MOUNT CARMEL COLLEGE

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

THE FIGURE OF THE

GEISHA

SHERYL M. YASEEN
MA171257
B.A. COMMUNICATION HONOURS
3RD SEMESTER
Review of Literature: The Figure of the Geisha

Introduction
This review of literature aims at examining research done on the topic of Geisha,
specifically how different scholars have looked at the figure, what they say about
her, and how they’ve related her to the culture of Japan. In order to do this, I’ve
divided the review into three subtopics:
 Scholarship on what is a Geisha
 Discourse on how the Geisha was affected by World War II and
Prostitution Prevention Act
 The Anxiety of the Geisha being an image of Oppression of Women
in General and Asian Women in Specific

Many scholars have tried to delve into the topic of, and understand, the Geisha in
relation to Japan, be it implicit or explicit in the work that they have done. Is a
Geisha a performer who upholds Japanese culture? Is she a symbol of oppression?
Is she someone who reinforces Asian stereotypes? Or is she simply a pleasure
woman? The various scholars seem to pick one of these narratives, and retell the
story of the Geisha with the help of very similar facts and references.

To understand the figure of Geisha requires an understanding of the history of

Geisha, as opposed to the present is what seems apparent on looking at the
different works. There seems to be little thought put upon the Geisha of the
modern world by all the scholars, and the focus remains on the progression of
Geisha through history, with special focus on the World War II. The three
subtopics were chosen based off of where emphasis has been placed by scholars.
There seems to be a debate on what a Geisha even is, quite literally. The laws
surrounding a Geisha and how it affected not her, but also the law’s place in Japan
and its relation to the world at a time of globalization has also been addressed by
different scholars in order to place a Geisha in Japan. Social Justice is, finally, a
broad term to address how the image of Geisha, domestically and internationally,
has been addressed by the authors to yet again determine how a Geisha plays in
the society of Japan.

All the scholars have referred to other articles, essays and books to build their
narratives. The references made by them include works by Japanologists,
Japanese women who’ve gained foreign education/grown up outside of Japan,
and former Geishas for the most part. References have also been made to Arthur
Golden’s famous work “Memoirs of a Geisha”, and how it affected the Geisha
figure. The story follows the life of a Geisha, Sayuri. In Gei of the Geisha, Kelly
M. Foreman explicitly criticizes Golden of perpetuating false views of the Geisha
Author Prusha Majid studies Memoirs of a Geisha and places the book into the
culture surrounding the Geisha to determine whether or not the criticism received
by the book is just in her paper “Prostitute or Artist?: Stereotype and Authenticity
in Arthur Golden’s Memoirs of a Geisha ”.
Scholarship on what is a Geisha
The question of “what is a Geisha” is one that is evoked pretty much by all
the scholars at hand. While the biggest question of if she is an artist or a prostitute
is addressed by all the authors through referencing the works of different Japanese
women and ex-geisha such as Mineko Iwasaki and Sayo Masuda, there have also
been other perspectives to this. In her book “Gei of the Geisha”, Kelly M.
Foreman has quite literally questioned what a Geisha is. The term Geisha comes
from two words, gei meaning art and sha meaning person. Foreman approaches
the concept of Geisha from the perspective of ethnomusicology, so her focus was
on the art of the Geisha. But to discuss the art of the Geisha, Foreman first chose
to discuss the treatment of the Geisha by other scholars, showing distaste towards
the treatment. At the very beginning of the book she says “Geisha do not study
‘pleasure arts’ pertaining to sexual services, nor do they speacialize in sensual
artistry”. Foreman expresses a sense of distaste towards the neglect of the art of
the Geisha. In the introduction of her book, Foreman even has a section dedicated
to “the Geisha Myth”, where she quite literally takes the dictionary definition of
the Geisha from different years, starting from Webster’s New International
Dictionary (1954). Here Foreman points out how the definition of the Geisha
slowly began to include the idea that she’s a courtesan, which was then used as a
segue into how Geisha have been treated by the west and by the different people
who have written about Geisha.

