Media Coverage
LA Times - "James Cahill dies at 87; scholar of Chinese art"
New York Times - "James Cahill, Influential Authority on Chinese Art, Dies at 87"
The Daily Californian - "Professor Emeritus James Cahill, Chinese art expert, dies at 87"
LANDsds Sustainable Voice News - "Loss of Guru Voice James Cahill Leader in Chinese Art"
SFGate - "James Cahill, Asian art expert at UC Berkeley, dies"
Correspondence With Jerome Silbergeld About Riverbank Revelation
Correspondence With Jerome Silbergeld About Riverbank Revelation
What follows is the correspondence I have had with Jerome Silbergeld over the past two weeks or so. Early in February I had sent out to some twenty people, colleagues who had been somehow involved in the Riverbank affair, on one side or the other, giving them advance access to the two Addenda Part Twos that conclude my Pure and Remote View series, one of them revealing and documenting more about the early stages of that affair leading up to the 1999 Authenticity Symposium at the Met, the other presenting once again the stylistic arguments why it can’t possibly be an early painting and must be a Zhang Daqian forgery--with a last-minute insert presenting what I believe to be ultimate visual evidence for this, beyond controversy. After I had waited another several weeks for responses and got none (or only a brief one from a former student) I wrote to Jerome Silbergeld, old friend whom I have always taken (and still take) to be fair-minded and open to new ideas and arguments--we have engaged in a number of them over the years. He responded, I wrote back--and so forth, producing the long correspondence that will be printed below. I should point out that Jerome seems to send his messages from a Blackberry or Iphone or something like that, so that they come through with no capitals. I have refrained from editing these responses in any way--they are entirely as he sent them. (I myself have never used or owned one of these hand-held devices, not even a cellphone--this certainly places me in medieval or even antediluvian times, where I am entirely comfortable.)
So, here is the Silbergeld-Cahill Riverbank Correspondence 2012.
Silbergeld, Jerome
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Jerome,
As an old friend, take a moment to fill me in on why my great revelation, sent to some twenty people ahead of the public posting so that those most involved could react, why this has been met with--total silence. Not a word from anybody. Is everybody simply stunned? Haven’t you all had time to watch & absorb it yet, and respond to it? Is some kind of suppression underway, by which nobody is going to talk about it? Our second press release similarly: sent out to lots of editors of publications, what should be big news, no response at all. Carl Nagin, who broke the original Riverbank affair in a brief New Yorker piece (as you remember), is writing another which I hope will have some effect--unclear yet where it will appear. What has WF’s response been? Any at all? Or are we, as I say, witnessing a grand conspiracy of silence? Anyway, please write when you have time and give me some sense of your sense of what’s going on, or not going on, and why, and what we should do about it, if anything.
Best, Jim
Dear Jim,
I can't begin to speak for others, and certainly not for Wen who as you know can carry on his ideas without change despite whatever new encounters come his way. So speaking just for myself, time and busyness is a major factor. With all my travel (Ann Arbor, Kansas, Toronto, Baltimore) and a death in the family, I couldn't get to any of this until about two weeks ago, then watched half of your new material, was tempted to write you something tentatively, then was interrupted again. But under the impulse of your note today, I've watched more of it, almost but not quite all. As you know, I've long ago staked out a wide middle ground as a connoisseurial agnostic. Not that I don't have opinions, but I don't see why anyone should take them too seriously (well, my students should perhaps, and occasionally some others do -- I share my thoughts with Bob Harrist, sometimes to actual effect). Being a referee in the matter came naturally to me because I am genuinely respectful of all sides and tend to think, as you know, that recovering the truth is not always possible (there is a truth, but access is restricted). In this case, I think your strongest new emphasis has to do with the question of the presumably artificial treatment of the silk. That pattern certainly cannot be easily dismissed. I remain somehow unconvinced that Zhang, specifically, was a good enough artist or forger to have produced this work and although you show many comparables, it seems to me one could show many others that might argue for other possibilities. Of course I don't take it as an authentic Dong Yuan but I'm a tough one to convince of anything, and I hope you don't take that as a personal matter. You have a better "eye" than WF, and I share your view about many of the works in the original 1973 purchase of 25 paintings from C.C. But for example, I don't think that the Met's Qian Xuan Wang Xizhi Watching Geese is authentic and I believe you do, and I think that their Li Gonglin Xiaojing tu as an absolute dog (I may have convinced Bob of that), so I don't think you're going to appreciate my views any more than some folks appreciate yours or Wen's. THAT is the state of our field, quite confused, but if you'll forgive me, that doesn't bother me as much as it interests me. I now have my students practicing what I call post-post-connoisseurship, which is the rejection of the rejection of connoisseurship but (usually) without conclusions -- a kind of Heisenberg approach with odds on various possibilities, not concrete results. In the case of Riverbank, my own stylistic judgment aside, I am stymied by some social considerations. C.C. knew Zhang Daqian and his hand and his forgeries as well as anyone. I wonder why you think he was so easily "taken" in this case. Also, given the tale that was told regarding the trade for the Jin Nong, Xu Beihong's supposed involvement in this, etc -- all pretty darned wierd, it's true -- and your dating of the forgery to the early 1950s, and Xie Zhiliu's involvement, I wonder what you now make of all this, especially Xie Zhiliu, who it seems would have been well aware of the appropriation of his name in the matter. I think you are fond of detective tales, and this is certainly one of them. Finally, do you know what Fu Shen's take on all this is? I have never taken the opportunity to ask him about it and should know but do not. In the end, I can only encourage you to continue to speak your mind and not depend on the unpredictable results of your colleagues in the field. This is one for the ages.
