Tatami rooms don't agree with G-8 visitors
When plans for Japan to host this week’s G-8 summit at Toyako were first announced, innkeepers in Hokkaido began to fret over the suitability of their accommodations for foreign visitors. Certainly the deluxe hotel suites used by foreign heads of state would be adequate; but the prospect of handling the overflow from the sizable national delegations, which included aides, support and security staff at the summit, had the local innkeepers on edge.
Sure enough, the evening tabloid Nikkan Gendai (July 8) reports, when the approximately 2,000 members of the foreign government contingents and media correspondents began converging on Toyako, the innkeepers’ anxieties proved prophetic.
“This is a hot springs district, so naturally most of the rooms are Japanese style, with tatami,” says a representative of the local innkeepers association. “But some of the visitors demanded Western-style rooms.”
Since facilities in Toyako were insufficient to accommodate all the visitors, some are being dispersed to Noboribetsu and other nearby resort towns. Previously the local ryokan (Japanese inns) had converted a portion of their tatami rooms to Western style years before, when they expanded or remodeled, but the overall capacity was still insufficient, and some of the foreign visitors had to be put up in tatami rooms. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs tried to encourage the foreign governments to use these rooms, but to no avail.
“When they adamantly refused to sleep on tatami, some inns laid down carpets and brought in large beds for the tatami rooms,” says Nikkan Gendai’s source. “Naturally this all had to be done at the owners’ expense.”
After the leaders of the four African nations of Tanzania, Senegal, Ethiopia and Ghana attended the extended conference on July 7, they immediately departed for Tokyo.
“That’s because of the dearth of suite room facilities in Sapporo hotels,” explains a local hotelier. “Many Africans are physically big and the beds and rooms were too confined. Apparently in their home countries these people lead a quite affluent lifestyle.”
Pristine Toyako may have been selected as an ideal venue for world leaders to discuss the global environment, but in the eyes of foreign visitors, the area’s “living environment” gets failing marks, Nikkan Gendai concludes ironically.
Recently Popular Posts
N Korea's Kim died in 2003; replaced by lookalike, says Waseda professor
Kuchikomi › 02:09 PM JST - 23rd August
Movie industry enjoying 'die-and-cry' boom
Kuchikomi › 11:24 AM JST - 27th August
Latest 15 of 104 Total Comments Show All
LFRAgain at 07:36 AM JST - 12th July
The right to complain may indeed be protected under free speech. But that does not translate to a right to beds as opposed to futons. Last I checked, I don't believe "beds" was included in any of the fine print. Yes, the G-8 atttendees can complain all they want, but to suggest that their expectations are reasonable or that Japan has some sort of obligation to provide beds in a country in which the traditional setting for sleeping involves sleeping on a futon? Tens of millions of Japanese do it every day. If they can do it, get up in the morning, and go to work, then the little princesses and princes of the G-8 can suck it up for a few days while they accomplish, err, little if anything.
cleo at 09:40 AM JST - 12th July
DanManjt -
lol, just got out of our first class in Civics 101, have we? Thank you for the edification. Now let me edify you a bit on the English language. To have a right to do something can mean, as you like to believe, all that hifalutin' stuff about Basic Human Rights. Or in the vernacular, it can just mean to be justified in doing something.
As you point out, they have every legal right to say whatever they want about the accommodations provided for them. Equally I have every legal right to call them precious little jerks for demanding legs on their beds. Nothing you or I write here on JT is going to affect anybody's legal rights. Didn't they teach you that in Civics?
So back to the vernacular; as LFRAgain reminds us, tens of millions of Japanese quite happily sleep on futons every night, get a good night's sleep and are ready to face a new day in the morning. Globe-trotting high-and-mighties who complain that this isn't good enough for them are precious little jerks. And of course they have every legal right to let the rest of us know what they are. Just as we have every legal right to call them out on it.
Where people are discussing how to help those in abject poverty....
Who says the accommodation wasn't 'modern'? Futon are used in millions of homes every day. They're every bit as 'modern' as beds with legs.
The article makes no mention of showers, internet access, cable or food. What makes you think these were not up to standard?
Why would Africans want to eat bland Western-style food?
jinjapan at 06:38 PM JST - 12th July
thank you lfragain. my point exactly.
DanManjt at 12:37 AM JST - 14th July
LFRAgain,
Thanks for the response.
