A Response to Paul Berry's Review of the Book, "Sex in the Floating World: Erotic Images in

Japan, 1700-1820" (University of Hawai'i Press, 1999)

Author(s): Timon Screech
Source: Archives of Asian Art, Vol. 56 (2006), p. 107
Published by: University of Hawai'i Press for the Asia Society
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20111340 .
Accessed: 25/03/2011 07:37

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=uhp. .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

University of Hawai'i Press and Asia Society are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Archives of Asian Art.

http://www.jstor.org
A Response to Paul Berry's Review of the Book, Sex
in the Floating World: Erotic Images inJapan, 1700?1820

(University of Hawai'i Press, 1999)

Timon Screech
School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London

NOTE FROM THE CHAIR OF THE EDITORIAL BOARD

We thank Timon Screech and Paul Berry for this stimulating exchange of ideas.As Dr. Screech points out, publishing Dr. Berry's review
essay was something of a departure from the journal. Given that it was a departure, we invited Dr. Screech to respond.We hope this
exchange will stimulate more discussion of issues raised by both writers, but such discussion will not be pursued further in these pages.
Moreover, while we invite the submission of review essays that introduce new scholarship or significant alternative perspectives, we will
maintain our policy of not presenting regular book reviews.As an annual journal, we cannot keep up with all of the books published in
thefields we represent, so must leave quick-response reviews tojournals that publish more frequently.

Jjecause Archives of Asian Art does not ordinarily publish scrupulous to avoid reifying it. Like other terms in com
book reviews, I felt considerable pride when its most mon use today?bakufu, tenn?, harakiri, and Fujiyama?the
recent issue (Vol. LIV/2004) carried an assessment by Paul historical validity of shunga is questionable, and no histo
Berry of my Sex in the Floating World: Erotic Images infapan, rian of the Edo period should deploy the term without
1700?1820 (University of Hawai'i Press, 1999). Upon read qualification if they hope to be taken seriously. Berry has
ing this review, however, my pride turned to dismay, for it used it without apparently recognizing that it is wrong,
conveys certain incorrect impressions. I am grateful to the pseudo-vernacular, and even, I would argue, orientalist.
editors for conceding me the opportunity to correct them. Berry's review also suggests that my book is an overview
I will pass over some significant matters of technical of sexual imagery of the entire Edo period, whereas my
error to point out the main flaw in the review: failure to analysis is limited to a specific time frame, 1700 to 1820.
recognize my analysis of the problematic term shunga, the Berry attempts to establish the broader context but fails
central concept of the book. To be sure, the publishers of because it focuses on my own book and lacks awareness of
the 1998 Japanese edition insisted on using that term in the vast body Edo erotica studies.
the title. I also employed it in the English edition but was

107