All the best,
Jerome
PS. One of my students is finishing up her dissertation on the Palace Banquet painting, which by any standards, or by my standards at least, is a far better and more important painting than Riverbank. I believe that the Met took actual ownership of that painting by the end of last year -- at least that was intended.
PPS., Wen will be publishing on Riverbank again, sometime later on, under Tang Center auspices which does not imply our endorsement of his view.
Dear Jerome,
Thanks for getting back to me so quickly, and with such a lengthy and informative response. (I remember Svetlana once writing me “Thanks Jim for your fulsome response” and I had to tell her to look it up.) I won’t try to answer all your points--I’ve done my best, and if you still aren’t convinced, that’s the way it is, no help for it. I don’t like leaving things I’m sure about and care about unresolved, and I thought that when I show with lots of close-in details how the person who did the “aging” on Zhang’s fakes on silk used a distinctive, unmistakable pattern of ripping the silk, which can be seen on all of his fakes on silk but not on genuinely old paintings, and then I show how it’s all over Riverbank, as I do in my Addendum 2B, “Riverbank, A Closer Look,” that would have to mark the end of skepticism, no way of holding out against that. But I guess I was wrong--or haven’t you watched that last bit yet? I respect you, as always, but how anyone can watch that and still argue for Riverbank as some kind of old painting--well, I won’t continue. Please, go back and watch that last bit again? From about 20 minutes in, where I begin showing close-ups of Chang’s fakes on silk, and then a series of close-ups of Riverbank?
Yes, Wen is going to be publishing on Riverbank again, I suppose in connection with its showing in the coming Shanghai Museum exhibition. And it will keep coming back & back, like the Monster They Couldn’t Kill in a bad Hollywood horror movie.
Various points in your email that I should respond to--quite legitimate questions you raise; I’ll do that later. I just wanted to off this Frustrated Old Person’s Message first--WILL NOTHING EVER CONVINCE THEM? Augh.
Best, Jim
Dear Jerome,
Now I see that you wrote in your email that you had looked at “nearly all but not quite all” of my videos--which means you hadn’t yet looked through the very last, the one with the (I think) big revelation about Riverbank, titled Riverbank: A Closer Look. I do believe--hope--that when you see that, you will (like others who have seen it) recognize it as more or less definitive proof that Riverbank is a Chang Ta-ch’ien fake. (The other Addendum Part 2, which is about the “Authenticity” symposium and how heavily it was stacked, and about other people who believe as I do but didn’t go public about it, should interest you also--you appear in it, positively I assure you. And there are some pretty interesting revelations in that one too.)
Chang, as I explain there and elsewhere, took advantage of one big failing in traditional Chinese connoisseurship, one that I keep coming back to--necessarily, I think--at various points in my lecture series. I make it clear from the first lecture on that C.C. Wang was one of my major teachers, from whom I learned a lot. But I also have to point out, in several places, that because the Chinese system of connoisseurship depends so heavily on recognizing the hand of the artist, on brushwork, all that, it doesn’t work (mostly, literati ptg being an exception) for Song and earlier painting. And Chang was able to paint in a no-brushwork manner, as I show with lots of details. And CC was taken in by this and others of his fakes--he also bought, shortly before his death, for a high price at a New York auction, the handscroll loosely attrib. to Yan Wengui that had been in the Juncunc Collection. I show it in this last lecture, along with others of Chang’s fakes, before turning to Riverbank; and when you see it, and the comparisons of details with good Song paintings, you’ll understand better what I’m talking about. Mountain forms with absolutely no structure, flat patterns imposed on flat shapes. I have no compunction in making these demands on your time because it’s important to me that you understand this argument of mine while I’m around to read your response.
There are still more interesting things in your long email that I must respond to--the Li Gonglin not real?!! But Dick wrote a whole book about it!?) Those will have to come later.
Best, Jim
Jim,
Quick notes. Yes, the symposium lineup was ridiculously stacked against you. We all saw that at the time. Strangely, though, and I don't know if you know this
and I still don't really understand it, I was firmly instructed not to call on CC himself -- which of course I did, conspiring with Arnold to bring up this request for CC to speak. And re. Li Gonglin, Bob Harrist, too, has written
extensively on it but now at least has been persuaded to have serious doubts about it.
Jerome
PS. One of my students is finishing up her dissertation on the Palace Banquet painting, which by any standards, or by my standards at least, is a far better and more important painting than Riverbank. I believe that the Met took actual ownership of that painting by the end of last year -- at least that was intended.
Jerome: I failed to respond to this. If you mean the painting with lots of female figures and architecture that Mike Hearn published a good article on, I agree completely--old and important painting, one of CC’s that I always admired. I spend some time on it in one of my two Five Dynasties lectures (guessing at that date for the original of which this is a late Song copy?), accept Mike’s idea about the subject, and show two other paintings with more or less the same subject which happened to be in New York at the same time--I recall writing Mike that he could bring them together for an exhibition. Joke, but I show and discuss the other two, show details from the Palace Banquet including the ink-monochrome landscapes on the walls, etc. Tell your student to watch that and write me what she thinks of it--right or wrong. It’s about 40 minutes into Lecture 5.
