Why are they called brass instruments?

A brass instrument is a musical instrument that produces sound by sympathetic vibration of air in a tubular resonator in sympathy with the vibration of the player's lips. Brass instruments are also called "labrosones", literally meaning "lip-vibrated instruments".

Brass instrument

There are several factors involved in producing different pitches on a brass instrument. Slides, valves, crooks (though they are rarely used today), or keys are used to change vibratory length of tubing, thus changing the available harmonic series, while the player's embouchure, lip tension and air flow serve to select the specific harmonic produced from the available series.

The view of most scholars (see organology) is that the term "brass instrument" should be defined by the way the sound is made, as above, and not by whether the instrument is actually made of brass. Thus one finds brass instruments made of wood, like the alphorn, the cornett, the serpent and the didgeridoo, while some woodwind instruments are made of brass, like the saxophone.

Modern brass instruments generally come in one of two families:
There are two other families that have, in general, become functionally obsolete for practical purposes. Instruments of both types, however, are sometimes used for period-instrument performances of Baroque or Classical pieces. In more modern compositions, they are occasionally used for their intonation or tone color.

Brass instruments may also be characterised by two generalizations about geometry of the bore, that is, the tubing between the mouthpiece and the flaring of the tubing into the bell. Those two generalizations are with regard to

While all modern valved and slide brass instruments consist in part of conical and in part of cylindrical tubing, they are divided as follows:

The second division, based on bore diameter in relation to length, determines whether the fundamental tone or the first overtone is the lowest partial practically available to the player:For half tube instruments the 'fundamental', although half the frequency of the second harmonic, is in fact a pedal note rather than a true fundamental

The instruments in this list fall for various reasons outside the scope of much of the discussion above regarding families of brass instruments.

Valves are used to change the length of tubing of a brass instrument allowing the player to reach the notes of various harmonic series. Each valve pressed diverts the air stream through additional tubing, individually or in conjunction with other valves. This lengthens the vibrating air column thus lowering the fundamental tone and associated harmonic series produced by the instrument. Designs exist, although rare, in which this behaviour is reversed, i.e., pressing a valve removes a length of tubing rather than adding one. One modern example of such an ascending valve is the Yamaha YSL-350C trombone, in which the extra valve tubing is normally engaged to pitch the instrument in B, and pressing the thumb lever removes a whole step to pitch the instrument in C. Valves require regular lubrication.

A core standard valve layout based on the action of three valves had become almost universal by (at latest) 1864 as witnessed by Arban's Method published in that year. The effect of a particular combination of valves may be seen in the table below. This table is correct for the core 3-valve layout on almost any modern valved brass instrument. The most common four-valve layout is a superset of the well-established 3-valve layout and is noted in the table, despite the exposition of four-valve and also five-valve systems (the latter used on the tuba) being incomplete in this article.

Since valves "lower" the pitch, a valve that makes a pitch too low (flat) creates an interval wider than desired, while a valve that plays sharp creates an interval narrower than desired. Intonation deficiencies of brass instruments that are independent of the tuning or temperament system are inherent in the physics of the most popular valve design, which uses a small number of valves in combination to avoid redundant and heavy lengths of tubing (this is entirely separate from the slight deficiencies between Western music's dominant equal (even) temperament system and the just (not equal) temperament of the harmonic series itself). Since each lengthening of the tubing has an inversely proportional effect on pitch (Pitch of brass instruments), while pitch perception is logarithmic, there is no way for a simple, uncompensated addition of length to be correct in every combination when compared with the pitches of the open tubing and the other valves.

For example, given a length of tubing equaling 100 units of length when open, one may obtain the following tuning discrepancies:

Playing notes using valves (notably 1st + 3rd and 1st + 2nd + 3rd) requires compensation to adjust the tuning appropriately, either by the player's lip-and-breath control, via mechanical assistance of some sort, or, in the case of horns, by the position of the stopping hand in the bell. 'T' stands for trigger on a trombone.

Traditionally the valves lower the pitch of the instrument by adding extra lengths of tubing based on a just tuning:

Combining the valves and the harmonics of the instrument leads to the following ratios and comparisons to 12-tone equal tuning and to a common five-limit tuning in C:
The additional tubing for each valve usually features a short tuning slide of its own for fine adjustment of the valve's tuning, except when it is too short to make this practicable. For the first and third valves this is often designed to be adjusted as the instrument is played, to account for the deficiencies in the valve system.
In most trumpets and cornets, the compensation must be provided by extending the third valve slide with the third or fourth finger, and the first valve slide with the left hand thumb (see Trigger or throw below). This is used to lower the pitch of the 1–3 and 1–2–3 valve combinations. On the trumpet and cornet, these valve combinations correspond to low D, low C, low G, and low F, so chromatically, to stay in tune, one must use this method.

In instruments with a fourth valve, such as tubas, euphoniums, piccolo trumpets, etc. that valve lowers the pitch by a perfect fourth; this is used to compensate for the sharpness of the valve combinations 1–3 and 1–2–3 (4 replaces 1–3, 2–4 replaces 1–2–3). All three normal valves may be used in addition to the fourth to increase the instrument's range downwards by a perfect fourth, although with increasingly severe intonation problems.

When four-valved models without any kind of compensation play in the corresponding register, the sharpness becomes so severe that players must finger the note a half-step below the one they are trying to play. This eliminates the note a half-step above their open fundamental.

Manufacturers of low brass instruments may choose one or a combination of four basic approaches to compensate for the tuning difficulties, whose respective merits are subject to debate:

In the Compensation system, each of the first two (or three) valves has an additional set of tubing extending from the back of the valve. When the third (or fourth) valve is depressed in combination with another one, the air is routed through both the usual set of tubing plus the extra one, so that the pitch is lowered by an appropriate amount. This allows compensating instruments to play with accurate intonation in the octave below their open second partial, which is critical for tubas and euphoniums in much of their repertoire.

The compensating system was applied to horns to serve a different purpose. It was used to allow a double horn in F and B to ease playing difficulties in the high register. In contrast to the system in use in tubas and euphoniums, the default'side' of the horn is the longer F horn, with secondary lengths of tubing coming into play when the first, second or third valves are pressed; pressing the thumb valve takes these secondary valve slides and the extra length of main tubing out of play to produce a shorter B horn. A later "full double" design has completely separate valve section tubing for the two sides, and is considered superior, although rather heavier in weight.

Initially, compensated instruments tended to sound stuffy and blow less freely due to the air being doubled back through the main valves. In early designs, this led to sharp bends in the tubing and other obstructions of the air-flow. Some manufacturers therefore preferred adding more ‘straight’ valves instead, which for example could be pitched a little lower than the 2nd and 1st valves and were intended to be used instead of these in the respective valve combinations. While no longer featured in euphoniums for decades, many professional tubas are still built like this, with five valves being common on CC- and BB-tubas and five or six valves on F-tubas.

Compensating double horns can also suffer from the stuffiness resulting from the air being passed through the valve section twice, but as this really only affects the longer F side, a compensating double can be very useful for a 1st or 3rd horn player, who uses the F side less.

Another approach was the addition of two sets of slides for different parts of the range. Some euphoniums and tubas were built like this, but today, this approach has become highly exotic for all instruments except horns, where it is the norm, usually in a double, sometimes even triple configuration.

Some valved brass instruments provide triggers or throws that manually lengthen (or, less commonly, shorten) the main tuning slide, a valve slide, or the main tubing. These mechanisms alter the pitch of notes that are naturally sharp in a specific register of the instrument, or shift the instrument to another playing range. Triggers and throws permit speedy adjustment while playing.

Trigger is used in two senses:

A throw is a simple metal grip for the player's finger or thumb, attached to a valve slide. The general term "throw" can describe a u-hook, a saddle (u-shaped grips), or a ring (ring-shape grip) in which a player's finger or thumb rests. A player extends a finger or thumb to lengthen a slide, and retracts the finger to return the slide to its original position.

Triggers or throws are sometimes found on the first valve slide. They are operated by the player's thumb and are used to adjust a large range of notes using the first valve, most notably the player's written top line F, the A above directly above that, and the B above that. Other notes that require the first valve slide, but are not as problematic without it include the first line E, the F above that, the A above that, and the third line B.

Triggers or throws are often found on the third valve slide. They are operated by the player's fourth finger, and are used to adjust the lower D and C. Trumpets typically use throws, whilst cornets may have a throw or trigger.

Trombone triggers are primarily but not exclusively installed on the F-trigger, bass, and contrabass trombones to alter the length of tubing, thus making certain ranges and pitches more accessible.

A euphonium occasionally has a trigger on valves other than 2 (especially 3), although many professional quality euphoniums, and indeed other brass band instruments, have a trigger for the main tuning slide.

The two major types of valve mechanisms are "rotary valves" and "piston valves". The first piston valve instruments were developed just after the start of the 19th century. The "Stölzel valve" (invented by Heinrich Stölzel in 1814) was an early variety. In the mid 19th century the "Vienna valve" was an improved design. However many professional musicians preferred rotary valves for quicker, more reliable action, until better designs of piston valves were mass manufactured towards the end of the 19th century. Since the early decades of the 20th century, piston valves have been the most common on brass instruments except for the orchestral horn and the tuba. See also the article Brass Instrument Valves.

