A Report on Panel 3: “Trans-Plantation: Colonial Sugar Networks in the Asia-Pacific”

 

Keaki Matsudaira

 Ph.D. candidate, Sophia University

​

              On December 16th, 2018, a panel titled “Trans-Plantation: Colonial Sugar Networks in the Asia-Pacific,” organized by Dr. Mariko Iijima (Sophia University), was held on the third day of a three-day symposium entitled “Practicing Power in the Global Asia-Pacific: Environments, Migrants and Womanhood.” In this report, I would like to summarize the papers, describe the ideas presented in the panel as well as the comments and discussions which followed, and add several points of view.

              “Trans-Plantation: Colonial Sugar Networks in the Asia-Pacific” is an ongoing project which aims to examine the process of “trans-plantation” between empires, colonies, and especially archipelagos by analyzing sugar production. Discussions in this panel were based on four pre-circulated papers; therefore, the audience was expected to have read them in advance. Summaries of the four papers are described below.

              Professor Martin Dusinberre (University of Zurich)’s “The Changing Face of Labor between Hawai‘i, Japan and Colonial Taiwan; or, The Friendship and the Frame” closely analyzed the meanings of a painting which was created by Joseph D. Strong in 1885 that depicted Japanese immigrants in Hawai‘i. The paper demonstrated that the painting was “trans-planted” several times in several ways: It was a gift from King Kalakaua to the Emperor Meiji, but was bequeathed to the Taiwan Sugar Company and ended up in the office of the president of the Mitsui Sugar Company, where it remains. Further, the scene of the painting was literally “trans-planted” in that the figures of the Japanese “laborers” in Spreckelsville in Maui were originally shown in a picture taken by Eduard Arning at the Honolulu Immigration Depot.

              Dr. Mariko Iijima’s paper titled “Sugar Islands in the Pacific in the Early 20th Century: Taiwan as a Protégé of Hawai‘i” examines how technologies of sugar production were trans-planted from Hawai‘i to Taiwan through networks created by Japanese migrants. The word “protégé” precisely indicates that the two places indeed had connections but were never equal, since Taiwan was depicted as inferior in its degree of civilization and sugar-production technology, which was described in newspaper articles in Hawai‘i.

              Dr. Miki Tsubota-Nakanishi (Sophia University)’s “The Absence of Plantations in the Taiwanese Sugar Industry: Problems of Land and Labor under Japanese Rule” carefully outlines the landowning situation, wages of laborers, and labor shortages in Taiwan through an analysis of the relations between sugar production and other construction projects, Japanese migrants, and other non-Japanese laborers, including “coolies.” While Dr. Iijima’s paper represents Taiwan as a protégé of Hawai‘i, Dr. Tsubota-Nakanishi’s paper interestingly indicates that Taiwan was subject to the influences of the Japanese empire’s project of southern expansion, which shows that the three “colonized” archipelagos were connected by the joint work of the empire and sugar companies.

              Dr. Akiko Mori (Doshisha University)’s paper, “A History of the Excluded: Rethinking the Sugar Industry in the Northern Mariana Islands under Japanese Rule,” attempts to understand the sugar industry in the islands through an examination of their long-term history of colonization by Spain, Germany, and Japan. Thus, she pays particular attention to the Chamorro indigenous people. Moreover, as an oral historian, she sheds light on the Okinawan immigrants and their ambivalent position of being colonized and a colonizer at the same time.

              In this panel, Dr. Iijima provided an introduction to the project and presented three general concepts. First, she proposed a keyword, “trans-plantation,” to be used in understanding the complexity of the sugar network, which can be compared to Fernando Ortiz’s “transculturation.” The concept of trans-plantation involves not only physical movements but also the circulation of knowledge, technologies, and capitals. The second concept involves the methodological perspective. This project focuses on the Pacific, which can challenge previous research that mainly discusses networks in the Atlantic world and sometimes ignores Asia and the Pacific, such as Sydney Mintz’s Sweetness and Sugar. Third, historiographical devotion to global history in the Pacific was suggested. The papers examine the complexity of Japanese migration, which can be described as involving immigrants but also colonialists. Therefore, sugar and race, or the relations between Japanese (including the Okinawan people in their ambivalent, “chameleon-like” position) and local indigenous people were also an important issue in understanding the power dynamics and hierarchy in the Pacific.

