Taiwan Under Japanese Colonial Rule, 1895

ABOLISHING THE CHINESE-LANGUAGE SECTION IN ALL DAILY NEWSPAPERS

On March 1,1937, the second page of the Taiwan Daily News printed the following announcement:

The following four newspapers jointly announce that due to the current state of affairs we have decided to abolish the Chinese section. It has been over forty years since Japan took over Taiwan. In the light of the thoroughness of imperialization and the flourishing of cultural activities, we believe there is no hindrance to the complete abolition of the Chinese section. Beginning on April 1, the Taiwan News, Tainan News, and Taiwan Daily News will drop their Chinese sections; Taiwan shinminpō will cut its Chinese section to half of its current four pages on April 1 and abolish it completely on the first of June. In place of the Chinese section, we are determined to double our efforts in our mission as news organizations to strengthen our content. We sincerely hope you, our readers, will understand this change.

In accordance with this notice, the Chinese language disappeared from the three listed daily newspapers on April 1,1937. The only newspaper that was run by the Taiwanese, Taiwan New Civil News, reduced its Chinese sections from four pages to two pages on April 1, and then abolished it completely on June 1 to accommodate its mostly native readership.

Though the abolishment of Chinese language was framed as an agreement negotiated by the four newspaper organizations, it was implemented at a time when only one-third of the population was considered proficient in Japanese. In other words, though there were about one and half million natives who understood some level of Japanese, their capability was still rather limited, and about three and a half million people still had no knowledge of the Japanese language. The banning of the Chinese section newspaper definitely would have had a great impact on the business of the news organizations.¹

Further, it seems rather unlikely that all daily newspapers, considering they competed with each other for readership, all voluntarily took the same action. Rather, it might be more appropriate for us to suppose that they were under some sort of pressure or order from the office of the governor-general to take up this action. Here I will examine the process and methods through which the office of the governor-general forced the newspaper organizations to ban all Chinese in the news media.

THE INQUIRY AT THE LOWER HOUSE BUDGET COMMITTEE

Before the above statement was issued by the four newspaper organizations, Matsuda Takechiyo , representative of the Minsei Party, made inquiries into the issue of abolishing the Chinese section in newspapers in the Lower House Budget Committee at the general assembly on February 25. Mention of the inquiry appeared as a brief item in the newspaper in Japan the next day, stating only that “Matsuda inquired about the abolition of the Chinese section in newspapers and magazines but the government did not reply to the inquiry.”² Further, the morning edition of the Taiwan Daily News dated February 26,1937, recorded that the minister of colonial affairs, Yūki Toyotarō , literally cut off Representative Matsuda Takechiyo’s inquiry into the motivation for abolishment of all Chinese in newspapers and magazines by delaying his reply and submitting the matter to further investigation.

Either way, the issue did not garner much attention in the Lower House Budget Committee at the general assembly. However, the February 25 assembly record shows the inquiry made by Representative Matsuda:

This is something that occurred in Taiwan, with the military advisor at the center of the matter. It is said that due to the wishes of the military, as of this April 1, the Chinese language will be forced to disappear from all newspapers and magazines, including the Taiwan Daily News, Taiwan News, and Tainan News, and only the Taiwan New Civil News will maintain one page of Chinese. I would like to have government officials from the Ministry of Colonial Affairs elaborate on the truth of this matter.

Representative Matsuda’s inquiry is significant in that it indicates that the initiative for the abolishment of the Chinese language in newspapers and magazines did not come from the news media organizations themselves. The abolishment of the Chinese language was imposed upon them by the military. Further, though the joint public announcement of the policy was published on March 1, Matsuda knew of it beforehand and brought it up during the February 25 assembly inquiry.

Morioka Jirō the head of general affairs in the governor-general’s office of Taiwan, replied to Matsuda’s inquiry as follows:

Let me answer the question which Mr. Matsuda raised a while ago. The Chinese section in newspapers will be abolished soon in Taiwan. As everyone knows, we have been trying very hard to promote the National Language [i.e., Japanese] in Taiwan. All the newspapers echo our effort, realizing that Chinese language is an impediment to the popularization of Japanese. They also understand that at this day and time, abolishing the Chinese paper section will not cause inconveniences to their readers, so they all came to the agreement to do it in unison. I count on your understanding of this matter. (Quoted in Taiwan Daily News, March 2,1937, morning edition)

Representative Matsuda wanted to continue his inquiry, but was interrupted by the head of the committee, Koyama Matsutoshi, who moved the Chinese language issue to the first subcommittee for the budget committee. However, the discussion that ensued in the subcommittee was not reported in the Japanese news media at all and even Taiwan Daily News gave it scant attention.³ Because of the lack of publicity in the mass media, researchers of Taiwan have never looked into the subcommittee record. Fortunately, it is well preserved and we can get a clear picture of the heated debate at the time.

On March 2, Representative Matsuda Takechiyo continued his inquiry at the first subcommittee for the budget committee. Deputy Minister of Colonial Affairs Irie Kaihei replied to his question that since the Japanese language had been widely popularized, all major news media organizations determined that there was no longer a need for Chinese language sections. Upon consultations held among all the newspapers, it was decided that Chinese would be abolished as of April 1.

Representative Matsuda pushed for the truth, dubious that the newspaper media would abolish Chinese language voluntarily. He continued his quest, stating: “This does not accord with information we have learned. Rather, we think it is the result of Chief of Staff of the Army Ogisu’s forceful persuasion and pressure on the news media since last year. The news media is incapable of resistance and thus reluctantly agreed to do so. I would like you to elaborate on this speculation.”