Because the player of a brass instrument has direct control of the prime vibrator (the lips), brass instruments exploit the player's ability to select the harmonic at which the instrument's column of air vibrates. By making the instrument about twice as long as the equivalent woodwind instrument and starting with the second harmonic, players can get a good range of notes simply by varying the tension of their lips (see embouchure).

Most brass instruments are fitted with a removable mouthpiece. Different shapes, sizes and styles of mouthpiece may be used to suit different embouchures, or to more easily produce certain tonal characteristics. Trumpets, trombones, and tubas are characteristically fitted with a cupped mouthpiece, while horns are fitted with a conical mouthpiece.

One interesting difference between a woodwind instrument and a brass instrument is that woodwind instruments are non-directional. This means that the sound produced propagates in all directions with approximately equal volume. Brass instruments, on the other hand, are highly directional, with most of the sound produced traveling straight outward from the bell. This difference makes it significantly more difficult to record a brass instrument accurately. It also plays a major role in some performance situations, such as in marching bands.

Traditionally the instruments are normally made of brass, polished and then lacquered to prevent corrosion. Some higher quality and higher cost instruments use gold or silver plating to prevent corrosion.

Alternatives to brass include other alloys containing significant amounts of copper or silver. These alloys are biostatic due to the oligodynamic effect, and thus suppress growth of molds, fungi or bacteria. Brass instruments constructed from stainless steel or aluminium have good sound quality but are rapidly colonized by microorganisms and become unpleasant to play.

Most higher quality instruments are designed to prevent or reduce galvanic corrosion between any steel in the valves and springs, and the brass of the tubing. This may take the form of desiccant design, to keep the valves dry, sacrificial zincs, replaceable valve cores and springs, plastic insulating washers, or nonconductive or noble materials for the valve cores and springs. Some instruments use several such features.

The process of making the large open end (bell) of a brass instrument is called "metal beating". In making the bell of, for example, a trumpet, a person lays out a pattern and shapes sheet metal into a bell-shape using templates, machine tools, handtools, and blueprints. The maker cuts out the bell blank, using hand or power shears. He hammers the blank over a bell-shaped mandrel, and butts the seam, using a notching tool. The seam is brazed, using a torch and smoothed using a hammer or file. A draw bench or arbor press equipped with expandable lead plug is used to shape and smooth the bell and bell neck over a mandrel. A lathe is used to spin the bell head and to form a bead at the edge of bell head. Previously shaped bell necks are annealed, using a hand torch to soften the metal for further bending. Scratches are removed from the bell using abrasive-coated cloth.

A few specialty instruments are made from wood.

Instruments made mostly from plastic emerged in the 2010s as a cheaper and more robust alternative to brass. Plastic instruments could come in almost any colour. The sound plastic instruments produce is different from the one of brass, lacquer, gold or silver. While originally seen as a gimmick, these plastic models have found increasing popularity of the last decade and are now viewed as practice tools that make for more convenient travel as well as a cheaper option for beginning players.

Brass instruments are one of the major classical instrument families and are played across a range of musical ensembles.

Orchestras include a varying number of brass instruments depending on music style and era, typically:

Concert bands generally have a larger brass section than an orchestra, typically:

British brass bands are made up entirely of brass, mostly conical bore instruments. Typical membership is:

Quintets are common small brass ensembles; a quintet typically contains:

Big bands and other jazz bands commonly contain cylindrical bore brass instruments.

Mexican bandas have:

Single brass instruments are also often used to accompany other instruments or ensembles such as an organ or a choir.

Brass instrument

A brass instrument is a musical instrument that produces sound by sympathetic vibration of air in a tubular resonator in sympathy with the vibration of the player's lips. Brass instruments are also called "labrosones", literally meaning "lip-vibrated instruments".

Brass instruments may also be characterised by two generalizations about geometry of the bore, that is, the tubing between the mouthpiece and the flaring of the tubing into the bell. Those two generalizations are with regard to

While all modern valved and slide brass instruments consist in part of conical and in part of cylindrical tubing, they are divided as follows:

The instruments in this list fall for various reasons outside the scope of much of the discussion above regarding families of brass instruments.

For example, given a length of tubing equaling 100 units of length when open, one may obtain the following tuning discrepancies:

Traditionally the valves lower the pitch of the instrument by adding extra lengths of tubing based on a just tuning:

When four-valved models without any kind of compensation play in the corresponding register, the sharpness becomes so severe that players must finger the note a half-step below the one they are trying to play. This eliminates the note a half-step above their open fundamental.

Manufacturers of low brass instruments may choose one or a combination of four basic approaches to compensate for the tuning difficulties, whose respective merits are subject to debate:

Trigger is used in two senses:

Triggers or throws are often found on the third valve slide. They are operated by the player's fourth finger, and are used to adjust the lower D and C. Trumpets typically use throws, whilst cornets may have a throw or trigger.

Trombone triggers are primarily but not exclusively installed on the F-trigger, bass, and contrabass trombones to alter the length of tubing, thus making certain ranges and pitches more accessible.

A euphonium occasionally has a trigger on valves other than 2 (especially 3), although many professional quality euphoniums, and indeed other brass band instruments, have a trigger for the main tuning slide.

Traditionally the instruments are normally made of brass, polished and then lacquered to prevent corrosion. Some higher quality and higher cost instruments use gold or silver plating to prevent corrosion.

A few specialty instruments are made from wood.

Brass instruments are one of the major classical instrument families and are played across a range of musical ensembles.

Orchestras include a varying number of brass instruments depending on music style and era, typically:

Concert bands generally have a larger brass section than an orchestra, typically:

British brass bands are made up entirely of brass, mostly conical bore instruments. Typical membership is:

Quintets are common small brass ensembles; a quintet typically contains:

Big bands and other jazz bands commonly contain cylindrical bore brass instruments.

Mexican bandas have:

Single brass instruments are also often used to accompany other instruments or ensembles such as an organ or a choir.

A brass aerophone is a musical instrument that produces sound by sympathetic vibration of air in a tubular resonator in sympathy with the vibration of the player's lips. Brass instruments are also called "labrosones", literally meaning "lip-vibrated instruments". There are several factors involved in producing different pitches on a brass instrument. Slides, valves, crooks, or keys are used to change vibratory length of tubing, thus changing the available harmonic series, while the player's embouchure, lip tension and air flow serve to select the specific harmonic produced from the available series.

Aerophone

An aerophone () is any musical instrument that produces sound primarily by causing a body of air to vibrate, without the use of strings or membranes, and without the vibration of the instrument itself adding considerably to the sound. Aerophones categorically comprise "the largest and most complex group of instruments in the Americas".

Aerophones are one of the four main classes of instruments in the original Hornbostel–Sachs system of musical instrument classification, which further classifies aerophones by whether or not the vibrating air is contained within the instrument. The first class (41) includes instruments which, when played, do "not" contain the vibrating air. The bullroarer is one example. These are called "free aerophones". This class includes (412.13) free reed instruments, such as the harmonica, but also many instruments unlikely to be called wind instruments at all by most people, such as sirens and whips. The second class (42) includes instruments which contain the vibrating air when being played. This class includes almost all instruments generally called wind instruments — including the didgeridoo, (423) brass instruments (e.g., trumpet, french horn, baritone horn, tuba, trombone), and (421 & 422) woodwind instruments (e.g., oboe, flute, saxophone, clarinet).

Additionally, very loud sounds can be made by explosions directed into, or being detonated inside of resonant cavities. Detonations inside the calliope (and steam whistle), as well as the pyrophone might thus be considered as class 42 instruments, despite the fact that the "wind" or "air" may be steam or an air-fuel mixture.

According to Ardal Powell, the flute is a simple instrument found in numerous ancient cultures. There are three legendary and archeologically verifiable birthplace sites of flutes: Egypt, Greece and India. Of these, the transverse flute (side blown) appeared only in ancient India, while the fipple flutes are found in all three. It is likely, states Powell, that the modern Indian "bansuri" has not changed much since the early medieval era.

Identifying the origin of the aerophone is difficult, though it is believed that Americans and their descendants developed the largest diversity of aerophones, and they are understood to have been the major non-vocal, melodic instruments of Native America. Archaeological studies have found examples of globular flutes in ancient Mexico, Colombia and Peru, and multiple tubular flutes were common among the Maya and Aztec. The use of shells of Conches as an aerophone have also been found to be prevalent in areas such as Central America and Peru.

Examples of aerophone type instruments in China can be dated back to the Neolithic period. Fragments of bone flutes can be found at the burial sites of the Jiahu settlements of ancient China, and they represent some of the earliest known examples of playable instruments. The instruments were typically carved from the wing bone of the red-crowned crane, and had five to eight holes. The flutes were efficient enough to produce sound in a nearly accurate octave, and are thought to have been used ceremonially or for ritualistic purposes. Examples of flutes made out of bamboo in China date back to 2nd Century BC. These flutes were known as Dizi's or simply "Di" (笛) and typically had 6 holes for playing melodies that were framed by scale-modes.