I am glad that we agree on the Summit's attendees' right to complain. Sorry to say, that is the extent upon what we can agree. Perhaps this impass results from what appears to be a misunderstanding on your part about my position. I do not argue that because the attendees have the right to demand beds that Japan is under any obligation to meet those demands. I zeroed in on the issue of rights simply to point out Cleo's muddy thinking. But then I explicitly stated "all that is really immaterial. It is not about rights. It’s about asserting privilege."
Its not about rights. Its about asserting privilege.
The question is not whether Japan is under an obligation to respect the G8's attendees rights. The question is whether Japan benefits suffers if she meets or doesn't meet G8s attendees assertion of privilege. Therefore, what is good for 10 million Japanese is irrelevant, and the line of thought you based this rebuttal on irrelevant as well.
As is your dislike for the "princes and princesses," and your disparaging the quality of their efforts. All that is irrelevant.
The only two considerations are, to repeat,
I argued above that "I recognize the attendees’ position of power and therefore respect their assertion of privilege." I'd like to hear your thoughts on why you think its ok to deny respecting the attendees position of power and not recognize their assertion of privilege.
More importantly
I also argue above that not meeting the attendees assertion of privilege brings national shame on Japan, because it tells the attendees who were denied Western-style accommodation in no uncertain terms
You do not matter to Japan as much as those who have Western style accommodation.
I believe it safe to say that this is not the impression that Japan's conservative, prestige conscience, and power seeking elite had in mind in hosting the G8 Summit.
What do you think?
DanManjt at 01:25 AM JST - 14th July
Cleo
To an impartial observer, the attempt for one to belittle another's argumentative style is only as persuasive as the substantive gap between the soundness of the former and the latter's respective positions. Such an impartial observer, I fear, would not judge your attempt very promising. Your parsing about the difference between the legal and what I shall term moral implication of Rights is amusing, to say the least. It is amusing, because, there is no possible way for anyone to construe that I ever believed at any point that you posses the power or position to deny any G8 attendee anything legal. It inevitably follows, then, that the only relevant value of your little routine was in your recognition that the attendees do have the right to demand beds and demand it unpleasantly. And it is really only a little distance more for you to admit that they should. Because I think upon sober reflection you will recognize that everyone should, as a matter of principle, maintain the right to express themselves in the manner they wish. Even when, or rather especially when, that expression conflicts with the prevailing norms, values and mores of a society.
This dedication to personal Liberty is Western Civilization's greatest contribution to the planet, and in my humble opinion, is worth more to the human race than all the futons in the world. It is bedrock upon which America was founded; it is what makes the US not only a powerful nation, but a great one. It is what makes the US better than Japan.
In response to your questions,
Who says the accommodation wasn't 'modern'?
For starter, Japanese do. "Japanese Toilet" and all.
But the complete answer is, sad to say, not a nice one: it is the strong, the powerful. For the strong do what they will and the week suffer what they must. It is the strong nations, the powerful nations, who set up and enforce the rules by which all nations play.
Japan, your beautiful, peace-loving Japan, that understands and works this truth in International Politics like no other. It is Japan, like no other, who strives for Prestige. It is Japan, like no other, who is more about status than any other. It is Japan who obsesses on meeting, promoting, those rules. It Japan who has, ironically, defined her own heritage as unmodern and jealously gaurded equal reciprocity in sharing her "beautiful traditions" with the world.g
Sushi Police indeed.
The article makes no mention of showers, internet access, cable or food. What makes you think these were not up to standard?
I don't. You missed the point, which is, these are the standards, and futons are not part of it. BTW, air-conditioning is included too.
Why would Africans want to eat bland Western-style food?
Its not that they would want to. Its that they do. In the same way that many expats will only speak Japanese to Japanese, and will use chopsticks.
Moreover, Africans eat bland Western-like food for the same reason that they consume mediocre Hollywood movies and know who Michael Jackson is. Its called "soft-power."
cleo at 09:06 AM JST - 14th July
Why on earth should I admit that people should be unpleasant? Sugar. Vinegar. Which catches more flies?
And equally you will recognise that I maintain the right to consider high-and-mighty wannabees who throw a wobbly about nothing to be nothing but precious little jerks. And to express that opinion in the manner I wish.
The futon is the prevailing norm of this society.
How on earth did America get in there? I thought the mod in his infinite wisdom objected to comparisons with other countries, especially when they're totally irrelevant? And just as an aside, your assertion that the US is 'better' than Japan is nothing more than your opinion. Not everyone, including me, will agree with you.