Yuko Eguchi Wright is another ethnomusicologist who discusses the art of the
Geisha, and through such gives a new definition of a Geisha. In her paper on the
arts of the Geisha, Wright specifically looks at the concept of iroke. While Wright
praises Foreman’s book, which focuses on the music of the Geisha, Wright
herself has a different look at the Geisha. Unlike Foreman, Wright herself trained
as a Geisha for a period of time, due to which perhaps there’s this emphasis on
the term iroke which is used to define the Geisha. Liza Dalby is another scholar,
an anthropologist, who also trained briefly as a Geisha, who also focused on the
concept of iroke. Iroke is important, because while scholars like Foreman may
completely reject the idea of the sexual in a Geisha, while others like see Geisha
as “pleasure women” of Japan, Wright acknowledges the sensuous quality present
in the Geisha, but presents it as an art of its own. Liza Dalby uses terms as
“eroticism” and “sensuality” as descriptors of this quality iroke, albeit in a
“milder sense than the English word conveys”. While Foreman shows frustration
at the shift in focus from the art of the Geisha to sex, and through her book showed
an aim at refocusing to the gei, i.e., the music and dance of the Geisha, Wright
choses to explain the shift. Wright points out that the change in the term iroke,
from being subtle to being overtly sexual has caused the exclusion of kouta and
koutaburi (the music of the Geisha) to be excluded from scholarly discourse, and
thus finds it important to understand the iroke.

This emphasis on the art of the Geisha is seen in Kathleen Furman’s paper
discussing the evolution and resurgence of Geisha post World War II. Furman
looks to explicitly affirm the significance of Geisha in Japan, spending a great
deal of time discussing the attire of the Geisha. Furman explains the kimono worn
by the Geisha, explaining in detail the significance of each pattern. Furman says,
“The cultural presence of Geisha seem to be solidly impressed into the mind of
the average Japanese citizen, to the point that they can confidently state a Geisha’s
chronological place in her career and even discern without asking what story
Geisha is telling with her clothes,” and goes on to talk about how even a child
could tell what season it is just by looking at the kimono. Through this Furman
reaffirms her belief that Geisha are integral to the Japanese society. In Furman’s
paper, as opposed to looking at the Geisha as an artist or prostitute, Geisha are
treated almost like a celebrity figure, placing her in a sort of pedestal, discussing
how Geisha also set fashion trends that were followed by women all over Japan.

The question of whether or not Geisha are prostitutes seems no contest coming
from all the scholars. While some scholars like Furman drew a clear line between
a prostitute and a Geisha (claiming Geisha had freedom of choice and personal
power), Svanhildur Helgadóttir chose to draw parallels between Geisha and
courtesans, putting them under the broad category of “pleasure women of Japan”
along with “court ladies”. While the other scholars treated Geisha as one large
entity, Helgadóttir found it necessary to classify different Geisha, focusing more
on the lower-class Geisha (from outside Tokyo and Kyoto). She put emphasis on
the fact that the Geisha of Kyoto are specifically called geiko (gei art; ko child),
thus addressing the Geisha from outside the rich areas of Japan. By making that
clear distinction, Helgadóttir seemed to paint a picture of a figure who was an
oppressed female, no different from girls sold off to brothels. On joining an okiya
(geisha house), a geisha earns a debt as the okiya provides her with food, clothing
(kimono and otherwise), classes for her to develop her skills in art, music, dance
and conversation making, etc. To pay off the debts geisha would have to live at
the okiya for stipulated number of years. Spending the night with men would earn
the Geisha more money, hence, according to Helgadóttir, there was an unspoken
expectation for Geisha to sleep with the patrons (as this way they would be able
to pay off their debts sooner). The Geisha here has almost no relation to the
Geisha that the aforementioned scholars were looking at. While Furman did
mention the importance in class hierarchy between Geisha belonging to Kyoto
and Tokyo V/S those from outside, it was more of an acknowledgment as opposed
to a focus. Prusha Majid’s paper addressing Arthur Golden said, “Of course they
are skilled in the arts of dancing, singing and art, and yet they exchange their
bodies for money, thus they must be referred to as prostitutes,” using those as
grounds to defend Golden from the criticism he received from Geisha supporters
on misrepresenting the culture.

