Stinchecum Who Tells the Tale

Transcription

Who Tells the Tale?: `Ukifune': A Study in Narrative Voice
Author(s): Amanda Mayer Stinchecum
Source: Monumenta Nipponica, Vol. 35, No. 4 (Winter, 1980), pp. 375-403
Published by: Sophia University
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2384415 .
Accessed: 11/08/2013 10:59
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
.
Sophia University is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Monumenta
Nipponica.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 142.157.75.3 on Sun, 11 Aug 2013 10:59:40 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Who Tells the Tale?
'Ukifune':A Studyin NarrativeVoice
by AMANDAMAYER STINCHECUM
'The one whospeaks (in the narrative)is not the one whowrites(in real life)
and the one whowritesis not the one who is.' ROLANDBARTHES.'
Narrative,Narrator,Speaker of theText
by
Does narrative
WEx
rHO tellsthetale? Who narratesthe narrative?
or are thesecognatesaccidental?Does
definition
requirea narrator2
everytexthavea narrator,
eitherexplicitor implied,or is therea mode
of discoursewhich'speaksitself'?These questionsariseas a matterof coursein
readingthefictionof JamesJoyce,VirginiaWoolf,WilliamFaulkner,and other
twentieth-century
novelists,as well as earlierwriterssuch as Jane Austenand
Gustave Flaubert. Here the narrator'spresenceoftenseems to be replaced,
overshadowedby that of the charactersthemselves.But what about the Genji
Monogatari?The word monogatariliterallymeans 'a tellingor recountingof
('to recountsomesomething';it strongly
impliesthe cognateverbmonogataru
thing,to tell a tale'), in whichthe teller,or narrator(katari-te)existsa priori.
Perhapswe can say that'narrator'is moreclearlycontainedwithinthe concept
of monogatari
thanin theEnglishword'narrative'.
suchas theOchikuboMonoIn earlyHeian-periodnarrativetales(monogatari)
gatari,the narratorplaces himself(or herself)betweenthe narrativeand us, the
by meansof commentsabout the characters
readers,guidingour understanding
of the Genji,
narration.In the firsttwo-thirds
and the story,and by descriptive
the readerhas a strongsense of the narrator'spresence,to the extentthatthe
thisnarratorquite
leadingscholarin thefield,TamagamiTakuya,has interpreted
the
if
who
records
as
she
were givingan
as a lady-in-waiting
story
concretely
recitalof a textwhichis itselfa recordof thetellingof thetale by
interpretative
who eitherwitnessedthe eventsdirectlyor heard
other,earlierladies-in-waiting
1 Roland Barthes,'An Introductionto the
StructuralAnalysis of Narrative', in New
LiteraryHistory,vi: 2 (Winter1975), p. 261.
2 RobertScholes and RobertKellogg make
this assumptionthe startingpoint for their
discussionof point of view in The Natureof
Narrative,Galaxy Books, OxfordU.P., 1968,
p. 240.
376
MonumentaNipponica,xxxv, 4
about themfromyet otherladies-in-waiting
who witnessedthemdirectly.3
But
evenwithinthepartof theworkdealingwiththelifeof HikaruGenji,thereare
manypassagesin whichwe seemto see directly
intotheheartsof thecharacters,
withouttheintervention
ofa narrator.
Theseincludelinesconveying
theinnermost
ofa character
thoughts
whichwe cannotinterpret
as thereportofa lady-in-waiting
who witnessedthesituation.4
But it is in thelast thirdof thework,in whichtheeventstakeplace mainlyin
Uji, that we feel the characters'innerworld open to us. Particularly
in those
chaptersin whichUkifune'splightreachesa crisiswe findtheflowofherthoughts
(and thoseof othersabout her)renderedapparentlywithoutanymediationby a
narrator.Oftentheformof thisnarrationis thatof directquotation,concluding
withthequotativeparticlesto,tote,or nado,and sometimesa verbsuchas omou
('she thinks').It also frequently
containsexclamatory
particlessuchas namu,zo,
and ka shi,whichone would expectto findin a directquotation,expressing
the
emotionof the speaker.For example,sonata ni nabiku-beki
ni wa arazu ka shi
toomou.... (vi, 135-136,'I certainly
mustnotyieldto him,shethinks... .'). Thus
directinteriormonologueis a kindof directdiscoursein Japaneseand contains
a quotativeparticle.
In otherpassages the characters'thoughtsor feelingsdo not appear as direct
quotationbutin a formcorresponding
to indirectspeech.Theyare markednotby
a phraseofdirectquotationsuchas toomoubutbyexpressions
suchas o omoi-yaru
('she wondersabout'), as in the sentence,mata konohitoni mie-tatematsuramu
o
omoi-yaru
namu,imijuikokoro-uki
(vi, 134. 4-5, 'and even wonderinghow could
she meetthisone is terriblewretchedness').
A variationof o omouis ni omou;for
ito
example, me-yasuku
ureshikaru-beki
kotoni omoite(vi, 148. 10-1 , 'she feelsit
to be a highlyproperand pleasingthing').Long adjectivalmodifiers
formanother
type of indirectquotation: kono hito ni ushi to omowarete,wasure-tamainamu
kokoro-bososa
wa,itofukoshiminikereba
(vi, 135.4-5, 'themiseryofbeingthought
odious and beingrejectedby thispersonsinksintoherverydeeply').Here, Ukifune's misery(kokoro-bososa)is amplifiedby the long modifyingclause that
3 TamagamiTakuya E hEW, 'GenjiMonogatari no Dokusha: Monogatari Ondoku-ron'
1 M
Mk)t
in Genji Monot: tP-a:,
gatari Hy6shaku MUtPO
, Kadokawa
Shoten, 1964-6, Bekkan I, Genji Monogatari
Kenkyd,1966,pp. 247-65.
4 All quotations from the text are from
Abe Akio V 4%kT_et al., ed., Genji Monogatari (Nihon Koten Bungaku Zensha *
ta:@h0,
Shogakukan, 1970-76. Unless
noted otherwise,all referencesare to the
'Ukifune' chapter. For the general reader,
correspondingchaptertitlesin English have
been included,fromEdward G. Seidensticker,
tr., The Tale of Genji, Alfred Knopf, New
York, 1976, 2 vols.
Nakano Koichi rPW4- citesii, 'Usugumo'
('A Rack of Cloud'), 438. 8-14, as evidence
against the viability of Tamagami's theory
('Genji Monogatarino Soshiji to Monogatari
Ondoku-ron' FJ -Q)
at
in
RS
Genji Monogatari,i (Nihon Bungaku Kenkyd
ShiryoSosho), Yuiseido,1969,pp. 206-7).
In thiscase the narratorcannot in any way
be interpreted
as a lady-in-waiting
who either
witnessedthe eventor heard it fromanother
lady who was a directwitness,but,according
to Nakano, mustbe more transcendental
and
omniscientthan any of the three narrators
Tamagami proposes.
STINCHECUM:
Who Tells the Tale?
377
the voice as Ukifune's(kono,'this',
precedesit. Thereare elementsthatidentify
indicatesUkifune'spoint of view),whileotheraspects,for example,the causal
('becauseit sankintoher'),can onlybe theresultofthe
construction
shiminikereba
referto thistypeof narrationas 'indirect
narrator'sreasoning.I shall hereafter
interiormonologue'.In general,one can say thatthe conclusiveform+ 'thinks'
correspondsto directinterior
(shuishikei
+ to omou),or some equivalentthereof,
form+ 'thinks'(ren'yokei+ omou),or some
monologue,whilethe continuative
equivalent,correspondsto indirectinteriormonologue.5
betweendirectand indirectdiscourseis
In Japanese,however,the distinction
intrudesinto a
not so clear as it is in English.The narrator'svoice frequently
thoughts
monologue),shadingthecharacter's
character's
discourse(usuallyinterior
Thustheentirenarration
tendsto becomereported
intonations.
withthenarrator's
speech.6This is similarto a thirdtypeof discoursein English,whichDorritCohn
has termed'narratedmonologue'.7She describesthiskindof narration,whichis
similarto the GermanerlebteRede and the Frenchstyleindirectlibre,as 'the
thethirdof a character'sthoughtsin his ownidiom,whilemaintaining
rendering
personformof narration'.8Cohn illustratesthesethreemodes of discourseas
follows:
He said: 'I did not come here yesterday.'
DIRECT STATEMENT:
He said that he had not gone therethe day before.
INDIRECTSTATEMENT:
NARRATEDMONOLOGUE:He had not come here yesterday.9
Note the changesin spatialand temporalloci: fromcometo gone,fromhereto
to thedaybefore.Cohn pointsout thatnarratedmonologue
there,fromyesterday
distinctmode peculiarto writtennarration;this is further
is a grammatically
demonstrated
by Ann Banfieldin her analysisof the 'freeindirectstyle'(style
indirectlibre).'0 Both Banfieldand Cohn remarkthat narratedmonologue,or
and adverbs associated with the
free indirectstyle,contains demonstratives
it
presenttenseand the character'sown spatiallocus, thusclearlydistinguishing
"
of Japaneseis reflected
by the
fromindirectdiscourse. The modal complexity
lack of suchclear categoriesof discourse.The grammarof reportedspeechdoes
5 Although Saeki Umetomo only draws
this conclusion in relation to adjectives,we
can expand it to referto reporteddiscoursein
monologue.
to interior
generaland particularly
See Saeki Umetomo 1*{MO:, 'Chokusetsu
Waho to Kansetsu Waho' EMM;m L SMI
,
in Jodai Kokugo-ho Kenkyu
aTiff5,
Daitobunka Daigaku Toyo Kenkyu-joSosho,
#3, 1966,pp. 42-3.
6 This is the reverseof Russian narrative,
in whichthe tone of thereportedspeechcasts
a shadow on the embeddingnarrativeand
influenceseven the narrator'stone. See V. N.
Volosinov, 'Reported Speech', in Ladislav
Matejka & KrystynaPomorska,ed., Readings
in RussianPoetics: Formalistand Structuralist
Views,MIT Press, 1971,pp. 167 ff.
7 Dorrit Cohn, 'Narrated Monologue:
Definitionof a FictionalStyle',in Comparative
Literature,xviii: 2 (Spring1966), pp. 97-112.
8 Cohn, pp. 97-8.
9 Cohn, p. 104.
10 Ann Banfield,'NarrativeStyle and the
Grammar of Direct and IndirectSpeech', in
Foundationsof Language, x (1973), pp. 1-39,
esp. pp. 10 ff.
11 Cohn, p. 105; Banfield,p. 10.
378
maybe
of verbaltense,and spatialand temporalreferents
not requireagreement
this(a correspondambiguous.An exampleof modernJapanesewilldemonstrate
in classicalJapanesecould be postulated,but an actual sentence
ing construction
classical
of
Japanesewould be muchless likelyto includea statedsubject,which
wouldcompoundtheambiguity).
Kare wa kyomatakokoni konaito itta.
He said, 'I won'tcome hereagain today.'
Removedfromany context,it is not clear whetherkoko ('here') refersto the
location of kare ('he') or that of the reportingspeakerwho is tellingus, 'He
The sameis
said . . .', althoughthelatterwouldbe themoreusual interpretation.
motiontowardthespeakertrueoftheverbkonai('won'tcome'),whichsignifies
but whichspeaker?The adverbof time,kyo('today'),mayreferto thetemporal
locus of kare or of the reportingspeaker.There is a furtherambiguityin the
Japanesewhichis notpresentin English:thesubjectoftheverbkonaimayor may
maybe removedbyinsertnotagreewiththesubjectofitta('said'). Thisambiguity
ingjibun ('himself')as the subjectof konai,but thenthe expressionno longer
rendershis wordsdirectlyand so no longercorrespondsto directdiscourse.Of
agree,but
coursein Englishreportedspeech,thesetwo subjectsdo notnecessarily
as to whethertheydo or notis limited.(In thelast examplebelow,
theambiguity
the two pronouns'he' may or may not referto the same person.)The following
possiblemeaningsand moreare all containedin thesingleJapaneseexample:
He
He
He
He
He
said, 'I won'tcome hereagain today.'
said, 'I won'tgo thereagain today.'
