The Asia-Pacific Journal | Japan Focus Volume 9 | Issue 20 | Number 3 | May 09, 2011

1

Visual Propaganda in Wartime East Asia – The Case of NatoriYōnosuke　　戦時の東アジアにおける視覚的プロパガンダ−−名取洋之助の場合

Andrea Germer

Visual Propaganda in Wartime EastAsia – The Case of Natori Yōnosuke

Andrea Germer

INTRODUCTION*

Visual propaganda that targeted the home-frontin wartime Japan has recently been examinedby scholars who have drawn attention to suchaspects of material culture as clothing andtextiles (Atkins 2002; Dower 2002), postcardsand ephemera (Barclay 2010; Kishi 2010; Ruoff2010) and propagandistic photo magazines(Kanō 2004, 2005; Earhart 2008) thatnormalize and popularize colonial and militaristpolicies by way of aesthetic artefacts ofeveryday use and consumption. Others haveexamined underlying developments in politicalinfrastructure and mass media as channels ofpropaganda transmission (Kasza 1988; Kushner2006). Still other scholars have focussed onvisual and other propaganda that targetedWestern and later Asian audiences by way ofcultural diplomacy by the Kokusai BunkaShinkōkai (Society for International CulturalRelations) affiliated with the Ministry ofForeign Affairs (Shibaoka 2007; Park 2009) andthereby highlighted the State’s efforts todistribute an alternative image to themilitaristic state portrayed in the West, as wellas to enhance its image in the occupiedterritories.

Propaganda in each of the countries thatparticipated in the Second World War variedwith its own political structures, cultural roots,

creative agents and targeted audiences. Whilepropaganda reception is a generally muchunderstudied subject, it becomes even moredifficult to approach in the case of a dispersedand undifferentiated ‘foreign’ (taigai),‘Western’ or ‘Asian’ audience. In order tosuccessfully sway a foreign audience, however,the creative agent must be versed in thementalities and cultural expectations of thereceiving side.

One of these creative agents in wartime Japanwas Natori Yōnosuke (1910-1962), who can besaid to have started his career proper with theManchurian invasion of 1931.

APJ | JF 9 | 20 | 3

2

Natori Yōnosuke (1910-1962)

The invasion ignited the interest of foreignmedia in the subject ‘Japan’, which is whyNatori, who was working as a contract photojournalist with Ullstein Press in Germany at thetime, was sent to Japan to create an extensivephoto documentary . Nator i ' s photodocumentary of Japan laid the groundwork forhis international recognition as a photographeras well as making him financially independent.Natori’s various activities after relocating toJapan in 1933 until the end of World War IIincluded producing the photo and designmagazine NIPPON (1934-1944), publishingphotographs and albums on Japan, the UnitedStates, and Germany, developing his‘workshop’ Nippon Kōbō into a limitedcompany with branches in occupied East andSouth East Asia, and publishing a number ofpropaganda magazines financed by theJapanese Imperial Army, Navy and the semi-governmental Society for International CulturalRelations (Kokusai Bunka Shinkōkai, KBS).After the war, Natori continued his career aspublisher of an illustrated magazine, leadeditor of the 286-volume Iwanami ShashinBunko, award-winning photographer (1953,1954) and influential photo critic.

Until recently, Natori’s work has been mainlyappreciated from the standpoint of aestheticsand design, and he won his highest praise inthe context of the history of photography.1 Therecollections of Natori's former students andhis staff (the so-called ‘Natori School’), and ofcolleagues in the postwar worlds of publishing,editing, photography, and design, abound inadmiration of their former mentor andboss.2 Another approach to Natori’s legacystarted with an exhibition on his photo bookGrosses Japan. Dai Nippon (Great Japan, Natori1937) in 1978, followed by publications thatincluded Natori’s contribution to the wartimeregime. The resurfacing of these works helpedto demystify Natori's previously one-sidedimage as the creator of monumental aesthetic

works.3 The reprint of his first illustratedmagazine NIPPON (2002-2005) laid the basisfor a broader re-evaluation of the politicalsignificance of Natori’s aesthetics (Kaneko2005: 3). Shibaoka’s (2007) erudite studyexamined the state’s cultural propagandastrategies through KBS and Natori ’sinvolvement, while Gennifer Weisenfeld’sarticle (2000) shed light on the nexus oftourism and imperialism in NIPPON’s editorialstrategies. Lastly, Koyanagi Tsuguichi’sreflections (Koyanagi and Ishikawa 1993)enabled a closer look at Natori’s wartimepolitical agency in China, for which Shirayamaand Hori (2006) provided the visual material.Drawing on the above studies, in this paper, Ifocus on Natori the photographer and editor-cum-artist from an angle that interrogates hispolitical agency as seen in his creative workand his visual strategies, as well as in hismanagement of the various magazines heedited during the Asia-Pacific War (1931-1945).Moreover, I discuss the extent to whichNatori 's legacy of Japanese wart imepropaganda has been critically reflected orobscured in his own postwar writings, in thoseof his disciples, as well as in scholarly literatureon photojournalism. While even some of thecritical scholarship on Natori shows apologetictendencies and fails to sufficiently address hisagency in the product ion of wart imepropaganda, I argue that Natori’s legacy andits treatment provide a showcase for theunresolved ways of coming to terms with thewartime past in Japan.

THE BEGINNING OF A CAREER INPHOTOJOURNALISM

Natori was born into a wealthy and influentialfamily associated with the Mitsui Conglomerateand the insurance company Teikoku Seimei.When ‘bad boy’ (furyō shōnen) Natori (2004:98) repeatedly failed to enter the preparatoryschool for Keio University, he was sent toGermany to study German at the age of 18.Subsequently, he studied design at an arts and

APJ | JF 9 | 20 | 3

3

crafts school in Munich and became acquaintedwith new trends in the emerging field ofphotojournalism. At the time, the portable,lightweight and high-quality German camerasErmanox and Leica greatly facilitated theemergence of the profession (Gidal 1972).Natori equipped himself with the newest modelcompact camera, a 35mm Leica. With the helpof his wife and partner Erna Mecklenburg(1901-1979) and his friend Hermann Landshoff,Natori became affiliated first with theMünchner Illustrierte Presse (MunichIllustrated Press) and was later hired as acontract photographer for the competitor of theMunich paper, the Berliner Illustrirte Zeitung(sic!) (Berlin Illustrated News; published byUllstein Press) in November 1931.4

Just two months earlier, on 19 September 1931,the Kwantung Army had invaded Manchuria,which could have been one reason for Natori’semployment. Only three months later, inFebruary 1932 and at the age of 22, he wassent to Japan. On his three-month stay in Japan,Natori took approximately 7000 photos on 30themes, such as Japanese family life, Japaneseinns (ryokan), beer factories, geisha schools,Yasukuni Shrine, tea ceremony, festivals, andGermans in Tokyo. According to Natori, photosof this journey had been published at least 270times by 1939.5 He established his reputationas a photo journalist through this collection ofphotographs and earned enough money tofinance himself for the next 10 years (Natori2004: 121). Natori's mission was to presentJapan as respectable, modern and at the sametime rich in cultural tradition, in order toameliorate Japan’s international isolation afterits withdrawal from the League of Nations(1933) and to work for its internationalrecognition as a ‘normal’ modern nation-state.He worked ‘from home’, so to speak, and onlylater would travel to China and eventuallyse t t l e the re i n o rder t o pursue h i spropagandistic work of covering up Japanesecolonialist and imperialist warfare.

After returning from Japan to Berlin, Natoriwas asked by Ullstein Press to cover theJapanese Army in Manchuria and he spentFebruary through May 1933 there. When backin Japan for a break, Ullstein informed him thatpolitical conditions in Germany had changedsuch that it was impossible for German mediato employ ‘non-Aryan’ staff.6 Nonetheless, theyof fered h im a f f i l i a t ion as a fore igncorrespondent. Uncertain of the future butfinancially independent, Natori declined theoffer and decided to establish his own businessin Japan. The timing was good as the photomagazine Kōga (Photograph) had just beenfounded the p rev ious year and thephotographic avant-garde was looking for waysto express itself. In 1933, Natori thus foundedNippon Kōbō together with photographerKimura Ihei (1901-1974), designer HaraHiromu (1903-1986), photo and art critic InaNobuo (1898-1978), and the very influentialproducer, actor and photographer Okada Sōzō(1903-1983; stage name Yamanouchi Hikaru).Supporting members were poet and writerTakada Tamotsu (1895-1952), journalist andcritic Ōya Sōichi (1900-1970) and journalist ŌtaHideshige (1892-1994).7

NIPPON KŌBŌ: FROM WORKSHOP TOCORPORATE BUSINESS

The artists and writers who would come to beassociated with Nippon Kōbō were interested inthe modern trend of 'new vision' and theGerman Bauhaus concept of Neue Sachlichkeit(new objectivity) that was to influence arts andcrafts worldwide.They were attracted by thetechnical and conceptual knowledge ofphotojournalism, arts, crafts and design thatNatori had brought back with him fromGermany and they aimed to start a practicalmovement along the lines of Neue Sachlichkeitin Japan. The first two Nippon Kōbō exhibitionswere both successful. The team planned to runa photo news agency to send photographs fromJapan to other countries and to producecommercial photo art. Due to differences in

APJ | JF 9 | 20 | 3

4

thinking and financial difficulties, however, thegroup that had been formed by professionals onan ‘equal level’ dissolved less than a year afterit had been founded. Natori (2004: 137)explained this as ‘a matter of course as this wasa group of very strong individuals.’ However,the f ac t tha t K imura , Ina and Harasubsequently founded Chūō Kōbō togethersuggests that the reason for the break-up was aconflict between Natori and the othermembers. Natori and Erna Mecklenburgmeanwhile re-established the second NipponKōbō with new, younger and less experiencedstaff.

The second Nippon Kōbō published a quarterlyillustrated review NIPPON for foreignaudiences in English, German, French andSpanish. It appeared in 41 issues, including fiveJapanese editions, between 1934 and 1944.

The cover of NIPPON’s first issue (1934) visualises

the combination of modernity and tradition, or theWest and Japan, through a colourful and highly

stylised female paper doll in traditional Japaneseattire superimposed on a photograph of modern

architecture’s functional style in black and white.