I had dinner Friday night with Xu Beihong’s daughter Fongfong, whom I’ve known since she turned up many years ago in Berkeley and we took her in and helped her get started, eventually at Stanford. I brought up; again the matter of her father having helped out Zhang Daqian--there’s no question that he did, inscriptions by him etc. trying to establish that phony provenance. I told her it was no discredit to her father--Chinese artists & collectors did this all the time to help their friends, as CCWang once explained to me at length--costs them nothing much and they can share the proceeds somehow--look at all the major people who write colophons to the Cernuschi’s fake “Han Gan,” another creation of Zhang Daqian, or others of his. Similarly for Xie Zhiliu--he helped out an old friend, as did lots of others. Also Ding Xiyuan, who turned up at the symposium. Early on they--and Wen Fong and others--were making much of a supposed letter trying to give credence to that story about Riverbank--later they dropped it. It’s another writing by Xu Beihong aimed at supporting their story--Xu’s first wife got it in her divorce settlement before she moved to Taipei, and as I relate in one of my later writings on the subject, anybody can see it in a Taipei dealer’s place. The whole “provenance” falls apart at numerous places when you start really looking at it. Anyway, I await with interest your response to my “revelation” in my last Addendum part 2. I wrote a blog with Zhang Daqian remembrances and stories for my RA in Vancouver to post on my website, as he’s done--look at it there (jamescahill.info)--I relate a great Zhang story, an old one that most people now don’t know. And send them off to look at my Revelation at the end.
So, awaiting your response when you find time (I really want to see this matter settled while I’m still here), Jim
dear jim,
i have been writing something in my usual obsessive way -- for shanghai, further down the line, post-U.S. show -- and when i get in the groove i hate to get bounced out of it so i turn other things off. (it's also my first sabbatical semester since the late 1980s, although with grad students and on-the-road lectures it hasn't provided much extra time. anyhow, that's my excuse for not seeing all of your online lecture yet. but let me respond to your blog without having seen the lecture, with comments on two aspects of it. and i am thinking psychologically, as you are but differently. you are wondering how to rouse people to a level of response, as hasn't happened yet; i am sympathetic with that but don't know what the best way is. so for one thing, i think it is premature and counterproductive to label type B as intellectually dishonest. i think i grasp from the blog itself the gist of your latest additional argument, and if so, then it would seem that what people should do (and which you have presumably done already yourself) is to test this by looking hard for other examples of the same (i think you call it brickwork; whatever, the artificial ageing of the silk). maybe someone will turn up something that you missed, and that's entirely legit and to the point. don't put people down for wanting to do that. what you don't want to happen is what you try to guard against in your postscript, and that's the ZZZ response. but rather than excoriating people for nonresponsiveness -- people do that all the time -- why don't you just claim victory until someone arises to dislodge you. that is, from your point of view, emphasize the positive. you know and i know that it's hard for men (and women) of advocacy to change their minds, but even if you nudge us halfway in your direction, in a case like this, that would be quite an achievement. you need to avoid anything counterproductive, like pushing more of us into an even deeper silence. (i'm sure you will ask, does it get any deeper?) but exploit the gap between this painting being thought of as an important early painting and a bad early painting -- not that early must mean good (i think you hold early to a higher standard than i would), but i think there are very few of our colleagues who think this is a good early painting and lot who think it's maybe early but not very good. it's the latter you want to budge, and they are holding to a somewhat tenuous position, so go for them. the postscript doesn't help.
jerome
ps. i have seen your online lecture section on the "palace banquet" painting and really liked it, especially the two comparison pieces. i don't think that the paintings-within-paintings force quite as late a date as southern song but it's hard to say, and it could be that late; my tendency would have been to say early 12th century. i set my student to a different task, the one of dealing with it as real-or-fantasy architecture: how well can one draw a workable ground plan of the place (answer: partly, only; she's done a very good job with this) and where are the gaps between real architecture and architectural fiction (answer: this can be pinned down to several specifics). also, this is clearly only 1/2 or 1/4 or 1/whatever of a larger original set. where would this part have fit into the whole, and what would the other portion(s) have looked like? this is, today at least, counterfactual, but i think that it is at least partly answerable nonetheless. i'm disappointed that it won't be going to the shanghai exhibition and wonder why not. it was number 2 on the original list. i'll try to find out from mike hearn the answer to this and will let you know if i do.
Jerome,
I don’t mean to try to draw you into more Riverbank argument, but want to make my position clear, with respect to the various positions you outline in your email. For me, the old painting/later painting, good painting/bad painting distinctions are all artificial and irrelevant. I want it to be recognized as a modern work, a fake by Chang Ta-ch’ien; I want it out of our writings & lectures on old Chinese landscape painting forever; I know what it is, can prove what it is, have piled up evidence way beyond what should have been needed to shoot the painting down; and am simply frustrated at this point by all attempts to circumvent that simple recognition.