Flutes including the famous Bansuri, have been an integral part of Indian classical music since 1500 BC. A major deity of Hinduism, Krishna, has been associated with the flute. Some early flutes were made out of tibias (shin bones). The flute has also always been an essential part of Indian culture and mythology, and the cross flute is believed, by several accounts, to originate in India as Indian literature from 1500 BCE has made vague references to the cross flute.

Free aerophones are instruments where the vibrating air is not enclosed by the instrument itself.

The air-stream meets a sharp edge, or a sharp edge is moved through the air.

The air-stream is interrupted periodically.

Occasionally called "percussive aerophones", plosive aerophones are sounded by percussion caused by a single compression and release of air. An example of a plosive aerophone is the "scraper flute" which has tubes with ridged or serrated edges so that they can be scraped with a rod to produce sound.

Non-free aerophones are instruments where the vibrating air is contained within the instrument. Often called wind instruments, they are typically divided into two categories; Woodwind and Brass. It is widely accepted that wind instruments are not classified on the material from which they are made, as a woodwind instrument does not need to be made of wood, nor a brass instrument made of brass. Woodwind instruments are often made with wood, metal, glass or ivory and include the flute, oboe, bassoon, clarinet, recorder and the saxophone. Brass instruments are often made with silver, copper, ivory, horn, or even wood and include the trumpet, cornet, horn, trombone and the tuba.

A flute is a type of aerophone, as is the Eunuch flute, also referred to as a mirliton. A flute is an aerophone or reedless wind instrument that produces its sound from the flow of air across an opening. According to the instrument classification of Hornbostel–Sachs, flutes are categorized as edge-blown aerophones. Aside from the voice, flutes are the earliest known musical instruments. A number of flutes dating to about 43,000 to 35,000 years ago have been found in the Swabian Alb region of Germany. These flutes demonstrate that a developed musical tradition existed from the earliest period of modern human presence in Europe.

A reed aerophone is a musical instrument that produces sound by the player's breath being directed against a lamella or pair of lamellae which periodically interrupt the airflow and cause the air to be set in motion.


Is John Legend an EGOT?

He received his Grammy Award for "The Book of Mormon" in collaboration with fellow EGOT winner Scott Rudin (among others), making them the first pair of Grand Slam winners to have been co-winners of the same award. Lopez is also the first person to have won the Oscar last, which he won with his wife Kristen Anderson-Lopez. He is also the first winner to also win the so-called "Double EGOT", winning each EGOT award twice.John Legend (born 1978), a musician and producer, received his fourth distinct award in 2018. Between 2006 and 2018, Legend received a total of 13 awards. Legend has won the most Grammy awards, 10, of any EGOT recipient, and is the second recipient, after Marvin Hamlisch, who is primarily a musician. In addition to being the first black man to achieve EGOT status, Legend is the first person to receive the four awards in four consecutive years, and has the shortest time to complete any run of EGOT wins (3 years, 7 months). Legend, Andrew Lloyd Webber, and Tim Rice all simultaneously became EGOT recipients on September 9, 2018, when they were collectively awarded the Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Variety Special (Live) for "Jesus Christ Superstar Live in Concert".Andrew Lloyd Webber (born 1948), a musical theatre composer, songwriter and producer, received his fourth distinct award in 2018. Between 1980 and 2018, Lloyd Webber received a total of 13 awards.Tim Rice (born 1944), a lyricist and producer, received his fourth distinct award in 2018. Between 1980 and 2018, Rice received a total of 12 awards, and shares some of his awards with his regular collaborator Andrew Lloyd Webber.The following artists have also received all of the four major awards. However, in each case, one of these awards has been received only in an honorary or other non-competitive category. (Streisand has not received a competitive Tony, Minnelli has not received a competitive Grammy, Menken has not received a competitive Emmy and Belafonte and Jones have not received a competitive Oscar.)

List of people who have won Academy, Emmy, Grammy, and Tony Awards

Fifteen people have won all four major annual American entertainment awards in a competitive, individual (non-group) category of the Emmy, Grammy, Oscar, and Tony (EGOT) Awards. Respectively, these awards honor outstanding achievements in television, recording, film, and theater. Winning all four awards has been referred to as winning the "grand slam" of American show business.

The EGOT acronym was coined by actor Philip Michael Thomas in late 1984, when his role on the new hit show "Miami Vice" brought instant fame, stating a desire to complete his own EGOT-winning collection. When coining the acronym, Thomas stated that it also means "energy, growth, opportunity and talent". However, he also intended that the "E" should only stand for the Primetime Emmy Award, and not a Daytime Emmy nor any of the awards presented at the other types of Emmy ceremonies. Nevertheless, two of 15 people listed as EGOT winners have won only the Daytime Emmy.

, no EGOT winner has actually won the awards in the acronym's order (first an Emmy, then a Grammy, then an Oscar, and finally a Tony), nor have they won each award to complete the EGOT before winning another (e.g. Audrey Hepburn, who won her awards in OTTETOG order). The closest person has been Robert Lopez, who won the "grand slam" in TEGO order.

To date, fifteen individuals have won all four awards in competitive categories.

Notes:
The artist also subsequently won one or more additional competitive awards.
The artist also received one or more honorary or non-competitive awards.
The artist also earned the Triple Crown of Acting, with singular (non-group/ensemble/company) acting wins in the Emmy, Oscar and Tony awards.
The artist has won a Daytime Emmy Award, not a Primetime Emmy Award.
The artist was awarded posthumously.
The artist has subsequently achieved multiple EGOTs.
Legend, Lloyd Webber, and Rice achieved their EGOTs simultaneously with their shared Emmy Award for producing "Jesus Christ Superstar Live in Concert"

Six other artists – Liza Minnelli, James Earl Jones, Barbra Streisand, Alan Menken, Harry Belafonte and Quincy Jones – have also received all four awards, but at least one of the awards was non-competitive, i.e. special or honorary in nature (Streisand's Tony, both Jones' Oscars, Minnelli's Grammy, Menken's Emmy, and Belafonte's Oscar).

The following are the six artists who also have won the four major awards but not exclusively in the main competitive categories.

Richard Rodgers (1902–1979), a composer, received his fourth distinct award in 1962. Between 1945 and 1979, Rodgers received a total of 13 awards.

Helen Hayes (1900–1993), an actress, received her fourth distinct award in 1977. Between 1932 and 1980, Hayes received a total of 7 awards. She was the first woman to win all four. Hayes was also the first person to win the Triple Crown of Acting, with singular (non-group/ensemble/company) acting wins in each of the Emmy, Oscar and Tony awards, winning her third in 1953. Counting only the first award of each type, she also has the distinction of the longest timespan (45 years) between her first and fourth award of any showbiz Grand Slam winner.

Rita Moreno (born 1931), an actress, received her fourth distinct award in 1977. Between 1961 and 1978, Moreno received a total of five awards. She is also the first Hispanic winner and the first winner to win a Grammy as their second award (both previous winners won Tonys as their second award). In addition, she became a Kennedy Center Honoree in 2015.

John Gielgud (1904–2000), an actor, received his fourth distinct award in 1991. Between 1948 and 1991, Gielgud received a total of six awards. Gielgud was the first winner to win any award other than the Oscar as their first award (his first award was a Tony). At age 87 when he won his Emmy, he was also the oldest winner.

Audrey Hepburn (1929–1993), an actress, received her fourth distinct award posthumously in 1994. Between 1953 and 1994, Hepburn received a total of six awards. She was the fifth person to complete the feat and the first to do so posthumously. She was also the first winner to win two of their awards in consecutive awards shows (the 1994 Grammys were the first Grammys since her posthumous win at the 1993 Emmys). She is one of the only two EGOT winners (the other being Jonathan Tunick) to not win multiple awards in any of the four award fields.

Marvin Hamlisch (1944–2012), a composer, received his fourth distinct award in 1995. Between 1973 and 2001, Hamlisch received a total of 12 awards. Hamlisch has the most Oscars of any Grand Slam winners (three). In 1974 he became the first winner to have won a "General Field" Grammy – taking Song of the Year and Best New Artist. He was also the first Grand Slam winner to have won multiple legs of the feat for the same work – an Oscar and a Grammy for song "The Way We Were".

Jonathan Tunick (born 1938), a composer, conductor, and music arranger, received his fourth distinct award in 1997. Between 1977 and 1997, Tunick received a total of four awards. Tunick is the first Grand Slam winner to have won an Emmy as their second award as well as the first to win the Tony as their fourth award. He is also the second person (after Audrey Hepburn) to not win any multiple awards in any of the four award fields.

Mel Brooks (born 1926), a director, writer and actor, received his fourth distinct award in June 2001. Between 1968 and 2002, Brooks received a total of 11 awards. Brooks was the first person to win the Emmy as the first award, and the first winner to have won his Oscar for screenwriting.