said, 'I won'tcome hereagain tomorrow.'
said, 'She won'tcome hereagain today.'
said thathe wouldn'tcome hereagain today.
Thus the possiblerenderings
of one sentenceof apparentlydirectquotationare
manifold.This phenomenonis directlyrelatedto the conceptof ba and bamen,
'linguisticsituation'.
In English,directspeech,indirectspeech,and narratedmonologueare gramin classicalJapanesemakes
maticallydistinct.The lack of such clear differences
thetransition
fromone to theothersmootherand moreeasilyaccomplished,
and
hencea more naturalfeatureof prose style.Saeki Umetomodemonstrates
that
evenwhatappearsto be directquotationin classicalJapaneseprose,markedat
the
theend ofthequotedexpressionby to,nado,or tote,is oftenshadedto reflect
speaker.'2Directquotationis at leasttheoretically
pointof viewof thereporting
couldbe madein classical
possiblein modernJapanese,and parallelconstructions
of Westernnovels,for
Japaneseas well,and mightoccurin Japanesetranslations
someoneelse's wordswouldnorinstance.But in practice,the sDeakerreporting
12
Saeki, p. 33.
STINCHECUM:
Who Tells the Tale?
379
mallyadapt thosewords,relatingthemto his own spatialand temporalloci-that
is, to theviewpointof thereporting
speaker.
narration(ji no bun)and interior
The subtlefusionof descriptive
monologueis
of theprosestyleof theGenji.'3
indeedone of themostprominent
characteristics
in theJapaneselanguagewhichmakespossibletheintensity
It is thisindeterminacy
worldofthenarrative
withwhichwe,as readers,see thefictional
tale(monogatari)
throughtheeyesof thecharacterswithinthework.
What is called kansetsuwaho('indirectdiscourse')in Japanese,particularly
in
thecase ofinterior
monologue,does notcorrespondto indirectspeechin English;
it is muchcloserto thefreeindirectstyleor narratedmonologue.BothJapanese
indirect
discourseand narratedmonologuemaycontaina numberofconstructions
cannot
that
of direct
appear in indirectspeechin Englishbut are characteristic
discourse: expressiveelementsand constructions,
incompletesentences,and
and quoted clauses (in Japanese,
different
dialectsor languagesin introductory
the lattercorrespondsto the use of honorific
language),'4as well as expressions
such as ureshiand kanashi,whichnormallyoccuronlyin first-person
discourse.
the demonstrative
elementsreferring
to the time or place of the
Furthermore,
reportedspeechact do not, in Japanese,necessarilybelongto the locus of the
reporting
speaker.
Thus whilethereis not an exactgrammatical
correspondence
betweennarrated
or freeindirectstyle,as Cohn and Banfielddefinethem,and whatI
monologue,
termindirectinteriormonologue(kansetsu-shiki
shinnaigo)in classicalJapanese,
the conceptsare close enoughin termsof literaryfunctionforus to be able to
comparethe use of thistechniquein literatures
as widelyseparatedas those of
eleventh-century
Japanand twentieth-century
Europe. Cohn describesthisfunction, statingthat in narratedmonologue, '. . . we move closer to the possibilityof
rendering
... thoughtsand feelingsof a character... not explicitly
formulated
in hismind[i.e.,as spokenexpression].
[It reveals]thatpartof thepsychewhichis
hiddenfromtheworldand half-hidden
fromthecensoringself;it can also more
readilyshowthemindas recipient
ofpassingimagesand sensoryimpressions
than
the morerhetoricalfirst-person
monologue."5In additionto the functionthat
Cohn ascribesto it, narratedmonologuealso allows the penetration
of another
voice-the voice of the narrator-intothe textat the same time as that of the
characterwhose thoughtsare being recorded.This interpenetration
of voices
permitsironicdistanceto open up in a contextwherewe leastexpectit,whenwe
believeourselvesto be confronting
thesouls of thecharacters.
directly
It is impossibleto discussnarrative
voiceor pointofviewwithoutencountering
'3
See Suzuki Kazuo !
*,, 'GenjiMonogatarino Hoj, Buntai: Shinnaigono Mondai'
t
in Genji
I
PllWQDM,
Monogatari,ii (Koza NihonBungaku),Kaishaku
to Kansho,Bessatsu(May 1978), pp. 163-84.
Throughouthis essay,a re-examination
of a
surveyof modes of discoursesin the Genji,
Suzuki reiteratesthat this fusionis typicalof
theGenfi(seepp. 167ff).He also notestheuse of
directinteriormonologueand indirectinterior
monologue and their frequency in other
major Heian-periodmonogatari(pp. 174 ff).
14
15
Banfield,
pp. 7-8.
Cohn, p. 110.
380
in accepting
Thereshouldbe no difficulty
theproblemof the narrator'sidentity.
thepremisethatthenarratorof a workof fictionis notthesame as thehistorical
personagewhoproducedtheworkduringsomecertain(althoughperhapsindeterminable)period. Until recently,Japanesescholarsdid not usuallymake this
personagewe
The narratorof the Genjiis not the eleventh-century
distinction.
and ifthereis indeeda
knowas MurasakiShikibu.The workis a createdentity,
narratorwithinthework,thatnarratoris createdbytheauthorand thusis notthe
same as thatauthor.The way or extentto whichthe narratorwithina textmay
expressthe viewsof thathistoricalpersonagewhomwe call the authorcan be
ofthenarrator
determined
onlyafterwe haveexaminedthattextand theworkings
withinthetext.In regardto a workas farremovedfromus in timeand conventions
thethoughtsof thepersonage
as theGenji,it is perhapsfutileto tryto determine
Murasaki Shikibu,based on the scatteredfactswe have about her life,and it
to projecttheseideas back onto
wouldbe a seriouserrorin criticalmethodology
to interpret
it. 6 In orderto avoidconfusioninthediscussion
thetextinattempting
thatfollows,1 shallcall thishistoricalpersonage(forexample,MurasakiShikibu)
in thisessay.
the'historicalauthor',and deal withhim(or her)no further
recites,tellsa tale?
Whatdo we meanbytheterm'narrator'-onewhonarrates,
The word has concreteand personalovertones;the narratoris not simplya
disembodiedvoice the subjectof a givenutterance but a voice thatimpliesa
itself,and beyondthat,a particular
attitudetowardthenarration
certainrhetorical
and to therecipient
ofthenarrative.
relationto theobjectofnarration
grammatical
a
situation
conditions
of
certain
linguistic
within
the
Hence the narratorspeaks
(ba or bamen).This linguisticsituation-thespeechact or paradigmof linguistic
performance-isdefinedas a triangularrelationship:a speaker,a topic,and a
situationor listener(recipient).That the speakeris sayingsomethingto the
of influencing
himwithrespectto thetopic,is central
withtheintention
recipient,
ofinventing
The necessity
an impersonal,
declarative
to theconceptofthenarrator.
styleof writtenJapaneseatteststo the particularimportanceof the linguistic
situationin Japanese.
Chinese)filledthisneed; in the
For centuries,
theuse ofkambun(Japanese-style
the de-aruverbform,whichneverappearsin naturalspoken
twentieth
century,
SincetheHeian period,the
writing.
Japanese,has replacedkambunforexpository
been
fromthatof official
quite
distinct
of
personal
communication
has
language
ofthelinguistic
situation(bamen)in Japanese
exchangesand records.The strength
has been discussedat lengthby the linguistTokieda Motoki.'1 The influenceof
thereporting
speakeron whatappearsto be directquotation(see p. 378, above)
narrationblendsinto interiormonologuein
and the ease withwhichdescriptive
andthedifficulty
situation
classicalJapaneseproseindicatetheforceofthelinguistic
in speakingfroma positionoutsideof it in Japanese.Whereasin Englishthefree
16 WayneC. Booth, TheRhetoric
of Fiction, Genron: Gengokateisetsuno Seiritsu X "-5
Universityof Chicago Press, 1961,pp. 151 ff. 19;S >--"fiD:X@S
cDJ;[, IwanamiShoten,1941,
17 Tokieda Motoki 41S1,
Kokugogaku pp. 38-56.
STINCHECUM:
Who Tells the Tale?
381
of written
distinct
grammatically
narrative,
indirectstyleis a specialcharacteristic
of
paradigm,in Japanesetheinfluence
fromthelanguageof thespeaker-recipient
in director
voice on thediscourseofindividualcharacters-whether
thenarrating
The linguisticsituation
indirectdiscourse is a resultof thatveryrelationship.
denies the
assertsitselfin Japanesein a contextwhichin Englishspecifically
relationship-inpassageswherethevoice of a characterblends
speaker-addressee
withand is shadedby thatof thenarrator.
As a resultofthisfeatureofJapanese,becausean impersonalmodeofnarration
perhaps
rarelyoccursin Heian-periodprose,thenarratoracquiresan importance
('narrativetales')
uniqueto classicalJapaneseliterature-notonlyin monogatari
dramatic,suchas nohand
butin modeswhichare usuallythoughtofas essentially
voiceofthenarratoris heardwellintothe
fjruri(puppetplays).The predominant
in theshi-shosetsu
(the'I-novel').
twentieth
century
thenarrator(katari-te)as thesubjectof expressionin passages
We can identify
the
personais evident.In theclassicalmonogatari,
wherethevoice of a narrating
referredto as soshiji
most obvious examplesare those passages traditionally
in whichthe narratoraddressesthe readerdirectly,
('narrator'scommentary'),
thatworld,judgingthe
steppingawayfromthecharactersof thetale,interpreting
is thespeakerwithin
for
Here
the
narrator
reader.
actions,
the
and their
characters
thelinguisticsituationthatis thetale. We recognizethevoice of the narratorby
means.The followingpassage,theconclusionof the
bothsemanticand linguistic
cited
'Yuigao'('EveningFaces') chapterof theGenji,is one of themostfrequently
examplesof narrator'scommentary.
Kayo no kuda-kudashikikoto wa,
anagachi ni kakuroe-shinobi-tamaishi
mo itoshikute,
mina morashi-todometaruo, nado mikadono mi-konaramu
kara ni, mimuhitosae katao-narazu,
mono-homegachi
naruto,tsukuri-gotomekite tori-nasuhito mo mono-shitamaikerebanamu. Amari mono-iisa
ga naki tsumi,sari-dokoronaku....
[I, 'Yfigao',269. 11-15]
His efforts
to concealthiskindoftroublesomethingwerepatheticand so I
had not let themcome out, but precisely because thereare even people
who thinkthewholethingis a fiction,
wondering,Just because he is the
emperor'sson, why do even people
who knowhimtendto praisehimand
thinkhe has no faults?[I have written
likethis.]Thereis no wayto avoid the
sin of gossiping....
If we look at the meaningof thispassage,the subjectof the expressionmina
o ('and so I had notletthemcomeout') cannotbe one of the
morashi-todometaru
forthewordsreferto theverymaking
whois thetopicofthenarrative,
characters
naku
of thenarrative.'8The expressionamarimonoiisaga nakitsumi,sari-dokoro
18 It is possible to considerthe subject of
fromthatofthecausal
thisexpressiondifferent
constructionand the commentat the close of
the passage, but for the purposes of our
discussion it does not make any difference
whetherthereis one or morenarratorsin this
sense.
For remarkson the possibilityof multiple
narrators in this passage and that at the
beginning of the 'Hahakigi' ('The Broom
382
('thereis no wayto avoid thesin of gossiping')can referonlyto a personawho
sees herselfas themakerof thenarrativeand declaresherselfto be such,thatis,
thenarrator.
Thereare also linguistic
(grammatical)
signsthatpointto thenarratorpersona.
The use of the honorificverb tamau(applied to Genji's actionsin the phrase
mo-'his efforts
to conceal'-and to some unidentified
kakuroe-shinobi-tamaishi
thereare people')
'people' in the phrasehitomo mono-shitamaikereba-'because
in
which
social
relation
the speaker's
to boththe
reflects
the linguisticsituation,
thecausal construction
in this
addresseeand thetopicis expressed.Furthermore,
phrasecan be attributed
onlyto a subjectwhocomments
about,formsconclusions
about,thepeoplewhoare criticizing
Genji,and aboutthemakingofthenarrative;
thewayitis.
thecausal construction
pointsto thereasonformakingthenarrative
The emphaticparticlenamufollowingthisconstruction
(whichI have translated
indicationofthe
as 'precisely')also derivesfromspokendiscourseand is a further
or affirming
his viewto the
presenceof a speakingsubjectexplainingsomething
addressee,that is, a narrator.'9Finally,the verbal suffix-keriin tamaikereba
of drawingaway fromthe topic,or
impliesa certaindegreeof objectification,
or explainingto the addresseeon the partof the speakeror subject
interpreting
of theexpression.20
These signsof the speakingsubjector narratoroccur not only in extended
in whichthenarrator
orsoshiji('narrator'scommentary',
passagesofcommentary,
expressesan opinionabout a giventopicor about theprocessof makingthetale,
thatexplainthatthenarratorhas omittedcertaindetails),
forexample,comments
likethatat theend of 'Yuigao',but also in passagesconsideredby manycontemporaryJapanesescholarsas simpledescription
(ji no bun).2' Here the narrating
about a character'sthoughtsor aboutthecauses or
voiceoftenmakesconjectures
resultsof a certainsituation.These conjecturescannot be attributedto any
characterwithinthe storyitselfand mustbe ascribedto the narrator.Theyare
such as -kemu,
indicated,usuallyat the end of the sentence,by verbalsuffixes
comment
in
a
-beshi,and -meri.Ratherthanconstituting
themselves,
theyexpress
a toneor mode in thenarrationwhichwe recognizeas belongingto thenarrating
voice. Honorificlanguage(keigo) used in relationto the charactersand their
an attitudeon thepartof thenarratortowardthecharacters.
actionsalso reflects
This attitudereflectsthe linguisticsituation(bamen),in which a subject (the
narrator)
addressesa recipient
(thereaderorlistener)
aboutan object(thecharacter
whoseactionis beingreported).22
Thus thevoice in such passages is necessarily
,
Tree') chapter,see Mitani Kuniaki 'Genji Monogatarini Okeru"Katari" no Kozo:
" Washa" to "Katari-te"aruiwa"Soshiji" Ron
Hihan no tameno Josho'MWMMMFJtS3 r
o, in Nihon Bungaku
4i*t, xxvHi:11(November1978), p. 46.
19 For a discussionof thesignificance
ofthe
+t4ISj attLIJQi7t
particle namu, particularlyin combination
withthe verbal suffix-keri,see Sakura Atsuyoshi tgX,A Bunshoto HyogenSZ4 *,
Kadokawa Shoten,1975,pp. 24-41.
20
21
22
Sakakura,p. 18.
Mitani,p. 43.
See above, p. 378.
STINCHECUM:
Who Tells the Tale?
383
The attempts
to definesoshijias an independent
and fixedentityhave
personified.
contributed
to the obscurityof the problemof narrativevoice in the Genji.23In
fact,theconceptofsoshijimaynotbe a usefulone forsucha discussion.In passages
usuallythoughtof as soshiji,as wellas thosein which-kemu,-beshi,-meri,-keri,
thevoiceas thatofthenarrator.If theirfunctions
are
etc.,appear,we can identify
and itis notat all clearthattheyare,thevoiceis fundamentally
thatofa
different,
Withinone passagewe mayfinda numberofdifferent
narrator.
narrapersonified
on theactivitiesofanother,butthevoicesremainon a level
tors,one commenting
fromthatof thecharacterswithintheworldof thenarrative,
as wellas
different
fromthatof thereaderand theauthor.
In readingtheGenji,however,it is evidentthatthispersonawe have calledthe
in pointof view,but is neitheromniscient
nor
narratoris not onlyinconsistent
controlsthenarrative.
We can
It is notthenarratorwho ultimately
omnipresent.
the
eitheracceptthepositionthatthereis no suchtranscendental
beingthatunifies
theessenceof which
textas a whole,or taketheviewthatthereis suchan entity,
is not expressedin the text.24For example,we may considereverynarrativea
and in thespeakeran
discourse:'a speech-actsupposinga speakerand a listener,
intentionto influencethe listenerin some way.'25This is the view voiced by
He remarks,'l'oeuvre
TzvetanTodorov,one thatis literary
ratherthanlinguistic.
est en meAme
tempsdiscours:il existeun narrateur
qui relatel'histoire;et il y a en
face de lui un lecteurqui la per9oit.'He further
specifiesthatby 'oeuvre'he means
everyworkof fiction.26
In passagesor narratives
wherethereare no linguisticsignsof thenarratorin
thetext,thenarrator(thesubjectofthediscoursethatis thetextitself)maybe said
to be effaced.27
It is thissubjectof the discourse(narrativetext)whichMitani
Kuniaki termsthe washa(literally,'the one who speaks',or 'the speakerof the
who appearsas a personain
thenarrator(katari-te),
text')in orderto distinguish
whoseexistenceis whollyfunctional
thetext,fromthegiverof thenarrative,
and
The washarefers
to thatbywhichwe see thetextas one,
underliestheentiretext.28
23
Some of these attemptsto definesoshiji
from the earliest sources to the presentare
discussedin TakahashiTaru Vi , ' "Katari"
no Hyogen Kozo: iwayuruSoshiji ni tsuite'
v'
C,
in
Fr
IN9j1tSv'
Genji Monogatari,ii (Koza Nihon Bungaku)
Kaishaku to Kanshlo,Bessatsu (May 1978),
pp. 119-38.
24 The formeris the position of Banfield,
pp. 25 ff.,who argueson groundsof transformational grammarthat in the free indirect
styletherecan be no othersubjectofexpression
thanthesubjectnamedin thegivenexpression.
S. -Y. Kuroda, in his essay, 'Where Epistomology, Style, and Grammar Meet: A
Case StudyfromtheJapanese',in S. Anderson
& P. Kiparsky,ed., A Festschrift
for Morris
Halle, Holt, Rinehart& Winston,New York,
1973, also argues that therecan be no omniscient narratorwho speaks directlyto the
reader because the free indirectstyle has a
unique grammarwhichis 'essentiallydifferent
fromtheparadigmaticlinguisticperformance'
(p. 387).
25 Emile Benveniste,Problmes de linguistiquegenerale,Gallimard,Paris, 1966,p. 241.
Benvenistedoes not hold thateverynarrative
is a discourse,however.
26 Tzvetan Todorov, 'Les categories du
8 (1966),
recit litteraire',in Communications,
pp. 126 & 147.
27 Tzvetan Todorov, The Poetics of Prose,
CornellU.P., 1977,pp. 27-8.
28 Mitani,pp. 39 ff.
384
thatwhichunderliesthe structure
and makes it a whole.In a sense thishighly
abstractconceptofan invisiblespeakerofthetexthas muchin commonwithwhat
WayneBooth calls the 'impliedauthor',the imagethe authorcreatesof himself
as he writes,notthehistoricalauthorbut theauthoras theone who controlsthe
narrative.29
But Booth'sidea is basicallythatofa persona,whileMitani'sremains
an abstract,evenmetaphysical,
function,
and Todorov'sconceptis fundamentally
closerto linguistics.
Whatis particularly
valuableabout Mitani'sstudyis thathe has drawna clear
distinction
betweenthenarratorwhosevoiceis heardin thetext,and thespeaker
ofthetextwhichis thesubjectof expressionof thenarrative
as a whole.Furthermore,accordingto Mitani,thepresenceofthenarrator(or narrators)
in theGenji
is a way of dealingwiththe oppositionbetweenthe Japaneselanguageitself,in
whichthe linguisticsituationis so stronga feature,and the natureof narrative,
whichhas a subjectof expressionthatis essentially
transparent
and neutral.The
narratorexpressesthataspectofthelanguagewhichis controlledbythelinguistic
situation.30
The speakerofthetextplaysno directrolein our interpretation
ofthetextas a
work,butas thesubjectofthetext,thepointofviewofthewashais thatofthetext
as a whole.We can saythatthepointofview(and thevoice) ofthespeakerofthe
textcoincideswiththat of certaincharactersin certainpassages. However,the
washaas an abstractfunction
has no voiceinthesenseofpersonalexpression.
Thus
whilewe mayspeak of thevoice or pointof viewof the speakerof thetext,this
mustbe understoodto mean thatin a particularpassage the washais the only
subjectofexpression,
butdoes nothavea personified
voicelikethatofthenarrator
or characters.
For example,in passagesofdescriptive
narration
we mightsaythat
thevoice is thatof thespeakerof thetext.
Functionsof NarrativeVoice in 'Ukifune'and To the Lighthouse
'Ukifune'chapterdepictsthe eventsprecedingUkifune'sattemptedsuicide.
Ratherthan 'events',perhapswe shouldsay the conflicting
emotionsleadingup
to her decisionand action-not only Ukifune'sresponsesto her situationand
reflections
on it, but also thoseof hermother,of Niou, Kaoru, Ukon, JijuD,
and
others.Precisely
becausethecrisisis impending,
itis herinnerlifeand thatofthose
aroundherthatare of importanceto us. This chapterrepresents
the characters'
thoughts
and emotions,theirkokoro,intheformofinterior
monologueto a greater
extentthanalmostany otherchapterin thewholeGenji.3'It is characterized
by
frequent
shiftsin pointofview,theviewofthespeakerof thetextcoincidingfirst
withthatof one character,thenanother.As a result,althoughthesefeaturesare
THE
Booth, pp. 70-71 & 151.
monologue per chapter is 11 .2 %; that in
Mitani,pp. 43 & 44.
'Ukifune',17.6%. In theGenji,thisis exceeded
31 According to Suzuki's analysis, pp.
only by 'Kagero' ('The Drake Fly'), 22.1%.
170-72, the average percentage of interior
29
3
STINCHECUM:
Who Tells the Tale?
385
notpeculiarto 'Ukifune',theyplaya conspicuousrolehere,and we can thuseasily
graspthe ironythatthesetechniquescreate.The observationsthatI have made
drawnare not intendedto be applied
and theconclusionsthatI have tentatively
to 'Ukifune'as opposedto otherchaptersin theGenji,but I hope thattheymay
of theUji chapters
illustrate
someaspectsofthatchapterwhichare characteristic
in generaland, to a certainextent,of theGenjias a whole.
In many cases, the characters'heartsare revealedthroughdirectdiscourse
thatof the characters
(directinteriormonologue)and the voice heardis entirely
thusdepicted.However,sometimesthisvoice blendsin withthatof thenarrator,
whosepresencein thesemonologuesappears,forexample,in theformofhonorific
that
constructions
languageappliedto thesubjectof themonologue,in syntactic
requirereasoningabout the situationor thoughtsrevealed,by exclamationsthat
Thereare also occasions
to eitherthecharacteror thenarrator.
couldbe attributed
narrationthat
whenthevoice of thecharacterfuseswitha passage of descriptive
In
case
becomes
indirect,
or
it.
latter
the
interior
monologue
the
precedes follows
construction
endingnotin thequotativeparticleto but withsome othersyntactic
thatmakesthemonologuea subordinate
partofthepassageas a whole.32
of different
degrees
The importanceof thesedistinctions
lies in therecognition
of
the
world
of aestheticdistancebetweenthereaderand
thetale; theyconstitute
the ironyof the work,as KonishiJin'ichihas pointedout.33Not onlydoes the
intrusionof the narrator'svoice distanceus fromthe characters,but even in
withtheirthoughts
monologue,wherewe areconfronted
passagesofdirectinterior
themselves
voice,thedistancebetweenthecharacters
unmediated
bythenarrator's
shows us the ironyof theirsituation.The creationof this aestheticdistanceis
one of thefunctions
of theshifting
pointof viewin theUji chaptersand
certainly
in the Genjias a whole.The narrationis not controlledby a singlepointof view
nor by a single
throughwhichwe see theeventsand charactersof the narrative,
thoseeventsand characters.
tellsus how to interpret
narratorwho consistently
of thatpersonaand
Althoughthevoice of a narratoris oftenheard,theidentity
herrelationto thecharacters
appearing
withintheworkare ambiguous,sometimes
on one levelof thenarrative,
sometimeson another.However,whenthenarrator
does speak out,herwordsoftentake theformof a conjectureabout a character
or his actions.
The shifting
voicein 'Ukifune'and in theUji chaptersas a wholehas
narrative
its closest counterpartin Westernliteraturein the novels of VirginiaWoolf,
in To theLighthouse.34
The innerlifeofthecharactersplaysa central
particularly
32 For a detaileddiscussionof thefusionof
in YamagishiTokuhei U),-I & Oka Kazuo
interior monologue with the embedding [F-l18, ed., Genji MonogatariKoza NFti
descriptivenarration,see Akita Teiji EfIt t
Xg, Yoseido, VII, pp. 44 ff.
3 Erich Auerbach's discussion of To the
'Genji Monogatarino Naiwa' 'fffJa'4P-MPQ
in Shinwa Kokubun lftffQ, 2 (December Lighthousefirstsuggestedto me a possible
1969), pp. 1-21.
analogy betweenWoolf's work and the Uji
33 Konishi Jin'ichi'J>E-,
'Genji Mono- chaptersof the Genii(and perhapsthe entire
gatari no Shinri Byosha' F
work). He calls the techniquefoundin Woolf
386
role in bothworks,an innerliferevealedto the readernot by meansof the socalled streamof consciousnesstechnique(whichdepictsless organizedlevelsof
consciousness)but by meansof a flowingprosestylewhichoftenexhibitsa high
degreeofliterary
Whilethenarrative
self-awareness.35
voiceshiftsfromcharacter
to characterto narratorto a non-personal
subjectwe have called the speakerof
thetext,bothworkspossessa certaindegreeof stylistic
unity,in partcreatedby
theuse ofnarratedmonologue,in whicha character'svoiceblendsintothatofthe
narratoror into descriptive
narration.The dictionof monologue,dialogue,and
is basicallythesame; whilethecontentofdifferent
descriptive
narration
characters'
thoughtsmayvary,the languagein whichthatcontentis expresseddisplaysfew
individualcharacteristics.
Thisevennessoftexture
extendsalso to theuse ofnature
imagery;in To theLighthouseand Woolf's othernovels(especiallyThe Waves)
an imageis oftenassociatednot onlywithone particularcharacterbut appears
in thethoughtsof severaland in descriptive
passagesas well.In 'Ukifune',and in
all oftheHeian narrative
theunityof imageryis dictatedto a
tales(monogatari),
greatextentby the conventionsof waka. Charactersmayresponddifferently
to
one image,but nevertheless
theimageis thesame.
On thewhole,in To theLighthouse
thepointof viewshiftsmoreslowlythanin
visionarelonger.The following
'Ukifune';passagesassociatedwithonecharacter's
passageillustrates
thetypeofambiguity
oftenfoundin Woolf.The entireincident
is part of Mrs Ramsay's recollectionof a walk to town withCharlesTansley,
provokedby his irritating
remark,'There'll be no landing at the lighthouse
tomorrow.'
. . . she made him feel betterpleased withhimselfthan he had done yet,and he,
wouldhaveliked,hadtheytakena cab forexample,
to havepaidforit.As forher
littlebag,might
he notcarrythat?No, no,shesaid,shealwayscarriedthatherself.
and some other20th-century
novelists'multipersonal representationof consciousness',
noting that the most importantdifference
between Woolf and earlier novelists who
renderedinner views of their charactersis
that while the earlierwriter,'withhis knowledge of an objective truth,never abdicated
his position as the final and governing
authority.... The essentialcharacteristicof
the techniquerepresentedby VirginiaWoolf
is that we are given not merelyone person
whose consciousness(that is, the impressions
it receives) is rendered,but many persons,
withfrequentshiftsfromone to theother....
The design of a close approach to objective
reality by means of numerous subjective
impressions received by various individuals ... is importantin the modern technique....'
Erich Auerbach,Mimesis: The Representationof Realityin WesternLiterature,Doubleday, AnchorBooks, Garden City,New York,
1957,p. 474.
I am greatlyindebtedin my discussionof
VirginiaWoolf's worksto JamesNaremore's
finestudy,The WorldWithout
a Self: Virginia
Woolfand the Novel, Yale U.P., 1973, esp.
pp. 112-50. For furtherdetailed analysis of
changesin point of view in To theLighthouse,
see Mitchell Leaska, VirginiaWoolf'sLighthouse: A Studyin CriticalMethod,Columbia
U.P., 1970,pp. 47-58.
3 For a basic studyof streamof consciousness, see Robert Humphrey, Stream of
Consciousnessin theModernNovel,University
of CaliforniaPress, 1954, esp. pp. 2 ff.For a
discussionof conflicting
views on the subject,
see Naremore,pp. 63-76.
STINCHECUM:
Who TellstheTale?
387
She did too. Yes, he feltthatin her.He feltmanythings,
something
in particular
thatexcitedhimand disturbed
himforreasonswhichhe couldnotgive.He would
likeherto see him,gownedand hooded,walkingin a procession.
A fellowship,
a
professorship,
he feltcapable of anything
and saw himself-butwhatwas she
lookingat? Ata manpastinga bill.Thevastflapping
sheetflattened
itselfout,and
eachshoveofthebrushrevealed
fresh
legs,hoops,horses,glistening
redsandblues,
beautifully
smooth,untilhalfthewall was coveredwiththeadvertisement
of a
circus; a hundredhorsemen,twentyperforming
seals, lions, tigers.... Craning
forwards,for she was short-sighted,
she read it out . . . 'will visitthistown,' she
read.Itwasterribly
dangerous
workfora one-armed
man,sheexclaimed,
tostandon
top ofa ladderlikethat-hisleftarmhad beencutoffin a reapingmachinetwo
yearsago.
'Let'sall go!' shecried,movingon,as ifall thoseridersandhorseshadfilledher
withchildlike
exultation
and madeherforget
herpity.
'Let'sgo,' he said,repeating
herwords,clicking
themout,however,
witha selfconsciousness
thatmadeherwince.'Letus go tothecircus.'No. He couldnotsayit
Whatwaswrongwith
right.
He couldnotfeelitright.
Butwhynot?shewondered.
himthen?36
The sectionbeginswith a descriptionof Tansley'sfeelings,but the words,
'had theytakena cab forexample',seem to renderhis thoughtsmoredirectly,
whilethefollowingtwo sentencesclearlyrepresent
dialogue.Again,'Yes, he felt
of his thoughts,
thatin her.He feltmanythings,'mustbe a rendering
whilethe
ofthosethoughts
seemsto comefromoutsidethescopeofTansley's
amplification
histhoughts,
as hisfantasy
about
consciousness.
The nextsentenceagainrepresents
is interrupted
Mrs Ramsayadmiringhisfutureaccomplishments
by herattention
of thepostermightreflect
turningto thecircusposter.The description
Tansley's
pointofviewas he followsMrs Ramsay's gaze,or hers,or both,buttheexplanaseemsto stemfromthenarrator
ratherthaneither
tion,'forshewas short-sighted',
of the characters.Mrs Ramsay'swordsare followedby anotherexplanationof
ofherexclamahermood('as if . . .') bythenarrator,
and thenTansley'srepetition
tion.But'No. He couldnotsayitright'couldbe eitherTansley'sownself-conscious
or Mrs Ramsay'sobservation
ofhim.'He couldnotfeelitright'seemsto
thoughts,
at his inabilityto respondspontaneously,
but withthe
renderhis own discomfort
to Mrs Ramsay'svoice.
followinglinewe are clearlylistening
In thispassage,almostentirely
of thenarraindirectly
narrated,theambiguity
tivevoice is quite marked.By means of thiskind of ambiguity
VirginiaWoolf
and betweenthecharacters
suggestsan absenceof space betweenthecharacters,
and thenarrator,
an ultimateunityofhumanlifewithinnature,or within
implying
theartist'svisionofit,as itis LilyBriscoe'svisionthatfinally
roundsoutthenovel.
36 Virginia Woolf, To the Lighthouse,
Harcourt, Bruce & World, Harvest Books,
New York, 1955, pp. 15 & 20-21. Due
acknowledgmentis made to the Author's
LiteraryEstate and The Hogarth Press for
permission to quote this passage. This
citationsreferto the
quotationand all further
editioncited above.
388
betweenVirginiaWoolf'stechniqueand thatof 'Ukifune'
Whilethesimilarities
thatare significant
forour
differences
thereare of courseimportant
are striking,
pointof contrastfor
Perhapstheprimary
of theworksthemselves.
interpretation
narrative
on thereaderof theshifting
thepurposesof our discussionis theeffect
and The
Mrs. Dalloway,To theLighthouse,
voice. Woolf's novels,particularly
between
communication
to showtheunderlying
perspectives
Waves,use different
people.As old AugustusCarmichaeland Mrs Ramsaybothadmirea dishoffruit,
'she saw thatAugustustoo feastedhiseyeson thesameplateoffruit,plungedin,
to his hive.
afterfeasting,
brokeoffa bloom there,a tasselhere,and returned,
unitedthem'
fromhers.Butlookingtogether
Thatwas hiswayoflooking,different
the approachingmarriageof two
(p. 146). Again,as Mrs Ramsaycontemplates
shefeelsa onenesswiththosearound
youngpeoplewhomshehas broughttogether,
her(pp. 170-71).
of styleand theflow,evenwithin
In 'Ukifune',however,in spiteof thefluidity
one sentence,of narrativevoice fromone persona to another,that veryflow
byplacingthemin closejuxtaposition
emphasizesthedistancebetweencharacters
and thus showingus the unbridgeablegaps that existbetweenthem.While in
of thoughtand feelingbetweenone character
Woolf'snovelwe see thecontinuity
in thought,
ofdictionrevealsdisjunctions
theuniformity
and another,in 'Ukifune'an active
and, even in dialogue, a lack of receptiveness,
misunderstandings,
turningawayfromeach other.This basic isolationof one humanbeingfromana Buddhistviewof theuniverse
otherin the Uji chaptersof theGenjimayreflect
empty,salvationas a finalrejection
as ultimately
thatseesall humanrelationships
of suchentanglements.
relationships.
Thus Ukifuneseekssalvationby turningher back on all former
Onna San no Miya ('The ThirdPrincess',Kaoru's mother),who loves neither
GenjinorKashiwagiand is evenmoreisolatedthanUkifune,also becomesa nun.
Ukifune'sfather,Hachi no Miya ('The EighthPrince'),wandersin purgatory,
to
unableto enterparadise,because he cannotfreehimselffromhis attachment
to
death
enter
his
before
eventhoughhe abandonsthem
his othertwodaughters,
isolatesherfrom
a monastery.37
AlthoughUkifunedoes indeedlove,herconflict
thoseshe loves.Can we believethatany of thesecharactersis trulysaved? Genji
takesordersafterLady Murasaki'sdeath,but thefactthattheeventis not part
kindof religiousfeeling,
it and suggesta different
of thenarrative
de-emphasizes
in
one thatis fullyrealizedonlywiththecompletionof a richlifeof involvement
thisworld.Perhapsthe GenjiMonogatariis sayingthatsalvationis meaningless
all humanties.
ifit is obtainedonlyby rejecting
contrastbetweenVirginiaWoolf's worksand the Genjiis
This fundamental
relatedto
apparentin two otheraspects.The use of narratedmonologue,directly
3 Afterhis death,Hachi no Miya appears
in dreamsto both Naka no Kimi and Azari
(v, 'Agemaki' ['Trefoil Knots'], 301.3 &
312.4).
STINCHECUM:
Who Tells the Tale?
389
shiftsin voice,in Woolfhelpsto createthatunderlying
unitydiscussedabove by
in prosestyleand imagery.
relatingcharacters
to each otherthroughsimilarities
In
'Ukifune'it also providesa certainkindof unityof the text:the veryfactthat
or evenseveralnarrators)avoids
thereis a narrator(eventhoughnot consistent,
ofthetextbyfulfilling
therequirements
ofthelinguistic
thecompletefragmentation
thussupplying
at leastan apparent
situationthroughthepersonaof thenarrator,
continuity.
Throughhonorific
reflects
languagetheproseof the Genjinecessarily
a personalvoice; thefusionof interiormonologueand descriptive
narrationis a
naturalconsequenceoftheJapaneselanguageitself,butin Englishthisis achieved
onlythroughthecreationof a specialgrammar.
theindirectness
of thetechniqueallowsus to see
Whereasin To theLighthouse
wouldnotordinarily
aspectsof thecharacterswhichtheythemselves
verbalize,in
'Ukifune'thesepassagesoftenendin remarksbythenarratorthatpointoutforus
theironicdistancewe havebeen shownthroughdirectinterior
monologue.In the
thatall-embracing
former,
theimagesof natureserveto reinforce
unitybetween
man and nature,as also amongmen(forexample,in the'Time Passes' sectionof
in The Waves);in thelatter,however,
To theLighthouse
and theinterchapters
while
naturereflects
themoodsofindividualcharacters
and is subsumedbythem,sometimesprovidinga linkbetweenthem,at thesame timesuchimagesalso pointto
theinsurmountable
distancesbetweenone humanbeingand another.Such is the
scenewhenKaoru and Ukifuneare both gazingat the river:whilehe thinksof
ofNiou (see pp. 396-97,below).A different
Oigimi,sheis lostin thoughts
kindof
distance,one in a sensecreatedwithinthe dimensionof thefictionalworld,one
themselves
and not simplyof thereader'sperception,
expressedby thecharacters
arisesbetweenUkifuneand Niou in theirexchangeof poemsabout thesnow.
Mine no yuki
migiwano kdri
fumi-wakete
kimini zo madou
michiwa madowazu
Treadingthe snow in the peaks, the
ice on the banks, I am lost in you,
thoughI didn'tlose myway here.
Ukifune:Furi-midare
migiwani koru
yukiyorimo
naka-soranitezo
warewa kenu-beki
[vi, 146. 2-7]
More than the snow which falls in
whirling flakes, freezingalong the
banks,I am suspendedin mid-airand
mustvanish.
Niou:
WhileNiou uses theimageof snowto expresshis frustration
at notbeingable
to see her,Ukifuneuses it to reflectherdesireto dissolveintonothingness,
her
desirefordeath.Thus,althoughmanmaybe a partof natureto theextentthatit
reflects
his mostsubtlefeelings,
it providesno consolation,no senseof oneness.
Natureis internalized,
yetat thesametimereflects
man's isolation.
390
TextualAnalysis:A Descriptionof NarrativeVoice
I shallpresent
As a resultofthefollowing
ofonesectionof'Ukifune',
analysis
a
ofthematerial
witheachpointofviewofthemaincharacters
synthesis
associated
and Kaoru).Everyreaderperforms
(in thesectionthatI havechosen,Ukifune
ina workoffiction-particularly
forhimself
thissynthesis
when
andinterpretation
thereis no narrator
us throughout
consistently
present,
telling
theworkhowto
it.Butwe cannotmakeanysuchinterpretation
interpret
without
understanding
ofdistance
thecharacters
thevariouslevelsanddegrees
between
bethemselves,
tweenthecharacters
and thenarrator,
between
thenarrator
and ourselves,
and
between
thenarrator
andthespeakerofthetext.Although
thenarrative
voiceof
thetextcoincides
herdirect
interior
withthatofUkifune
during
monologues,
and
ofthenarrator,
fora moment
weseethings
from
herpointofview,theintervention
theshift
toKaoru'spointofview,moving
Ukifune
asinterior
awayfrom
monologue
blendsintodescription,
us fromher,andthrough
thisverysubjective
all distance
methodofnarration,
enableus to makeourown'objective'
viewofthefictional
world.
The aimofmyanalysisis twofold.
ofall descriptive:
It is first
to identify
the
narrative
voicewithin
a selected
shifting
passageandto seehowsuchtransitions
areeffected.
Secondarily,
itis interpretative.
However,
thekindofinterpretation
1 haveoutlined
abovecanbe accomplished
onlywitha muchbroader
foundation,
on thebasisofan analysis
oftheUji chapters
as a unitorperhapstheGenjias a
whole.Hencemyconclusions
in thisrespect
willbe tentative
I have
andlimited.
selectedthisparticular
passageof 'Ukifune'becauseit is a unitof manageable
length
forthiskindof analysis,
becauseit containsclearshifts
in pointofview
of successive
interior
and becauseeven
depictedin theinterplay
monologues,
I do notmeantosuggest
within
thatthe
a unitofthislength
ironyis quiteevident.
narrative
techniques
revealedbymyanalysisare peculiarto or characteristic
of
as opposedtotherestoftheGenji;rather,
onlythe'Ukifune'
chapter,
myfocusing
on thispassagemayshedsomelighton theworkas a whole.Thefollowing
is not
whichI hopereflects
a polishedliterary
buta literalrendering
the
translation
oftheoriginal
to maketheanalysis
syntax
sufficiently
intelligible.
I haveattempted
toretaintheaspectsoftheverbsas theyappearintheoriginal
texttotheextent
tousualpractice.
thatthisis possible,
although
itis contrary
The
useofa verbalaspectthatroughly
tothepresent
inEnglish
indicative
corresponds
is usuallyexplained
and alwaystranslated
intothepast
as a 'historical
present'
tensein English;however,
changesin verbaspectsin Japanese
reflect
changesin
thespeaker's
relation
to thecontent
ofthediscourse,
andthusareimportant
for
ourstudy.
inverbalaspectinJapanese
narrative
worksareanalogous
Theseshifts
to theeffect
ofchanges
in tensein nineteenth-century
Russianworkspointedout
of pointof view,A Poeticsof
in his detailedexamination
by BorisUspensky
In hisdiscussion
ofverbtensesin Leskov'sstory,
ofthealternation
Composition.
he notes,
'LadyMacbethoftheMtsensk
District',
STINCHECUM:
Who TellstheTale?
391
thepresenttenseis usedto fixthepointofviewfromwhichthenarration
is
carriedout.Each timethepresentis used,theauthor'stemporal
positionis synchronic-that
is, itcoincideswiththetemporal
positionofhischaracters.
He is at
thatmoment
locatedin theirtime.Theverbsin thepasttense,however,
providea
transition
betweenthesesynchronic
sectionsof thenarrative.
Theydescribethe
ofthenarrative
totheperception
conditions
whicharenecessary
from
thesynchronic
position.
"
A fulldiscussionof Japaneseverbalaspectsis beyondthescope of thisarticle,
butit shouldbe notedthatalthoughUspenskyspeaksof 'temporalposition',this
in the
reallypointsto aestheticdistancebetweennarratorand character.Similarly,
suffixes
such
Genji,theuse of verbaspectsthatmayreferto past time-perfective
to indicatean increasein distancebetweenthe
as -ki,-tsu,-keri,-kemu--seems
voiceofthetext(and hencethereader)and thecharacters,
whiletheuse
narrative
as
to
the
often
ofaspectsthatcan be interpreted referring
present
appearsto effect
is not nearly
a decreasein thatdistance.However,in theGenjithecorrespondence
so exactas in Leskov'swork.39I have followedtheNKBT text.40
(1) Taishodono,sukoshi nodoka ni
narinurukoro, shinobiteowashitari.
Tera ni hotoke nado ogami-tamau.
Mi-zukyosesase-tamauso ni, monotamainado shite....
Whenthingsat courthad settleddown
a bit, the major captain, as usual,
slipped away inconspicuouslyand
cameto Uji. At thetempleheworships
theBuddhas; to themonkwhochants
sutrasforhim,he gives alms and so
forth....
The passage opens withan impersonalview of Kaoru; thereis no emphaticor
to indicatethenarrator'spresence.
particle,no verbalsuffix,
exclamatory
koko ni wa shi(2) ... yuitsugata,
nobitaredo,kore wa wari naku mo
eboshi noshi no
yatsushi-tamawazu,
kiyogenite,
sugata,ito ara-mahoshiku
yori,hazukashigeni,
ayumi-iri-tamau
yoi kotonari.
38 Boris Uspensky,A Poetics of Composition: The Structureof the ArtisticText and
Form,University
Typologyof a Compositional
of CaliforniaPress, 1973,p. 71.
3 To myknowledge,no one has discussed
the literarysignificancein shiftsfrom past
or perfectaspects to what may be called
presentaspectsoftheverbin classicalJapanese
studiesof
narrative.There are manylinguistic
and comparisonsof
individualverb suffixes,
ki and keri,forinstance(see n. 19, above), but
theydo not deal withthechangesin narrative
... and towardeveninghe comeshere
secretly.
However,he,forhispart,has
not taken greatpains to conceal his
rank.His figurein informalcap and
robe is flawlessand refined,
and from
the timehe steps into the room, the
care he takes with everything
is so
special that one feels overwhelmed
by his presence.
aspect thatI have touchedupon above.
40
See n. 4, above. The sectionin question
correspondsto VI, 133.7-137.15.
This passage corresponds to Tamagami
Takuya, Genji Monogatari Hyoshaku, xii,
ed., Genji
pp. 89-94; Akiyama Ken fki,
Monogatari(Nihon Koten Zenshu), Shogakukan, 1976,VI,133.7-136.9;YamagishiTokuhei
W):t,'', ed., GenjiMonogatari(NihonKoten
BungakuTaikei 18), Iwanami Shoten,1963,v,
230.12-233.15.
392
Yutsugata('towardevening')constitutes
a neutraltransition,
forwithkoko ni
('to here') we move into Ukifune'sspatial locus. Hazukashige('one feelsoverwhelmed')impliesa perceiving
sensibility;
althoughthereis no specificreference
to Ukifune,we beginto wonderherewho is thesubjectof thisemotion.4'Moreover,korewa ('he, forhis part') is a comparisonwithNiou, a comparisonmade
Kaoru and Niou as seenthrough
perhapsbya narrator
butalso ofcoursereflecting
Ukifune'seyes.This is broughtinto sharpfocuswiththe firstwordof the next
sentence,onna('the lady'). The transition
fromdescription
narration(1), an imis effected
personalviewofKaoru, to Ukifune'sthoughts
byhisspatialmovement
towardher,by references
to herspatialand psychological
locus (koko,kore),and
by the adverbhazukashige,whichstronglysuggestsa perceivingconsciousness
withinthenarrative
worldthatis affected
by Kaoru's appearanceand behavior.
(3a) Onna,ika demie-tatematsuramu
to suramu,to, sora sae hazukashiku
osoroshikini, anagachi narishi hito
no on-arisama, uchi-omoi-ideraruru
ni....
The lady,wondering,
How shallI ever
be able to face him? is ashamed, terrifiedof the skyitself,but in spiteof
this,she recalls the presenceof him
who had been so impetuous ....
The shiftto Ukifune'spoint of view is confirmed
by a briefdirectinterior
tosuramu('How shallI everbe able to face
monologue,ika de mie-tatematsuramu
him?'). Here thepointof viewof thetextcoincideswithherand thedistancebetweenus and Ukifuneis reducedto itsminimum.We drawaway fromhera bit
withthewords,sorasae hazukashiku
osoroshiki
ni ('eventheskyitselfis terrifying,
makingherashamed'),butwe can also readit,'eventheskyitselfis shame-making,
terrifying',
takingit as Ukifune'sthoughts,
so thedistanceis notgreat.Ukifune's
pointofviewis maintained
inthefollowing
passage,to(4), kokoro-bososa
('misery'),
butthedistancebetweenus and hershrinksand stretches
as thevoiceis sometimes
clearlyUkifune's,in directinteriormonologues,at timesfarther
fromheras her
monologuesbecomeindirectnarration.
