CHAPTER 1

To Return or Not to Return

The Changing Meaning of Mobility amongJapanese Brazilians, 1908–2010

KOJI SASAKI

In 1938, Shungoro Wako, an officer of the Japanese Imin Takushoku Gaisha(Company for Emigration and Colonization) in Brazil, made this remarkin the introduction to his collection of statistical and historical data onJapanese migrants in a rural region in São Paulo:

If someone asks me to choose between return and permanent settlement,I, with all my sincerity, would never hesitate to answer, "Iardently desire to return." ... [However,] I will work very hard untilI am buried in this country [Brazil]. I will cherish the visions of mydear homeland [Japan] and will pray for its prosperity until the lastmoment of my life. Nonetheless, I will dedicate my body and soul toraise my children as outstanding Brazilians. (1938, 3, 11)

His painful inner struggle may look puzzling to today's readers. Whatcompelled him to suppress the burning desire to return? How should wereconcile his deep attachment to Japan and the determination to raise offspringas Brazilians? It is evident from his writing that his dilemma didnot arise from his calculation of conflicting personal interests, but wasrather deeply ideological and even morally charged. Indeed, to return ornot to return was a question of utmost importance among the Japanesecommunity in Brazil during a good part of the twentieth century. Never astraightforward question, whether or not to return aroused considerableagony and confusion. The intention to return was driven not only by economicconsiderations but also by migrants' emotional perceptions of theirrelations to the larger global political order, particularly the rise and fallof the Japanese empire and the consolidation of the Japanese and Braziliannation-states.

This chapter examines the changing perception of return among theJapanese in Brazil from the beginning of the twentieth century to the earlypart of the twenty-first century. It follows the analytical strategy of regarding"return" as an idea, or, more precisely, as an imaginary that definesthe directionality of one's physical movement, gives particular meaningsto mobility, and shapes the mobile subjects' self-positioningin the world (Xiang, introduction, this volume). By taking mobility as a mediumthrough which the migrant intentionally acts on the external world, thischapter teases out how the meaning of return changes with the rise and fallof the Japanese empire over three time periods. These narratives span thefirst half of the century, the establishment of a new world order centeredon nation-states since the 1950s, and the reemergence of transnational networkswith intensified globalization after the 1980s.

While the meaning of return has been contested and never stable, aparticularly sharp historical turning point took place in the 1950s. In thefirst half of the twentieth century, the migrants' return was discouragedbecause Japan was preoccupied with its imperialistic expansion project;furthermore, return was unlikely due to economic and transport constraints.Nevertheless, return remained a major concern among the migrantsduring that period and it was in fact an important topic of heateddebate among them whether they should return and under what conditions.This continued to be the case for a short while even after the SecondWorld War ended in 1945. In the second half of the century, however, returngradually lost its ideological and sentimental connotation as the migrantshad succeeded in establishing a respected minority status in Braziliansociety. As a result, when tens of thousands of descendants of formerJapanese emigrants (Nikkeijin) headed to their ancestors' homeland in the1980s and 1990s, they hardly viewed their experience as a return. Rather,the cultural and linguistic differences caused an immense sense of alienationon the part of these migrants. The Japanese government, on the otherhand, exploited the ambiguity of their status by creating a special legal migrationchannel for these descendants on the basis of their blood relationswith Japanese citizens. This channel, exclusive to the Nikkeijin, allowedthem to live and work in Japan relatively freely, although it was less liberalin allowing, let alone encouraging or supporting, the Nikkeijin's permanentsettlement. Under this system of quasi-return, the preference forethnic homogeneity and the need for cheap labor in a time of increasingglobalization were also reconciled. In this sense, the history of return is ahistory fraught with changing logics of what it means to be a mobile subject.Specifically for the Japanese Brazilians, their subjectivity shifted continuallyfrom self-styled imperial subjects to national citizens (of Brazil)and to transitional labor.

The Desire to Return as a "Disease"

The Japanese emigration to the Americas began as part of a state-initiatedprogram designed to counter the twin problems of overpopulation andrural poverty during the Meiji period (1868–1912) (see Gaimu-sho 1941).In the late nineteenth century, the government sent groups of Japaneseto Hawaii and North America. With the rise of the anti-Japanese movementin the United States in the early twentieth century, however, the Japanesegovernment and numerous "emigration companies" (private enterprisesthat...