When he appeared on the January 30, 2015 episode of "Real Time with Bill Maher", Brooks called himself an EGOTAK, noting that he had also received awards from the American Film Institute and Kennedy Center.

Mike Nichols (1931–2014), a director, actor and comedian, received his fourth distinct award in November 2001. Between 1961 and 2012, Nichols received a total of 15 awards. Nichols was the first slam winner to win the Grammy as their first award, the first winner to have won multiple awards (an Oscar, several Tonys, and two Emmys) for directing. When counting all awards won—not just the first of each type—Nichols has the longest timespan of awards among Grand Slam winners, at 51 years.

Whoopi Goldberg (born 1955), an actress, comedian and talk-show host, received her fourth distinct award in 2002. Between 1985 and 2009, Goldberg received a total of 6 awards. Goldberg is the first African American winner, the first to win the Oscar as their second award, and the first to win two of their awards in the same year (she won both her first Daytime Emmy and her Tony in 2002).

Notes: Although she has not won a competitive Primetime Emmy award, she has been nominated several times. The fact that she does not have a competitive Primetime Emmy Award has led to debate over her inclusion in the "official list." In the "30 Rock" episode "Dealbreakers Talk Show*#0001", Goldberg (playing herself) addresses this when questioned by character Tracy Jordan about her Daytime Emmy: "It still counts! Girl's gotta eat!"

Scott Rudin (born 1958) received his fourth distinct award in 2012. Between 1984 and 2017, Rudin received a total of 18 awards making him the record holder for most awards won among the people who have won all four awards in competitive categories. Rudin is the first winner who is primarily a producer.

Robert Lopez (born 1975), a songwriter, received his fourth distinct award in 2014. Between 2004 and 2018, Lopez received a total of 10 awards. Like fellow EGOT winner Whoopi Goldberg, his Emmy awards are Daytime Emmys (although he has been nominated for three competitive Primetime Emmy awards). Lopez is the first Filipino and Asian to achieve this feat. He is also the youngest winner to receive all four awards in competitive categories, as well as the fastest to complete his qualifying run of EGOT award wins (10 years), and the first to complete any run of EGOT wins in under 4 years (3 years, 8 months).

Barbra Streisand (born 1942), a singer and actress, received her fourth distinct award in 1970. Between 1963 and 2001, Streisand received a total of 18 awards. Having completed the showbiz Grand Slam at age 28, she is the youngest winner, and with just six years elapsing between her first award (a 1964 Grammy) and her final award (a 1970 Special Tony), Streisand also completed the Grand Slam in the shortest amount of time. She is also the only winner to have won an Oscar in both a music and an acting category. She is also the only winner to have won all of her competitive awards for her debut performances (her first musical album, feature film and television special, respectively). In addition, she also received the AFI Life Achievement Award, the Kennedy Center Honor, the Cecil B. DeMille Award, the National Medal of Arts, the American Society of Cinematographers Board of Governors Award, the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

Liza Minnelli (born 1946), an actress and singer, received her fourth distinct award in 1990. Between 1965 and 2009, Minnelli received a total of 7 awards.

James Earl Jones (born 1931), an actor, received his fourth distinct award in 2011. Between 1969 and 2011, Jones received a total of 7 awards.

Alan Menken (born 1949), composer and songwriter, received his fourth distinct award in 2012. Between 1989 and 2012, Menken received a total of 21 awards. He has the most Oscar wins (8) by a grand slam winner and is the second most prolific Oscar winner in the music categories after Alfred Newman. He is also notable for frequently having multiple songs from the same film nominated for major awards.

Harry Belafonte (born 1927), an actor, received his fourth distinct award in 2014. Between 1954 and 2014, Belafonte received a total of 6 awards.

Quincy Jones (born 1933), an American record producer, actor and composer, received his fourth distinct award in 2016. Between 1964 and 2016, Jones received a total of 31 awards — the highest number of awards of any grand slam winner. He has 27 Grammy Awards and a Grammy Legend Award received in 1992.

The following people have each won three out of the four major entertainment awards in competitive categories.

In addition to the above winners, the following people have each won three out of the four major entertainment awards in either competitive categories or non-competitive special and honorary categories.The following people have not won all four awards in competitive categories, but have received at least one nomination for each of them:A PEGOT winner is someone who has won all four EGOT awards as well as a Pulitzer Prize.

PEGOT winners:

People who have won a Pulitzer, and are only missing one EGOT award:

Of these five, only Miranda and Sondheim are still alive. Miranda was nominated for a 2017 Oscar for Best Original Song but did not win.

John Legend is an American soul singer, songwriter and pianist. In 2005, Legend received fifteen nominations and won two, including Best New Artist at the Black Entertainment Television Awards (BET Awards) and Best R&B Act at the MOBO Awards. In 2006, Legend received ten nominations and won five, including Best R&B Male Vocal Performance for "Stay with You", Best R&B Album for "Get Lifted", Best New Artist at the Grammy Awards; Best R&B/Soul Album Male for "Get Lifted", Best R&B/Soul Single Male for "Ordinary People" at the Soul Train Music Awards. In 2007, Legend received six nominations and won three, including Best R&B Performance by a Duo or Group for "Family Affair", Best Male R&B Vocal Performance for "Heaven" at the Grammy Awards; Best R&B/Soul Single Male for "Save Room" at the Soul Train Music Awards. In 2017, Legend was the recipient of Smithsonian Magazine's American Ingenuity Award for Performing Arts. In 2018 Legend became the first Black male to achieve an EGOT with his Emmy win for "Jesus Christ Superstar." Overall, Legend has won 33 awards from 88 nominations.

List of awards and nominations received by John Legend

The African-American Film Critics Association (AAFCA) is a group of African-American film critics that give various awards for excellence in film at the end of each year. Legend has won one time.

The American Music Awards is an annual awards ceremony created by Dick Clark in 1973. Legend has been nominated five times, and received one award.

The BET Awards were established in 2001 by the Black Entertainment Television network to celebrate African Americans and other minorities in music, acting, sports, and other fields of entertainment. The awards are presented annually and broadcast live on BET. Legend has won one award from four nominations.

The Billboard Music Awards are sponsored by Billboard magazine and is based on sales data by Nielsen SoundScan and radio information by Nielsen Broadcast Data Systems. Legend received two of seven nominations.

The Critics' Choice Movie Awards are bestowed annually by the Broadcast Film Critics Association (BFCA) to honor the finest in cinematic achievement. Legend has won one award in 2015.

The Primetime Emmy Award is an American award bestowed by the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences in recognition of excellence in American primetime television programming. Legend has received one award from two nominations for "Jesus Christ Superstar Live in Concert".

Legend won one award from the Georgia Film Critics Association in 2015.

The Golden Globe Awards were established in 1944 by the Hollywood Foreign Press Association to celebrate the best in film and television. John Legend has received one nomination and win.

The Grammy Awards are awarded annually by the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences. Legend has won ten awards from twenty-nine nominations.
The Houston Film Critics Society is a non-profit film critic organization which presents an annual set of film awards for "extraordinary accomplishment in film" in a ceremony held at the Museum of Fine Arts, Houston. Legend has been nominated once.

iHeartRadio Music Awards is an international music awards show founded by iHeartRadio in 2014. Legend has been nominated twice.

Mnet Asian Music Awards, otherwise abbreviated as MAMA, is an award show held by Mnet annually that credits South Korean artists, as well as foreign artists who have had an impact in the South Korean Music industry.

The MOBO Awards (an acronym for "Music of Black Origin") were established in 1996 by Kanya King. They are held annually in the United Kingdom to recognize artists of any race or nationality performing music of black origin. Legend has won one award from three nominations.

The MTV Video Music Awards were established in 1984 by MTV to celebrate the top music videos of the year. Legend has been nominated five times and won once.

The NAACP Image Awards is an award presented annually by the American National Association for the Advancement of Colored People to honor outstanding people of color in film, television, music and literature. Legend has been nominated twice.

The Soul Train Music Awards is an annual award show aired in national broadcast syndication that honors the best in African American music and entertainment established in 1987. Legend has won five awards from twelve nominations.
The Tony Award recognizes the excellence in live Broadway theatre. The awards are presented by the American Theatre Wing and The Broadway League. Legend has received one award from two nominations.

The Vibe Awards are hosted annually by "Vibe" magazine. Legend has been nominated four times.


How long was Takeo Fukuda prime minister of Japan?

Takeo Fukuda was an expert in economics. He took on the role of an ‘economic prime minister’ under Miki's administration from 1974 to 1976. During this time, he established the Ministerial Conference on Economic Measures, enabling cross-ministry and agency talks on finance, wage and labor issues.
Fukuda subsequently became the 67th prime minister of Japan, lasting for only one term from 1976 to 1978. However, he was not forced out of office before he had gotten two major diplomatic reforms executed. Under Fukuda cabinet, Japan conducted an omnidirectional peace diplomacy, and signed Japan-China Treaty of Peace and Friendship in 1978. He pushed forward Japan's pacifistic position while making an effort to strengthen relations with Asian countries.

