Similar to many of his other post-World War II films, Yasujiro Ozu's Tokyo Story focuses on changes within a Japanese family. While superficially, the film seems to only deal with its primary characters, in actuality, the fragmented Hirayama family is allegorical of Japanese families in the post-war era. In looking at Tokyo Story, it is important to look the economic and sociological history of Japan in addition to the film's precise style to notice how Ozu blames his country's explosion into modernity for the decay of the family.

McDonald, Keiko. "Ozu's Tokyo Story: Simple Means for Complex Ends." The Journal of the Association of Teachers of Japanese 17 (1982): 19-39. JSTOR.<http://www.jstor.org/stable/489426>.

 

In her analysis of Tokyo Story, Keiko McDonald suggests that Ozu provides three possible reactions to the changing world.  The first, shown by Shukichi, Tomi, and Noriko, depicts a saddened acceptance of change.  They are clearly disappointed by new values, but manage to continue their lives calmly.  The second reaction is shown through the three oldest children, Koichi, Shige, and Keizo.  They take the changing world for granted and passively go with the flow.  Finally, the youngest child, Kyoko, represents a denial of modern changes.

It does not seem fair to suggest that one of these points-of-view is better than another, and it is easy to see the reasoning behind each opinion.  While each philosophy is certainly subjective, McDonald astutely points out that Ozu aligns himself with the first group's view of the world.  Throughout the film, he pushes his audience to sympathize with Shukichi and Tomi's loneliness.  At the same time, viewers come to love Noriko who gives her full attention to the elderly couple despite not even being blood related.  On the other hand, the three oldest children are depicted as cold and selfish.  From a completely neutral position, it is not fair to blame them for their inattentiveness towards their parents; the children each have busy lives of their own, complete with children or time consuming professions.  Yet, at the end of the film, one cannot help but dislike them.

By aligning himself with the parents, Ozu shows himself to be a reflection of his protagonists.  He knows modernity is producing significant changes around him, and just like Shukichi at the end of the film, he is forced to accept the alterations in society.

 

 

In her sociological report regarding World War II’s effects on Japanese social structure, Edna Cooper Masuko et al highlights the massive emigration from the rural countryside to urban areas following the war.  Although this trend is noticeable as early as the 1880s, the end of the Pacific War marked the beginning of what she calls a “great transformation” (1).  With the American occupation of Japan, there was an increase in industry, commerce, and other urban occupations which led to 54 percent of all Japanese living in urban areas in 1950 compared to 32 percent two decades earlier.  This movement in demographics was accompanied by new attitudes which directly conflicted with traditional Japanese values.

This statistical information reported by Masuko provides an essential background to understanding Ozu's world during the creation of the film.  Made in 1953, Tokyo Story clearly echoes the changes expressed in the paper.  While the drama focuses on the damaged relationship between three generations, it is important to remember that the decay of the family is deeply rooted in the children’s exodus to Tokyo.  Ozu generally shows this clash between old and new values subtly; however, the scene where Shukichi gets drunk and expresses disappointment in his children’s lack of success and filial piety is allegorical of traditional Japan’s disillusionment with the modern era.  In this scene, and throughout the film as shown through the neglect of the parents, Ozu suggests that modernity and the resulting urbanization have divided the family apart.  This is shown both literally, through the physical distance between the parents and their children, and emotionally, through the children’s selfish priorities which arise from fast city living.  While Masuko’s statistics give insightful facts, Ozu makes the trends she writes about come alive, complete with the negative implications of the emigration.

 

Nakao, Keiko. "Sociological Work in Japan." Annual Review of Sociology 24 (1998): 499-516. JSTOR.<http://www.jstor.org/stable/223491>.

 

Keiko Nakao writes about the changing family structure following World War II.  The traditional family unit, known as ie, consisted of grandparents, a son and wife, and their children.  In 1947, however, Japanese laws were revised and no longer recognized the ie as a legal entity.  From here, Americanized nuclear families became more common in Japanese society.  While the nuclear family unit may seem typical to most contemporary viewers, the transition from ie to smaller families fragmented and separated traditional social roles.

