Tag Archives: Precarity

Final Prompt

Performative Assembly and a Revised Ethics of Doing

Leave a comment

I always appreciate the opportunity to read Judith Butler’s work because there is such a depth to her writing. The chapters from her recent Notes Toward a Performative Theory of Assembly that we read for the course is one that I had not read before and am glad to have. It has helped me flesh out some theoretical issues that have been at play in my own work and shaped my thinking around the role of the humanities within the larger scope of environmental action.

At the forefront of Butler’s argument is precarity, that is, existing within the system of neoliberal capitalism wherein our bodies and identities are caught up in our ability to produce some kind of economic value. This reduction makes the exigence of much academic work focused on results that generate capital, draw investors or grants, and help market the university or department where the work is done. This model is something I think we all feel on some level, some more than others. But, in the humanities, the drive toward marketability has in recent years grown louder and louder.

This is where I feel Butler’s intervention most dearly. When she writes that, “My increasing urgent sense about speaking in public, or writing for a public, is not that it should lead us straightway to a path for action; it is, rather, a chance to pause together and reflect on the conditions and directions of acting, a form of reflecting that has its own value, and not merely an instrumental one” (124). Doing for the sake of doing or rather, critical inquiry for the sake of education, something which the humanities as a discipline took as foundational for years seems under pressure to change into a more market driven approach to knowledge production. I think this formulation can be of use in thinking about the power of the humanities and its role within global disasters. The STEM programs are not the only ones with answers to these problems.

While, “just doing something” even if it doesn’t create any discernable change may seem like a futile attempt to participate, I think Butler wants us to think about this kind of action on a deeper level of what such action can evoke in those who are a part of it—that is, what can it helps us realize about ourselves and our communities? She writes, “What does it mean to at together when the conditions for acting together are devastated or falling away? Such an impasse can become the paradoxical condition of a form of social solidarity both mournful and joyful, a gathering enacted by bodies under duress or in the name of duress, where the gathering itself signifies persistence and resistance” (123).

What she calls “Vulnerability as a form of activism” is probably the most impactful idea that I learned from this course (123).  Care and vulnerability already shape a lot of my work, especially in how we think of our relationships with the nonhuman world. But also in my interest in contemporary fiction and what some are calling a turn away from post-modern irony toward a kind of “new sincerity”.  This movement is shaped by a desire to be engaged with genuine feelings without needing to create ironic distance between the self and the object of attention while at the same time not relinquishing the self-awareness and self-referential power of the post-modern. Such a discourse benefits from Butler’s notion of vulnerability as activism because it helps to inject a politics into the otherwise aesthetically focused concept of sincerity. To be vulnerable together—to care together—about the things we like and about the things we hold dear, (our political identities and our collective interests among them), is a way to embrace the precarity of our lives and find empowerment because of it. The importance of care and vulnerability, touch on nearly all of the major topics in the environmental humanities that we covered this semester. From precarity (which Butler also helps us theorize) to an openness to the agency of the material world beyond the human that Bennett asks us to embrace, there lies a push to recognize the already vulnerable nature of our existence. To think that we are not already vulnerable is delusion. The only way forward in terms of reconciling human impact on the planet and what we can do about it while entrenched in a system that complicates and perverts collective action, is through an embrace of that vulnerability.

 

 

 

Prompt 8

Solidarity, resistance, and the will to live freely

1 Comment

Naše země dostala příležitost prokázat absurdnost okupánských záminek a žalob, dostala příležitost veřejně osvědčit a demonstrovat solidaritu, odolnost, a vůli žít svobodně, a uskutečňovat jen humanitní socialismus (Our country has the opportunity to show the absurdity of the occupation’s pretenses and accusations, has the opportunity to publicly establish and demonstrate solidarity, resistance, and the will to live freely, and to realize humanitarian socialism). (3:46–4:04)

Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty Czechoslovak Broadcasting
28 August 1968

Context: the mood of restraint.

