilation of Meiji political novels edited by Yanagida Izumi (1967). 117) looked upon as his “scientific homeland” (the original wording is “meiner wissenschaftlichen Heimath” with wissenschaftlichen encompassing the narrow sense of “academic” and more general sense of “systematic learning”)—when some of the Meiji oligarchs did. the project of creating a “national language” was still in its inception stage in Meiji Japan and late Spanish colonial Philippines. Rizal’s assessment of Japan’s difficulties resonates with Suehiro’s (and many Japanese’s) the Spanish mestizos. On the semantic richness of the term “Malay. which was handed over to another Japanese. Hong Kong. where the National Character is being exterminated?” We thank Ben Anderson for translating the passage from the original German. 15 Ben Anderson has called our attention to Rizal’s use of “reversed synecdoche” (a nationalist “slide”) to refer to the Philippines as “Mistress of the Orient” when it is actually the city of Manila that—until the late-eighteenth century and until the British colonized Singapore. so that “pu-pu-pa” communication was a defining characteristic not only of intra-Asian encounters and exchanges but also of encounters and exchanges within Japan and the Philippines. which. which historically refers to the territories traversing the South China Sea (i. and more generally the South Pacific. Malaya. some members of his Independence Party were arrested for purchasing bombs (although he himself was not implicated). after all. 21 We should also keep in mind the fact that. We thank Ben Anderson for his help with translating Rizal’s German letters. and had known the Korean reformist Kim Okgyun (who was also close to Fukuzawa. Suehiro was already calling for a merger of the Liberal (Jiyū) Party and Reform (Kaishin) Party to work toward the establishment of a constitutional polity. closed within a month of Suehiro’s departure. It may have been that he failed to find an interpreter to guide him through the country. 23 In her exhaustive study of Suehiro’s career as a writer. in his later years. In their travels together. Studies of Suehiro that were published during the late Taish� and early Sh�wa period were mainly concerned with Suehiro’s contributions to the development of Japanese journalism. . and Southeast Asia. Suehiro also taught the classics at a han kou (clan school) in his native Uwajima. 12 He would.. He had sent a letter from San Francisco that was published in three installments in the Ch�ya Shimbun in April 1888. This kind of thing occurs often in the Philippines among June he sent a second communication that appeared in two installments. 172) has argued. will cross the Pacific territories" (la sacudida que á modo de corriente eléctrica va á cruzar los territorios del Pacifico) (Moret 1996. and upliftment of their respective countries. Col. 19).” Goodman (ibid.. 30 This watered-down Asianism is not expounded in his Japanese-language article published a year before the English article. but on repugnance for the senseless cruelty and murder madness which possessed his commanders and associates” (quoted in Fajardo n. results in too narrow a focus on figures like Hirayama Shū and Nakamura Yaroku. 274. was known to have opposed universal suffrage (Iwamoto 1968. wrote: “As fate would have it . . 