Does 'historical background' of a doll bother you.

No, but a tragedy that happened centuries ago will have less emotional impact on someone living today as one that happend 60 years ago.

Around the time Date was raging war in Korea, Philip II of Spain declared war against the Netherlands with the 80 Years War as a result. The Duke of Alba did - for today's standards - atrocious things to my people in an attempt to strike down 'Dutch rebellion', but if some Spanish company decided to make a doll of this guy, I wouldn't hold a grudge, because I am not personally effected by this period.
I AM however personally effected by WWII. The Nazi interrogation of my grandfather (he was a member of the resistance) and the deaths of others have had a huge impact on our family. The effects are still present today.

So, although tragedies will not become less tragic with time, the emotional power it holds over us does wear off. As such, I don't think Volks did anything wrong, or disrespectful, I think they are doing a good thing trying to revisit history.

 

Also remember what they say about peope who don't learn from history... eliding or removing parts of history will also put a people more at risk of repeating it.

History has to include the warts and all, if it is to be a complete picture. However, since it is almost always written by the victors, usually you only get partial warts (or wart-free) until someone else comes along with a different facet of the story. When the immediate generations who lived through the events are gone, there has to be something left to show the incoming generations what happened, as well as the circumstances that let it happen.

But I think the most important part to rememer is that 'depiction' does not always equal 'glorification'. People are always forgetting/refusing to see that bit.

 

This is getting OT but personally, I find the comparison of Date Masamune and Adolf Hitler offensive and showing a lack of knowledge of History. Date Masamune was not trying to eradicate all Koreans and did not continue to massacre Koreans at the cost of the war effort simply because he wanted to eradicate Koreans. They are not even close to being comparable. A much more apt comparison would be say King Richard (the Lion Hearted) of England, hero in the Robin Hood stories who was out leading crusades killing thousands "heathen" aka Jewish and Muslim non-believers. Am I offended as a Jew that he is a great hero in Robin Hood, no. Would I be offended if there was a doll of him? No.

And just a point of fact, not only has there been a Hitler doll but Nazi uniforms have been released for BJDs. I remember both Volks and Luts making fairly accurate ones.

 

History is for a large part written by the victors, but my grandfather witnessed the bombing of Dresden, my father's uncle married a German woman who had to flee from Russian soldiers at the end of WWII and my grandmother was forced to work for the Germans in the same war. The stories from all sides can be very gruesome and upsetting. When there is a war everybody will lose something.

But I agree with Silk that it does matter how much you are personally affected by a historical event. It really is a big difference when you read about something in a history book or when you have family and people you care about tell you about they and the ones they loved went through.

 

I'm afraid I would have to disagree with you there. My Grandmother was effected by The second World War and the Nazi occupation also, she was born in Belgium and part of the resistance and had family killed. But just because someone wasn't there and had no connection to the second world war doesn't diminish their right to feel offended or appalled or deeply hurt. As a race when one evil act is committed against one person then we should all feel the affects whether you are a stranger or a close relative. It is our responsibility to, as compassionate human beings. if we start to distinguish and say i can feel such and such because and you should feel such and such because, then we are in the area of dictating how others should react, which is always dangerous territory to operate in.

No man is an island, and for the same reason I feel for my grandmother and the relatives I will never meet, I should be able to feel for people who died in India during the rebellion against the British, and even for Nazi soldiers committing acts of violence, because it's you or them. If that was the case, and no one felt the same when they have no personal stake in something, charity would never work.

Just because you have no connection to a place or time, doesn't mean that you're opinion or feelings on that topic should be dismissed. Just because someone had family who lived through the event etc, doesn't give them the right to simply say, 'well you don't understand because you're not feeling what I'm feeling'. But caring doesn't necessarily mean that you should be for or against something.

And also you can't compare Date Masamune to Hitler, it's just not an analogy that holds up. No ones grandmother would have been alive when Masamune was fighting his war. There is no living account of it, therefore it's just not the same.

 

I think that we can all agree that it's different when a historical reference is made from a time still in living history. It is only long after all the directly affected people or their close relatives are dead and gone that people can treat this kind of subject with detachment.