Alexander James Brown provides some helpful context for the anti-nuclear movement. He explains the “mood of restraint” in post-3/11 society, an “atmosphere” built on tragedy and spun with threads of ugly feelings: anxiety, uncertainty, failure (39). The Japanese people were “stupefied,” “overwhelmed,” and “confused,” in the words of activist Amamiya Karin, by the series of unknowns leading to and following after the triple disaster (qtd. 43). How can someone make sense of a disaster with unknown causes and unknown effects? As organizer Oda Masanori writes of the anti-war movement,

People dashed outside with this feeling of being at one’s wits end, of being unable to bear this suffocating feeling. (qtd. 46)

It’s suffocating—the static, stubborn not-knowing, the not-speaking, not-expressing, not-doing—such that a person might be compelled to “dash outside” in hopes of any change at all. And still, only silence.

As I wrote in my last blog post, without a catalyst, ugly feelings might continue without end alongside the everyday. That’s just what the mood of restraint called for, a catalyst for “emotional release,” and that’s what it found in the form of protest, according to Brown (41):

Affective protest creates space for the expression of emotions, particularly negative emotions, which otherwise may not be socially acceptable. (43)

Protest, in words and body, allows for the release of pent-up anger, frustration, and blame, and of the hopelessness that comes with inaction (64). Through the play of sound demonstrations, it can tend to “feelings of powerlessness,” or the impotence recognized and resisted by stuplimity (48). A sort of disorganization can help, too, as countering the mood of restraint didn’t have to mean defending a single argument or posing a single solution, but might instead take the nebulous shape of solidarity.

This is what we find in humanERROR—a performative protest that resists the mood of restraint by giving voice to the fury, the frustration, the indignation, and most of all the silence following 3/11. It’s a protest in the name of feeling, not reasoning; of experience, not ideology. When the vocalist is seen from a low angle, framed against clear sunny skies, we see this best. In those moments, he isn’t preaching to Japan, but screaming into the skies in a visceral act. “This is no time for hair-splitting arguments” (9:14).

Context: place, time, body.

By nature of performing, speaking, even being in public, Frying Dutchman put themselves at risk. Not bodily, in the strictest sense, as would be the case in or near exclusion zones, for example, but in mind or spirit. Breaking the silence, they enter into a state of being vulnerable to the censorship upheld as much by the powers of government, corporation, and media as by society and the self. That’s the price of confronting the expectations of group conformity, as Brown describes through sociologist Shibuya Nozomu (42). Vulnerability is the price of bodily assembly, which “puts livable life at the forefront of politics” (Butler 18).

The protest of bodies assembled in the street (and let’s not forget other forms of protest: by nature, such as those in virtual space, or by necessity, as in the hunger strikes of prisoners) calls attention to what Judith Butler calls interdependencies. humanERROR embodies the feelings shared by many Japanese, especially in this historical moment, but also the basic needs of human life—safe access to public space, air, mobility, land, shelter, sustenance—which are denied to some by the nuclear power industry and threatened for all of material life in the nuclear age. Butler explains:

What I am suggesting is that it is not just that this or that body is bound up in a network of relations, but that the body, despite its clear boundaries, or perhaps precisely by virtue of those boundaries, is defined by the relations that make its own life and action possible. (130)

Frying Dutchman are working to strive in concert, as Butler would say, to demonstrate the symbiosis between one body and all other bodies, one individual and all of society. They suggest, I depend on you, and you on me. We have to work together.

Frying Dutchman invite participation from anyone who crosses their path, on the street or with a flyer, to witness in the moment or replay after the fact. They “accept a kind of unchosen dimension to our solidarity with others” (Butler 152). The vocalist, especially, moves across speech, scream, and melody, giving voice to more than one response to 3/11. He moves across space, too, directing address to three crowds: passers-by pausing along the bridge, the audience standing on the shore, and viewers watching online. And the performance moves across time as well, as people go about their way, search for more information online, tell a friend, share a video, play the audio at home or in a demonstration.

