Red List of Intangible Folk Cultural Properties
1. Cultural properties and folk cultural properties in crisis
(1) Creation of a Red List of cultural properties to support the inheritance of traditional craftworks
The title “Red List of Intangible Folk Cultural Properties” explains the main focus of today’s discussion. Red List originally refers to the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, but there was a news report this summer that a Red List of cultural properties is being planned to support the inheritance of traditional craftworks. That is, the Agency for Cultural Properties will be creating a comprehensive Red List of cultural properties, including traditional craftworks that are in danger of extinction due to the lack of successors. Traditional craftworks are a category of intangible cultural heritage, but the theme here is intangible folk cultural properties. The title thus embodies the idea of whether a Red List can be created of intangible folk cultural properties.
(2) Suspension and discontinuation of 60 traditional events designated as intangible folk cultural properties in 20 prefectures
An independent study conducted by Kyodo News hit the news in 2017—including the January 3, 2017 issue of Nihon Keizai Shimbun—and shocked officers in charge of intangible folk cultural properties in prefectures and municipalities throughout Japan. The news coverage reported on the situation in which 60 intangible folk cultural properties have been suspended or discontinued in 20 prefectures.
Everyone involved in cultural property administration was somewhat aware that many intangible folk cultural properties have been suspended, but there were also large numbers of people who were surprised by the news. It was said that in some prefectures, the provision of detailed information that led to the disclosure of such a specific number of discontinued intangible folk cultural properties was regarded as a problem by the prefectural or municipal assembly. On the other hand, the news caused no stir in prefectures where investigations were not conducted in detail.
In any case, it can be said that the news served to raise public awareness that intangible folk cultural properties are in severe danger of becoming lost. The crisis itself had begun much earlier, but the news helped trigger widespread awareness of the issue.
(3) No performance of the traditional Shishi-odori this year—61-year-old leading actor is injured in Kanegasaki, Iwate
There was another similar news report. A journalist for the American economic magazine Bloomberg visited the Tokyo National Research Institute for Cultural Properties and requested to collect information on intangible folk cultural properties that have been suspended or discontinued. The institute thus introduced the journalist to the Shishi-odori (deer dance) of Kanegasaki town, Iwate prefecture as a folk cultural property that had been suspended ever since its main successor was injured, since the institute had a connection with the town at the time. The journalist worked hard at investigating the impacts of such a suspension/discontinuation of intangible folk cultural property, from the perspective of local economy. The case was also an example of how an injury to a single individual could plunge an intangible folk cultural property into a crisis.
Below, allow me to reflect upon my study this fiscal year.
The Hokkaido Eastern Iburi Earthquake hit the eastern Iburi region of Hokkaido this September. Two days later, I traveled to Fukagawa city via Asahikawa to see the Shishimai (lion dance) as I had originally planned. It was only two days after the earthquake, but the dance was being performed as in previous years. There are many different Shishimai dances in Hokkaido, brought by settlers from the main island of Japan. The Shishimai of Fukagawa city was brought to Hokkaido by settlers from Kagawa prefecture during the colonization of Hokkaido. The people of Fukagawa are strongly devoted to the tradition.
The neighboring town of Numata is home to the Honganji-Etchu Shishimai, a lion dance that originally came from Toyama prefecture. When I visited the town, the usual festival was being held, but I was told that the Shishimai has been suspended from this year. The town said it can no longer put on the performance because of the lack of children in town. The adults were gathered in the shrine drinking sake, but the lion mask remained in storage in the community center. The lack of children was a far larger problem than the earthquake.
I also went farther north to Haboro town. I already had information that the Shishimai here had been suspended, but I hoped to see some traces and tools of the dance. Unfortunately, I found nothing. Like Numata town, Haboro was also cultivated by settlers from Toyama prefecture. It had a fine shrine, but when I looked inside, it was empty. The space where the object of worship was thought to be enshrined, was also empty. There were still some houses in the community, but no gods to worship. According to the residents, the shrine was merged with a shrine located in the center of Haboro town. Losing the Shishimai may have been inevitable, but I was able to gain a sense of the serious situation in Hokkaido where even shrines must be transferred elsewhere.
During the Obon period in mid-August, I saw several Shishi-odori (Shishimai) performances in Akita. The Shishi-odori here is performed in a very warm atmosphere, in town and at the cemetery, as part of an extremely lively festival that also consists of bojutsu (martial art performance using a stick), a daimyo procession, and various other such attractions in addition to the Shishi-odori. Many of the performers were young people, so I assumed the tradition has a future, but I learned that there are normally few young people in town and that they come home only for the Obon holiday. I also heard that the Shishi-odori is somehow realized by having these young people learn the dance overnight or on the very day of the festival and basically play it by ear.
There are many Shishi-odori performances in this region, and they are all put on at around the same period, so it is a challenge to see them all. I went to several venues, but there were no tourists or other outside spectators. The people who were gathered to watch the performance were all local townspeople. The elderly seemed particularly happy watching the young people dance the Shishi-odori. In a sense, the air of excitement was like that at a community sports festival. Seeing this, I thought to myself that intangible folk cultural properties have a role much like the role of a local sports festival.
At the same time, there is also the Shishimai like that of the Shin-minato district in Imizu city, Toyama prefecture. The Shishimai here is extremely popular, and even took part in the national folk performance contest this fiscal year. Young people play an active part in the performance, as spectators surround them with feverish excitement. On May 15, Shishimai groups in tens of locations make a round of houses in their respective areas and perform their dance, such that there is a Shishimai at intervals of every several hundreds of meters. There are few spectators during the daytime, but they begin to form large crowds as evening comes near. This is proof that such lively and vibrant folk performances still exist. Where does the difference lie? This question may perhaps constitute one of the themes in examining the issue of intangible folk cultural properties in crisis.
2. Is a Red List of intangible folk cultural properties possible?
Let us now return to the issue of whether a Red List of intangible folk cultural properties is possible.
In a nutshell, we created an Intangible Cultural Heritage Information Network in the wake of the Great East Japan Earthquake. We also launched an organization and created a website for this undertaking, and disclosed an online database that provides information on the state of intangible folk cultural properties that suffered damage in the earthquake disaster, with a focus on folk performing arts and festivals.
The database also includes information on the status of each property, such as whether they have resumed or continue to be performed. We pondered the validity of specifying properties as “interrupted” or “suspended,” because if a property is labeled as “interrupted” or “suspended,” the public might continue to perceive the property as such even of it is planned to be resumed. In other words, we feared that such a list might turn the danger of extinction into reality.
Another issue was whether properties that were not performed this year but might be performed next year could be justly labeled as “suspended.” If local residents say they will never again perform a property, then that is that. However, if a property is not declared as such, and if there is the possibility that it will be performed again by the next generation, is it right to place it on a Red List? By placing a property on a Red List or by removing it from the list of traditions being handed down, the property might actually become extinct. Therefore, there was the risk that a Red List could turn into a sort of “death note.”
What we are attempting today is to create a comprehensive database of intangible folk cultural properties nationwide using the same type of system as the database that was created in the wake of the Great East Japan Earthquake for intangible cultural properties in disaster-affected regions. We are also creating an archive of images and videos that would be linked to the database.
3. Various topics
There was previously a Conference on the Study of Intangible Folk Cultural Properties themed on “outward-facing intangible cultural heritage.” This also relates to today’s theme. In the conference, consideration was given to the possibility of expanding the scope of successors. For example, there were proposals to allow the participation of children and/or women in festivals that were traditionally restricted to men, or to bring in external people, such as people relocating or returning to the regions.
There was also a discussion on how to disseminate information to external people such as fans, domestic tourists, and inbound tourists. From this perspective, there was also the view that it is important to expand the scope of beneficiaries (spectators). Successors of intangible cultural heritage, in particular, may struggle with the idea of outwardly opening their intangible cultural heritage, but this inner conflict of theirs is perhaps also necessary in handing down intangible cultural heritage to posterity.
There was also a conference themed on “intangible cultural heritage and disaster prevention.” Natural disasters came to be spotlighted after the Great East Japan Earthquake. However, they are not simply a problem in and of themselves, but also pose a problem of causing daily risks to manifest all at once. In this sense, disaster prevention is also linked to the issue of intangible folk cultural properties in crisis.
In the above conference, the significance of intangible folk cultural properties in the face of disasters became clearer than ever. For example, it was said that intangible folk cultural properties also contribute to social welfare, and that they are tools that fundamentally help local communities achieve sustainable development. We need to therefore think about what it means to lose intangible folk cultural properties.
The conference last year was themed on “UNESCO intangible cultural heritage.” This theme often tends to spotlight the merits and demerits of UNESCO’s intangible cultural heritage system, but this should not be so, because the original system is completely different from the world heritage system and places priority on “protecting” cultural properties. Thus, within the scope of the intangible cultural heritage system, there are properties that are selected for inscription on the Urgent Safeguarding List or the Register of Good Safeguarding Practices, both of which aim to safeguard intangible cultural properties. There are also cases where successor groups form a network among themselves, with prospects that their properties might become a UNESCO intangible cultural heritage.
Though not a conference theme, I wish to add that the “utilization” of cultural properties, which has become a topic of interest in recent years, also has a large impact. Whether folk cultural properties can be utilized is a large issue. The National Center for the Promotion of Cultural Properties has been established within the organization of the National Institutes for Cultural Heritage, but as of the present, intangible cultural heritage is not included within its scope of operations.
Under this situation, what can be done to promote intangible folk cultural properties that exist throughout Japan? Or should they even be promoted at all? The difference with other cultural properties is that successors exist who can hand down the tradition. Thus, it is necessary to think about how intangible folk cultural properties can be utilized without imposing a burden on these successors. “Utilization without imposing a burden” also requires an investment in networks of successor groups or investments not only on the successor side but on the side of spectators and external participants as well. For example, an investment could perhaps be made in a system that encourages spectators to go and see a performance upon studying the performance in more detail.
Let us think about intangible folk cultural properties in crisis from these diverse perspectives.
KUBOTA, Hiromichi (Department of ICH, TOBUNKEN)