In the July WWAW thread, I wrote that I had my eye on this 10-episode dorama and hoped to discuss it upon finishing the series. Viki still had to release the last four episodes at the time of my writing.

I said that the show interested me because the setting was Japan in 1936 (updated: 1936 to 1937), and the hero was an officer in the Imperial Japanese Navy. But lest I incorrectly assumed that everyone on the blog knew the historical background, I included three main points to remember about that time period on the WWAW thread. I said that Japan –

a) was dealing with the rise of nationalism,
b) had grown bellicose with its military agenda and foreign policy, and
c) had aligned itself with Nazi Germany.

I also mentioned that while most viewers, especially the Americans, would consider the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, as the infamous day when USA was dragged into the conflict, World War II actually began two years earlier on September 1, 1939. That’s the day Germany steamrolled into Poland.

That said, when we look beyond this European blitzkrieg, and also take into account the crisis in the Pacific-Asian region, it would be more accurate to say that WWII started in 1937 when Japan invaded China. To me, this timeline is relevant to understanding the dorama, “A Calm Sea and Beautiful Days With You” (or “Beautiful Days” for short) better.

This was my “first impression” of the series from my July WWAW write-up.

Knowing the future events made watching this dorama a bittersweet experience for me. I’m happy for the couple, but I know that their happiness is going to be short-lived. I think that’s the whole point of this dorama: to revel in the impermanent, transitory beauty of calm seas, halcyon days, and cherished ones.

But come August, I realized there’s need to revise my good opinion of the show.

When @GB mentioned on the August WWAW thread that she had finished watching “Beautiful Days,” I replied that this whole dorama had produced a cognitive dissonance in me.

Let me expound on my original comment on the August WWAW.

1. First, I said that I liked a simple love story. But if I didn’t have the a posteriori knowledge of the Japanese atrocities during WWII, I would have loved the male character more.

2. Second, I like how the story humanizes a soldier of the Japanese Imperial Navy, depicting the “enemy” as hankering for a simple life with a “calm sea and beautiful days.” But I wonder how I would feel if a Nazi or Taliban was depicted in the same manner. Would I forgive and forget, and exclaim, “Awww. He’s human, too! He’s just like you and me”?

Let’s take for instance the last scene of Episode 10.

The narrator had given us heads-up that the year was 1937. It’s summertime once again and our happy couple, Takimasa and Natsumi, could finally watch the fireflies as he had promised her a year ago. They sat by the lakeside and Natsumi pointed out the two brightest stars in the night sky, telling him how the two stars could only meet once a year on July 7th.

She mused, “That’s why the days feels so special to them. We are similar to them, by the way. It is because our time together is limited that every moment, every hour, every minute, every second is special to us. It is something we treasure. That is why time feels short, and yet so long.”

He looked at her tenderly, reached for her hand and leaned to kiss her.

What a sweet moment, right?

I’m not sure whether it was the screenwriter’s intention to mention July 7th or not, but I thought it smacked of historical insensitivity. Because here’s the historical context –

On July 7, 1937, on this dreamy night when Takimasa and Natsumi watched the fireflies by the lake, and kissed under the starlight, World War II began in Asia.

There was a Marco Polo bridge (or Lugou bridge in Chinese), located outside Wanping Town, near Beijing, China. Under the pretext of searching for a missing comrade, the Japanese demanded entry into Wanping town. Naturally, the Chinese refused. When they did so, the Japanese mobilized and attacked the town. (Note: The “missing” soldier was later discovered to be inside the Japanese barracks all along.)

The Japanese surprise attack galvanized the Chinese to unite and resist the Japanese invaders. (Foreshadowing Pearl Harbor much?) Unfortunately for them, Japan was a much better prepared and equipped military. Despite being outnumbered and fighting in a foreign land, the Imperial Army conquered Chinese territories, slaughtering, raping, burning and looting everybody and everything in its way.

By November 1937, they drove out the Chinese from Shanghai. And by December 1937, the then-capital of China, Nanjing, fell to the Japanese.

The Massacre of Nanjing is especially seared into our minds because of the most atrocious and barbaric cruelties the Japanese did, not only to the Chinese soldiers, but to the innocent civilians. It’s said that as many as 80,000 women, from young girls to elderly ladies, were raped and gang-raped. Fathers were forced to rape their daughters, sons their mothers. Pregnant women were disemboweled, their babies ripped from their wombs. Babies were thrown in the air and speared with the bayonets. Civilians were rounded up, machine-gunned to death then burned. There was even a contest between two Japanese officers on who could behead 100 Chinese nationals with their sword the quickest.