Content: evocations and other effects.

For me, what’s most effective about humanERROR is its evocative potential. The cyclical, lo-fi rhythm as backdrop to exclamatory and at times harsh vocals reminds me of a song by the Velvet Underground, “The Gift.” Whereas “The Gift” privileges rhythm over speech, Frying Dutchman balance the audio with clear emphasis on vocals. Lou Reed tells the story of Waldo Jeffers, a lovesick teenager who mails himself to his college girlfriend, Marsha, only to be impaled by a sheet metal cutter, “(thud),” when Marsha’s friend opens the package. He narrates this without feeling, as if it were simply a matter of fact. The performance in humanERROR tells an equally absurd and morbid story, that of nuclear energy, with an affective tone. It’s not a comparison that works for everyone—but I can imagine endless associations for those who protest against precarity.

A more relatable example might be that of place. I’m not familiar with the specific setting of humanERROR, but, similar to the audio, the visuals resonate with personal experience. The setting reminds me of long afternoons sitting along Náplavka, the bank of the Vltava River in Prague, just below the busy street of Rašínovo nábřeží. There, on any given Saturday, you’d find local beer, live music, and food markets. Náplavka brings back a host of sensations—the sun in my eyes, a cool spring breeze—but most of all it reminds me of time, or the absence of time. It reminds me of whole days spent without a thought for time, the excitement of opening a new book, the wandering of good conversation. It’s the sort of place that makes a person appreciate the moments, and the infrastructure, that make life livable.

To conclude, “demonstrations do not need to make specific demands” (Brown 49). humanERROR may ask participants to “wake up” (like Shiriagari Kotobuki, as we read last week) to the propaganda in the media, the dishonesty of the government, and the exploitation throughout nuclear histories. It may advocate for hydroelectric and geothermal power. What it doesn’t do, though, is frame action between only two possibilities, a population targeted or protected (Butler 144). Rather, humanERROR embodies a call to act, and leaves open which specific action one might take: “Each of us must now carefully consider various information with an open mind and decide our own opinion” (humanERROR Parade).

Prompt 6

The king of sloppy—and stuplimity

1 Comment

In “The Sloppy Realities of 3.11 in Shiriagari Kotobuki’s Manga,” Mary Knighton defines stuplimity as

comical stupefaction at the sheer scale of the human-wrought crisis and our own passive impotence in the face of it. (21–22)

Here, we see that stuplimity is made up of three parts. First, a cause: we live within or in the wake of a “human-wrought crisis” of shocking magnitude. Next, an effect: we find ourselves caught in a paralyzing state of “passive impotence.” Finally, a response: we take in the grim reality of this crisis and our inability to resolve it, and we respond with “comical stupefaction.” In this way, stuplimity (a) identifies a crisis and (b) counters human impotence, all the while (c) bringing us to rethink catastrophe, in Shiriagari’s case through sloppiness and humor. It’s the sublime turned inside-out, with the object moving from environment to society, or from the natural to the artificial, and with the affect turning from terrible wonder to ludicrous horror.

By identifying a crisis or network of crises, stuplimity says something about the world we live in today. Sloppiness in particular acts as a reflection of our reality, and one that may be more mimetic than at first thought. Shiriagari argues that “‘sloppy’ things are real,” at least in part because we live and die “sloppily” (Knighton 1). As when the Japanese look for reliable information on the effects of nuclear disaster but find too much data, data that’s contradictory, or data of suspicious origin, sloppiness indicates that a single, objective truth is not possible. There is no one feeling to have or single action to take. Techniques harkening back to realism or a third-person perspective belong to the unreal for Shiriagari, in keeping with a satirical or surreal tone (7). Sloppy drawing says something about the mimetic quality of narratives as well. In life, we find no promising climax, no clean resolution, no villain responsible, and in catastrophe, too, we find that the cause belongs not to a single event or mastermind, but rather to a complicated web of banal corruption and poor planning.