NIPPON claimed to represent ‘actual life andevents in modern Japan and the Far East’(NIPPON 1, 1934).

Cover page of NIPPON 4. The claim to represent‘actual life and events in modern Japan and the Far

East’ is a claim for truth and authenticity that ismade and asserted on the front cover of the

magazine. This is the only issue of NIPPON that doesnot provide a visual on its cover. All the same, the

choice of the colours red and white and the redJapanese title in the centre of the scriptural designrefer to the colours and the structural design of the

national flag.

Clearly influenced by the modern trend of 'newvision' and Bauhaus aesthetics, it was masterfulin terms of layout, design and photography.Rather than a review, however, it was a

APJ | JF 9 | 20 | 3

5

propaganda tool similar to later propagandisticjournals and photo magazines, such as Shūhō(Weekly Report, established in 1936) orShashin Shūhō (Photographic Weekly Report,founded in 1938) (Kanō 2005: 35, Earhart2008, Weisenfeld 2005). Natori’s magazine wassupported by corporate advertising and by theForeign Ministry from 1934 (Koyanagi andIshikawa 1993: 91). Its main advertisers wereKanebo, Mitsui and Mitsubishi conglomerates,and various other large companies in printing,insurance, textile, export and technicalequipment. NIPPON was thus a state directedpropaganda organ, the first of its kind in Japan,reflecting political and financial circles’ anxietyabout the isolation that ensued with Japan’swithdrawal from the League of Nations in1933. The first feature story of the first issueintroduced foreign diplomats and their spousesin a ‘private’ relaxed setting during a weekendouting to the hot springs and resorts ofKaruizawa and Nikko.

APJ | JF 9 | 20 | 3

6

NIPPON 1, 1934: 4-5. These are some of the visualsthat appear in a photo story on European, Americanand Chinese ambassadors and their wives on outings

to Karuizawa and Nikko. The visuals depict morewomen than men and connote a feminised sphere of

recreation, culture and friendship that is in starkcontrast to the political world of diplomatic affairs.

Thus NIPPON set the stage for presenting animage of Japan that was neither militaristic andaggressive nor quaint and old-fashioned. Byvisually inviting foreign readers to join Westerndiplomats and their spouses on their joyful andrelaxed trips to scenic spots of the country, itcleverly combined ‘semi-official’ representationwith a private, personal, cultural and peacefulcontext, displaying a community of friendshosted by the Japanese.

Although NIPPON was the product of Natori’swhole team at Nippon Kōbō, his influence aseditor, art director, photographer and producerwas so overwhelming that according to Kaneko

Ryūichi (2005: 2) it reflected the world view ofone man and needs to be treated as such.Indeed, neither in Natori’s own writings nor inthose of his staff or his disciples is there anyindication of pressure or intervention from themagazine’s sponsors. Rather, as Koyanagirepeatedly noted, Natori actively proposedstrategies to advertise ‘Japan’, Japanese politicsand Japanese products to foreign audiences(Koyanagi and Ishikawa 1993: 91-94).

The model for NIPPON was the Germanmagazine Die Böttcherstrasse. InternationaleZeitschrift (The Böttcher Street. InternationalJournal, 1928-1930).8 This magazine assembledhigh ranking international scholars, artists,intellectuals and politicians and carriedvölkisch-racist ideas combined with highlyaesthetic design, luxurious layout and highquality print. Half cultural review and halfadvertisement paper (Schlawe 1962: 50), it wasfinanced by the coffee industrialist GerhardLudwig Wilhelm Roselius (1874-1943). Natori,together with graphic designer Kōno Takashi(1906-1999) and the editor of the Germanmagazine Albert Theile, produced a model forNIPPON. Natori took this blueprint to the chiefexecutive of Kanebo, Tsuda Shingo, andexplained its underlying ideas (Natori 2004:139). Aware of the low image of Japaneseproducts worldwide, Tsuda fully supported theplan and agreed to finance the first issue ofNIPPON.9 In the same way that Roselius’company Kaffee Hag had become the mainsponsor and main advert iser for DieBöttcherstrasse, Kanebo became the mainsponsor and advertiser for the magazineNIPPON.

The aim of Natori’s magazine was to presentJapan as a country that was not reducible to‘Fujiyama, cherry blossoms, geisha and maiko[apprentice geisha]’ (Natori 2004: 130), but asone that excelled as a modern nation-state. Thisaim is repeatedly asserted in the recollectionsof his staff (Fukkokuban NIPPON bessatsu2005). Rather than deconstructing the

APJ | JF 9 | 20 | 3

7

stereotypes of ‘oriental’ Japan, NIPPONreconfirmed other established tropes such asits unique family system, the high value oftradition and the unbroken line of emperors,and simply added another technically advancedand modern image to it.

NIPPON 20, 1939: 23. This photograph illustrates thearticle ‘Family — Base of the Nation’ by Nakagawa

Zennosuke. Neither the photographer's nor thefamily’s name are noted. In its line-up in traditionalJapanese wear with the tall male figure in the visual(though not numerical) centre, it serves to illustrate

the concept or essence of the ‘Japanese family’ ratherthan individual and identifiable people.

NIPPON 9, 1936. The presentation of Japan as anequal technical and commercial partner to the Westis emphasised repeatedly throughout the magazine.The close stylistic emulation of Bauhaus aestheticsand 'new vision' photography is particularly evident

in this photograph.

APJ | JF 9 | 20 | 3

8

NIPPON 20, 1939, has one of the most denselydesigned covers. It displays Japan as industrialised

with modern land, sea and air infrastructure forcommerce and travel, with an intact agriculturalsector and scenic rural beauty. Superimposed is ashrine gate that resembles that of Yasukuni but

could be any shrine. The image signifies the nexus ofShinto, family, and nation that is visualised and

propagated inside the magazine.

As such it promoted Japan as a moderncommercial partner as well as an attractivetouristic site. As Weisenfeld (2000: 750)summed up, ‘NIPPON was both an attempt bystate-sanctioned representatives of theJapanese empire at self-representation and aninvocation to the Western viewer to colonizethe country through a kind of touristic gaze.’With its use of montage and captioning –techniques that were also employed at theWorld Fairs that were covered in NIPPON – itself-reflexively presented ‘Japan-as-Museum’,displaying Japan’s ‘“national strength, national

character and national significance” forWestern consumption’ (NIPPON 17, 1939: 48;Weisenfeld 2000: 774). Offering ‘a means of“specular dominance” over Japan’ asWeisenfeld (2000: 750) observed, did not,however, imply or engender the panopticistpower of the viewer. Rather, the illusion of aspecular dominance was created by means ofclever, highly elaborate and aesthetic visualcompositions that served to veil politicalinterests. Natori, as art director and designerof the magazine, put the utmost care in itspresentation. He was also recognized by thegovernment and by the military as an expert instate propaganda and was sought after as apartner in subsequent propaganda strategies.

Natori approached the Ministry of ForeignAffairs and the Imperial Army to lobby for hisproject of advertising Japan to the West. Whilehe did not find support from the Ministry atfirst, Natori (2004: 140) mentioned that it was‘ironically the Press Unit of the Army Ministry(Rikugunshō no shinbunhan) that showed keeninterest’. Soon, however, the civil iangovernment would follow and from 1935 ordersfor stock photos came in from Kokusai BunkaShinkōkai (Society for International CulturalRelations). KBS was established in April 1934as an extra-governmental organisationaffiliated with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs,the f irst organisat ion of this k ind inJapan.10 Natori presumably had already aimedat a sponsorship by KBS, as NIPPON issues 1and 3 carried articles that introduced KBS indetail (Shirayama 2005: 10-11). Cooperationwith KBS intensified after the beginning of theSino-Japanese War in 1937, when Natoribecame an associate (shokutaku) of KBS.Thereafter, production costs of NIPPON wereborne by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, theArmy and the Navy and the inter-MinisterialInformation Committee (Gaimushō, Rikukaigun,Jōhō Iinkai) (Shirayama 2005: 15). Japaneseofficials had discussed using media for warpropaganda since the end of World War I, butthe Army did not request a ministry of

APJ | JF 9 | 20 | 3

9

propaganda until 1934 (Kanō 2005), followingthe Nazi model.11 Natori, because of hisknowledge and skills acquired in Germany, canbe seen as a forerunner of such directpropagandistic efforts.

The Asia-Pacific War as propaganda war

From the time of the Second Sino-JapaneseWar, Natori became very busy on two fronts. InNazi Germany he published a German photoalbum on ‘Great Japan’ (Grosses Japan. Dai-Nippon) in 1937 (second edition 1942) andorganised two exhibits of Japanese arts andcrafts there for KBS in 1938. Natori was evenmore active in occupied China. From his travelsto Germany and the United States in 1936-1937and on an assignment for LIFE magazine, hewent straight from San Francisco to Shanghaiafter the outbreak of the Sino-Japanese War(July 1937) and spent the rest of the war there.The 1937 October 4 issue of LIFE magazinepublished the famous press photo by H.S.Wongthat became the most influential visual of anti-Japanese propaganda. The photo depicts acrying baby in rags sitting on a platform of theSouthern Train Station of Shanghai that hadbeen destroyed by the Japanese Army duringtheir invasion of the city.

After the Japanese bombing of the South RailwayStation Shanghai on 28 August 1937. Thisphotograph by H.S. Wong became the most

influential visual image of anti-Japanesepropaganda.

Koyanagi Tsuguichi (1907-1992),12 who joinedNippon Kōbō in October 1937, suggested thatthe photo looked staged,13 but reported thateveryone at Nippon Kōbō was stunned. Natoricommented that the photo was very well takenand an excellent example of Chiang Kai-shek’santi-Japanese propaganda. He stressed thatJapan needed the same kind of photographicpropaganda to find allies on the internationallevel, and he told the Ministry of ForeignAffairs and the Army that he wanted tocontr ibute to the war by making warpropaganda (Koyanagi and Ishikawa 1993:93-94). Natori went as far as travelling to visitthe Shanghai Expeditionary Army14 where hepersuaded the Group Leader of the SpecialAssignments Unit, Major Kaneko Shunji, thatpropaganda was needed against Chiang Kai-shek.15 In December 1937, Natori went toShanghai with Koyanagi to join the ShanghaiExpeditionary Army Special Assignments PressUnit. The deal that Natori struck with the Army

APJ | JF 9 | 20 | 3

10

was that three staff from Nippon Kōbō wouldbe sent to Shanghai to serve as photographersfor the Army and that the Army provide threecars and finance a service that would sellphotographs to foreign publishers. The photosthemselves were to be Nippon Kōbō’s propertyyet the negatives would belong to the Army(Nakanishi 1980: 231).