Representative Nakamura Hirotoshi (Seiyūkai faction) also chimed in with the following inquiry: “I understand that in order to teach the Taiwanese people Japanese, Taiwanese papers were not allowed to be published. … However, it seems to me rather drastic to make all the newspapers published in nothing but Japanese. I am afraid that it may cause resentment (from the native population).”

Again, to this concern, Morioka Jirō pointed to the fact that the policy had been discussed by the “Committee for Promoting Good Citizenship” during the time of the previous governor-general, Nakagawa Kenzō in July two years before. He indicated that although the chief of staff of the military had emphasized the need for banning Chinese, he was only one of many who held the same opinion. Also, as for the date for implementing the banning policy—originally it was to be January first, but after several extensions, but now had settled into two different starting dates: April 1 and June 1.

Representative Matsuda, rebutting Morioka’s response, pointed to the news media’s powerlessness in resisting Chief of Staff Ogisu’s pressure on the banning policy: “I would simply like you to acknowledge the fact that the military played a potent role in fostering this measure in order to thoroughly elevate the spirit of the citizen by promoting National Language.” Matsuda continued: “There are five million ethnic Han and only about two hundred thousand Japanese in Taiwan. I do not understand how you can talk about elevating the spirit of the citizen on one hand and on the other suddenly abolish the Chinese section in news media.” Matsuda pushed on: “I think it is outrageous to try to abolish the Chinese language, a language of another ethnic group, the most stubborn Han ethnic group, a majority group.”

To his outrage, Morioka retorted: “It is certainly not an easy task to completely erase the native language of the islanders. However, it is a matter of course to compel them to use Japanese since they are the subjects of Japan. I would not say so of all island inhabitants, but there are some that still regard Chinese as their mother tongue. One way to rid them of this idea is to get rid of their own national language. Making them use the Japanese language will be one way to make them realize that Japan is the only motherland they have.” Morioka insisted that since the Taiwanese had now become Japanese, it was their duty to learn the “national language” and it was all but natural to eliminate Hanwen (i.e., Chinese).

The debate went on for a long time. However, perhaps because of pressure from the office of the governor-general and also because Representative Matsuda did not have sufficient evidence to prove his point, he was not able to get a very satisfactory explanation. Nevertheless, from the record we can safely conclude that banning the Chinese newspaper section was the result of Ogisu’s strong-arm tactics forced upon a news media that was too weak to resist. It reveals a deeply rooted, complicit scheme by the military, the governor-general, and the news media.

THE COUNCIL FOR PROMOTING GOOD CITIZENSHIP

I will now focus on the “Committee for Promoting Good Citizenship” mentioned by Morioka. The correct title for the organization should be “council” rather than “committee” (Minfu sakko kyogikai). A council meeting that included the military, bureaucracy, and powerful civilians had been called by Governor-General Nakagawa on July 25, with its purpose being “to emphasize our concerns for the promotion of good citizenship in order to achieve a comprehensive assimilation and to elevate the national spirit of the people on the island during this urgent time.” Those who attended included chiefs of bureaus under the governor-general’s office, heads of the states, administrators, the mayor of Taipei City, President Shidehara Hiroshi of Taipei Imperial University, Supreme Court Judge Saitō, Chief Prosecutor Tomono, Chief of Staff for the Military Ogisu, Security Chief Iwamatsu, Captain Saitō, Head of the Military Police Oki, naval officer Sakai, principals of public schools, powerful civilians, and section chiefs from all ministries—in all, about one hundred and twenty people.⁴

The meeting began with Governor-General Nakagawa reading the “Imperial Edict for Promoting National Spirit,” followed by Chief of General Affairs Hiratsuka’s welcoming remarks. After Culture and Education Minister Fukagawa’s address, the meeting started its deliberations. The morning was a free discussion session, and Miyamoto Ichigaku (president of Tainan News) moved to organize a committee to submit a formal report. The motion was passed and twelve members and one chair were appointed.

Even though Miyamoto was the one who made the motion for organizing the committee, it is difficult to ascertain whether he did this of his own volition. Another attendee, civilian Miyoshi Tokusaburō later stated in his book that it seemed that the Culture and Education Ministry asked him to make the motion.⁵ Of the committee members, seven were Japanese and five were Taiwanese, and the majority of them were well-known industrialists and socially prominent members of society. The fact that some of the most important figures of the Taiwanese news media, such as Ōsawa Teikichi (chief editor of Taiwan Daily News), Matsuoka Tomio (owner of Taiwan News), and Miyamoto Ichigaku (president of Tainan News), were serving on the committee implies that the office of the governor-general had played a role in determining its composition. On the other hand, it is also rather suspicious that the only daily newspaper that did not fully comply with the ban, Taiwan shin minpō, was not included in the committee. The twelve members of the committee were able to come back later that day with a full report, indicating that it had been prepared by the Culture and Education Ministry beforehand.

In the afternoon session of the meeting some proposals were made to amend the report, and a final version could not be agreed upon immediately. Again, according to Miyoshi’s book, the military took a hard line on the issue and there was some tension. Ōsawa, Matsuoka, and Miyamoto all agreed on banning the Chinese language. Also, Abbot Takabayashi expressed his wish to include religious groups in the final report.

The hard-line position taken by the military included two amendments made by naval officer Sakai. One replaced “In order to promote good citizenship, all governmental offices, schools, companies, banks, and other civil organizations should take the lead in implementing appropriate policies” with “In order to thoroughly carry out the movement of promoting good citizenship, all governmental offices, schools, companies, banks, civil organizations, religious groups, and news media should take the lead in implementing appropriate policies.”