The definition of the Geisha by each of the scholars is ultimately a means to an

end. The ethnomusicologists aim to use this figure in order to emphasis nuances
of an art, Furman uses the Geisha figure in highlighting the Japanese ideal of
“honor” (referring to a Geisha’s pride and her dignity, describing her as a
“protector of culture”). Liza Dalby as well, in her well revered research
established and asserted the fact that Geisha define themselves as artists rather
than prostitutes. On the other hand what Helgadóttir and many other scholars and
writers (such as Arthur Golden) have done is use Geisha to address systems of
oppression that have entrapped women, saying they were only one step above
prostitutes in hierarchy.

Discourse on how the Geisha was affected by the World War II

and the Prostitution Prevention Act
World War II led to changes in the Japanese society as well as the position
of Japan on the globe, which according to the different scholars also affected the
Geisha’s position in Japan. Kathleen Furman noted that the Japanese opinion of
Geisha was changing preceding the war as well, but especially so during. She
believes that a big contributor to the “popularity” of the Geisha during this period
was wartime nationalism experienced by the citizens of Japan. Geisha performed
traditional Japanese music and dance, and wore tradition clothes and make up,
which, according to Furman, framed the Geisha in a favorable light. Through this
Furman furthers the image of the Geisha that she has built, as one who carries the
tradition of Japan, and so is, to some degree, revered.
But only Furman holds any ounce of positivity in light of the war years. It is noted
by most all scholars that the popular image of the Geisha, i.e., the immoral
mysterious courtesans of Japan became prevalent due to the war. With the war
came the west, especially their soldiers. According to Furman, prostitutes were
used to pacify the U.S. soldiers that came to Japan, in order to “protect the
everyday woman”, and due to this. She called the Geisha the “dignified versions”
of the courtesans. They also served the purpose of “comforting” soldiers, and as
they were regulated by law, it also helped control sexually transmitted diseases.
Due to this, Furman refers to them as “useful wartime machines”. By doing so
Furman further establishes the importance of the Geisha in Japan and her history.

When speaking about the war and its effects on the Geisha, Kelly M. Foreman
instead expressed the belief that the Americans spread “misinformation” about
the Geisha, bringing in the idea of the “Geisha Girls” (going so far as to calling
this concept a “monster”) that became popular during the American Occupation
(1945-1952). As the Prostitution Prevention Act (1956) came into being, the
world of the Geisha changed drastically, as agreed upon by Furman, Foreman and
Helgadóttir. Furman claims American conservation of painting a bad image of
the Geisha, saying in a way that the American morality of what is good and bad
affecting the deep-rooted culture that came with the Geisha. This is something
Yuko Eguchi Wright seems to agree with, when she speaks about the iroke. Albeit
not explicitly mentioned by her, there is an awareness in her writing about how
Western language is much harsher, and thus misrepresents the concept of iroke.
Put together with the need for change due to the war (shortage in money during
wartime cause okiya to shut down, hence Geisha were required to perform more
sex acts, as said by both Furman) the essence of iroke was transformed from
subtle sensual nuances to “naughty” or “dirty” acts of seduction. But while
discussing this, Wright also mentions that there is no standard aesthetic to judge
all art form with, thus using the Western aesthetic to judge traditional Japanese
art, especially when the concept of iroke was involved, was simply not possible.
But it was done either way, harming the image of not only Geisha, but also the
music and dance they performed. Prusha Majid as well, in her work studying the
whether or not the criticism received by Arthur Golden’s “Memoirs of a Geisha”
said that, “… their [the Geisha’s] reputation was lost. They never recovered after
the war since the damages were heavy.” Thus applying Western morality to the
Japanese tradition on top of the misconception of the American’s who didn’t have
even basic understanding of the art, and were mostly only familiar with prostitutes
who took on the name of the Geisha to avoid being arrested, deeply affected
conditions of the Geisha.