Also, and separately, I hope you agree when you do find time to look at the last lecture (Addendum 2B) that the pattern of artificial silk-breaking that I show over & over in Chang’s recognized fakes, and then show, just the same, here & there in Riverbank (and we could have added more), is distinctive enough, different enough from anything to be found on genuinely old paintings (why, if it were genuine damage from age & mistreatment, etc., would it be scattered in patches so quasi-evenly over the whole surface?) that I really believe it’s decisive, beyond challenge, so that… . etc.,leading to the judgment of intellectual dishonesty, which I’ll try not to spell out as I did, but find it hard to hold in--
Jim
Jim,
OK, I'm back on email. This morning, I had a half-hour talk with Freda, who is briefly at Princeton. I don't know if she is one of your designated 20 recipients or not and therefore whether or not she has seen you Addendum 2B. So I mentioned the matter in an indirect way, and not surprisingly, she commented that it was the technical studies that Mike Hearn had done of the materials which convinced her of the "earliness" (Song? Yuan?) of the painting. It is, of course, possible that this is a new painting on old, newly distressed silk. But her comment reinforces my sense that rather than trying to convince those of us who can't see the difference between 10th and 20th century in style that you do in the painting and don't know much about materials that you should try to convince the few who do know about materials to take your latest observations (still unseen by me; sorry!) into account with an open mind and see how they effect their sense of the overall equation. I can tell that your patience has pretty much run out, but all I can counsel is "patience." Let those who are knowledgable accept or, with the additional time it would take, try to refute your most recent claim and see what that comes to. I think that most of us would look on with genuine interest - I am not invested in any particular outcome but obviously find all of this enormously instructive, and I would like to continue learning from this case. Such a shame that John Winter is lost to us: there was a deeply knowledgable and eminently fair-minded player who could be a far better referee of the matter than I was. Is there no such other person around today?
Jerome
Dear Jerome,
Thanks for continuing to be engaged & advising me--this is all very helpful.
Yes, citing Mike’s study of the silk etc. is one way out. WF did that in his paper for the symposium, saying that it proved that Riverbank couldn’t possibly be a modern forgery by Chang Daqian. I cited this in my paper, and then the long footnote in his old “Forgeries” article telling how the Bodhisattva that is his main example there of Chang’s fakes was put through an exhaustive technical examination--the silk that is--at the Kyoto Nat’l Museum, and came through so positively that they were writing a scholarly article on it as a fine and reliable example of Tang-period silk--until they learned the truth. And WF concluded that we can’t trust technical exams, need to use our eyes; and I said that between the 1957 WF and the 1999 one, I would choose to believe the early one. And I still feel that way--he was right back then. The one person I know who has really made a serious study of the silk on which old Chinese paintings are done, Bob Mowry (he hasn’t published on this, although I’ve urged him to for years) wrote me--I cite this in my Addendum 1B and show his letter as I remember--wrote that even if the silk of Riverbank were really old, he wouldn’t accept it as an old painting. Likewise their clever trick of borrowing the BM “Juran” to hang beside it, and saying: Look, they don’t look alike! Therefore…
So…
Best, Jim
4.22.2012
dear Jim,
i've finally gotten around to your addendum 2B and your latest blog, and you may be disappointed by my response, but let's just say this is an initial response only and i suggested earlier that i would prefer to play the referee's role than that of the scorekeeper and emphasize looking at both sides of the situation. to use my referee's lingo, i've got to say, you clearly feel like you've gotten in a winning shot at the buzzer, but as far as others are concerned i don't think you can count on them regarding this as a slam-dunk. you may still find yourself operating in some kind of a parallel ball court! so let me respond with a few thoughts on two different counts. first, the new material, the so-called artificial distressing of the silk. and second, the trees, the water, the old stylistic stuff.
let's assume, to begin with, that you are right, that the distressing of the silk ought to run perpendicular to the rolling of the scroll, i.e., horizontal for a hanging scroll and vertical for a handscroll. i'd never thought of that, and i'm guessing that you hadn't either until recently. at any rate, it is both insightful and logical, but does the evidence bear this out? not being in a museum, i can only look at books, which is highly unsatisfactory, for all the obvious reasons: big paintings/little photographs; damaged paintings/careful repairs. even so, if i pull a few books off of the shelves and look at presumably-song paintings, i see some notable degree of exception to the otherwise logical principle. (i'm not talking about your "brickwork pattern"/simultaneous vertical-horizontal yet – i'll get there.) examples of vertical scrolls with vertical damage (all on silk, of course) : fan kuan, guo xi, li tang 1124, wen tong's s-shaped bamboo, cui bo, cat and peonies; and on into the yuan, khubilai khan hunting, and so forth. it's just not that uncommon. but i understand that's not quite what you're talking about. (and believe me/excuse me, i'm capable of misunderstanding and misconstruing your argument; but if i am, some others will be as well. apologies.) you are describing a more complicated pattern, and perhaps a closer look at some of these would reveal that full pattern but probably not; the wen tong seems to come closest. but i can name one other painting which you accept as authentic song that seems to me to fit exactly what you are talking about: the metropolitan's "li gonglin" xiaojing tu. you already know what i think about that work. anyhow, even in reproduction i think you can see this clearly: check out barnhart, p.l 5, among others. (again, i may be misunderstanding you or misreading, but i think not. you'll let me know.)