(3b) ... mata kono hito ni mietatematsuramuo omoi-yaru namu
kokoro-uki.Ware wa toshigoro
imiju7
miruhitoo mo, minaomoi-kawarinubekikokochinamusuru,to notamaishi
o, ge ni, sono nochi,mi-kokochi
kurushi tote,izukuni mo izukuni mo, rei
no on-arisamanarade, mi-zuhonado
sawagu-naruo kiku ni, mata ika ni
kikiteobosamu....
... evenjust imagining
howcould she
meetthisone is terriblewretchedness.
He did say, 'My feelingsabout all of
the ladies I have been seeing for so
longseemto be changingcompletely.'
Hearingthat,indeed,sincethattime,
sayingthat he does not feel well, he
does not treatany of themas usual,
and that people are makinga great
deal ofcommotion,sayingprayersfor
his recoveryand so forth,I wonder
what would he feelif he heard about
this?
41 Tamagami, xii, p. 92, takes this whole
clause, from ayumi-iri-tamau
yori ('when he
stepsintotheroom'), to be Ukifune'spointof
view.
STINCHECUM:
Who Tells the Tale?
393
We can read theabove narrationas one continuouspassageof directdiscourse
depictingUkifune's thoughts(. . . o kiku ni can also be read as 'when she hears',
movingthepointof viewjust outsideof Ukifune'srange).The wordso omoi-yaru
kokoro-uki
painful')could be inter('even imaginingthatis terribly
namuimiju7
pretedas thevoice of thenarrator.However,in theentiresectionI am analyzing,
we almostneverhearthenarrator'svoiceclearly,so it seemsmoreappropriateto
and our own are
say thatin thispassage Ukifune'spointof view,thenarrator's,
This is even more effective
in
so close thatat timestheyare indistinguishable.
reducingthe aestheticdistancethan removingany such ambiguity.Niou's state
to thecapitalcould notbe perceiveddirectly
by Ukifune;in order
afterhe returns
as hearsaytransmitted
to herby
to retainUkifune'svoice here,it is represented
one of herservingwomen.
somethirdparty-presumably
toomoumoitokurushi
('evenwondering
about
Thereis a briefbitofdescription,
voiceagaincoincideswiththatof
thisis extremely
painful'),and thenthenarrative
modifieskokoro-bososa
Ukifunein an extendedpassagewhichdirectly
('misery'),
of Ukifune'sstatenotmade by herbutbytheimpersonalvoice
a characterization
of thespeakerof thetext:
(3c) Kono hito hata, ito kewai koto
ni, kokoro-bukaku,namamekashiki
sama shite,hisashikaritsuru
hodo no
okotarinado notamaumo, koto okarazu, koishi kanashi to oritatanedo,
tsuneni ai-minukoi no kurushisao,
sama yoki hodo ni uchi-notamaeru,
imijiku iu ni wa masarite,ito aware,
to hitono omoinu-beki
sama o, shimetamaeruhito-garanari. En narukata
wa saru mononite,yukusue nagaku
hito no tanominu-bekikokoro-bae
Omonado,koyonakumasari-tamaeri.
wazu narusama no kokori-baenado,
mori-kikasetaramu
toki nanome narazu imijikukoso abekere. Ayashui,
utsushi-gokoro
mo no oboshi-iraruru
hito o, aware to omou mo, sore wa
ito aru-majikukarokikoto zo ka shi.
Kono hito ni ushi to omowarete,
wasure-tamainamu....
But thisperson,too, has a way with
himthatis quite out of the ordinary;
he is deeplyconsiderateand his figure
is graceful,
and whenhe apologizesfor
his long neglect,his words are few.
Although he is not outspoken,exclaiming,'How precious! How adorable!', his genteelway of speakingof
thesorrowsofa love in whichthetwo
do not oftenmeetis superiorto passionateexclamations;his characteris
such that anyone would certainly
think,How moving!, of his figure.
His charmis a matterof course. His
characteris onea womancoulddepend
on fora long time,and is incomparably superior.If he should happen to
hear of my own wild infatuation,it
would surelybe terribleindeed.Even
to thinklonginglyof thepersonwho
lovesme so madlyis trulya frivolous
thingthatmustnot be....
halfofthissection
particlesinthefirst
The absenceofemphaticand exclamatory
allowsus to readit as eitherUkifune'spointofviewor thatofthetext(and hence
ours),as in section(3b). But theseweighingsof Kaoru's elegantreserveagainst
wouldseemto be takingplacewithinUkifune.Thisissupported
Niou's effusiveness
394
to
bytheuse ofkonohito('thisperson')inboth(3b) and (3c) (in bothcasesitrefers
locus. Furthermore,
Kaoru), whichpointsto Ukifune'sspatialand psychological
itself(indicatedbythesparsity
we mayalso seethelack ofemotioninthenarration
as reflecting
theabsenceofpassionin Ukifune'srelation
of emphaticexpressions)
towardthe end of the passage, nanome
to Kaoru. The emphaticconstructions
indeed')and itoaru-majiku
narazuimijikukosoabekere('it wouldsurelybe terrible
thingthatmustnotbe') stressthepresence
karokikotozo ka shi('trulya frivolous
whom I take to be Ukifune,since nothing
of the speakerof theseexpressions,
thevoiceas hers.Thesephrasescould be readas expressions
opposesinterpreting
but thewholeof section(3) is so clearlyUkifune'spointof view
of thenarrator,
thatI see no reasonto thinkthatthenarratorsuddenlyintrudeshere.
(4) . . . kokoro-bososawa, ito fuko
keshiomoi-midaretaru
shiminikereba,
ki o ...
... because the misery of being
thoughtodious and beingrejectedby
thispersonsinksintoherverydeeply,
she is distraught;observingher state,
he thinks...
With kokoro-bososa('misery'),the descriptionof Ukifune'sstate,we move
awayfromher;itis notshewhoreasonsaboutit,forming
thecausal construction,
shiminikereba
('becauseit sinksintoher'),butthenarrator;thisdirectrepresentato a personified
tion of the reasoningprocessmustbe attributed
voice,and not
simplyto the speakerof thetext,whichhas no personaand thuscannotbe the
The distance
statement.
source of a judgment-theformationof a cause-effect
withthe wordkeshiki('state', 'appearbetweenUkifuneand us widensfurther
of Ukifune's
of inneremotion.It is thisreflection
ance')-the visiblereflection
froman internalto
innerstatethatKaoru sees.The pointofviewhas thusshifted
an externalviewof her,and thatpointof viewbecomesKaoru's.42
(5)
...
tsuki-goroni, koyo-no mono
no kokoro shiri, nebi-masarinikeri,
tsure-zurenaru sumika no hodo ni,
omoi-nokosu
koto wa araji ka shi....
. . . overthepast fewmonths,shehas
come to understandthetruenatureof
thingsand has matured.Because of
the tedious place in whichshe lives,
her thoughts must certainlyleave
nothingunexplored....
Here the voice is clearlyhis,as thissectionis immediately
followedby to mitamau(thequotativeparticletoplus'he thinks').His monologueis straightforward
The verbalsuffix
and simplesyntactically.
-keriand exclamatory
particleska shi
emphasizethepresenceof a speakingsubject.
(6) . . . tomi-tamau
mokokorokurushikireba tsune yori mo kokorotodometekatarai-tamau.
. . ., he thinks;sinceeven to see this
is extremelypainful, more attentativelythanusual he speaks intimately
to her.
42 For definitions
of external
and internal tions,see Uspensky,
pp. 83-5.
pointsofviewand a discussion
oftheirfunc-
STINCHECUM:
Who Tells the Tale?
395
In (6), the pointof view shiftsslightly
froman internalto an externalviewof
Kaoru. Againit can onlybe thenarratorwho formsthecausal construction.
In theprecedingsilentexchangebetweenUkifuneand Kaoru we see thepattern
of theirother,verbal,exchanges.Some externalmanifestation
of Kaoru is the
about himand Niou. On the otherhand,her
occasion forUkifune'sreflections
mood, as it appears to Kaoru, is completelymisunderstood.
He interprets
her
distressas theresultof his failureto visitherfrequently
enough,and immediately
beginsto talkaboutthenewlifehe is planningforher.He blameshermood on the
narusumikano hodo ni, 'because of the
place, the desolationof Uji (tsure-zure
tediousplace in whichshe lives'),and his solutionto herproblemsis a new place.
He triesto comforther as one would a child.When Kaoru speaks to Ukifune
he speaksof externalthingsonly:
directly,
(7) Tsukurasurutokoro,y6yo yoroHito-hinamumishiushi-nashitekeri.
shikaba,koko yori wa ke-jikakimizu
Sanjo
ni, hana mo mi-tamaitsu-beshi.
no miya mo chikaki hodo nari.
Akekure obotsukanaki hedate mo,
onozukara ara-majiki o, kono haru
no hodoni,sarinu-bekuba
watashitemu
to omoite-notamau
mo ...
'The place I am havingbuiltforyou is
graduallytakingshape. I saw it the
otherday,and theriveris moreagreeable than here and you will also be
able to see the cherryblossoms.The
Palace of theThirdWard is also near
by.The separationbetweenus whichis
so unsettling,
day and night,will, of
itself,cease to be. And so, some time
this spring,if thingsgo well, I will
move you.' When he speaks his
thoughts...
Althoughhe sayshe is movedby herpain,he does notaddresshimselfdirectly
norindeedsayanything
abouthisown.His speechsimplyindicates
to herfeelings,
to makeherfeelmoresecureaboutthefuture.
hisintentions,
and attempts
Kaoru's
words,likeUkifune'sair of distress,do notconveywhatis behindthem;he does
not succeedin communicating
whathe wishes,the stabilityin his plans forher
future,
graduallybeingrealizedin thisbuildingproject.Instead,hiswordsserveas
of Niou's wordsand his plansforher:
an occasionforherrecollection
(8) ... kano hito no, nodoka narubeki tokoro omoi-moketari,
to kino
mo notamaerishio, kakaru koto mo
shirade,sa obosuramuyo to, aware
nagara mo, sonata ni nabiku-bekini
wa arazu ka shi, to omou kara ni,
arishi on-sama no omokage ni oboyureba,ware nagara mo, utatekokoro-u no mi ya, to omoi-tsuzukete
nakinu.
.. . she thinks,That personwas sayingjust yesterday,'I've thoughtof a
place whereyou shouldbe able to feel
at ease,' but he mustbe thinkingthat
waywithoutknowingaboutthissituation,and althoughit is heart-rending,
I certainlymust not yield to him.
Whileshe thinksthis,an imageof the
way he had looked risesup beforeher
What
and she has to admitto herself,
to feel
a wretchedlot!, and continuing
thisway,she burstsintotears.
396
The contrastbetweenKaoru's wordsand Ukifune'sthoughtsabout Niou is
connection
betweenthem:notamaumokanohitono . .. to
stressedbythesyntactic
kinomo notamaerishi
('whenhe saysthis,she thinks,That personwas sayingjust
. .'). The transition
fromone voiceto theotheris providedby Kaoru's
yesterday.
words.Directspeechdoes not functionherein the expectedway,as a meansof
thethoughtsof one personto another.That function
is deniedhereby
conveying
ofKaoru's wordsand Ukifune'sthoughts
ofNiou. She does not,
thejuxtaposition
however,totallyignoreKaoru's words;she takessomething
fromthem(theidea
thathe is planningto moveherintothecity)and herownfeelings
developaround
thatkernel.In a similarway she uses the imageryand dictionof the poemsaddressedto her to rejectwhattheysay. Withthe wordnakinu('she burstsinto
tears')thedistancewidensonce morebetweenus and Ukifune,and we see what
of herinnerstate.But even
Kaoru seesand respondsto: thevisiblemanifestation
thoughhe seestheexternalsigns,thereal sourceof heroutburstis notcommunicatedto him herdespairat whatshe believesto be the necessity
to rejectNiou
and at the same timeher inabilityto do so. Again Kaoru misunderstands
the
expressionof thisdespairand interprets
it as unhappinessat his neglect.
We haveseenin sections(5) and (6) thatKaoru is saddenedbywhathe considers
her new-foundmaturity,
her new understanding
