christian university faculty of foreign languages and literatures annals of

296 Pages·2016·5.78 MB·English

“DIMITRIE CANTEMIR” CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY

FACULTY OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES AND LITERATURES

ANNALS OF “DIMITRIE CANTEMIR” CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY

LINGUISTICS, LITERATURE AND METHODOLOGY OF TEACHING

VOLUME XVI
No.1/2016
This journal is included in
IDB SCIPIO

http://analeflls.ucdc.ro
[email protected]

ISSN 2065 – 0868
ISSN-L 2065 - 0868

Each author is responsible for the originality of his article and the fact that it
has not been previously published.
“DIMITRIE CANTEMIR” CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
FACULTY OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES AND LITERATURES

ANNALS

OF

“DIMITRIE CANTEMIR”

CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY

LINGUISTICS, LITERATURE AND METHODOLOGY
OF TEACHING

VOLUME XVI
No.1/2016

CONTENTS

PROCEEDINGS OF THE THIRD INTERNATIONAL
CONFERENCE

JAPAN: PRE-MODERN, MODERN AND CONTEMPORARY. A
RETURN TRIP FROM THE EAST TO THE WEST. LEARNING IN,
ABOUT AND FROM JAPAN
9-11 September 2015

I. LITERARY STUDIES

Yasusuke Oura: Fiction and fictionality in Japanese culture:
shishōsetsu (i-novel) and “otaku” culture……………………………………………8

Tomoe Nakamura, Akihiro Kubo, Manabu Kawada: Description
and point of view in the modern Japanese novel: Iwano Hōmei’s
theoretical discourse…………………………………………………………………………23

Chien Hui Chuang: A Study of 'Shanghai'Magazine, and its Proponents,
Focusing on its Literary Column……………………………………………………….42

Junko Abe: Representation of tamashii in Reflections on Contemporary
Tales by Matsutani Miyoko……………………………………………………………….54

Sungkook Kang: Western Civilization as Exhibited in a Sino-Japanese
Poem from the Edo Period: An Analysis of Arai Hakuseki’s “The Alarm
Clock”………………………………………………………………………………………………68

II. LANGUAGE STUDIES

Andreea Sion: Japanese words used in Romania…………………………….83

Júlia Somodi: Interpersonal Relations in Source Text and Target Text
in the Light of the Translation of Appelatives……………………………………..95

III. CULTURAL STUDIES
5
Brendan Le Roux: Was Lafcadio Hearn’s Prophecy about Japanese
Migrants in Guadeloupe Right? The Background of the 1895 Japanese
Workers’s Labour Movement…………………………………………………………..112

Diana Tihan: Japanese Approaches to the Challenges of Ageing-
Lessons for Romania………………………………………………………………………132

Raluca Nagy, Horea Sibișteanu: The Taming of the Earthquake. Can
Romania Learn from Japan?....................................................................143

Magdalena Ciubăncan: A Rose by Any other Name is Still a Rose…or Is
It? On Gender Roles in Contemporary Japan……………………………………160

Angela Drăgan: Japan’s Image in the Romanian Mass-Media in the
First Half of the 20th Century…………………………………………………………..169

Irina Holca: Romania and Japan: Real and Imaginary Encounters at
the Turn of the 20th Century…………………………………………………………….178

Maria Grăjdian: Identity in Fragments. Kanno Yōko, Counter-
Orientalism and Eclectic Nostalgias in Anime Soundtracks...................191

Oana Loredana Scoruș: A Cultural Interpretation of the Features of a
Japanese Garden……………………………………………………………………………212

Saida Khalmirzaeva: Yuriwaka: On the Possible Route of the Story’s
Transmission…………………………………………………………………………………230

Rieko Kamei-Dyche: Depicting Authority: The Saionji Family and
Cultural Capital in the early Medieval Japanese Court……………………..251

Andrew T. Kamei-Dyche: Mapping the Intellectual Landscape:
Bookstores and the Book towns in the Late Era…………………………………267

Carmen Săpunaru Tămaș: From Conception to Adulthood-Children’s
Rites of Passage in Japanese Society………………………………………………..277