1896 issues of La Solidaridad carried a front-page article by former Spanish Minister of Overseas Territories Segismundo Moret y Prendergast on “El Japón y las Islas Filipinas” (Japan and the Philippine Islands).26 We have been unable to find any record of sales for Suehiro’s Nany� novels. Aguinaldo appointed Umeya (who also knew Sun Yat-sen and. 101) is rightly critical of the “redemptorist school” in the Philippines that “saw the Japanese as fellow Asians whose geographic proximity. came to know my father intimately. but Lanuza and Zaide are clearly exaggerating when they speak of Rizal’s “mastery” of sumi-e (Japanese brush painting). and allows himself to speculate on the possibility that Nany�’s Japanese-mestizo hero Takayama may have been modeled on Rizal “because Tetcho was told by Rizal that he [Rizal] had Japanese blood on his mother’s side. In looking at the ongoing transformation in the Far East (el extremo Oriente). and as one of those who did what he could. including what was essentially a compilation of his notes from his travel to France (K�setsu- roku). however. Roxas’s son Manuel M.). in its place is the more conventional biogenetic notion of kinship as a basis for Asian solidarity. 10) recalls that he was introduced to Aguinaldo at the bicycle shop in the Wanchai area where Aguinaldo was residing at the time. . 29 We thank Ben Anderson for identifying this silence. whose writings mainly addressed the “middle class” and intelligentsia. 47 and 49 of Lanuza and Zaide 1961) is clearly the work of one who is untrained in even the rudiments of either Chinese or Japanese brush techniques (let alone a master!). But it cannot be readily applied to Rizal.” see Del Pilar 1894/1996. and. This in itself is an indication that there was (or at least his publishers believed there was) an audience for his writings. In his autobiographical Waga kage (My shadow). wrote that “He [Jimbō] was known in the Philippines as one of the few Japanese officers with a genuine sympathy for our plight.. 28 Noted historian Greogorio Zaide had been sent by the Centennial Congress to Japan to conduct research (see Kimura 1962. They were part of the same “Philippine” network. whose ideas about reform and revolution are more complex than that implied by the “awake the ignorant” exhortation. the POW camp’s commanding officer.” Goodman (ibid.” 31 The Wikipedia (2009) article on Kimura Ki states that his publications were so numerous that it is unable to provide a definitive list of his complete works. 32 In a letter to the Philippine Daily Inquirer dated 13 Apr. through Sun. Nobuhiko Jimbō. when can say with certainty is that. A careful and rigorous examination of the “painting” by qualified authorities is needed to clear up questions about its provenance. Moret’s understanding of the common origins and experiences of racial abjection that link the Philippines and Japan. he succeeded and my father’s life was spared. The president was then governor Azuma Ryūtaro. which anticipates that “the shock” generated by Japan’s victory over Qing China. and as “the brief. The only thing we personal esteem for me. 344). he risked his life by disobeying an order issued for my execution. Spanish and Japanese” on his mother’s side). A trained calligrapher would have quickly recognized that Rizal’s calligraphy of “Dai Nippon koku” in kanji characters (see insert between pp. 36 Grant Goodman (1970. plus Chinese. strengthening. and made a successful appeal at a later time for the rescinding of the execution order. Roxas Jr. ethnic origins and finally industrial and military achievements made them logical helpmates in the realization of Philippine nationhood. within the limits of his official station. Suehiro’s public stature was such that publishers were willing to print anything he wrote. 27 The reproductions of Rizal’s sketches and diaries in Lanuza and Zaide’s book provide ample evidence of Rizal’s talents as an artist. 34 This last quotation at least has some bearing on Suehiro’s real-life ideas. Kimura (1961. which was established in 1970 with Kimura as vice-president and Jimbō as chairman of the board. to alleviate the brutal savagery of his superiors and subordinates. Moret explores the implications of the victory’s galvanization of the region’s indigenous populations.” Roxas himself. 22 and 23) were written by him. an audience that was most likely larger than the readership commanded KK Global: Hau by the one-hit-wonder (but subsequently commercially unsuccessful) Yamada and the relatively obscure Suganama’s writings on the Philippines. 