Who Tells the Tale?: `Ukifune': a Study in Narrative Voice Author(S): Amanda Mayer Stinchecum Source: Monumenta Nipponica, Vol

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 who writes(in real life) and the one who writesis not the one who is.' ROLANDBARTHES.'

Narrative,Narrator, Speaker of theText WExrHO tellsthe tale? Who narratesthe narrative?Does narrativeby definitionrequire a narrator2or are thesecognates accidental? Does everytext have a narrator,either explicit or implied,or is therea mode of discoursewhich 'speaks itself'?These questionsarise as a matterof coursein readingthe fictionof JamesJoyce, Virginia Woolf, William Faulkner, and other twentieth-centurynovelists, as well as earlierwriters such as Jane Austen and Gustave Flaubert. Here the narrator'spresence often seems to be replaced, overshadowedby that of the charactersthemselves. But what about the Genji Monogatari?The word monogatariliterally means 'a tellingor recountingof something';it stronglyimplies the cognateverb monogataru ('to recountsome- thing,to tell a tale'), in whichthe teller,or narrator(katari-te) exists a priori. Perhapswe can say that 'narrator'is more clearlycontained within the concept of monogatarithan in theEnglish word 'narrative'. In earlyHeian-period narrative tales (monogatari)such as the OchikuboMono- gatari,the narratorplaces himself(or herself)between the narrativeand us, the readers,guiding our understandingby means of commentsabout the characters and the story,and by descriptivenarration. In the firsttwo-thirds of the Genji, the readerhas a strongsense of the narrator'spresence, to the extentthat the leadingscholar in thefield, Tamagami Takuya, has interpretedthis narrator quite concretelyas a lady-in-waitingwho recordsthe storyas if she were givingan interpretativerecital of a textwhich is itselfa recordof the tellingof the tale by other,earlier ladies-in-waiting who eitherwitnessed the eventsdirectly or heard

1 Roland Barthes,'An Introductionto the this assumption the startingpoint for their Structural Analysis of Narrative', in New discussionof point of view in The Nature of LiteraryHistory, vi: 2 (Winter1975), p. 261. Narrative,Galaxy Books, OxfordU.P., 1968, 2 RobertScholes and RobertKellogg make p. 240.

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 376 MonumentaNipponica, xxxv, 4 about themfrom yet otherladies-in-waiting who witnessedthem directly.3 But even withinthe part of the workdealing with the lifeof Hikaru Genji,there are manypassages in whichwe seemto see directlyinto thehearts of thecharacters, withoutthe intervention of a narrator.These include lines conveying the innermost thoughtsof a characterwhich we cannotinterpret as thereport of a lady-in-waiting who witnessedthe situation.4 But it is in thelast thirdof the work,in whichthe eventstake place mainlyin Uji, that we feel the characters'inner world open to us. Particularlyin those chaptersin whichUkifune's plight reaches a crisiswe findthe flow of herthoughts (and thoseof othersabout her) renderedapparently without any mediationby a narrator.Often the form of thisnarration is thatof directquotation, concluding withthe quotativeparticles to, tote,or nado,and sometimesa verbsuch as omou ('she thinks').It also frequentlycontains exclamatory particles such as namu,zo, and ka shi,which one would expectto findin a directquotation, expressing the emotionof the speaker.For example,sonata ni nabiku-bekini wa arazu ka shi to omou.... (vi, 135-136,'I certainlymust not yield to him,she thinks... .'). Thus directinterior monologue is a kind of directdiscourse in Japaneseand contains a quotativeparticle. In otherpassages the characters'thoughts or feelingsdo not appear as direct quotationbut in a formcorresponding to indirectspeech. They are markednot by a phraseof direct quotation such as toomou but by expressions such as o omoi-yaru ('she wondersabout'), as in the sentence,mata konohito ni mie-tatematsuramuo omoi-yarunamu, imijui kokoro-uki (vi, 134. 4-5, 'and even wonderinghow could she meetthis one is terriblewretchedness'). A variationof o omouis ni omou;for example,ito me-yasuku ureshikaru-beki koto ni omoite(vi, 148. 10-1 , 'she feelsit to be a highlyproper and pleasingthing'). Long adjectivalmodifiers form another type of indirectquotation: kono hito ni ushi to omowarete,wasure-tamainamu kokoro-bososawa, ito fuko shiminikereba (vi, 135.4-5, 'themisery of beingthought odious and beingrejected by thisperson sinks into hervery deeply'). Here, Uki- fune's misery(kokoro-bososa) is amplifiedby the long modifyingclause that

3 Tamagami Takuya E hEW , 'GenjiMono- York, 1976, 2 vols. gatari no Dokusha: Monogatari Ondoku-ron' Nakano Koichi rPW4- citesii, 'Usugumo' Mk)t 1 M t: tP-a:, in Genji Mono- ('A Rack of Cloud'), 438. 8-14, as evidence gatari Hy6shaku MUtPO , Kadokawa against the viability of Tamagami's theory Shoten, 1964-6, Bekkan I, Genji Monogatari ('Genji Monogatarino Soshiji to Monogatari Kenkyd,1966, pp. 247-65. Ondoku-ron' FJ -Q) at R S in 4 All quotations from the text are from Genji Monogatari,i (Nihon Bungaku Kenkyd Abe Akio V 4%kT_et al., ed., Genji Mono- ShiryoSosho), Yuiseido,1969, pp. 206-7). gatari (Nihon Koten Bungaku Zensha * In this case the narratorcannot in any way ta:@h0, Shogakukan, 1970-76. Unless be interpretedas a lady-in-waitingwho either noted otherwise,all referencesare to the witnessedthe eventor heard it fromanother 'Ukifune' chapter. For the general reader, lady who was a directwitness, but, according correspondingchapter titlesin English have to Nakano, must be more transcendentaland been included,from Edward G. Seidensticker, omniscientthan any of the three narrators tr., The Tale of Genji, Alfred Knopf, New Tamagami proposes.

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 STINCHECUM: Who Tells the Tale? 377 precedesit. Thereare elementsthat identify the voice as Ukifune's(kono, 'this', indicatesUkifune's point of view),while otheraspects, for example,the causal constructionshiminikereba ('because it sankinto her'), can onlybe theresult of the narrator'sreasoning. I shall hereafterrefer to thistype of narrationas 'indirect interiormonologue'. In general,one can say thatthe conclusiveform + 'thinks' (shuishikei+ to omou),or some equivalentthereof, corresponds to directinterior monologue,while the continuativeform + 'thinks'(ren'yokei + omou),or some equivalent,corresponds to indirectinterior monologue.5 In Japanese,however, the distinctionbetween direct and indirectdiscourse is not so clear as it is in English.The narrator'svoice frequentlyintrudes into a character'sdiscourse (usually interior monologue), shading the character's thoughts withthe narrator's intonations. Thus theentire narration tends to becomereported speech.6This is similarto a thirdtype of discoursein English,which Dorrit Cohn has termed'narrated monologue'.7 She describesthis kind of narration,which is similarto the German erlebteRede and the Frenchstyle indirect libre, as 'the renderingof a character'sthoughts in his own idiom,while maintaining the third- personform of narration'.8Cohn illustratesthese threemodes of discourseas follows: DIRECT STATEMENT:He said: 'I did not come here yesterday.' INDIRECTSTATEMENT: He said that he had not gone there the day before. NARRATEDMONOLOGUE: He had not come here yesterday.9 Note the changesin spatialand temporalloci: fromcome to gone,from here to there,from yesterday to theday before.Cohn pointsout thatnarrated monologue is a grammaticallydistinct mode peculiarto writtennarration; this is further demonstratedby Ann Banfieldin her analysisof the 'freeindirect style' (style indirectlibre).'0 Both Banfieldand Cohn remarkthat narratedmonologue, or free indirectstyle, contains demonstrativesand adverbs associated with the presenttense and the character'sown spatiallocus, thusclearly distinguishing it fromindirect discourse. " The modal complexityof Japaneseis reflectedby the lack of such clear categoriesof discourse.The grammarof reportedspeech does

5 Although Saeki Umetomo only draws Matejka & KrystynaPomorska, ed., Readings this conclusion in relation to adjectives,we in RussianPoetics: Formalistand Structuralist can expand it to referto reporteddiscourse in Views,MIT Press, 1971, pp. 167 ff. generaland particularlyto interiormonologue. 7 Dorrit Cohn, 'Narrated Monologue: See Saeki Umetomo 1*{MO:, 'Chokusetsu Definitionof a FictionalStyle', in Comparative Waho to Kansetsu Waho' EMM;m L SMI , Literature,xviii: 2 (Spring 1966), pp. 97-112. in Jodai Kokugo-ho Kenkyu aTiff5, 8 Cohn, pp. 97-8. Daitobunka Daigaku Toyo Kenkyu-joSosho, 9 Cohn, p. 104. #3, 1966, pp. 42-3. 10 Ann Banfield,'Narrative Style and the 6 This is the reverseof Russian narrative, Grammar of Direct and IndirectSpeech', in in whichthe tone of the reportedspeech casts Foundationsof Language, x (1973), pp. 1-39, a shadow on the embedding narrativeand esp. pp. 10 ff. influenceseven the narrator'stone. See V. N. 11 Cohn, p. 105; Banfield,p. 10. Volosinov, 'Reported Speech', in Ladislav

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 378 MonumentaNipponica, xxxv, 4 not requireagreement of verbaltense, and spatialand temporalreferents may be ambiguous.An exampleof modernJapanese will demonstrate this (a correspond- ing constructionin classicalJapanese could be postulated,but an actual sentence of classicalJapanese would be muchless likelyto includea statedsubject, which would compoundthe ambiguity). Kare wa kyomata kokoni konaito itta. He said, 'I won'tcome hereagain today.' Removedfrom any context,it is not clear whetherkoko ('here') refersto the location of kare ('he') or that of the reportingspeaker who is tellingus, 'He said . . .', althoughthe latter would be themore usual interpretation.The same is trueof theverb konai ('won't come'), which signifies motion toward the speaker- but whichspeaker? The adverbof time,kyo ('today'), may referto thetemporal locus of kare or of the reportingspeaker. There is a furtherambiguity in the Japanesewhich is notpresent in English:the subject of the verb konai may or may notagree with the subject of itta ('said'). Thisambiguity may be removedby insert- ingjibun ('himself')as the subjectof konai, but thenthe expressionno longer rendershis wordsdirectly and so no longercorresponds to directdiscourse. Of coursein Englishreported speech, these two subjectsdo not necessarilyagree, but theambiguity as to whetherthey do or not is limited.(In thelast examplebelow, the two pronouns'he' may or may not referto the same person.)The following possiblemeanings and moreare all containedin the singleJapanese example: He said, 'I won'tcome hereagain today.' He said, 'I won'tgo thereagain today.' He said, 'I won'tcome hereagain tomorrow.' He said, 'She won'tcome hereagain today.' He said thathe wouldn'tcome hereagain today. Thus the possiblerenderings of one sentenceof apparentlydirect quotation are manifold.This phenomenonis directlyrelated to the conceptof ba and bamen, 'linguisticsituation'. In English,direct speech, indirect speech, and narratedmonologue are grammaticallydistinct. The lack of such clear differencesin classicalJapanese makes thetransition from one to the othersmoother and moreeasily accomplished, and hence a more naturalfeature of prose style.Saeki Umetomodemonstrates that even whatappears to be directquotation in classicalJapanese prose, marked at theend of thequoted expression by to,nado, or tote,is oftenshaded to reflectthe pointof viewof the reportingspeaker.'2 Direct quotation is at leasttheoretically possiblein modernJapanese, and parallelconstructions could be made in classical Japaneseas well,and mightoccur in Japanesetranslations of Westernnovels, for instance.But in practice,the sDeakerreporting someone else's wordswould nor-

