Modern Japanese Stories/Introduction

Introduction

by Ivan Morris

Contemporary literature in Japan, despite its remote ancestry, may be regarded as a new literature, scarcely beyond its formative stage. The Meiji Restoration marked a departure in Japanese writing, as it did in politics, education and so many other fields. For a general understanding of the modern Japanese novel or short story it is hardly necessary to go back more than a century. The Japanese language has undergone a continuous development since earliest times, and to this extent modern fiction derives stylistically from classical and medieval writing. Even here, however, the Restoration had an important effect by bringing the literary language closer to that of ordinary speech. The major influences can be found among works of foreign literature introduced into Japan after about 1860 and among certain important Japanese writers of the Meiji Period.

This introduction cannot attempt to present a systematic history of modern Japanese literature, but it may be worthwhile indicating a few general trends that can help the reader to view the twenty-five stories in context. Notes on the twenty-five authors and their place in modern Japanese writing appear at the end of the volume.

The historical approach to literature has many dangers. Too much concentration on ‘social backgrounds’, ‘literary influences’ and ‘schools of writing’ may lead us to read the stories not as independent works but as representatives of some particular period, and to regard their writers, not as unique individuals having their own views of life and their characteristic methods of expression, but simply as members of certain literary schools with established outlooks or more or less set programmes.

When, however, we are faced with a literature as remote from most Western readers as that of Japan, the historical approach can hardly be avoided. As Mr Angus Wilson has said, “To read the literature of a civilization or age entirely or almost unfamiliar emphasizes one’s unconscious dependence on historical background. To begin with, the unfamiliar is likely immediately to present a number of specious qualities—the ‘quaint’, the ‘charming’, the ‘horrific’—which are merely attempts to come to terms with a strange world on a surface level. Greater familiarity always destroys the immediate impressions.”

In few countries is the dividing line that marks the beginning of the ‘modern’ period as clear as in Japan. What historians term the Meiji Restoration was the result of inter-acting processes that had been continuing for a very long time. When these processes finally reached their culmination, the collapse of the old régime, which had given the country some two and a half centuries of peace and stability, occurred with remarkable speed. In 1867 the gradual stagnation and disintegration of the economic system, increasing pressure from foreign powers and the revolt of four of the great clans combined with numerous other factors to bring about the downfall of the centralized feudal government that had been in the hands of a succession of military rulers belonging to the Tokugawa family. Political power was handed over in 1867 to the Emperor Meiji and his advisers. In the years that followed, every effort was made to abolish feudalism, especially in its political and economic aspects, and to turn Japan into a centralized nation-state on the European model. The political structure was completely reorganized and a capitalist economy rapidly developed with the impetus of a belated industrial revolution. In the effort to become ‘modern’, countless old customs, habits and heritages were scrapped in a wave of cultural iconoclasm which at one stage went so far that there were serious proposals to replace the Japanese language by English and the native religions by Christianity.

Following 1868 every effort was made to adopt the techniques and culture of the West. Japan, which for two hundred and fifty years had to a large extent been isolated from the main stream of Western development, tried in the period of a few decades to absorb everything from the outside that would turn her into a modern nineteenth century state; such a state might be able to deal with foreign nations on a basis of equality and, above all, avoid the fate that had overtaken other materially backward Asian countries. By the last decade of the century the Meiji oligarchy had succeeded in forging a modern military establishment which enabled the country to defeat China in 1895 and, one decade later, to win the war against Russia, thus establishing Japan as one of the Great Powers.

The cumulative effect on the country’s literature of all these immense changes can hardly be overestimated. None the less, the destruction of the old and the adoption of the new was not immediately reflected in Japanese writing. The original aim of the oligarchy was to import the techniques of the West while preserving the Japanese ‘spirit’ intact. Chimerical as this ideal eventually proved, it caused the emphasis to be placed at first on the material aspects of Westernization. There was a cultural lag of some fifteen years during which literature continued on its course, relatively unaffected by Western influences. This literature, it should be noted, had sunk to a remarkably low level. The prose fiction of the late Tokugawa Period was in a groove of mediocrity, having largely lost the power and originality that animated the work of the great prose writers of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, such as Saikaku, Kiseki and Akinari. Frivolous tales about courtesans, banal stories of licentiousness in the gay quarters and prolix works of a didactic nature were the stock-in-trade of the early nineteenth century prose writers with only two or three notable exceptions.

Had late Tokugawa literature been more vigorous and creative, it is possible that the literary impact of Western culture would have proved less overwhelming. As it was, the introduction of European culture resulted in a major break with the past that has no parallel in any of the important literature of the West.

Until about 1860 the only foreign literary influences of importance had come from China. For over two centuries, contacts with Europe had by and large been limited to the small Dutch settlement off Nagasaki—and there the focus was on trade rather than culture. Translations of European literature began in the 1860’s, but it was not until 1878 that the first complete novel from the West was translated into Japanese. As in the case of many of the early translations, the choice, Bulwer-Lytton’s Ernest Maltravers, strikes one as peculiar. Practical information was at least as important a criterion as literary value in introducing books from the West and one of the most successful of all the early importations was Samuel Smiles’ utilitarian tract, Self-Help. The novels of Disraeli, reflecting modern political processes, were also given an undue degree of attention.

