imperial japan history

Research:Large to Small Scale, Avoiding Homogenizing East Asian Cultures, & Paralleling Regions Appropriately

I’m currently working on a project set in a secondary world, but with nations that roughly correspond to major cultures in our world. 

By that I mean I’m trying to create amalgamations of cultural groups. For example, one country corresponds to Germanic cultures, one to Celtic, one to Mediterranean. There are, so far, also countries that correspond to Eastern Asia - a mixture of Japanese, Chinese and Korean, mainly - South America, “Arab countries” and so on. My first question, in that regard, would be whether or not this concept - creating a “vibe” that reads Eastern Asian, for example, but is not one specific culture - is offensive and if it is, what I can do to solve it. 

The project I’m working on makes use of so called FaceClaims, which means that, for example, actors are used to represent fictional characters. If I based the country on China alone, then I could only use Chinese FCs and would thus greatly limit the representation. A solution I thought of was to have each country be inofficially split up in itself, so the “East Asian” country would have a “Chinese” region, a “Korean” region and so on.
Secondly, I have a desert region that I thought would be nice for an “African” (I am very much aware that there is no such thing as an “African culture”, so bear with me) cultural group. For this “country”, I thought of a loose union between different nations of people. There, I’m stuck - should I choose one region in Africa, let’s say West Africa, and base each nation on one specific peoples there? Or should I create my own “African-inspired” cultures? Or should I choose cultures from all around Africa and base a nation on each?

My third question goes along a similar line: The “cultures” I have chosen for the countries are by far not all there are in the world. There is no country for Native Americans, for example, none for South-Eastern Asians (unless I integrate them with my “India”), no Central Asian, etc. I know it is impossible to include all cultures there are in the world, but how do I choose which ones to represent in a concept like mine? I don’t want to exclude them, but I simply cannot create as many countries as there are cultural groups.

One possible solution I thought of specifically refers to Jewish people, since I feel it is important to represent them more in fantasy writing. My current idea was to have their story go similar to that of our world: Exile, long travels, and a split into groups, one of which would be the Ashkenazim, living somewhere near the Germanic country, and the other would be the Sephardim, which I imagined to live in between the “Arab” and “African” country, in a semi-autonomous city-state. But is it offensive to adapt what happened to the Jewish people in a secondary world or should I make it so that they have a more positive past and life, no exile like there was in our world? As far as I know, the exile is an important part of Jewish identity and cultural understanding, but I thought I’d ask anyway.

I’m going to preface this that some of this wording might sound very harsh, but I recognize you are genuinely asking out of a place of respect but you just aren’t sure what the best way to respect the world’s diversity is. The problem is it’s still not quite respectful enough, and shows sometimes glaring ignorance of nuances in the region.

I would also like to remind people that just because your exact question hasn’t been answered to the full scope you’re looking at, doesn’t mean you can’t get an answer as a whole. For example, we’ve discussed the concept of how and when to mix different cultures in the East Asian tag. Shira will cover your questions regarding Jewish representation below. 

However, I’m going to specifically tackle this from a research and worldbuilding perspective, primarily talking about a history of forced homogenization and how to avoid recreating colonialism/imperialism.

Notes on Language and False Equivalences

For starters, basically all of these groups are too broad. By a long shot. Either they flatten sometimes dozens to thousands of cultures (“Native American country” is in the thousands, “West Africa” is in the hundreds, “China, Japan, Korea” is in the dozens, if not hundreds, same deal with India). This language use makes people pretty uncomfortable, because it implies that the basis is stereotypes. It implies you haven’t done research, or, at least, haven’t done enough. When discussing nuance, it’s best to imply you understand there is nuance— like you did with Africa and Jewish culture, but neglected to do everywhere else.

You also go very broad with all non-European cultures, but narrow down a general homogeneous part for your European analogues, by picking Germanic and Celtic.

This double standard is something that is exactly what we try to draw attention to at WWC: to our ears, it sounds like “I’m taking Germanic peoples for Europe, but I’m going to mix three East Asian countries because those two regions have the equivalent amount of sameness that I can pass it off.”

While that sounds specific to just you, it’s not. We’ve received this type of question dozens of times in the past and it’s a general cultural attitude we’ve faced lots and lots and lots of times. Western society makes you think the equivalence is equal, because they’ve flattened all non-European countries with the single broadest brush, but it’s not.