With the implementation of Prostitution Prevention Act, prostitution was banned

from Japan, but this excluded Geisha as they weren’t supposed to provide sexual
pleasures (although they did). Foreman says that this allowed just about any
prostitute to call themselves a Geisha so long as they wore the kimono. The U.S.
soldiers would mistake the prostitutes in kimono, says Foreman, taking back
home with them the “myth” of the Geisha Girls (mysterious prostitutes of Japan).
This carried back home three ideas of Geisha, all of which Kelly M. Foreman is
vehemently opposed to. These will be discussed in the next section of this Review
of Literature.

On looking at how the different scholars have discussed the effect of war and the
subsequent changes in the representation and treatment of Geisha, the idea of a
“means to an end” seems to continue. There seems to be a trend of negativity
directed towards the entering of the Western world into the closed culture. While
the Japanese government found it necessary to change its ways in order to fit in
with the super powers of the world, some of the scholars show distaste towards
this decision. Even Helgadóttir, who by no means was looking to defend or
protect the figure of the Geisha acknowledged that this adoption of western ways
into this society was only harmful. But that being said, Kathreen Furman found a
positive in this westernization. She writes that this change propelled Geisha to a
path of modernization, moving further away from the expectation of sex and
refocusing on the art of the Geisha.

The Anxiety of the Geisha being an image of Oppression of Women

in General and Asian Women in Specific
The argument of Geisha perpetuating sexist ideals, as well as perpetuating
various stereotypes regarding women, especially Asian women is one that’s been
prevalent in the discussion on Geisha. One of the most popular work on Geisha
is Arthur Golden’s “Memoirs of a Geisha” received great criticism from
supporters of Geisha, especially Mineko Iwasaki who was interviewed by Golden
prior to the book. The novel focuses heavily on one specific tradition called mizu
age where the young Geisha upon reaching the correct age sells her virginity off
to the highest paying patron chosen by her okiya. Iwasaki criticizes Golden of
misrepresenting a culture, and accuses him of writing a book about sex. In her
paper, Prusha Majid also mentions Iwasaki’s comparison of the ritual to marriage
in the Japanese culture, saying that the groom’s family giving a gift to the bride’s
family is no different than the patron paying the okiya for the “deflowering
ceremony”. Every marriage is, in a way, mizu age. But even so, we don’t see
Prusha Majid criticizing Golden at all, ultimately saying that despite their art,
Geisha’s actions are similar to prostitutes, hence there’s no real
misrepresentation.

This in a sense reaffirms Kelly M. Foreman’s opinion that, “(Liza Dalby’s)

contributions brought little change to the public commitment to the pathetic,
passive ‘geisha’ idea”, especially taking into consideration that Prusha Majid also
used Liza Dalby as a reference for her research. Foreman says that Amrtican ideas
and institutions represented Asian women negatively because of misconceptions
regarding the Geisha, instead of putting the blame on the Geisha herself. She
found that there were three prevalent images of the Geisha perpetuated by the
West:
1) “Geisha as Asian whore” devoted to servicemen and other foreign men
overseas
2) Confusion about the dichotomy between their “geisha-girl” ideas and
the actual geisha writers met in the course of traveling to Japan.
3) “‘Ideal woman’. Merged with a more general notion of Asian woman in
a reminiscing for a mythical past when all women were passive and docile.
“Geisha” becomes symbolic of a lost feminine ideal, to what all men used to be
entitled.”
All of which she substantiated with instances from writing from different authors,
advertisements from the time period, etc.