In the 1880’s the trickle of Western works grew into a stream and, by the end of the century, into a mighty torrent which is still continuing in the present day. Several of the most gifted writers of the Meiji Period devoted much of their energies to the translation of one or more European authors; indeed it was mainly through these translations that the reading public first became acquainted with the various aspects of modern fiction. In many cases Japanese writers then tried to produce the same type of novels in Japanese, with rather surprising results. One Japanese author, for example, under the impact of Crime and Punishment, wrote a story about the life and tribulations of a man belonging to the untouchable eta class. For even in these early days of direct assimilation, European literary influence was rarely a matter of straightforward imitation. Naïve interpretation, and often misunderstanding, of the models played a capital part in the process of absorbing Western literature. As a modern Japanese critic, Mr Yoshida Kenichi, has pointed out, Tolstoy’s Resurrection when first introduced into Japan was considered merely a romantic tale of unhappy love.

The main effect of the influx from the West was not so much to provide specific literary models as to encourage Japanese to break away from sterile traditions and to describe in a more or less realistic way the brave new world that they saw growing up about them. 1885 is generally regarded as a key date in the development of modern Japanese fiction. That year saw the publication of ‘The Essence of the Novel’ (Shōsetsu Shinzui) by Tsubouchi Shōyō (1859–1935). Not only was this the first important critical work of the new era, but it was the first serious theoretical study of the novel in Japan. During the Tokugawa Period, and indeed ever since the days of The Tale of Genji, scholars had looked down on prose fiction, which was widely regarded as being fit only for women, children and the lesser breeds. Writers like Saikaku were largely ignored and critical attention was concentrated on tanka and other forms of classical poetry and, to a lesser extent, on dramatic works. As a rule, the only novelists who were accorded any respect were didactic writers like Bakin. One result of the introduction of Western literature was to enhance the position of prose fiction in Japan.

Like so many of the important literary figures of the Meiji Period, Tsubouchi Shōyō devoted a considerable part of his time to translation. He was a specialist in English literature and among other things he translated the complete works of Shakespeare into Japanese. His acquaintance with the writing of the West brought home to him the low state of fiction in Japan. A considerable part of The Essence of the Novel is concerned with criticizing the current state of Japanese fiction in the light of literary lessons from Europe. Tsubouchi referred to the recent resurgence of the novel in Japan as a result of new printing methods and of increasing literacy. The standard, however, was low: “An endless number of the most diverse novels and romances is now being produced in our country and the book-shelves groan under their weight; yet they all consist of mere foolishness.”^[1]

Tsubouchi blamed this on the lack of discrimination among readers and on the failure of writers themselves to cut loose from the late Tokugawa tradition of tedious didacticism. In the typical spirit of the Meiji intellectual, Tsubouchi declared that the solution lay in ‘modernizing’ Japanese literature. This involved, on the one hand, adopting the realistic approach of modern Western fiction. In particular Japanese writers should strive for psychological realism whereby they might faithfully reproduce the actual complex workings of men and women. According to Tsubouchi, the novelist’s task was not to apportion praise or blame, but to observe and describe the underlying passions that make human beings act as they do. Here we find an adumbration of the Naturalist approach that was to play so important a part in subsequent Japanese literature. At the same time, however, Tsubouchi stressed the aesthetic purpose of the novel. The function of the writer was not to teach or to expound approved moral sentiments, but to produce works of artistic merit which would serve to elevate the public taste.

Banal as many of Tsubouchi’s ideas may strike the present-day reader, their effect on Meiji literature was momentous. Indeed, the development of modern realistic fiction can be dated from the publication of The Essence of the Novel. After 1885 fantastic tales of jejune romances began to give place to accounts of real people living in contemporary society. Tsubouchi tried to put his own theories into practice in a novel with the inauspicious title of The Spirit of Present-day Students. His effort was singularly unsuccessful.

The first important work to reflect Tsubouchi’s theories was ‘The Drifting Cloud’ (Ukigumo), a novel by Futabatei Shimei (1864–1909) that appeared between 1887 and 1889. This unfinished work deals realistically with a commonplace, rather lethargic young intellectual of the Meiji Period. Futabatei’s study of Russian literature, in particular of Turgenev, had convinced him of the need for realism both in subject and in style. He was the first important novelist to abandon the conventional literary language and to use ordinary colloquial forms in describing the inner struggles of the modern man. In this and many other ways The Drifting Cloud occupies a pioneer role in the development of modern Japanese fiction, although it will hardly strike most present-day readers as a literary masterpiece.

Another outstanding figure in Meiji literature was Mori Ōgai (1862–1922), the first of the twenty-five writers represented in the present anthology.^[2] Whereas previous writers knew the West mainly through their readings, Ōgai became acquainted with Europe at first hand as an army doctor in Germany from 1884 to 1888. During these years he became familiar with current European literature and his voluminous translations and essays greatly affected the development of modern Japanese drama and poetry, as well as the novel and the short story. In his literary criticism Ōgai was greatly influenced by the idealistic aestheticism which was current in Germany during the latter part of the nineteenth century and which was expressed by such philosophers as Karl von Hartmann. He returned from Europe at a time when German influence was steadily becoming stronger in Japan, as seen for example in the enactment of the Meiji Constitution (1889), based to an important extent on German principles of absolutism.

