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
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS