著者
朴 沙羅
出版者
日本社会学会
雑誌
社会学評論 (ISSN:00215414)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.64, no.2, pp.275-293, 2013 (Released:2014-09-30)
参考文献数
34

近年, 敗戦直後の連合軍占領期 (1945年9月から52年4月) における人口移動が解明されるにつれて, 在日コリアンの一部が太平洋戦争後に日本へ移住してきたことも次第に明らかにされてきた. その移動は通常, 「密航」や「不法入国」と呼ばれ, 管理され阻止される対象となった. しかし, 「密航」という言葉のあからさまな「違法性」のためか, 「密航」を定義する法律がどのように執行されるようになったかは, 未だ問題にされていない.本稿が問題とするのはこの点である. 出入国管理法が存在せず, 朝鮮半島からの「密航者」や日本国内の「朝鮮人」の国籍が不透明だった時期に, なぜ彼らの日本入国を「不法」と呼び得たのか. 「密航」はどのように問題化され「密航者」がどのように発見されていったのか. これらを探究することは, 誰かが「違法」な「外国人」だとカテゴリー化される過程を明らかにし, 「密航」をめぐる政治・制度・相互行為のそれぞれにおいて, 「合法」と「違法」, 「日本人」と「外国人」の境界が引かれていく過程を明らかにすることでもある.したがって, 本稿は, 朝鮮人の「密航」を「不法入国」と定義した法律, その法律を必要とした政治的状況, その法律が運用された相互行為場面のそれぞれに分析の焦点を当て, それによって, 植民地放棄の過程において「日本人」と「外国人」の境界がどのように定義されたかを明らかにしようと試みる.
著者
朴 沙羅
出版者
The Japan Sociological Society
雑誌
社会学評論 (ISSN:00215414)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.64, no.2, pp.275-293, 2013

近年, 敗戦直後の連合軍占領期 (1945年9月から52年4月) における人口移動が解明されるにつれて, 在日コリアンの一部が太平洋戦争後に日本へ移住してきたことも次第に明らかにされてきた. その移動は通常, 「密航」や「不法入国」と呼ばれ, 管理され阻止される対象となった. しかし, 「密航」という言葉のあからさまな「違法性」のためか, 「密航」を定義する法律がどのように執行されるようになったかは, 未だ問題にされていない.<br>本稿が問題とするのはこの点である. 出入国管理法が存在せず, 朝鮮半島からの「密航者」や日本国内の「朝鮮人」の国籍が不透明だった時期に, なぜ彼らの日本入国を「不法」と呼び得たのか. 「密航」はどのように問題化され「密航者」がどのように発見されていったのか. これらを探究することは, 誰かが「違法」な「外国人」だとカテゴリー化される過程を明らかにし, 「密航」をめぐる政治・制度・相互行為のそれぞれにおいて, 「合法」と「違法」, 「日本人」と「外国人」の境界が引かれていく過程を明らかにすることでもある.<br>したがって, 本稿は, 朝鮮人の「密航」を「不法入国」と定義した法律, その法律を必要とした政治的状況, その法律が運用された相互行為場面のそれぞれに分析の焦点を当て, それによって, 植民地放棄の過程において「日本人」と「外国人」の境界がどのように定義されたかを明らかにしようと試みる.
著者
朴 沙羅
出版者
社会学研究会
雑誌
ソシオロジ (ISSN:05841380)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.54, no.3, pp.89-104,173, 2010-02-28 (Released:2015-05-20)
参考文献数
18

The purpose of this article is to examine what actually happened in the Suita incident, a well-known political riot in postwar Japan, and how the incident was told and reconstructed after it took place. The Suita incident is famous in the history of Japanese social and political movements for its nonviolence, cooperation with Korean Japanese, and the victory in a trial which lasted for 20 years. However, even though this incident is well known and often recounted, and although it critically influenced the Japanese Communist Party, which organized the incident, there are few studies which clarify “what happened”, and “how events are narrated” by whom, how and why. Therefore, using documentary resources and interviews with the participants, this article first looks at “what happened” in the Suita and Hirakata incidents, and then examines how these two incidents have been recounted and their images have been molded by three component entities, namely the Japanese Communist Party, Korean Japanese, and the Japanese government. The “Suita incident” was, in a sense, very useful for all three, and all three profited from it by making partisan speeches on this political riot, slanted in a particularly favorable way for each.
著者
朴 沙羅
出版者
社会学研究会
雑誌
ソシオロジ (ISSN:05841380)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.58, no.2, pp.39-55,140, 2013-10-31 (Released:2015-05-13)
参考文献数
19