Fukuda Doctrine

The Fukuda Doctrine is based on a speech by Japanese Prime Minister Takeo Fukuda. In 1977, while on a tour of the ASEAN member states, the prime minister made a speech in Manila in which he articulated Japan's foreign policy that later became known as the Fukuda Doctrine.

Prime Minister Fukuda pledged that Japan, a country committed to peace, would never become a military power and that Japan would build up a relationship of mutual confidence and trust with Southeast Asian countries in wide-ranging fields, and that Japan would cooperate positively with ASEAN and its member countries in their own efforts, as an equal partner. The Fukuda Doctrine serves as the foundation of Japan's current and future diplomacy toward the rest of Asia.

After the Second World War, Japan's policies towards Southeast Asia, can be divided into two distinct phases - a period of reparations (1952-1964) and a period of regional economic development (1965-1975). The historic events and the features of those periods have contributed to the development of Fukuda Doctrine and the subsequent policies towards the region.

The first period in the relationship between Japan and Southeast Asia, can be characterized by Shigeru Yoshida’s “Economic Diplomacy”, officially promulgated in 1957. The so-called “Yoshida Doctrine” put high priority on development and aimed at peaceful expansion of Japan's economic power in foreign markets, in order to rebuild the economy and raise the living standards of the Japanese population. As a part of this policy, Japan sought to improve ties with the Southeast Asian region. Reparations settlements between Japan and Southeast Asian countries played a significant role in such environment as they served as a tool which provided a ground for rebuilding of the relations, severed by Japanese aggression during the war. During this period, Japan paid reparations to Burma, Philippines, Indonesia, Republic of Vietnam (South Vietnam). Other than reparations in the strict sense, Japan also provided “quasi-reparations” in the form of grants and aid to Laos, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore. This way, reparation payments paved the way for Japan's economic involvement in Southeast Asia, allowing it to pursue economic interest in the region.

Another aspect of this period, again motivated by the goal of expanding Japan's economy, is the policy of a triangular relationship with the US and Southeast Asia. This strategy, coordinated with US Cold War policies, aimed at bringing together Japanese know-how, US capital and Southeast Asian raw materials, in order to secure strategic resources and sustain the economic growth.

The second phase of Japanese policy towards Southeast Asia is characterized with the active involvement of Japan in the region's development. This was partly due to the increasing pressure from the international community that Japan share a burden on the international arena as a “developed” country. Оn the other hand, this shift towards participation in the region was motivated by the new US policy on the development of Southeast Asia that aimed to protect South Vietnam from communist expansion. These changes contributed to the extensive Japanese engagement towards Southeast Asia, manifested through huge investments of capital and the involvement in development plans and projects. During this period Japan assisted the establishment of Asian Development Bank; the (ASPAC); the Ministerial Conference for the Economic Development of Southeast Asia etc. In spite of the increased involvement, however, the essence of the Japanese policy didn’t change significantly, as it remained focused on the triangular relationship it was fostering.

During the early 1970s Japan was at the turning point for its post-war process, after Okinawa's reversion, and the normalization of Sino-Japanese diplomatic relations. However it had no clear vision for its future diplomatic policies. Meanwhile, the international society continued viewing Japan as solely pursuing its own economic interests. With the end of the Vietnam war in 1975 and the US withdrawal from the region, Japan was expected to take on international responsibility in Southeast Asia. As a result, Japan became determined that as the second-biggest economic power at the time, it should make international contribution to the region, setting the starting point of the vision of the Fukuda doctrine.

Japan initially viewed ASEAN as economically strategic, but remained insouciant to the association until the early 1970s. ASEAN was established at a time when the Japanese government was prioritizing the reversion of Okinawa from the United States over an active role in the ASEAN region. When Japan was rid of the Okinawa problem, attitude towards ASEAN had already turned negative. ASEAN's adoption of a neutralization policy in 1971 was deleterious to Japan's foreign policy on supporting an organization whom incorporated neutralization.

Towards 1975, however, the Tokyo government had no choice but to abandon its foreign policy on minimal involvement with organization embodying neutralization, and to establish negotiations with ASEAN countries. The growing fear of Japan's economic domination amongst Southeast Asian nations resulted in collective actions by ASEAN against Japan, exemplified by acute anti-Japanese demonstrations.

Changes in Southeast Asian security environment following the new realities of 1975 engendered a major shift in Japan's approach to foreign policy in the region. Prior to 1975, conflict between East and West defined the security of ASEAN in purely military terms, which also meant the insignificant role of Japan in the view of ASEAN nations. After the liberation of Vietnam and the fall of Kampuchea government to the communists, combined with the declining presence of American forces in Southeast Asia, ASEAN nations began to perceive their own security in terms of raising the standard living of their people. The recognition that military power alone could not secure ASEAN interests gave way to a new priority of economic well-being. This change in priority led to a redefinition of security from that of a military perspective to one that was economic, wherein Japan could play a decisive role in contributing to ASEAN economic development and political stability.

"First, Japan, a nation committed to peace, rejects the role of a military power”

Fukuda stated that even though Japan had the capability to rearm and to produce nuclear weapons, it steered clear of resurrecting its military past. Fukuda used article 9 of the 1946 constitution to reassert Japan's pacifist stance post-war. For the ASEAN nations and Southeast Asia as a whole, this statement served as a psychological reassurance to the memories of Japanese aggression in the second world war.

"Second, Japan, as a true friend of the countries of Southeast Asia will do its best for consolidating the relationship of mutual confidence and trust based on “heart-to-heart” understanding with these countries”

The Prime Minister called for mutual confidence and trust between Japan and ASEAN by emphasizing the words “heart to heart” in his definition of a development of relation between Japan and ASEAN.

"Third, Japan will be an equal partner of ASEAN and its member countries, and cooperate positively with them in their own efforts to strengthen their solidarity and resilience"

Fukuda declared Japan as “an equal partner” who would “walk hand-in-hand with ASEAN.” The word “equal” implied the fear of Japanese economic dominance (“economic animal”) amongst ASEAN members – by being “an equal partner,” Japan would no longer seek dominance in the Asian scene nor would it regard other Asian nations as inferior to itself.

Japan's efforts to providing itself a political role in ASEAN and Indochina was dubbed a neo-realist approach, made possible by a declining United States presence and commitments in Southeast Asia. This approach, manifested by the rejection of military force and emphasis on economic power, demonstrated Japan's belief in the use of soft power. It was for this very reason that Japan was so keen on encouraging the development of multilateralism in Southeast Asia.

This approach to foreign policy in a sense was intended to establish a ‘political coordination’ between Japan and ASEAN as a regional actor. Fukuda had warned, in the area of trade, it was not in Japan's interest to form an exclusivist economic bloc with ASEAN. The Prime Minister's warning in effect functioned as a switch to a ‘political role’ in ASEAN and Indochina from its conventional practice of providing economic assistance. Moreover, by forging close diplomatic ties, what Sueo Sudo calls a ‘special relationship,’ with the organization through the use of FDI, ODA and other financial aids, Japan would try to establish a greater role for itself in the development of ASEAN region. Fukuda further implied Japan's responsibility in the region and its larger role as a world leader by acting as an informant on current developments in international issues that could directly affect member nations.

The sudden American withdrawal from Indochina left Southeast Asia vulnerable to pressure from the Soviet Union and People's Republic of China (PRC), both of which were not in the interest of Japan.

The Soviet Union and China, aware of an opportunity presented in Southeast Asia following the decline of U.S. hegemony in the region, grappled for influence. China, in particular, was concerned with the “Soviet hegemony” in the internal communist movement and took concrete measures to prevent further Soviet influence. The 1978 Asia visit to Malaysia and Singapore by Prime Minister Deng Xiao Ping reflected PRC's attempt to win over the ASEAN governments as an ally capable of supporting PRC's interest in the region. On the other hand, the Soviet Union developed a thought-control system in which it would try to coax Southeast Asian nations into thinking of Chinese diplomacy as a form of new imperialism. The Soviet deputy foreign minister visit to ASEAN states to discuss on friendship treaties and economic aids stands as a strong proof for its determination in Southeast Asia during the 1970s. Japan, imbibing all the happenings and changes in the power balance in Southeast Asia, feared for its position, security, and economy which, until the early 1970s, had been under the United States wing. As the last resort to curb further communist influence, Japan decided to offer itself as an alternative power base of Asia. Argued by Haddad, this goal is perhaps the true “thrust of the Fukuda doctrine.”