What's not modern about a Japanese toilet? I very much doubt the toilets in these posh hotels and ryokans were hole-in-the-floor-don't-drop-your-wallet affairs. More likely heated seats, music-playing, automatic disinfecting, automatic lid-raising, bum-washing, flashing lights affairs. Though the squat types may not have the automatic lid.
Tanzania, Senegal, Ethiopia and Ghana? ...
You may not have noticed, but Japan is up there in the G8; Japan is one of those 'strong nations'. There's no reason Japan should not set the standards when it hosts one of these jaunts.
They're not in a position of power. They're servants of the people. Supposedly. They're not there to assert privilege, they're there to do a job of work. Supposedly. And no one denied them anything. They just didn't like the perfectly adequate accommodations they were offered.
serendipity628 at 01:34 AM JST - 15th July
Some tediously wordy comments here confirming that, just like a number of those in the G8 entourage, some people are better than others at adapting to different cultures.
888naff at 06:39 AM JST - 15th July
"give them a tent to sleep in!" was the best response i got from a japanese friend.
i'm suprised that the hotel owners foot the bill of providing beds in this situation. too kind. maybe the goverment has a fund to help with that.
If these people are so busy and important and rude... then why don't they get better organized travel coordinators.
DanManjt at 11:58 AM JST - 15th July
Ah, cut and paste. The last refuge of the quibbler. Its gives the appearance of a response, when none is actually there. It appears to take issue with something important, but actually just dissect a post to the point of meaninglessness, which I suppose is the intention of the Cut-and-Paster.
Allow me to demonstrate:
Why on earth should I admit that people should be unpleasant?" Sugar. Vinegar. Which catches more flies?
Why An interrogative marker. On A prepostition marking something is above and touching something else. earth Known also as the planet earth, the world, and also means dirt or an area of dirt. In Latin, its terra firma. *Why on earth * A question strongly expressing the speakers desire to stress why....
And so on and so on. And so on.
DanManjt at 12:02 PM JST - 15th July
serendipity628
I suppose precision and clarity seem tedious to the the unrigorous.
Cultural sensitivity and insensitivity have nothing to do with it.
What part of international conference do you not understand?
cleo at 12:05 PM JST - 15th July
lol. Danmanjt, you really are clutching at straws. Give up.
DanManjt at 12:29 PM JST - 15th July
Well, I am glad that at least we both are finding this amusing.
In reply, let me just say that as a general JT rule of thumb, when people resort to ad hominem and then declare victory it usually means they've puttered out of ideas.
If you wish to continue our discussion, kindly respond substantively to my yesterdays post.
cleo at 01:06 PM JST - 15th July
DanManjt -
I did respond, you apparently disapprove of either my response or the way I framed it. That's your choice.
Let's try to put things in a form you are willing to accept (you see how reasonable I am? and pleasant?) :-)
The right to free expression does not include the right to be unpleasant. For example, I'm within my rights to voice my opposition to the military exploits of George Bush and his pals, but if I choose to express my anger by throwing rotten eggs at George, then I'm in trouble. The international, globetrotting precious little jerks in Hokkaido obviously weren't that unpleasant, but still there's a world of difference between making a request and making an obnoxious complaint about perfectly adequate accommodation and forcing hotel-owners to remodel rooms that really don't need remodelling.
And again, there is nothing un-modern about a Japanese toilet. http://www.theplumber.com/japan.html
And again, Japan is right up there with the 'strong and the powerful'. If it's 'the strong and the powerful' who decide what's acceptable, then when in Hokkaido the rest of the world should feel privileged to have the chance to experience what millions of Japanese consider the norm - and what hundreds of millions of those supposedly represented by the international globetrotting precious little jerks would consider the height of luxury, and comfort they aren't likely to see this side of the Pearly Gates.
LFRAgain at 03:13 PM JST - 15th July
DanManjt,
Thanks for the response. First things first: A futon is a place to sleep; therefore it IS, by definition, a bed.
To continue, we’re talking about three things here: One, whether or not these G-8 prissies have the Right (with a capital “R”) to complain about their sleeping arrangements. Two, whether or not they have a right (lower case - as in “being in the right” or “being correct”) to complain about their sleeping arrangements. Cleo’s thinking wasn’t muddy. She was quite clear in what she meant by “rights” and you distorted that meaning for whatever purpose, perhaps if only to give yourself a platform from which to launch your digest version of civil rights principles. Since you opened that particular avenue of the discussion, don’t back out of it by belittling a poster’s honest clarification of the difference between the two. That kind of petty sarcasm diminishes the credibility of your argument. Finally, the third issue here is whether or not Japan has an obligation to address those complaints beyond what they’ve already done.