12 Saeki, p. 33.

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 STINCHECUM: Who Tells the Tale? 379 mallyadapt thosewords, relating them to his own spatialand temporalloci-that is, to theviewpoint of the reportingspeaker. The subtlefusion of descriptivenarration (ji no bun)and interiormonologue is indeedone of themost prominent characteristics of theprose style of theGenji.' 3 It is thisindeterminacy in the Japanese language which makes possible the intensity withwhich we, as readers,see thefictional world of thenarrative tale (monogatari) throughthe eyes of thecharacters within the work. What is called kansetsuwaho ('indirect discourse') in Japanese,particularly in thecase of interiormonologue, does notcorrespond to indirectspeech in English; it is muchcloser to the freeindirect style or narratedmonologue. Both Japanese indirectdiscourse and narratedmonologue may contain a numberof constructions that cannotappear in indirectspeech in Englishbut are characteristicof direct discourse: expressiveelements and constructions,incomplete sentences, and differentdialects or languagesin introductoryand quoted clauses (in Japanese, the lattercorresponds to the use of honorificlanguage),'4 as well as expressions such as ureshiand kanashi,which normally occur onlyin first-persondiscourse. Furthermore,the demonstrativeelements referring to the time or place of the reportedspeech act do not, in Japanese,necessarily belong to the locus of the reportingspeaker. Thus whilethere is not an exactgrammatical correspondence between narrated monologue,or freeindirect style, as Cohn and Banfielddefine them, and whatI termindirect interior monologue (kansetsu-shiki shinnaigo) in classicalJapanese, the conceptsare close enoughin termsof literaryfunction for us to be able to comparethe use of thistechnique in literaturesas widelyseparated as those of eleventh-centuryJapan and twentieth-centuryEurope. Cohn describesthis function, statingthat in narrated monologue, '. . . we move closer to the possibilityof rendering... thoughtsand feelingsof a character... not explicitlyformulated in hismind [i.e., as spokenexpression]. [It reveals]that part of thepsyche which is hiddenfrom the worldand half-hiddenfrom the censoringself; it can also more readilyshow the mind as recipientof passingimages and sensoryimpressions than the more rhetoricalfirst-person monologue."5 In additionto the functionthat Cohn ascribesto it, narratedmonologue also allows the penetrationof another voice-the voice of the narrator-intothe textat the same time as that of the characterwhose thoughtsare being recorded.This interpenetrationof voices permitsironic distance to open up in a contextwhere we leastexpect it, when we believeourselves to be confrontingdirectly the souls of thecharacters. It is impossibleto discussnarrative voice or pointof viewwithout encountering

'3 See Suzuki Kazuo ! *,, 'GenjiMono- Suzuki reiteratesthat this fusionis typicalof gatari no Hoj, Buntai: Shinnaigono Mondai' theGenfi(see pp. 167ff). He also notesthe use of I t - PllWQDM, in Genji directinterior monologue and indirectinterior Monogatari,ii (Koza NihonBungaku), Kaishaku monologue and their frequency in other to Kansho,Bessatsu (May 1978), pp. 163-84. major Heian-periodmonogatari (pp. 174 ff). Throughouthis essay,a re-examinationof a 14 Banfield,pp. 7-8. surveyof modes of discourses in the Genji, 15 Cohn, p. 110.

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 380 MonumentaNipponica, xxxv, 4 the problemof the narrator'sidentity. There should be no difficultyin accepting thepremise that the narrator of a workof fictionis notthe same as thehistorical personagewho producedthe work during some certain (although perhaps indeter- minable) period. Until recently,Japanese scholars did not usually make this distinction.The narratorof the Genjiis not the eleventh-centurypersonage we knowas MurasakiShikibu. The workis a createdentity, and if thereis indeeda narratorwithin the work, that narrator is createdby the author and thusis notthe same as thatauthor. The way or extentto whichthe narratorwithin a textmay expressthe viewsof that historicalpersonage whom we call the authorcan be determinedonly after we haveexamined that text and theworkings of the narrator withinthe text. In regardto a workas farremoved from us in timeand conventions as the Genji,it is perhapsfutile to tryto determinethe thoughts of thepersonage Murasaki Shikibu,based on the scatteredfacts we have about her life,and it would be a seriouserror in criticalmethodology to projectthese ideas back onto thetext in attemptingto interpretit. 6 In orderto avoid confusionin thediscussion thatfollows, 1 shallcall thishistorical personage (for example, Murasaki Shikibu) the 'historicalauthor', and deal withhim (or her)no furtherin thisessay. Whatdo we meanby the term 'narrator'-one who narrates,recites, tells a tale? The word has concreteand personal overtones;the narratoris not simplya disembodiedvoice the subjectof a givenutterance but a voice thatimplies a certainrhetorical attitude toward the narration itself, and beyondthat, a particular grammaticalrelation to theobject of narration and to therecipient of the narrative. Hence the narratorspeaks withinthe conditionsof a certainlinguistic situation (ba or bamen).This linguisticsituation-the speech act or paradigmof linguistic performance-isdefined as a triangularrelationship: a speaker,a topic, and a situationor listener(recipient). That the speaker is saying somethingto the recipient,with the intention of influencinghim with respect to thetopic, is central to theconcept of the narrator. The necessityof inventing an impersonal,declarative styleof writtenJapanese attests to the particularimportance of the linguistic situationin Japanese. For centuries,the use of kambun(Japanese-style Chinese) filled this need; in the twentiethcentury, the de-aruverb form, which never appears in naturalspoken Japanese,has replacedkambun for expository writing. Since the Heian period,the languageof personalcommunication has been quite distinctfrom that of official exchangesand records.The strengthof the linguistic situation (bamen) in Japanese has been discussedat lengthby the linguistTokieda Motoki.'1 The influenceof the reportingspeaker on whatappears to be directquotation (see p. 378, above) and the ease withwhich descriptive narration blends into interiormonologue in classicalJapanese prose indicate the force of the linguistic situation and the difficulty in speakingfrom a positionoutside of it in Japanese.Whereas in Englishthe free

16 WayneC. Booth, TheRhetoric of Fiction, Genron: Gengokateisetsuno Seiritsu X "-5 Universityof Chicago Press, 1961, pp. 151 ff. 19;S >--"fiD:X@ScDJ;[, IwanamiShoten, 1941, 17 Tokieda Motoki 41S1, Kokugogaku pp. 38-56.

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 STINCHECUM: Who Tells the Tale? 381 indirectstyle is a specialcharacteristic of writtennarrative, grammatically distinct fromthe language of thespeaker-recipient paradigm, in Japanesethe influence of thenarrating voice on thediscourse of individualcharacters-whether in director indirectdiscourse is a resultof that veryrelationship. The linguisticsituation assertsitself in Japanesein a contextwhich in Englishspecifically denies the speaker-addresseerelationship-in passages where the voice of a characterblends withand is shadedby thatof the narrator. As a resultof this feature of Japanese, because an impersonalmode of narration rarelyoccurs in Heian-periodprose, the narrator acquires an importanceperhaps unique to classicalJapanese literature-not only in monogatari('narrative tales') butin modeswhich are usuallythought of as essentiallydramatic, such as noh and fjruri(puppet plays). The predominantvoice of thenarrator is heardwell into the twentiethcentury in theshi-shosetsu (the 'I-novel'). We can identifythe narrator (katari-te) as thesubject of expressionin passages wherethe voice of a narratingpersona is evident.In the classicalmonogatari, the most obvious examplesare those passages traditionallyreferred to as soshiji ('narrator'scommentary'), in whichthe narratoraddresses the readerdirectly, steppingaway fromthe characters of thetale, interpreting that world, judging the charactersand theiractions, for the reader. Here thenarrator is thespeaker within the linguisticsituation that is the tale. We recognizethe voice of the narratorby both semanticand linguisticmeans. The followingpassage, the conclusion of the 'Yuigao'('Evening Faces') chapterof theGenji, is one of themost frequently cited examplesof narrator'scommentary.

Kayo no kuda-kudashikikoto wa, His effortsto concealthis kind of trou- anagachi ni kakuroe-shinobi-tamaishi blesomething were pathetic and so I mo itoshikute,mina morashi-todome- had not let themcome out, but pre- taruo, nado mikadono mi-konaramu cisely because thereare even people kara ni, mimuhito sae katao-narazu, who thinkthe whole thing is a fiction, mono-homegachinaru to, tsukuri-goto- wondering,Just because he is the mekite tori-nasuhito mo mono-shi- emperor'sson, why do even people tamaikerebanamu. Amari mono-iisa who knowhim tend to praisehim and ga naki tsumi,sari-dokoro naku.... thinkhe has no faults?[I have written [I, 'Yfigao',269. 11-15] likethis.] There is no way to avoid the sin of gossiping.... If we look at the meaningof thispassage, the subjectof the expressionmina morashi-todometaruo ('and so I had not letthem come out') cannotbe one of the characterswho is thetopic of thenarrative, for the words refer to thevery making of thenarrative.'8 The expressionamari mono iisa ga nakitsumi, sari-dokoro naku

18 It is possible to considerthe subject of whetherthere is one or more narratorsin this thisexpression different from that of thecausal sense. constructionand the commentat the close of For remarkson the possibilityof multiple the passage, but for the purposes of our narrators in this passage and that at the discussion it does not make any difference beginning of the 'Hahakigi' ('The Broom

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 382 MonumentaNipponica, xxxv, 4