To exercise power politics, Japan took responsibility for the strengthening of member states’ economies and the inculcation in ASEAN a belief in the idea of peaceful coexistence with the three communist states of Laos, Kampuchea and Vietnam. The strengthening of ASEAN economies would raise the standard of living of the people, hence improving the image of Japan in the region. Moreover, the peaceful coexistence belief undergirded by Japan would serve as a bulwark against the penetration of Soviet Union and People's Republic of China. ASEAN was initially formed as a non-communist alliance, which meant the members shared a common feeling of threat from the Indochinese communist states. Malaysia and Thailand, in particular, bordered these states and were exercising joint military operations along their borders against communist guerrillas. This consternation worked to Japan's advantage. ASEAN needed a strong base against communist influence as the U.S. withdrew from the region, and Japan was the only power within suitable distance. As Thai Commerce Minister Suthi alluded on the relationship between Japan and Southeast Asia,
“Thailand is a country which is adjacent to communist nations…Japan and Thailand have the relationship of mutual dependence and assistance. The development of Thailand also serves to ensure Japan’s security.”
The statement implied the close connection between Japan and Southeast Asian nations' security.

The Japanese policies after the promulgation of the Fukuda Doctrine in regards to Southeast Asia can be divided into three main areas: bridging the gap between ASEAN and Indochina; serving as economic model and providing economic assistance; and promoting Japanese soft power.

After the end of the Vietnam War, Japanese assumed a political role of bridging the gap between Indochina and ASEAN. It attempted to utilize economic assistance to foster better relationships between the three Indochinese countries Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia and the other states in the region. In regards to building bridges between Southeast Asian countries with Vietnam in particular, Japan employed two tactics. First, it granted economic aid to Hanoi, hoping that it would be used to purchase commodities from other ASEAN countries. It was argued that with developing economic ties, the relations between the two sides would improve. Second, Japan attempted, to resort to discontinuation of its aid to Hanoi in order to exert pressure on the latter's behavior toward neighboring countries. In addition, Japan tried to assist the postwar reconstruction of the country, by providing grant of 55 million dollars to the Government of South Vietnam for the purchase of necessary Japanese equipment and materials.

At the end of 1978, however, Japan's current policy towards Vietnam could no longer continue, as Vietnam invaded Cambodia - an act widely condemned by the international community, including US, China and most of ASEAN members. In April 1979 Japan notified, unofficially, Vietnam the freeze of all assistance and made renewal contingency upon Vietnamese withdrawal from Cambodia. In addition, following the US stance on the issue, Japan continued to see the Government of Democratic Kampuchea as the legitimate government of Cambodia and refused to recognize the Government set by Vietnam in Phnom Penh. It may be argued that it would have been more beneficial to Japan to have a softer stance to Vietnam and keep the channels of dialogue open, however it was not ready to assume such political role and part ways with the US. This showed that even after the Fukuda Doctrine, there was still a large discrepancy between Japan's economic power and its political role in the international arena.

Yet, in spite of Japan's failure to play a political role of building bridges in regards to Indochina and Vietnam in particular, Japan managed to strengthen its position in the region. Following the Vietnamese invasion of Kampuchea, it undertook to provide increased economic assistance, especially to Thailand to help the country cope with the new menace from Indochina, supporting the "front line" state of the conflict.

The second area of development of Japanese policies after the Fukuda Doctrine is Japan's economic strategy towards Southeast Asia. During the 1970s Japan realized the importance of furthering the interests of Japanese businesses and included this component in its foreign policy. This coincided with the assumption that Japan has achieved the third stage of the “flying geese” pattern of development - an economic model that was influential to Japanese lawmakers at the time. That change encouraged transfers of labor-intensive industries to Southeast Asia. Southeast Asian countries were also eager to receive Japanese Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in the pursuit of their own industrialization. The transfer was further supported by Japanese Official Development Assistance (ODA), which at the time was mainly tied aid. It paved the way for Japanese businesses to work on development projects and promoted the penetration for Japanese FDI in the region. As a result of this convergence of interests, Southeast Asian countries first welcomed Japanese textile industries, then electronics and vehicle-assembly businesses, contributing to the development of new economic links.

FDI's role increased even more during the 80s, after the Plaza Accord of 1985, that appreciated the yen and gave an incentive to Japanese companies to produce abroad. The main beneficiaries of those increased capital flows were Indonesia, Singapore and Thailand. By 1992 Japan had become the largest investor in the region, excluding the Philippines, where the US still remained in the first place.

Aid also came from the private sector. In July 1977, the Overseas Trade Development Association Foundation of Japan (OTDAF) revised its rules, easing restrictions on loans to medium and small Japanese companies’ overseas investments. The new rule allowed firms to request for loans even if it did not hold more than 50% of the investment.

Following the Fukuda Doctrine, Japan undertook major changes in terms of its ODA. As the international community had started to recognize Japan as a developed country, it had to start bearing the accompanying responsibilities. After the US's withdrawal from the region, Japan had to replace America's presence with an expansion of aid and trade networks in the region. For that purpose Japan undertook to increase ODA in 1978, announcing a plan to double its ODA in three years in the First Medium-Term Target of ODA. In that spirit, Japan's ODA dramatically grew in magnitude from the late 1970s throughout the 1980s. In 1983 it became the third largest donor country among the DAC members and the second largest in 1986. Over 30% of the total Japanese ODA by 1980 was directed to Southeast Asia, with the main recipient being Indonesia, followed by Thailand, Philippines and Malaysia.

In addition to this rapid expansion of the amount of ODA, Japan launched another major change. Due to the growing criticisms by industrial nations of the commercial orientation of Japanese aid and its vast foreign trade surplus, combined with US pressure to eliminate tied ODA loans, in 1978 Japan decided to start untying its aid. It issued a joint communiqué with the US, announcing these intentions. The move was going to make the Japanese development projects accessible to other companies, especially allowing US companies to compete for Japanese aid-funded contracts. The process of untying continued during the 1980s and 1990s with the levels of untied loans increasing from 65.2% in 1980 to 97.7 in 1995.

In regards to the shaping of “special” relationship with ASEAN, Japan engaged with the organization in many ways, including negotiations to establish the Common Fund, the International Tin Agreement, rubber and sugar agreements. In the 1977 Second Japan-ASEAN Forum various agreements were reached - such as providing 1 billion to ASEAN industrial projects; further study of STABEX (export stabilization) by a joint committee of Japanese and ASEAN experts; reduction of tariff and non-tariff barriers and improvement of the generalized preference system for ASEAN products within the framework of the Tokyo Round; establishment of cultural exchange programs. And although all of these agreements were implemented in the following years (except STABEX), economic cooperation between Japan and ASEAN did not progress significantly, leading to ASEAN's dissatisfaction. Even after Japan's reduction of tariffs in 1978 on a number of products, including coconut oil, palm oil, bananas, shrimps, and canned pineapples, ASEAN still demanded much larger concessions. It can be argued that in a sense, Fukuda's aspirations for "heart-to-heart" relations had unexpectedly raised ASEAN's hopes for Japan's economic offers to the region. In the following years trade negotiations became the core aspect of Japan-ASEAN economic relations. However, as economic cooperation progressed rather slowly, criticisms and negative feelings dominated Japan-ASEAN relations.

One of the reasons for the birth of the Fukuda Doctrine was partly the concern for Japan's image in Southeast Asia. It may be argued that the rise of anti-Japanese feelings in the 1970s and the backlash toward the rapidly increasing dependence on Japan in regards to trade, investment and assistance contributed to the formulation of the doctrine. As it is described by Kazuo Ogoura: “"Some people sarcastically labelled the country “Faceless Japan” or “Banana Japan”, the latter implying that the Japanese did not understand Asia because they were yellow on the outside (Asian in appearance) but white on the inside (Western in thinking).”"

These sentiments had an influence in the way Japan established its future policies. The country decided to project its soft power as a mean to broaden its relations beyond the economic field, further contributing to long-term stable ties with Southeast Asia. The Japanese strategy was adopted based on two main factors: Japan becoming the second biggest world economy and model for Asian countries; the inability of other Asian countries to utilize soft-power in the same manner. The soft power approach included various elements, such as economic influence (ODA) and socio-cultural aspects (promotion of culture, exchanges, and cooperation on different levels).

As a part of that policy, the ASEAN Cultural Fund was established in 1977 to promote intra-ASEAN cultural exchanges as well as between ASEAN countries and third parties. Two years later, in 1979 the Southeast Asia Youth Invitation Program was set to encourage better mutual understanding through the invitation of outstanding young Southeast Asian leaders to Japan. A Japan Scholarship Fund for ASEAN Youth for an yearly amount of 3 million dollars was also established. Other initiatives included: the Human Resources Development Project (1981); the Japan-ASEAN Research Cooperation Fund (1982) promoting intra-ASEAN area studies and Japan-ASEAN academic exchange; the ASEAN Japan Friendship Program for the 21st Century (1983) promoting students trips and exchanges.

The doctrine was not without problems, at least on the Japanese side. Immediately following the agreement on setting aside 1 billion yen to fund construction projects, the Diesel plant proposal was met with opposition from Indonesia which feared competition with its domestic industry. The disagreement was eventually resolved when Indonesia and Singapore reached an export-limitation agreement in which Singapore would not export any engines to Indonesia unless requested. Nevertheless, this difference in views amongst member states increased anxiety on the Japanese side, whom demanded member states reach a mutual agreement if they want funds to be extended.