The statement “In order to popularize the national language, all everyday speech should be in Japanese to reinforce the consciousness of nationhood” was replaced with “In order to thoroughly popularize the national language, all everyday speech, newspapers, and magazines should be in Japanese to reinforce the consciousness of nationhood. In the light of the nation’s state of emergency, the creed of national defense should be fully implemented.”

In other words, the core proposal of the military’s tough position was that “all newspapers and magazines should get rid of the Chinese sections and be unified in using the Japanese language only.” To this proposal, three newspapers (Taiwan Daily News, Taiwan News, Tainan News) that catered to the government’s favor agreed with the military’s proposal while the Shinminpō indicated disagreement with the policy, though there was no record of what kind of protest they made. There were some oppositional comments, but the situation seemed to be moving toward one side. The next day, the Taiwan Daily News reported on the meeting:

Mr. Tanimoto [principal of Taipei High School Tanimoto Seishin ] stood up and said that it’s all well and fine to abolish the Chinese language but he worried what old people who relied solely on Chinese sources to get their information would do. To his comment, Chief of Staff of the Military Ogisu responded strongly, and there was a lively debate.

The meeting was able to proceed according to the wishes of the office of the governor-general and the military, and the two amendments made by the military were accepted and passed unanimously. In other words, the decision to ban the Chinese language in newspapers and magazines was forced upon the committee by Ogisu and passed by the floor.

For the office of the governor-general to “promote complete and thorough use of Japanese,” it was felt necessary to ban Chinese from newspaper and magazines. As for the military, Chinese in newspapers and magazines was an obstacle to its goal of “fully implementing the creed of national defense.” So in a sense, the office of the governor-general and the military apparatus shared the same interest in banning Chinese. Knowing that no one could resist the will of the military, the office of the governor-general assigned the three major newspapers to draft the final report, indicating that everyone present should agree to the proposal. The first charge of the “imperial subject movement” (kōmin undō ) was to “promote complete and thorough use of Japanese,” and the council meeting achieved this goal—all that was left was to find the right timing for implementing the policy, and the office had only to put more pressure on the newspapers to come up with a date of execution.

However, banning Chinese was not a decision made out of the blue at the council meeting. Several days before, on July 22 and 23, a conference for local governors throughout the whole island was held in the same conference room. Governors of five prefectures (Taipei, Hsinchu, Taichung, Tainan, Kaohsiung) plus district administrators from the three districts (Hualian, Taidong, Penghu), together with all bureau chiefs and section heads of the office, were gathered to hear the call by Hiratsuka “to see progress in the popularization of the Japanese language and the expansion of language facilities, to promote everyday use of the language. I wish wholeheartedly that you will all do your best to realize the ideal of one single unified national language.”

No matter how each newspaper might have resisted the idea, then, it is apparent that the office of the governor-general had already determined the direction of the matter. This political position of” promoting everyday use of the language” and “realizing the ideal of one single unified national language” was passed on by Hiratsuka to his successor, Morioka Jirō, without alteration. Both accepted that the Chinese language was an obstacle to the spread of Japanese, and both strongly felt that in order to unify the national language, banning Chinese was a necessary strategy.

According to the record of the general assembly and of the Lower House Budget Committee, despite Representative Matsuda’s repeated inquiries, neither the office of the governor-general nor the minister of colonial affairs was willing to admit to putting any pressure on the news media. As for the military, it did not even seem aware that it had applied pressure at all. However, from the announcement by Hiratsuka at the conference for the local governors of the island and the proclaimed report in the Council for Promoting Good Citizenship one may conclude that the office of the governor-general had been carefully laying the foundation for implementation of a policy that the news media could only go along with. The banning of Chinese language was based on the will of both the government and the military, and certainly not voluntarily taken up by the news media themselves. Yet in the joint statement issued by the newspapers it was portrayed as a voluntary act.

THE POLICY OF GOVERNOR-GENERAL KOBAYASHI SEIZŌ

In 1937, when the Chinese-language ban was issued, the governor-general of Taiwan was Kobayashi Seizō (1896–1962). He was born in Hiroshima. After he graduated with honors from the naval academy, his military career went smoothly. He became deputy naval officer in 1930, and in 1931 he was commissioned as Commander in Chief for the First Naval Battalion and the Joint Battalions. In 1933 he was promoted to admiral and was seen as the next minister of the navy. His position regarding reduction of naval force was at odds with the navy, however, and he thus lost his chance to serve as minister and was assigned to the reserves in March 1936, right after the February 26 Incident. Most people thought that was the end of his professional career, but six months later, on September 2, he was appointed governor-general of Taiwan. He served for four years, until he was removed from the position on November 27, 1940.

The appointment of Kobayashi signaled the end of nine consecutive terms of civilian rule that had begun in 1919 when the Seiyūkai faction of Hara Takashi ’s cabinet appointed Yamada Kenjirō to replace the previous governor-general, who came from the military. The other notable feature of Kobayashi’s appointment is that he came from the navy despite the fact that the army had a dominant position in Taiwan. In any case, Taiwan entered into its second period of rule by governors-general with military backgrounds.