Ōgai criticized many of Tsubouchi’s theories concerning realistic literature and in their place advanced a form of romanticism that laid stress on the emotional realization of the self. His first piece of fiction, which appeared in 1890, was the romantic account of a tragic love affair in Berlin between a young Japanese gentleman engaged in research work and a beautiful German ballet-dancer named Alice. Evidently based on personal experience, ‘The Dancing Girl’ (Maihime) was written in the first person and was described by Ōgai himself as an Ich Roman. “I have attempted,” wrote Ōgai, “to portray a Japanese who was living in Berlin at the same time as I and who came to grips with the kind of situation described in the story.” Then (as a typical afterthought of the Western-influenced Meiji writer) Ōgai added, “There are a good many European works of fiction with similar plots.” The Dancing Girl is hardly a great work of literature, but it stands out as one of the earliest examples of the shi-shōsetsu (‘I-novel’ and ‘I-story’), the autobiographical, confessional type of writing that has occupied such an important role in modern Japanese literature.

It is one of the peculiarities of this literature that the writers who were most enthusiastically to adopt the shi-shōsetsu should have been the members of the Naturalist School. The introduction into Japan of the writings of Zola and Maupassant had far-reaching effects in literary circles. It accelerated the movement away from traditionalism and, at about the time of the Russo-Japanese War (1904–5), produced a group of influential writers who proclaimed that the purpose of literature was to search for the truth and to describe it with the detached accuracy of a scientist. Literary embellishments and conventional sentiments had to be discarded in favour of a cold, objective presentation of life as it was actually lived by ordinary men and women. Factual detail was more important than style, form or atmosphere; the modern writer must strive to achieve the unadorned directness of the policeman’s statement or the clinical report.

From the outset, however, Japanese Naturalism began to diverge from the movement in Europe that had inspired it. The publication in 1908 of ‘The Quilt’ (Futon), a novel by Tayama Katai, one of the leading Naturalists, served to establish the autobiographical approach as the standard for Japanese writers of the Naturalist School. This novel deals in exhaustive detail with the events and emotions in the life of the author-hero and is one of the first in the long series of Japanese novels that unabashedly describe the experiences and emotions of the character known as watakushi (‘I’).

Many reasons have been suggested for this confessional aspect of Japanese Naturalism. According to some critics, the late collapse of feudalism and the fact that important changes have always come from above rather than as a result of popular effort resulted in a peculiarly wide gulf between individual and social life and made the Japanese far less interested in political and social questions than people in most modern Western countries. Strong authoritarian traditions gave rise to a widespread feeling of indifference or resignation to outside problems and official censorship discouraged Meiji writers from voicing any criticism of current conditions. Writers who wished to present life strictly on the basis of facts concentrated on their direct personal experiences, tending to neglect the wider subjects that had been treated by Zola and the other Naturalists of the West. Readers, for their part, were prone to be more interested in books that described the detailed experiences of a single individual, preferably the writer himself, rather than novels giving a broad picture of society by means of a more objective handling of a variety of characters.

The main legacy of Naturalism in Japan has been to convince many writers that the only worthwhile and ‘sincere’ form of literature is that which takes its material directly from the facts of the author’s physical and spiritual life. This trend affected several writers who were in other respects strongly opposed to the Naturalists. Among them was Shiga Naoya, whose success in the genre encouraged many less talented authors to probe into their personal experiences for literary material.^[3]

The shi-shōsetsu tradition, though it has sometimes given rise to works of unusual sharpness and honesty, has had a number of baneful effects. In their efforts at faithful reproduction many modern Japanese writers tended to forget the demands of fiction and of literary style. Furthermore, the confessional type of literature implies a rather dangerous form of conceit, based on the idea that there is something intrinsically interesting in an honest account of one’s inner life. In the case of certain gifted authors this assumption has sometimes been justified. However, less talented and original writers have often been led to produce works of extraordinary dullness in which the fictional element is so attenuated that the terms ‘novel’ or ‘short story’ hardly seem appropriate.

The great decade of modern Japanese writing was that which followed the end of the Russo-Japanese War. It was during these years that many of the most important writers did their best work, while others started their careers.^[4] Victory against a major foreign power led to an upsurge of national self-confidence and prosperity. At the same time the multifarious European cultural influences were coming to fruition. Although the literary scene was dominated by the Naturalists, many of the important authors who were active during this period were vocally opposed to the Naturalist approach and reflected this opposition in their writing.

Several of the schools of writing that Japanese critics spend so much time in classifying and sub-classifying (Neo-Romanticist, Neo-Idealist, Neo-Realist, etc.) arose in protest against the prevailing Naturalism. The early careers of a surprisingly large number of important modern writers were marked by a conscious revolt against the gloom, aridity and lack of style that marked the Naturalists.^[5] It is worth observing that it is frequently the works of these writers that are read and valued today, whereas much of the Naturalist literature against which they were rebelling has passed into oblivion.

The proliferation in Japan of exclusive literary groups may require a few words of comment. The phenomenon of cliquishness is by no means limited to the world of literature; it exists in almost every sphere of Japanese life, including the academic world, politics, bureaucracy and business, as well as music, painting and all the traditional arts. The tendency of writers and others to band together in groups or societies derives directly from the pre-modern period, when the individual young artist had scant chance of recognition unless he could be identified with some established family or school that would give him its protection and encouragement. This relates to the feudal tradition of a close relationship between master and pupil which even today plays an important part in literature and other fields.

Japan, of course, is not unique in having literary coteries, but there can be few countries where their existence and the resulting rivalries have had so much influence. The ramifications of the various schools and factions need not concern the general Western reader, but some of the more important groupings, such as the Shirakaba and the Neo-Perceptionists, are identified in the biographical notes. The personal nexus, reinforced by bonds of loyalty and obligation, often plays at least as important a part in the development of these cliques as does common adherence to a literary programme. This also applies to the fields of politics and elsewhere.