This sloppy reality resonates with many of our readings this semester. Shiriagari’s representation of “malaise” (Knighton 1) and “paralysis and enervation” (8) aligns with the precarious existence Anne Allison explains in Precarious Japan. Although precarity begins with precarious employment, which is “uncertain, unpredictable, and risky” for workers (6), it spreads across all areas of life, infecting every moment and thought until our very “human condition” becomes precarious, a state of being marked by doubt and fear (9). Shiriagari places this state of being in a crisis with no end in sight, much like Robert Nixon’s concept of slow violence, which describes crises that not only unfold slowly and beneath the surface, but which also elude “tidy closure” (6). And, not unsurprisingly, this kind of mounting threat points to problems firmly embedded in neoliberalism, with its “relentless and ubiquitous economization” of everyday life, and in capitalist economies, which demand continuous (and impossible) growth (Brown 31).

Shiriagari does more than just represent these crises; he resists them, and counters the “passive impotence” that results as well. He disregards the dangers of reception, for example. Representing nuclear disaster in fiction draws controversy, especially when the means may be considered disrespectful, as is the case with humor (DiNitto). But humor does accomplish something in nuclear contexts. Comparable to the hibakusha’s struggle to communicate their experience through atomic-bomb narratives, Shiriagari responds to nuclear disaster “with new words or even a new language” through humor (Treat 30). Humor allows for a call to action, asking readers again and again to “wake up” from their malaise (Knighton 1, 23, 25, 31) and stay with the trouble, or learn “to be truly present” (Haraway 1). Without provocative and imaginative approaches to human suffering, we might never find the means to represent it. It would be easier to forget what happened at Tōhoku, and even easier to remain complacent. In Milan Kundera’s words:

the struggle of man against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting. (qtd. Treat 21)

Even if Shiriagari only manages to provoke readers with the audacity of his approach, this is still an accomplishment of sorts. Indignation and anger, I would argue, are a better alternative to wishy washy feelings of uncertainty, anxiety, or disappointment. Without a catalyst, what Sianne Ngai calls ugly feelings “hum alongside the everyday” without end (Knighton 3). And Shiriagari does give us a catalyst. He combines kakusei (“stimulating humor”) and warawareru (“being reduced to laughter”) to offer readers a “new way of seeing or thinking,” and an outlet for the frustration of an open and ongoing crisis (9). This reminds me of something discussed in another one of my classes this week, on Pseudodoxia Epidemica. In Pseudodoxia, Thomas Browne argues that the production of knowledge depends on the “challenges, corrections, and propositions” of “diverging voices” (West 170). In other words, communities of difference bring us closer to the truth. Maybe the greatest challenge to representing nuclear disaster is silence—that a robust and complex conversation is not already taking place. 

As for the third piece in the stuplimitous puzzle, evoking “comical stupefaction”—well, this is what Shiriagari does best. Shiriagari’s sloppiness pushes against the “idealism” of modes like Cool Japan, and humor disrupts the “arrogance” of powers in both society and fiction (Knighton 8). Shiriagari encourages readers to see and think in new ways by entertaining paradoxical or unsettling conclusions. The family of Defenders, for example, bring us to acknowledge that the conditions of modern life are not safe or in control. The episode “Hope” personifies radioactive materials rather than vilifying them. This reveals the vibrancy of all matter, even nuclear, in its capacity “to act as quasi agents or forces with trajectories, propensities, or tendencies of their own” (Bennett viii). When a character in “The Village by the Sea” protests the return of electricity, exclaiming that “he had never been able to see so many stars,” Shiriagari doesn’t glorify a way of life without technology. He reminds us that we’re forced to encounter and adapt to change all the time, and that any solution to catastrophe may be temporary (Knighton 7).