So, when addressing ‘Memoirs of a Geisha’, unlike Majid who says that the novel
wasn’t entirely unfounded, Foreman says, “What Golden’s compelling novel
does accurately, however is to present succinct collection of the American ideas
tied to ‘geisha’.” She says that while the Geisha herself doesn’t do anything to
hinder women, but it is in fact the cultivated image of the Geisha by American
society that fuels the fire, in order to “satisfy a desire for the exotic doll, a model
of deplorable, pitiable women.”
Majid says that a Geisha committed to a danna is more like his property, as
opposed to being a human being. She believes that the novel “Memoirs of a
Geisha” is only showing that both, Geisha and prostitutes are in the same boat,
being victims of an oppressive, patriarchal society. Helgadóttir also felt a similar
way, saying that the Geisha was no different from being indentured at a brothel
as they may have even one partner that they may not like (although Furman argues
that they did have the right to choose, although the distinction between the
Tokyo/Kyoto geisha is made her, as Helgadóttir is more specifically referring to
the less affluent class of geisha). But Kathleen Furman doesn’t seem to agree to
that per say. As opposed to looking at the Geisha as an object a patron would
carry around, Furman describes her as a functional tool for the society, who
through her talents and class could elevate her patron’s status through her mere
presence. This narrative gives power to the Geisha as opposed to taking it away
from her. The more elaborate the Geisha’s attire, the more elegant she appeared
and presented herself, the more elevated her patron was. Majid of course then
addresses this aspect of the Geisha, saying her life seemed a bit like capitalism,
where her goal is to be on top and make profit (calling back to the ritual of mizu
age where the highest bidder would win her). Furman calls this quality of the
Geisha to be like a business woman, and even a self-sufficient woman. She points
out that during a period in time Geisha were the only women who had a job and
weren’t reliant on the men. Instead, the okiya was dependent on the Geisha, and
the success and sustenance of the okiya relieved entirely upon the Geisha. And,
if the Geisha payed her debt off fast (which usually required her to provide sexual
favors as they paid more) the Geisha could easily leave her okiya and either get
married or start her own okiya. “Geisha sold to the highest bidding patron, to
become his mistress, which was most likely also for his benefit, as well as
affecting his social standing for the better” from Svanhildur Helgadóttir seemed
in support with Majid’s statement.

Svanhildur Helgadóttir didn’t seem to agree with this empowered figure that was
painted by Furman. She says that like the courtesans of Japan, Geisha only
received shame and dishonor for the sexual aspects of their profession. She also
says that the Geisha’s life was full of abuse; at the hands of the okaa-san (mother
of the okiya), the elder sisters, as well as at the hands of aggressive customers.
Prusha Majid gives a milder example of this, saying she has to smile and be
patient even if the customer is rude, but ultimately sharing the same sentiment.
But Furman on the other hand says that the Geisha didn’t have to tolerate
everything at the hands of the customer. According to her, the Geisha didn’t
tolerate unwanted touching, and were even known to hit unruly patrons with fans
and threaten them with harm, so in her opinion the Geisha was actually quite
empowered. This liberty of fighting back for herself, according to Furman, was
not one the common Japanese woman had, and so the Geisha was by no means
helpless. She brings out an anecdote from Mineko Iwasaki, from when one
particular customer had a knife pulled on him by her, as she said she felt
humiliated by him and would stab him. The crowd supported Iwasaki, and the
customer quickly apologized to her. Furman believes this anecdote to substantiate
her image of the Geisha.

Foreman’s criticism of the image of the weak, Asian woman, who was a victim
of her sex (such as the one represented by Golden) was strong in her writing, and
took up a good portion of her paper to discuss it. She mentioned, and criticized
Puccini’s famous opera (1904): “These works developed and strengthened the
association between “Geisha” and female submission, servitude and availability,
because Puccini’s “Geisha” character Cio-cio-san is not a performing artist within
an active urban arts community but an isolated woman available and eager to
serve a foreign man” she is “idle, possessive, melodramatic, and ultimately
without any reason to live if she is to live without her white male ‘keeper’”
She felt that if the writers who were writing about the Geisha, if they truly cared
for her, would discuss about her art that she put many hours and finances into
developing, instead of “obsessing” over her sexual relationships. Although this
was more in reference to writers such as Golden, and the media portrayal of
Geisha, and obviously not scholars such as Helgadóttir.