The Great War was on the whole a material boon to Japan and the outbreak of hostilities (in which Japan participated on the Allied side) possessed none of the disruptive significance that it did for English, French or German literature. Far more important was the unrest subsequent to the end of the war. Inflation and economic dislocation produced considerable social turmoil; this combined with the repercussions of the Russian Revolution to stimulate left-wing and labour movements. A large part of the Japanese intelligentsia, including not a few writers, was affected by these developments and during the years following 1918 several of them participated directly or indirectly in the incipient trade union, socialist and communist activities.

The Proletarian School of writing was formed in 1920 (the year in which fierce riots broke out to protest against soaring rice prices) and it attracted to its ranks a considerable number of vocal writers. Despite severe government repression, which started at the time of the great earthquake in 1923 and became intensified after the passing of the draconian Peace Preservation Law in 1925, Proletarian writers continued to be active during the 1920’s and the early part of the 1930’s, exerting an extremely important influence on Japanese literature between the wars.

Most of these Proletarian writers took an active part in political and labour activities; indeed, their writing was often done in prison cells where many of them spent a considerable portion of their lives.^[6] The characteristic work of the Proletarian School was concerned with the sufferings of the exploited urban workers and seamen (also to a lesser extent of the peasantry) and with the supposed iniquities of the capitalists and of the repressive government that supported them. In many cases the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics hovers in the background as an adumbration of better days to come.

Despite the many differences in approach between the Proletarians and the Naturalists, the two schools may be regarded as occupying analogous positions in the development of modern Japanese literature. In both cases literary style was considered to be secondary to content, and emotions were rejected in favour of a ‘scientific’ treatment of reality. In both cases, also, this seemingly hard-headed, realistic approach frequently masked a fundamentally sentimental outlook. Many writers who did not actually belong to the Proletarian School were influenced by its teachings.^[7] The concept that worthwhile modern literature must be concerned with the harsh realities of working-class life was widely held for many years.

As in the case of the Naturalist writers, the prestige of the Proletarians served to provoke a reaction on the part of several young writers who set out to reaffirm the primacy of literary values.^[8] Many of the important men who started to write in the late Taishō and early Shōwa periods were consciously rebelling against the influence of the ‘committed’ left-wing authors. As a rule their work has survived far better than that of the Proletarians, which by its very nature was bound to become hopelessly dated.

The militarist period, inaugurated by the Manchurian Incident in 1931, saw the progressive suppression of thought and speech as the government regimented the country in the cause of right-wing nationalism and aggressive expansionism. During the 1930’s a thoroughgoing police state grew up. Democracy and liberalism were rejected as foreign creeds unsuited to Japanese conditions, individualism was attacked as a manifestation of ‘egoism’ and all unorthodoxy was burked as constituting ‘dangerous thoughts’. Left-wing writers were harshly persecuted and those with liberal views frequently preferred to remain silent rather than to speak out their beliefs in the atmosphere of intolerance and jingoism that prevailed. It is pleasing to record that only a small number of reputable writers lent their talents to assisting the government in its propaganda efforts. Fanatic nationalism reached its height during the four years of the Pacific War. Thought control became more thorough than ever and this, combined with a severe paper shortage, resulted in a tragic blank so far as real literature was concerned.

Japan’s defeat in 1945 led to Allied Occupation and to the loss of national independence for the first time in the country’s history. Paradoxically, its effect on many Japanese intellectuals was that of emancipation. Freedom of speech and thought was finally restored; unorthodoxy and radicalism received legal protection. No longer did the police have the power to suppress ‘suspicious’ literary works or to arrest their authors for ‘thought crimes’. Occupation censorship, being directed mainly at journalism and political writing, had relatively little effect on fiction.

The early post-war period was marked by a breakdown of the traditional values that had been systematically foisted on the country by the central government since the time of the Meiji Restoration. In their place the Occupation reformers attempted to instil a respect for the liberal democratic principles of the West. Democracy, however, was not something that could effectively be imposed from the outside like many of the more concrete Occupation reforms; despite the initial enthusiasm for demokurashi, especially among the youth, it was clear that considerable time would be needed before it became sufficiently implanted in people’s minds to take the place of official state nationalism as a guiding and inspiring force. Meanwhile the country was faced with what is frequently described as a spiritual vacuum. The staggering wartime losses and the prostration of defeat resulted in a period of economic chaos and political confusion.

The years following 1945 saw an impetuous reaction to the many-sided suppressions of the militarist era. There was a release of pent-up intellectual energies and a general sense of licence that inevitably affected the early post-war literature.

One important aspect was freedom to treat the subject of sex. After years of cavilling censorship, during which not only contemporary works but even some of the country’s great classics were bowdlerized or suppressed, writers were once more free to describe emotions and events that the militarists had frowned on as being decadent. As an inevitable result there was an outpouring of pornographic works. Yet serious authors were now able to write naturally, without concern over captious censorship.

With the removal of restrictions, writers were free to criticize national military traditions. Emperor worship, the family system—the entire structure, indeed, which nationalists had described as being ‘flawless like a golden chalice’, but which appeared to have brought the country to ruin. The breakdown of constituted authority and of old social traditions induced in many young writers a mood of thoroughgoing scepticism, which frequently took the form of nihilism, hedonism, irresponsibility and despair.

Shortly after the war there was a vogue (which continues until this day) for French existentialism, introduced to Japan through translations of Sartre and Camus. As so often happens in the case of Japanese importations, the content of existentialism was frequently oversimplified and misunderstood. Its main effect was to give certain writers a specious philosophical basis for their prevailing nihilistic mood.