('thereis no way to avoid the sin of gossiping')can referonly to a personawho sees herselfas themaker of the narrativeand declaresherself to be such,that is, thenarrator. Thereare also linguistic(grammatical) signs that point to thenarrator persona. The use of the honorificverb tamau(applied to Genji's actionsin the phrase kakuroe-shinobi-tamaishimo-'his effortsto conceal'-and to some unidentified 'people' in the phrasehito mo mono-shitamaikereba-'becausethere are people') reflectsthe linguisticsituation, in whichthe speaker'ssocial relationto both the addresseeand thetopic is expressed.Furthermore, the causal constructionin this phrasecan be attributedonly to a subjectwho comments about, forms conclusions about,the people who are criticizingGenji, and aboutthe making of the narrative; thecausal constructionpoints to thereason for making the narrative the way it is. The emphaticparticle namu following this construction (which I have translated as 'precisely')also derivesfrom spoken discourse and is a furtherindication of the presenceof a speakingsubject explaining something or affirminghis viewto the addressee,that is, a narrator.'9Finally, the verbal suffix-keri in tamaikereba impliesa certaindegree of objectification,of drawingaway fromthe topic, or interpretingor explainingto the addresseeon the part of the speakeror subject of theexpression.20 These signs of the speakingsubject or narratoroccur not only in extended passagesof commentary, or soshiji('narrator's commentary', in whichthe narrator expressesan opinionabout a giventopic or about theprocess of makingthe tale, forexample, comments that explain that the narrator has omittedcertain details), likethat at theend of 'Yuigao',but also in passagesconsidered by manycontem- poraryJapanese scholars as simpledescription (ji no bun).2' Here the narrating voice oftenmakes conjectures about a character'sthoughts or aboutthe causes or resultsof a certainsituation. These conjecturescannot be attributedto any characterwithin the storyitself and mustbe ascribedto the narrator.They are indicated,usually at the end of the sentence,by verbal suffixessuch as -kemu, -beshi,and -meri.Rather than constituting a comment in themselves,they express a tone or mode in thenarration which we recognizeas belongingto thenarrating voice. Honorificlanguage (keigo) used in relationto the charactersand their actionsalso reflectsan attitudeon thepart of thenarrator toward the characters. This attitudereflects the linguisticsituation (bamen), in which a subject (the narrator)addresses a recipient(the reader or listener)about an object(the character whoseaction is beingreported).22 Thus the voice in such passages is necessarily

Tree') chapter,see Mitani Kuniaki - , particle namu, particularlyin combination 'Genji Monogatarini Okeru"Katari" no Kozo: withthe verbal suffix-keri, see Sakura Atsu- " Washa" to "Katari-te"aruiwa "Soshiji" Ron yoshi tgX,A Bunshoto HyogenSZ4 *, Hihan no tame no Josho'MWMMMFJtS3 r Kadokawa Shoten, 1975,pp. 24-41. 20 Sakakura,p. 18. +t4ISj attLIJQi7t o, in Nihon Bungaku 21 Mitani,p. 43. 4i*t, xxvHi:11(November 1978), p. 46. 22 See above, p. 378. 19 For a discussionof thesignificance of the

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 STINCHECUM: Who Tells the Tale? 383 personified.The attemptsto definesoshiji as an independentand fixedentity have contributedto the obscurityof the problemof narrativevoice in the Genji.23In fact,the concept of soshiji may not be a usefulone forsuch a discussion.In passages usuallythought of as soshiji,as well as thosein which-kemu, -beshi, -meri, -keri, etc.,appear, we can identifythe voice as thatof the narrator. If theirfunctions are different,and it is notat all clearthat they are, the voice is fundamentallythat of a personifiednarrator. Within one passagewe mayfind a numberof differentnarra- tors,one commentingon theactivities of another,but thevoices remain on a level differentfrom that of the characterswithin the worldof the narrative,as well as fromthat of thereader and theauthor. In readingthe Genji, however, it is evidentthat this persona we have called the narratoris not onlyinconsistent in point of view,but is neitheromniscient nor omnipresent.It is not thenarrator who ultimatelycontrols the narrative.We can eitheraccept the position that there is no suchtranscendental being that unifies the textas a whole,or takethe view that there is such an entity,the essence of which is not expressedin the text.24For example,we may considerevery narrative a discourse:'a speech-actsupposing a speakerand a listener,and in thespeaker an intentionto influencethe listenerin some way.'25This is the view voiced by TzvetanTodorov, one thatis literaryrather than linguistic. He remarks,'l'oeuvre est en meAmetemps discours: il existeun narrateurqui relatel'histoire; et il y a en face de lui un lecteurqui la per9oit.'He furtherspecifies that by 'oeuvre'he means everywork of fiction.26 In passages or narrativeswhere there are no linguisticsigns of the narratorin thetext, the narrator (the subject of the discourse that is thetext itself) may be said to be effaced.27It is this subjectof the discourse(narrative text) which Mitani Kuniaki termsthe washa(literally, 'the one who speaks', or 'the speakerof the text')in orderto distinguishthe narrator (katari-te), who appearsas a personain thetext, from the giver of thenarrative, whose existence is whollyfunctional and underliesthe entire text.28 The washarefers to thatby which we see thetext as one,

23 Some of these attemptsto definesoshiji Halle, Holt, Rinehart& Winston,New York, from the earliest sources to the presentare 1973, also argues that therecan be no omni- discussedin Takahashi Taru Vi , ' "Katari" scient narrator who speaks directlyto the no Hyogen Kozo: iwayuruSoshiji ni tsuite' reader because the free indirectstyle has a FrIN9 j 1tSv' v' C, in unique grammarwhich is 'essentiallydifferent Genji Monogatari,ii (Koza Nihon Bungaku) fromthe paradigmaticlinguistic performance' Kaishaku to Kanshlo,Bessatsu (May 1978), (p. 387). pp. 119-38. 25 Emile Benveniste,Problmes de linguis- 24 The formeris the position of Banfield, tiquegenerale, Gallimard, Paris, 1966, p. 241. pp. 25 ff.,who argues on groundsof transfor- Benvenistedoes not hold thatevery narrative mational grammarthat in the free indirect is a discourse,however. stylethere can be no othersubject of expression 26 Tzvetan Todorov, 'Les categories du thanthe subject named in thegiven expression. recit litteraire',in Communications,8 (1966), S. -Y. Kuroda, in his essay, 'Where Epi- pp. 126 & 147. stomology, Style, and Grammar Meet: A 27 Tzvetan Todorov, The Poetics of Prose, Case Studyfrom the Japanese', in S. Anderson Cornell U.P., 1977, pp. 27-8. & P. Kiparsky,ed., A Festschriftfor Morris 28 Mitani,pp. 39 ff.

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 384 MonumentaNipponica, xxxv, 4 that whichunderlies the structureand makes it a whole. In a sense this highly abstractconcept of an invisiblespeaker of the text has muchin commonwith what WayneBooth calls the 'impliedauthor', the imagethe authorcreates of himself as he writes,not thehistorical author but theauthor as the one who controlsthe narrative.29But Booth'sidea is basicallythat of a persona,while Mitani's remains an abstract,even metaphysical, function, and Todorov'sconcept is fundamentally closerto linguistics. Whatis particularlyvaluable about Mitani'sstudy is thathe has drawna clear distinctionbetween the narratorwhose voice is heardin thetext, and thespeaker of thetext which is thesubject of expressionof thenarrative as a whole.Further- more,according to Mitani,the presence of thenarrator (or narrators)in theGenji is a way of dealingwith the oppositionbetween the Japaneselanguage itself, in whichthe linguisticsituation is so stronga feature,and the natureof narrative, whichhas a subjectof expressionthat is essentiallytransparent and neutral.The narratorexpresses that aspect of thelanguage which is controlledby thelinguistic situation.30 The speakerof thetext plays no directrole in our interpretationof thetext as a work,but as thesubject of the text, the point of view of the washa is thatof the text as a whole.We can say thatthe point of view(and thevoice) of thespeaker of the textcoincides with that of certaincharacters in certainpassages. However,the washaas an abstractfunction has no voicein thesense of personal expression. Thus whilewe may speak of thevoice or pointof view of the speakerof the text,this mustbe understoodto mean thatin a particularpassage the washais the only subjectof expression, but does nothave a personifiedvoice like that of the narrator or characters.For example,in passagesof descriptivenarration we mightsay that thevoice is thatof the speakerof thetext.

Functionsof NarrativeVoice in 'Ukifune' and To the Lighthouse

THE 'Ukifune'chapter depicts the eventspreceding Ukifune's attempted suicide. Ratherthan 'events',perhaps we should say the conflictingemotions leading up to her decisionand action-not only Ukifune'sresponses to her situationand reflectionson it, but also thoseof hermother, of Niou, Kaoru, Ukon, JijuD,and others.Precisely because the crisis is impending,it is herinner life and thatof those aroundher that are of importanceto us. This chapterrepresents the characters' thoughtsand emotions,their kokoro, in theform of interior monologue to a greater extentthan almost any otherchapter in the whole Genji.3'It is characterizedby frequentshifts in pointof view,the view of thespeaker of thetext coinciding first withthat of one character,then another. As a result,although these features are

29 Booth, pp. 70-71 & 151. monologue per chapter is 11 .2 %; that in 3 Mitani, pp. 43 & 44. 'Ukifune',17.6 %. In theGenji, this is exceeded 31 According to Suzuki's analysis, pp. only by 'Kagero' ('The Drake Fly'), 22.1%. 170-72, the average percentage of interior

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 STINCHECUM: Who Tells the Tale? 385 notpeculiar to 'Ukifune',they play a conspicuousrole here, and we can thuseasily graspthe ironythat these techniques create. The observationsthat I have made and the conclusionsthat I have tentativelydrawn are not intendedto be applied to 'Ukifune'as opposed to otherchapters in the Genji,but I hope thatthey may illustratesome aspectsof thatchapter which are characteristicof theUji chapters in generaland, to a certainextent, of the Genjias a whole. In many cases, the characters'hearts are revealedthrough direct discourse (directinterior monologue) and the voice heardis entirelythat of the characters thusdepicted. However, sometimes this voice blendsin withthat of the narrator, whosepresence in thesemonologues appears, for example, in theform of honorific languageapplied to the subjectof themonologue, in syntacticconstructions that requirereasoning about the situationor thoughtsrevealed, by exclamationsthat could be attributedto eitherthe character or thenarrator. There are also occasions whenthe voice of thecharacter fuses with a passage of descriptivenarration that precedesor followsit. In thelatter case theinterior monologue becomes indirect, endingnot in the quotativeparticle to but withsome othersyntactic construction thatmakes the monologue a subordinatepart of the passage as a whole.32 The importanceof thesedistinctions lies in the recognitionof differentdegrees of aestheticdistance between the reader and theworld of thetale; theyconstitute the ironyof the work,as Konishi Jin'ichihas pointedout.33 Not onlydoes the intrusionof the narrator'svoice distanceus fromthe characters,but even in passagesof direct interior monologue, where we are confrontedwith their thoughts unmediatedby thenarrator's voice, the distance between the characters themselves shows us the ironyof theirsituation. The creationof this aestheticdistance is certainlyone of thefunctions of theshifting point of viewin theUji chaptersand in the Genjias a whole.The narrationis not controlledby a singlepoint of view throughwhich we see the eventsand charactersof the narrative,nor by a single narratorwho consistentlytells us how to interpretthose eventsand characters. Althoughthe voice of a narratoris oftenheard, the identityof thatpersona and herrelation to thecharacters within the work are ambiguous,sometimes appearing on one levelof thenarrative, sometimes on another.However, when the narrator does speak out, herwords often take theform of a conjectureabout a character or his actions. The shiftingnarrative voice in 'Ukifune'and in theUji chaptersas a wholehas its closest counterpartin Westernliterature in the novels of VirginiaWoolf, particularlyin To theLighthouse.34 The innerlife of thecharacters plays a central