so, assume now that your are right about this distressing being abnormal and artificial. and accept that both riverbank and the "li gonglin" are characterized by it. does this make either or both of them a modern forgery? by zhang daqian? are there no other possibilities that need to be dismissed? i'm no materials expert. (i translated the yu feian book because what i didn't know, not because of what i did.) i can only imagine a few of the questions that others might ask, or a few of them anyhow; and others might come up with better, or at least more questions than i could. presuming (as you do) that this wasn't done by zhang daqian but by someone else (at his command, you would say, a Japanese mounter perhaps), how do you know that this was an intentional undertaking indicative of a forger's intent? isn't there some circularity in your reasoning? that is, all of the paintings become the product of zhang daqian because of their common pattern of distress and the pattern of distress becomes phony because they are all by zhang daqian. let's say i'm right about the xiaojing tu, of which zhang was not part of the chain of transmission but his friend c.c. wang was (c.c. inscription dated 甲辰, 1964 and a gap in documented transmission before that dating back to 1880). let's say zhang daqian saw the work, who knows when, perhaps 1952 (i'm making it up, of course) and said to himself, here's the distress pattern to get my mounter to imitate. or, let' say that zhang came by riverbank rightfully, as he claimed, and said to himself, here is the distress pattern to get my mounter to imitate when he helps me perpetrate my forgeries (the british museum Juran, for example). if i were a diehard holdout against your views, stubborn and committed and somewhat closed-minded but bound to defend my views and live by the ultimate logic of the matter, this is what i would throw back at you: prove to me that this could not have been the case. otherwise, demonstrate zhang daqian's authorship of the xiaojing tu. oh yes, one more painting that seems (to my untrained eye) to fit this distress pattern: the archaeologically excavated Karakhoto fragment (datable 1032-1226).
sherlock holmes always steps into a situation where lestrade thinks he solved the dilemma, and sherlock always demands alternatives, always finds the second or third way of thinking about things. i'm no sherlock, but i always suspect there are alternatives yet to be imagined and explored. to be guarded against: "believing is seeing." i have a bumper sticker hung up where my kids can see it: "don't believe everything you think." i'm not just trying to be contrarian, but i don't think we're there yet on this one. no way you could convince me this is a dong yuan. (i'm not even sure why his name is brought into it.) but even if it was a 20th-century painting, and that's a stretch still, it seems to me a stretch to attach it specifically to zhang daqian, whose other landscape forgeries are all so tacky compared to this one. so on to the style question.
the comparison of trees doesn't say to me what it does to you. they may share the same model but not the same hand. and if zhang daqian owned riverbank in all honesty, why wouldn't he have used it as a model. that would only be natural. fu shen says he did not, but maybe that is not entirely so. i think i can put my finger on two points where we differ: you argue for a higher standard of accurate, naturalistic depiction in all song painting than i would. you combine this with a conviction (as in your du jin argument) that the original tends to be more accurate in depiction than the copy (it seems to me this could go either way; a copyist can make mistakes or he can clean up a mess out of fear that jim cahill will find his work is a forgery). i think we can point to many examples of confused depiction in song painting: spatially mixed up, spongy, whatever. i demonstrated some of this in my own riverbank symposium talk / "issues in connoisseurship" essay, including details in riverbank that even you did not point out and also in the excavated liaoning scroll (the same problem there that you point out about the placement of the riverbank scholar's lodge) and in the guo xi, as well as (in my talk, which didn't make it into my written essay) the bizang chuan. do you not set too high a standard for the song? besides, we have so little that remains of song painting, we hardly know what diversity must have existed regionally and outside the ranks of those we think we know today as having set the standards back then. (e.g., the palace museum's juran, xiao yi obtains the orchid pavilion manuscript, both artist and title not to be believed: the guy has no clue as to how to paint a horse or a bridge, yet it could be an old painting.) i don't think the water in riverbank is all that hot, but so what? why should it be, if we don't insist on this being a masterpiece of the period? i do not find it upsetting, nor do i find it "unnatural." in seattle, i often crossed the floating bridge to bellevue and back and frequently observed that the water looked very much like this: blown by a hard wind making its way up from the south of lake washington, it took a highly uniform pattern of small waves just like this on the south side of the bridge, while on the north side of the bridge, which broke the wind pattern, it flattened out completely for hundreds of yards until farther north it gradually picked up the same pattern again. the water in the zhao gan is so varied in its flow around the shore and rocks precisely because it is not under such a force. and clearly, there is a storm pattern suggested in riverbank, so to me this is not the weakness that sherman lee tried to characterize it as being. i do not find this water at all comparable to that in the ho kungshang publication that you have recently illustrated online; likewise the trees. neither do i find the riverbank's turning of a walkway into a riverway disturbing. i have seen that happen in many a painting, both chinese and western. (example: domenico ghirlandaio's famous grandfather and grandson, where i suspect it has some "path of life" significance; example closer to home: the first section of li gonglin's composition longmian shanju tu, berenson coll.) conversely, among the striking weaknesses of the painting, the disappearing mountain tops. but where else in a zhang daqian forgery do we find this? in his modern splashed ink style, sure. but in his forgeries and even his loose "studies" of the past, he wouldn't do this, and why would he if he were trying to fake us out? surely he knows how to finish off a mountain peak in song style. to me, this feature in isolation suggests just the opposite, that it is not a modern forgery, at least not by any modern forger with half a brain. as for the figures in riverbank, i don't find the main figures particularly "dramatic," as you suggest. no more than those in many a song figures-in-landscape painting (the Nelson "Li Cheng"; the Freer "Guo Xi"; etc). words become a problem: sure they're "dramatic" if you expect "no drama," but that's why we use dual projection – words have little meaning except as calibrated by chosen examples.