It’s said that, at least, the Nazis tried to hide their depravity. In contrast, the Japanese flaunted theirs, taking photographs of the victims and/or allowing their war crimes to be filmed.

However, what strikes me as particularly heinous about these atrocities is the fact that each act – be it rape, beheading, torture, bayonetting – was committed by INDIVIDUALS, by THOUSANDS of individuals in the Japanese military. Unlike the gas chambers used by the Nazis where the perpetrators could distance themselves from the killings, the massacre of Nanjing was up-close and personal. The rank-and-file soldiers of the Imperial Japanese army THEMSELVES — not a machinery or a system — participated in the mad bloodlust.

Do you see what I mean then? Yes, this dorama succeeded in “humanizing” the male character Takimasa. But unfortunately for the Chinese, they weren’t considered humans by the Japanese military in 1937. They were dehumanized.

3. Third, I like that the romance is devoid of context and is narrated by a quirky man in a bowler’s hat. He documented the story as if it was a slice of life, a show about mundane things in life. He even entertained us with Japanese slang and buzzwords. However, when I fill in the missing historical background, I’m revolted that this sweet pie-in-the-sky dorama was made with a poisoned apple.

The narrator made the dorama look so sweet, appealing and “normal” that many viewers don’t even realize the disconnect with reality. The show effectively tricked undiscerning viewers to forget what really happened during that time.

In this sense, this dorama reminds me of the “Hello Kitty” rebranding of Japan post-WWII.

Do you know “Hello Kitty”?

Whether by coincidence or design, “Hello Kitty” and other such “kawaii” characters played a significant role in rehabbing Japan’s image after WWII. “Hello Kitty” transformed the international community’s perception of Japan from that of a violent, militaristic aggressor to an innocent, non-threatening merchandise preaching world harmony and cuteness. Who could hate “Hello Kitty”?

There was also a subtle cultural engineering behind the “Hello Kitty” brand. It’s said that the “kawaii” character converted the Japanese mindset from the “Bushido” or “Way of the Samurai” into a peaceful, gentler and cooperative worldview. You see, historians attributed the rise of rabid militarism of the Imperial Age to the feudalistic mentality of samurais who valued loyalty to one’s overlord above anything else, and fighting to the death for honor.

Now, if there’s anything that is diametrically opposed to the samurai, it’s the pink and white rotund “Hello Kitty.” A samurai is hyper-masculine while “Hello Kitty” is ultra-girly.

Lastly, it’s said that “Hello Kitty” offered the Japanese a nostalgic escape to the innocent days of childhood before their hands were bloodied by the unspeakable horrors of WWII. The cute character enabled them to erase the genocide, rape, and tortures they committed during WWII and pretend to live in an imaginary, cutesy, context-free world.

For me, this dorama does no less than the “Hello Kitty.”

It’s the “Hello Kitty” version of dramas.

While focusing on the sweet and cute relationship between the Takimasa and Natsumi, I could forget that Takimasa was part of Japan’s military fascism. While smiling at Natsumi’s bumbling ways on her dates with Takimasa, I could forget that Nanking has an estimated 300,000 deaths of civilians and soldiers; the Japanese weren’t so bumbling then.

In fact, I found only three scenes in Episode 1 when the Real World intruded in the happy, context-free world of our couple, Takimasa and Natsumi.

1. First was when the narrator introduced himself and set the stage in 1936. He listed two things that happened that year: in America, the Charlie Chaplin film “Modern Times” was released, and in Japan, the February 26 incident occurred.

If you aren’t a WWII history buff, you’d have to google the significance of February 26.

In a nutshell, there was an uprising in the Imperial Army on 2/26 by junior officers who wanted to overthrow the “western-style” form of government (note to myself: they had a parliamentary government like UK). These rebels wanted to recognize the Emperor as supreme ruler (who needs the Diet?!) and to expand Japan’s hegemony in Asia. Fortunately, their coup failed. Unfortunately, despite the execution of the rebel leaders, the military’s influence and control over the government only grew stronger after the rebellion.