32 For a detaileddiscussion of thefusion of in Yamagishi Tokuhei U),-I & Oka Kazuo interior monologue with the embedding [F-l18, ed., Genji Monogatari Koza NFti descriptivenarration, see Akita Teiji EfIt t Xg, Yoseido, VII, pp. 44 ff. 'Genji Monogatarino Naiwa' 'fffJa'4P-MPQ 3 Erich Auerbach's discussion of To the in Shinwa Kokubun lftffQ, 2 (December Lighthousefirst suggested to me a possible 1969), pp. 1-21. analogy between Woolf's work and the Uji 33 Konishi Jin'ichi'J>E-, 'Genji Mono- chaptersof the Genii (and perhaps the entire gatari no Shinri Byosha' F work). He calls the techniquefound in Woolf

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 386 MonumentaNipponica, xxxv, 4 role in both works,an innerlife revealed to the readernot by means of the so- called streamof consciousnesstechnique (which depicts less organizedlevels of consciousness)but by meansof a flowingprose stylewhich often exhibits a high degreeof literaryself-awareness.35 While the narrative voice shiftsfrom character to characterto narratorto a non-personalsubject we have called the speakerof thetext, both works possess a certaindegree of stylisticunity, in partcreated by theuse of narratedmonologue, in whicha character'svoice blends into that of the narratoror into descriptivenarration. The dictionof monologue,dialogue, and descriptivenarration is basicallythe same; whilethe content of different characters' thoughtsmay vary,the languagein whichthat content is expresseddisplays few individualcharacteristics. This evenness of texture extends also to theuse ofnature imagery;in To theLighthouse and Woolf's othernovels (especially The Waves) an image is oftenassociated not onlywith one particularcharacter but appears in thethoughts of severaland in descriptivepassages as well.In 'Ukifune',and in all ofthe Heian narrativetales (monogatari), the unityof imageryis dictatedto a greatextent by the conventionsof waka. Charactersmay responddifferently to one image,but neverthelessthe image is the same. On thewhole, in To theLighthouse the point of viewshifts more slowly than in 'Ukifune';passages associated with one character'svision are longer.The following passageillustrates the type of ambiguityoften found in Woolf.The entireincident is part of Mrs Ramsay's recollectionof a walk to town withCharles Tansley, provokedby his irritatingremark, 'There'll be no landing at the lighthouse tomorrow.'

. . . she made him feel betterpleased withhimself than he had done yet,and he, wouldhave liked, had theytaken a cab forexample, to havepaid forit. As forher littlebag, might he notcarry that? No, no,she said, she always carried that herself. and some other20th-century novelists 'multi- Erich Auerbach, Mimesis: The Representa- personal representationof consciousness', tionof Realityin WesternLiterature, Double- noting that the most important difference day, Anchor Books, Garden City,New York, between Woolf and earlier novelists who 1957, p. 474. rendered inner views of their charactersis I am greatlyindebted in my discussion of that while the earlierwriter, 'with his knowl- VirginiaWoolf's works to JamesNaremore's edge of an objective truth,never abdicated finestudy, The WorldWithout a Self: Virginia his position as the final and governing Woolfand the Novel, Yale U.P., 1973, esp. authority.... The essential characteristicof pp. 112-50. For furtherdetailed analysis of the techniquerepresented by VirginiaWoolf changesin point of view in To theLighthouse, is that we are given not merelyone person see Mitchell Leaska, VirginiaWoolf's Light- whose consciousness(that is, the impressions house: A Studyin CriticalMethod, Columbia it receives) is rendered,but many persons, U.P., 1970, pp. 47-58. withfrequent shifts from one to theother.... 3 For a basic studyof streamof conscious- The design of a close approach to objective ness, see Robert Humphrey, Stream of reality by means of numerous subjective Consciousnessin theModern Novel, University impressions received by various individ- of CaliforniaPress, 1954, esp. pp. 2 ff.For a uals ... is important in the modern tech- discussionof conflictingviews on the subject, nique....' see Naremore,pp. 63-76.

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 STINCHECUM: Who Tells theTale? 387 She did too. Yes, he feltthat in her.He feltmany things, something in particular thatexcited him and disturbedhim for reasons which he couldnot give. He would likeher to see him,gowned and hooded,walking in a procession.A fellowship,a professorship,he feltcapable of anythingand saw himself-butwhat was she lookingat? At a manpasting a bill.The vast flapping sheet flattened itself out, and eachshove of the brush revealed fresh legs, hoops, horses, glistening reds and blues, beautifullysmooth, until half the wall was coveredwith the advertisementof a circus; a hundredhorsemen, twenty performing seals, lions, tigers.... Craning forwards,for she was short-sighted,she read it out . . . 'will visit this town,' she read.It wasterribly dangerous work for a one-armedman, she exclaimed, to standon top of a ladderlike that-his left arm had beencut off in a reapingmachine two yearsago. 'Let'sall go!' shecried, moving on, as ifall thoseriders and horseshad filledher withchildlike exultation and madeher forget her pity. 'Let's go,' he said,repeating her words, clicking them out, however, with a self- consciousnessthat made her wince. 'Let us go to thecircus.' No. He couldnot say it right.He couldnot feel it right. But why not? she wondered. What was wrong with himthen?36 The sectionbegins with a descriptionof Tansley's feelings,but the words, 'had theytaken a cab forexample', seem to renderhis thoughtsmore directly, whilethe followingtwo sentencesclearly represent dialogue. Again, 'Yes, he felt thatin her.He feltmany things,' must be a renderingof his thoughts,while the amplificationof thosethoughts seems to comefrom outside the scope of Tansley's consciousness.The nextsentence again represents his thoughts, as hisfantasy about Mrs Ramsayadmiring his futureaccomplishments is interruptedby herattention turningto thecircus poster. The descriptionof theposter might reflect Tansley's pointof viewas he followsMrs Ramsay's gaze, or hers,or both,but the explana- tion,'for she was short-sighted',seems to stemfrom the narrator rather than either of the characters.Mrs Ramsay's wordsare followedby anotherexplanation of hermood ('as if . . .') bythe narrator, and thenTansley's repetition of her exclama- tion.But 'No. He couldnot say it right' could be eitherTansley's own self-conscious thoughts,or Mrs Ramsay'sobservation of him. 'He couldnot feel it right'seems to renderhis own discomfortat his inabilityto respondspontaneously, but withthe followingline we are clearlylistening to Mrs Ramsay'svoice. In thispassage, almost entirely indirectly narrated, the ambiguityof the narrative voice is quite marked.By means of thiskind of ambiguityVirginia Woolf suggestsan absenceof space betweenthe characters,and betweenthe characters and thenarrator, implying an ultimateunity of human life within nature, or within theartist's vision of it, as itis LilyBriscoe's vision that finally rounds out thenovel.

36 Virginia Woolf, To the Lighthouse, LiteraryEstate and The Hogarth Press for Harcourt, Bruce & World, Harvest Books, permission to quote this passage. This New York, 1955, pp. 15 & 20-21. Due quotationand all furthercitations refer to the acknowledgmentis made to the Author's editioncited above.

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 388 MonumentaNipponica, xxxv, 4 Whilethe similarities between Virginia Woolf's technique and thatof 'Ukifune' are striking,there are of courseimportant differences that are significantfor our interpretationof theworks themselves. Perhaps the primary point of contrastfor thepurposes of our discussionis theeffect on thereader of the shiftingnarrative voice. Woolf's novels,particularly Mrs. Dalloway,To theLighthouse, and The Waves,use differentperspectives to showthe underlyingcommunication between people.As old AugustusCarmichael and Mrs Ramsayboth admire a dishof fruit, 'she saw thatAugustus too feastedhis eyeson thesame plateof fruit,plunged in, broke offa bloom there,a tassel here,and returned,after feasting, to his hive. Thatwas hisway of looking, different from hers. But looking together united them' (p. 146). Again, as Mrs Ramsaycontemplates the approachingmarriage of two youngpeople whom she has broughttogether, she feels a onenesswith those around her(pp. 170-71). In 'Ukifune',however, in spiteof thefluidity of styleand theflow, even within one sentence,of narrativevoice fromone persona to another,that veryflow emphasizesthe distance between characters by placingthem in closejuxtaposition and thus showingus the unbridgeablegaps that existbetween them. While in Woolf'snovel we see thecontinuity of thoughtand feelingbetween one character and another,in 'Ukifune'-the uniformity of dictionreveals disjunctions in thought, misunderstandings,and, even in dialogue, a lack of receptiveness,an active turningaway fromeach other.This basic isolationof one humanbeing from an- otherin the Uji chaptersof the Genjimay reflecta Buddhistview of theuniverse thatsees all humanrelationships as ultimatelyempty, salvation as a finalrejection of suchentanglements. Thus Ukifuneseeks salvationby turningher back on all formerrelationships. Onna San no Miya ('The Third Princess',Kaoru's mother),who loves neither Genji norKashiwagi and is evenmore isolated than Ukifune, also becomesa nun. Ukifune'sfather, Hachi no Miya ('The EighthPrince'), wanders in purgatory, unable to enterparadise, because he cannotfree himself from his attachmentto his othertwo daughters,even though he abandonsthem before his deathto enter a monastery.37Although Ukifune does indeedlove, her conflict isolates her from thoseshe loves. Can we believethat any of thesecharacters is trulysaved? Genji takesorders after Lady Murasaki'sdeath, but the factthat the eventis not part of the narrativede-emphasizes it and suggesta differentkind of religiousfeeling, one thatis fullyrealized only with the completion of a richlife of involvementin thisworld. Perhaps the GenjiMonogatari is sayingthat salvation is meaningless if it is obtainedonly by rejectingall humanties. This fundamentalcontrast between Virginia Woolf's worksand the Genji is apparentin two otheraspects. The use of narratedmonologue, directly related to

3 Afterhis death,Hachi no Miya appears (v, 'Agemaki' ['Trefoil Knots'], 301.3 & in dreams to both Naka no Kimi and Azari 312.4).

