|IIJIMA SHUJI||Last modified date：2020.02.13|
Associate Professor / Department of Clinical Psychology and Community Studies / Department of Human Sciences / Faculty of Human-Environment Studies
|1.||Shuji IIJIMA, Need for International Solidarities for Fieldwork Education, International Union of Anthropology and Ethnographical Sciences, 2019.08.|
|2.||飯嶋 秀治, Comparative Study of Fieldwork, International Union of Anthropology and Ethnographic Sciences, 2017.05, [URL].|
|3.||Various Representations on Minamata from Abroad .|
|4.||飯嶋 秀治, Cultural Perception and Its Re-embedded Context from the Toxic Sea, 国際シンポジウム「北東アジアの環境：文化的認識と政策的関与」, 2016.12.|
|5.||IIJIMA SHUJI, The Day After: Illness Experiences of Minamata Disease and Some Possibilities of Multi-layered Ethnography, IUAES2014（日本文化人類学会第48回学術大会）, 2014.05, Minamata disease is caused by mercury poisoning due to the release of mercury in the industrial wastewater from Chisso and was officially discovered in 1956. Although many legendary works have been presented by novelists, artists and doctors, and the Japanese government has often used such terms like 'final solution' and 'regeneration', sufferers still insist that 'Minamata disease never be finished'.
During the days after Minamata disease struck, everything changed in the Minamata city. Not only did the mercury attack 'patients' but it polluted the entire region around the Shiranui Sea. Through peddlers' routes, contaminated seafood was delivered up in the mountains. All human relationships were wrenched by symptoms, results and effects of the disease. 'How to stay alive' was a question to be answered, especially in the Minamata city. Post 11 March, 2011, Fukushima inhabitants and academics have tried to learn some lessons from the Minamata experience, but the government also appears to have learned how to localize issues such as the Minamata disease.
In this presentation, our panel wants to share some possibilities of multi-layered ethnography. Akira Nishimura maps some environmental pollutions in the Kyusyu area. Shuko Hagihara investigates some life histories from the Minamata regions. Kentaro Shimoda focuses on the alternative social movement of specific core sufferers and their supporters. Shuji Iijima examines a specific fisherman's village. Our presentation does not cover the 'possibilities of ethnography itself' but the 'possibilities through ethnography'. Through these works, we hope we can view 'the future of/with anthropologies'..
|6.||IIJIMA SHUJI, A resident said, ‘We get sick of people who want to smell Minamata disease’: a fisherman’s village after fifty eight years, IUAES2014（日本文化人類学会第48回学術大会）, 2014.05, As an academic, who has majored in cultural anthropology and clinical psychology for seventeen years, I have observed that ethnographic reports seem to have been published 'automatically' or 'arbitrarily' against field-site situations because in clinical psychology, the therapist's work is done according to the client such as the period of time with the client, the timing of the intervention and the timing of publishing an article.
In a very early stage of our visit to the fishing village in 2009, many residents seemed to avoid talking about Minamata disease even though the village was famous for its charismatic storyteller. Thus, during our first stage of research, we changed our focus from Minamata disease to folk society. At that time, we did not know how many years we could research, but according to our annual funding plan, we had to publish an ethnographic report at the end of 2009. However, during our second research period in 2011 we could research various roots and routes of products. During our third research period in 2013, we focused on life history finding that the charismatic storyteller's family was exceptional in the village. So they needed their network of sufferers.
Through this presentation, we want to share some topics such as various experiences of Minamata disease, how to utilize the annual ethnographic report clinically and the need to layer focuses, to prioritize issues and to construct collaborative relationships on each issue. This will serve as a reply to the question of the future with/of anthropologies..
|7.||飯嶋 秀治, Solidarity between Academics and Staffs against Abuse in Japanese Child Protection Institutions, Bush Mob Organization, 2013.09.|
|8.||I failed on the return of my reports：Various ways to respond to field sites.|
|9.||In front of ”the Violence”.|
|10.||Vision and Process of "Living History" in Kyushu Region.|
|11.||Folk Logic of A Fisherman's Community.|
|12.||Homeless at Home：An Human -Environment Study of a City.|
|13.||Homeless People,Indigenous Poeples, and Child Protection Institutions：The Logic of Exclusion and Inclusion.|
|14.||Economics and Anthropology: A Case Study on Individual Investor.|
|15.||Towards a Solution of Violence among Children as Institutional Abuse: Report on the Safety Committee Approach from an Anthropological View.|
|16.||On the Children's nursery home.|
|17.||Rapport,Participant Observation, and Anthropology.|
|18.||Arrernte Now:Two Radical Forms of Violent Life;Arrernte Fighting and Iraq War, [URL].|