110) characterizes Japanese assistance to the Philippine independence movement as lacking official sanction. like Rizal’s. 33 Kimura and Jimbō knew each other well. although he had that too. since both were actively involved in the Japan Rizal Association. coexists alongside his notion of a “Malay race” whose glory and power (gloria y poderío) is likely to emerge in some areas of the region. the kanji on that “sumi painting” suggest that the “painting” may not be a painting at all.” The concern with separating official from unofficial action. On Hong Kong as a “haven. in his letter to Chiang. and “Tagalog and Bisayan. while the Nany� novels did not match the sales of the bestselling Setchūbai. but some kind of woodblock-print playbill distributed or bought at the kabuki theater. who were not exactly insignificant figures in Japanese politics at the time. insignificant and somewhat ridiculous attempt of a tiny group of Japanese activists. On one occasion. To Jimbō’s credit. 37 Dissident Filipinos had long established a base in Hong Kong owing to its proximity to the Philippines and its system of laissez-faire government. No. 6 and 7). Jimbō came to the conclusion that my father would be more valuable to the Japanese alive than dead. Miyazaki T�ten) as a liaison officer for the Philippine revolutionary army. “like an electric current.S. State Department to lodge a formal protest with the Japanese government. and overlooks the larger network that linked these men to people such as Inukai Tsuyoshi (a leading member of the opposition party and future prime minister) and Kawakami S�roku (army chief of staff). Suehiro. The Nunobiki incident was serious enough to prompt the U. 2007. Moreover. 91). 20) dwells on Rizal’s bloodline (Chinese on his father’s side. Rizal’s crudely written “Nippon” kanji leave us doubting that the kanji that appear on the “sumi painting” alleged to have been executed by Rizal of a scene from the kabuki play Sendaihagi (ibid. Umeya saw action in the last stages of the joint Filipino-American offensive against Spanish-occupied Manila.. whose common origins and experience of humiliation and dejection (abatimiento) by the white race (la raza caucásica) are likely to inspire them to work for the regeneration. The Japanese officer was won over by my father’s character and leadership qualities. This action was not based especially on a 56 HAU & SHIRAISHI / ASIANISM AS NETwoRk AND fANTASy 381 380 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57. Umeya (1916. Jimbō then took it upon himself to assiduously persuade his superiors—all the way up the chain of command—to revoke the order of execution.d. 35 The 31 July 1895 and 15 Aug. 3 (2009) . Here. insert between pp. 102) calls this the “image and the legend” of “Japan as the inspiration and stimulus of Philippine independence. The Sino-Japanese war was given extensive coverage by La Solidaridad (see the articles in vols. Nakamura was able to obtain from the Japanese army Murata rifles. Roxas. see Kimura 1981. In Kokusai id� to shakai heny� [International migration and social transformation]. Phases and faces in the Filipino war film: Images of the Japanese invader and the Filipino in contemporary Philippine cinema. Fukuzawa wrote the article immediately following the execution of Kim Okgyun. Sovereignty and authenticity: Manchukuo and the East Asian modern. 1960. 238–40. NY: Cornell University Press. Reynold S. General Kawakami was instrumental in overriding objections raised by the Minister of Foreign Affairs to the authorization to release these weapons. the coup attempt was foiled when the Qing state intervened on behalf of the Korean Queen Min. ed. 83–115 for an account of the impact of the Philippine Revolution on Chinese intellectuals. 1970. 41. 279–82. see Zhou 1993. 44–83. 