Of course, censorship was in ef fect .Immediately after the China incident, the HomeMinistry issued pre-publication warnings. TheArmy Ministry, the Navy Ministry and theForeign Ministry also banned i tems,culminating in so-called consultation meetings(kondankai), the institutionalised feature of top-down press controls that also served toblacklist writers and drive press organs out ofbusiness (Kasza 1988: 168-172). Natori, incontrast, took the initiative to serve theinterests of the Army in China and actively andcreatively pursued cooperation. Within twomonths in Shanghai, he had set up a pressagency ‘Press Union Photo Service’ and provedhimself as a professional in the propagandawar. As foreign media were not allowed toaccompany the Army, Natori had manyrequests for visual material from internationalpublishers, which he also provided (Koyanagiand Ishikawa 1993: 99).

Camouflaged as a private institution, his pressoffice was in fact completely financed by theJapanese Army. None of the pictures thatNatori sold showed any trace of massacres orwar crimes.16 Natori himself never went to thebattle front, indeed, he reportedly said that hewould not go where bullets fly (Koyanagi andIshikawa 1993: 116). He would visit areas theJapanese Army controlled and have himselfphotographed by Koyanagi. Natori sent thesekinen shashin (commemorative photos) off toforeign publishers to convey the impressionthat he was a frontline reporter (ibid.).

From November 1938, Natori also publishedthe English language magazine SHANGHAI

which was distributed in Shanghai.

The magazine SHANGHAI (image in Shirayama andHori 2006: 82) presented as a Chinese production bya Chinese editor, was actually designed and produced

by Nippon Kōbō in Tokyo and fully financed by theJapanese Army.

It was camouflaged as a Chinese culturalmagazine produced and published in Shanghaiby producer and editor Ching Cong Kan(Nakanishi 1980: 227-228; 1981: 56). In fact,Natori brought photographic material fromChina to Tokyo and had Nippon Kōbō producethe issues. SHANGHAI is thus a prime exampleof ‘black propaganda’ that either intentionallyfalsifies or does not reveal the identification ofthe sender (Bussemer 2008: 36). It carried themessage that Japan brought peace anddevelopment to China and that only theJapanese Army could liberate China fromcommunism and from the military clique ofChiang Kai-shek. The financial means for thismagazine was provided by the Army Press Unit

APJ | JF 9 | 20 | 3

11

(Gun Hōdōbu) (Koyanagi and Ishikawa 1993:144-145). Nippon Kōbō editor Iijima Minorucalled SHANGHAI an aggressive propagandamagazine (kōgekiteki senden zasshi, quoted inNakanishi 1980: 228; Nakanishi 1981: 56, 68)and co-worker Koyanagi quotes Natori asproposing that Koyanagi take foreignphotographers out to get them drunk whileNatori would meanwhile search their rooms formaterial that could be detrimental to the imageof the Imperial Army (quoted ibid.). Accordingto this account, Natori was an active plotter ina conspiracy, not only on the level of profitableand productive cooperation with the Army andKBS, but also on the level of suppressing anyevidence that would record a story differentfrom his own propaganda.

By 1944, Natori is said to have witnessed warcrimes by the Japanese Army in China(Nakanishi 1981: 82, Shirayama and Ishii 1998:69). Nippon Kōbō staff and Army photographerKoyanagi also said he witnessed a youngChinese woman who was accused of being aspy being raped and murdered by a Japanesesoldier.17 According to some accounts, Natoridiscussed the wartime state with Japaneseintellectuals he invited to Shanghai, wrote aletter of protest (ikensho) against wrongdoingsof the Japanese Army stationed in China, andcreated posters carrying the appeal ‘Don’tburn, don’t steal, don’t rape (yakuna ,nusumuna, okasuna)’.18 However, there is notrace of such posters or record of a protestletter. In any event, Natori himself kept silentabout his activities in China.

Natori also established branch operations.Around the time of the Canton operation, inSeptember 1938, two more members of NipponKōbō were sent to China, this time to the PressUnit of the Army in South China (Nan-ShiHakengun Hōdōbu) in Canton. There, theyestablished a sister company to the Press UnionPhoto Service, the South China Photo Service.There, Natori created the English language

photo magazine CANTON , which wassponsored by the Army Press Unit andproduced by Nippon Kōbō in Canton itself.Natori argued for a similar propagandamagazine in Manchuria and eventually foundedthe Manchurian Photo Service and themagazine MANCHOUKUO in 1940. The ordersfrom government agencies to Nippon Kōbōincreased dramatically between 1938 and1939, making Natori’s company one of themany businesses that profited from theoccupation of China. Kobayashi Masashi, whoduring Natori’s frequent absences from Tokyowas in charge of several of the new magazines(Kobayashi 2005: 90), called the three yearsbetween 1936 and 1938 ‘the golden years ofdevelopment’ for the team of Nippon Kōbō. Inthe course of the war, income generatedthrough commercial advertisements decreasedwhile income and activities associated with thenewly founded foreign propaganda magazinesas well as the number of overseas branchessteadily rose.

In an interview published in the photographyjournal Shashin Bunka in September 1941,Natori stressed that war was not only fought byweapons but also by ideologies, and thatphotojournalism everywhere expressed nationalideology (quoted in Shirayama 2005: 25).Therefore, he said, it does not make sense tocopy the West. Instead, Japanese must developits own photojournalistic expression ofJapanese ideas. He went on to stress the needfor active expansion and indoctrination in EastAsia, maintaining that,

[ … ] t o s a y ‘ w e a d v a n c e t oBangkok’, go over there, takephotos and bring them back tointroduce them to Japan is notenough. Is not rather the mostimminent task for Japanesephotojournalists to actively andrelentlessly pursue their work inmagazines published over there? I

APJ | JF 9 | 20 | 3

12

really think the only way to do it isfor Japanese photojournalists to goover there, install themselves andwork from the standpoint ofJapanese thinking. (Natori 1941,quoted in Shirayama 2005: 26)

This is precisely what he did, first when hecommuted between Tokyo and Shanghai fromlate 1937, then when he and Mecklenburgrelocated to Shanghai in 1940.19 After theoutbreak of the Pacific War, Natori wouldbecome even more explicit regarding hisconviction that Japan should turn away fromWestern models and aggressively propagate itsagenda in its own way in the occupiedterritories.

As part of its growth strategy in East Asia,Nippon Kōbō was renamed and restructured in1939 as a corporation, the Kokusai Hōdō KōgeiKabushiki Kaisha. Four years later it wasrenamed the Kokusai Hōdō Kabushiki Kaisha.In 1940, the Tokyo-based firm had branches inŌsaka, Nanjing, Shanghai, Canton and Shinkyō(today’s Changchun), the capital of theManchurian puppet state. It employed around80 photographers and designers, producings e v e r a l o p e n l y p r o p a g a n d i s t i c o r‘propagandistically interspersed’ culturalmagazines,20 all of them of high quality andcombining arts , cul ture, photos andillustrations. The magazines Natori initiatedand Nippon Kōbō produced were NIPPON(from 1934, KBS, Imperial Army), COMMERCEJAPAN (April 1938, Bōeki Kumiai Chūōkai),SHANGHAI (November 1938, Naka ShinaHakengun), CANTON (April 1939, Nan-ShiHakengun), SOUTH CHINA GRAPHIC (April1939), MANCHOUKUO (April 1940, SouthManchurian Railways), EASTERN ASIA (1940,South Manchurian Railways), CHUNHA (NakaShina Hakengun), KAUPĀPU KAWANŌKU [TōaGahō, East Asia Picture Post] (December 1941,in Thai language) and others.21

Covers of some of the propaganda magazinesinitiated and produced by Natori Yōnosuke’s

company (images in Shirayama and Hori, 2006:100-127). MANCHOUKUO’s front cover visually

connotes the ideology of the ‘empty’ Manchurianterritory, the wide, open, and fertile lands awaiting

the Japanese settlers. Its back cover carries anadvertisement by the main sponsor, the South

Manchurian Railway. The veins of a leaf indicate therailway tracks and traffic infrastructure that signifyS.M.R. as the ‘carrier of civilization into Manchuria’,

using natural structures to in effect naturalisecolonial expansion. S.M.R. also sponsored EASTERN

ASIA that propagated the ideology of the ‘GreaterEast Asia Co-prosperity Sphere’. Published mainly inEnglish, summaries were in French and German, and

the captions appeared in all three languages. Thepropaganda magazine KAUPĀPU KAWANŌKU [TōaGahō, East Asia Picture Post] appeared in the Thai

language with some English and katakana captions.It advertised Japan and propagated the Japanese

advances in South East Asia.

Other press-related companies that Natoriestablished between 1938 and 1944 included apublishing company in Tokyo called NatoriShoten (1940) and a printing company that the

APJ | JF 9 | 20 | 3

13

Japanese Army had requisitioned in Nankingand for which Natori received the managingrights in 1941, renaming it Taihei InsatsuShuppan Kōshi (Pacific Press PublishingCompany). In Shanghai, he established thepublisher Taihei Shokyoku (1942) thatproduced propaganda publications in Chinesefor KBS and the Imperial Army. Apart frommagazines, his company designed andproduced propaganda photo exhibitions thatwere presented in China as well as photoalbums for the Imperial Army (Jūgun kirokushashinshū). From 1944, it published Chinesetranslations of Japanese literature as part ofthe cultural propaganda strategy. This mayhave been a product of Natori’s connections toIwanami Shoten. The Publishing BusinessDecree, announced in February 1943, effectedanother round of consolidation in thepublishing business (Kasza 1988: 223),including the forced merger of Kokusai Hōdō(and one other company) with Iwanami(Shirayama and Hori 2006: 155). Natori wasalso asked to run an office in Nanjing for theSouth China Expeditionary Army Press Unit(1944) as he fervently supported WangJingwei’s collaborationist government inNanjing. In 1944, his company became anofficially affiliated organisation of KBS, andNatori thus ran a major organisation for theproduction of state propaganda (Koyanagi andIshikawa 1993: 146).