That said, I also think it's entirely legitimate for people who are offended by something to express their discomfort. Possibly writing a polite letter to Volks explaining their position would be an appropriate thing to do, if that is the case, so they can consider their fans' feelings in the future.

 

I think that was the poin that others were trying to make, ultimately. No-one alive today remembers what Masamune has done beyond what they've read in history books, but there are still people alive that have witnessed what Hitler had done. The difference isn't that you can't feel for people who have been through tragedies, but that some tragedies have been so recent that the wound is still fresh. Scars should still be respected and remembered, but there is a difference between a scar that has healed and one that has only started.

 

I can see why some people would be upset by this - even when encouraged to look at it from a historical or artistic perspective, you can't expect people to completely let go of their personal feelings on the subject. Japan and Korea have had a lot of bad blood between them in the past; Japanese were jerks to the other Asians for a long time, and some wounds take longer to heal than others. If a well-known artistic Canadian company released a model of them buring down the White House in 1812 and everyone thought it was neat, I'd be kinda offended, even if that did take place a long time ago.

On the other hand, the only person who was ever like Hitler was HILTER. Stop comparing people to him. Find some other historical mass murdering figurehead to use for a while.

 

And we should probably stop bring up the Hitler thing and get back to Date now. I think we can all agree that Hitler was very bad and that that war is still to recent in people's minds for us to compare others to on an historical basis.

But I will say I do like the uniforms, even if they are based on Nazi ones. As long as they don't have actual swastikas on them, I don't consider them actual Nazi uniforms.

 

But this is not a playset of Date Masamune slaughtering Koreans. Using your burning of the White House example, the equivalent would be Canada (or the UK or Ireland) releasing a doll of Major General Robert Ross or Sir George Cockburn, both heroes of the Napoleonic wars, and no I really would not be offended if those dolls were released.

 

@ayreweth: That's not what I meant at all. No-one is allowed to disregard someone's feeling and everyone (except for psychopaths perhaps) is able to relate to someone else or feel sympathy. But, like other people said, there is a difference between history learned from history books and history we all remember.

Anyway, lightbulby said it better than me.

 

My opinion is actually going to stray to a non-political level [I really don't want to get into WWII and Nazi's, I come from a jewish family who was very lucky to have not suffered during that time, and all of this talk of Nazi's and such really gets to me, regardless of whether or not our family was directly affected. Dismissing it completely offends me, people talking about it like it never happens/'its over and done with' really makes my heart sink and my stomach sick. So I'm gonna stay away from that.]

Personally...I'm not sure if I'd buy a doll based on a real person. Period. Be they historical, celebrity, etc. I think it takes imagination away from a doll for me. I know some companies put a backstory to their doll, but their doll doesnt resemble anyone I may recognize. So I guess I feel more free to have imagination with the doll. I feel if I were to buy a doll named after a historical figure, even if I wanted to make that doll into something of my own, I would always see that person their named after's face and whatnot.

That's just my personal opinion. However I'd like to say one last thing.

Props to the OP for bringing up a real dolly debate in this forum. It's the first one I've seen since I joined. =]

 

Korean owners have currently contacted Volks via e-mails to confirm that Date Masamune will not be released in Korea in any way, and although we were enraged we are being as polite as possible (since Volks must be at unease also), and are hoping for Volks's thorough understanding. Personally, I think Volks will surely respect the situation since I trust Volks and I know they are good people.
I'm sure it will work out well, and I'm glad the situation was able to be presented in differnet views and facts, and most of all, the message of the importance of respect was let out.
Thank you Rosemarygarden for the thread!

 