The twin old geezers confront nuclear realities particularly well, I think. Episode 2 emphasizes that it isn’t nuclear energy that has changed, but us, its keepers and neighbors, who have failed to see nuclear energy (which was once, and in some circles still is, the champion of green energy) to its full potential. And episode 3 prompts readers to recognize that the nuclear crisis is, to put it simply, complicated. As pictured below, the episode imagines reactions on either end of the spectrum as ludicrous, short-sighted, and often counter-productive. The jabbering of birds, nothing more than white noise. The sky may be falling, or everything may be fine, sure, but Shiriagari would have us regard nuclear disaster from somewhere in between, first suspending dis/belief. Like Donna Haraway, he would have us stay with the trouble: at times “stir up potent response,” and at others, “settle troubled waters” (1).

Shiriagari Kotobuki, from Kawakudari futago no oyaji (“The Twin Old Geezers Go Downriver,” Episode 3), in Ano hi kara no manga: 2011.3.11, 2011 (Manga Ever Since: 2011.3.11)
Prompt 6

The Place of Belonging in Post-3/11 Japan

Leave a comment

As I skim through chapters of Anne Allison’s Precarious Japan for the fourth time, I begin to feel like I am standing before a sea of Japanese words and phrases: ryuudouka “the liquidization or flexibilization of work and life” (7-8), muen shakai “the relationless society” (8), genpatsu nanmin “nuclear refugees” (12), ikizurasa “pain in life” (17), kodokushi “lonely death” (19), tsunagari “one-to-one connections” (20), gesenbyou “landsick” (183), ganbaru “working hard together” (187). My sea of words, the very image itself, is Japanese as well. It comes to me from Miura Shion’s The Great Passage (Fune o Amu), a 2011 novel I have not read. Indeed, I have not even seen the 2013 live-action film adaptation. I am, however, midway through the 2016 anime adaptation, which tells the story of Majime Mitsuya, an out-of-place bookish young man who finds confidence and a sense of belonging working with an editorial team to develop a new dictionary. As Majime imagines it, this new dictionary, “Daitokai,” will “cross the sea of words,” (often depicted literally in the anime while Majime imagines it). The anime is at once heartwarming and innocuous, inspiring and mundane. I often forget that it is set in the present. Something about it conveys a certain timelessness. How interesting to think then that this popular and award-winning novel was published just six months after 3/11.

One of these Japanese phrases in my sea of words, “ibasho ga nai,” articulates an affective sense of unbelonging, of figuratively having no home. Allison, who was forced to adapt Precarious Japan to the triple disaster of 3/11 as the project was all but complete, highlights the ways that the disaster plays into ongoing trends of instability in Japanese life. On the ground in Touhoku, she sees signs that, even amid all the loss and displacement, the disaster drove many Japanese to pull together: “Belonging became the new buzzword: belonging to one another, to Japan, to a homeland transformed by mud and radiation. References to connectedness (tsunagari) and bonds (kizuna) gushed everywhere—from a rise in marriage applications to surveys pronouncing its new importance to a majority of Japanese” (198). Perhaps it is in this context that a quaint story of a young man discovering himself and overcoming a sense of “ibasho ga nai” became so appealing.

There is of course a demographic for whom “ibasho ga nai” takes on a much more painful and present meaning; these are the genpatsu nanmin, the nuclear refugees, forced from their homes. Lorie Brau’s account of The Truth About Fukushima arc in the long-running food manga Oishinbo asks us to think too about ways home can be lost even when the government has not forced an evacuation. Describing the arc’s emotional climax, she writes, “Yamaoka’s grief over his mother’s passing evokes and heightens the grief over the truth about Fukushima, both the farmer’s and fishermen’s loss of livelihood, and the inaccessibility of the land as mother—home and source of sustenance” (192). Indeed, for Brau, the manga reminds us how food, tradition, land, and home are deeply interrelated. No amount of “working hard together” (ganbaru) can restore a sense of belonging that is inexorably tied to a particular place– once that place has been rendered foreign through contamination. Tawada’s novella, The Emissary, offers perhaps a telling counterpoint. Faced with a breakdown of traditional forms of belonging, both familial and terrestrial, her imagined future Japan turns to an extreme nationalism centered on isolationist foreign policy. National belonging and shared history attempt to replace what has been lost. Is this merely a more sinister and extreme version of what Allison witnessed in Japan?

