this chapter is enriched by a number of personal stories of triumph against adversity. Finally, chapter 6 (“Occupational Rehabilitation”) crosses the divide of war and defeat by examining how the program of demilitarization, one of the key pillars of the U.S.-led occupation, ended the special treatment accorded disabled veterans, and how this, coupled with a larger profi le for the war bereaved in Japanese society, marginalized them, causing them to become “the forgotten men.” There is no conclusion, chapter 6 serving as a chapter in its own right and an opportunity for some concluding remarks. This is a shame as it does not provide suffi cient space to draw together the various strands of the book’s thesis—the argument that “Japanese wounded servicemen are double casualties of history”—and to refl ect on what is a wide-ranging and highly engaging analysis of the treatment, rehabilitation, and representation of disabled veterans, particularly amputees, and its broader meaning for our understanding of wartime Japan and its postwar legacy. A substantial conclusion would have provided an opportunity to look back and forward, exploring the stark contrast between the rather pathetic depictions of disabled veterans after the Russo-Japanese War and the more heroic ones of the 1930s and 1940s, enabled by modern technologies and rehabilitation techniques. Just as the latter’s legacy for postwar Japan merits closer attention, so does the issue of war memory and why more recent debates about how the war should be remembered do not engage more fully with the fate of veterans with disabling injuries. Also, a separate conclusion might have provided an opportunity to consider the hiatus of 1941–45, to refl ect more on the impact of the war in the Pacifi c and the increasing reality of defeat on the care of disabled veterans. These criticisms aside, this is a powerful analysis of an important but neglected subject. I enthusiastically recommend it to my fi nal-year undergraduate students studying Japan during the Asia-Pacifi c War and Allied occupation and commend its use of a wide range of Japanese sources, together with its skillful use of personal narratives to bring the subject alive.

中文翻译：

---

归国：五十岚义国的迟来的日本迷失士兵归来

本章通过一些战胜逆境的个人故事充实了这一章。最后，第 6 章（“职业康复”）通过研究非军事化计划（美国领导的占领的关键支柱之一）如何结束给予残疾退伍军人的特殊待遇，以及这如何与失败相结合，跨越了战争和失败的鸿沟。对日本社会失去亲人的战争有更大的影响，将他们边缘化，使他们成为“被遗忘的人”。没有结论，第 6 章本身就是一章，也是一些总结性评论的机会。这是一种耻辱，因为它没有提供足够的空间来汇集本书论点的各个方面——“日本受伤军人是历史的双重受害者”的论点——并反思什么是广泛而高度对残疾退伍军人（尤其是截肢者）的治疗、康复和代表性进行分析，及其对我们理解战时日本及其战后遗产的更广泛意义。一个实质性的结论将提供一个回顾和向前看的机会，探索日俄战争后对残疾退伍军人的相当可悲的描绘与 1930 年代和 1940 年代在现代技术和康复技术的支持下更加英雄的描绘之间的鲜明对比. 正如后者对战后日本的遗产值得密切关注一样，战争记忆问题也是如此，为什么最近关于如何记住战争的辩论没有更充分地涉及伤残退伍军人的命运。此外，一个单独的结论可能提供了一个机会来考虑 1941-45 年的中断，更多地反映太平洋战争的影响以及对残疾退伍军人的照顾日益失败的现实。撇开这些批评不谈，这是对一个重要但被忽视的主题的有力分析。我热情地将它推荐给在亚太战争和盟军占领期间学习日本的最后一年本科生，并赞扬它使用了广泛的日本资源，以及它对个人叙述的巧妙运用，使这个主题生动起来。