The statements above all seem to agree on one thing: that sumo is more than a mere sport but is also an historic treasure. Other authors don't seem to agree. Mina Hall, for instance, while not directly disagreeing with the authors above, sees sumo as "sport in its purest form". She explains further: "[Sumo] is a simple contest with no equipment involved...It is only man against man. It is the ultimate test of power, technique and concentration." However, she concedes that sumo is "so pure that it almost surpasses the boundaries of sport and reaches the border of art" (The Big Book of Sumo, California: Stonebridge Press, 1997, p. 10). David Benjamin, for his part, completely disagrees with all claims of sumo being a cultural icon. He writes in The Joy of Sumo: A Fan's Notes (Tokyo: Tuttle, 1991) that "[s]umo is a splendid sport, a joy to discover, a fascination to pursue" and that his book is written from the point of view of a sports fan. He continues, "I know that many others, especially gaijin (foreigners), come to sumo from a perspective [that sees the sport] as Cultural Treasure of Japan...Much of the interest, among foreigners, dwells on a tiny, weird backstage domain, a cloister, 'the sumo world' in which the participants circulate...I have begun to suspect that this unnatural focus on background--rather than competition--plays a major role in the odd, and grotesque, image of sumo outside Japan" (pp. 14-15).

From these contrasting claims I came to write this paper. It seems that there are two major opposing parties of gaijin (foreigner) sumo experts. On the one hand, there is the Cultural Treasure Party which claims that sumo is not merely a sport. On the other hand, there is the Sumo is a Sport Party which claims that sumo, in itself, with or without the cultural trappings, is completely satisfactory as a sport, and that's that.

Now with whom does this writer agree with?

While I enjoy the rituals and customs of sumo, I see it basically as a sport. However, I do believe that sumo is a very unique sport, a world in itself, a world that is open to the public, yet very exclusivist at the same time. It is a world comprising almost entirely of Japanese, which is exactly the situation in present Japanese society. Like the "real" Japanese society, the sumo world's rankings, hierarchy, meritocracy and organization mirror that of Japanese society. Treatment of elders, women and children inside the sumo world reflects the treatment of these groups in Japanese society in general. Not only that, its reaction toward foreign rikishi may be paralleled to the attitude of Japanese society to foreigners in general. Thus, while I see sumo as mainly a sport, I think of it as a sport that exists in a world of its own and that accurately mirrors Japanese society, wittingly or unwittingly.

Some of the sumo-related historic artifacts that can be found in the Sumo Museum at the Ryogoku Kokugikan (national sport arena) in Tokyo.

In other words, sumo is not some ancient artifact or outdated lifestyle existing uncomfortably within an economically advanced nation. My claim is that sumo is not merely a glimpse of the past, but is also--and more importantly--a mirror of the present. With this, I hope to straddle over the two opposing gaijin camps and extend my analysis beyond their claims.

Needless to say, this method is far from satisfactory. Actual interviews with members of the sumo world would have made for new and concrete data, but as explained earlier, this is near-impossible for a busy student with no press credentials and no connections whatsoever. However, there are hundreds of thousands of materials portending to analyze and explain Japan that were written by people who have actually never lived in Japan and who can't speak a word of Japanese (maybe except for the words "sushi" and "sayonara"). Hence, while unfortunately having to be classed among those smart-alecks connecting the samurai to the modern-day Japanese businessman and the like, I dare say that this writer here still has more say on Japanese society than half the authors in, for instance, Wray and Conroy's Japan Examined: Perspectives on Modern Japanese History (Honolulu: University of Hawaii, 1983). (Half of the authors in this book have absolutely no idea what they are blabbering about.)