of human relations.He feels
responsible
forhavingleftheralone so longin so inhospitable
a place,but at the
sametimehe seemsto longfortheold calm and compliantUkifune:
(9) Mi-kokoro-bae no, kakarade
oiraka narishikoso, nodokani ureshikari-shika. Hito no ika ni kikoeshirasetarukoto ka aru. Sukoshimo
oroka naramu kokorozashinite wa,
ko made mairi-ku-beki,
mi no hodo
michi no arisama ni mo aranu o
nado . . .
'When your dispositionwas not like
thisand was calm, I was relaxedand
happy.What have people been telling
you? If myintentions
werein theleast
bitfrivolous,neithermyownposition
nor the conditionof the road is such
that I could come here like this.'
Sayingthingslikethis...
Her earliersubmissiveness
is givingwayto something
thathecan neither
control
nor understand.
Perhapshe sensessomething
contraryin heroutburst(indeedit
is herlongingforNiou and deceptionof Kaoru thatare thesourceof heragony).
He frequently,
ifnotalways,thinksofheras a substitute
forOigimi,butwhenshe
assertsherownidentity
to an expectedpattern,
bynotconforming
he can no longer
manipulateherforhisownends-thatis,treatheras an imageofOigimi.Not only
do his wordsfailto communicate
reassuranceto her,but as if to emphasizethe
distancebetweenthem,he seemsnot to expecta replyfromher.He movesaway
fromherand lies downby theveranda,directing
his attention
awayfromher:
(10) . . . tsuitachi-goro
no yu-zukuyo
ni,sukoshihashi-chikakufushite
nagaOtoko wa, sugime-idashi-tamaeri.
nishikata no awareo mo oboshi-idete,
... as it was a moonlightevening
around the firstof the month,he lay
downneartheedgeoftheverandaand
was gazing out. The man recallshis
STINCHECUM:
Who Tells the Tale?
onna wa, imayorisoitarumi no usa o
nageki-kuwaete,katami ni monoomowashi.
397
longingfor the past, while the lady
lamentsthe new griefthat has been
added to her lot, and each is sunkin
painfulthoughts.
awayfromUkifune'sview,but in
Kaoru's monologue(9) servesas a transition
the narrativevoice to Kaoru, both he and Ukifuneare
(10), ratherthanshifting
The wordskatamini mono-omowashi
('each is sunkin painful
describedneutrally.
theironicdistancebetweenthetwo,and betweenthemand
thoughts')crystallize
ofNiou and Kaoru ofOigimi,butneitherof
us: we knowthatUkifuneis thinking
themhas any idea of the other'sthoughts(nor do theyseemto care here). The
providesa bridgeto whatappearsto be a purelydescriptive
neutralperspective
passage:
Yama no kata wa kasumihedatete, samuki susaki ni tateru
kasa-sagi no sugata mo, tokoro-gara
wa ito okashu7miyuruni, Uji-bashi
no haru-baruto mi-watasaruruni,
ni
shiba-tsumi-bune
no tokoro-dokoro
yuki-chigaitaru
nado, hoka nite menarenukoto-domonomi tori-atsumetarutokoronareba,mi-tamautabigoto
ni,nao, sono kamino kotono tadaima
no kokochishite, ito kakaranu hito
o mi-kawashitaramu
dani,mezurashiki
naka no aware okaru-bekihodo nari.
Maite koishikihito ni yosoeraretaru
mo, koyo nakarazu, yJyJmono no
arikokoro shiri, miyako-nareyuku
sama no okashiki mo, koyo naku
kokochi shi-tamau
mi-masarishitaru
ni....
(11)
... the mountainsare shrouded in
mist,and thefigureof a crestedheron
standingon a cold sandspit because
of the characterof the place- seems
especiallylovely; Uji Bridge can be
seen in the distance,and boats piled
high with brushwoodply back and
forth;because it is a place whereonly
thingslike this are broughttogether,
thingshe is used to seeing nowhere
else, everytime he looks at it those
dayspast seempresentto him; evenif
he wereexchanging
glanceswithsomeone who was not like this,the rare
betweenthemwould surely
sympathy
be deep. But as she is theveryimage
of someone dear to him,it is all the
morespecial.Graduallyshehas come
to understandthe nature of things.
He feelsthatthecharmof herappearance, whichhas becomemoresophisticated,is now beyondcompare....
This depictionof the riversceneryat Uji seemsat the beginningto be pure
butgraduallythereadersensesthepresenceof a perceiving
narration,
description
subjectwhichat last becomesfocusedon Kaoru. The clause ito okashuimiyuru
('seemsespeciallylovely')impliesa subjectto whichit so seems;withtheclause,
nado, hoka niteme-narenu
ni yuki-chigaitaru
no tokoro-dokoro
shiba-tsumi-bune
tokoronareba('because it is a place whereonly
nomitori-atsumetaru
koto-domo
thingshe is used to seeingnowhereelse, like boats piled highwithbrushwood
plyingback and forth,are broughttogether'),we knowthatit is Kaoru who is
thisscene.His feelingthatthepast is presentis not onlyexplainedto
perceiving
398
us in thispassagebut shownto us directly
(if we are good readers):Kaoru gazes
at a similarscenethefirsttimehe exchangespoemswithOigimi,whenhe watches
on the transmallboats laden withfirewoodpassingback and forthand reflects
sienceof humanlife.43
The past and presentexistsimultaneously
bothforKaoru and forus, butwhile
of thepresent,forus theeffect
is quite
thisjuxtapositionenhanceshis enjoyment
We cannothelpbut sensehis distancefromUkifune,a gulfcreatedby
different.
hislongingforthepast.Althoughwe,too, see theUji Riverthroughhiseyes,our
is presentalso in
pointof viewdoes not quitecoincidewithhis. This ambiguity
the text:whilethepointof viewis clearlyKaoru's, thevoice neverbecomesso.
'not
'can be seenin thedistance',and me-narenu,
Verbsof seeing(mi-watasaruru,
used to seeing'),whichhave no honorific
suffixes
attachedto them,can be interpretedas generalstatements,
whileverbsthatcan referonlyto Kaoru as thesubject
endinthehonorific
tamau(mi-tamau
tabigotoni,'everytimehe looks',and kokochi
shi-tamau
ni, 'he feels').These honorifics
reflect
the narrator'spointof viewand
consciousnessof Kaoru's rank-a narratorwho speaks about Kaoru froma
standpointveryclose to him.But in anotherclause in whichwe would expecta
thereis none: sono kamino koto no tadaimano kokochishite
similarhonorific,
('thosedayspast seempresentto him'),suggesting
thatthevoice hereis Kaoru's
own (in whichcase we mightread it,'thosedayspast seempresentto me'), as do
the followingclauses.However,the usual signsof directinteriormonologueare
missing(exclamatory
and emphaticparticles,and verbalsuffixes
thatpointto the
presenceofa speakingsubject),nordoes thepassageendwitha quotativeparticle,
but becomesan extendedmodifierforkokochishi-tamau('he feels'). Here, the
honorific
suffix
indicatesthe narrator'svoice. The transition
from(10) to (11) is
reflected
froma neutralpoint of view,thus minimizing
the syntacticbreak at
omowashi('lost in thought').Althoughthereis one conclusiveform(shuishikei)
withinthe passage describingKaoru's feelings('hodo nari'), thereis no shiftin
pointof viewhere;so again thesyntactic
breakis de-emphasized.
Syntacticunits
do not correspondcloselyherewithshiftsin perspective.
Hence theseshiftstake
place withinthealmostunbrokenflowof words.
(12) . . . onna wa, kaki-atsumetaru
kokorono uchini moyosaruru
namida
to mo surebaide-tatsuo....
... but on the lady's part, the tears
whichhave welled up because of her
accumulated feelings are about to
fall....
AlthoughUkifune'sfeelingsare describedto us, we see barelymore of her
thanKaoru himself
can see. The sourceofherpain is not statedherebecauseit is
notvisibleto him.Againhe misinterprets
herdistress,
sheis upsetby his
thinking
negligence.
includesno expressionof emotion,no direct
Kaoru's poem characteristically
of his own feelings:
statement
43 V,
'Hashihime' ('The Lady at the Bridge'), 141.8-11.
STINCHECUM:
Who Tells the Tale?
399
. . . nagusame-kane-tamaitsutsu, ... but beingunable to comforther,
he says, 'The enduringvow of Uji
Uji-bashino
Bridgewill not decay. Don't let your
nagakichigiriwa
heartbe tornby whatyou fear.Now
kuchisejio
you will surelysee-'
ayabumukata ni
kokorosawaguna.
to notamau.
Ima mi-tamaitemu
(13a)
In verse,as in prose,Kaoru's speechis unadorned.Thisis evidentifwe compare
Kaoru's poem withthatof Niou about thesnow(see p. 389,above). The former
requestthatshe nothesitateto relyon him.In heranswering
is a straightforward
her.
sherejectshisattemptto comfort
poem,althoughshehas notmisunderstood,
(13b) Taema nomi
yo ni wa ayoki
Uji-bashio
monoto
kuchisenu
nao tanometo ya
'There is nothingbut gaps in this
world. Are you reallytellingme to
relyon thatdangerousUji Bridgeas
somethingthatwill not decay?'
thatshe cannotdependon him,
misleadshimby implying
Ukifunedeliberately
of herstate.In thisway,herpoem
hispreviousmisinterpretation
thusreinforcing
viewofher
We see thepoemwithoutan accompanying
also failsto communicate.
thoughts;it is thusseen fromKaoru's pointof view.We have no access to her
real reactionto his poem because he himselfdoes not. Althoughthereare subtle
shiftsin voice,thepointof viewremainswithKaoru.
Althoughhe findsit
He does not replyto Ukifune'sexpressionof insecurity.
harderthaneverto leaveher,hisconcernoverwhatpeoplewouldsayifhe stayed
longeroverridesany senseof herfeelings:
(13c) Sakizaki yori mo ito misutegataku,shibashimo tachi-tomaramahoshiku obosaruredo, hito no
mono-iino yasukaranuni, ima sara
sama nite koso,
nari, kokoro-yasuki
akatsukini kaerinado oboshi-sashite,
tamainu.Ito yo mo otonabitaritsuru
oboshika na, to, kokoro-gurushiku
izurukoto,arishini masarikeri.
to leave her than
It is more difficult
ever,and althoughhe feelshe would
like to stay even for a little while
longer,sincehe is uneasyabout what
to
people mightsay,makingan effort
think,It would be foolishnow. When
I can relax . . . , at dawn he returned
to the capital. Recollecting, She
certainlyhas grown up, was more
painfulthanever.
but the voice varies,
Here again, the point of view is Kaoru's throughout,
the narrator'spresence.The
sometimescoincidingwithhis, sometimesreflecting
'wantingto stay'),whichin the
firsttwoclauses(throughtachi-tomara-mahoshiku,
constitutean indirectmonologue.
Japaneseare paralleladverbialconstructions,
The last
('althoughhe feels'),we see his thoughtsdirectly.
Followingobosaruredo
has
ka na ('she certainly
itoyomootonabitaritsuru
directquotationofhisthoughts,
400
grownup'), also re-emphasizes
hislack ofunderstanding
ofher.Thusevenin pasclosestto a character,
whenthenarrative
voice
sagesin whichwe are linguistically
is whollyhis, we are consciousof ironicdistance.The distancebetweenus and
Kaoru is stressedby theclosingof thewholesection,markedby theverbalsuffix
-keri.Here,the narratordescribesKaoru's feelings,to,kokoro-gurushiku
oboshiizurukoto arishini masarikeri('recollecting... was more painfulthan ever'),
whichwe knowto be based on a misunderstanding,
and roundsoffthesentencein
a way thatpointsbothto the presenceof the narrating
voice and to thefactof
narration.The sectionthusconcludesin a way thatis typicalof manyof the
chaptersof theGenji,whereby variousmeansthenarrative
pointsto itself.44
FromAnalysisof theText to Interpretation
of the Work:FirstSteps
FROM the above analysisof narrative
voice in a shortsectionof 'Ukifune',it is
of theinsightgainedfromit about each of the two
possibleto forma synthesis
a synthesis
