Introduction
Ethnographies are detailed results of studies about the culture that are conducted by an anthropologist who is well trained. This paper is meant to find out the theme, issues and problems that are considered by an ethnographer when compiling ethnography. Specifically, this paper will consider “The return of the Ainu: cultural mobilization and the practice of ethnicity in Japan” which was conducted by Katarina Sjoberg in 1993. The major theme of this ethnography was to come out with factors that were possibly contributing to the wiping out of the Ainu and their culture. Ainu was a group of indigenous population in Japan. Some of the factors that were considered were for instance, worries, inflexible rules, floods of migration, harassment, the struggle for existence and burdensome taxes. The present situation of the Ainu is that; their culture is almost disappearing and that they live as a marginal minority community with poor politics and economy (Sjoberg, p. 1).
The Ainu traditionally lived as hunters and gathers and they mainly inhabited Hokkaido which is an island in northern Japan. This community was later 1868 incorporated into the Nohin culture after their native land of Hokkaido was annexed. The Ainu exhibited different biological, linguistic and cultural characteristics which made them different from the majority of other cultures in Japan. This resulted in their matters being classified as different institutions of social services. However, even after being considered in specific social works and welfares, the majority of Ainu had a living standard that was very low as compared to the average nation (Sjoberg, p. 1). A separate welfare policy referred to as The Hokkaido Utari Welfare Policy was established in 1974 with the major objective being to raise the living standard of the Ainu. However, this policy did not bear significant fruits. These efforts to try and improve the lives of the Ainu prompted the need for finding out why the Ainu and their culture were fading. Today, there are some of the Ainu who are not willing to live in the existing modes of interpretation of their ethnographic and historical background. This group of the Ainu has interacted with the large society at large and is now realizing the need to recognize their lost culture (Sjoberg, p. 4).
Another concern of this ethnography is determining the procedure of integrating and fragmenting the relationship that exists between the Ainu and the other cultures. This is certainly true because the Ainu are currently distributed across Nihon even though Hokkaido was their main territory.
Methods used in data collection
To achieve the objective of this study, the ethnographer used material that was written and taped, field and archival material. This data was collected in the form of in-depth interviews with open-ended questions. There were two principal areas of research that were considered and whose relevant data was collected. The first area of concern was data on what is mobilizing the Ainu today. This area dealt with those people who registered themselves as Ainu and those who did not, this was so because some people were involved in practices and activities that belonged to the Ainu while others periodically engaged in these activities. In addition, some people engaged in these activities individually while others as groups, other people hid their interest in these activities when they were among the Wajin and instead showed this interest when they were among their people. Another reason for this approach was because there were other groups of people who engaged in the Ainu activities because they saw an opportunity of achieving an ethnic position while others engaged in these activities because they had the interest of knowing their ethnography. These complex factors in engagements lead to the need to collect data from the representative of all the classes of people (Sjoberg, p. 6).
The second era of data collection dealt with collecting views from the Ainu on how the ethnographic and historic writings identified them. This data was important because earlier Wajin and Western representations of the Ainu ethnography and history had been debated on the identity of the Ainu. Such an analysis was important in order to determine the relationship between the Ainu and the other communities. In order to make an illustration of the aspects that lacked consistencies among the views of the Ainu, the ethnographer used his own field research to incorporate the Ainu views, criticism and comments with respect to the way other cultures identified them (Sjoberg, p. 4).
The stage of data collection consumed a lot of time for the anthropologist. This was because it was a hard decision to determine which places would best suit the purpose. For this reason, a minor survey was made at some of the places before deciding on the places that met the criteria for the study. Therefore there was the need to extend from far above the community level. This was so because the target population was a minority community that lived in the outskirts of large cities and therefore they could not be studied in isolation from the center. Factors such as how the Ainu used their resources and their employment situation could only be determined above their heads and by considering the whole nation. For such reasons, the ethnographer decided to settle in three separate areas namely; Akan, Nibustani and Shiraoi. Nibustani was selected as the field base. These areas were not selected at random but rather on the basis of information that was gathered from reliable informants (Sjoberg, p. 14).
Content
The selected center, Nibutani was rather a small town. This village was located in Hidaka, which was the region with the highest number of the Ainu. Hidaka was further divided into 9 autonomous towns referred to as Cho, Biratori Cho is one of the small towns. Many villages constituted one Biratori Cho (Sjoberg, p. 14). Nibutani was the administrative headquarters of the Biratori Cho and it had 24 elected town officers. There were representatives from each village.