If one strain of response to 3/11 has been groping toward a sense of communal belonging based in Japan’s ability to overcome the disaster, mangaka Shiriagari Kotobuki offers a very different strain. His “Twin Geezers” for instance find themselves drifting on a river beset by the challenges that face modern Japan—reevaluating the relationship with nuclear energy, sorting through contradictory opinions and information, deciding what path to go down. Faced with these dilemmas, their ridiculous solution—using one of their penises to point the way—seems no worse than any other. For Mary Knighton, “Shiriagari’s ‘sloppy’ aesthetics thwarts…Romantic idealism by working from within the paralysis and enervation of the endless everyday” (8). As is evident with the Twin Geezers, driven relentlessly down river and forced to confront challenge after decision after challenge, Shiriagari also recognizes “that the quotidian has its own dangers, which include its relentless temporal unfolding and the dictatorial ease with which it covers up or incorporates difference and dissent under repetitive normalcy” (Knighton 8). In some senses “ibasho ga nai” is the starting point for Shiriagari’s art; normalcy itself is revealed as strange and the corresponding tension between belonging and unbelonging emerges as humor.

I am on the edge of suggesting that there is something a little insidious about The Great Passage with all its relentless normalcy, its Romanticization of belonging, and its imagination of a Japanese present without the impact of 3/11. I would never deign to criticize escapism, but what I find perhaps questionable is the way it might dovetail with the PR project of TEPCO and the Japanese Government. When does a belonging predicated on the ability to endure and overcome start to occlude the reality and severity of the ongoing disaster? What responsibility do artists have to resist a government that would be happy for everyone to forget? And what role do I, happily consuming the sanitized products of “Cool Japan,”[1] play in abetting this policy of diminishing and forgetting?

 

 

[1]While it’s no Naruto, I would argue this category includes the anime adaptation of The Great Passage, which is available for Americans to stream on Amazon Prime Video.

(“Site Visits in the Fukushima Prefecture (02811058)” by IAEA Imagebank is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0)

Prompt 6

“Nuclear Gypsies:” the Workers of Nuclear Power Plants

Leave a comment

The tone, visuals, and characterization found in Katsuma Susumu’s Devil Fish and Tatsuta Kazuto’s Ichi-F contribute to their depiction of nuclear laborers as “nuclear gypsies.” In each manga the workers depicted are ostracized from society for being “contaminated,” even called “dirty” and are generally treated like gypsies and forced to live on the outskirts of society. When the main character of Ichi-F attempts to rent a vehicle, he hears “I’m afraid we’re not renting vehicles to anyone traveling to Ichi-F… Some people say that there’s a greater-than-zero chance of contamination, so…” (p.201). Though “nuclear gypsy” may seem callous, this term aptly describes the way these workers are received by other people in Japan in two eras of Japan’s “atoms-for-peace” history, regardless of their separation by more than three decades. Furthermore, the similarities of the work of the employees of a functioning nuclear power plant and the workers who are cleaning and repairing a destroyed power plant are eerily similar, effectively showing the inherent precarity of nuclear power.