The purpose of this article is to discuss the construction of the ethnic and legal category “Korean” in early postwar Japan. Taking the Imperial Ordinance of Alien Registration, issued in May 1947, the author focuses on how this first ordinance that regulated immigration control and alien registration in Japan was understood and enacted by the Japanese authorities, local governments, and so-called “Korean illegal entrants”, who were the targets of this imperial ordinance. Based on documental sources from General Headquarters Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers, the Imperial Japanese Government, and local governments, the author points out the following two things. Firstly, the legal status of “Korean” in Japan was decided through negotiation and compromise between the US Government, the Occupation Forces and the Japanese Government. All three presupposed that Koreans, as “liberated peoples” in Japan, would and should be repatriated from Japan to Korea as soon as possible. Secondly, the instructions to the Japanese local governments indicate that the most important point in registering aliens was not to uncover “illegal entrants” but to find and reduce “ghost populations” stemming from double- or triple-registration for food rations. From the interviews with the former “illegal” migrants from Korea, the following can be pointed out: they made the best use of their knowledge and “common sense” to enable them to obtain their legal identity, the alien registration card, which defined them as “Korean”, thus also as “foreigners”. In fact, most of the “illegal” immigrants had lived in Mainland Japan for years before the liberation of Korea, and their migration history and knowledge of Japanese society enabled them to negotiate with Japanese authorities. With the collapse of the Japanese Empire, ethnic category such as “Japanese”, “Taiwanese” and “Korean” became an important factor that decided legal identities. Based on ordinary everyday ways of understanding, this decision was made through negotiations between each “Japanese” bureaucrat and “Korean” migrant, and influenced the migrant’s whole life and the legal status of “Korean” in Japan.
著者
朴 沙羅
出版者
京都大学大学院文学研究科社会学研究室
雑誌
京都社会学年報 = Kyoto journal of sociology
巻号頁・発行日
no.22, pp.89-115, 2014-12

Oral history is one of the major research methods in both humanities and social sciences such as anthropology, history, and sociology. The characteristics have been discussed, and methodology has been accumulated over decades. This research note tries to grasp major research topic and research projects in oral history and tries to figure out what kind of research projects have been regarded as "oral history". In contrast to the previous literatures on oral history, this note does not look at methodological discussion but at actual research projects and articles by region. After grasping overall conditions of oral history research past around 50 years, I analyze rough trends according to survey population and research intention.
著者
朴 沙羅
出版者
京都大学大学院文学研究科社会学研究室
雑誌
京都社会学年報 : KJS = Kyoto journal of sociology
巻号頁・発行日
vol.22, pp.89-115, 2014-12-25

Oral history is one of the major research methods in both humanities and social sciences such as anthropology, history, and sociology. The characteristics have been discussed, and methodology has been accumulated over decades. This research note tries to grasp major research topic and research projects in oral history and tries to figure out what kind of research projects have been regarded as "oral history". In contrast to the previous literatures on oral history, this note does not look at methodological discussion but at actual research projects and articles by region. After grasping overall conditions of oral history research past around 50 years, I analyze rough trends according to survey population and research intention.
著者
朴 沙羅
出版者
社会学研究会
雑誌
ソシオロジ (ISSN:05841380)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.56, no.1, pp.39-54,94, 2011-06-30 (Released:2015-05-13)
参考文献数
24
被引用文献数
1

The purpose of this article is to suggest a “positivistic” methodology of oral historystudies. As is well known, there are said to be two main methodologies in oral historyresearch: positivist and constructivist. While positivist research tries to discoverhistorical/sociological facts of the past and the present, the constructivist approachfocuses on the interactional process of research and aims to write ‘ethnographies ofinterviews’ (Yamada, 2005). However, the constructivist approach seems to have two critical problems. If it focusesmerely on the interaction between interviewers and interviewees, there is no reasonto research any biography. If it advocates constructivism, then its presumption ofseparating ‘how’ and ‘what’ contradicts the principle of social constructivism. Moreover,by accepting multiple interpretations of past events, the approach opens itself tohistorical relativism, which endangers the very foundation of oral history studies. The ‘positivist’ approach, which is based on historical positivism, tries to write factsof the past and present as accurately as possible. Facts, for the ‘positivist’ approach,are what people tell, and the existence of the narrative itself. It does not separate ‘whathappened’ and ‘how it is narrated’; how it is narrated is also a present event, and even ifthe narrative is ‘false’, namely, different from the past event itself, the difference carriesmeaning, which tells us something more about ‘what happened’ and ‘what is happening’.Only by shifting our attention from story to history will sociological and historicalresearch be enabled.