Conclusion
Conclusion reemphasises the historicity of the everyday in Ozu’s films, which is not a void entity but characterized by various modern subjects – distinguished in class, gender and generation – with conflicting views, the interaction among which changes throughout history. Temporality (permeation of the past into the present) and spatiality (deviation) are also importantly discussed in relation to the working of Ozu’s everyday, especially in the postwar period when historical experience of wartime presents more complex layer of social critique. The role of the Japanese film industry (namely, Shochiku) is reiterated in terms of establishing Ozu’s everyday realism, which is constantly placed in negotiating relationship with the former’s commercial concerns. Lastly, a question is raised about whether Ozu should be regarded as conservative in representing the social reality, for which the particularity of his everyday realism is suggested as an answer.