so Jim, i am surely disappointing you here. you thought i was so sensible and all, that surely i could be persuaded. but please note: i am not saying you are wrong, and it is not that i could not possibly be persuaded. but i am very much an agnostic, and it would take a lot for me to feel like anyone has pinned this painting down to any given century, 10th, 11th, 14th, whatever, and i don't find that particularly disturbing or that it says anything bad about our field of study. furthermore, i don't hesitate to say that you are far ahead of me in connoisseurship, and so too are many others whose updated responses i would very much like to hear. i admire greatly your challenge not just to the metropolitan-princeton "in-crowd" but to us all, plus all the enormous effort you have put into thinking about this. you set a high personal standard and i hope you will not be discouraged by any of us, whether we speak up or because we sit still. and still, i hope you will allow some leeway for those of us who think hard about this but think otherwise.
jerome
ps. if you ever wish to put this online for folks to think about open-mindedly, as you have done with a few other items lately, here is my permission to do so.
Dear Jerome,
At the end of your long latest response you suggest that we might put the whole correspondence online “for folks to think about open-mindedly,” and you give your permission. I certainly agree, and will do that. You are welcome to respond to this message of mine, and maybe that will be a good time to end it--I don’t think we are getting anywhere, into new areas of agreement & disagreement.
You wonder near the beginning whether I will be disappointed with your response--well, let’s say that I did have some hope that if I presented enough examples of distinctive features to be seen in Riverbank that are to be found in Zhang Daqian’s fakes but not in any genuinely old paintings, that might sway you. But you continue to stay in the “referee” role that you adopted during the 1999 Symposium, and adamantly decline to accept what seems me to be overwhelming evidence. (I think I will insert here, as Fig. 1, the photo of you in your striped referee shirt giving that talk.) Together with a preposterous “provenance” that can be shown to have been concocted (as I did in my long paper back then), the new visual proofs that I’ve brought together--or that have been supplied by a supporter--should be enough to let the painting join van Meegeren’s “Supper At Emmaus” among the distinguished examples of high-level fakery that the history of art offers. But alas, they don’t seem to.
It appears to me that you are re-stating my arguments in a way that pulls away their NO WAY OUT character, and then trying to find a way out. Your long paragraph on the “distressing of the silk” is an example. If I had been writing and talking only about old paintings on silk with both horizontal and vertical cracking, yes, I could find a lot of them too. But in my Addendum B Part 2 I showed something much more specific, and damning: the visually distinctive “brickwork pattern” seen at scattered places on the surfaces of Zhang’s fakes on silk, on all the examples I show. And then there it is, unmistakably, on Riverbank. And if you try to find that distinctive visual feature in genuinely old paintings, I don’t think you will succeed. Others will try also, for sure, and will proclaim that they have found old examples, but I don’t believe that their finds will bear up under close scrutiny. (When I get back to Vancouver I’ll look at my images from the Li Gonglin Xiaojing tu scroll and see whether my ‘brickwork pattern” really appears there, as you suggest. I’ve never thought of including that painting among my list of Zhang fakes.)
You write about the mountaintop that disappears into mist: “the disappearing mountain tops. but where else in a zhang daqian forgery do we find this? in his modern splashed ink style, sure. but in his forgeries and even his loose "studies" of the past, he wouldn't do this, and why would he if he were trying to fake us out? surely he knows how to finish off a mountain peak in song style.” But the truth is that it is to be seen in another of Zhang’s forgeries, the “Juran” landscape formerly owned by J.D. Chen. I pointed this out in my old lecture on Zhang’s fakes, which is on my website as:
CLP 16: 1991 "Chang Ta-ch'ien's Forgeries of Old Master Paintings." Symposium, Sackler Museum, D.C
I think you were present, certainly Wen Fong and Dick Barnhart were. Here are two excerpts from this old lecture-article. (The (S,S) marks are for slides I was showing.) The first excerpt is from around the middle of the lecture, the second from near the end:
“(S,S) The two large, impressive paintings purportedly by Tung Yüan and Chü-jan that were among the treasures of the Hong Kong collector J. D. Chen are both based on identifiable prototypes. . . . (Notice, by the way, how the mountaintop in the Chu-jan forgery disappears entirely, not through damage but simply through not being there; we will note the same curious feature later in what I believe to be another of Chang's creations.)
“(--S) All the elements I have been trying to define as characteristic of Chang's style come together in this much-praised work [Riverbank], ascribed to Tung Yüan and bearing his "signature". The composition is paralleled more closely in Chang's paintings (such as the two we have just seen) than in anything genuinely archaic, and is filled with spatially and formally unintelligible passages, which time does not permit me to point out individually. I have used the picture as a visual test for students in my early Chinese painting courses; the sharp-eyed ones point out, for instance, that what begins as a winding river in the distance turns imperceptibly into a road with figures walking on it. (I received for the first time a readable photograph of this painting from its owner, someone I respect highly, just as I was preparing the doctoral exams for Richard Vinograd, and gave it to him as a part of his connoisseurship exam; with no prior acquaintance with the painting, he analyzed it skilfully, coming, I think, to the right conclusion, that it could not be a genuinely old picture.)