‘Manchoukuo’ as propaganda

The Japanese term most often used forillustrated magazines during the 15 year war issenden zasshi, a highly ambiguous term thatcan be rendered as ‘advertisement magazine’as well as ‘propaganda magazine’. The termblurs the borders between advertisement,business and politics and at the same timeobscures their intimate connections. On theother hand, as Bussemer (2008: 25) noted inhis study on propaganda, it is indeed difficult todistinguish propaganda from advertisement,public relations, persuasion, and political

communication. Nazi strategies, for instance,attempted to control not only all means ofpolitical expression but also non-politicalp o p u l a r m a s s c o m m u n i c a t i o n f o rpropagandistic purposes – not least in order tosuppress older competing discourses in youthand workers’ movements (Bussemer 2005: 56).

The topic of Manchuria lends itself to aclarification of the question of how and whenNIPPON developed from an internationaladvertising magazine presenting Japan andJapanese products to an aggressive organ ofwartime pan-Asian propaganda. With regard toits political stance towards Japan and East Asia,one can observe a continuum rather than anybreak in the course of NIPPON’s existence. Inthe very first issue (NIPPON 1934), Japan’samicable foreign relations, modern industry,and traditional culture form the overarchingthemes, and the colonies rather casually appearas part of the advertisement for tea producedin ‘Formosa, Japan’ (p.31), of Kirin Beer‘sbranch in Seoul (p.39) and as the scientificexamination of the sun’s total eclipse fromLasop Island (part of the Caroline Islands)identified as under Japanese control (p.38).22 Inthe third issue,

APJ | JF 9 | 20 | 3

14

The cover of NIPPON’s third issue reflects the mixedmessages that visuals and accompanying texts withinthe issue convey: Harmonious cultural background inimpressionist colours and technological advancementin black and white -- Peace and at the same time the

readiness for war.

the portrayal of several politicians marksNIPPON as a full-f ledged propagandamagazine. Foreign Minister Hirota Kōki(1878-1948)23 is introduced as the ‘maker ofOriental peace’ (NIPPON 1935, 3: 4-5, no pagenumbers) and Araki Sadao (1877-1966),Minister of War during the Manchurianinvasion and supporter of the secret biowarfareUnit 731, authors an article in which he assertsthat Japan is the guarantor of ‘peace andhumanity’ (Araki 1935: 10).

Foreign Minister Hirota Kōki (NIPPON 3, 1935),‘Maker of Oriental Peace’

APJ | JF 9 | 20 | 3

15

Minister of War Araki Sadao (NIPPON 3, 1935), ‘ForPeace and Humanity’.

The political tension surrounding theManchurian puppet state was a major reasonfor the existence of NIPPON, and NIPPON’st reatment o f th i s s ta te renders i t apropagandistic tool from the journal’s veryinception. With the beginning of the SecondSino-Japanese War in 1937, a belligerent tonetakes over and reflects a sense of wartimecrisis. While this forms an accommodation towartime rhetoric, it does not represent a breakin the general character of the magazine as apropaganda tool justifying and naturalisingJapan’s colonisation in Asia. A Japanese editionof NIPPON had already in 1938 displayedmilitary motifs such as Koyanagi Tsuguichi’scover photograph of a Japanese soldier incombat in China.

NIPPON, Japanese edition Vol.1, No.2, 1938,photograph by Koyanagi Tsuguichi

However, the focus on cultural inclusion andappropriation of East Asia remains a markedfeature, even after the beginning of the PacificWar and issue No 30 (1942),24 when the articleson military achievements increase and thecover design of every single issue of the foreignlanguages edition becomes a military- or war-related visual.

APJ | JF 9 | 20 | 3

16

NIPPON 31, 1943, Cover

Weisenfeld (2000: 774) amply demonstrated‘NIPPON’s subtle interweaving of colonialsubjects into the fabric of Japan’, and herexamination of the collage and photomontagecover25 of the special issue on ‘Manchoukuo’(NIPPON 1939, 19) brilliantly outlines theimperialist message that the issue transmitted(Weisenfeld 2000: 774-781).

A special issue on ‘Manchoukuo’ (NIPPON 19, 1939)

Both text and image of that issue assertedJapan's benevolent rule in Manchukuo and thespecial and harmonious relationship betweenJapan and the new state. The text stated that,‘Japan’s assistance toward Manchoukuo ispurely that of a friend, there being no suchrelationship as exists between a principal and atributary state’ (NIPPON 1939, 19: 16-17, nopage numbers printed). Cut-out figures fromthe interior of the magazine that areidentifiable by costume as Japanese, Western,Korean, Han-Chinese, Mongolian andManchurian are superimposed on an orangemap of Manchukuo and visualize a variation ofthe ideology of the ‘harmony of the five races’in Manchuria. The composition of the ‘fiveraces’ was not entirely stable. While the officialideology of the five races does not includeWesterners, NIPPON’s feature article onagriculture states ‘In Manchoukuo, with

APJ | JF 9 | 20 | 3

17

Manchurians as the nucleus, the Mongolians,Koreans, Japanese, White Russians and variousother races combine in mutual harmony tocarry on agriculture’ (NIPPON 19, 1939: 16).The visual and textual inclusion of WhiteRussians can be seen as part of an explicitappeal to Western audiences to accept theManchurian puppet state. The colours of theManchurian flag that represent the ‘five races’are also reflected in a subdued tone in thecolouring of the cover montage itself. It isinstructive to remember what was not coveredin the propaganda magazine NIPPON, such asUnit 731, which began operating in 1932 in theManchu puppet state (Harris 2002: 37). TheUnit tortured and killed several thousandmostly Korean and Chinese political prisoners,POWs and civilians (men, women and infants).It also developed germ warfare that killedseveral hundred thousand people in East Asia(Tanaka 1996, Harris 2002). Natori and histeam were actively reproducing and ‘designing’the lies that the Japanese Government andImperial Army invented.

There is an interesting twist particularly in theissue on the Manchu state, which carriedmostly material that Natori had brought backto Tokyo from the puppet state. The covermontage’s cut-out figures of various inhabitantsand settlers in Manchuria shows only onefigure standing outside the frame of theManchurian map and pointing to it with greatpurpose. According to Nakanishi (1980: 231;Nakanishi 1981: 62), this male figure wearingthe Manchu state’s uniform, the so calledharmony-clothes (kyōwafuku), is none otherthan Natori himself. This staging highlights theproduction of propaganda as a creativeinvention of de-contextualised cut-and-pasteelements and visually underscores Natori’spersonal complicity and active involvement inthis fabrication of lies.

POSTWAR CAREER – A NEW BEGINNINGOR ARTICULATE SILENCE?

Iizawa Kōtarō’s 1993 history of postwarJapanese photography begins with an accountof the personal fate of Natori Yōnosuke and hisnew magazine Shūkan San Nyūsu (Weekly SunNews). Iizawa's book illustrates the centralpos i t ion that Nator i inhabi ts in thehistor iography of postwar Japanesephotography and the importance of the so-called Natori School. By the time of Japan’scapitulation, Natori had returned to Nanking.Following an order of the Army, he destroyedhis negatives and other material accumulatedduring the war. The same was done with anycompromising material (all except culturalphotographs) in the main Tokyo branch.Because Natori had to have an emergencyoperation and his new wife Tama was givingbirth just at that time, it was not until April1946 that they returned to Japan via Nagasaki.Natori apparently still had the excretion pipeextending from his stomach from the surgery.Nevertheless he resumed his activities straightaway, drawing on the old network. WithMatsuoka Ken’ichirō (1914-1994) from SunNews Photo Company (San Nyūsu Fotosha) hediscussed plans to create a ‘LIFE magazine ofJapan’.26 Matsuoka was the eldest son of formerForeign Minister Matsuoka Yōsuke (1880-1946)who had been a major advocate of theTripartite Pact and President of the SouthManchurian Railway. Incidentally, the elderMatsuoka was portrayed by Sugiyama Heisuke(1940: 12-15) in a feature article in NIPPON24, in which he was hailed for his role inJapan’s withdrawal from the League of Nationsand his foresight in demanding the dissolutionof the political parties.

Immediately after the war, a true magazineboom ensued,27 including a host of photomagazines.28 In this context of restarting ornewly developing magazines and media, Natoriproduced Shūkan San Nyūsu (Sun NewsWeekly). This magazine, which came out on 13January 1947, was first published in B4 format.It consisted of only 24 pages of poor paperquality and cost 20 Yen. The cover page

APJ | JF 9 | 20 | 3

18

showed photos taken by Kimura Ihei of threewomen’s faces in profile next to each other.This differed from the norm for cover portraits,of frontal shots of smiling female faces. It wasalso unusual that the magazine used horizontalscript (yokomoji) instead of the commonvertical script. The magazine’s first issuecarried an article titled ‘The human populationincreases with the speed of 2.6 people perminute’ with illustrations, photos, and captionsthat dealt with the so-called populationproblem (jinkō mondai). Although 30,000copies of Shūkan San Nyūsu’s first issue wereprinted, only 10,000 sold. According to Iizawa(1993: 7), with its political and economic topicsi t w a s m e a n t t o b e a m a g a z i n e o fenlightenment, but the German functionalstyle, layout, and the horizontal script did notmeet the expectations of the mass audience ittargeted. However, I would argue that Natoriwas continuing the same style that he haddeveloped before and during the war, in termsof both content and form. The topic ofworldwide overpopulation connects to thewartime ideology of Japan as an overcrowdedcountry that needed the ‘empty spaces’ ofManchuria for its surplus population. Duringthe war, Natori had created several magazinesto please the Imperial Army and KBS, whichfinanced his propaganda. That the Japanesereadership he targeted with Shūkan San Nyūsuwas different from the one he had targetedbefore, and did not appreciate his continuationin style and content, seems hardly surprising.In the eighth issue, the form, style and contentof the magazine was changed towards a morepopular appearance. Colour photographs,manga by artists Okabe Fuyuhiko (1922-2005)and Nemoto Susumu (1916-2002), and a serialnovel by Ibuse Masuji (1898-1993), who hadpreviously contributed to NIPPON, appeared.Nevertheless, the magazine was not successful.Publication stopped after 5 March 1949, the41st issue.