I would also caution you on relying on media images for face claims, because media images only represent the idealized version of beauty. We’ve written multiple description guides that point out how much variety exists within all ethnic groups and how people seeing us as all the same is a microaggression.

You are right that you can’t tackle all of the world’s diversity into your worldbuilding, because, well, there is so much. The core of your question is basically how to narrow it down, which is what I’m going to tackle.

My suggestion is twofold: 

  1. Research big, top level things, over a few centuries— namely, keep track of empires that have tried to take over places and look at what groups Western society lumps together when it spreads multiple regions.
  2. Build small with a focus on a very specific place and group— namely, pick the smallest possible region you can and see what you have to build from there.

Researching Big

Researching big helps you catch what not to flatten, or at least, where flattening might be reinforcing situations that a government perpetuated. I’m going to focus on East Asia since that’s the bulk of your question, and it’s also where I’ve spent some time worldbuilding. The principles apply to all groups you’re trying to research.

East Asia— namely Japan, Korea, and China, although that is an oversimplification itself— is composed of two empires: China and Japan. This makes homogenization extremely risky because you’re touching two nerves of countries trying to take over in very recent history.

China has taken over a very large swath of land over centuries, and still has independence fights to this day from their recent history. As a result, they have both a roughly overreaching culture because the empire is so old, and a very fractured culture with over 50 recognized ethnic groups. When you think of “Chinese” you usually think of the dominant Han Chinese, but because of its old empire roots you can get a giant variety. In modern day, some provinces have kept their individual culture, while others have been part of China for so long there is a general “sameness” to them that can capture the flare you want.

Japan’s imperialism is similarly recent, only ending in 1947, and it left wounds across the Pacific (including Korea, China, Taiwan, the Philippines, and Malaysia). Many of their actions are classified as war crimes. They’ve also erased their own Indigenous population by insisting only one ethnicity lived in the country. Both of these factors make mixing Japan into an “East Asian” mix tricky. Japan’s culture, while heavily impacted by China and Korea, is pretty distinct because of its island status.

Big research also lets you see the neighbouring areas at a time borders might not have been the same. For example, in the 1600s, China was much smaller because the Manchu External Expansion hadn’t happened yet. As a result, places we now think of as “Chinese” actually weren’t, and you’ll have to account for these differences in your worldbuilding. You can determine this by looking up historical maps/empires, which might require book research (libraries are wonderful).

This does not mean you can ignore recent history, however. Because the story is set in modern day, people will be viewing it through a modern lens. You need to research both the modern and the historical context in order to understand how to go about crafting a respectful world.

So that’s stuff you would’ve discovered by big research. By tracking empire movements, you can see where old wounds are and what historical contexts exist within whatever region you’re pulling from. If you take North America, you can see how each individual tribe is cast aside in favour of settler stories; in Africa, you can see how multiple empires wanted to plunder the land and didn’t care who it was; in the Middle East, you can see both the recent military involvement, the historical Ottomans, and the historical Persians.

Build Small

You can also see what empires influenced their regions for long enough to create a similar-ish culture throughout multiple regions, which can help you extract the essence you’re looking for. I would add a very large caution to only do this for historical empires where those who suffered under the regime are not fighting in present day/ have living memory of it (such as incorporating too much of England, France, or Spain in the Americas, along with the two examples above).

Now you can build small. If you wanted to give a sense of, say, coastal China with a heavy amount of trade, you can pick a major port city in China and figure out the pluralism in relation to that city. What parts identify it as Chinese (architecture, governance, food, general religious practices— folklore changes by region, but the general gist of practices can remain similar enough to get a vibe), and what parts are borrowed from a distinct enough culture they’re noticeably different?

By going from a city level, you can imply pluralism by throwing in asides of differences “out there” that shows you’ve thought about it, without cramming your world full of cultures you can’t fit in the plot. You can then also narrow down what to include based on map proximity: if there’s an easy sea or land path to an Egyptian analogue, you’re probably going to at least hint at it. This is a known historical trade, btw. Egyptian blue and Han purple are made of similar substances, pointing to an ancient cultural link.

