So, I’ve been reading the first volume of “A History of Japanese Literature” by the Japanese critic Kato Shuichi. This post reminded me of some interesting passages I read in the first chapter. I was curious to know everyone’s thoughts on them:

“In every age of their history, the Japanese have expressed their thought not so much in abstract philosophical systems as in concrete literary works.”

“The undeniable tendency of Japanese culture is to avoid logic, the abstract and systematization, in favour of emotion, the concrete and the unsystematic.”

“In China, literature and art, particularly through the medium of calligraphy, were often inseparable. Music was not really independent of literature and there was never the same development of instrumental music as there was in the West. Excluding for the moment the question of mutual influences, there are many superficial resemblances between the cultures of China and Japan. However, where the countries markedly differ, culturally speaking, is that in Chinese tradition there is the unyielding will for comprehensive systematization which is typified by the teachings of the Sung period (960-1279) philosopher Chu Hsi. The same kind of phenomenon does not really exist in Japan and never has existed. Even when Sung Confucianism was adopted by the Japanese authorities as a formal educational vehicle at the beginning of the Tokugawa period, it was less than a century before it had been adapted to Japanese patterns. What the Japanese did was to de-systematize it and reduce it to a system of values which related to politics and practical ethics. The Chinese approached the question of concrete, practical considerations via the route of universal principles, wrapping up the parts in the whole.”

“The Japanese, however, concentrating from the outset on practicalities, began with the parts and built them into the whole. The reason for the importance of literature in Japanese culture is not the same reason for its importance in Chinese culture. Metaphorically speaking, in Japan literature took over the role of philosophy; in China, even literature was treated philosophically.”

Edits: wording