              In the second part of the panel, Professor Shun Ishihara (Meiji Gakuin University) provided comments on the papers. He mentioned the similarity between the Northern Mariana Islands (which Dr. Mori’s paper addresses) and the Daitō Islands and Iwo Jima, where workers were hired as tenant farmers during the wet season and as wage laborers during the dry season in both areas. He suggested that there would have been a possibility of trans-plantation, and that there are still possibilities for comparative research based on oral histories. Dr. Mori responded that she also perceived a similarity among the archipelagos, and that Matsue Haruji, the Sugar King, probably read some books and learned about the plantation system in Iwo Jima and Daitō Jima. However, primary sources are scarce and limited for proving that connections exist between these islands. Dr. Mori also added that some of the Okinawan workers in the Northern Mariana Islands used to work in these islands, as well. The fact that strikes occurred almost simultaneously in these islands indicates that the workers possibly exchanged information and knowledge with one another through their homeland in Okinawa.

              Professor Ishihara also found it fascinating that the government-sponsored migrants who had settled in family units became devoted to the stabilization of colonial rule in Taiwan, which was discussed in Dr. Tsubota-Nakanishi’s paper. This is interesting because Taiwan was very unique and different from Hawai‘i, Iwo Jima, and the South Seas Islands, but was similar to the Bonin (Ogasawara) Islands in terms of land ownership and naturalization policies, which also could be attributed to the stabilization of colonial rule.

              A fair amount of time was devoted to the Q&A session, which covered a wide range of topics. One question was on the concept of trans-plantation. All the participants shared the idea that the word can be understood as a process of something being trans-planted, which also led to various economic and social transformations. Another question was on sugar consumption and its relationship with production. Most of the sugar which was produced in Taiwan during Japanese rule went to mainland Japan. While Mintz argued that the sugar which was produced around the Caribbean Sea was consumed for tea, the sugar which was produced within the Japanese empire was consumed mainly in western sweets (i.e., chocolates and candies) and less in traditional Japanese ones. China also produced and consumed sugar in a traditional manner, but this project seeks to depict mobility of the system of sugar plantations and modern technologies. Other questions were equally important and stimulating, but I am unable to introduce all of them here.

              Last, I would like to highlight some of the ideas which relate to my own research. One regards networks and hierarchy, and the other concerns something which cannot be trans-planted: land and indigenous people. What most attracted me to this panel was that all the papers examined not just migrants but also indigenous people and their hierarchical relations. I am very grateful and honored to have been an organizer of the workshop titled “Rethinking Mobility beyond Migration: Networks and Actors in the Pacific World, 1890s to 1960s,” held on the first day of the symposium. Our project also sought to illustrate networks around the Pacific World. However, although all of us focused on unusual mobilities from an actor-centric perspective, I did not propose to include the concept of hierarchy, which would have been quite essential for all of our research. Although the words “network” and “connection” and the prefix “trans-” can implicitly indicate equality, it was very difficult for circumstances to be equal when the networks or the connections were created under colonial powers, as illustrated in Dr. Iijima’s discussion on Taiwan as a protégé of Hawai‘i. Turning to my presentation on the trans-border or the “back and forth” experiences of Japanese Americans, I suggested the idea of “borderless-ness,” but I must be careful and consider that while some situations can transcend borders, power asymmetries and hierarchy may be still present. When we think about the history of migration, we suppose that “available land existed there,” unquestionably. However, Dr. Mori’s paper reminds us of the facts that the land must have been alienated and there must have been indigenous people who owned it.

              This research project, including all the papers and discussions, was fascinating for scholars, including myself, who are researching Japanese Americans’ trans-border experiences. In participating in this panel, I appreciated the project arguing that colonial sugar networks can lead to many types of comparative research, such as comparison between the archipelagos within the Japanese empire (i.e., the Bonin Islands and the Iwo Volcano Islands), between the Pacific and the Atlantic, and between historical timeframes (i.e., the pre-colonial era, the colonial era, and the post-colonial era). Therefore, I believe that this project will enrich the literature on global history. I would like to thank all the panelists who provided very thought-provoking papers, and the participants who enlivened the discussions with their valuable comments and questions.