You can research this by simply googling the country and looking under its history in Wikipedia. If you look up “China”, you can see “Imperial Unification” as one of its history points. “Japan” similarly gets you the Meiji period. Turkey shows the Ottoman empire. You can also look up “empires in [region]” that will give you a similar overview. This even works for places you don’t think have historical empires, such as North America (the pre-colonization section notes several).

This also is a starting place for what the borders would’ve been during any given time period, and gives you places to potentially factor in military involvement and recent strife. This is where modern research comes in handy, because you can get an idea of what that strife looked like.

Hope this gives you an idea how to go about worldbuilding a diverse population, and how to avoid paralleling recent wounds. 

~ Mod Lesya

Regarding Your Jewish Characters

I think it’s valid to reflect our real history in fantasy although if you dwell too much on the suffering aspects and not the “richly varied cultural traditions” aspects you’ll probably lose some of us because suffering-porn written from the outside gets old fast (if you’re Jewish yourself you 200% have the right to write this, of course.) Human Jewish characters living in pockets in fake-northern-Europe and fake-Mediterranea and fake-North-Africa (or even Fake China and Fake India; we’re there, too) is actually injecting some well-needed historical accuracy back into a genre that’s been badly whitewashed, gentilewashed, etc by imagining a Europe where nobody but white gentiles existed until they conveniently popped into existence during whatever era the writer thinks is appropriate.

In other words, if your fake Germany has a Jewish neighborhood in its largest city, that’s a way of making pseudo-European fantasy more realistic and less -washy, and is overall a good move, despite the fact that the destruction of the temple is the reason we were in Germany in the first place. (I mean… it’s not like you’re planning on sitting there writing about Tisha b'Av itself, right? You don’t have to say “And the reason there are Jews here is because a bazillion years ago, we wound up getting scattered” just to have Jews.)

By the way, having myself written secondary-world fantasy where entire countries, plural, get to be majority-Jewish, and 100% free of on-screen antisemitism, I think both ways are valid.



Japanese Discipline and Training During World War II

The Japanese soldier was perhaps the most disciplined soldier of World War II.  Sure the Germans had discipline too, but not on the level of the Japanese Army.  After all Japanese soldiers were more than willing to turn themselves into human bombs or commit suicide for their emperor.  German soldiers were not so willing to do so for Hitler. While German discipline was more in the realm of tactics, organization, and esprit de corps, Japanese training centered more on extreme physical toughness, extreme mental toughness, a willingness to endure disease, hunger, deprivation, torture, and a willingness to die for the cause en masse.  To boil the comparison down even further into oversimplified statements, German soldiers were trained to be killers, Japanese soldiers were trained to die.  German soldiers were trained to be elite warriors, Japanese soldiers were trained to be cheap cannon fodder.

To instill this physical and mental discipline, the Japanese Imperial Army had the toughest and most brutal training program in all of the 20th century.  Rigid discipline was always maintained, and punishments were extreme.  Even the smallest or slightest infraction could result in beatings, starvation, and even execution.  Irokawa Daikichi is an eminent historian who was drafted while in college at Tokyo University during World War II.  According to him, after first learning how to fire a rifle, he was taught how to commit suicide with it, using his big toe to pull the trigger while cradling the rifle with his body and placing the muzzle under his chin.  He also gives this account of the brutal treatment he endured during his training,

“After I passed the gate to the Tsuchiura Naval Air Base, “training” took place day after day. I was struck on the face so hard and frequently that my face was no longer recognizable. On January 2, 1945, Kaneko (Ensign) hit my face twenty times and the inside of my mouth was cut in many places by my teeth. I had been looking forward to eating zōni [a special dish with rice cakes for the New Year]. Instead, I was swallowing blood from the inside of my mouth. On February 14, all of us were punished because they suspected that we ate at farmers’ homes near the base to ease our hunger. In the midst of the cold winter, we were forced to sit for seven hours on a cold concrete floor and they hit us on the buttocks with a club. Then each of us was called into the officer’s room. When my turn came, as soon as I entered the room, I was hit so hard that I could no longer see and fell on the floor. The minute I got up, I was hit again by a club so that I would confess. A friend of mine was thrown with his head first to the floor, lost consciousness, and was sent to a hospital. He never returned. All this savagery was orchestrated by the corps commander named Tsutsui. I am still looking for this fellow.  Memorizing and reciting the Imperial Rescript to Soldiers (Gunjin Chokuyu) of 1882, written in archaic language, were a daily exercise. If we failed in the accurate recitation of the Rescript, we were hit to the ground, as I experienced personally.