During the period when civilians occupied the position of governor-general of Taiwan there were frequent changes in the position, whenever the cabinet went through any change. It is understandable that the position needed to reflect the cabinet’s colonial policy. For example, neither Hamaguchi Osachi ’s (Minsei Party) cabinet in July 1929 nor Kawamura Takeji ’s (Seiyūkai) cabinet lasted more than a year. In December of 1931 the Inukai Tsuyoshi (Seiyūkai) cabinet was established. During the January 13 cabinet meeting of the following year, without consulting the governor-general of Taiwan, Ota Masahiro (Minsei Party), it was decided to terminate the chief of general affairs, Kinoshita Shinsaburō . Again, in the cabinet meeting on January 29, it was also determined that the head of the police, Inoue Ei, would be terminated. Ota resigned in protest of the direct interference by the cabinet.

Domestic politics had a great impact on Taiwan. Whenever a new governor-general was appointed, the position of chief of general affairs also underwent a change. At the same time, when a new governor-general arrived, new rules and regulations would be put in place to replace the old ones, causing confusion among the bureaucrats and the Taiwanese people. Therefore, the islanders did not trust the civilian administrators. In some cases, “in order to expand the influence of the political party the governor belonged to and to raise funds for the party, the governor’s office established special relationships with sugar companies or other special interest companies. They spent most of their time receiving and socializing with visitors from Japan.”⁶ Therefore, Kobayashi Seizō’s appointment garnered a lot of attention. Once Kobayashi arrived in Taiwan, he proclaimed his wish to implement the imperial subjugation of the Taiwanese people, the industrialization of Taiwan, and also the transformation of Taiwan into a base for the southern advance in Japan’s military expansion to the South. Kobayashi stated in his memoir My Abridged History (Hisha no ryakureki ):

I think the Japanese and the Taiwanese are all the children of the emperor. There is no great difference between their abilities. And since there is a whole string of islands connecting the two places, certainly I think all discriminative policies making distinctions between the Japanese and the islanders should be removed. I will make “Japan and Taiwan as one” (naitai itchi) as my basic strategy. Because of that we should promote education, strengthen the compulsory education system, creating new organs for formulating autonomous local rules, and making an effort to make them our equals in the spiritual and intellectual dimensions.

In other words, Kobayashi’s basic strategy was “Japan and Taiwan as one” and making the Taiwanese into Japanese. For that purpose, promoting the national language (Japanese) was essential. Therefore, he sought to remove Chinese from the school system and also from all newspapers and magazines. Other than the language issue, to press forward with “reverence to kami ” he also enforced obligatory worship at Shinto shrines, the reorganization of traditional temples, and the prohibition of long-established local religious activities and festivals as well as native theatrical performances in order to rid Taiwanese of their native consciousness and to promote the “imperial subject movement.”

CRITICISM OF GOVERNOR-GENERAL KOBAYASHI SEIZŌ

Kobayashi was a pioneer in implementing the imperial subject movement and was very aggressive in promoting the Japanese language in order to graft the Japanese spirit onto the Taiwanese. There is powerful evidence that he put pressure on the news media. In his My Humble Opinion on the Taiwanese News Media Under the Japanese Colonial Rule (Nihon tōchi jidai no Taiwan shinbunkai kanken ) Mutsu Kojō was critical of Kobayashi, but particularly harsh toward the chief of general affairs, Morioka.⁷

The planning stage to rein in the Taiwanese news media was undertaken by the military, the bureaucrats, and some of the civilians. The execution of the plan was carried out by Navy General Governor Kobayashi, Chief of General Affairs Morioka Jirō, head of the police Futami Naozō , Secretary-General Suzuki, and military police section chief Hashitsume Kiyoto . Kobayashi came from the military and did not know much about politics. Morioka had served as the head of the police and security bureau at the interior ministry and was also a protégée of Mori Itaru at the Seiyūkai faction. It is no wonder that Morioka chose two Seiyūkai faction members—Futami and Hashitsume—whereas Suzuki was a high-ranking bureaucrat who did not show a particular political tinge but often went along with the flow. Morioka was a hardcore Seiyūkai member, and he found out before he arrived in Taiwan the political affiliations of the bureaucrats who would be working under him. He was a suspicious, difficult person who guarded vigilantly against anyone affiliated with the Minsei Party and made personnel changes accordingly. Therefore, it is no surprise that the bureaucracy in Taiwan began to take on a Seiyūkai tinge. Next, he proceeded to politicize the news media. … Morioka viewed Kobayashi as a hindrance and acted arrogantly toward him. Morioka’s first and foremost enemy was the Minsei Party. He used the excuse that the news media was dominated by Minsei Party loyalists, which hindered the governor-general’s political goals, to crack down, without any warning, on news media that reported the progress of the war.⁸ It was Morioka and Hashitsume who conspired to implement these acts of media control. We can also view the three civilians who concurred with the act as co-conspirators. … It was the military and a few powerful civilians who put the Taiwanese news media in dire straits.⁹

The consolidation of Taiwanese news media into one started with the Sino-Japanese War in 1937 by Kobayashi Seizō, Morioka Jirō, and Hashitsume Kiyoto. We should never forget that these three are the founding fathers of the suppression of the Taiwanese news media. Besides Kawamura Tōoru and Miyoshi Tokusaburō, two civilians who were involved in the issue, it was these three who were responsible for censoring newspapers.¹⁰

What Mutsu Kojō refers to as “censoring newspapers” did not include the abolition of the Chinese-language section. However, from this record we can clearly see that the Kobayashi regime put a lot of pressure on the news media, thereby limiting freedom of speech, and that Morioka, Futami, and Hashitsume were the ones who carried out the policy.