Shūkan San Nyūsu was a commercial failurebut nevertheless highly influential in the

publishing industry of postwar Japan, as manywriters, photographers, designers and mangaartists who had been active during the warpublished there. This group-- the ‘NatoriSchool’ – eventually became very influentialand successful in postwar photojournalism andthe media economy. Among its members wereKoyanagi Tsuguichi, Kimura Ihei, KojimaToshiko, Miki Jun, Sonobe Kiyoshi, FujimotoShihachi, Inamura Takamasa, NaganoShigeichi,29 Tagawa Seiichi,30 and KojimaToshiko. The Natori School thus comprised ahost of photographers and editors who wouldshape the postwar Japanese photographicprofession, some as professors and presidentsof photo societies who would even lend theirnames to photography awards (Miki Jun award,Kimura Ihei award; Ina Nobuo award).31

Natori himself remained influential inphotojournalism and photo criticism. In adebate with Tōmatsu Shōmei (born 1930),winner of the 1958 Japan Association of PhotoCritics Debut Prize for ‘Local Politicans’ (Chihōseijika), he criticised Tōmatsu’s photos ashaving left the realm of photojournalism orhōdō shashin:

Photojournalism values a certainfact (jijitsu) and a certain time(jikan). Tōmatsu has disposed oft h i s h i g h v a l u e t h a tphotojournalism places in a certainfact. He attempted to move in adirection in which there is no limitto time or location. To put itdifferently, by his detachment fromtime and location, he severed hisphotos from photojournalism.32

Tōmatsu rebutted that he was not of the NatoriSchool and that he did not see himself as aphotojournalist in the first place, ‘the heavyfeeling (jūryōkan) that is associated withphotojournalism [in Natori’s sense] is a thing ofthe past’ (quoted in Kishi 1974: 83).

APJ | JF 9 | 20 | 3

19

A rare debate in photographic circles, thecritique of Natori could have gone further. Itcould have led to question the ‘factuality’ ofNatori ’s own practice of propagandaphotography and could have sparked adiscussion on wartime imbrications of thephotographic and publishing profession. But itdid not. The silences continued. PhotographerDomon Ken (1909-1990) who had worked forNippon Kōbō from 1935 until 1939 and then forKBS started a new movement in postwar Japanwith his proclamat ion of ‘ real ism inphotography’ (riarizumu shashin undō).However, Julia Thomas (2008) criticallydiscusses Domon's postwar photography as acontinuation rather than as a break with hiswartime style in that he sought to capture an‘authentic’ Japan; Kishi suggests that this‘ r e a l i s m ’ w a s i n e f f e c t j u s t w h a tphotojournalism had always claimed to be, butthat Domon wanted to disassociate himselffrom the kind of photojournalism that wastainted by the smell of the Army.33 Kishicomments that ‘there should be many wartimephotographers who will sense an ache in theirh e a r t s w h e n t h e y h e a r t h e w o r d“photojournalism”’(Kishi 1974: 16), indicatingthat they might feel shame for their co-operation in the wartime propaganda.

Natori’s lack of reflection about his wartimerole in Japanese Army propaganda isextraordinary. In the introduction to hisposthumously published book Shashin noyomikata (Natori 2004: i-iii),34 Natori musedabout the various advantages that photographyhad brought him. Full of praise for the limitlesspossibilities of creating stories by the means ofphotography, he also cautioned that one cancreate lies via the assemblage of photos,captions and text. In a chapter titled Shashinno uso to shinjitsu (The lies and truths ofphotographs), he chose the example of theHungarian revolt against the Soviets as it wascovered by LIFE magazine in 1956.35 While thiswas certainly a timely example when he wrote(around 1958), he fails to even hint at his own

active production of so many lies aboutbenevolent Japanese rule and harmonious co-existence in Manchuria and the rest of EastAsia over the many years he spent in China.Nor does he mention his active involvement indestroying an archive of photo material thatcould have served as evidence for the activitiesor even atrocities of the Japanese Army inmainland China, some of which Natori mayhave witnessed himself. Instead, Natori startedhis discussion of ‘lies’ with the theoreticalobservat ions that the technology ofphotography itself bears ‘major lies’ when itturns the coloured object into black and whiteor when it reflects a three-dimensional realityin a two-dimensional photograph (Natori 2004:36-37). He concluded his paragraph on lies bynoting that the photographs we see are theresult of the triangular relationship of thephotographer’s intention, the editor’s choiceand the reader’s expectation as presumed bythe editor, and that these images areconstituted by, as he put it, ‘the lies that theyall need,’ making the veiled argument that thephotographer and editor were responding tothe as-yet-unstated demands of the viewer.(Natori 2004: 45). Hailed as a photographictheory that for the first time takes into accountthe ‘standpoint of the viewer’ (miru hito notachiba kara) (Kimura and Inubushi, in Natori2004: 204), it seems to me that with regard toNatori’s wartime practice of photojournalism,‘the viewer’ must take an undue share of ther e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r t h e c h o i c e s t h ephotographer/editor makes. In the wartimesituation of government-controlled publishingand increasingly severe paper rationing, itmakes more sense to exchange ‘the viewer’with Natori’s financial and political ‘patron,’the Army and KBS.

Natori’s observations, arguments and examplesseem carefully constructed manoeuvres todivert/deflect attention from the role of his ownever-growing business of war propaganda fromthe late 1930s until the end of the war. Thepersonal agency he displayed in persuading the

APJ | JF 9 | 20 | 3

20

military, the state (KBS) and the businesscommunity of the need for propaganda, and thetools he created, shows that wartimepropaganda was not only produced as a resultof systematic or fateful structural changes inthe wartime bureaucracy but was championedand produced by individual human activity.This leaves one wanting more investigation intothese human political decisions, and into thecosts, the gratifications and victimisations theyinvolved. With the exception of a very briefmention by former Nippon Kōbō staff InadaTomi,36 hardly any of Natori’s disciples havequestioned his (or their own) role in producingthe propagandistic fabrications in NIPPON andother overseas propaganda magazines orassessed their contribution to the wartimeregime. Neither do we find one word of regretfor recognition of the East Asian victims in thiswar that, according to Natori (1941, inShirayama 2005: 25) was ‘also a thought war’fought with ideological weapons.37 This may bebecause they were all implicated and chosesilence to cover their shame (Kishi 1974: 16;Shibaoka 2007: 137) – it is at any rateindicative of the broader ‘alchemy of amnesia… forgetting atrocities and war crimes’ thatMark Selden (2008) attests not only to Japanbut to the war nationalisms of all combatantpowers including the U.S. Some havesuggested that Natori reflected on his wartimeactivities by giving up photography for severalyears after the war and engaging in editorialwork instead (Ishikawa 1991: 243; Shibaoka2007: 137). Yet, this claim does not seemconvincing because his years affiliated with theJapanese Army in China were marked more bythe creation, editing and management of newpropaganda magazines than by his work as aphotographer. Rather, Natori’s biographershave abetted the silence about his wartimeactivities. In Iwanami’s 41 volume series onJapanese photographers, volume 18 on Natori(Nagano 1998) carries an introduction byI i zawa Kōtarō focus ing on Nator i ’ saccomplishments as a photographer whounderstood ‘photographs as signs (kigō)’

(Iizawa 1998: 3).38 The introduction includesonly one short paragraph that comments onNatori’s wartime work:

Of course, as editor and artdirector his talents in dealing withp h o t o g r a p h s h a d b e c o m econspicuous before [the war], butone cannot deny that unfortunatelywhen all of Japan was swallowed int h e g r e a t w a v e o f w a r h einvo luntar i l y was made toparticipate in military propaganda.(Iizawa 1998: 5)

This is indicative of the way in which, againstconsiderable evidence, Natori is repeatedlyportrayed as a passive actor, as someone whounwillingly had to go along with the tide of thetime and who bears no responsibility for thechoices he made. The image and underlyingmessage of passive natural metaphors such asbeing ‘swallowed in the great wave’ excuseshim and at the same time ‘all of Japan’ asvictims of a natural disaster. When it comes towartime agency and responsibility, theotherwise outstanding genius Natori suddenlybecomes a passive commoner, one of ‘all ofJapan’.

Nakanishi Teruo provides rare explicit criticismof Natori’s political stance:

Natori Yōnosuke gradually driftedaway from photojournalism andl e a n e d t o o m u c h t o w a r d spropaganda that targeted foreignaudiences. He became absorbedwith the demands of the time( j i k y o k u n o y ō s e i ) a n daccommodated his own wavelengthtoo much to the advances of theJapanese Army. The strategy toexpand his business by adjustinghis wavelength was expressed in

APJ | JF 9 | 20 | 3

21

the change of format that cameabout with the reorganisation [ofNippon Kōbō] into [the stockcompany] Kokusai Hōdō Kōgei [orNippon Studio, LTD] (Nakanishi1980: 231)

But Natori initiated this accommodation of his‘wavelength’ with the advances of the JapaneseArmy in order to expand his own business. Inthe same way, Natori’s case must be seen notonly as an example of how someone formed amutually useful connection with KBS and theArmy (Shirayama 2005: 30) but of how oneindividual encouraged this alliance ofaesthetics, business, politics and the military toadvance the wartime colonisation of China andmake a profit.

