Regarding the current crisis in the Sumo World, apparently there is nothing in the Sumo rule book to preclude bout-fixing, and also there is nothing in the Japanese law books. Anyone who runs an organization knows that rule books can be extremely cumbersome. Whenever an untoward incident happens, the temptation is to add another rule, so rule books can become thicker and thicker. Do we really want that? It seems like what is commonly understood need not be said. For example, is it really necessary to make a rule that a teacher must be in time for class? And in the case of sumo, is it just so much part of common understanding that bouts shouldn’t be fixed that a rule need not be stated? Or, could it be the opposite, i.e., fixing bouts is just part of what one does depending on the circumstances? Officially, of course bouts cannot be fixed, but unofficially? Behind the scenes? Honne vs Tatemae? Thanks to modern cellular phone technology, the cat is out of the bag, so to speak, and once it is, it can be hard to stuff it back in again.
If the sumo wrestlers have no salary until they enter the top division and then, in the top division, they have a minimum salary of 1 million yen per month, it must certainly be a temptation for lower division wrestlers to take their turn helping their fellows out, or UP should I say?
« previous post
A Colorless World?When I was a college student I took a summer class on the works of Herman Melville at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore. I had to write a paper on one of Melville's works. The title of my essay, which is all I remember of it, was "Double Look + Twice Think = Horror: Melville's World View a...
next post »
Nature Studies