In April 1937 the Chinese-language sections in newspapers were banned. At the same time, all writing and publication in Chinese was also forbidden. Kobayashi was also the one who got rid of the Chinese course in the public schools for natives, and the one who initiated the policy on unifying and managing the temples. His four-year reign is comparatively long, but he initiated many unpopular policies and so was not a very popular governor.¹¹

THE CHINESE ERADICATION POLICY OF THE OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR-GENERAL

In April 1937, when the Chinese-language sections in newspapers were banned, Chinese courses in all the public schools were also removed from the curriculum. Up until that time, Chinese had been available as an elective course. However, in February 1937, an amendment to the “Rules and Regulations for Public Schools” was made to remove the section that said “Chinese can be added as an elective course.” In other words, Chinese was eliminated from the public schools in order to achieve the goal of” cultivating virtue, meritorious actions, and civic spirit through the promotion of the National Language, which is our fundamental charge in the education of this island.” In fact, only 37 schools (13 in Taipei county, 24 in Taichung county) in the entire island offered Chinese as an elective course, a mere 6 percent out of the total 625 schools on the island.¹² As there was no urgent reason to change the rule, one may see reflected in this change the emphasis that the governor-general placed on the eradication of Chinese. The abolition of the Chinese sections in the newspapers and the elimination of the Chinese courses in school worked in tandem with each other.

On April 1, 1937, the first day the eradication policy were put into place, the Taiwan Daily News carried a conversation with Kobayashi, as well as celebratory notes from Hata Shunroku , the commander in chief of the military, acting Chief of General Affairs Tabata, and the chief of the bureau of culture and education, Shimada Shōsei.

Kobayashi first stated that “from my own standpoint in ruling this island, which is to make Taiwan to fully become part of Japan, this occasion is indeed worth celebrating.” He expressed his gratitude to the news media: “I am sure you have encountered numerous difficulties in pursuing this policy. I would like to convey my appreciation for your courage and sacrifice for the greater cause of assimilating Taiwan into Japan.” He further elaborated: “For the convenience of our readers we were not able to completely eliminate Chinese before this. But it was only a matter of time; no one questioned that we would one day have to do this,” and concluded, “Basically, promoting spoken and written Japanese is a long-established policy of the Office of Governor-General. We firmly believe that only in this way [eradicating Chinese] can we achieve true assimilation and can bring happiness to the islanders, both materially and spiritually. With the banning of Chinese from the news media, we are hoping to hasten the adoption of Japanese. The office of the governor-general not only urges all government organizations to use Japanese on a daily basis, but also asks the public to cooperate in this matter.”

The office of the governor-general issued an order, signed by Morioka, to all local administrators, enforcing total daily use of Japanese language, an unprecedented order that cast a wide net. Thus, on April 1, 1937, Chinese disappeared completely from all daily newspapers.

At the same time, the “Alliance for the Acculturation of Taiwan” (Taiwan kyōka rengōkai ) mobilized all cultural and civic groups throughout the colony to promote guidelines regarding the use of Japanese at home, the promotion of Japanese in the countryside, the advocation of Japanese in cities and townships, the organization of various Japanese language groups, etc.

Because of these campaigns, the popularization of the Japanese language accelerated rapidly. The movement became established throughout the island with the recognition of “Japanese language families” (kokugo jōyō katei ) and the provision of many actual material benefits to families using Japanese daily. For example, in Taipei the benefits for the privileged families were clearly stated: enrollment in the elementary schools reserved for the Japanese only (shōgakkō ); priority consideration for middle school admission; employment at all levels of public offices; commissions to honorary positions in social organizations; eligibility for business permits and assistance; and permission to visit Japan on business trips.¹³

In actuality, Chinese was purged from elementary schools for natives (kōgakkō ), newspapers were only in Japanese, and both in the workplace and at home Japanese was the compulsory language. The attempt was to compel those who used Taiwanese not only to feel uneasy but to have a guilty conscience. As of April 1937, creative writing in Chinese, the traditional language of the Taiwanese people, was essentially eliminated through its banning in all elementary schools for natives and the prohibition on Chinese-language sections in all newspapers and magazines. In its place, people were coerced into using Japanese.

REACTIONS AND THE AFTERMATH OF CHINESE ERADICATION POLICY

The prohibition on use of the Chinese language in Taiwanese news media does not seem to have received any attention inside Japan. There was no report in either the Osaka Mainichi News or the Tokyo Asahi News . The people of Japan appear to have regarded the prohibition on Chinese in Taiwan as a matter of course, a matter that had no news value. The issue did not merit a single line in the Great Taiwanese Chronicle published by the Taiwan keisei shinpō (Taiwan Printing, Inc., December 1938, 4th ed.). Even in the realm of Taiwanese public opinion, then, the issue was not a big one.

On the other hand, an article in Nihon gakugei shinbun (no. 82: April 20,1937), most likely written by Yang Kui satirized the news media’s complicity in this matter as a way to ingratiate themselves with the authorities:

Four Taiwanese daily newspapers and more than ten weekly publications eliminated their Chinese language section in unison (only Shin minpō . cut its Chinese language section to half and will formally ban it on the first of June) on April 1 in order to curry favor with the authorities. For this reason, the eyes of those Taiwanese who want to learn about what happens in the world but know only the Chinese language will be veiled. There was a report that an old man in his seventies began to learn Japanese. Some carping chaps ridiculed him saying “Learning a, i, u, e, o (Japanese vowels) in your seventies, perhaps by the time you are about to go into your tomb you will be able to read the newspaper.” In any case, the constant slander in the news reported by the current newspapers is probably fit for those in the grave to read.