On the one point, with regard to Rights as they pertain to Liberty and the free exercise thereof, the G-8 guests are not being denied any intrinsic right to complain. You know it. I know it. And no one here was calling for it. Speaking in the lofty terms of individual Liberty, they expressed their right to complain, were not imprisoned by the NPA, and were free to go home to complain another day.
Regarding whether or not they have a right, e.g., are “in the right” to complain, I believe they do not, or more clearly, are unjustified in griping about their sleeping accommodations, particularly when those accommodations are entirely modern by the estimation of some ¼th of the world’s population in particular, and by the general standards of most industrialized countries. You think that’s irrelevant, but I respectfully disagree - with just a hint of disdain for your pretentious and arrogant tone.
Speaking of Japan in particular, futon mattresses and futon comforters are made with high quality materials, complying with government-mandated safety minimums regulating purity of materials used, flammability resistance, and durability, standards that meet or exceed those of many Western nations, including the USA (massive beef recall, anyone?). The standards used to produce these common household items adhere to so many of the same as those used for the sheets, pillows, and comforters used in the West that the odds are incredibly high that those futons were made on the exact same assembly line that your comforters were. That a futon lacks a frame and four legs does not diminish its ability to fulfill its function and provide a comfortable place to sleep.
In order to better gauge your position, please answer me this: Had Japanese delegates demanded the installation of Japanese-style toilets, tatami, and futon in their hotels in the last G-8 conference in Germany, would you have considered their demands reasonable?
The reasons they are not “in the right” to complain, IMO, are numerous, but start most simply with clarifying the relationship between Japan and the visiting G-8 representatives. Simply put, it’s a relationship between guest and host. G-8 members are the guests. Japan is the host. For guests to piss and moan to the host in this manner, especially when the accommodations perfectly suit the needs of the guests (clean, safe, climate-controlled, conveniently located near meeting venues), is the height of arrogance and rudeness. It’s petty, childish, and offensive to the host. Just as I would never visit your home and berate your taste in sofas, neither should the G-8 guests criticize Japan for not going through considerable expense, both monetarily and materially, in recreating mini-oases with “a flavor of home” for these spoiled, preening asses.
Which leads into yet another reason some G-8 members need to gain some perspective: This (and every other G-8) meeting is ostensibly about discussing ways to combat material and financial shortfalls in the world today. The hypocrisy of these sorts of petty demands is obvious.
On the third point, does Japan have an obligation to provide beds for all 2000 G-8 guests? Based in large part, but not exclusively on what I outlined above, the answer is no. Japan has done its part. Japan has provided a venue, far from the access of violent protest. Japan has committed a small army of police officers for security. Japan has provided hotels in a resort area that is held in high esteem in the tourism industry, complete with all of the amenities that one would expect to come from a decent hotel – clean rooms, baths, dining, air conditioning, televisions, laundry facilities – ALL at a tremendous expense to the proprietors of the businesses and to the host nation itself. Japan’s met it only obligation, which is to provide a safe, clean environment for the members of the G-8 to conduct their business.
"Privilege?" "Power?" "Liberty," "America?!" You forgot to throw "mom," "apple pie," and "baseball" in there. I’ll second Cleo’s confusion. How the hell did America become the centerpiece of your argument?
You ridicule other posters’ positions with Animal Farm references regarding the foolishness of applying any sort of relativity to freedom of speech, yet you seem perfectly at home with the idea that some people are more equal than others because of the power they possess; Some are more equal than others because of the prestige they possess. You defend the G-8 attendee’ demands as a privilege conferred by power and essentially dismiss 1000 years of progress towards human rights by extolling the very anathema of Liberty: Might Makes Right.
Returning to my host/guest analogy, if I were, say, Wayne Newton, and I brandished a weapon in your home when I made a demand that you replace your sofa with one I preferred, would that mean you had an obligation to comply, if for no other reason than the power and prestige I possess? By your reasoning, it would. And that's more than a little screwy.
You asked:
Because the attendees are elected representative of democratic governments. They don’t deserve or demand any other privilege than the honor of representing their constituents. Anything beyond that, any further expression of the privileges of power and prestige – well, there’s a word for that: Corruption.
Japan has failed at nothing in not providing enough Western-style beds for these pampered buffoons.
DanManjt at 11:57 PM JST - 25th July
Cleo LFRAgain
Got really busy really fast. I apologize for the delay and plan to respond this weekend.
Cheers.
Register or login to add a comment!