In Devil Fish, the economy is booming from the initial success of the nuclear power plants in Japan. However, even this apparent economic success cannot completely obscure the precarity of life around nuclear power when an employee gets hurt while working at plant and it creates a panic instead of being handled appropriately. The characters were faced with two major problems: the injured employee was not allowed to leave without being decontaminated and the representatives of the plant were concerned about word of an accident getting out. The nuclear plant boss emphatically says “No, no, no ambulance. No way. No one can know there was an accident inside the plant… The power company won’t give us any more work” (p. 47). This shows the how the government and businesses (the power companies) were desperate to show nuclear power was completely safe and reliable, even if that safe image was false, exemplifying both the economic and political struggle of having a positive view on nuclear power (as well as the danger and precarity of the job itself.) Devil Fish also uses the image of an octopus as a symbol of the strangeness of nuclear power. The octopus is one of the most alien and mutant-like creatures within the ocean and it being attracted to the nuclear power plant is symbolism for the strange and new world of Japan with nuclear power.

In contrast to Devil Fish, ICHI-F depicts an economy that is reeling after the devastation of the Tohoku earthquake and the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant disaster. The visuals of the accurate and detailed drawings of the buildings and reactors within the nuclear power plant give the reader the sense they are actually working on the various buildings within the contaminated zone. Many of the workers are the ones who had their home and jobs destroyed by the tsunami and earthquake. The sense of precariousness is everywhere in this book, even as the main character tried to find a job in the nuclear power plant area almost immediately after the devastation but it takes him nearly a year to find a job in the zone. Tatsuta characterizes a widespread eagerness to work in the zone for both altruistic and practical needs, as the main character states “I was swayed by high pay, curiosity and just a bit of altruism for those affected.” (p.25). The precariousness of the work is also evident in Tatsuta’s tone, as the common salutation when leaving for work in the contaminated area is “Stay safe.” Seemingly a harmless platitude, it also shows the acknowledged inherent danger of working in the contaminated zone. Furthermore, it echoes how simple gestures that attempt to create safety only create the illusion of it, as the main character goes on to say “This phrase might sound ominous to people who don’t hear it this often, but I find it reassuring” (p.22). Another part of the precarity of this life inside the contaminated zone is the fact that the work will not always be guaranteed, because you cannot work at the site once you have reached your yearly radiation limit. So, even after the danger of the physical harm the radiation can put on your body, you have another added sense of precariousness with the job only being temporary. The main character enforces this idea when he says “I can only work at the amount of radiation I received today for 20 days a year, so it’s not exactly that lucrative in the long run” (p.279). The manga also documents the progress of the sites he visits and works on, including when certain areas were opened to the public and when certain areas of the nuclear power plant were repaired. This documentation shows how important the cleaning and repairing of the plants were so important not only for the economy of Japan, but also for a sense of security in society and politics as well.

Despite different settings and time periods, nuclear laborers, or “nuclear gypsies,” have been similarly portrayed in the manga by Katsuma Susumu and Tatsuta Kazuto. In his manga Devil Fish, Katsuma details the daily life of nuclear plant workers in the burgeoning world of nuclear power in Japan during the 1980’s. Getting paid rather large sums of money, appropriately called “hazard pay,” for short but dangerous work was apparently very appealing for a lot of people in Japan. This phenomena recurs in Tatsuta’s post-3.11-disaster Ichi-F, in which the more hazardous areas to clean and repair were more dangerous and therefore more lucrative. Tatsuta heavily used visuals and characterization to portray his characters as nuclear gypsies and also establish a prevalent sense of precariousness; for example his characters’ eagerness to work even in an environment known to be dangerous to show how desperate some people in Japan were to make a good wage. Visuals in both manga such as the sharing of clothing, caravanning, and general communal living without modern amenities within the nuclear power plant contribute to the image of “gypsy” life. Portrayed in Devil Fish, much of the work of the nuclear plant worker is the changing of clothes and the decontamination process, which directly mirrors the life of the people cleaning up the nuclear disaster at the Fukushima nuclear power plant in Ichi-F. The frequent visuals in both texts of shared clothing, washing and resting areas for the workers and their limited access to running water and electricity all augment this concept of “nuclear gypsies.”