A number of the apurē (après-guerre) writers lived in a state of desperate disorder of a type that Rimbaud had made familiar at an earlier stage of European development. Alcohol, drugs, sexual promiscuity, nihilism and thoughts of suicide played a large part in their lives and in their writing. To express the complexities and confusions of the new rootless age these writers attempted to break away from such literary tradition as existed and to create new and freer forms of literature. Apart from Dazai Osamu, however, few of them succeeded in producing works of much literary value; and Dazai, with his personal, ‘confessional’ approach, was in many ways less of an innovator than is often imagined.^[9]

1948, the year in which Dazai Osamu committed suicide, may be regarded as marking the end of the turbulent apurē period in Japanese writing. The steady improvement of economic conditions, political stabilization under a succession of conservative governments and the official resumption of national independence in 1952 led to a more normal and tranquil atmosphere; this inevitably had its effect on literature, even though many of the iconoclastic apurē trends continued.

A remarkably large number of the important Meiji period writers were still alive. Many of them had been obliged to remain silent during the years of militarist repression, but after the war they once more became active. Their earlier works were republished and many of them continued to write novels and stories. It is a tribute to the longevity and energy of Japanese authors that so many of those who first made their names some forty years ago should still be alive and engaged on new work.^[10]

The present literary scene is one of immense activity. Publishers and literary magazines abound, and the number of novels and stories published every year is overwhelming. With books extremely cheap (an average novel costs the equivalent of 6s. and of 1s. 6d. in a paper-backed edition) and the reading public large and alert, sales are vastly in excess of those before the war; the material rewards for literary success are considerable. Some of the most substantial incomes in Japan are at present earned by popular writers.

This situation is not without its dangers—dangers almost as great as those that beset the economically hard pressed writers before the war. There is a considerable risk that ‘pure literature’ (as it is rather primly termed in Japan) will still further lose audiences to commercial literature and to the so-called ‘middle novels’, which occupy a place somewhere between the artistic and the popular. In order to earn money many of the best writers produce serial novels for newspapers and magazines of large circulation. Sometimes an author will be working on two or more serial novels at the same time, as well as turning out articles on assorted subjects from birth control to Japanese-American relations, giving lecture tours and dashing off occasional stories to satisfy the requests of the numerous literary and semi-literary magazines. One popular novelist recently became so confused by the number of different things he was writing simultaneously that he inadvertently changed the name of the main character in the middle of one of his serial novels—an error that was not caught up in proof and which caused considerable bewilderment to his readers.

For the successful Japanese writer it never rains, it pours. To remain successful he cannot afford to be long out of the public eye, and the artistic energy necessary to produce serious work is often dissipated by commercial demands. Such conditions are, of course, not limited to Japan, but the lack of solid tradition in modern Japanese literature adds to the danger. Fortunately the risk of total commercialization is recognized and deliberately resisted by a number of the better authors.

Among those who oppose commercialism, though not for literary reasons, are the ‘committed’ writers. In the present political scene this invariably means communist and near-communist writers. They are organized into two or three main groups; in these groups they energetically carry on the tradition of the pre-war Proletarian School and look on the writers of ‘pure literature’ as escapists. The economic distress of the early post-war years, the discrediting of the old régime and all that it stood for, the moral vacuum left by defeat—these and other factors led many writers to join such groups. With improving material conditions the appeal of the extreme Left has steadily diminished—its period of greatest influence was in 1949—and the ‘committed’ writers have been increasingly out of touch with the mood of the country, which remains predominantly conservative. The complete freedom of thought and expression since 1945 has not, so far, led the contemporary committed writers to produce fiction of any higher quality than that of the pre-war Proletarian writers, and their calls for a literature of social protest have had very little effect on post-war fiction. Their voices are heard more in the political than in the literary field; they frequently emerge as vocal opponents of conservative policy or as apologists for left-wing causes.

The shi-shōsetsu tradition of semi-autobiographical ‘fiction’ has survived into the post-war period, but it is no longer as widely followed as some decades ago. Most contemporary writers seem to be aware of the need for a wider approach than is usually manifested in the ‘I-novel’ and the ‘I-story’. Nevertheless, the confessional, diary type of writing, in which everything is seen through the eyes of one lone, sensitive individual, continues to be far more popular in Japan than in the West.

After 1945 the torrent of translations from foreign languages, which naturally subsided during the war, reached new heights. Novels, plays, short stories and poems from almost every country in the world were translated and published for a public whose appetite had been whetted by the years of official xenophobia and isolation. The choice of books for translation was often indiscriminate, sometimes incomprehensible. Nevertheless in the influx a large mass of worthwhile literature from the outside world has been made available.

To what extent, then, is current Japanese literature influenced by that of the West? In the first place, it should be emphasized that on the whole the influence is not nearly as direct as is often assumed by Western readers. Japan has now had some seventy years in which to absorb the literary traditions of the West. European and American literature have come to be taken for granted, and works from the outside no longer carry the aura of the exotic and the startling that they had in the early days of importation. Even more important, Japanese writers now have their own great literary figures—Natsumé Sōseki, Mori Ōgai, among others. They can now look back with a sense of belonging to an indigenous, if recent, tradition. Although in many ways the Pacific War and its aftermath constituted a break with the past as great or even greater than that provided by the Meiji Restoration, there was no rupture with native literary tradition such as occurred in the nineteenth century. Whereas the new Meiji writers tended to look entirely to the West for their models, the writers of the present day receive their influence both from the West and from their own writers of the past sixty years.