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 STINCHECUM: Who Tells the Tale? 389 shiftsin voice,in Woolfhelps to createthat underlying unity discussed above by relatingcharacters to each otherthrough similarities in prosestyle and imagery.In 'Ukifune'it also providesa certainkind of unityof the text:the veryfact that thereis a narrator(even though not consistent,or even severalnarrators) avoids thecomplete fragmentation ofthe text by fulfilling the requirements of the linguistic situationthrough the persona of thenarrator, thus supplying at leastan apparent continuity.Through honorific language the prose of the Genjinecessarily reflects a personalvoice; thefusion of interiormonologue and descriptivenarration is a naturalconsequence of theJapanese language itself, but in Englishthis is achieved onlythrough the creation of a specialgrammar. Whereasin To theLighthouse the indirectness of thetechnique allows us to see aspectsof thecharacters which they themselves would not ordinarilyverbalize, in 'Ukifune'these passages often end in remarksby the narrator that point out forus theironic distance we have been shownthrough direct interior monologue. In the former,the imagesof natureserve to reinforcethat all-embracing unity between man and nature,as also amongmen (for example, in the 'Time Passes' sectionof To theLighthouse and theinterchapters in The Waves);in thelatter, however, while naturereflects the moods of individualcharacters and is subsumedby them, some- timesproviding a linkbetween them, at the same timesuch imagesalso pointto the insurmountabledistances between one humanbeing and another.Such is the scene whenKaoru and Ukifuneare both gazingat the river:while he thinksof Oigimi,she is lostin thoughtsof Niou (see pp. 396-97,below). A differentkind of distance,one in a sensecreated within the dimensionof the fictionalworld, one expressedby thecharacters themselves and not simplyof thereader's perception, arisesbetween Ukifune and Niou in theirexchange of poemsabout the snow. Niou: Mine no yuki Treadingthe snow in the peaks, the migiwano kdri ice on the banks, I am lost in you, fumi-wakete thoughI didn'tlose myway here. kimini zo madou michiwa madowazu Ukifune:Furi-midare More than the snow which falls in migiwani koru whirling flakes, freezingalong the yukiyori mo banks,I am suspendedin mid-airand naka-soranite zo mustvanish. warewa kenu-beki [vi, 146. 2-7] WhileNiou uses theimage of snowto expresshis frustrationat not beingable to see her,Ukifune uses it to reflecther desireto dissolveinto nothingness,her desirefor death. Thus, although man maybe a partof natureto theextent that it reflectshis mostsubtle feelings, it providesno consolation,no senseof oneness. Natureis internalized,yet at the same timereflects man's isolation.

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 390 MonumentaNipponica, xxxv, 4

TextualAnalysis: A Descriptionof NarrativeVoice As a resultof the following analysis of one sectionof 'Ukifune', I shall present a synthesisof the material associated with each point of view of the main characters (in thesection that I havechosen, Ukifune and Kaoru). Everyreader performs thissynthesis and interpretation forhimself in a workof fiction-particularly when thereis no narratorconsistently present, telling us throughoutthe work how to interpretit. Butwe cannotmake any such interpretation without understanding thevarious levels and degreesof distancebetween the characters themselves, betweenthe characters and thenarrator, between the narrator and ourselves,and betweenthe narrator and the speaker of the text. Although the narrative voice of thetext coincides with that of Ukifune during her direct interior monologues, and fora momentwe see things from her point of view, the intervention ofthe narrator, theshift to Kaoru's point of view, moving away from Ukifune as interiormonologue blendsinto description, all distanceus fromher, and through this very subjective methodof narration,enable us to makeour own 'objective' view of the fictional world. The aimof myanalysis is twofold.It is firstof all descriptive:to identifythe shiftingnarrative voice within a selectedpassage and to see howsuch transitions areeffected. Secondarily, it is interpretative.However, the kind of interpretation 1 haveoutlined above can be accomplishedonly with a muchbroader foundation, on thebasis of an analysisof the Uji chaptersas a unitor perhapsthe Genji as a whole.Hence my conclusions in thisrespect will be tentativeand limited.I have selectedthis particular passage of 'Ukifune'because it is a unitof manageable lengthfor this kind of analysis,because it containsclear shifts in pointof view depictedin theinterplay of successiveinterior monologues, and becauseeven withina unitof this length irony is quiteevident. I do notmean to suggestthat the narrativetechniques revealed by my analysis are peculiarto or characteristicof onlythe 'Ukifune' chapter, as opposedto therest of the Genji; rather, my focusing on thispassage may shed some light on thework as a whole.The following is not a polishedliterary translation but a literalrendering which I hope reflectsthe syntaxof the original sufficiently to make the analysis intelligible. I haveattempted to retainthe aspects of the verbs as theyappear in the original textto theextent that this is possible,although it is contraryto usualpractice. The useof a verbalaspect that roughly corresponds to thepresent indicative in English is usuallyexplained as a 'historicalpresent' and alwaystranslated into the past tensein English;however, changes in verbaspects in Japanesereflect changes in thespeaker's relation to thecontent of the discourse, and thus are important for ourstudy. These shifts in verbalaspect in Japanese narrative works are analogous to theeffect of changes in tensein nineteenth-centuryRussian works pointed out by BorisUspensky in his detailedexamination of pointof view,A Poeticsof Composition.In his discussion of the alternation of verb tenses in Leskov'sstory, 'LadyMacbeth of the Mtsensk District', he notes,

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 STINCHECUM: Who Tells theTale? 391 thepresent tense is used to fixthe point of viewfrom which the narration is carriedout. Each timethe present is used,the author's temporal position is synchronic-thatis, it coincideswith the temporal position of his characters. He is at thatmoment located in theirtime. The verbsin thepast tense, however, provide a transitionbetween these synchronic sections of the narrative.They describe the conditionswhich are necessary to the perception of the narrative from the synchronic " position. A fulldiscussion of Japaneseverbal aspects is beyondthe scope of thisarticle, but it shouldbe notedthat although Uspensky speaks of 'temporalposition', this reallypoints to aestheticdistance between narrator and character.Similarly, in the Genji,the use of verbaspects that may refer to past time-perfectivesuffixes such as -ki,-tsu, -keri, -kemu--seems to indicatean increasein distancebetween the narrativevoice of thetext (and hencethe reader) and thecharacters, while the use of aspectsthat can be interpretedas referringto thepresent often appears to effect a decreasein thatdistance. However, in theGenji the correspondence is not nearly so exactas in Leskov'swork.39 I have followedthe NKBT text.40 (1) Taishodono,sukoshi nodoka ni Whenthings at courthad settleddown narinurukoro, shinobiteowashitari. a bit, the major captain, as usual, Tera ni hotoke nado ogami-tamau. slipped away inconspicuouslyand Mi-zukyosesase-tamau so ni, mono- came to Uji. At thetemple he worships tamainado shite.... theBuddhas; to themonk who chants sutrasfor him, he gives alms and so forth.... The passage opens withan impersonalview of Kaoru; thereis no emphaticor exclamatoryparticle, no verbalsuffix, to indicatethe narrator's presence. (2) ... yuitsugata,koko ni wa shi- ... and towardevening he comeshere nobitaredo,kore wa wari naku mo secretly.However, he, for his part, has yatsushi-tamawazu,eboshi noshi no not taken great pains to conceal his sugata,ito ara-mahoshikukiyoge nite, rank.His figurein informalcap and ayumi-iri-tamauyori, hazukashige ni, robe is flawlessand refined,and from yoi kotonari. the timehe steps into the room, the care he takes with everythingis so special that one feels overwhelmed by his presence. 38 Boris Uspensky,A Poetics of Composi- aspect thatI have touchedupon above. tion: The Structureof the ArtisticText and 40 See n. 4, above. The sectionin question Typologyof a CompositionalForm, University correspondsto VI, 133.7-137.15. of CaliforniaPress, 1973, p. 71. This passage corresponds to Tamagami 3 To my knowledge,no one has discussed Takuya, Genji Monogatari Hyoshaku, xii, the literarysignificance in shiftsfrom past pp. 89-94; Akiyama Ken fki, ed., Genji or perfectaspects to what may be called Monogatari(Nihon Koten Zenshu), Shogaku- presentaspects of theverb in classicalJapanese kan, 1976,VI, 133.7-136.9; YamagishiTokuhei narrative.There are manylinguistic studies of W):t,'', ed., Genji Monogatari(Nihon Koten individual verb suffixes,and comparisonsof BungakuTaikei 18), Iwanami Shoten,1963, v, ki and keri,for instance (see n. 19, above), but 230.12-233.15. theydo not deal withthe changesin narrative

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 392 MonumentaNipponica, xxxv, 4 Yutsugata('toward evening') constitutes a neutraltransition, for with koko ni ('to here') we move into Ukifune'sspatial locus. Hazukashige('one feelsover- whelmed')implies a perceivingsensibility; although there is no specificreference to Ukifune,we beginto wonderhere who is the subjectof thisemotion.4' More- over,kore wa ('he, forhis part') is a comparisonwith Niou, a comparisonmade perhapsby a narratorbut also ofcourse reflecting Kaoru and Niou as seenthrough Ukifune'seyes. This is broughtinto sharpfocus with the firstword of the next sentence,onna ('the lady'). The transitionfrom description narration (1), an impersonalview of Kaoru, to Ukifune'sthoughts is effectedby his spatialmovement towardher, by referencesto herspatial and psychologicallocus (koko,kore), and by the adverbhazukashige, which strongly suggests a perceivingconsciousness withinthe narrative world that is affectedby Kaoru's appearanceand behavior. (3a) Onna,ika de mie-tatematsuramu The lady,wondering, How shallI ever to suramu,to, sora sae hazukashiku be able to face him? is ashamed, ter- osoroshikini, anagachi narishi hito rifiedof the skyitself, but in spite of no on-arisama, uchi-omoi-ideraruru this, she recalls the presenceof him ni.... who had been so impetuous .... The shiftto Ukifune'spoint of view is confirmedby a briefdirect interior monologue,ika de mie-tatematsuramuto suramu ('How shallI everbe able to face him?'). Here thepoint of viewof thetext coincides with her and thedistance be- tweenus and Ukifuneis reducedto its minimum.We draw away fromher a bit withthe words, sora sae hazukashikuosoroshiki ni ('eventhe sky itself is terrifying, makingher ashamed'), but we can also readit, 'even the sky itself is shame-making, terrifying',taking it as Ukifune'sthoughts, so thedistance is not great.Ukifune's pointof view is maintainedin thefollowing passage, to (4), kokoro-bososa('misery'), butthe distance between us and hershrinks and stretchesas thevoice is sometimes clearlyUkifune's, in directinterior monologues, at timesfarther from her as her monologuesbecome indirect narration. (3b) ... mata kono hito ni mie- ... evenjust imagininghow could she tatematsuramuo omoi-yaru namu meetthis one is terriblewretchedness. imiju7kokoro-uki. Ware wa toshigoro He did say, 'My feelingsabout all of miruhito o mo, mina omoi-kawarinu- the ladies I have been seeing for so bekikokochi namu suru, to notamaishi long seemto be changingcompletely.' o, ge ni, sono nochi,mi-kokochi kuru- Hearingthat, indeed, since thattime, shi tote,izuku ni mo izukuni mo, rei sayingthat he does not feel well, he no on-arisamanarade, mi-zuhonado does not treatany of themas usual, sawagu-naruo kiku ni, mata ika ni and that people are makinga great kikiteobosamu.... deal of commotion,saying prayers for his recoveryand so forth,I wonder what would he feelif he heard about this? 41 Tamagami, xii, p. 92, takes this whole stepsinto theroom'), to be Ukifune'spoint of clause, from ayumi-iri-tamauyori ('when he view.