Tokyo Story is essentially about the disbanding of the ie.  While the division of family is catalyzed by urbanization, the end of the ie familial structure is largely responsible for the the unwinding of the film's family.  In a symbolic scene, Noriko and the parents stand at the top of a building looking over Tokyo.  Noriko points across the city in different directions to show the parents where their children live.  Besides demonstrating the physical distance between the members of the family, these scene places Tokyo at the center of the detachment, making the city a central character in the film. 

This lack of ie which Nakao refers to is apparent throughout the film.  Traditionally, the son's wife would take care of the grandparents as they get old; with everyone separated in Tokyo, however, this is no longer possible.  Additionally, the lack of ie is shown when the parents are sent to a seaside spa.  The children give up their responsibility of caregivers and pay for someone else to entertain their parents on the vacation.  Had film taken place before the war with the ie still existing as the conventional family unit, the parents would not have been neglected.

In this article, Ronald W. Wilson offers a critique of Jonathan Munby’s piece “Public Enemies, Public Heroes: Screening the Gangster from Little Caesar to Touch of Evil.” He discusses Munby’s portrayal of the gangster as an American icon, reviewing the idea that the gangster emerged as a symbol representing America at a time when the nation was experiencing rapid urbanization.

 

According to Wilson, Munby argues that city dwellers were unaccustomed to the hasty changes taking place in their neighborhoods. A majority of urban citizens were familiar with a largely homogenous, Anglo-Saxon Protestant culture, and were unsure about how to react to an influx of immigrants that differed from them vastly. The gangster came to represent a fusion of the various cultures that were pooling into America’s cities. Essentially, the cinematic gangster was a manifestation of all types of ‘otherness’ that Americans were not able to psychologically penetrate.

 

Wilson agrees with this claim to a large extent, but adds that the perception of the gangster changed with the advent of sound technology. He writes that the institution of sound made the gangster seem even more foreign, as audiences were able to hear characters such as Powers or Scarface speak with a pronouncedly different accent. 

 

This article makes an interesting point, and would add another dimension to my analysis. Wilson makes a valid claim when he states that Anglo-Saxon, Protestant audiences viewed Italian or Irish gangsters as fairly foreign, and were unable to connect with those characters. However, as the article mentions, these homogenous audiences filled theaters in the early 1920s, when urbanization was in its initial stages.

 

In my paper, I will emphasize the timeline of urbanization, noting that when The Public Enemy was released in 1931, the cultural composition of audiences had changed. A significant portion of movie-goers were the products of immigration and urbanization, and many of them were from either Italy or Ireland. As a result, the gangster – who spoke with an accent and ate ‘ethnic’ dishes – was an accurate representation the backgrounds of audience members. Consequently, the processes of immigration and urbanization changed cultural make-up of audiences, allowing viewers to see themselves reflected on screen and identify more fully with the characters. 

Mega-cities, mega-problems
Billions in the developing world are shifting from rural to urban areas, bringing poverty to dangerous new levels.
By Nicolas P. Retsinas, NICOLAS P. RETSINAS is the director of the Joint Center for Housing Studies at Harvard University and chairman of the board of directors for Habitat for Humanity International.
February 28, 2007

THE WORLD HAS reached a point of hyper-urbanization: 2007 marks the first year when more than half the global population is "urban," not "rural." Indeed, this is the era of the "mega-city" - metropolises of 10 million-plus. In 1950, only Tokyo and New York met that threshold. Today there are 20 mega-cities, including Mexico City, Karachi, Manila, Dhaka, Lagos, Jakarta and Chongqing.

This type of drastic population shift isn't without precedent. During the Industrial Revolution, concentrations of people in U.S. and European cities were part and parcel of a factory economy. But that economic and technological progress came with a price - decades of fetid slums, horrific child mortality, raging epidemic disease. This time around, with cities 10 times bigger and demand for workers uncertain, the costs could be exponentially larger.

In general, an optimist might cheer urbanization as a sign of modernization; Residents of developed countries are much more likely to live in cities than their counterparts in still-developing nations (74% vs. 43%). The city, after all, is the hub of culture, a magnet that draws artists, writers, musicians - the place where creative spirits create. Great cities have ballet troupes, opera companies, orchestras. The city is, likewise, the hub of industry, generating the bulk of most countries' gross domestic product. Most important, the city is the hub of ideas. The mingling of people spurs the intellectual innovation that fuels thriving societies, at least in the developed world.