foreward: Just a splurge of my thoughts so far. I have talked
to many lolita in particular who do not fit this category; namely,
there are some people who have moved or changed schools, and they
turn to the clothes as a way to protect themselves from their
feeling of lonliness. In these cases, they often had friends who
wore the clothes back in their old setting, and thus the clothes
act as a surrogate for those people they had to leave behind.
Others have been discriminated against and the clothes stop people
from talking to them, and still others just love new fashion and
being looked at. This is just one branch of lolita - please keep
that in mind.
I also have a strong sense of morality, responsiblity, and
revenge. Which is why this is up. Lolitas who are really into
the culture are (sometimes nice, but still very) weak people.
After reading "Religious Violence in Contemporary Japan",
I do not believe that it is possible to explain why the subway
attacks occurred, but I do think it is possible to explain why
the followers did not oppose them or prevent them. From watching
A and A2, from my own experiences with Japanese society, and from
reading this book, I have come to the conclusion that Japan is
inherently selfish. The lower ranking members of Aum probably
had little interest in what was happening on the higher levels
of the movement. Because of this, they were they happy not knowing
all of Aum's intentions, as they did not affect them on a direct
level.
Reader says of the people who joined Aum that "they were not
necessarily committed to [society's] laws, and they sought an
alternative reality that emphasized inner development above all
else" (237). But who is to say they were committed to the laws
of Aum either? Aum reminds me of the gothic lolita subculture,
in which people use their clothes as an excuse to not interact
with others. "My friends are all hitogirai," one girl informed
me when I asked if she knew anyone who would be willing to let
me interview them. Hitogirai itself suggests an introverted personality,
and the fact that so many people I have encountered who wear the
clothing are unwilling to talk to me or grant me interviews, has
lead me to believe that the clothes act as an excuse for them
not to interact with society or make compromises with people.
Gothic lolita also prove unwilling or unable to see the far reaching
consequences of outside events; I will be writing a book on gothic
lolitas, and although I would have liked to write more about what
it is actually like being a lolita, I will have to focus on why
they become lolita. Some will come across in a very good light,
as there are difference types of lolitas, but for most the book
will not be about a subject that favors them.
Ultimately, I believe that the subculture is a way of allowing
people to focus on themselves, rather than on their surroundings,
and to ignore the confusing consequences of their actions on the
world outside their own social grouping. Aum, with its emphasis
on personal salvation methods and renouncing society, fits very
neatly into the same category of movement as the gothic lolita.
When Reader suggests that it was the member's "silence and acquiescence,"
(238) that enabled Aum to carry out the attacks, I would attribute
it more to difference and narcissism.
Bibliography:
Reader, Ian. 2000. Religious Violence in Contemporary Japan:
The Case of Aum Shinrikyou. Great Britian: Biddles Ltd.
Copyright Faith Shinri, January 17, 2005
.