This week’s class topic does nothing short of cause an internal battle of the psyche of each reader. The recorded histories surrounding the Rape of Nanking are overwhelmed by biased, one-sided views and opinions that enter into a argument of “he-said, she-said” thwarts for public approval. The entire discussion on the Rape of Nanking might even be more convoluted and opinion-driven than the present day political situation in the United States of America. I, like many of you, am left confused.
One side of the story surrounding Nanking during the early 20th century Japanese take over of China paints a picture of Chinese men, women, and children being brutalized by the conquering Japanese soldiers. According to Iris Chang, the Author of The Rape of Nanking – The Forgotten Holocaust of World War II, the Chinese citizens of Nanking suffered through tortures including, but not limited to, death by machine gun fire, bayonet practice, decapitating competitions, burning alive, live burial, incest rape, and rape by occupying Japanese soldiers. Chang talks about how the Japanese government has gone to great lengths to avoid accepting blame for any incidents that may have occurred at Nanking. The Japanese educational system too has skipped over The Rape of Nanking in its effort to teach history to the Japan’s youth.
Tanaka Masaaki, however, depicts the Rape of Nanking as nothing more than a political hoax in his book, What Really Happened in Nanking – The Refutation of a Common Myth. Here, the incidents at Nanking are described as acts of war that are not out of place in any armed conflict. The “victims” of the brutalization are determined to be Chinese soldiers masquerading as normal citizens. Masaaki argues that many of the photos used to depict the incidents at Nanking as a massacre or societal rape were either taken out of context or completely falsified. Pictured above, you can see the arguments made about the photos that are supposed to serve as historical proof of the incident. There is controversy surrounding the uniforms and equipment worn and used in the photos, as well as the shadows cast by the people pictured.
Between the two sides to this one controversial argument, it is hard to tell where the truth lies. Because of this, it is important to remember that we are not studying the Rape of Nanking; but rather, we are studying the way the story of the Rape of Nanking is told. The people telling the story have different backgrounds and beliefs, both with strong sentiments about the topic. It is not hard to see where their bias lies, but it is extremely difficult to see past said bias. Although, making head or tails of what really happened at Nanking in the early to mid-20th century, it is certainly not hard to see that the controversy surrounding Rape of Nanking’s lies more with the Historiography than with the History itself.
I really enjoyed your post. Focusing more on the historiography side to this week’s assignment had me really confused. As in, trying to look past the bias and personal agendas of the different authors did not leave me much to go on. Iris Chang, a Chinese-American had thought about the massacre since she was a child after hearing stories her Chinese father told her. It is not hard to see that she would have wanted to prove her father correct, as well as shine light on the victims of China. On the other hand, Tanaka Maaksai, a Japanese man, would most likely follow a similar nationalist agenda as he would not want to tarnish Japan’s reputation.
I really liked how your blog brought up the importance of historiography in the readings. I thought it was interesting to read about the two extremes on the Rape of Nanking. I had learned about it in previous classes, but I did not know that people tried to deny that it happened. I also liked how you mentioned even though we have biased opinions on the Rape of Nanking, it is important to notice how each sides story is told.