Even in the early days of importation, literary influence in Japan rarely produced slavish imitation of certain specific European or American models. It was usually a much more indirect and complex process. As the young post-war writer, Mr Mishima Yukio, has pointed out, Japanese novelists have usually assimilated only those elements of foreign literature that are in some way close to the recipient. This is more than ever true today when the Japanese writer has such an immense selection of world literature at his disposal.

Although the most conspicuous influences have certainly come from Europe, it would be a mistake to discount the effect of Chinese and Japanese classical literature on certain modern writers. This classical influence is reflected in the imagery, the descriptions, the general mood and sometimes the structural techniques of many outstanding post-Meiji writers and their successors.^[11] One of the most interesting aspects of writers like Nagai Kafū, Tanizaki Junichirō and Kawabata Yasunari is precisely the way in which they succeeded in moulding classical traditions with modern Western thought and technique.

However, the fact remains that the modern Japanese novel and story are essentially Western forms; in so far as literary influence has played a part, most Japanese prose writers are indebted to modern Western literature far more than to their own country’s classical tradition. It is writers like Hugo, Poe, Whitman, Baudelaire, Dostoievsky, Tolstoy, Hardy, Zola, Huysmans, Maupassant, Wilde and D. H. Lawrence that have exercised influence rather than Murasaki Shikibu, Saikaku, Bakin and the other famous prose writers of earlier centuries. The remark made in 1910 by Natsumé Sōseki, one of the most important of the post-Meiji novelists, could well be uttered by the vast majority of modern Japanese prose writers: “What governs my mind at this moment, what will influence all my future work, is not, alas, the tradition of my ancestors, but, rather, thoughts brought over from across the sea, and by an alien race.”^[12] But few post-war writers in making this statement would be inclined to include Sōseki’s expression of regret.

Japan is, of course, not the only country in which imported literature has exerted an influence, but the historical conditions of the Meiji Period made this influence of primary importance. As Mr Mishima (who among the younger writers is particularly conscious of his own country’s classical heritage) has said, “In most other countries there exists a strong literary tradition into which writers can assimilate whatever is imported. In Japan our literature does not rest on any such tradition. Although our talented writers have managed to utilize their abilities individually, there are very few of them who have managed to ground their works on secure tradition.”

In Japan, as in most other countries, the story or tale has an extremely long and varied history. Among the earliest collections that have come down to us (leaving aside ancient mythological collections where the literary motive is secondary) are those from the Heian Period in which brief prose passages serve to provide the background for thirty-one-syllable classical poems or to link a series of such poems by means of rudimentary plots. The Tales of Isé from the ninth century is the best-known example; The Tales of Yamato (tenth century) belongs to the same tradition. The Tales of Tsutsumi Chūnagon (which includes the charming and original fragment ‘The Lady Who Loved Insects’) is a collection of ten stories with well-defined plots and considerable realism. In the eleventh century Tales of Past and Present, consisting of over 1,000 stories taken from Indian, Chinese and Japanese history and folklore, represents a considerable advance in construction over the lyrical tales of the early Heian Period. Otogi-Zōshi is the generic term for collections of popular stories, most simply fairy-tales, that were in circulation during the Muromachi Period (c. 1300–1600).

In a more recent period the numerous collections of stories by Ihara Saikaku (1642–93) deal in a more or less realistic way with the lives of contemporary men and women, mostly members of the seventeenth century townsman class. Tales of the Moonlight and the Pain (1776), a famous collection of nine ghost stories by Ueda Akinari, belongs to a tradition of supernatural tales that goes back to the eighth century. We should also take note of a common form that is to be found in much of Saikaku’s work and elsewhere. This consists of a collection of stories having a common thread or theme; a typical example is Saikaku’s ‘Reckonings that Carry Men through The World’ (Seken Munesanyō, 1693), which is a volume of twenty independent stories all dealing with the torments that different groups of characters experience on the last day of the year when all debts become due for payment.

Despite this ancient and diverse tradition, the modern Japanese story form in this century owed remarkably little to the various pre-Meiji collections of which examples have been given above. It is true that a number of the Meiji Period writers (including Higuchi Ichiyō, Ozaki Kōyō, Kōda Rohan and Tayama Katai) recognized in Saikaku’s stories the same vigorous realism that they had found in modern French literature. Saikaku’s realism, however, served to confirm such writers in their already established literary approach, rather than to inspire them. When it actually came to writing stories, the main influences derived, not from Saikaku or the other pre-Meiji masters of realistic fiction, but from the recent literature of Europe and America.

The history of the modern story in Japan can be considered to date from the introduction of Maupassant’s work in the 1890’s. One of the earliest writers to attempt to produce in Japanese the type of story that was current in Europe was Mori Ōgai, who after his return from Germany in 1888 did so much to familiarize Japanese readers with Western literary forms.

Of the two masters of the late nineteenth century short story in Europe, Maupassant exerted considerably greater influence in Japan than Chekhov. The reason is not far to seek: the introduction of Maupassant’s short stories coincided with the rise of Naturalism in Japanese literature and, indeed, was one of the important influences in this movement. It was Maupassant’s direct, realistic and often harsh approach to his material that affected Japanese writers, rather than his mastery of the short story form itself.