1955. see Schmid 2002. 2007. he had invited Inukai Tsuyoshi to join his newspaper Ch�ya Shimbun. The Masonic life of Manuel A. In April 1885. 2003. Japan and pan-Asianism: Problems of definitions. 2008.glphils. Victor Koschmann. Datsu-A ron [Dissociating from Asia]. 39 For details of the Nunobiki Maru incident. Furuta Moto’o.the Filipino-American war broke out. 2009. n. Beasley. London: Verso.htm. 41 For example. M[arcelo] H. Nakamura was a member of the House of Representatives when he was asked by Inukai to help the Philippine independence army procure weapons and ammunitions for their impending showdown with the Americans. Ajia shugi sha tachi no koe [Asianist voices]. Anon. George Collins. The essay’s rhetorical outbursts of pessimism about the prospects for solidarity among East Asian countries were fueled by Fukuzawa’s grief and anger over the death of his Korean friend. Fajardo. Inukai later accused Nakamura of malfeasance and collusion in the sale of defective weaponry to the revolutionists. Dennehy. Ithaca. Luis Camara. Derrida. Cemil. 2007. Sen kyūhyaku sanjū nendai “Ajia Kaiki” ron to Dai Aja Ky�kai: Sono konnichi teki “imi” o kangaeru [Discourses on “Return to Asia” in the 1930s and the Greater Asia Association: Reflections on their contemporary significance]. In this sense. vol. Albert-László. analyses of Fukuzawa’s (1960) famous essay “Datsu-A Ron” (Dissociating from Asia) read the essay as Fukuzawa’s response to the failure of the Kapsin Coup in Korea. Suehiro then quit the newspaper to join the T�ky� K�ron (Manabe 2006. and political consequences. Tokyo: Shoshi Shinsui. Fukuzawa Yukichi. 1–15. Philippine Studies 57(1): 77–104. while generally valid.) This reading. vol. Duara. 2002. but entailed emotional involvement through his personal interactions and relationships with the Korean exponents and participants. Benedict. http://www. 210-22. 2005. ed. Journal of Oriental Studies (Jan. ed. Camagay. 2001. New York: Columbia University Press. Sun then obtained permission from the Philippine army to “borrow” the arms for his own planned uprising. 73–104. had taken over the newspaper and turned it into a Reform Party organ. 2009. 10. overlooks the fact that Fukuzawa’s support for Korean reform and modernization was not just a matter of principle. Nakamura met with Ponce in Tokyo to coordinate the logistics of shipping these arms. 42 For an important reminder of the limits of “globalization” as evident in the absences and silences in Ponce’s overseas contacts and correspondence. Frederick C. Hong Kong y Filipinas [Hong Kong and the Philippines]. When the world loved the Filipinos: Foreign freedom fighters in the Filipino struggle for freedom. bullets for Mosel rifles. For a Chinese-language account of Sun’s involvement in the purchase of arms and ammunition for the Philippine revolutionary army. trans. See Karl 2002. Richmond. 2007. Lanham: Rowan and Littlefield. Kristine.org/famous-masons/fmroxas. a second attempt was made to send arms to the Philippines.): 100–112. 45). Tokyo: Tokyo University Press. The origins and development of the Northeast Asian political economy: Industrial sectors. Ponce published a series of articles on the Philippine Revolution in Keikora Nippo (Kaika Nippo). Japan and the Philippine Revolution: Image and legend. Mariano Ponce: Emissary to Japan. 1995. In When the world loved the Filipinos and other essays on Philippine history. Sven Saaler and J. 1987. Nishikawa Jun and Hirano Ken’ichiro. After the Nunobiki Maru sank. Famous Filipino Masons. 40 In Japan in 1900. Grant K. vol. For details on Anderson. Surrey: Curzon Press. Bruce. but the attempt was again unsuccessful. Vietnam no sekai shi [World history of Vietnam]. but also the specific personal circumstances that impelled Fukuzawa to write with such a sense of urgency and disillusionment. 1997. 213–25. see note 22). 