framed on manifestly hierarchical and patriarchal lines. It would be a mistake to suggest that this evidence shows that Western influence automatically yields a rejection of Japanese values. That point is made by Soutar, Grainger, and Hedges, who explain that "there are drawbacks in focusing inquiry on what are essentially the dominant values in cultural groups" (203) and that within any macro culture there may exist a variety of subcultures that function or behave as it were against the stereotype. Nevertheless, it is possible to identify features of contemporary Japanese life that show that, like the countries of the West, Japan has been affected by dynamics that originate and/or dominate Western culture and social praxis. For example, as a long-lived nation, Japan--like the industrialized countries of the West--is subject to "strong forces" within the culture for the following:
integration, including a dominant language, a common mass media, a national education system, national armed forces, a national political system, national sports teams and events with strong symbolic and emotional appeal, and a national market for particular skills, products and services (Soutar, Grainger, and Hedges 203).
Plainly both Japan and the countries of the industrialized West fit the foregoing profile. But not every feature of experience takes shape exactly the same way in any two countries. It remains to sort out the content of difference and similarity, particularly where there may be evidence of Western influence on the content of contemporary Japanese experience.
The comparison study of Western (Australian) and Japanese intercultural understanding made by Soutar, Grainger, and Hedges found that Japanese managers tended to understand features of Australian culture more readily than their Australian counterparts understood Japanese culture. They attribute the difference in social/cultural acuity to the centuries-long isolation of Japan un...