A proverb says: “War does not determine who is right, just who is left”. Left, that is
naturally the veterans who managed not to get killed in battle and thus survived their
mission. But left, that is also the ones who refused fighting in a war for their country,
for whatever the reason. War and its aftermaths clearly do not take a decision on which
of the two behaviors is right. It just leaves the involved people opposing each other contrarily
– like left and right.
In John Okada’s novel No-No Boy, almost all of its characters are immediately
confronted with the previously mentioned discord. Set in the Seattle of 1945, No-No
Boy deals with the outer and inner conflicts of a young Japanese American, named
Ichiro, who refused the draft by a government, which in his eyes deprived him of his
identity as an American. The narration starts with its central character, Ichiro, who had
just arrived at a bus station in Seattle and now sees himself confronted with a drastically
changed and diverse Japanese American community. By telling the story from Ichiro’s
perspective, Okada thereby convinces his audience with an authentic depiction of “a
quest for self-identity under extreme circumstances” (Huang, 2006: 152) in this fragmented
and torn segment of society.
Like his protagonist, Okada himself was an American-born son of Japanese immigrants,
a so-called Nisei, and therefore also got evacuated from his hometown Seattle
during the war years. When the Second World War broke out in 1939, Okada was in his
mid-twenties and, unlike Ichiro in the novel, volunteered in the US Air Force, only to
get discharged again directly after the war, in 1946 (see Huang, 2006: 152). Okada
therefore can be rated a prime source for rendering a Japanese-American community in
Seattle which on the one hand “struggles with and seeks to recover from the disruptive
effects of the internment” (Cheung & Peterson 195), and on the other hand has to deal
with the repercussions of a more or less forced recruitment. Moreover, during the progress
of his book, Okada confronts the topic of racism and segregation in the United
States with his “painful, powerful, and nuanced messages” (Huang, 2009: 768) – some
of which the United States of the 1950s were not yet ready for. [...]
At a glance
- Grade: 1.3 (1.0 is the best grade)
- Examines postwar Seattle Japanese American community conflicts through John Okada’s No-No Boy
- 20 sources in the bibliography
Contents
1. Introduction
2. Historical Background of the Novel
3. The Selected Nisei Characters
3.1 Minor Characters
3.1.1 The Realist: Gary
3.1.2 The Traitor: Taro Yamada
3.1.3 The Impostor: Eto Minato
3.1.4 The Loudmouth: Bull
3.1.5 The Daredevil: Freddie
3.2 Major Characters
3.2.1 The Son of America: Kenji Kanno
3.2.2 The Contemplator: Ichiro Yamada
4. Conclusion
Purpose and Key Themes
This paper examines how selected Nisei characters in John Okada’s No-No Boy respond to postwar discrimination, fractured community relationships, and conflicting Japanese American identities. It asks how each character’s approach to these circumstances shapes their prospects and can be understood in terms of failure.
- Japanese American internment and its historical context
- The loyalty questionnaire and the draft refusal dilemma
- Conflicts between Nisei and Issei generations and identities
- Veterans, “no-no boys,” and community divisions
- Minor and major characters’ contrasting responses to adversity
- Ichiro’s struggle for self-identity and belonging
Excerpt from the Book
The Realist: Gary
The first character to be examined in more detail is Gary. His first and only appearance in the novel is relatively short and also close to the end which makes him a model minor character. Ichiro meets Gary at the Christian Rehabilitation Center where he paints the signs on the trucks. Mr. Morrison, the manager of the Center and therefore Gary’s supervisor, characterizes Gary as “a fine worker, a real artist. […] Youth, intelligence, charm, a degree in fine arts, health – he’s got everything” (Okada 219-220). Obviously the only reason, why a man like Gary should be reliant on an institution like the Rehabilitation Center, is his status as a “no-no boy”. In the Center Mr. Morrison usually has to deal with all kinds of people who need help to re-establish themselves in society. This means that normally people like “drunks, morons, incompetents, delinquents, the physically handicapped” (Okada 220) are among Mr. Morrison’s regular customers. The conclusion which is to be drawn from this is not far to seek: for their decision not to go to war for a country that had them and their families locked up somewhere in the desert, Gary and the other men who did so have become a new kind of social outcasts. In this respect, Gary becomes a reflection of Ichiro who is in an equal situation.