Eh, I'm someone who abandoned pretty much all of my ties to any specific country. I [personally] find patriotism a very unnecessary yet dangerous and exploitable thing, and as such I have a really hard time getting bothered over something to do with any of the countries in my "heritage". I mean damn, Genghis Khan and his empire completely decimated my "home" country for lots and lots of years, there are PLENTY of folk and fairy tales that feature Mongols as the bad guys, and lots of historical accounts of their cruelty, and isn't he considered like, a great man, one of the greatest men who ever lived? Doesn't bother me. Everyone knows that killing and pillaging is bad, but he's not famous for the killing and the pillaging (well, uh, not ONLY for that) - he's famous for creating a great and powerful empire (whiiiiich was based around his ruthlessness, no doubt). I mean yeah, he probably chopped/did horrible things to some of my ancestors and relatives, but... I really, honestly, don't care. Someone has a doll of him, or was selling a doll of him? Meh. I'd hope the outfit was cool. If the sculpt suited my purposes, I'd buy it without a second though. Or going even more recently - if someone decided to make dolls of famous German soldiers from WWI? Or Napoleon Bonaparte? It wouldn't bother me. Some people view them as heros and great men, and I know they're not trying to offend me because my home country happened to be on the other end of the dispute.

I think the difference is intent. If they made a doll of a person who was famous for indiscriminate and cruel slaughter, OR if that was the justification behind making the doll ("We wanted to depict him in the center of a group of small children whom he's slaying!!! ), then yeah, that's tasteless and offensive. If they made a doll of some country's war hero? Well, yeah, whoever opposed that country probably wouldn't see him as a hero and an admirable figure because they'd view them as responsible for awful things happened in that war, but that doesn't overshadow THAT specific country's admiration for a "hero".

Now, if the question is, should we ever treat warriors and war-mongers as heros... Well, that's a much better discussion, but I'm afraid with how deeply honour in winning fights are ingrained into our brains from pre-historic caveman days, I don't think that's gonna go away any time soon. As odd as it may be, "soldier"/"warrior" and "murderer" are very different terms in our world, because they don't always do... distinctly separate things.

And it's not like they sell this doll with the intent of people treasuring Date Masamune-Sama in a make-shift shrine every day and bringing him food offerings for his great conquests. They just needed some background to give the doll, and decided to go with their theme of historical releases to match the city. Chances are, only a small fraction of those Date dolls are even going to stay Date for ANY reason (primarily the rather impersonal fullset/collector's value) - the rest will go the dolly way and become someone's one-eyed android OC from the future who likes puppies, or something like that.

 

That does make me think. A lot of people in the South (USA) view General Robert Lee as a hero. There's statues and stained glass commemorating him. Up North though, people remember him more as a man that fought on the side 'for slavery'. His actions were the same, but different sides chose to focus on either the good or the bad because of their own connection to him.

Really interesting to think about!

 

That is soooo true.

Lelite, I think you summed up everything I've been thinking while reading through this thread and considering everyone's opinions (and you did it in an awesomely hilarious way, too). LOL, I can't stop imagining the nice people at Volks passing around ideas at the table like "We wanted to depict him in the center of a group of small children whom he's slaying".

 

Robert E. Lee is a great example. And on the flip side of the American civil war, Generals Grant and Sherman are considered Union heroes in the North. Grant fought a war of attrition, and I am fairly positive that Sherman is not viewed as a hero to the people of Georgia since he essentially burned most of the state to the ground during his march and civilians were not spared. I doubt he was seen as someone fighting for freedom and equality and good in the South. Two different views on historical figures from within the same country.

 

Yes, he was part of the Korean invasions. But....most historical figures from that time period were involved in wars of one kind or another. Korea did attempt to invade Japan before the Sengoku period. I highly doubt the invading Koreans were going to sit down to tea with the Japanese, and that if the full scale invasion had actually been successful, there would have been war on Japanese soil. I'm pretty sure Europe was embroiled in war at the same time, like the Spanish attempt to invade England with their armada.

I fail to see how he is any different than any other historical figure from the time period. He did things that were socially acceptable for the time, as was stated earlier, he was very much a man of the period he was raised, which was a bloody feudal system based around military power. If you condemn him, you should condemn them all. In which case, we're condemning a lot of really important people. I have always been fascinated by Alexander the Great. He conquered most of the known world. His contributions to western civilization are great. Are we supposed to ignore all of that because he led armies centuries ago, because he was raised as a warrior and did this because it was what men of ambition and power did back then?

I think it's a bit...silly to judge someone on their reaction to a historical figure that's been dead for 4 centuries. Especially when that historical figure is generally portrayed as a positive one. I admit, I am very fond of Date thanks to his fictional portrayals and from reading translations of some of his existing letters where we learn he had some problems with his male lovers.