The Japanese were further concerned with the capability of recipient nation's infrastructure. The members of ASEAN were much behind in technological development, causing Japanese diplomats to be worried about the feasibility of advanced technical projects in the region. Furthermore, Japan was cautious of ASEAN members’ order of priority, often worrying that ASEAN members were not highly appreciative of the proposed Japanese-funded industrial projects.

The STABEX (export stabilization) fund proposal also faced complications on the Japanese side. Despite continuous reassertion of a desire for a STABEX system, Japan had so far only agree on a joint-examination of the possibility of establishing such a fund. The problem with STABEX is its defiance to the previously agreed GATT and its high political sensitivity. Internationally, ASEAN is pressuring Japan to open up its import markets while the Western counterpart requests it to decrease exports. Domestically, the Liberal Democratic Party’s electoral votes were highly dependent on the business and agricultural sectors, both of which are hostile to STABEX for reasons of competition.

The Japan-Southeast Asia friend and foe relationship can be characterized by material interests and historical antagonism caused by Japan’s imperialistic past. However, Overall, there was an enhancement of the relations.

A significant incident was the increase of Southeast Asia’s anxiety in the 1970s when Japan expanded its economic practices and raised exports of synthetic rubber. The Tokyo government eased the tension by accepting ASEAN demands and limiting its production of synthetic rubber, attending ASEAN Post Ministerial Meeting (PMC), and becoming a dialog partner.

The enhancement of the Japan-Southeast Asia relations was not only a result of Japan’s reassurance efforts, but also a result of two significant fears brought about by the change in the strategic landscape of the region. One is the emergence of a power vacuum caused by the U.S. withdrawal from the region and the shift of the structure of rivalry from U.S. versus the Soviet Union and China to the Soviet Union versus China and U.S. The other is Japan’s rising influence in the region at the time. Japan was undergoing a rapid economic development, reviving material power and geostrategic resources such as Okinawa. In this situation, the Fukuda Doctrine reassured that despite the power vacuum, Japan would not dominate the region.

Japan's consistent adherence to the Doctrine contributed to the longevity of the positive relations. Japan participated in the peacebuilding missions in Southeast Asia since the 1990s. The emphasis was put on “human security” during the 1997 Asian financial crisis, during which Japan supported social stability through economic assistance. Furthermore, Japan has also been supporting ASEAN’s community-building efforts since the early 2000s, in an attempt to strengthen its political-security and to form economic and socio-cultural communities. The Fukuda Doctrine, as Kei Koga, a researcher of the Center for Strategic and International Studies writes in his report, "Transcending the Fukuda Doctrine", “has been instrumental in defining Japan’s approach toward ASEAN’s efforts to integrate politically.”

Koga further argues that the current Japan-Southeast Asian relations have developed beyond socio-cultural, economic, to include political and security dimensions, and at a point where they can help shape and direct the region. Further progress is essential, considering the rise of China and the uncertainty over US-Southeast Asia policy under President Donald Trump.

The reactions of ASEAN countries shifted from being cautious but optimistic in August, to openly hostile at the end of 1977. If the promises could be fulfilled, the Doctrine was welcomed. In fact, The ASEAN members, regretting America's withdrawal, initially encouraged Japan to play a bigger role as long as Japan doesn't become a military threat. Nonetheless, the feeling of suspicion that Japan would not fulfill the promise of the doctrine was prevalent among these countries due to Japan's past of not delivering its promises. Additionally, the fact that Japanese visible trade surplus for July was as much as US$2.05 billion added to the extant feeling of suspicion. The reaction gradually turned inimical, which could be perceived to be Japanese ‘foot dragging’. There was caution, for example on Japanese credibility, with no aid to ASEAN being made.

China's reaction, on the other hand, was more complex. It supported Japan's effort for a larger influence, in that Japan was strengthening its defensive power in the region. This was due to China's intention to minimize the influence of the Soviet Union, which was identified as China's primary enemy. However, simultaneously, it was not delighted to see a U.S. ally exercising influence on Southeast Asia.

The United States's response was positive. Present American policy in Southeast Asia take root in July 1973 with the announcement of the Nixon Doctrine. As a consequence of this doctrine, America pulled its land forces out of Asia. Following the Nixon doctrine, America espoused another major set of beliefs. The Ford Doctrine, announced in 1975, called for the normalization of relations with China. These elements, along with the collapse of the three Indochinese countries to communism, shaped American policy towards ASEAN countries, with the key determination being the protection of the non-communist countries while maintaining good relations with China and withdrawing from the region. Thus, America, as well as China, was supportive of Japan's new advance in the region.

The reaction of Vietnam, the most powerful Indochinese communist state, changed before and a while after the Fukuda visit. Its attitude went from being hostile to a more benign one. At first, Vietnam viewed Japan as a supporter of capitalist interest due to Japan-U.S. alliance and ASEAN as a hostile military alliance.

However, the growing hostility resulting from a war with Kampuchea in 1978, and the need for outside funding for its ambitious five-year economic development plan left Vietnam little choice but to seek for financial support from Japan. Despite Japanese conditionality, the full repayment of outstanding debts of South Vietnam's, Fukuda made an extraordinary statement that moved the stalled negotiations forward, which received a positive reaction from Vietnam.

Overall, the Doctrine was perceived as a promise of a strengthening of political and economic bonds, however, over time, the reversal of the trend could be depicted. This reversal was due to the fear that Japan would be less focused on ASEAN. Japan's external and internal policies in the last quarter of 1978, was affected by the development of Sino-Japanese relations, the change of leadership from pro-ASEAN leader Fukuda to pro-China leader Ohira, the competition for the “China market” among OECD countries, the uncertainty in the Southeast Asia region with the influx of refugees into ASEAN from the conflicts in Indochina.

Domestic views of the government's new policy towards ASEAN were diverse. Views of press, the bureaucracy, the business community and opposition (political) parties were different, but essential.

The press, in spite of being criticized for sympathizing with the Liberal Democratic Party, exercised great influence over national consensus on Japan's new role in Southeast Asia. Journal articles published during and after the visit predominantly argued in favor of the Fukuda doctrine. If any criticism were visible, it would only be in the area concerning the articulation of the doctrine. The press demanded that the doctrine does better to change Japan's narrow attitude towards foreign nations and improving its cultural ties with other countries, particularly Southeast Asia, as well as refining the educational system to one that puts greater emphasis on foreign languages.

Likewise, the bureaucracy regarded the visit as an invariable success, and that it proved the Prime Minister's ability to convince his hosts “to open a new page in Asia’s history.” Despite the Ministry of Finance resistance to cultural fund, the bureaucracy nevertheless wholly agreed to endorse the doctrine.

The reaction of the business community, in contrast, was to some degree intricate. Amongst positive reactions to the Overseas Trade Development Association Foundation of Japan's revision, there was a growing fear that the unbridled assistance to Southeast Asian industrialization may ineluctably drive Japanese manufacturers out of the ASEAN market. Regardless, those supporting of the doctrine argued against such thought by interpreting industrialization as the increase in standard of living which could subsequently engender higher income and more demand for Japanese products.

Opposition parties, on the other hand, found themselves with no saying in the materialization of the doctrine. The Social Democratic Party (JSP) and Japanese Communist Party (JCP) meekly argued that the doctrine was merely a reassertion of Japan's subservience to the United States in another form. In particular, the JCP disproved aid to puppet governments, deploring that it was no different from America's aid to ineptitude government of Saigon, Phnom Penh and Vientiane. The two parties, however, never really found support for their statements.

The reaction of the people in Japan, by the end of 1997, was comparably hostile, and Fukuda's popularity was declining. This was due to the well-known fact of American displeasure with the Japanese economy, and the feeling of unrest in Japan as the unemployment rate was not improving.

The Fukuda Doctrine has received considerable attention over the years in Japan and Southeast Asia. The articulation and the implementation of the Doctrine improved Japan's image. The Doctrine itself became “a symbol of amity and cooperation between Japan and Southeast Asia.” According to the opinion polls in seven ASEAN countries (Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam) in 2014, the majority of the public believed that their state-to-state relationship with Japan was friendly and dependable.

The Doctrine continues to be significant for Japan's policy towards Southeast Asia relations in the post-Cold War era. The doctrine served as “the blueprint of Japan’s foreign policy towards Southeast Asia", and established new norms with its three principles. The Fukuda Doctrine survived the Cold War, unlike the Brezhnev Doctrine, or the Nixon Doctrine that disappeared under it. Rather, it strengthened the discourse about the Japan-Southeast Asian relations into the 21st century. Thus, there is an expectation that it’ll evolve and remain relevant.

References to the Doctrine are still being made. The son of Fukuda Takeo, Fukuda Yasuo, made a reference to it when he became Prime Minister in 2007. Although he did not update the Doctrine as anticipated, he declared that ASEAN and Japan would be ”partners thinking together, acting together and sharing a future vision.”