Nibutani also served as a tourist village for the Hidaka region and also most of the Ainu resided here. The Ainu who lived here considered their cultural uniqueness with a lot of emphases. Majority of these Ainu had full-time engagement on issues relating to their cultural heritage; in addition most of these people identified themselves as Ainu. For that reason, they arranged their courses in material culture, Ainu language, religious belief and history. The plans to make this village a knowledge center for the Ainu have grown up to this day. This idea was supported by the Nihon state government, Biratori administrative unit and the Hokkaido prefectural government. The ethnographer had the chance to attend a meeting in Nibutani and during this meeting, matters relating to the distribution of Biratori Cho cultural funds were debated and it was decided that a historic museum would be established there. This museum was to be surrounded by dwelling huts built using the Ainu style, the Ainu products used to construct these huts would also be crafted by handcraft and in the old Ainu fashion. Other plans that were debated during that meeting were to establish a national park of the available mountains and forests so as to preserve the flora and fauna of the once-famous Ainu land of Hokkaido. Other plans were to change farming commodities like corn, rice and beans that were imported from Honshu and instead plant Ainu vegetables and other crops. The final plan was the establishment of a center of study of the Ainu history, oral language and material culture and the specific lectures were to be conducted by the Ainu themselves (Sjoberg, p. 14).
The areas that were considered as strong Ainu areas were Shiraoi and Akan in the Iburi and Kushiro regions. The Ainu living here identified themselves as Ainu and the Ainu culture was strongly emphasized, this was very common during the tourist season that lasted from May to October. This was the main season when the Ainu from all over Hokkaido came to participate in the Ainu activities and performances like dances (Sjoberg, p.14).
Discussion
Various advantages were associated with the prolonged stay in the study area. The ethnographer was in a position to make a comparison of the gathered information from the various interviews and also to determine what people said to each other when they were not interviewed. Another important comparison that the ethnographer made was, if the actions corresponded to the opinions that the people expressed during the interviews (Sjoberg, p. 14). The ethnographer’s long stay in the study area provided enough time to identify the inconsistency that existed between the views of the Ainu and what was written about them.
The quantitative data collected was of great significance to the ethnographer. This data which was collected in the form of basic census was restricted to enumeration of the composition of households. This data was collected particularly in Nibutani because of the reputation that this center had in the study of the Ainu culture. In order to have a good record of the quantitative data, the ethnographer used a register to record the number of Ainu inhabitants living in Nibutani and fully participating in activities rooted in the Ainu culture. Data on divorces, marriage alliances, migration and employment was also stored in the same register. This data was useful in determining the interdependence that existed between the Ainu living in the provincial areas and those who lived in the suburbs (Sjoberg, pp. 14-15).
The decision by the ethnographer not to use questionnaires and interview guides and instead use in-depth interviews which employed open-ended questions was of great value. This was because the ethnographer was able to discuss things that seemed to be unfamiliar. In addition, the issues discussed came from the social context that emerged in the course of the interviews (Sjoberg, pp. 17-18). The use of such method created a free social environment for the ethnographer; it was therefore possible for the Ainu to ask the ethnographer questions freely and from such a discussion, the ethnographer was able to acquire the necessary information for the study (Sjoberg, p. 20).
Conclusion
This paper has discussed the return of the Ainu which was a marginalized community living in northern Japan. During the data collection step of this ethnography, the ethnographer employed good methods of data collection that is open interviews. By using this method the ethnographer did not undermine the human behavior because there are some sensitive issues of life that human beings cannot easily provide to strangers. In addition, as identified by the ethnographer, modernization can change people’s culture either positively or negatively. This can be illustrated by the way the Ainu were incorporated into the Nothin community.
This ethnography assists an individual to easily understand his or her own culture in that the case of the Ainu illustrates how cultural mobilization and change affect the community. As discussed above, the Ainu traditionally lived as hunters and gatherers in Hokkaido but after the integration into the larger Wajin community, the culture of the Ainu started fading. The ethnographer in this case emphasized the complexity of the factors that contribute to cultural change and how a certain culture considers how it is classified. From the discussion, it is evident that in order to understand a culture, the culture should not be considered as if it is self-contained but rather interactions with other cultures and authority should be taken into account. In addition, in order to learn own culture, the traditional practices should be considered. For instance, rice growing in Vietnam was inherited from the political, social and moral influence that the Chinese culture had on Vietnam. Another notable aspect of cultural change by the Vietnamese culture was the adoption of the Latin alphabet as a result of the colonization by the French. The integration of the Vietnamese culture into the communist nations like China and the Soviet Union has therefore led to adoption of the European and Asian cultures. However, there are still elements that are considered to belong to the Vietnamese culture like, family values, community respect, manual labor and ancestral veneration.
Works cited
Sjoberg, Katarina. The return of the Ainu: cultural mobilization and the practice of ethnicity in Japan. Amsterdam: Harwood Academic Publishers, 1993.