Edward R. Drott – författare

Scholars have long remarked on the frequency with which Japanese myths portrayed gods (kami) as old men or okina . Many of these ""sacred elders"" came to be featured in premodern theater, most prominently in Noh. In the closing decades of the twentieth-century, as the number of Japan's senior citizens climbed steadily, the sacred elder of premodern myth became a subject of renewed interest and was seen by some as evidence that the elderly in Japan had once been accorded a level of respect unknown in recent times. In Buddhism and the Transformation of Old Age in Medieval Japan, Edward R. Drott charts the shifting sets of meanings ascribed to old age in medieval Japan, tracing the processes by which the aged body was transformed into a symbol of otherworldly power and the cultural, political, and religious circumstances that inspired its reimagination.Drott examines how the aged body was used to conceptualize forms of difference and to convey religious meanings in a variety of texts: official chronicles, literary works, Buddhist legends and didactic tales. In early Japan, old age was most commonly seen as a mark of negative distinction, one that represented the ugliness, barrenness, and pollution against which the imperial court sought to define itself. From the late-Heian period, however, certain Buddhist authors seized upon the aged body as a symbolic medium though which to challenge traditional dichotomies between center and margin, high and low, and purity and defilement, crafting narratives that associated aged saints and avatars with the cults, lineages, sacred sites, or religious practices these authors sought to promote.Contributing to a burgeoning literature on religion and the body, Buddhism and the Transformation of Old Age in Medieval Japan applies approaches developed in gender studies to ""denaturalize"" old age as a matter of representation, identity, and performance. By tracking the ideological uses of old age in premodern Japan, this work breaks new ground, revealing the role of religion in the construction of generational categories and the ways in which religious ideas and practices can serve not only to naturalize, but also challenge ""common sense"" about the body.

William LaFleur (1936-2010), an eminent scholar of Japanese studies, left behind a substantial number of influential publications, as well as several unpublished works. The most significant of these examines debates concerning the practice of organ transplantation in Japan and the United States, and is published here for the first time.This provocative book challenges the North American medical and bioethical consensus that considers the transplantation of organs from brain dead donors as an unalloyed good. It joins a growing chorus of voices that question the assumption that brain death can be equated facilely with death. It provides a deep investigation of debates in Japan, introducing numerous Japanese bioethicists whose work has never been treated in English. It also provides a history of similar debates in the United States, problematizing the commonly held view that the American public was quick and eager to accept the redefinition of death.A work of intellectual and social history, this book also directly engages with questions that grow ever more relevant as the technologies we develop to extend life continue to advance. While the benefits of these technologies are obvious, their costs are often more difficult to articulate. Calling attention to the risks associated with our current biotech trajectory, LaFleur stakes out a highly original position that does not fall neatly onto either side of contemporary US ideological divides.

William LaFleur (1936-2010), an eminent scholar of Japanese studies, left behind a substantial number of influential publications, as well as several unpublished works. The most significant of these examines debates concerning the practice of organ transplantation in Japan and the United States, and is published here for the first time.This provocative book challenges the North American medical and bioethical consensus that considers the transplantation of organs from brain dead donors as an unalloyed good. It joins a growing chorus of voices that question the assumption that brain death can be equated facilely with death. It provides a deep investigation of debates in Japan, introducing numerous Japanese bioethicists whose work has never been treated in English. It also provides a history of similar debates in the United States, problematizing the commonly held view that the American public was quick and eager to accept the redefinition of death.A work of intellectual and social history, this book also directly engages with questions that grow ever more relevant as the technologies we develop to extend life continue to advance. While the benefits of these technologies are obvious, their costs are often more difficult to articulate. Calling attention to the risks associated with our current biotech trajectory, LaFleur stakes out a highly original position that does not fall neatly onto either side of contemporary US ideological divides.

William LaFleur (1936-2010), an eminent scholar of Japanese studies, left behind a substantial number of influential publications, as well as several unpublished works. The most significant of these examines debates concerning the practice of organ transplantation in Japan and the United States, and is published here for the first time.This provocative book challenges the North American medical and bioethical consensus that considers the transplantation of organs from brain dead donors as an unalloyed good. It joins a growing chorus of voices that question the assumption that brain death can be equated facilely with death. It provides a deep investigation of debates in Japan, introducing numerous Japanese bioethicists whose work has never been treated in English. It also provides a history of similar debates in the United States, problematizing the commonly held view that the American public was quick and eager to accept the redefinition of death.A work of intellectual and social history, this book also directly engages with questions that grow ever more relevant as the technologies we develop to extend life continue to advance. While the benefits of these technologies are obvious, their costs are often more difficult to articulate. Calling attention to the risks associated with our current biotech trajectory, LaFleur stakes out a highly original position that does not fall neatly onto either side of contemporary US ideological divides.