Natori’s case raises issues of wartimeresponsibility and of ways of coming to termswith the Japanese imperial, colonial and ultra-nationalist past that are yet to be examined indepth. Placing beauty and aesthetics in thecentre of his drive for perfection, Natori notonly shared the regime’s colonial and ultra-nationalist goals but initiated and devisedpropagandistic means of concealing them.While other wartime artists who have becomeinfamous for their art-as-propaganda, such asFujita Tsuguharu (also known as LéonardFoujita, 1886-1968) in Japan3 9 or LeniRiefenstahl (1902-2003) in Germany, wererepeatedly confronted with their wartimeactivities, Natori faced hardly any trace of suchcharges in his lifetime. For one thing, he diedyoung, at the age of 52, in 1962. Also he did notoccupy any official position, unlike Fujita, whohad served as President of the Army ArtAssociation during the war. In addition, thepersonal influence of the ‘Natori School’, whichstarted in the 1930s as a network of peoplewho were mostly in their early twenties andwho grew to be influential in photography andgraphic design in postwar Japan, cannot beunderestimated. This group’s own implication

in wartime activities would have made itdifficult to criticize Natori. Also, Natori’swartime propaganda primarily targeted foreignaudiences and peoples in the occupiedcountries, and was little known in Japan untilrecently. But other facts suggest that thephotography world was aware of Natori’swartime activities. It was only in 2005 that theJapan Professional Photographers Societyestablished the Natori Yōnosuke Award foryoung photographers under the age of 30.Given the fact that other of his contemporarieswere honoured much earlier by awards thatbear their names, the lateness of theestablishment of the Award can be seen as anindicator of the particularly troubled legacythat Natori represented. At the same time, theAward and a number of publications andexhibitions of his work in the twenty-firstcentury indicate the kind of ‘rehabilitation’ thatSusan Sontag (1974) diagnosed for LeniRiefenstahl in the 1970s and that Ikeda Asato(2010) described for Fujita Tsuguharu in recentexhibitions in Japan.40 Natori’s rehabilitationmay also be indicative of a general intellectualmove to a more right-wing political culture incontemporary Japan (McCormack 2010) and aneo-nationalist revival in the context of the US-Japan security relationship (Selden 2008). Atany rate, it serves as a showcase for the stillunresolved ways of coming to terms withJapan’s ultranationalist and colonialist past.

Andrea Germer is Associate Professor atKyushu University with previous positions atNewcastle University (UK) and the GermanInstitute for Japanese Studies (Tokyo). She hasbeen conducting research in gender studies,history, visual and cultural studies. Shepublished a book on women’s history in Japanand the lay historian and controversial feministTakamure Itsue (in German). Essays in Englishhave appeared in Social Science Japan Journaland Intersection. She is currently working on abook project on Visual Propaganda in Wartime

APJ | JF 9 | 20 | 3

22

Japan and Germany. Forthcoming is also anessay collection, co-edited with V. Mackie andU. Woehr, Gender, Nation and State in ModernJapan.

Recommended citation: Andrea Germer, VisualPropaganda in Wartime East Asia – The Case ofNatori Yōnosuke, The Asia-Pacific Journal Vol 9,Issue 20 No 3, May 16, 2011.

* Acknowledgements. Research for this articlewas undertaken during my fellowshipgenerously granted by Japan Foundation,2010-2011. I would also like to thank theeditors of Japan Focus, Laura Hein and MarkSelden, as well as Paul Barclay, Yuki Tanakaand one anonymous referee for their invaluablecomments and suggestions. I am grateful fordiscussions on the subject with Ulrike Wӧhrand Yulia Mikhailova and students fromHiroshima City University where I had theopportunity to present a version of this paper inthe Special Colloquium Series on 17 December2010.

Articles on related topics

• H. Byron Earhart(https://apjjf.org/-H__Byron-Earhart/3528),Mount Fuji: Shield of War, Badge of Peace• Rumi Sakamoto(https://apjjf.org/-Rumi-SAKAMOTO/3497),‘Koreans, Go Home!’ Internet Nationalism inContemporary Japan as a Digitally MediatedSubculture• Asato IKEDA(https://apjjf.org/-Asato-Ikeda/3432), TwentiethCentury Japanese Art and the Wartime State:Reassessing the Art of Ogawara Shū and FujitaTsuguharu• Laura Hein(https://apjjf.org/-Laura-Hein/3334) andNobuko Tanaka(https://apjjf.org/-Nobuko-TANAKA/3334),Brushing With Authority: The Life and Art of

Tomiyama Taeko• Laura Hein(https://apjjf.org/japanfocus.org/-Laura-Hein/2477) and Akiko Takenaka(https://apjjf.org/-Akiko-TAKENAKA/2477),Exhibiting World War II in Japan and theUnited States• elin o'Hara slavick(https://apjjf.org/-elin_o_Hara-slavick/3196),Hiroshima: A Visual Record• Nakazawa Keiji(https://apjjf.org/-Nakazawa-Keiji/2638),Barefoot Gen, the Atomic Bomb and I: TheHiroshima Legacy• John W. Dower(https://apjjf.org/-John_W_-Dower/1604),Ground Zero 1945: Pictures by Atomic BombSurvivors

Bibliography

Araki, Sadao (1935): Für Frieden undHumanität [For peace and humanity]. In:NIPPON 3, pp. 10-11.

Atkins, Jacqueline M. (2002): Propaganda onthe Home Fronts: Clothing and Textiles asMessage. In: Atkins, Jacqueline M. (ed.):Wearing Propaganda: Texti les on theHomefront, in Japan, Britain and the UnitedStates, 1931-1945. New Haven and London:Yale University Press, pp. 51-73.

Barclay, Paul D. (2010): Peddling Postcards andSelling Empire: Image-Making in Taiwan underJapanese Colonial Rule. In: Japanese Studies30,1 (May), pp. 81-110.

Barthes, Roland (2009 [1957]): Mythologies.London: Vintage.

Boyle, John H. (1972): China and Japan at War,1937-1945: The Politics of Collaboration.Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.

Bussemer, Thymian (2008): Propaganda:

APJ | JF 9 | 20 | 3

23

Konzepte und Theorien [Propaganda: Conceptsand theories]. Wiesbaden: Verlag fürSozialwissenschaften.

Bussemer, Thymian (2005): “Űber Propagandazu diskutieren, hat wenig Zweck”: Zur Medien-und Propagandapolitik von Joseph Goebbels[‘To discuss propaganda is not very useful’: OnJoseph Goebbel’s media and propagandapolitics]. In: Hachmeister, Lutz and MichaelKloft (eds.): Das Goebbels-Experiment:Propaganda und Politik. Munich: DeutscheVerlags-Gesellschaft, pp. 49-63 and 118-119.

Dower, John (2002): Japan’s Beautiful ModernWar. In: Atkins, Jacqueline M. (ed.): WearingPropaganda: Textiles on the Homefront, inJapan, Britain and the United States,1931-1945. New Haven and London: YaleUniversity Press, pp. 93-113.

Earhart, David (2008), Certain Victory: Imagesof World War II in Japanese Media. Armonk,N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe.

Fukkokuban NIPPON bessatsu (2005) [NIPPONfacsimile supplement].Tokyo: KokushoKankōkai.

Gidal, Tim N. (1972): Deutschland – Beginn desmodernen Photojournalismus [Germany –Thebeginning of modern photojournalism]. Luzern,Frankfurt am Main: Bucher.

Harris, Sheldon H. (2002): Factories of Death:Japanese Biological Warfare, 1932-1945, andthe American Cover-up. New York, London:Routledge.

Iijima, Minoru (2005): ‘Nippon Kōbō‘ sōsetzukara ‘Kokusai Hōdō Kōgei‘ kaisan made [Fromthe start of Nippon Kōbō to the dissolution ofKokusai Hōdō Kōgei]. In: Fukkokuban NIPPONbessatsu. Tokyo: Kokusho Kankōkai, pp. 36-55.

Iizawa, Kōtarō (1993): Sengo shashinshi nōto[Notes on postwar photographic history].Tokyo: Chūō Kōronsha.

Iizawa, Kōtarō (1998): Kigō toshite no shashin[Photographs as signs]. In:Nagano, Shigeichi etal. (eds.): Natori Yōnosuke (=Nihon noshashinka Vol. 18).Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten,pp.3-6.

Ikeda, Asato (2010): Twentieth CenturyJapanese Art and the Wartime State:Reassessing the Art of Ogawara Shū and FujitaTsuguharu. In: The Asia-Pacific Journal 43, 2,1 0 ( O c t o b e r 2 5 ) , l i n k(https://apjjf .org/-Asato-Ikeda/3432).

Ishikawa, Yasumasa (1991): Hōdō shashin noseishun jidai: Natori Yōnosuke to nakamatachi.[Photojournalism in its youth: the group aroundNatori Yōnosuke].Tokyo: Kōdansha.

Kaneko, Ryūichi (2005): ‘NIPPON’ to wa nandata no ka: Fukkokuban kanketsu ni atatte[What was NIPPON? Notes on the occasion ofthe conclusion of the reprinted edition]. In:Fukkokuban NIPPON bessatsu. Tokyo: KokushoKankōkai, pp.2-4.

Kanō, Mikiyo (2004): Sensō puropaganda tojendā hyōshō [War propaganda and genderrepresentation]. In: Jinmin no Rekishigaku 61,10, pp. 13-24.

Kanō, Mikiyo (2005): Shashin Shūhō ni mirujendā to esunishiti [Gender and ethnicity inShashin Shūhō].In: Image & Gender 5, 3, pp.35-41.

Kasza, Gregory J. (1988): The State and theMass Media in Japan, 1918-1945. Berkeley, LosAngeles, London: University of California Press.

Kishi, Tetsuo (1974): Shashin jānarizumu[Photojournalism]. Tokyo: Dabiddosha.

Kishi, Toshihiko (2010): Manshūkoku nobijuaru-media: Postā, ehagaki, kitte [ColonialManchuria's visual media: Posters, pictorialpostcards, postal stamps]. Tokyo: YoshikawaKōbunkan.

APJ | JF 9 | 20 | 3

24

Kobayashi, Masashi (2005): Wakai taiyō to akaisekiyō [The young sun and the red setting sun].In: Fukkokuban NIPPON bessatsu. Tokyo:Kokusho Kankōkai, pp. 78-93.

Koyanagi, Tsuguichi and Ishikawa Yasumasa(1993): Jūgun kameraman no sensō [The war asseen by a photographer in the Japanese Army].Tokyo: Shinchōsha.

Kushner, Barak (2006): The Thought War:Japanese Imperial Propaganda. Honolulu:University of Hawai’i Press.

Kuwabara, Suzushi: Sengo gurafu zasshi to…[Illustrated magazines in the postwar period…].( L i n k(http://blogs.yahoo.co.jp/suzushi2346/7930778.html); accessed 11 November 2010).