In his book, Tōa no ko kaku omou (, The child of East Asia thinks thus; Iwanami shoten, July, 1937), Cai Peihuo spoke frankly about his views on this issue:

Starting this April 1, throughout the island of Taiwan Chinese language was purged from the newspapers. Because of this, many elderly islanders, who know no Japanese and always get their information through the Chinese language alone, were suddenly thrust into a world of darkness and remain there now. This is a serious matter that not only inconvenienced many common folks, but also is problematic as a national policy of the Japanese empire, in view of the absolute necessity to maintain friendly relations with China and keep communications between the two countries smooth. This acceleration of the prohibition on the Chinese language is something I sincerely hope that both the government and general populace of the Japanese empire, which aspires to be the leader of peace in East Asia, should reflect upon. Though the authorities wish to assimilate (the natives) completely, and to be looked upon as the benevolent elders whose merit is to be admired by all nations, is it not the case that too much pressure was applied to the common folks, inconveniencing their lives? Besides, I do not think those old folks, who were forced to rid themselves of the Chinese language, can turn around and pick up Japanese right away and become acculturated, as those governmental officials expect. Although this type of act demonstrates the government’s authority, it also indicates a failure of benevolent rule. As a policy, I suspect that it will not succeed and that practical benefits will be miniscule. I do not say this on behalf of the humble folks of my island; I speak for the greater plan of our East Asia and the future of my Japan. (pp. 178–179)

FROM THE ERADICATION OF CHINESE IN NEWSPAPERS TO BANNING WRITINGS IN CHINESE

The office of the governor-general also issued a prohibition that banned the use of Chinese in all bilingual literary journals. The biggest victim of this act was Yang Kui’s journal New Taiwanese Literature (Taiwan Shinbungaku )· Its December 1936 issue (1:10) had announced an upcoming special issue on “Chinese literature”: “People have been lamenting the decline of Chinese literature, and we are trying to show (through this journal) the skill and the passion for breaking the silence and come back with will be deployed by many writers who have not been writing for a while.” Unfortunately, censors banned this special issue, as mentioned in the next “Editor’s note,” (2:1), which stated: “For no obvious reason, we somehow touched a nerve with the authorities and the issue was banned.” Since the office of the governor-general was aggressively promoting policies such as “Taiwan and Japan are one” and “Imperial Subject Movement” and the Council for Promoting Good Citizenship had decided in July 1936 that “all newspapers and journals are to be published in Japanese,” the authorities could not permit the special Chinese issue, which seemed in contravention of official policy.

Since Li Xianzhang ’s A Collection of Taiwanese Folk Literature (; published by Taiwan bungei kyōkai , June 1936) was published just before the government hardened its policy, we may conclude that the aggressive enforcement was put in place after the meeting of the Council for Promoting Good Citizenship in July 1936. In other words, the foundations for the policy had already been laid in July.

In the “Editor’s note” to one issue of New Taiwanese Literature (2:4; May 1937) Yang Kui noted: “In response to current tendencies, Chinese publication in this journal is decreasing and in no time it will face the fate of being completely expunged. For those who only write in Chinese and for those readers who read only Chinese, I beg your understanding and forgiveness. Let’s all start again by learning a, i, u, e, o.” Thus magazines were also forced to take the same measures as the newspapers concerning their Chinese sections. Moreover, in the next issue of New Taiwanese Literature (2:5; June 1937) the editor lamented: “As of this issue, the Chinese section has been terminated. Not only is it sad for those who write and read only in Chinese, all of us feel a great sense of loss.” Even Taiwan Shinminpō, which had until June to do away with its Chinese section, had already eliminated all Chinese; there was no way that New Taiwanese Literature could have published anything in Chinese.

In a sense, the act signified the end of the journal New Taiwanese Literature. Though the main reason for the elimination of the journal was financial, it is hard to deny the role governmental censorship and the ban on Chinese played in its demise. For the security division of the police department, which was directly in charge of censorship, the Edict for Taiwanese Newspapers (Taiwan shinbun rei ) was applicable to all newspapers and journals, and New Taiwanese Literature was no exception. In the end, banning the Chinese sections in newspapers amounted to banning all Chinese creative writing.

On the surface, there was no official order issued to ban publication in Chinese. Rather, it was a decision agreed upon through negotiations among all news media organizations. However, it was only window dressing. As we have seen from Representative Matsuda’s inquiry in the budget committee, the office of the governor-general and the military applied certain “forceful persuasions” (though he did not go into the exact content of the “forceful persuasions”) to the heads of the four major papers. So we can come to the conclusion that the four, at the urging of the authority and the military, caved in to their demands.

The censorship system in Taiwan¹⁴ involved a censor’s inspection of pre-publication off prints. If he determined that there were any inappropriate expressions, he would notify the publisher to erase the sections and forbid their publication in the future. This was the so-called eradication decision or warning decision, an ad hoc judgment that was different from an administrative penalty for violating the Edict for Taiwanese Newspapers. Further, according to the content, there were three types of rejection: a “notification” was issued when an article was banned upon its publication; a “warning” was issued when a ban might be issued if social conditions changed; “dialogue” meant no ban had been issued but that the authorities relied on the discretion of the newspaper to refrain from publishing the said article. The so-called dialogue rejection really did not allow the newspaper to assert anything that was against the will of the authority. The same principles applied to magazines as well.