Gary himself has learned to live with the circumstances. Even more, as he expresses, the time in prison “was the best thing that ever happened to [him]” (Okada 224). For Gary, his imprisonment meant a realignment of things. As he points out in his chat with Ichiro, he now thinks of himself as a serious painter who does not waste as much time futilely as he did before. Moreover Gary seems to feel certain that things will also get back to normal for the “no-no boys”. After a while, he thinks, the people who are now picking on them will simply forget about what happened: “They’ll forget. […] Time will make them forget, but I’m not sure that we will” (Okada 227). In this statement, he already gives a relatively distanced assessment of things – and thus calmly expresses the tragedy he and Ichiro will have to live with for the rest of their time.
During the conversation, Gary noticeably tries to make a realistic and serene appearance. However, already in his monologue about the time before his imprisonment, the reader can feel the emotional élan of which the painter is capable. This impression even gets intensified when Gary talks about the subliminal racism which keeps Japanese Americans from equal opportunities. From the outside, everything he says seems very reasonable and well-conceived. But his choice of words lets the reader assume that Gary may be involved a little bit deeper on an emotional basis than he is willing to admit (see Okada 227). This suppressed emotionality can be interpreted as Gary’s very unique form of failure. Surely he is an able young man at best age who does roustabout work for minimal pay – a fact, which for most people would mean already enough of a failure. Yet, the resignation with which he acquiesces in the given circumstances is to be allotted an even higher significance.
Chapter Summaries
Introduction: The paper frames Ichiro’s return to Seattle and his struggle for identity amid a divided Japanese American community. It introduces the argument that the characters’ different attempts to improve their lives can be read in terms of failure.
Historical Background of the Novel: This chapter outlines the wartime internment, the loyalty questionnaire and draft-refusal dilemma, and the resulting divisions within Japanese American communities. It also considers conflicts between the Issei generation and American-born Nisei.
The Selected Nisei Characters: This chapter analyzes selected characters as representatives of different responses to post-internment conditions and as influences on Ichiro’s development. Its minor-character section considers Gary, Taro Yamada, Eto Minato, Bull, and Freddie; its major-character section focuses on Kenji Kanno and Ichiro Yamada.
Conclusion: The conclusion reflects on how success and failure depend on perspective, while emphasizing the novel’s depiction of individual, community, and national failures amid racial division.
Keywords
John Okada, No-No Boy, Nisei, Japanese Americans, internment, World War II, draft refusal, loyalty questionnaire, identity, race, discrimination, community, failure, Seattle, postwar literature
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this paper about?
It examines how selected Nisei characters in John Okada’s No-No Boy respond to the consequences of wartime internment and the postwar conflicts within their community.
What are the central themes?
The central themes include Japanese American identity, racial discrimination, internment, draft refusal, generational conflict, and the search for belonging.
What is the paper’s main research question?
It asks how the characters’ approaches to their circumstances shape their lives and why their efforts can be interpreted as failures.
What method does the paper use?
It uses literary character analysis, interpreting selected figures through their defining traits, interactions, and outcomes in the novel.
What does the main section cover?
It discusses the historical context and analyzes minor characters including Gary, Taro Yamada, Eto Minato, Bull, and Freddie, as well as Kenji Kanno and Ichiro Yamada.
Which keywords characterize the work?
Key terms include Nisei, Japanese American identity, internment, draft refusal, discrimination, community, and failure.
How does Gary respond to his imprisonment?
Gary describes his prison experience as a turning point and believes that, with time, others may forget the conflict, though he doubts that the affected men will.
What dilemma did the loyalty questionnaire pose to young Nisei men?
Questions 27 and 28 asked about military service and allegiance, allowing only “yes” or “no” answers despite the complicated circumstances facing respondents.
How does Kenji contrast with Ichiro?
Kenji served in the war and is presented as a loyal, reflective friend, while Ichiro refused the draft and struggles with his place in America and the Japanese American community.
Why is the novel’s ending significant for Ichiro?
Although Ichiro has suffered major losses, the closing moments suggest a renewed possibility of hope and belonging.
- Quote paper
- Michael Burger (Author), 2009, The Concept of Failure Represented by the Nisei Characters in John Okada’s 'No-No Boy', Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/142139