McCormack, Gavan (2010): Ideas, Identity andIdeology in Contemporary Japan: The SatoMasaru Phenomenon. In: The Asia-PacificJournal , 44, 1, 10 (November 1), l ink(https://apjjf.org/-Gavan-McCormack/3435).

Mikami, Masahiko (1988): Wagamama ippaiNatori Yōnosuke [The very self-centred NatoriYōnosuke]. Tokyo: Chikuma Shobō.

Morris-Suzuki, Tessa (2005): The Past WithinUS: Media, Memory, History. London: Verso.

Nagano Shigeichi et al. (eds.) (1998): NatoriYōnosuke (Nihon no shashinka, Vol. 18). Tokyo:Iwanami Shoten.

Nakanishi, Teruo (1980): Natori Yōnosuke wanani o nokoshitaka (6): Chūgoku de Nihongunno taigai senden ni nettchū [What did NatoriYōnosuke leave behind? (6): Becomingpassionate for the Japanese Army’s foreignpropaganda in China]. In: ASAHI CAMERA 6,pp. 227-231.

Nakanishi, Teruo (1981): Natori Yōnosuke nojidai [The era of Natori Yōnosuke]. Tokyo: AsahiShinbunsha.

Natori, Yōnosuke (1937): Grosses Japan. DaiNippon [Great Japan]. Berlin: Specht.

Natori, Yōnosuke (1941): Kao to koe 1 Hōdōshashinka wa kaku aru beshi Natori Yōnosukehōmon [Faces and voices 1. Photojournalists’opinion - Natori Yōnosuke]. In: Shashin Bunka,No 9 (September).

Natori, Yōnosuke (1992): Amerika 1937. NatoriYōnosuke shashinshū [America 1937. NatoriYōnosuke photo collection]. Tokyo: IwanamiShoten.

Natori, Yōnosuke (2004 [1962]): Shashin noyomikata [How to read photographs]. Tokyo:Iwanami Shoten.

Natori, Yōnosuke (2006): Doitsu 1936. NatoriYōnosuke shashinshū [Germany 1936. NatoriYōnosuke photo collection]. Tokyo: IwanamiShoten.

NIPPON. Facsimile. 3 Vols (2003-2005). Tokyo:Kokusho Kankōkai.

Nippon Kōbō no Kai (ed.) (1980): Senku noseishun – Natori Yōnosuke to sono sutaffu tachino kiroku [Pioneering youth – Records of NatoriYōnosuke and his staff]. Tokyo: Nippon Kōbō noKai.

Nobuta, Tomio (2005): Natori Yōnosuke san towatashi [Natori Yōnosuke and I] . In:Fukkokuban NIPPON bessatsu. Tokyo: KokushoKankōkai, pp.56-62.

Park, Sang Mi (2009): Wartime Japan’s CulturalDiplomacy and the Establishment of CultureBureaus. WIAS Discussion Paper No.2008-09.

Ruoff, Kenneth J. (2010): Imperial Japan at itsZenith: The Wartime Celebration of theEmpire's 2,600 Anniversary. Ithaca: CornellUniversity Press.

Sandler, Mark H. (2001): A Painter of the “HolyWar”: Fujita Tsuguji and the Japanese Military.In: Mayo, Marlene J. and J. Thomas Rimer with

APJ | JF 9 | 20 | 3

25

H. Eleanor Kerkham (eds.): War, Occupationand Creativity: Japan and East Asia 1920-1960.Honolulu: University of Hawai’I Press, pp.188-211.

Sachsse, Rolf (2000): “Dieses Atelier ist sofortzu vermieten”: Von der “Entjudung” einesBerufsstandes [‘This photo studio is now to let’:On the ‘De-Jewdification’ of a profession]. In:Fritz-Bauer-Institut (ed.): “Arisierung” imNationalsozialismus: Volksgemeinschaft, Raubund Gedächtnis. Frankfurt am Main: Campus,pp. 269-286.

Schlawe, Fr i tz (1962) : Literar ischeZeitschriften. Teil 2 (1910-1933) [LiteraryMagazines.Part 2 (1910-1933)]. Stuttgart: J.B.Metzler.

Selden, Mark (2008): Japan, the United Statesand Yasukuni Nationalism: War, HistoricalMemory and the Future of the Asia Pacific. In:The Asia-Pacific Journal 43, 2, 10 (September10), link (https://apjjf.org/-Mark-Selden/2892).

Shibaoka, Shinichirō (2007): Hōdō shashin tot a i g a i s e n d e n : 1 5 n e n s e n s ō k i n oshashinkai [Photojournalism and propagandatargeted at foreign audiences: Photographiccircles and the 15 years war]. Tokyo: NihonKeizai Hyōronsha.

Shirayama, Mari (2005): Natori Yōnosuke noshigoto 1931-45 [Natori Yōnosuke’s work1931-45]. In: NIPPON. Fukkokuban bessatsu.Tokyo: Kokusho Kankōkai, pp. 5-33.

Shirayama, Mari (2006): Nippon Kōbō o hikiitaNatori Yōnosuke [Natori Yōnosuke – Head ofNippon Kōbō]. In: Shirayama, Mari and HoriYoshio (eds.): Natori Yōnosuke to Nippon Kōbō.Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, pp.vi-xv.

Shirayama, Mari and Hori Yoshio (eds.)(2006):Natori Yōnosuke to Nippon Kōbō [NatoriYōnosuke and Nippon Kōbō].Tokyo: IwanamiShoten

Shirayama, Mari and Ishii Ayako (1998): NatoriYōnosuke ryaku nenpyō [Short table of lifedates of Natori Yōnosuke]. In: Nagano,Shigeichi et al. (eds.): Natori Yōnosuke(=Nihon no shashinka Vol. 18). Tokyo: IwanamiShoten, pp.68-69.

Shirayama, Mari and Motohashi Masayoshi(2005) (eds.): ‘Shūkan San Nyūsu’ no jidai –Hōdō shashin to ‘Natori Gakkō’ [The era of‘Weekly Sun News’ – Photojournalism and the‘Natori School’]. Tokyo: JCII Photo Salon.

Sontag, Susan (1974): Fascinating Fascism. In:The New York Review of Books . (Link(http://bustill.blogspot.com/2009/02/fascinating-fascism-by-susan-sontag.html); accessed 16October 2010).

Sugiyama, Heisuke (1940): Foreign MinisterYōsuke Matsuoka. In: NIPPON 24, pp. 12-15.

Tagawa, Seiichi (2003): Kōkoku wa wagashōgai ni arazu. Shōwa senden kōkoku nosenkusha Ōta Hideshige. Tokyo: Heibonsha.

Tagawa, Seiichi (2005): Yakeato no gurafizumu.‘FRONT’ kara ‘Shūkan San Nyūsu’ e [Graphicsof burnt-out lands: From FRONT to Shūkan SanNyūsu]. Tokyo: Heibonsha.

Takenaka, Tomi (2002): Nippon Kōbō noomoide [Remembering Nippon Kōbō]. In:Fukkokuban NIPPON geppō, dai 2 ki-November2002, no page numbers.

Tanaka, Yuki (1966): Hidden Horrors: JapaneseWar Crimes in World War II. Boulder: WestviewPress.

Thomas, Julia A. (1998): Photography, NationalIdentity, and the “Cataract of Times”: WartimeImages and the Case of Japan. In: AmericanHistorical Review, 103, 3 (December), pp.1475-1501.

Thomas, Julia A. (2008): Power Made Visible:Photography and Postwar Japan’s Elusive

APJ | JF 9 | 20 | 3

26

Reality. In: The Journal of Asian Studies, 67, 2(May), pp. 365-394.

Watanabe, Yoshio (1977): Shinbi no anguru 6[The angle of true beauty 6]. In: Niigata Nippō,Evening edition of May 9.

Weisenfeld, Gennifer (2000): Touring Japan-asMuseum: Nippon and other JapaneseImperialist Travelogues. In: positions 8, 3(Winter), pp. 747-793.

Notes

1 See for example the commentary articles inNatori’s photo albums that were publishedposthumously, Amerika 1937 (Natori 1992);Doitsu 1936 (Natori 2006) as well as Iizawa(1993, 1998) and Ishikawa (1991).

2 See Nippon Kōbō no Kai (1980), some of theseare reprinted in the separate volume withcommentaries on the reprinted edition ofNIPPON (Fukkokuban NIPPON bessatsu 2005);see also Ishikawa (1991).

3 See Nakanishi Teruo’s article (1980) and book(1981), Mikami Masahiko (1988) as well as amonograph by Koyanagi and Ishikawa (1993).Recently, Shirayama Mari (2005, 2006) hasprovided a closer examination of the trajectoryof Natori’s artistic and political career.

4 This meant that Natori’s income woulddepend on the photo stories he could produceand sell which at f irst left Natori andMecklenburg who had given up her post inMunich in an extremely tight financial state(Natori 2004: 115-117).

5 Natori in the article Hōdō shashin dangi 3, (in:Kamera, April 1952) quoted in Shirayama(2005: 6).

6 In October 1933, Joseph Goebbels ’‘Schriftleitergesetz’ (Journalists’ Law) § 5,3stipulated that ‘only those who are of Aryandecent and not married to a non-Aryan spouse’

were allowed to work in the journalisticprofession. The Law went into effect 1 January1934 (Sachsse 2000: 274).

7 See Natori (2004: 131). Okada helpedestablish the publisher Tōhōsha, whichproduced the propaganda magazine FRONT.Ōta would later also contribute to thispropaganda magazine (Tagawa 2003).

8 The magazine was publ ished by theAngelsachsen Verlag in Bremen. Its namederived from the street Böttcherstraße in whichcoffee industrialist Gerhard Roselius boughtthe houses in a street and then turned theminto an open air museum. It included the houseof Paula Becker-Modersohn.

9 With a print runof 10 000, Natori (2004: 140)estimated production costs of 6000 to 7000Yen, which proved to be far too low.