April 19, 1917 - Japanese Second Squadron Arrives at Malta, 3 Cruisers and 12 Destroyers will Patrol for German and Austrian U-Boats

Pictured - Japanese Kaba-class destroyer in the Med.

In 1902, Britain and Japan signed a treaty of alliance. Two island nations with powerful navies, their pact was first in mutual opposition to Russia, and then, after the Japanese routed the Russian in 1905 and sent the Tsarist fleet to the bottom of the Tsushima Straits, against the Germans. In 1914 Japan joined the Entente on the promise that it would gain most of Germany’s Chinese and Pacific territories. Their alliance was a boon to the Allies, because Japan possessed one of the strongest fleets in the world, including twenty-one battleships and twenty-nine cruisers.

Japan duly gobbled up most of Germany’s eastern terriotries, including the port of Tsingtao in China after a lengthy siege. Their contiribution to the Entente cause afterwards was largely naval. Japanese ships protected Anzac troop conveys heading to Egypt, and other Entente trade in the Pacific and Indian oceans, freeing up the Royal Navy to blockade Germany. The Japanese squadron in the Mediterranean helped patrol for Central Powers U-boats that continued to sneak out of Austria and play havoc with Allied shipping.  When the United States entered the war, the Imperial Japanese Navy also protected the west coast of Canada and the (ironically, in hindsight,) the Hawaiian Islands.

The strength of racial prejudice held by white Europeans was such that even after the 1905 war many believed that Japanese were inferior seamen. The IJN duly proved them all wrong during the war, consistently running their ships at a level of efficiency unmatched even by the British. Japanese ships were underway almost twice as often as the French. By the end of the war, the Second Special Squadron had escorted 788 ships across the Mediterranean, safely transporting more than 700,000 troops to the Western Front. Winston Churchill summed up the change in attitude of Europeans when he said that he  “did not think that the Japanese [squadron] had ever done a foolish thing.“ 

I mean there’s just something scary how a powerful empire like Japan often gets pigeonholed as just being a “”POC”” victim by people applying Western race politics to Asia. This is something I’ve seen a lot. In the 1930s, Japan had one of the most powerful navies in the world. Pearl Harbour was all about destroying the naval fleet of the only other country that could possibly challenge its dominance in the Pacific. The Empire of Japan =/= the interned Japanese-Americans who were obviously not in a position of power.

My family ended up under Japanese rule not just because our colonial masters were embroiled in Europe and North Africa, but because the Japanese turned their military into a flexible, mobile fighting machine whereas the British were still looking at the WW1 playbook. The Japanese Army completely outsmarted the Europeans in jungle warfare too- the British had thought the logic that the jungles in SEAsia were impassible was ironclad. The Japanese Army proved them wrong. The British outnumbered the Japanese in the Malayan peninsular like by 2 to 1 and were still defeated. By then, the Japanese had long successfully conquered large swathes of mainland China.

And you know, there was also a lot of arrogance amongst our colonial rulers that Japan -being an Asian army- couldn’t possibly defeat them. Which seems to subtly be the same kind of logic at work when people love depicting WW2 Japan as just a “POC victim”; that globally, non-white people are only ever victims, are never in the position to be imperialist. That’s the narrative the Japanese government plays into, in order to deny its crimes. WW2 between the US and Japan was a battle between empires- the difference being that the US won its gamble in developing the atomic bomb and decided to use it. So please, enough of those posts uncritically collapsing the Empire of Japan with the victims of the African slave trade or anti-Asian racism INSIDE the US against Asian-Americans or US imperialism in Iraq and Afghanistan- as if the war was a typical example of one-sided Western aggression and imperialism.


An animated sequence showing the Japanese advance and offensive at Liaoyang, summer 1904.

From the movie 203 kochi (二百三高地)/Port Arthur (1980).

Ensign Junichi Sasai (1918-1942), commanding the Tainan Zero fighter group, Lae. Supervisor of the Saburo Sakai, 64-victory ace, himself an ace, standing in front of the captured P-40, similar to the one he shot down. KIA while Saburo was in the hospital in Japan but kept the special tiger belt buckle that Sasai gave him until his own death in 2000.