The four major newspapers that came to agree upon banning Chinese must have received “dialogue” messages prior to their decision, and once the daily newspapers had banned the language, other weekly news outlets were bound to follow suit. Clear orders were issued to the magazines requesting them to also eliminate Chinese sections, threatening them that anything contravening the ban would result in a ban on that particular issue. Since magazines were not that numerous and pre-publication censorship was in place, it was not too difficult for the government to totally prevent publication in Chinese. Because this was censorship, it fell under the jurisdiction of the security section of the police department.

SPECIAL PERMISSIONS FOR SOME CHINESE MAGAZINES AND WRITING IN CHINESE

The ban on Chinese sections in the newspapers literally resulted in there being no creative literary works being published in newspapers thereafter. Li Xianzhang’s A Collection of Taiwanese Fiction (Taiwan shōsetsu sen , originally scheduled to come out in January 1940) was an attempt to collect together fictional works written during the period of the Taiwanese New Literature Movement. However, it failed to pass the censor’s inspection and its publication was prohibited.

On the other hand, there was a Chinese literary magazine named Fengguebao (Wind and moon) and a Chinese-Japanese art journal called Taiwan yishu (Taiwan art). Many Chinese novels were also published, such as Wu Mansha’s Shayang zhi zhong (The Bell of Sayang). How do we take into account this seemingly contradictory situation, with the banning of Chinese in the newspaper and forbidding the use of Chinese and the reality of these Chinese language publications? This is our second question.

The predecessor of the Chinese literary magazine Fengguebao was the Chinese newspaper Fengyue , which was founded on May 9,1935. It published on days ending in -3, -6, or -9 and was distributed to members who knew Chinese. However, the content was crude and it did not last long. It folded on February 8, 1936, after putting out its forty-fourth issue. On July 20,1937, it reappeared in a new format and published its forty-fifth issue under the new name Fengguebao. From July 1, 1941 (the 133th issue), it was renamed Nanfang (The south). Later, due to the shortage of paper, its name was again changed to Nanfang shiji (Southern poetry) on February 25, 1944; and finally, on March 25 of the same year, after 190 issues, the magazine folded for good. At one point, the magazine arranged to have Zhang Wenhuan start a Japanese language section, but throughout its publication, it remained a Chinese magazine with lasting support from its Chinese readers.¹⁵

The Chinese-Japanese art journal Taiwan yishu was founded by Huang Zongque in March 1940. It was a private commercial magazine, and was therefore allowed to serialize Chinese language novels. All the staff, from editorial to management, was native Taiwanese. With a circulation of 40,000, it was published as an entertaining, popular magazine, selling in train station kiosks, and was also sent to the battlefield for the soldiers. Beginning in the mid-1940s, the Chinese pages disappeared, but the magazine was able to continue for a long time. In December 1944, beginning with volume 5, issue 12, it was forced to change its name to Xindazhong (New masses), but it somehow escape the consolidation of magazines in 1944 and was able to continue to publish until October 1945, right after the war.¹⁶

In the end, banning the Chinese section in the newspapers or forbidding writing in Chinese was not a direct result of any law or ordinance. The governor-general’s office would not risk carrying out an ordinance that would have been criticized by the international world for trying to impede freedom of speech. Since there was no law created to ban Chinese, they had a certain leeway for “forbidding” and “permitting.” Censorship could be conducted behind closed doors through the Edict on Taiwanese Newspapers and the Rules and Regulations for Publications in Taiwan.

In addition, banning Chinese section in the newspapers or forbidding writing in Chinese was part of the strategy to popularize the “National Language,” Japanese. On the other hand, the fact that the Chinese-language magazine Fengguebao was allowed to survive indicates that the authorities indeed understood the importance of mollifying those who knew only Chinese. As for the bilingual Taiwan yishu, it was deemed necessary as a forum connecting both languages that would advance the Imperial Subject Movement. The publishing permits were issued by the security section of the police department, which was in charge of the censorship, therefore they were at liberty to allow Fengyuepō and Taiwan yishu to continue to publish. Also, by allowing these two journals to continue in print, the authorities were able to claim that the banning of the Chinese section in newspapers was something initiated by the news media themselves and not forced upon them by the authorities.

In April 1937, with the banning of Chinese sections in the newspapers and the prohibition of writings in Chinese language, those who knew only Chinese were literally shut off from the media. The readership that had subscribed to the newspaper for its Chinese-language section decreased significantly. New Taiwanese Literature lost a lot of subscribers who read the journal for its Chinese language writings, and many Taiwanese natives who provided financial support to the journal also withdrew support. There was no place for Chinese language writers to publish. Many writers who were active in the New Taiwanese Literary Movement, writing in both Chinese and Japanese, were totally discouraged and left the movement. The movement came to an end before it matured. In this sense, the 1937 banning episode was a symbolic event.

After the Chinese sections were banned, the Taiwan Daily News dated April 1 stated:

As we notified you before, as of April 1 the Chinese language section has been abolished. The last page of the morning and evening news will be filled with novels, sports, entertainment reports, market reports, Chinese poetry, and news in kana . We are eager to improve and enrich the content of the whole newspaper, and fulfill our mission as an organ of public opinion.

After getting rid of the Chinese language section, Taiwan Daily News beefed up its literary, non-news section. Other papers also followed suit. Osaka Asahi News added a section called “South Island Literary Arts” and Taiwan News added “Monday Literary Forum.” The increase of the literary arts sections (in place of the Chinese-language sections) was a benefit to the promotion of Japanese-language literature.