This was later highlighted in ASEAN Chairman's Statement on the ASEAN Post Ministerial Conferences (PMC) + 1 Sessions in Singapore in 2008. It read; “The Meeting welcomed the “New Fukuda Doctrine,” in which Prime Minister of Japan Yasuo Fukuda declared that ASEAN and Japan would be partners thinking together, acting together and sharing a future vision.” Other than diplomats, journalists and scholars also made reference to the Doctrine in major conferences held in Japan and Southeast Asia in 2007, to mark the 30th anniversary for the doctrine.

According to Tadokoro Masayuki’s argument in 2010, the principles of the Doctrine are relevant not only for Southeast Asia, but also for Africa today. He argues that “given the amicable relations that have developed between Japanese and the people in ASEAN countries since then, we should not be too cynical about the roles played by such political initiatives,” and that “For Japan, Africa represents neither an object of pity nor a security threat nor a mere supplier of natural resources nor a giant zoo, but rather a partner with whom Japanese should be willing to work together.”

However, the principles of the Doctrine are considered not enough to articulate the current relationship and to enhance it. In the post-Cold War era, ASEAN has expanded its functions to include strengthening the security for regional peace and stability. ASEAN's importance has increased due to the strategic uncertainty by the power shift to China. Japan has advanced “de facto regional integration” with ASEAN through aid, trade, investment and cultural exchanges. ASEAN, as a result, has gained the dominant position in the region. Japan-Southeast Asia relations are now at a point where they can help shape and direct the region. Japan and ASEAN are both pursuing goals to better the issues of human rights, the rule of law, and other democratic principles. Kei Koga argues that there is an opportunity to enhance their political cooperation that transcends the Fukuda Doctrine, in pursuing these shared goals.

Fukuda was born in Takasaki, Gunma, the eldest son of politician (later the 67th Prime Minister) Takeo Fukuda. He grew up in Setagaya, Tokyo, attending Azabu High School and graduating from Waseda University in 1959 with a degree in economics. After university, he joined Maruzen Petroleum (now part of the Cosmo Oil Company). He was only minimally involved in politics over the next seventeen years, working his way up to section chief as a typical Japanese "salaryman". He was posted to the United States from 1962-64. While his father Takeo Fukuda was prime minister from 1976–78, Yasuo became a political secretary. From 1978 to 1989, he was a director of the Kinzai Institute for Financial Affairs, serving as a trustee from 1986 onward.

Yasuo Fukuda

Following the resignation of Prime Minister Shinzō Abe, Fukuda was elected as President of the Liberal Democratic Party and became Prime Minister in September 2007. Fukuda was the first son of a former Japanese Prime Minister (Takeo Fukuda) to also take up the post.

On 1 September 2008, Fukuda announced his resignation, triggering another LDP leadership election.

Although Japan hosted the G8 summit meeting without mishap during Fukuda's time in office, he himself earned little or no credit from ordinary Japanese, and when he resigned, he became the first of the G8 leaders to leave office.

Fukuda also served as president of the Japanese Canoe Federation prior to his September 2007 election as Prime Minister.

Fukuda ran for the House of Representatives in 1990 and won a seat. He was elected deputy director of the Liberal Democratic Party in 1997 and became Chief Cabinet Secretary to Yoshirō Mori in October 2000. He resigned his position as Chief Cabinet Secretary on 7 May 2004 amid a large political scandal related to the Japanese pension system.

Fukuda was considered a contender for the leadership of the LDP in 2006, but, on 21 July, he decided that he would not seek the nomination. Instead, Shinzō Abe succeeded Junichirō Koizumi as leader of the LDP and Prime Minister of Japan. One of his most noted policy goals is to end prime ministerial visits to Yasukuni Shrine. In June 2006, Fukuda joined 134 other lawmakers in proposing a secular alternative to the shrine, citing constitutional concerns.

Following Abe's resignation in September 2007, Fukuda announced that he would run in the Liberal Democratic Party leadership election, which would also determine the prime minister, given the LDP's majority in the House of Representatives.

Fukuda received a great deal of support in his bid, including that of the LDP's largest faction, led by Foreign Minister Nobutaka Machimura, of which Fukuda is a member. Finance Minister Fukushiro Nukaga, who initially had intended to run for the leadership, also backed Fukuda. Fukuda's only competitor for the leadership, Tarō Asō, publicly acknowledged the likelihood of his own defeat a week before the election.

In the election, on 23 September, he defeated Aso, receiving 330 votes against Aso's 197. Fukuda was formally elected as Japan's 91st prime minister on 25 September. He received 338 votes, almost 100 more than necessary for a majority, in the House of Representatives; although the House of Councillors (the upper house), led by the opposition Democratic Party, elected Ichirō Ozawa over Fukuda by a margin of 133 to 106. This deadlock was then resolved in favor of the lower house's choice, according to Article 67 of the Constitution.

Fukuda and his cabinet were formally sworn in by Emperor Akihito on September 26.

On 11 June 2008, a non-binding censure motion was passed by parliament's opposition-controlled upper house against Yasuo Fukuda. Filed by the Democratic Party of Japan and two other parties, it was the first censure motion against a prime minister under Japan's post-war constitution. Ahead of the G8 summit, it attacked his handling of domestic issues including an unpopular medical plan and called for a snap election or his resignation.
On 12 June, a motion of confidence was passed by the lower house's ruling coalition to counter the censure.

On 1 September 2008, Fukuda announced his resignation, citing reasons related to improving the flow of the political process. The sudden announcement began with a call for an emergency press conference issued at 6:00 pm, The purpose not disclosed until 10 minutes prior to the scheduled start of the press conference. The resignation was widely compared to the sudden resignation of Abe a year earlier. Fukuda said that while Abe's resignation was due to health reasons, his own resignation was motivated by a desire to remove impediments to legislative and political process due to deadlock between his party and the opposition-controlled upper house of the Diet.

The resignation led to another leadership election within the LDP. Tarō Asō was viewed as the likely front-runner to replace Fukuda, and was elected a week later. His popularity was hit by a controversial medical plan for elderly people, falling below 30% at one stage. He said:Today, I have decided to resign. We need a new line-up to cope with a new session of parliament. My decision is based on what I thought the future political situation ought to be. The Democratic Party has tried to stall every bill so it has taken a long time to implement any policies. For the sake of the Japanese people, this should not be repeated. If we are to prioritize the people's livelihoods, there cannot be a political vacuum from political bargaining, or a lapse in policies. We need a new team to carry out policies.

Taro Aso was elected to succeed Fukuda as LDP President on 22 September. Fukuda and his cabinet resigned "en masse" on 24 September 2008, to make way for a new Cabinet headed by Aso. Aso was elected as Prime Minister by the House of Representatives on the same day.

In June 2014, Fukuda visited Beijing for secret meetings with Chinese government officials. The meeting was seen as the first after nearly 18 months between a senior Japanse political leader and Chinese officials. During the meeting, Fukuda was passed the message that President Xi wanted to meet with the Japanese Prime Minister Abe. Following this, in late July Fukuda conveyed the details of the discussion to Abe. On getting the consent from Abe, Fukuda returned to Beijing and on 28 July informed Xi about the consent from Abe, and thus laid the groundwork for the Japan-China summit that was held in November 2014.

When Fukuda was Chief Cabinet Secretary to former Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi he was reported to have made highly controversial comments during an off-the-record discussion with reporters in June 2003 regarding the victims of rape by male members of the Waseda University "Super Free" club, according to an article in the weekly magazine "Shukan Bunshun".

The magazine quoted Fukuda as saying: "There are women who look like they are saying 'Do it to me'. Those who have that kind of appearance are at fault, because men are black panthers." In response, Fukuda claimed that the "Shukan Bunshun" had distorted his comments, stating that he had never intended to defend rape, and told a parliamentary panel afterward that rape was "a criminal act and an atrocious crime."

One of the major issues during Fukuda's first months in office was the status of Japan's Indian Ocean refueling mission. After the 11 September attacks and the subsequent invasion of Afghanistan, the Diet passed a bill that allowed Japanese oil tankers to provide fuel for American ships involved in military operations. When Fukuda became Prime Minister he vowed to continue the mission, this despite the fact that the DPJ which opposed the authorization bill now had a majority in the upper house. After several months of debate and aborted attempts at compromise the upper house rejected the bill to continue the mission. However, the bill ultimately became law as Fukuda used the LDP's 2/3 majority in the lower house to win successful passage for the bill.

Fukuda's cabinet was formed on 26 September 2007. It was almost identical to Abe's. Since his administration started in September, their approval rating has continually dropped. According to "Asahi Shimbun" newspaper, in late April the disapproval rating of the Cabinet was 60 percent and the approval rating at 25 percent. Fukuda reshuffled his cabinet on 1 August 2008.

In March 2008, Croatian President Stjepan Mesić presented Fukuda with the Grand Order of Queen Jelena with the Sash and the Croatian Morning Star. The decoration was given to Fukuda for his efforts in promoting friendly relations between Japan and Croatia.