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 STINCHECUM: Who Tells the Tale? 393

We can read theabove narrationas one continuouspassage of directdiscourse depictingUkifune's thoughts(. . . o kiku ni can also be read as 'when she hears', movingthe point of viewjust outsideof Ukifune'srange). The wordso omoi-yaru namuimiju7 kokoro-uki ('even imaginingthat is terriblypainful') could be interpretedas thevoice of thenarrator. However, in theentire section I am analyzing, we almostnever hear the narrator's voice clearly, so it seemsmore appropriate to say thatin thispassage Ukifune'spoint of view,the narrator's,and our own are so close that at timesthey are indistinguishable.This is even more effectivein reducingthe aestheticdistance than removingany such ambiguity.Niou's state afterhe returnsto thecapital could notbe perceiveddirectly by Ukifune;in order to retainUkifune's voice here,it is representedas hearsaytransmitted to herby some thirdparty-presumably one of herserving women. Thereis a briefbit of description, to omoumo itokurushi ('even wondering about thisis extremelypainful'), and thenthe narrative voice again coincides with that of Ukifunein an extendedpassage whichdirectly modifies kokoro-bososa ('misery'), a characterizationof Ukifune'sstate not made by herbut by theimpersonal voice of the speakerof thetext:

(3c) Kono hito hata, ito kewai koto But thisperson, too, has a way with ni, kokoro-bukaku,namamekashiki him thatis quite out of the ordinary; sama shite, hisashikaritsuruhodo no he is deeplyconsiderate and his figure okotarinado notamaumo, koto oka- is graceful,and whenhe apologizesfor razu, koishi kanashi to oritatanedo, his long neglect,his words are few. tsuneni ai-minukoi no kurushisao, Although he is not outspoken,ex- sama yoki hodo ni uchi-notamaeru, claiming,'How precious! How ador- imijiku iu ni wa masarite,ito aware, able!', his genteelway of speakingof to hitono omoinu-bekisama o, shime- thesorrows of a love in whichthe two tamaeruhito-gara nari. En naru kata do not oftenmeet is superiorto pas- wa saru mono nite,yuku sue nagaku sionateexclamations; his characteris hito no tanominu-bekikokoro-bae such that anyone would certainly nado,koyo naku masari-tamaeri. Omo- think,How moving!, of his figure. wazu naru sama no kokori-baenado, His charmis a matterof course. His mori-kikasetaramutoki nanome na- characteris one a womancould depend razu imijiku koso abekere. Ayashui, on fora long time,and is incompara- utsushi-gokoromo no oboshi-iraruru bly superior.If he should happen to hito o, aware to omou mo, sore wa hear of my own wild infatuation,it ito aru-majikukaroki koto zo ka shi. would surelybe terribleindeed. Even Kono hito ni ushi to omowarete, to thinklongingly of the personwho wasure-tamainamu.... loves me so madlyis trulya frivolous thingthat must not be....

The absenceof emphatic and exclamatoryparticles in thefirst half of this section allowsus to readit as eitherUkifune's point of viewor thatof thetext (and hence ours),as in section(3b). But theseweighings of Kaoru's elegantreserve against Niou's effusivenesswould seem to be takingplace withinUkifune. This is supported

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 394 MonumentaNipponica, xxxv, 4 bythe use ofkono hito ('this person') in both(3b) and (3c) (in bothcases it refersto Kaoru), whichpoints to Ukifune'sspatial and psychologicallocus. Furthermore, we mayalso see thelack ofemotion in thenarration itself (indicated by the sparsity of emphaticexpressions) as reflectingthe absence of passionin Ukifune'srelation to Kaoru. The emphaticconstructions toward the end of the passage, nanome narazuimijiku koso abekere ('it wouldsurely be terribleindeed') and itoaru-majiku karokikoto zo ka shi('truly a frivolousthing that must not be') stressthe presence of the speakerof theseexpressions, whom I take to be Ukifune,since nothing opposesinterpreting the voice as hers.These phrasescould be read as expressions of the narrator,but thewhole of section(3) is so clearlyUkifune's point of view thatI see no reasonto thinkthat the narrator suddenly intrudes here. (4) . . . kokoro-bososawa, ito fuko ... because the misery of being shiminikereba,omoi-midaretaru keshi- thoughtodious and beingrejected by ki o ... thisperson sinks into her very deeply, she is distraught;observing her state, he thinks... With kokoro-bososa('misery'), the descriptionof Ukifune'sstate, we move awayfrom her; it is notshe who reasonsabout it, forming the causal construction, shiminikereba('because it sinksinto her'), but thenarrator; this direct representa- tion of the reasoningprocess must be attributedto a personifiedvoice, and not simplyto the speakerof the text,which has no personaand thuscannot be the source of a judgment-theformation of a cause-effectstatement. The distance betweenUkifune and us widensfurther with the word keshiki('state', 'appear- ance')-the visiblereflection of inneremotion. It is this reflectionof Ukifune's innerstate that Kaoru sees. The pointof viewhas thusshifted from an internalto an externalview of her,and thatpoint of viewbecomes Kaoru's.42 (5) ... tsuki-goroni, koyo-no mono . . . overthe past fewmonths, she has no kokoro shiri, nebi-masarinikeri, come to understandthe true nature of tsure-zurenaru sumika no hodo ni, thingsand has matured.Because of omoi-nokosukoto wa araji ka shi.... the tedious place in which she lives, her thoughts must certainlyleave nothingunexplored .... Here the voice is clearlyhis, as thissection is immediatelyfollowed by to mi- tamau(the quotative particle to plus 'he thinks').His monologueis straightforward and simplesyntactically. The verbalsuffix -keri and exclamatoryparticles ka shi emphasizethe presence of a speakingsubject.

(6) . . . tomi-tamau mo kokorokuru- . . ., he thinks;since even to see this shikireba tsune yori mo kokoro- is extremelypainful, more attenta- todometekatarai-tamau. tivelythan usual he speaks intimately to her. 42 For definitionsof externaland internal tions,see Uspensky,pp. 83-5. pointsof viewand a discussionof theirfunc-

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 STINCHECUM: Who Tells the Tale? 395

In (6), the pointof view shiftsslightly from an internalto an externalview of Kaoru. Again it can onlybe the narratorwho formsthe causal construction. In thepreceding silent exchange between Ukifune and Kaoru we see thepattern of theirother, verbal, exchanges. Some externalmanifestation of Kaoru is the occasion forUkifune's reflections about him and Niou. On the otherhand, her mood, as it appears to Kaoru, is completelymisunderstood. He interpretsher distressas theresult of his failureto visither frequently enough, and immediately beginsto talkabout the new life he is planningfor her. He blamesher mood on the place, the desolationof Uji (tsure-zurenaru sumika no hodo ni, 'because of the tediousplace in whichshe lives'),and his solutionto herproblems is a new place. He triesto comforther as one would a child. When Kaoru speaks to Ukifune directly,he speaksof externalthings only: (7) Tsukurasurutokoro, y6yo yoro- 'The place I am havingbuilt for you is shiushi-nashitekeri. Hito-hi namu mi- graduallytaking shape. I saw it the shikaba,koko yori wa ke-jikakimizu otherday, and theriver is moreagree- ni, hana mo mi-tamaitsu-beshi.Sanjo able than here and you will also be no miya mo chikaki hodo nari. able to see the cherryblossoms. The Akekure obotsukanaki hedate mo, Palace of theThird Ward is also near onozukara ara-majiki o, kono haru by.The separationbetween us whichis no hodoni, sarinu-bekuba watashitemu so unsettling,day and night,will, of to omoite-notamaumo ... 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 not addresshimself directly to herfeelings, nor indeed say anything about hisown. His speechsimply indicates hisintentions, and attemptsto makeher feel more secure about the future. Kaoru's words,like Ukifune'sair of distress,do not conveywhat is behindthem; he does not succeedin communicatingwhat he wishes,the stabilityin his plans forher future,gradually being realized in thisbuilding project. Instead, his wordsserve as an occasionfor her recollection of Niou's wordsand his plans forher:

(8) ... kano hito no, nodoka naru- .. . she thinks,That personwas say- beki tokoro omoi-moketari,to kino ing just yesterday,'I've thoughtof a mo notamaerishio, kakaru koto mo place whereyou shouldbe able to feel shirade,sa obosuramuyo to, aware at ease,' but he mustbe thinkingthat nagara mo, sonata ni nabiku-bekini waywithout knowing about thissitua- wa arazu ka shi, to omou kara ni, tion,and althoughit is heart-rending, arishi on-sama no omokage ni obo- I certainlymust not yield to him. yureba,ware nagara mo, utatekoko- Whileshe thinksthis, an imageof the ro-u no mi ya, to omoi-tsuzukete way he had looked risesup beforeher nakinu. and she has to admitto herself,What a wretchedlot!, and continuingto feel thisway, she burstsinto tears.