1999. as part of his effort to unite the two parties. the essay needs to be understood not only in terms of the unfolding events of the time. Deyo. In La Solidaridad. But after he returned from his study tour to KK Global: Hau Japan in 1889. see Anderson 2005. The politics of anti-Westernism in Asia: Visions of world order in pan-Islamic and pan-Asian thought. In Pan-Asianism in modern Japanese history: Colonialism. Overcoming colonialism at Bandung. was involved in the Nunobiki Maru incident. In The political economy of the new Asian industrialization. In Collected Writings. London: Routledge. product cycles. Tokyo: Iwanami. Politics of friendship. Aydin.d. Tokyo: Yomiuri Shimbun Seibunsha. 6: 272. regionalism and borders. No. Although the coup plotters were able to occupy the palace in December 1884. These articles. and some cannons and artillery belonging to the Qing army that had been seized by the Japanese during the Sino-Japanese war. “Meiyaku nite naseru”: Umeya Sh�kichi to Son Bun [Sun Wen] [“Accomplished by oath”: Umeya Sh�kichi and Sun Yat-sen]. Barabási. Goodman. would appear in book form in 1901 and were subsequently translated to Chinese in 1902. who was one of his students (and Suehiro Tetch�’s friend as well. 1894/1996. accessed 24 Feb. In Fukuzawa Yukichi senshu [The selected works of Fukuzawa Yukichi]. Through his connections with several top officials in the bureaucracy.d. Maria Luisa. (The coup d’etat was launched by Enlightenment Party reformists Kim Okgyun and Pak Yonghyo—whom Ponce would come to know in Yokohama—with Japanese support. Asian and Pacific Migration Journal 8(1–2): 101–15. science. and everyday life. 274. Prasenjit 2003. Dery. Under three flags: Anarchism and the anti-colonial imagination. William G. References 38 Suehiro knew Inukai from their days as members of the opposition Liberal and Reform Parties respectively. he found that Inukai. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten. Umeya’s career as an activist and cinema impresario. translated into Japanese. Got� Ken’ichi. 2005. Pasig City: Fundación Santiago. Campoamor. Jacques. Gonzalo A. 57 HAU & SHIRAISHI / ASIANISM AS NETwoRk AND fANTASy 383 382 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57. Internet document. Cumings. Linked: How everything is connected to everything else and what it means for business. London: Verso. New York: Plume. On the checkered career of pan-Asianism in Korea. 3 (2009) . 207–9. see High n. Del Pilar. 1. Manila: University of Santo Tomas Publishing House. along with novelist Ozaki Yukio (who was also in London when Suehiro was there). Inukai. Sanjūsan-nen no yume [Thirty-three years’ dreams]. Two Eastern fables. ed.go. Tokyo: Azusa Shuppansha. http://services. n. 2008. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 172–210. Berlin: Berliner Buchdruckerei-Actien-Gesellschaft. Mirror: The Saturday Magazine. Tsuyoshi (1855–1932). 2. Internet document. Miyazaki. 5. 342. accessed 23 Mar. 2004b. Hatano. 40. Barnard. ______. 1964.d. Zaide. Nagoshi Futaranosuke. Japanese perspectives on Asia: From dissociation to coprosperity. 2006. Ponce. Internet document. Manila: National Heroes Commission. In The Japanese colonial empire. 1961. Morga. 2009. Nunobiki Maru: Firipin dokuritsu-gun hiwa [Nunobiki Maru: The secret story of the Philippine independence army]. Thomas Satchell. Internet document. “Kindai no ch�koku” to wa nani ka? [What does it mean to “go beyond modernity”?]. In AAken Tonan-Ajia kenkyū dai-ichi-kan: Seikitenkan-ki ni okeru Nihon Firipin kanke [Asia-Africa Institute. Southeast Asian Studies. Sucesos de las islas Filipinas por Antonio de Morga. 1984. Caesar Z. ______. vol. ______. Tokyo: Charles E. 2004. 2003. ______. 52–86. Chūokoron [Central forum] (Sept. 1–36. De Rizal à Ponce. 2009. Ramon H. Jose Rizal and the gifted Japanese man of letters. Philippine Daily Inquirer 13 April. Jimbō N[obuhiko]. Hotta Eri. 1999. Nick Joaquin.badosa. http://www. ed.htm#IV. 1989. Tokyo: K�bundo. Roxas. Suehiro. ed. Jose Rizal. 