Although Maupassant, like Chekhov, regarded the short story as being a genre in itself and although he contributed so greatly to giving it the characteristic form with which we are now familiar, his early influence in Japan did not on the whole lead writers to make the clear differentiation between the novel and the short story that is accepted in the West. The line of demarcation in Japan between the two genres has always tended to be vague. This is reflected in the terminology. Both forms are known as shōsetsu, the word for short story being differentiated only by the prefix tampen (short piece). Shōsetsu is also used with the prefix chūhen (middle piece) to describe an intermediate length of work having about 40,000 to 60,000 words; this roughly corresponds to what is sometimes known as novelette, but the form is very much more popular in Japan than in the West. Thus there is a regular continuum from tampen-shōsetsu through chūhen-shōsetsu to shōsetsu. The only real differentiation is in the matter of length, which itself tends to be very indefinite. This is not simply a matter of terminology, but extends to the conception—or rather, lack of conception—of the short story as a distinct literary form. Very frequently we find the same piece of fiction being described alternatively as a novel and as a short story.

One result of this vague differentiation is the absence from so many Japanese stories of certain stylistic qualities that we have come to regard as essential to the modern short story in the West. This is certainly not to suggest that the story is a narrow form with certain strictly defined rules or cannons. Far from it. A genre that so greatly antedates the novel is bound to have enormous flexibility. The history of the story in the West goes back to the Tales of the Magicians and traces its complex descent through Aesop, Boccaccio, Chaucer, the Bible and La Fontaine, to name only a few of the great landmarks. Any neat definition is both impossible and undesirable. As the well-known short-story writer, Kay Boyle, has said, “The only continuity it [the story] possesses is that it was isolated individuals, sometimes writing centuries apart, who spoke with freshness and vigour, in a short-winded rather than a long-winded form, of people, and ideas, and incidents, which seemed to the reader moving and true.”

Since the time of Gogol, however, the story has developed in a certain manner that we may characterize as the ‘style of the modern Western short story’. Its outstanding feature is an economy of means. This has involved a tendency to compression, to the dropping of inessentials. The tendency has continued until the present day and has been given particular short stories of Ernest Hemingway, whom Mr H. E. Bates describes as the “man with an axe … [who] cut out a whole forest of verbosity”.^[13] Without economy there can be no short story in the modern sense of the term. This, of course, does not preclude the existence of short stories of considerable length. The tendency since the time of Tolstoy has certainly been in the direction of brevity, but the modern story may vary from a few hundred words to 15,000 or even 20,000. What is essential is the close construction, the casting of all the material round a single central image and the overall compression that have become the marks of the successful modern short story in the West.

By these general standards a considerable proportion of tampen-shōsetsu are not short stories at all; frequently they appear to be sketches, essays or truncated novels. A large number of Japanese story writers are primarily novelists for whom stories tend to be what Miss Elizabeth Bowen has called “side-issues from the crowded imagination”. Since the novel and the modern short story are two totally different genres it is most unlikely that a writer will be equally at home in both, and this applies in Japan quite as much as in the West. The plethora of literary magazines in Japan has encouraged many writers to produce stories when their style was better suited to the novel. As a result, their work frequently lacks the stylistic compression that is the essence of the modern short story. This is not primarily a matter of word-length (though it is worth noting that Japanese stories are as a rule far longer than their modern Western counterparts), but of failure to apply the indirect, suggestive and dramatic methods which are indispensable for economy of style. In a country that has produced the most compressed forms of poetry in world literature it is remarkable that stories should so frequently be marked by a turgid verbosity which cries out for the ministration of a red pencil.

Fortunately a number of good modern writers in Japan have treated the short story as an equal and separate genre of literature, not merely as an abbreviated novel or as a sketch. Of the authors represented in the present collection, the three who stand out in Japanese letters as short-story writers are Shiga Naoya, Akutagawa Ryūnosuké and Nakajima Ton. The fact that these three writers are all masters of literary style is not irrelevant. Like the poem, the short story is undoubtedly type of writing in which style or form is all-important. An indifferently written or poorly constructed novel may impose by the ingenuity of its plot, by the evocation of some unusual scene or atmosphere or again by the vivid portrayal of a character; but a badly written short story is almost bound to fail, regardless of its content.

In the present collection, twenty-five well-known modern Japanese writers were chosen and each of these writers represented by one story. The period covered by the stories is from 1910 to 1954; the stories appear in the order of their authors’ years of birth. About one half of the stories was selected by the editor, the other half by Mr Kawabata Yasunari and members of the Japanese National Commission for UNESCO, for whose advice and co-operation I should here like to express my grateful thanks. I should also like to thank Mr Yoshida Kenichi, the critic, for his valuable advice. The stories were divided among four translators, three of whom have English as their mother tongue and one Japanese.^[14]

Any selection implies a degree of criticism. Omission of certain distinguished writers from the present collection does not, however, suggest any adverse judgment. In several cases writers were omitted because it seemed impossible to represent their work adequately by one story. The most notable instance is that of the great novelist, Natsumé Sōseki (1867–1916), whose name has appeared several times in the present introduction. Ozaki Kōyō (1867–1903), Kōda Rohan (1867–1947), Shimazaki Tōson (1872–1943), Arishima Takeo (1878–1923), Itō Sei (b. 1905) and others would certainly have been included if it had been possible to find suitable stories.

The many-sided literary gifts of men like Nagai Kafū and Tanizaki Junichirō can certainly not be represented by a single story or even by a single novel. The most that can be hoped is to display some facet of their talents. Clearly this is more difficult in the case of writers whose forte was the novel and for whom the writing of story was merely a side issue. From the point of view of most readers, however, a story provides a more satisfactory way of sampling the work of an unfamiliar writer than a selected passage or a synopsis of a novel, even though the novel itself may be a far more representative and interesting work than the story. Few modern novels are susceptible of effective extract and the summary of a novel can hardly be enjoyed as literature.