Now, while the Imperial Navy (of which Takimasa was a junior officer) wasn’t part of the coup and in fact, sided with the government against the rebels, there was a kernel of truth when Natsumi’s older sister remarked that she didn’t “trust “military men” after Takimasa didn’t show up for his own wedding. Coming from a civilian family, she would understandably be suspicious of a military man’s action (or inaction, for that matter). After all, the couple’s wedding supposedly took place in the Spring of 1936, only a few months after the uprising.

2. Second was when the couple faced each other at dinner for the first time.

If you noticed, Natsumi wore a traditional kimono while Takimasa had changed out of his military uniform and wore Western-style shirt, vest, and pants. This domestic scene reminded me that back in 1936 when this story was set, it had only been a little over than 80 years since the “bunmei-kaika” movement happened in Japan.

For the curious: “Bunmei-kaika” was a government policy that promoted the adoption of Western-style institutions, law reforms, education, architecture, social customs, lifestyle, food and even, clothing. You see, for almost two centuries, Japan was an isolationist country. Only in 1854, upon the American Commodore Perry’s arrival in Japan with an impressive fleet, did the nation open itself to Western interaction and trade. The Emperor Meiji realized then that they had a lot of catching up to do with the Western world so he enforced the “bunmei-kaika” or “civilization and enlightenment.”

Hence, when I see the couple’s differing outfits, I’m reminded that Takimasa and Natsumi mirror of their society which is still transitioning from the feudalist age to Charlie Chaplin’s “Modern Times”. The Japanese were trying to hold on to their traditions and culture, but they were aware that if they wanted to emerge as a global power like the US, UK and Germany, they needed to swim with the Western tide.

3. Third was when Natsumi took on her husband’s surname, Ebata.

From the 17th century to about the mid-19th century, only the nobility and warrior class had surnames in Japan. In 1896, the Civil Code was amended to specify that marriage couples adopt the same last names. So, it’s only been 40 years since the practice began.

Thus, I don’t blame her when she forgot and wrote her maiden name instead of Ebata. But her cover-up of her mistake made the situation worse than it actually was.

Overall, I don’t see any harm in indulging in these “Hello Kitty”-ization of doramas as long as we remind ourselves of two key things.

1. Japan has a problem acknowledging the extent of the atrocities they committed during WWII even to this day.

This showed in two instances in the final episode.

a. When the Takimasa’s foster mother lectured Natsumi after seeing her cry. She said, “We, navy wives, fight alongside our husbands. If you are shedding tears of misery for being left behind, dry those shameful tears immediately. If you are shedding tears from needlessly negative thoughts, dry them, for you are being disrespectful to those fighting for our country.”

Lol. Fighting for their country?! They were INVADING other countries! She made it sound like Japan was being invaded and their military was fending off, repulsing the invaders.

b. When the narrator gave the closing remarks to the story.

He said, “This was an era where folks found their moments of peace, while war loomed on the horizon. No, rather…Perhaps they cherished small moments in their daily lives because war haunted over them. Folks, are you cherishing the small moments in your daily lives?”

Ugh. To me, he made it sound like the looming war occurred because of some external force when the fact is Japan instigated, ordered and carried out the attacks. No! Blame can’t be shifted here to a nebulous state or government entity. As I noted previously, individuals, not the state, slaughtered, raped, and tortured.

Moreover, his words sounded like these simple “folks” were victims of circumstances just as much as the Chinese, Koreans, Filipinos, and Vietnamese whom the Japanese attacked. Nope. Japanese can’t play the victim card as they were the aggressors in the war.

2. “The banality of evil”

We tend to hold this wrong generalization that horrifyingly barbaric acts are done by monstrously evil actors. But the 20th century philosopher Hannah Arendt warned us that ordinary people can also participate in evil because of their blind obedience to authority, conformity, passivity, and failure to think critically. Takimasa, Natsumi, their friends and families are as ordinary as you can get.

Mundane tasks, even those done without malice, e.g., Natsumi cooking meals and cutting a lock of Takimasa’s hair before he left for his mission, can become complicity in evil and/or normalization of evil. (And let’s not forget what Takimasa’s foster mom said: navy wives fight alongside their husbands.)

IMO, the viewers of “Beautiful Days” unwittingly accepted the banality of evil because this dorama is devoid of historical context and because the sweet romance left them feeling good.

As a propaganda, I’d rate it 10/10.