1889–1890.php?article_id=60123. 116–21. http://www. Phan Boi Chau. and Gregorio F. Chinese and the Japanese: Essays in political and cultural interactions. Tōten. Moret y Prendergast. Japan and the Philippines. Rizal. 1876.html. Miyazaki T�ten. accessed 5 July 2009. T�kai d�chū hizakurige [Mare’s shanks]. 1938b. Epistolario Rizalino. Manila: Bureau of Printing. Mojares.go.net/print/print. Tokyo: Sophia University and Charles E. trans. Vinh Sinh and Nicholas Wickenden. Ikehata Setsuho. Tokyo: Appolon-sha. 3 (2009) HAU & SHIRAISHI / ASIANISM AS NETwoRk AND fANTASy 385 . accessed 5 July 2009. ed.com/bin/obra. ed. Peter B. Manila: Comisión Nacional de Centenario de Jose Rizal. In Jose Rizal to Nihon [Jose Rizal and Japan]. 58 384 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57. No. Akira Iriye. 1885–1905: Mutual images and interests. Noli me tangere. Tokyo: Contribution of The Philippines Reparations Mission to the Rizal Centennial.org/files/14839/14839-h/14839-h. In Contesting Malayness: Malay identity across boundaries. Ajia Kenkyū [Asian Studies] 34(4): 69–95.: 19–21. http://www. The miscellaneous writings of Dr. trans. ______. 1961.jp/portrait/e/datas/282. ______. 1961. trans. 83–114. Manabe Misa.go. 1891. Internet document. Resil B. accessed 20 Apr. The Nan’y�: Japan in the South Pacific. Understanding Melayu (Malay) as a source of diverse modern identities. Anthony. 2004c. ed. 234–38. Dait�ry� wo sukutta rikugun chūsa: Roxas to Jimbō no yūj� monogatari [The army lieutenant colonel who saved the president: The story of Roxas and Jimbō’s friendship]. Staging the world: Chinese nationalism at the turn of the century. 1–24.html.S. 4. 19–46. José. Sucesos de las islas Filipinas [Events in the Philippine islands]. Portraits of modern Japanese historical figures.ndl. Durham: Duke University Press. Suehiro Tetch� kenkyū [Studies on Suehiro Tetch�]. Umeya Sh�kichi: The revolutionist as impresario. Peattie. ______. 1962. Meyer-Van-Loo. 346. Tokyo: Seidosha. Filipinas dentro de cien años [The Philippines a century hence].html. NTT. vol. ______. pl?id=n134. lang. Yu Jose. Jippensha Ikku.jp/proj/socho/mirai/mirai-high. Doña Perfecta. El filibusterismo. ______. Boekdrukkerij F. In Waiting for Mariang Makiling: Essays in Philippine cultural history. Portraits of modern Japanese historical figures. 2008. 1981. Online: http://www.jp/portrait/e/datas/339_1. Mark R. http://www. La Solidaridad. Historical Bulletin (2 June): 181–92. Portraits of modern Japanese historical figures. Epistolario Rizalino.Hashikawa Bunk�. Tetchō (1849–1696). In Japan’s modern century. vol. Manila: Filipino-Chinese Cultural Foundation. Rebecca E. 1885–1945. Timothy P. part 1. Project Gutenberg document. 1895–1945. 1960. 20. the founder of the Republic of China. Iwamoto Yoshio. Internet document.ndl. Tokyo: Tentensha. accessed 13 Feb. 1965. Ghent: CIEI. 1993. ed. part 1.inquirer. 2007. In Philippines-Japan Relations. accessed 24 Feb. Singapore: Singapore University Press. 1931. ______. Tokyo: Tokyo University of Foreign Languages. Princeton: Princeton University Press. In The Francisca Peruja. Suguru. El Japón y las islas Filipinas [Japan and the Philippine islands]. annot. Antonio de. 2007. vol. Lanuza. 5. Manila: Bureau of Printing. 2009. Online edition. ______. Tuttle Co. 32–36. Kimura Ki. KK Global: Hau High.ndl. Mariano. Letter to the editor. Epistolario Rizalino. Carta no. Edmund Skrzypczak.pdf. Carta no. vol. ______. Peattie. Firipin dokuritsu und� to Nihon no tai� [The Philippine independence movement and Japanese responses]. Manila: Bureau of Printing. Jose Rizal to Nihon [Jose Rizal and Japan]. 1999. Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press. Kimura Ki. 52–60. 1962. http://www. Karl. 1895/1996. 2002. S[egismundo]. 