“(S--) At the bottom, the same moody scholar leans on the balustrade of his porch and gazes out over the water. Here, too, he is surrounded by the kind of representational incoherence we saw in others of Chang's fabrications: spongy earth-masses of no plausible plastic form that blur ambiguously into trees and houses; a radical failure to attend to keeping one pictorial element distinct from another. The fact that the distant mountain disappears entirely at the top, as it does in the "Chü-jan" forgery shown earlier, cannot be explained as damage, or mildew, or mist; it simply isn't there. Chang, secure in his assumedly unfathomable murkiness of darkened silk, did not paint it in. (I hear a chorus of protest: Chinese artists were not concerned with such descriptive niceties of hsing-ssu or form-likeness. Wrong, I reply, they were; anyone arguing otherwise must explain why no comparable incoherence or form-faking can be found in reliably old Chinese paintings.)”
Back to you, Jerome: If you can look at the juxtaposition of passages of trees from Zhang’s old teaching pictures with those in Riverbank, in the composite image that John Rohrer sent me (reproduced with the previous blog), and not take those to be obviously done by a single hand, then we really are seeing with different eyes. Kohara-san and Sherman Lee, and others as documented in my other video (Addendum A Part 2), saw what I see--how can we two be so far apart? (I have introduced Sherman here mainly so to put on the photo of him, Mike Hearn, and myself seated on the stage at the Symposium as Fig. 2.)
My frustration, as you can guess, is that I can go on writing blogs and missives like this one endlessly, and those of our colleagues who choose to ignore them can go on doing so forever. My frustration is like the one I describe in one of my videos, which I would feel when C. C. Wang would ask me, standing in front of Riverbank with me, to explain to him why it’s not a great old painting. (See Fig. 3, C. C. Wang speaking up at the Symposium, through his daughter Yien-koo.) Short of sitting him down in a lecture room and showing him slides--or, today, in front of a computer and calling up the images--there was no way I could convey to him the compelling--even, now, decisive--visual evidence for what I know to be true. And that wasn’t going to happen. Nor can I, now, sit my learned colleagues down in a lecture hall and show them with slides all the new evidence, which I believe to be overwhelming. I can only hope that enough of them will look at the new stuff of their own accord, and that some of them will say, even publicly: Yes, he’s right, the evidence is too clear and abundant for us to continue to ignore it.
Your long response is useful, then, in giving me clues to how a lot of our colleagues are going to respond--if they do so at all. I expect that some of them will choose that passive kind of response, or lack of it: “Let’s just pretend he isn’t there, and maybe he will go away.” I will go away, but (I hope) not before I see to it that Riverbank joins the great corpus of recognized Zhang Daqian fakes, and the whole affair becomes as public and familiar as the van Meegeren/Vermeer series of forgeries. My old friend Mr. Zhang, who was much more versatile and altogether a better painter than van Meegeren--besides being far more likeable as a person--deserves nothing less.
Yours, Jim
(Sent later on same day:)
dear jim,
just in case i am wrong, here is how i can explain it
jerome
Dear Bob,
We haven’t been in touch for a while. Did I read somewhere that you are retired, or close to it? Anyway--I’m in Berkeley at the moment--I still go back & forth between here and Vancouver, where I continue to produce video-lectures, the main project of my later years. I included you among the twenty-or-so people who got advance notice of the additions at the end (Addenda A&B, Part 2 of each) about Riverbank. The first of these, about the famous symposium & how it was “stacked” etc., I put together from a file of old correspondence, including several letters to & from you, during the time I was preparing my paper for that--I hope you didn’t mind being mentioned & quoted (positively, of course.)
My old friend Carl Nagin, the former journalist who first broke the Riverbank story with a short New Yorker piece, as you remember, was here this afternoon, and I was talking about your study of old painting silks (which I’ve been urging you to publish for years, without success.) And he asked what your response might be to the new revelations about the silk on which Zhang Daqian’s fakes were painted, how it was “aged” (I assume by someone in Japan). I said I didn’t know, but I would write you. Have you had time to look at the “Riverbank: A Closer Look” video, into which I inserted at the last minute the series of images with commentary about my discovery: that all of Zhang’s forgeries on silk (all I have in good enough images to tell) have passages of this “brickwork” pattern scattered over them--including Riverbank--while it’s not to be found on any genuinely old paintings. That, at least, is what I argue, and I’ve looked through lots of old painting details. But Carl very sensibly would like to hear the opinion of the real expert on old Chinese painting silks, yourself. When you have time and if you are interested (as I hope you are) I hope you will look at this video and let us know what you think. Any comments at all, or any more about Zhang’s fakes on silk, will be very welcome. He is writing an article for publication on these new revelations, and wants to gather opinions from really knowledgeable and engaged people.
All the best, Jim
Back to Jerome
Dear Jerome,
At the end of your long latest response you suggest that we might put the whole correspondence online “for folks to think about open-mindedly,” and you give your permission. I certainly agree, and will do that. You are welcome to respond to this message of mine, and maybe that will be a good time to end it--I don’t think we are getting anywhere, into new areas of agreement & disagreement.