Even the best chosen story, of course, is unlikely to convey the real individuality of the writer and when stories by twenty-five different writers are put together the effect is liable to be one of blurring and confusion. It is hoped, however, that if each story is read in conjunction with the corresponding note on the author something of his distinctive personality will emerge.^[15]

Readers who are acquainted with modern Japanese literature will undoubtedly be struck by the inclusion of works by certain writers who have a far less important place in modern Japanese fiction than some others who (for lack of space) have not been represented at all. Two reasons account for this seeming anomaly. First, certain selections were made not to represent the work of a particular writer, but because the story itself seemed to be worth including on its own literary merits. Secondly, it was felt that a collection of this type should attempt to carry a few works which, if not eminently successful as short stories, represented certain specific types of modern Japanese writing. Examples of this are the Nationalist story, the ‘proletarian’ story, the plotless, lyrical story, the political satire, the historical story and the story of village life. The twenty-five selections represent almost every mam type of modern Japanese story—with the exception, that is, of the most common form of all, namely, cheap magazine stories written by popular writers (taishū-sakka) whose sole aim is to appeal to as large a public as possible.

There have been no deliberate efforts to represent all the different aspects of modern Japanese life. The twenty-five stories do, however, give a remarkably wide picture of the various strata of society during the first half of the present century, and for many readers unfamiliar with Japan this may provide as much interest as their actual literary content. Not a single story has been chosen for its specifically Japanese or Oriental quality. While characteristic Japanese scenes, customs and psychology emerge throughout the stories, the reader will find nothing in the way of quaintness or Japonaiserie. Many of the stories do provide an insight into unfamiliar ways of life and thought. In social life as well as in literature it is often the very degree of Westernization in post-Meiji Japan that makes the specifically Japanese qualities stand out. To read the works of a wide range of modern Japanese writers is to rid oneself of many preconceptions and commonly accepted generalizations concerning Japan and her people. At the same time it brings home to us that, impressive as it has been, the break with the past marked by the years 1868 and 1945 was in some ways not nearly as complete as might be supposed.

The question of tradition and foreign influence may be briefly outlined as follows. The Meiji Restoration marked an almost complete break in some fields (e.g. official recognition of a social system in which the warrior class was supreme, official support for Confucianism), a partial break in others (e.g. the bureaucratic structure, eating habits); but in some fields (e.g. Nō theatre, family system in rural areas) there was considerable continuity.

In the case of literature there was hardly any break in the development of Nō or in Haiku poetry, for example, but an almost complete break in the novel and the story. It follows that when we read a collection of modern Japanese stories which attempt to give a realistic picture of contemporary life we find two things. First, the actual form of the stories owes far more to modern Western influence than to pre-Meiji Japanese literature (here we have a case of the ‘almost complete break’). Secondly, much of what is reflected in the stories about modern Japanese life (e.g. the social position of women, the geisha system and its ramifications, the attitude to authority, the Buddhist sense of fatalism, the absence of any sense of sin regarding suicide) derives from pre-Meiji cultural traditions. For those who value the persistence of cultural diversity in the modern world this continuity is bound to be a cause for satisfaction.

1. Shōyō Senshū (Collected Works of Shōyō), Vol. III, p. 3. Tokyo, 1927.
2. For detailed note on Mori Ōgai see pp. 489–91.
3. For detailed note on Shiga Naoya see pp. 493–6.
4. Among those included in the present collection: Mori Ōgai, Tokuda Shūsei, Nagai Kafū, Shiga Naoya, Tanizaki Junichirō, Satomi Ton and Akutagawa Ryūnosuké.
5. See biographical notes on Mori Ōgai, Nagai Kafū, Shiga Naoya, Tanizaki Junichirō, Akutagawa Ryūnosuké, etc.
6. See, for example, the biographical note on Hayama Yoshiki, pp. 503–4. One of the best known Proletarian writers, Kobayashi Takiji (1903–33), died in the hands of the local police during one of his many periods under arrest.
7. See biographical notes on Ogawa Mimei and Hayashi Fumiko.
8. e.g. Yokomitsu Riichi, Kawabata Yasunari and the Neo-Perceptionists.
9. See biographical note on pp. 514–15. Dazai started to write well before the war and, strictly speaking, cannot be regarded as an apurē writer. There is no doubt, however, that he was the literary hero of the apurē generation.
10. Of those included in the present collection, Shiga Naoya, Tanizaki Junichirō, Satomi Ton, Murō Saisei, Satō Haruo and Ogawa Mimei were all alive in 1961.
11. Among the writers included in the present collection Mori Ōgai, Nagai Kafū, Tanizaki Junichirō and Satō Haruo frequently show classical Chinese or Japanese influence in their writing; the tradition has been carried on by Kawabata Yasunari, Nakajima Ton and Mishima Yukio.
12. Quoted by Mr Miyata Shimpachirō in ‘Translated Literature in Japan’, Japan Quarterly, Vol. IV, p. 169.
13. H. E. Bates: The Modern Short Story, pp. 168–9.
14. A list of stories prepared by the respective translators appears on p. 526. The dates of the twenty-five authors, together with the date when each story was first published, appears at the end of the story.
15. Notes on the twenty-five authors (prepared by the translators of the corresponding stories) appear at the end of the volume (pp. 487–517). For the benefit of readers who wish to become familiar with the works of particular writers, a fairly complete list of translations into English has been appended in the Selected Bibliography on pp. 518–525.