10 On KBS see Shibaoka 2007: 77-89. Thesuccessor to KBS in postwar Japan is JapanFoundation (established in 1972).

11 The Reich Ministry for Public Enlightenmentand Propaganda (Reichsministerium fürVolksaufklärung und Propaganda orPropagandaministerium) was the Nazi ministrydedicated to enforcing Nazi ideology inGermany and regulating its culture and society.Founded on 13 March 1933, the ministry washeaded by Dr. Joseph Goebbels and wasresponsible for controlling the press andculture of Nazi Germany.

12 Koyanagi became a photographer of theImperial Army Press Unit just three monthsafter joining Nippon Kōbō in 1937 and servedfrom the beginning of the Sino-Japanese Warthroughout the Pacific War. He was one of thefew who was not primarily dispatched by anewspaper or magazine publisher but directlyserved the Japanese army in China, Manchuria,the Philippines and various places in Japan(Koyanagi and Ishikawa 1993: 19).

APJ | JF 9 | 20 | 3

27

13 Koyanagi mentions that he met H.S. Wongafter the war and asked him straightforwardlywhether the photograph was staged. Hereports that Wong simply answered thequestion with a smile (Koyanagi and Ishikawa1993: 94). For a discussion of the ongoingdispute on the authenticityof the photograph see Morris-Suzuki (2005:72-74).

14 The Shanhai Hakengun was renamed NakaShina Hakengun (Central China ExpeditionaryArmy) in February 1938.

15 See Koyanagi and Ishikawa (1993: 94). Natoriasked Koyanagi to accompany him to Shanghaiand for the first three months there, they joinedthe Japanese Army without pay, as Natorithought he had more freedom in takingpictures if he stayed independent. However,later, Koyanagi earned around 120 Yen permonth from the Army (Koyanagi and Ishikawa1993: 98).

16 Koyanagi took the pictures while Natoriselected the material for sale. Koyanagi’sphotographs did not document the Nankingmassacre. Photographs of war dead or warinjured were off limits for both internationaland domestic use as it was assumed that theywould weaken the fighting morale of the homefront (Koyanagi and Ishikawa 1993: 100). Someof the photographs later reproduced inKoyanagi’s book of 1993 had been censored atthe time, such as a visual of soldiers praying atthe graves of their comrades who died in China(Koyanagi and Ishikawa 1993: 62-63).

17 The questions remain whether Koyanagi tookpictures of this incident since at least thekilling of the woman was something hewitnessed (Koyanagi and Ishikawa 1993: 122).

18 For reference to the posters see Nakanishi(1981: 83), Mikami (1988: 304-305), Shirayama(2006: xiv), Shibaoka (2007: 129-130).

19 Erna Mecklenburg‘s expertise in design and

bookmaking and her cooperation in thecreative projects and organisation of NipponKōbō are repeatedly mentioned in thereminiscences of former Nippon Kōbō staff(NIPPON bessatsu 2003-2005). Her particularrole and contribution during Natori’s time inChina is unclear.

20 Examining Goebbels’ ideas on propaganda,Bussemer (2005: 55) notes that popular mediaand seemingly non-political popular culturethat met the tastes of mass audiences wereused to stabilize the political system and theresult was a ‘propagandistically interspersedpopular culture’.

21 See Nobuta (2005: 60) and Koyanagi andIshikawa (1993: 146). For listings see thetables in Nakanishi (1981: 126-127), Shirayamaand Ishii (1998: 68-69), Mikami (1988) andIshikawa (1991: 252-253). A detailed annotatedchronological listing with visuals is provided inthe exhibition catalogue Natori Yōnosuke toNippon Kōbō 1931-1945 edited by Shirayamaand Hori (2006).

22 After the defeat of the German Empire inWorld War I the German colony CarolineIslands was occupied by the Japanese Navy in1914 and formally handed over to Japan as aClass C League of Nations Mandate toadminister in 1920. The Mandates themselveswere a cover up for the division of the spoils ofwar between the major powers. In violation ofthe Washington Naval Treaty, Japan began withthe construction of military sites on the islandsin the 1930s.

23 Hirota can be counted as a member of theexpansionist camp in the Second Sino-JapaneseWar (Boyle 1972: 44).

24 The size of NIPPON changed from A3 to A4with issue 29 (1942), an issue depicting themap of East Asia with the tracks of ‘TheGreater East Asia Railway’ and carrying aphoto essay on Japan’s youthful and vigorousAir Force.

APJ | JF 9 | 20 | 3

28

25 The cover was designed by Kamekura Yūsaku(NIPPON 19, 1939: impressum; Nakanishi1980: 230; Weisenfeld 2000: 775).

26 See Iizawa (1993: 9) and the introduction tothe exhibition on Shūkan San Nyūsu (in 2006)f o u n d h e r e(http://www.jcii-cameramuseum.jp/photosalon/photo-exhibition/2006/20061128.html), accessed10 November 2010) and Shirayama andMotohashi (2006) for the exhibition catalogue.LIFE magazine can be said to have been themodel and aspiration of many popularmagazines that were established in Japan in theimmediate postwar period. The layout andcontents of the magazines Hōpu (Hope, firstpublished January 1946) or Asahi Gurafu (AsahiGraph, first published July 1948) are seen to beparticularly close emulations of LIFE( K u w a b a r a S u z u s h i(http://blogs.yahoo.co.jp/suzushi2346/7930778.html); accessed 11 November 2010).

27 The new magazine Shinsei (New Life)published in November 1945 sold out withinthree days. In 1946, the magazines Fujin Gahō,Bungei Shunjū, Chūō Kōron, Kaizō and otherswere published again, while Sekai, Tenbō,Chōryū, Heibon and others were newly founded(Iizawa 1993: 3).

28 In January 1946, Kamera (Camera) was re-published and the first issue was completelysold out. It had started in 1921 and wastargeted at an amateur photo audience. Whenit was published again in the postwar, itadvertised itself as a magazine that was nowable to publish under politically liberatedconditions. 1946 also saw the publication ofSekai Gahō (World Illustrated), which was acontinuation of the prewar magazine Gurafikku( G r a p h i c ) w i t h i t s f o c u s o n p h o t odocumentaries. Asahi Kamera (Asahi camera),which targeted amateur art photographers, wasre-published in 1949 (Iizawa 1993: 4-5).

29 Nagano (1998) is one of the editors of the

album on Natori (vol. 18 of the Iwanami serieson Japanese photographers).

3 0 Tagawa previously worked for thepropaganda magazine FRONT that appearedbetween 1942 and 1945 (altogether 10 issues).He wrote a book on his experiences in which hemaintains that the expertise gained whileproducing propaganda was still valuable today(Tagawa 2005).

31 See Iizawa (1993: 8) and the exhibitionShūkan San Nyūsu no jidai: Hōdō shashin toNatori gakkō (The time of Shūkan San Nyūsu:Press photography and the Natori school) inT o k y o i n 2 0 0 6 ( L i n k(http://www.jcii-cameramuseum.jp/photosalon/photo-exhibition/2006/20061128.html), accessed6 October 2010)

32 See Natori (1960) in the October issue ofAsahi Kamera, quoted in Kishi (1974: 81).

33 See Kishi 1974:16; on postwar discussions on‘realism’ in Japan’s photographic circles withparticular attention to Domon Ken and KimuraIhei, see Thomas (2008).

34 The posthumous publication is based onNatori’s writings, mostly from the postwarperiod. Collected and arranged by Kimura Iheiand Inubushi Hideyuki into a loosely connectedtext of book format, the compilers concede thathad Natori lived to see the compilation hemight have corrected and added to the format(Natori 2004: 204). Therefore, the silences ofthis book may to some extent be also theproduct of, or concurrent with, the silenceproduced by the specific choices that thecompilers made.

35 While the photos in the LIFE report showedmainly Soviet forces and members of theHungarian Security Police Force as victims ofHungarian rage over the invasion, the photosalong with the captions and the explanationwere read as the cruelty and pain thatcommunists inflicted on another people (Natori

APJ | JF 9 | 20 | 3

29

2004: 31).

36 In the collection of commentaries publishedwith the reprints of NIPPON (FukkokubanNIPPON bessatsu, 2005), only one member ofthe team, Takenaka [formerly Inada] Tomi,points briefly to ‘the lies’ that Nippon Kōbōreproduced with regard to Manchuria(Takenaka 2002: no page numbers) .Incidentally, this editorial staff member was,apart from Mecklenburg (and two contracttranslators), the only female editorial staff inthe young boys’ network. Rather than pointingto a sexual differentiation in the capacity toface up to one’s past, I assume that she had agreater distance from her work because sheleft Nippon Kōbō when she married in 1945and did not pursue a professional career in thepostwar publishing business. Watanabe Yoshio,another previous Nippon Kōbō staff unable tocontinue a professional career after the end ofthe war commented of his involvement inpropaganda in 1977, ‘that I co-operated withthe regime – albeit not actively but indirectly -remained somewhere at the bottom of myconsciousness and, spending my daysdepressed and suicidal, I did not feel likeworking again’ (Watanabe 1977 quoted inShibaoka 2007: 137).

37 Kobayashi Masashi’s recollections inparticular seem an extension of the ideologicaljustification for propaganda magazines as he

praises their expertise and exceptionally highquality and continues to claim that theirfunction was simply to present Japan to aninternational audience. Kobayashi had in factacted as the editor in chief of NIPPON from the9 th issue on, when Natori was travellingbetween Germany, the United States, Chinaand Japan, and was busy setting up newbranches in East Asia. Kobayashi also oversawthe editions of COMMERCE JAPAN andCANTON (Kobayashi 2005: 90)

38 Natori (2004 [1963]) introduced the conceptof semiology, the functioning of signs in theinterpretation of photography withoutmentioning Barthes’ name. Barthes hadpublished on semiotics in the 1950s and hisMythologies in which he discusses theiconography of Abbé Pierre (Barthes 2009:49-51) appeared in book form in 1954, of whichthe earliest translation into Japanese I couldfind appeared with Shinchōsha in 1967.

39 Fujita’s monumental war paintings were alsopublished in NIPPON 27, 1941. For adiscussion of Fujita’s war art see Sandler(2001) and Ikeda (2010)..

40 In this context, see also Thomas’ criticalessay on a photography exhibition in aJapanese public art museum and its role in themaking of a ‘usable past’ in Japan at the turn ofthe millennium (Thomas 1998).