Adrian Ovidiu Tămaș, Carmen Săpunaru Tămaș: A Romanian
Community in Ōsaka: A Case Study of Class Discrimination in Two
Languages……………………………………………………………………………………..290

6
LITERARY STUDIES
FICTION AND FICTIONALITY IN JAPANESE
CULTURE:
SHISHŌSETSU (I-NOVEL) AND “OTAKU” CULTURE

Yasusuke OURA

Abstract: Fiction and fictionality—their features and uses—can provide
numerous insights into a culture. The issues they raise also offer a fertile ground
for comparative studies. In the case of Japanese culture, the shishōsetsu (I-
novel), often considered the representative genre of modern Japanese literature,
uses a special type of fictionality, which is one of its definitory features.
Oversimplifying the facts, we could say that it stands at the intersection of the
study of Japanese culture and theory of fiction. In Japan, only few thinkers have
analysed the shishōsetsu from this standpoint; for example, Itō Sei and
Maruyama Masao, soon after the end of the Second World War, pointed out the
unique type of fictionality present in the shishōsetsu, and connected it to a wider
argument about the Japanese cultural background and mentality. This talk
introduces the ideas of Itō and Maruyama, and attempts to reconsider the
theoretical implications of this “Japanese-style fiction” from a present-day
perspective.
Another topic I tackle is the so-called “otaku culture”, especially the
production and consumption of narratives it involves, often discussed in terms
of “narrative consumption”, nijisōsaku (derivative work), etc. The phenomenon
is not limited to literature, encompassing many subculture genres: manga,
anime, video games, etc. The “otaku culture” in this sense, when we consider it
from the point of view of fictionality, seems to contrast strangely with the
shishōsetsu: while the latter is a quasi-autobiographical genre, recounting the
author’s everyday experiences, the former is characterised by a sort of
panfictionalism, a key concept of “postmodern” culture. Nevertheless, both are
presumed to be Japanese. How can we explain this? That is the question I
address in concluding my talk.
Keywords: shishōsetsu, otaku, fiction, narrative, derivative work

INTRODUCTION

Fiction and fictionality — their features and uses — can provide numerous
insights into a culture. Fiction is a social institution. If the term “institution” is
an exaggeration, then it is at least a social agreement or convention. While there
might still be some discussion over whether fiction is something Western in
nature, it is an undoubted fact that it has not existed all over the world in all
ages in the same fashion. It is said that even in the West, the concept of fiction

 Professor, Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University
8
as we know it today — i.e., something not designed to deceive people and clearly
distinguished from lies — began to take root only after the Renaissance. This
seemingly simple attitude of producing and receiving fiction as fiction is by no
means obvious. I will not go into details here, but it is evident that a society’s
degree of permissiveness towards fiction varies significantly depending on the
age and the cultural background. In the West, the discourse praising the
cognitive value and social benefits of fiction, as seen with Aristotle, and the
argument that fiction is harmful, which was started by Plato, have coexisted
throughout the ages in different forms. For example, the novel as a genre has
enjoyed tremendous popularity since its inception, while at the same time it has
been an easy target of the argument that fiction is harmful, i.e., “fiction has a
corrupting influence on women and young people”. On the other hand, recent
events, such as members of the Islamic community calling for the death of
Salman Rushdie for his Satanic Verses, the incident related to the satirical
Muhammad cartoons published by a Danish newspaper, and the terror attack
on Charlie Hebdo in France, can be seen, at least in a sense, as manifestations
of intolerance to fiction, backed up by cultural differences. Needless to say, the
issue is very delicate in areas connected to religion and discrimination. In some
cases, fiction can be the source of terrorism and diplomatic problems.
Anyway, I repeat, fiction and fictionality — their features and uses — can
provide numerous insights into a culture. The issues they raise also offer a fertile
ground for comparative studies1. Shishōsetsu, one of the topics I am going to
focus on, is a type of novel that reached its peak in the 1910s and the 1920s, i.e.,
from the end of the Meiji period to the beginning of the Shōwa period, and
continued to be pursued actively even after World War II. It has long been
considered the typical example of modern Japanese novel, both with a positive
and negative connotation, by Japanese critics and foreign scholars who study
Japanese literature alike. One of the main distinguishing features of the
shishōsetsu is its unique fictionality. On the other hand, “otaku culture” is a
term used to refer to a part of the Japanese subculture that has developed since
the 1980s, as well as the behavior of young people who get absorbed in it. Since
“otaku” is now an international word, I guess that many people are familiar with
what “otaku culture” refers to, as it has become known worldwide and is
actually much more popular than the shishōsetsu. “Otaku culture” is also
related to the problem of fiction through its unique conception of the narrative.
Thinking about shishōsetsu and “otaku culture” at the intersection of the
studies on Japanese culture and those about fiction may sound a little too
ambitious, but this is the topic of my talk today. Please understand that, due to
the time constraints, I might not be able to go into specifics.
Before continuing to the main discussion, let me add one thing. This
April, we published an anthology of Japanese literary theories, the fruit of a
joint study I conducted over the past four years at the Institute for Research in
Humanities, Kyoto University. The book is titled Literary Theories in Japan:

1 Cf. Anne Duprat & Françoise Lavocat eds., Fiction et Cultures, coll. « Poétiques
comparatistes », Société française de littérature générale et comparée, 2010.
9
An Anthology (beta version) and includes excerpts from materials related to
literary theories written by Japanese literati after the Meiji period; they are
organized by theme, and have added commentaries. This work is the result of
collaboration among experts on Western theories and scholars who study
Japanese literature, and, in this sense, I think that it is very unique. The reason
we call it “beta version” is that we want to ask our colleagues to use it in class
and let us know what they think about the usability of the contents; based on
their opinion, we want to create a final version. In fact, many of the materials
that I will use in this talk are partially included in the Anthology, and I also
refer to some of the commentaries therein. Thus, in a sense, my talk today is a
way of utilizing this book.

I. Shishōsetsu and the Problems of Fiction
I-1. What is Shishōsetsu?
Now, let us go into the main discussion. As some people may not be
familiar with the term “shishōsetsu”, first I would like to briefly explain what it is.
As the name suggests, shishōsetsu is a novel about the “I”. In Japanese, it is also
called “watakushishōsetsu”, and is translated as “I-novel” or “autobiographical
novel” in English. Foreign scholars often use the term “shishōsetsu” as such,
without translating it. In this type of novel, the main character serves as the
narrator in some cases but not in all (the narration can be either in the first or
third person). Either way, he is often supposed to be a writer, more or less
professional, and can be identified with the author himself or herself. It may be
more appropriate to say that the shishōsetsu is produced and read on the basis of
an unspoken understanding or a reading convention that the main
character/narrator is the author of the novel. Among early shishōsetsu writers are
Shimazaki Tōson, Tayama Katai, Tokuda Shūsei, Masamune Hakuchō,
Chikamatsu Shūkō, Kasai Zenzō, etc. The peak of the genre’s popularity, as
mentioned earlier, was attained in the 1910s and the 1920s, but it has managed
to survive and thrive even after this period.
From the perspective of literary history, Japan experienced two literary
movements during the mid-1920s, “New Sensationalist School (shinkankakuha
新感覚派)” and “Proletarian Literature,” both of which, however, lasted for only
ten years and failed to drive away the shishōsetsu. Ironically, the proletarian
writers, who had vehemently opposed shishōsetsu, began to write this type of
novel after their conversion, i. e., after renouncing their Marxist credo. From this
fact alone, we can see how deeply-rooted shishōsetsu is as a literary trend.
Indeed, there have been numerous writers who wrote novels that can be called
shishōsetsu. Terada Tōru noted in 1950, “among the writers who emerged after
the Meiji Restoration, Natsume Sōseki, Kōda Rohan, and Izumi Kyōka are the
only ones who never wrote shishōsetsu”. In addition to Chikamatsu Shūkō and
Kasai Zenzō, mentioned earlier, Shiga Naoya and Kamura Isota are often
referred to as shishōsetsu writers. After the 1930s, there were many others,
whose works were widely read, such as Kanbayashi Akatsuki, Dazai Osamu, Dan
Kazuo, and Shimao Toshio. In fact, even today quite a few writers call
themselves “shishōsetsu writers”, such as Kurumatani Chōkitsu, Saeki Kazumi,
10