Mika Tanaka, author of the 2014 non-fiction novel Wansei Back Home (灣生回家), has admitted to fabricating her identity as a descendant of wansei — Japanese who were born in Taiwan during Japanese colonial rule.
The admission has had a heavy impact in cultural circles.
When the best-seller was made into a documentary of the same name in 2015, both the book and film caused a sensation in Taiwan.
Wansei status represents a “cross-border identity” in Taiwanese history. As second-generation Japanese in Taiwan during Japanese colonial rule, they carried not only their parents’ memories of Japan, but, having been born in Taiwan, also their own memories of Taiwan.
In the eyes of the Japanese empire, they were not “Japanese,” while in the eyes of colonized Taiwan, they were not Taiwanese. Stuck in the cracks between the two cultures, their national identity was an awkward issue.
Had it not been for the documentary, wansei would have been forgotten long ago and faded into history. The film has brought them back to public attention, recalling deep hidden memories.
If Tanaka, the executive producer of the film, had not falsified her personal history as a descendant of a wansei, the movie would have touched countless Taiwanese.
The significance of the documentary lies in the fact that it allows this invisible group to be seen again. Without it, many people would have been unaware of the complexities and instability of Taiwanese history before and after World War II.
From the perspective of the film, whether Tanaka is a wansei descendant or not is not important, but her claim seems to have lent the film weight.
It is already several years since it was discovered that Tanaka is not a wansei descendant. Before the news broke she claimed in her book and in public speeches that she was the granddaughter of a wansei woman named Sayo Tanaka — her real name is Chen Hsuan-ju (陳宣儒).
During an interview three years ago with Japanese journalist Takeshi Yoshimura, then-director of the Japanese-language Sankei Shimbun’s Taiwanese branch, Yoshimura revealed several contradictions in what Tanaka said and accused her of being a fraud.
This fraudster deceived wansei, her publisher, the audience and even history. The wansei that appeared in the documentary were actual descendants, but Chen’s fabrication had a negative impact both on their integrity and on the documentary’s emotional impact on its audience.
As the Chinese saying goes, “fire cannot be wrapped up in paper,” and Chen eventually sent a statement to Yuan-Liou Publishing Co founder Wang Jung-wen (王榮文) to apologize and admit that she was not a wansei descendant, revealing her fraud. Her motives remain unclear and we do not know if she falsified her status to boost her credibility, or to improve the sales of the book and documentary.
Regardless, Chen’s fabrication has dealt a huge blow to Taiwanese history and cultural circles.
Some wansei concealed their status on returning to Japan after World War II. It cannot be denied that many memories that once were lost have been brought back to life by the documentary and from this perspective the movie has been a positive contribution: It rekindled nostalgia among Taiwanese.
History must be treated with great respect. Using a fabricated identity to promote a book or a documentary is not only unethical, it is also extremely harmful to historic truth.
Bringing such rare and precious history to light once again can help older generations to gain a better understanding of history, while it could instill respect for history in younger generations. Unfortunately, that Chen fabricated her identity has caused many people to begin to question the truth of wansei and their stories, and therefore the truth about the end of the war.
Chen’s fabrication cannot be forgiven. Because of her, the authenticity of wansei is questioned and their stories are no longer believed.
After this, they might not dare return to Taiwan and younger generations might no longer believe their stories.
All these questions and doubts must be dispelled if wansei truly are able to return home one day.
Chen Fang-ming is director of the Graduate Institute of Taiwanese Literature at National Chengchi University.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Russian President Vladimir Putin is an expert at bluffing and keeping the West on its toes, pushing relations to the edge before pivoting without warning. However, hemmed in and fuming, he is deadly serious about being heard on Ukraine. Those close to the Kremlin said that the Russian president does not want to start another war in Ukraine. Still, he must show he is ready to fight if necessary in order to stop what he sees as an existential security threat: the creeping expansion of the NATO in a country that for centuries had been part of Russia. After years of disillusionment
At a time when China continues its assertive policy toward its neighboring countries, the regime of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with Bhutan last month to resolve a longstanding border dispute. However, this is not the first time China and Bhutan have taken such efforts on this issue. Over the years, China has expanded its claim over territory in Bhutan. China claims over 764km2 of Bhutan’s territory, which includes Doklam, Sinchulung, Dramana and Shakhatoe in the northwestern region and the Pasamlung and Jakarlung Valleys in the central part of Bhutan. Although the two sides held
The Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) sixth plenary session has ended and from all appearances, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) has set the stage to rule for the rest of his life. Some might be tempted to declare that this calls for Xi to do a victory lap, but all is not well on the other side of the Taiwan Strait. To parody a line from Ya Got Trouble, a song from Broadway musical The Music Man: “There’s trouble in River City, (aka, Beijing). Trouble with a capital T, which rhymes with C for CCP.” Why? Taking control of a nation is always much
Among the voices expressing concern for Chinese tennis player Peng Shuai (彭帥) over the past two weeks, one was barely audible — that of her long-time former doubles partner Hsieh Su-wei (謝淑薇). Following their defeat in the WTA Finals championship match in Mexico on Nov. 18, Taiwan’s Hsieh and her Belgian partner Elise Mertens fielded questions via a Zoom call. Chinese state media had just released an incredibly suspicious e-mail, purportedly from Peng, and Canadian tennis Web site Open Court broached the issue. With the entire tennis world chiming in, seeking Hsieh’s opinion seemed obvious. However, the Web site’s reporter prefaced her question