Short Abstract

This panel examines Manchuria in the early 20th century as a site of inter-imperial rivalry and interethnic interaction among Japanese, Chinese, Manchu, and Russian actors. The papers explore how everyday encounters, colonial spaces, and political reporting articulated the ambivalences of empire.

Long Abstract

The three papers in this interdisciplinary and trans-regional panel examine the history and literature of East and Northeast Asia with a focus on Northeast China (Manchuria) in the first half of the twentieth century. The papers address various dimensions of the multifaceted interactions among Japanese, Chinese, Manchu, and Russian people in Manchuria—a region that became a stage for inter-imperial rivalry and developed fragmented and uneven settlement patterns. While the region’s history has been extensively examined from the perspective of political and military confrontations among competing powers, this panel seeks to reframe its history and culture by focusing on the interactions and mutual influences among people of different cultural backgrounds. Rather than treating imperial power as a monolithic force, the panel highlights the ambivalences, contradictions, and pragmatic adaptations that characterized life and expression in Manchuria. The first paper examines Aoki Minoru’s “Manchu works” and Hinata Nobuo’s 1937 short story Train Junction No. 8. It argues that sympathetic portrayals of Chinese railway workers articulate the ambivalent politics of Manchukuo’s “multiethnic nation” ideology, depicting local Chinese caught between imperial transitions while maintaining deliberate ambiguity that both aligns with and subtly critiques Japanese colonial rule. The second paper analyzes migration and settlement in northern Manchuria from the late 1890s to the early 1920s. It argues that labor recruitment based on circular migration produced unstable demographic structures and uneven development, shaping colonial spaces marked by shifting Russian and Japanese influence and persistent local Chinese resistance to imperial railway expansion. The third paper examines Dagong Bao’s reporting on the 1931–1932 Japanese invasion of Manchuria in comparison with Shen Bao and Central Daily. It argues that Dagong Bao’s political stance was shaped less by moral commitments than by editorial pragmatism, reflecting efforts to navigate censorship, protect reputation, expand circulation, and signaling a broader turn toward politicization and state cooperation in Chinese journalism.

Key words: Manchuria, inter-imperial rivalry, inter-ethnic interactions, railroads, labor, Japanese literature, mass media