characters,
whichis at the same timean interpretation
of the text.
Obviouslythereare aspectsofKaoru and Ukifunethatdo notappearat all in this
In orderto interpret
passage; thusmyremarksare necessarily
tentative.
fullyeven
thissmallpartofthetext,we mustreadit in lightof the restof the Uji chapters,
ifnottheGenjias a whole.AlthoughI have attempted
to limitmyanalysisto the
selectedpassage,theinterdependent
structure
of thetexthas requiredthatI refer
to an earlierchapterin orderto makea particularsceneintelligible.45
But we can
gaina considerabledegreeof understanding
of themutualrelationship
of thetwo
charactersfroman examinationof thisbriefsection.
The firstglimpsewe see of Ukifuneshowsus thatshe respondsnegatively
to
Kaoru. This is quiteclearfromherfirstinterior
monologue,and is also suggested
by theprecedingtransitional
passage thatdescribesthe impressionhe makeson
some,as yetunnamed,observer.Her embarrassment
and fearof Kaoru are contrastedwithherpassionatelove forNiou, whosewarmthis repeatedly
in
reflected
Ukifune'sthoughtsabout him. While she notes,one by one, the praiseworthy
aspectsof Kaoru's character,herfrequentattemptsto suppresshermemoriesof
Niou and herfeelingsforhimleave no doubtthatit is Niou thatshe loves.46
But it is not only Ukifunewho respondswithoutpassion to Kaoru's calmer
virtues.We also see himas she does. The openingsection(1) showsus hisdispassionatenature;his situationis describedas nodokanari('calm')-Kaoru himself
is referred
to by thesameadjectiveat thebeginning
ofthechapter(vi, 99.10). He
44 Earl Miner, 'Narrative Units in the
GenjiMonogatari:"Ukifune" in its Context',
unpublishedmanuscript.
45 This verynecessity
to referback to other
partsof the textmakes it clear thatthe Genji
is essentiallya written
work.See the reference
to Tamagami's theoryof the work as performance,pp. 375-76, above.
46 For a discussion of Ukifune as she
appears throughoutthe Uji chapters,and in
particularher relationsto Kaoru and Niou,
see Takahashi Toru, 'Sonzai-kankaku no
Fr
Shiso5:"Ukifune"ni tsuite'#-At
CDOUIR:
r:
fti- h
, in Nihon Bungaku, xxiv: 11
(November 1975), pp. 79-80. Takahashi
supportsmyreadingof Ukifune'sfeelings.
STINCHECUM:
Who Tells the Tale?
401
presentsa striking
contrastto Niou, who,in theimmediately
precedingpassage,
thinkshe willdie of love (vi, 133. 5-6). Kaoru, on theotherhand,is in no great
hurryto see Ukifune.Whenbusinessmattersare nottoo pressing,
he findstimeto
go to Uji; whenhe arrives,he does notrushimmediately
to herquartersbutgoes
firstto thetemple,prays,spendssometimewiththepriests,and, finally,
whenhe
has takencare of theseotherresponsibilities,
he stops in to see her. The very
absenceof interiormonologueheresuggeststhathe is not thinkingof anything
relevantto thestoryof Ukifune.
Whenhis thoughtsare exposedto us, two pointsemergeclearly:his repeated
misunderstanding
of Ukifune,and his preoccupationwithOigimi.We cannot
censureKaoru for not knowingthe real source of Ukifune'sunhappiness,but
because we do know we cannot simplyaccept Kaoru's judgmentthat she has
matured;thatjudgmentis based on ignorance.Ratherthanbeingpleasedby this
changein her,he reproachesherforit,forshe no longerrespondsin theway he
expects,and he cannotcontrolher.Kaoru is deceivingUkifunein nottellingher
to Oigimi,and deceivinghimself
in continuing
abouthisattachment
to see Ukifune
as an imageofOigimi.The ironicdistancethusestablishedbetweenus and Kaoru
withhim too closely,and in effectpreventsour taking
preventsour identifying
Kaoru as theherooftheUji chapters.His longestinterior
monologuein thechapter,whenhe discoversthe deceptionof Ukifuneand Niou (vi, 165-167),reveals
some of themostunattractive
theirony.
aspectsof his character,
reinforcing
It is not onlyKaoru who practicesdeception.Ukifune'sagitationprovokeshis
poem,an attemptto consoleher.But heranswering
poem,farfromrevealingher
realemotionsas we haveseenthemthroughherinterior
monologues,concealsthe
withinher.Accordingto herpoem,shedoubtstheenduranceofKaoru's
conflicts
thatdistresses
vow; however,we knowthatit is not his unreliability
her,but her
own and Niou's. It is theveryfactof Kaoru's dependability
whichmakeshimso
clearlya betterpotentialhusbandthanNiou, thatrequiresherto rejectNiou and
createsher conflict.Ukifune'swordsare opposed to herfeelings.This contrast
becomesvividforus throughthejuxtapositionof twoformsof directutterancedirectspeech(herein theformofa poem)and directinterior
monologue,thelatter
narrationhad beenour onlysource
supportedby narrateddialogue.If descriptive
ofinformation
about herthoughts,
we wouldnotfeelthecontrastwiththewords
so strongly
as we do whenwe seeherthoughts
fromherownpointofview.
directly,
theironyof herpoem. It is moredifficult
Because we see directly,
we understand
to understandUkifune'srole in the workthanit is to evaluateour relationto
withher,but,in theend,we standapartfromher.
Kaoru. At timeswemayidentify
it is mixed withcensuretowardher
While we may view her withsympathy,
is notofthesamequality
indecisiveness.
However,thedistancewe thusexperience
and
offidelity
as thesharpironywithwhichwe mustregardKaoru's protestations
ourpointofviewand thatoftheworkas a wholedo notcoincide
piety.Ultimately,
in theUji chapters.Throughtheuse ofmultiple
withthatof anyofthecharacters
ofUkifuneand Kaoru,
pointsofview,byplacingin appositiontheconsciousnesses
402
we are distancedfrombothof them.The ironyoftheirwordsthusbecomesvivid.
The narrativevoice shifts,then,fromcharacterto character,to descriptive
narration,
to thevoice of a narrator.Whileinteriormonologuebringsus faceto
face withthe characters,descriptivenarrationprovidesa backgroundagainst
whichwe see themas objects,on theone hand,and on theotherconfronts
us with
whatthecharacters
themselves
see. The latterkindofdescription
beginsas narrabutas thepassageproceedsthepointof
tionin whichthevoiceis notpersonified,
viewbecomesthatof one of thecharacters.Thus,to a certainextent,descriptive
insofaras theirmovements
narrationservesto moveus awayfromthecharacters,
Butas thiskindofdescription
and thoughts
aredescribedin summary.
(particularly
ofa certaincharacter,
of nature)takeson theintonationand orientation
we move
his
voicethenblendswith in directinterior
closerto him,and whenthenarrative
monologue,we facehimdirectly.
However,whenthe voice is personified
as a narrator,the distancingeffectis
The auxiliaryverb-kericalls attention
stronger
thanin passagesofdescription.
to
the presenceof a personified
in
subject,thatis, a narratingvoice, particularly
conjunction
withtheemphaticparticlesnamu,zo, and koso. In addition,thereare
auxiliaryverbssuchas -beshi,-meri,and -kemu,whichindicateconjectureon the
voiceabout thesubjectof themainverb(see p. 382,above).
partof thenarrating
For example,in theexpressionomoi-yoru
ka shi(vi, 177.3,'it mustbe
nari-kemu
thatshethoughtofit'),itis notthesubjectoftheverb'thinks'(here,Ukifune)that
Ukifune'sthinking.
Causal construcwhois explaining
speculates,butthenarrator
of
about
a
character'smotives
tionsperform
thesamerole.This kind speculation
or actionsplacesthenarratorwithinthesamedimensionas thecharacter(thatis,
thenarratoris not omniscient)
and at thesametimeobjectifies
him,thuscreating
distancebetweenus and him.The techniquehas close parallelsin To theLighthouse.47In Auerbach'swords,Woolfis deliberately
'obscuringand evenobliteratknownto theauthor'precisely
ofan objectiverealitycompletely
ingtheimpression
In theGenji,also, theveryhumannessof
in orderto createa morereal reality.48
functions
thenarratorwho wondersabout Ukifune'smotivations
to establishthe
realityof thefictionalworld.
As the voice of the narratorbecomesmore insistent,
unquestionably
distinct
fromthatofthecharacterbeingdescribedand obviouslypersonified,
thecharacter
We can see thisin the
is objectified
and ourdistancefromhimis at itsmaximum.49
zo nikukiya
hito-kotowa, motomai-idenu
sentence,kano mimitodome-tamaishi
47 See
especially the famous passage omniscient,withwhichI cannot agree. There
is a fundamentaldifferencebetween omnibeginning,'Never did anybodylook so sad':
scient narration,which implies a consistent
Woolf,p. 46.
48 Auerbach,p. 472.
point of view throughouta text and at the
49 Konishi,pp. 53 ff.,
discussesthecreation same time a personifiedsubject of expression
of aestheticdistancein the Genjiby means of that freely makes judgments about the
themanipulationof pointof viewand the use characters,and the kind of multiple-point-ofof personifiednarrators.He states,however, view narration that characterizesthe Genji
thatin generalthepointof viewin theGenjiis and thenovelsof Woolf,Faulkner,and Joyce.
STINCHECUM:
Who Tells the Tale?
403
(vi, 145. 7-8, 'it is reallyhatefulthathe does not mentionthatwordthatcaught
condemnsNiou fornotmentioning
to Ukifunethat
hisear'),in whichthenarrator
he overheardKaoru repeatinga poem about his longingfor the lady of Uji
Bridge.50Both of these techniquesof distancing-descriptivenarrationand
in 'Ukifune'in comparisonto
are relatively
narrator'scommentaryinfrequent
otherchaptersoftheGenji;however,theydo occuroftenenoughto forma signifimethodin 'Ukifune'.
cantaspectof thenarrative
narrative
voicein 'Ukifune',incontrastto similartechniques
Thustheshifting
of
whiledrawingus closerto thecharacters
in VirginiaWoolf's To theLighthouse,
withintheirworldalso createsironyand controlstheaestheticdistanceamongthe
and betweenthe fictionalworldand us, the readers.A
charactersthemselves,
studyof narrativevoice in the Genjias a whole should indicatean increasing
intheusesofaestheticdistanceand irony;evenon thebasisofa cursory
refinement
betweenthe degreeand
reading,thereseems to be a fundamentaldifference
oftheironydirectedtowardHikaruGenjiand thedistancebetweenus
consistency
Kaoru. However,such
and themajorcharactersin the Uji chapters,particularly
conclusionsmust be the resultof a much broadercriticalexaminationof the
Genji.I have confinedmyselfin the presentstudyto a selectedpassage fromthe
'Ukifune'chapter.Althoughmy analysisis extremely
limited,it has revealed
of major characterswithinthe fictional
importantelementsin the relationships
method.
worldas wellas significant
aspectsof narrative
50 Similarexpressions
bythenarratorabout
the charactersoccur throughoutthe chapter.
See vi, 139.7-9; 149.12-13; 162.14-15; 169.12;
177.1-3.

Stinchecum Who Tells the Tale

Transcription

Similar documents

Counterfactuals and Hypothesis Testing in Political

In the House of the Child

Mark Twain the Tourist: The Form of The Innocents Abroad

The Canon of Polykleitos - Department of Art History

Punk "Noir": Anarchy in Two Idioms

National Art Education Association

Class 4 Andres Serrano Interview - Rebels and Scandal in Art History

18th Century Japanese art

Narrator 2 - Hawker Brownlow Education

Afewerq Yohannis and Debbebe Seyfu: Notes on Ethiopian Writers

The Tale of Genji