“Her face [the geisha], smoothed to eggshell whiteness, becomes a blank

screen onto which desires and fantasies may be projected. She is beautiful but
anonymous. All traces of her uniqueness have been erased. Her eyes and mouth
are highlighted and emboldened, beacons to the opposite sex.” (Cobb 1997, 10)
when in fact all dancers (including kabuki performers and non-geisha performers)
of traditional Japanese nihon buyō dance wear the same make up as it is a stage
convention designed to be seen from a distance, wrote Kelly M. Foreman.
Conclusion
The anxieties regarding this figure of the Geisha are ultimately addressed
in the different research scholars. The scholars seem to have a definite perception
of the Geisha that none of them seem to deter from, irrespective of the different
aspects that surround the Geisha. It almost seems as though the scholars ignore
any question or piece of information that may bring their own opinions and
statements into question, which in itself poses a problem when it comes to
actually answering any questions. So, in that way, the scholars who were
specifically looked into for the purpose of this Review of Literature seemed blind
to the possibility of the other scholar’s perspective.

Another problem with the papers is the fact that there doesn’t seem to be one
question that anyone is particularly trying to answer. Each paper seeks to explain
the scholar’s own perspective, and so while any anxieties they experience do
come forward in the writing and structure, there ultimately hardly ever seems to
be a question with specific regards to the Geisha that’s being evoked explicitly
that the scholar tries to answer, but instead the papers seem to try to only reinforce
the scholar’s opinion (with the exception of Prusha Majid’s “Prostitute or Artist”
but even there it’s more with respect to one piece of literature as opposed to the
Geisha figure herself).

The modern Geisha was also ignored by most of the scholars. As the Geisha is
being addressed as some kind of historical figure, she’s neglected as an entity of
the present time. Even when addressed it’s more so in passing, and mostly only
by Kathleen Furman.

The scholars in themselves were a bit of a limitation. For one, the scholars occupy
an “outsider position” with respect to the culture. Even Yuko Eguchi Wright, who
had trained as a Geisha, expressed this anxiety, as even she felt that she was
looking at it from the perspective of someone who was neither an outsider, nor
an insider. This sense of not being one with those that are the crux of every
question pertaining to this Review of Literature made it difficult to fully answer
the questions posed, which seemed to have been the limitation of Liza Dalby as
well, her being in a similar position as Wright of being neither an insider nor an
outsider. The male perspective was also something which was missing. While the
female one may be “key” as the figure of the Geisha has universally become
female, and so the perspective of other women helps understand her to a great
degree, the male perspective is also necessary to have a more definitive answer,
as the world that has created this figure is both male and female.

The Geisha as a figure is quite complex, and the research done on her has certain
limitations that haven’t quite been tackled yet, due to which placing her exactly
seems not possible, but through this research there is a better understanding of
how intricate her relationship with Japan is.
BIBLIOGRAPHY

 Kathleen Furman, “The Evolution and Resurgence of the Geisha Profession 1937-
1965” (2016)

 Kelly M. Foreman, “Gei of the Geisha”(2008)

 Yuko Eguchi Wright, “The Arts of the Geisha: Unraveling the Artistic Traditions and
the Aesthetics of Iroke through an Analysis of their Music and Dance” (2016)

 Svanhildur Helgadóttir, “Pleasure Women: Court Ladies, Courtesans and Geisha, as seen
through the eyes of female authors” (2011)

 Prusha Majid, “Prostitute or Artist?: Stereotype and Authenticity in Arthur Golden’s

Memoirs of a Geisha” (2014)