The Taiwanese literary movement again gained momentum in 1940 when the Taiwan Writers’ Association was founded with its own journal, Bungei Taiwan . The next year, 1941, Zhang Wenhuan’s quarterly magazine Taiwan Bungaku was born. Because of the emergence of these two journals, Taiwanese colonial literature entered a flourishing period. Due to the abolishing of the Chinese section in the newspaper, literary arts sections had been set up in its place, which in turn fostered literature written in Japanese. Three years after the elimination of the Chinese-language section in the newspaper, Taiwanese writers, having abandoned Chinese, began engaging in the creation of the Japanese language literature. Though the period from 1937 to 1940 is often considered a blank period in Taiwanese literary history, it can nevertheless be seen as the period of incubation for a new kind of Taiwanese literature. In order to truly comprehend the Taiwanese literature of the 1940s, further research on this incubation period is needed.

NOTES

1. The office of the governor-general (sōtokufu ) asserted that promoting Japanese language would “not only improve the cultural and spiritual education of the citizens but also enhance the benefit of the islanders. Therefore, it is the most fundamental and basic aspect of managing the island.” In December 1931, a decision was made to establish national language schools and elementary national language schools. The national language school was for those between the ages of twelve and twenty-five who did not know Japanese; it had a mandate to teach at least one hundred days a year of basic education with Japanese language education at its core. The elementary national language school provided night classes in basic Japanese to farmers during the less busy agricultural season (three–six months per semester). Further, in 1933 a “Ten-Year Plan for Popularization of the National Language” was set up with the goal to achieve a Japanese literacy rate of 50 percent in ten years. In 1932 the literacy rate was 22.7%; 1933, 24.5%; 1934, 27%; 1935, 29.7%; in 1936 the rate finally reached one-third of the population at 32.9%, and by 1937 it had reached 37.8% (data from Taiwan jihō , 1939 edition, published by Taiwan Jihō Publications, December 1934?).

2. Other major Tokyo newspapers, such as Tokyo Asahi News and Tokyo Daily News, did not even report the inquiry by Matsuda Takechiyo.

3. Two major new papers in the Tokyo area, Tokyo Asahi News and Tokyo Daily News, did not report this exchange about abolishing the Chinese language at all.

4. Taiwan Daily News, July 26,1936.

5. Miyoshi Tokusaburō, The Gleans of Mountain Recluse Miyoshi Chakurai (Namigata Shōichi, ed., Miyoshi Tokusaburō to Tsujiri Chaho [Tokyo: Nihon tosho center, August 2002], 239).

6. Itō KinJirō, Taiwan azamukazaru no ki (Meirinkan, March 1948), 66.

7. Itō Takashi and Nomura Minoru, eds., Kaigun taishō Kobayashi Seizō oboegaki (Yamakawa shuppansha , 1981), 200–201.

8. I refere here to the July 1937 crackdown on Izumi Furō’s weekly, Nanei shinpō.

9. Mutsu Kojō, Nihon tōchi jidai no Taiwan shinbunkai kanken <3> (Taiwan dōmei tsūshin 28, January 1957).

10. Mutsu Kojō, Nihon tōchi jidai no Taiwan shinbunkai kanken <9> (Taiwan dōmei tsūshin 39, December 1957).

11. On the reorganization of temples, Itō Kinjirō in his book, Taiwan azamukazaru no ki (68–69) criticized Kobayashi in this way: “After the July 7 incident, Kobayashi hastened his pace in propagating the Imperial Subject movement. He was the pioneer in bringing an intellectual dimension to the movement. However, since he was anxious to see the results of the Imperial Subject movement, and also due to Morioka’s fervency in making the movement a success, they reorganized and banished the traditional temples swiftly, and as a consequence they lost the trust of the people. Everyone knows that Chenghuang temples (City God Temple) and Mazu temples are the sacred sites where the Han people worshiped from ancient times. It is a feature of the Han people, who had the greatest reverence for their temples and tombs. Seeing the Japanese abruptly getting rid of these temples, erasing the native traditions, and rejecting their beliefs, trampling on their customs—it is no wonder that Kobayashi’s plan caused a lot of discontent among the people.”

12. Taiwan Daily News, April 1, 1937.

13. Taiwan shibao 211 (June 1937), 143–148.

14. Publication of newspapers and magazines was regulated by the Edict for Taiwanese Newspapers (Taiwan shinbun rei) while other publications fell under the Rules and Regulations for Publications in Taiwan (Taiwan shuppan kisoku). Compared to regulations in Japan, the rules in Taiwan were obviously much more strict. Further, cases that were not specified in the law were subject to ad hoc decisions. As a result, censor officials had a lot of flexibility in their pre-publication assessment. For details, see Kawahara Isao, “Kaisetsu,” in Taiwan shuppan keisatsu hō (Fuji shuppan 2001). Also see, Nakajima Toshio’s “Nihon tōchiki Taiwan kenkyū no mondaitenTaiwan sōtokufu ni yoru kanbun kinshi to Nihon tōchi makki no Taiwango kinshi o rei to shite” (Gifu shōtoku gakuen daigaku gaikokugo gakubu chūgokugo gakka kiyō 5: March 2002), which deals with the banning of the Chinese language from a different angle.

15. For details, see Kawahara Isao, ed., Fengyue, Fengyuepō, Nanfang, Nanfang shiji zongmulu zhuanlun zhuzhe suoyin , , , , , (Taipei: Nantian shuju, 2001).

16. For details see Kawahara Isao, “Zasshi ‘Taiwan yishu’ to Jiang Xiaomei Taiwan yishu Xindazhong Yihua zonmuci” (Seikei ronsō 39 [March 2002]).