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 396 MonumentaNipponica, xxxv, 4

The contrastbetween Kaoru's words and Ukifune'sthoughts about Niou is stressedby the syntactic connection between them: notamau mo kano hito no . .. to kinomo notamaerishi('when he saysthis, she thinks,That personwas sayingjust yesterday.. .'). The transitionfrom one voiceto theother is providedby Kaoru's words.Direct speechdoes not functionhere in the expectedway, as a means of conveyingthe thoughts of one personto another.That functionis deniedhere by thejuxtaposition of Kaoru's wordsand Ukifune'sthoughts of Niou. She does not, however,totally ignore Kaoru's words; she takessomething from them (the idea thathe is planningto moveher into the city) and herown feelings develop around thatkernel. In a similarway she uses the imageryand dictionof the poems ad- dressedto her to rejectwhat theysay. Withthe word nakinu('she burstsinto tears')the distancewidens once morebetween us and Ukifune,and we see what Kaoru sees and respondsto: thevisible manifestation of herinner state. But even thoughhe sees theexternal signs, the real sourceof heroutburst is not communi- cated to him herdespair at whatshe believesto be the necessityto rejectNiou and at the same time her inabilityto do so. Again Kaoru misunderstandsthe expressionof thisdespair and interpretsit as unhappinessat his neglect. We haveseen in sections(5) and (6) thatKaoru is saddenedby what he considers her new-foundmaturity, her new understandingof human relations.He feels responsiblefor having left her alone so long in so inhospitablea place,but at the same timehe seemsto long forthe old calm and compliantUkifune: (9) Mi-kokoro-bae no, kakarade 'When your dispositionwas not like oiraka narishikoso, nodokani ureshi- thisand was calm, I was relaxedand kari-shika. Hito no ika ni kikoe- happy.What have people been telling shirasetarukoto ka aru. Sukoshi mo you? If myintentions were in theleast oroka naramu kokorozashinite wa, bit frivolous,neither my own position ko made mairi-ku-beki,mi no hodo nor the conditionof the road is such michi no arisama ni mo aranu o that I could come here like this.' nado . . . Sayingthings like this ... Her earliersubmissiveness is givingway to somethingthat he can neithercontrol nor understand.Perhaps he sensessomething contrary in her outburst(indeed it is herlonging for Niou and deceptionof Kaoru thatare thesource of heragony). He frequently,ifnot always, thinks of heras a substitutefor Oigimi, but when she assertsher own identity by not conforming to an expectedpattern, he can no longer manipulateher for his own ends-that is,treat her as an imageof Oigimi. Not only do his wordsfail to communicatereassurance to her,but as if to emphasizethe distancebetween them, he seemsnot to expecta replyfrom her. He movesaway fromher and lies down by theveranda, directing his attentionaway fromher:

(10) . . . tsuitachi-gorono yu-zukuyo ... as it was a moonlightevening ni,sukoshi hashi-chikakufushite naga- around the firstof the month,he lay me-idashi-tamaeri.Otoko wa, sugi- downnear the edge of the veranda and nishikata no aware o mo oboshi-idete, was gazing out. The man recalls his

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 STINCHECUM: Who Tells the Tale? 397

onna wa, ima yorisoitaru mi no usa o longingfor the past, while the lady nageki-kuwaete,katami ni mono- lamentsthe new griefthat has been omowashi. added to her lot, and each is sunk in painfulthoughts. Kaoru's monologue(9) servesas a transitionaway from Ukifune's view, but in (10), ratherthan shiftingthe narrativevoice to Kaoru, both he and Ukifuneare describedneutrally. The wordskatami ni mono-omowashi('each is sunkin painful thoughts')crystallize the ironicdistance between the two,and betweenthem and us: we knowthat Ukifune is thinkingof Niou and Kaoru of Oigimi,but neither of themhas any idea of the other'sthoughts (nor do theyseem to care here). The neutralperspective provides a bridgeto whatappears to be a purelydescriptive passage:

(11) Yama no kata wa kasumi- ... the mountains are shrouded in hedatete, samuki susaki ni tateru mist,and thefigure of a crestedheron kasa-sagi no sugata mo, tokoro-gara standingon a cold sandspit because wa ito okashu7miyuru ni, Uji-bashi of the characterof the place- seems no haru-baruto mi-watasaruruni, especiallylovely; Uji Bridge can be shiba-tsumi-buneno tokoro-dokoroni seen in the distance,and boats piled yuki-chigaitarunado, hoka nite me- high with brushwoodply back and narenu koto-domonomi tori-atsume- forth;because it is a place whereonly tarutokoro nareba, mi-tamau tabigoto thingslike this are broughttogether, ni, nao, sono kamino kotono tadaima thingshe is used to seeing nowhere no kokochi shite, ito kakaranu hito else, everytime he looks at it those o mi-kawashitaramudani, mezurashiki dayspast seempresent to him; evenif naka no aware okaru-bekihodo nari. he wereexchanging glances with some- Maite koishikihito ni yosoeraretaru one who was not like this, the rare mo, koyo nakarazu, yJyJmono no sympathybetween them would surely kokoro shiri, miyako-nareyukuari- be deep. But as she is the veryimage sama no okashiki mo, koyo naku of someone dear to him, it is all the mi-masarishitarukokochi shi-tamau morespecial. Gradually she has come ni.... to understandthe nature of things. He feelsthat the charm of herappear- ance, whichhas become moresophis- ticated,is now beyondcompare....

This depictionof the riverscenery at Uji seemsat the beginningto be pure descriptionnarration, but graduallythe reader senses the presence of a perceiving subjectwhich at last becomesfocused on Kaoru. The clause ito okashuimiyuru ('seemsespecially lovely') implies a subjectto whichit so seems;with the clause, shiba-tsumi-buneno tokoro-dokoroni yuki-chigaitarunado, hoka niteme-narenu koto-domonomi tori-atsumetaru tokoro nareba ('because it is a place whereonly thingshe is used to seeingnowhere else, like boats piled highwith brushwood plyingback and forth,are broughttogether'), we know thatit is Kaoru who is perceivingthis scene. His feelingthat the past is presentis not onlyexplained to

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 398 MonumentaNipponica, xxxv, 4 us in thispassage but shownto us directly(if we are good readers):Kaoru gazes at a similarscene the first time he exchangespoems with Oigimi, when he watches smallboats laden withfirewood passing back and forthand reflectson the tran- sienceof humanlife.43 The past and presentexist simultaneously both for Kaoru and forus, but while thisjuxtaposition enhances his enjoymentof thepresent, for us theeffect is quite different.We cannothelp but sensehis distancefrom Ukifune, a gulfcreated by his longingfor the past. Althoughwe, too, see theUji Riverthrough his eyes,our pointof viewdoes not quite coincidewith his. This ambiguityis presentalso in the text:while the pointof viewis clearlyKaoru's, the voice neverbecomes so. Verbsof seeing(mi-watasaruru, 'can be seen in thedistance', and me-narenu,'not used to seeing'),which have no honorificsuffixes attached to them,can be interpretedas generalstatements, while verbs that can referonly to Kaoru as thesubject endin the honorific tamau (mi-tamau tabigoto ni, 'every time he looks',and kokochi shi-tamauni, 'he feels').These honorificsreflect the narrator'spoint of viewand consciousnessof Kaoru's rank-a narratorwho speaks about Kaoru froma standpointvery close to him.But in anotherclause in whichwe would expecta similarhonorific, there is none: sono kami no koto no tadaimano kokochishite ('thosedays past seempresent to him'),suggesting that the voice hereis Kaoru's own (in whichcase we mightread it,'those days past seempresent to me'), as do the followingclauses. However,the usual signsof directinterior monologue are missing(exclamatory and emphaticparticles, and verbalsuffixes that point to the presenceof a speakingsubject), nor does thepassage end witha quotativeparticle, but becomesan extendedmodifier for kokochi shi-tamau ('he feels'). Here, the honorificsuffix indicates the narrator'svoice. The transitionfrom (10) to (11) is reflectedfrom a neutralpoint of view,thus minimizingthe syntacticbreak at omowashi('lost in thought').Although there is one conclusiveform (shuishikei) withinthe passage describingKaoru's feelings('hodo nari'), thereis no shiftin pointof viewhere; so again the syntacticbreak is de-emphasized.Syntactic units do not correspondclosely here with shifts in perspective.Hence theseshifts take place withinthe almost unbroken flow of words.

(12) . . . onna wa, kaki-atsumetaru ... but on the lady's part, the tears kokorono uchini moyosarurunamida whichhave welled up because of her to mo surebaide-tatsu o.... accumulated feelings are about to fall.... AlthoughUkifune's feelings are describedto us, we see barelymore of her thanKaoru himselfcan see. The sourceof herpain is not statedhere because it is not visibleto him.Again he misinterpretsher distress, thinking she is upsetby his negligence. Kaoru's poem characteristicallyincludes no expressionof emotion,no direct statementof his own feelings:

43 V, 'Hashihime' ('The Lady at the Bridge'), 141.8-11.

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 STINCHECUM: Who Tells the Tale? 399

(1 3a) . . . nagusame-kane-tamaitsutsu, ... but being unable to comforther, Uji-bashino he says, 'The enduringvow of Uji nagakichigiri wa Bridgewill not decay. Don't let your kuchisejio heartbe tornby what you fear.Now ayabumukata ni you will surelysee-' kokorosawagu na. Ima mi-tamaitemuto notamau.

In verse,as in prose,Kaoru's speechis unadorned.This is evidentif we compare Kaoru's poem withthat of Niou about thesnow (see p. 389,above). The former is a straightforwardrequest that she not hesitateto relyon him.In heranswering poem,although she has notmisunderstood, she rejectshis attemptto comforther.

(13b) Taema nomi 'There is nothingbut gaps in this yo ni wa ayoki world. Are you really tellingme to Uji-bashio relyon that dangerousUji Bridgeas kuchisenumono to somethingthat will not decay?' nao tanometo ya

Ukifunedeliberately misleads him by implyingthat she cannotdepend on him, thusreinforcing his previousmisinterpretation of her state. In thisway, her poem also failsto communicate.We see thepoem withoutan accompanyingview of her thoughts;it is thusseen fromKaoru's pointof view.We have no access to her real reactionto his poem because he himselfdoes not. Althoughthere are subtle shiftsin voice,the point of viewremains with Kaoru. He does not replyto Ukifune'sexpression of insecurity.Although he findsit harderthan ever to leave her,his concernover what people would say if he stayed longeroverrides any senseof herfeelings:

(13c) Sakizaki yori mo ito mi- It is more difficultto leave her than sutegataku,shibashi mo tachi-tomara- ever,and althoughhe feelshe would mahoshiku obosaruredo, hito no like to stay even for a little while mono-iino yasukaranuni, ima sara longer,since he is uneasyabout what nari, kokoro-yasukisama nite koso, people mightsay, making an effortto nado oboshi-sashite,akatsuki ni kaeri- think,It would be foolishnow. When tamainu.Ito yo mo otonabitaritsuru I can relax . . . , at dawn he returned ka na, to, kokoro-gurushikuoboshi- to the capital. Recollecting, She izurukoto, arishi ni masarikeri. certainlyhas grown up, was more painfulthan ever.