1609/2007.A. Rizal in Japan. Koyasu Nobukuni.nagoya-u.: Fondo de Cultura Económica. accessed 5 July 2009. ed. 1988. Matsumoto Ken’ichi and Takeshi Nakajima. Overturned chariot: The autobiography of Phan Boi Chau. 27 Jan. 1: Japan-Philippine relations at the turn of the century]. Myers and Mark R. 2002. 1887. Pan-Asianism and Japan’s war 1931–1945. 2004a. 344. 1980. Sun Yat-sen. In Dait�a sens� sono go [The Greater East Asia war and after]. Rizal and Tetcho. U. Pasig City: Fundación Santiago. Pérez Galdós. Manuel M. Who saved Manuel Roxas’ life?. Tokyo: Heibonsha. Ikehata Setsuho and Lydia N. vol. London: Palgrave Macmillan.): 132–41. National Diet Library.ac. 1938a. Chūgoku to indo wa “kindai no ch�koku” no tetsu wo fumuka? [Do China and India make the same mistake of “going beyond modernity”?]. 7: 1895.jp/portrait/e/datas/17. Reid. Rizal reading Pigafetta. 10–48.gutenberg. 117–19. Firipin kakumei to Nihon [The Philippine revolution and Japan]. Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press. 1968. 328–55. Suehiro Tetch�: A Meiji political novelist. 2009. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press. Tuttle Co. Benito. Tokyo: Appolon-sha. ______. “Ajia-shugi” no jubaku wo koete–Higashi-Ajia ky�dotai saik� [Overcoming the curse of “Asianism”: Revisiting the East Asia Community]. Tokyo: Shuny�d�. 169–94. In Suihitsu Meiji bungaku [Essays on Meiji literature]. Oxford: Oxford University Press. A short history of the Nanyang Chinese. 1993. Shiraishi Takashi. Unno Hiroshi. 1891.org/wiki/木村毅. Uemura Kimio. Pathé. K�setsu-roku [Stork prints on snow]. 3 (2009) HAU & SHIRAISHI / ASIANISM AS NETwoRk AND fANTASy 387 386 . How does Asia mean?. Miyazaki kyodai den [Biography of the Miyazaki brothers]. Nihon to Ajia [Japan and Asia]. 2007. London and New York: Routledge. ______. Ithaca. Tokyo: Ashi Shobo. ed. Tokyo: Shunjūsha. Suehiro Tetch�. In Sengo Nihon: Senry� to sengo kaikaku [Postwar Japan: Occupation and postwar reform]. 1887. 1968.com/HinhAnh. Oshi no ryok� [Mute’s travels].): 168–79. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten. 1895–1919. Umi no teikoku [Empire of the seas: The making of a region]. regionalism and borders. ______. 1992. 1. London: Routledge. Hui Shiu-Lun and Lau Kinchi. Daroy and Dolores Feria. 9–65. accessed 5 July 2009. Southeast Asia and Australia. 1942. In Network power: Japan and Asia. Tokyo: Hakubund�. Hanama no uguisu [Nightingale among flowers]. Young. http://ja. NY: Cornell University Press. ______. London and New York: Routledge. 2009. Szpilman. Tokyo: Chikuma Shob�. 246–52. Marxism and literature. 33–46. Berkeley: University of California Press. Louise. Shiso kadai to shite no Ajia: Kijiku. Tokyo: Ashi Shobo. Tokyo: Hakubund�. vol. Kuan-Hsing Chen and Chua Beng Huat. Manila: De La Salle University Press. 1997. Shimizu Hiromu. 2005. ______. Leonards. ed. Williams. 2. ______. In Feilübin yü huaren [The Philippines and the ethnic Chinese]. Josefa. forging an empire. Keizai sai-shinshutsu he no michi: Nihon no tai-Tonan Ajia seisaku to kaihatsu taisei [Road to economic re-advancement: Japan’s Southeast Asia policy and developmental regimes]. In Jose Rizal to Nihon [Jose Rizal and Japan]. Korea between empires. 49–67. 2007. Tokyo: Heibonsha. 408–30. Richard. In The Inter-Asia Cultural Studies reader. Revolutionary dreams: Utopian vision and experimental life in the Russian revolution. Raymond. ______. Shin. 1989. Imb� to gens� no dai Ajia [The Greater Asia of conspiracies and fantasies]. ______. Wang Gungwu. Victor Koschmann. In Community and nation: China. ed. 11–39. Between pan-Asianism and nationalism: Mitsukawa Kametar� and his campaign to reform Japan and liberate Asia. html. ed. Shiraishi Takashi and Caroline Hau. ed. 1968. Petronilo Bn. Sven Saaler and J. 1999. Yamamuro Shin’ichi. ______. Arashi no nagori [Remains of the storm]. 2001.wikipedia. Zhou Nanjing. 3d ed. and projects]. ______. 258–62. Tokyo: Chūok�ronsha. 