Here again, the point of view is Kaoru's throughout,but the voice varies, sometimescoinciding with his, sometimesreflecting the narrator'spresence. The firsttwo clauses (through tachi-tomara-mahoshiku, 'wanting to stay'),which in the Japaneseare paralleladverbial constructions, constitute an indirectmonologue. Followingobosaruredo ('although he feels'),we see his thoughtsdirectly. The last directquotation of his thoughts, ito yo mootonabitaritsuru ka na ('she certainlyhas

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 400 MonumentaNipponica, xxxv, 4 grownup'), also re-emphasizeshis lack of understandingof her.Thus evenin pas- sagesin whichwe are linguisticallyclosest to a character,when the narrative voice is whollyhis, we are consciousof ironicdistance. The distancebetween us and Kaoru is stressedby theclosing of thewhole section, marked by theverbal suffix -keri.Here, the narratordescribes Kaoru's feelings,to, kokoro-gurushiku oboshi- izurukoto arishini masarikeri('recollecting ... was more painfulthan ever'), whichwe knowto be based on a misunderstanding,and roundsoff the sentence in a way thatpoints both to the presenceof the narratingvoice and to the factof narration.The sectionthus concludesin a way that is typicalof many of the chaptersof the Genji,where by variousmeans the narrative points to itself.44

FromAnalysis of theText to Interpretationof the Work: FirstSteps

FROM the above analysisof narrativevoice in a shortsection of 'Ukifune',it is possibleto forma synthesisof the insightgained from it about each of the two characters,a synthesiswhich is at the same time an interpretationof the text. Obviouslythere are aspectsof Kaoru and Ukifunethat do notappear at all in this passage; thusmy remarks are necessarilytentative. In orderto interpretfully even thissmall part of thetext, we mustread it in lightof the restof the Uji chapters, ifnot theGenji as a whole.Although I have attemptedto limitmy analysis to the selectedpassage, the interdependent structure of thetext has requiredthat I refer to an earlierchapter in orderto makea particularscene intelligible.45 But we can gain a considerabledegree of understandingof themutual relationship of thetwo charactersfrom an examinationof thisbrief section. The firstglimpse we see of Ukifuneshows us thatshe respondsnegatively to Kaoru. This is quiteclear from her first interior monologue, and is also suggested by the precedingtransitional passage thatdescribes the impressionhe makes on some,as yetunnamed, observer. Her embarrassmentand fearof Kaoru are con- trastedwith her passionate love forNiou, whosewarmth is repeatedlyreflected in Ukifune'sthoughts about him. While she notes,one by one, the praiseworthy aspectsof Kaoru's character,her frequent attempts to suppressher memories of Niou and herfeelings for him leave no doubtthat it is Niou thatshe loves.46 But it is not only Ukifunewho respondswithout passion to Kaoru's calmer virtues.We also see himas she does. The openingsection (1) showsus his dispas- sionatenature; his situationis describedas nodokanari ('calm')-Kaoru himself is referredto by thesame adjectiveat thebeginning of thechapter (vi, 99.10). He

44 Earl Miner, 'Narrative Units in the 46 For a discussion of Ukifune as she Genji Monogatari: "Ukifune" in its Context', appears throughoutthe Uji chapters,and in unpublishedmanuscript. particularher relationsto Kaoru and Niou, 45 This verynecessity to referback to other see Takahashi Toru, 'Sonzai-kankaku no parts of the textmakes it clear that the Genji Shiso5:"Ukifune" ni tsuite'#-Atr: CDOUIR:Fr is essentiallya writtenwork. See the reference fti- h , in Nihon Bungaku, xxiv: 11 to Tamagami's theoryof the work as per- (November 1975), pp. 79-80. Takahashi formance,pp. 375-76, above. supportsmy readingof Ukifune'sfeelings.

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 STINCHECUM: Who Tells the Tale? 401 presentsa strikingcontrast to Niou, who,in the immediatelypreceding passage, thinkshe willdie of love (vi, 133. 5-6). Kaoru, on the otherhand, is in no great hurryto see Ukifune.When business matters are nottoo pressing,he findstime to go to Uji; whenhe arrives,he does not rushimmediately to herquarters but goes firstto thetemple, prays, spends some timewith the priests, and, finally,when he has taken care of these otherresponsibilities, he stops in to see her. The very absence of interiormonologue here suggests that he is not thinkingof anything relevantto thestory of Ukifune. When his thoughtsare exposedto us, two pointsemerge clearly: his repeated misunderstandingof Ukifune,and his preoccupationwith Oigimi.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;that judgment is based on ignorance.Rather than being pleased by this changein her,he reproachesher for it, forshe no longerresponds in theway he expects,and he cannotcontrol her. Kaoru is deceivingUkifune in not tellingher abouthis attachment to Oigimi,and deceivinghimself in continuingto see Ukifune as an imageof Oigimi.The ironicdistance thus established between us and Kaoru preventsour identifyingwith him too closely,and in effectprevents our taking Kaoru as thehero of the Uji chapters.His longestinterior monologue in thechapter,when he discoversthe deceptionof Ukifuneand Niou (vi, 165-167),reveals some of themost unattractive aspects of his character,reinforcing the irony. It is not onlyKaoru who practicesdeception. Ukifune's agitation provokes his poem,an attemptto consoleher. But heranswering poem, far from revealing her real emotionsas we have seenthem through her interior monologues, conceals the conflictswithin her. According to herpoem, she doubtsthe endurance of Kaoru's vow; however,we knowthat it is not his unreliabilitythat distresses her, but her own and Niou's. It is thevery fact of Kaoru's dependabilitywhich makes him so clearlya betterpotential husband than Niou, thatrequires her to rejectNiou and createsher conflict.Ukifune's words are opposed to her feelings.This contrast becomesvivid for us throughthe juxtaposition of twoforms of directutterance- directspeech (here in theform of a poem)and directinterior monologue, the latter supportedby narrateddialogue. If descriptivenarration had been our onlysource of informationabout herthoughts, we wouldnot feelthe contrast with the words so stronglyas we do whenwe see herthoughts directly, from her own point of view. Because we see directly,we understandthe irony of herpoem. It is moredifficult to understandUkifune's role in the workthan it is to evaluateour relationto Kaoru. At timeswe mayidentify with her, but, in theend, we standapart from her. While we may view her with sympathy,it is mixed with censuretoward her indecisiveness.However, the distance we thusexperience is not ofthe same quality as thesharp irony with which we mustregard Kaoru's protestationsof fidelity and piety.Ultimately, our point of view and thatof the work as a wholedo notcoincide withthat of any of thecharacters in theUji chapters.Through the use of multiple pointsof view, by placing in appositionthe consciousnesses of Ukifune and Kaoru,

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 402 MonumentaNipponica, xxxv, 4 we are distancedfrom both of them.The ironyof theirwords thus becomes vivid. The narrativevoice shifts,then, from character to character,to descriptive narration,to thevoice of a narrator.While interior monologue brings us face to face with the characters,descriptive narration provides a backgroundagainst whichwe see themas objects,on theone hand,and on theother confronts us with whatthe characters themselves see. The latterkind of descriptionbegins as narra- tionin whichthe voice is notpersonified, but as thepassage proceeds the point of viewbecomes that of one of thecharacters. Thus, to a certainextent, descriptive narrationserves to moveus awayfrom the characters, insofar as theirmovements and thoughtsare describedin summary.But as thiskind of description (particularly of nature)takes on theintonation and orientationof a certaincharacter, we move closerto him,and whenthe narrative voice thenblends with his in directinterior monologue,we face himdirectly. However,when the voice is personifiedas a narrator,the distancingeffect is strongerthan in passagesof description.The auxiliaryverb -keri calls attentionto the presenceof a personifiedsubject, that is, a narratingvoice, particularlyin conjunctionwith the emphatic particles namu, zo, and koso. In addition,there are auxiliaryverbs such as -beshi,-meri, and -kemu,which indicate conjecture on the partof thenarrating voice about thesubject of themain verb (see p. 382, above). For example,in theexpression omoi-yoru nari-kemu ka shi (vi, 177.3,'it mustbe thatshe thought of it'), it is notthe subject of the verb 'thinks' (here, Ukifune) that speculates,but the narrator who is explainingUkifune's thinking. Causal construc- tionsperform the same role. This kindof speculationabout a character'smotives or actionsplaces thenarrator within the same dimensionas thecharacter (that is, thenarrator is not omniscient)and at thesame timeobjectifies him, thus creating distancebetween us and him.The techniquehas close parallelsin To theLight- house.47In Auerbach'swords, Woolf is deliberately'obscuring and evenobliterat- ingthe impression of an objectivereality completely known to theauthor' precisely in orderto createa morereal reality.48In the Genji,also, thevery humanness of the narratorwho wondersabout Ukifune'smotivations functions to establishthe realityof thefictional world. As the voice of the narratorbecomes more insistent,unquestionably distinct fromthat of the character being described and obviouslypersonified, the character is objectifiedand ourdistance from him is at itsmaximum.49 We can see thisin the sentence,kano mimitodome-tamaishi hito-koto wa, motomai-idenuzo nikukiya

47 See especially the famous passage omniscient,with which I cannot agree. There beginning,'Never did anybodylook so sad': is a fundamentaldifference between omni- Woolf, p. 46. scient narration,which implies a consistent 48 Auerbach,p. 472. point of view throughouta text and at the 49 Konishi,pp. 53 ff.,discusses the creation same time a personifiedsubject of expression of aestheticdistance in the Genji by means of that freely makes judgments about the the manipulationof point of view and the use characters,and the kind of multiple-point-of- of personifiednarrators. He states,however, view narration that characterizesthe Genji thatin generalthe point of view in the Genjiis and thenovels of Woolf,Faulkner, and Joyce.

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 STINCHECUM: Who Tells the Tale? 403

(vi, 145. 7-8, 'it is reallyhateful that he does not mentionthat word thatcaught hisear'), in whichthe narrator condemns Niou fornot mentioning to Ukifunethat he overheardKaoru repeatinga poem about his longingfor the lady of Uji Bridge.50Both of these techniquesof distancing-descriptive narration and narrator'scommentary- are relativelyinfrequent in 'Ukifune'in comparisonto otherchapters of the Genji; however, they do occuroften enough to forma signifi- cant aspectof thenarrative method in 'Ukifune'. Thusthe shifting of narrative voice in 'Ukifune',in contrastto similartechniques in VirginiaWoolf's To theLighthouse, while drawing us closerto the characters withintheir world also createsirony and controlsthe aesthetic distance among the charactersthemselves, and betweenthe fictionalworld and us, the readers.A studyof narrativevoice in the Genji as a whole should indicatean increasing refinementin theuses of aesthetic distance and irony;even on thebasis ofa cursory reading,there seems to be a fundamentaldifference between the degree and consistencyof the irony directed toward Hikaru Genji and thedistance between us and themajor charactersin the Uji chapters,particularly Kaoru. However,such conclusionsmust be the resultof a much broadercritical examination of the Genji.I have confinedmyself in the presentstudy to a selectedpassage fromthe 'Ukifune'chapter. Although my analysisis extremelylimited, it has revealed importantelements in the relationshipsof major characterswithin the fictional worldas wellas significantaspects of narrativemethod.

50 Similarexpressions by the narrator about See vi, 139.7-9; 149.12-13; 162.14-15; 169.12; the charactersoccur throughoutthe chapter. 177.1-3.

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