1889. Internet site. Imagining the Filipino Revolution 100 years ago. toki [Asia as a question of thought: Axes. ______. Internet document. Tokyo: Aoki Kozand�. accessed 28 Feb.A. New York: Columbia University Press. Tokyo: Ashi Shobo. 1961. rensa. Kimura Ki. 1987. 2002. Kimura Ki. Tokyo: M. vol. ed.truonghongbang. Yoon Keun Cha. St. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten. 2009. ______. 1998. region. vol. Stites. Gi-Wook. series. Andre. No. creating a Trường Việt Ngữ Hồng Bàng. Tokyo: Chikuma. Sun Ge. Quezon City: Guro Books. Kaiy� bungaku to nanshin shis� [Literature of the seas and ideas of southward expansion]. 1894. 87–100. Meiji seiji sh�setsu shū [A compilation of Meiji political novels]. Takeuchi Yoshimi. In Pan-Asianism in modern Japanese history. 1996. 3. Christopher W. Yanagida Izumi. Tokyo: Heibonsha. Sven. Asianism in Korea’s politics of identity. Arnold Azurin and Sylvano Mahiwo. Wikipedia (Japanese). 2006. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2007. 2000. 1886. Japan and the Philippines 1868–1898. 59 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57. 1995. Nakamura Masanori. 1–18. Quezon City: Kultura’t Wika. ______. 1998. 1998. 2007. Sven Saaler and J. Ryu no gotoku: Miyazaki T�ten den [Like a dragon: A biography of Miyazaki T�ten]. Victor Koschmann. 2005 [1934]. Tokyo: Hakubund�. Nihon bungaku ni okeru Jose Rizal [Jose Rizal in Japanese literature]. Katzenstein and Takashi Shiraishi.Saaler. Japan’s total empire: Manchuria and the culture of wartime imperialism. 1977. 2001. 2. Manila: Feilübin Huayi Qingnian Lianhehui. In Rizal: Contrary essays. 1916. Peter J. and Igarashi Takeshi. 1. Tokyo: Ashi Shobo. Rizal and Suehiro Tetcho. Seiji sh�setsu kenkyū [Studies on the political novel]. Nany� no daiharan [Storm over the South Seas]. 2009. 211–52. KK Global: Hau ______. 1891. ______. ed. In Seiji sh�setsu kenkyū [Studies on the political novel]. Suehiro Tetch� kenkyū [Studies on Suehiro Tetch�]. trans. Miyazaki kyodai den [Biography of the Miyazaki brothers]. Tokyo: Shuny�d�. Japan and Southeast Asia. Kimera: Manshūkoku no sh�z� [Kimera: A portrait of Manzhouguo]. Wu Wenhuan [Go Bon Juan]. 1889. ed. Tokyo: Nippon H�s� Shuppaky�kai. 319–544. 1967. ______. Suehiro Akira. Tokyo: Aoki Kozand�. vol. � Unabara [The big ocean]. Setchūbai [Plum blossoms in the snow]. ed. 24–37. Inter-Asia Cultural Studies 6 (4): 616–30. 2005. Saniel. Chūok�ron [Central Forum] (Feb. Pan-Asianism in modern Japanese history: Overcoming the nation. Tokyo: Chūok�ronsha. http://www. In Pan-Asianism in modern Japanese history: Colonialism. Feilübin duli zhanzheng yü Zhongguo renmin [The war of Philippine independence and the Chinese people]. Miyazaki kyodai den [Biography of the Miyazaki brothers]. Nany� no daiharan [Storm over the South Seas]. Umeya Sh�kichi. 50–72. New South Wales: Asian Studies Association of Australia and Allen and Unwin. Schmid. In Junctions between Filipinos and Japanese: Transborder insights and reminiscences. ed. vol. Amakawa Akira. Waga kage [My shadow]. 1993. Network Power: Japan and Asia (1997. coedited with Peter J. Chiyoda-ku. Katzenstein). She is the author of On the Subject of the Nation: Filipino Writings from the Margins 1981 to 2004 (2005) and Necessary Fictions: Philippine Literature and the Nation. Japan. Kyoto 606–8501. Tokyo 100–8970. 3–1–1 Kasumigaseki. 1946–1980 (2000)[email protected]. and Beyond Japan: The Dynamics of East Asian Regionalism (2006. No. Kyoto University. Yoshida. <hau@cseas. Cabinet Office.jp> 388 PHILIPPINE STUDIES 57.jp> Takashi Shiraishi is an executive member of the Council for Science and Technology Policy. 1912–1926 (1990).KK Global: Hau Caroline S. Japan. 3 (2009) 60 .kyoto-u. Sakyo-ku. coedited with Peter J. Hau is associate professor at the Center for Southeast Asian Studies. Among his English-language publications are An Age in Motion: Popular Radicalism in Java. <takashi.ac. 46 Shimoadachi-cho. Katzenstein).