You wonder near the beginning whether I will be disappointed with your response--well, let’s say that I did have some hope that if I presented enough examples of distinctive features to be seen in Riverbank that are to be found in Zhang Daqian’s fakes but not in any genuinely old paintings, that might sway you. But you continue to stay in the “referee” role that you adopted during the 1999 Symposium, and adamantly decline to accept what seems me to be overwhelming evidence. (I think I will insert here, as Fig. 1, the photo of you in your striped referee shirt giving that talk.) Together with a preposterous “provenance” that can be shown to have been concocted (as I did in my long paper back then), the new visual proofs that I’ve brought together--or that have been supplied by a supporter--should be enough to let the painting join van Meegeren’s “Supper At Emmaus” among the distinguished examples of high-level fakery that the history of art offers. But alas, they don’t seem to.
It appears to me that you are re-stating my arguments in a way that pulls away their NO WAY OUT character, and then trying to find a way out. Your long paragraph on the “distressing of the silk” is an example. If I had been writing and talking only about old paintings on silk with both horizontal and vertical cracking, yes, I could find a lot of them too. But in my Addendum B Part 2 I showed something much more specific, and damning: the visually distinctive “brickwork pattern” seen at scattered places on the surfaces of Zhang’s fakes on silk, on all the examples I show. And then there it is, unmistakably, on Riverbank. And if you try to find that distinctive visual feature in genuinely old paintings, I don’t think you will succeed. Others will try also, for sure, and will proclaim that they have found old examples, but I don’t believe that their finds will bear up under close scrutiny. (When I get back to Vancouver I’ll look at my images from the Li Gonglin Xiaojing tu scroll and see whether my ‘brickwork pattern” really appears there, as you suggest. I’ve never thought of including that painting among my list of Zhang fakes.)
You write about the mountaintop that disappears into mist: “the disappearing mountain tops. but where else in a zhang daqian forgery do we find this? in his modern splashed ink style, sure. but in his forgeries and even his loose "studies" of the past, he wouldn't do this, and why would he if he were trying to fake us out? surely he knows how to finish off a mountain peak in song style.” But the truth is that it is to be seen in another of Zhang’s forgeries, the “Juran” landscape formerly owned by J.D. Chen. I pointed this out in my old lecture on Zhang’s fakes, which is on my website as:
CLP 16: 1991 "Chang Ta-ch'ien's Forgeries of Old Master Paintings." Symposium, Sackler Museum, D.C
I think you were present, certainly Wen Fong and Dick Barnhart were. Here are two excerpts from this old lecture-article. (The (S,S) marks are for slides I was showing.) The first excerpt is from around the middle of the lecture, the second from near the end:
“(S,S) The two large, impressive paintings purportedly by Tung Yüan and Chü-jan that were among the treasures of the Hong Kong collector J. D. Chen are both based on identifiable prototypes. . . . (Notice, by the way, how the mountaintop in the Chu-jan forgery disappears entirely, not through damage but simply through not being there; we will note the same curious feature later in what I believe to be another of Chang's creations.)
“(--S) All the elements I have been trying to define as characteristic of Chang's style come together in this much-praised work [Riverbank], ascribed to Tung Yüan and bearing his "signature". The composition is paralleled more closely in Chang's paintings (such as the two we have just seen) than in anything genuinely archaic, and is filled with spatially and formally unintelligible passages, which time does not permit me to point out individually. I have used the picture as a visual test for students in my early Chinese painting courses; the sharp-eyed ones point out, for instance, that what begins as a winding river in the distance turns imperceptibly into a road with figures walking on it. (I received for the first time a readable photograph of this painting from its owner, someone I respect highly, just as I was preparing the doctoral exams for Richard Vinograd, and gave it to him as a part of his connoisseurship exam; with no prior acquaintance with the painting, he analyzed it skilfully, coming, I think, to the right conclusion, that it could not be a genuinely old picture.)
“(S--) At the bottom, the same moody scholar leans on the balustrade of his porch and gazes out over the water. Here, too, he is surrounded by the kind of representational incoherence we saw in others of Chang's fabrications: spongy earth-masses of no plausible plastic form that blur ambiguously into trees and houses; a radical failure to attend to keeping one pictorial element distinct from another. The fact that the distant mountain disappears entirely at the top, as it does in the "Chü-jan" forgery shown earlier, cannot be explained as damage, or mildew, or mist; it simply isn't there. Chang, secure in his assumedly unfathomable murkiness of darkened silk, did not paint it in. (I hear a chorus of protest: Chinese artists were not concerned with such descriptive niceties of hsing-ssu or form-likeness. Wrong, I reply, they were; anyone arguing otherwise must explain why no comparable incoherence or form-faking can be found in reliably old Chinese paintings.)”
Back to you, Jerome: If you can look at the juxtaposition of passages of trees from Zhang’s old teaching pictures with those in Riverbank, in the composite image that John Rohrer sent me (reproduced with the previous blog), and not take those to be obviously done by a single hand, then we really are seeing with different eyes. Kohara-san and Sherman Lee, and others as documented in my other video (Addendum A Part 2), saw what I see--how can we two be so far apart? (I have introduced Sherman here mainly so to put on the photo of him, Mike Hearn, and myself seated on the stage at the Symposium as Fig. 2.)
My frustration, as you can guess, is that I can go on writing blogs and missives like this one endlessly, and those of our colleagues who choose to ignore them can go on doing so forever. My frustration is like the one I describe in one of my videos, which I would feel when C. C. Wang would ask me, standing in front of Riverbank with me, to explain to him why it’s not a great old painting. (See Fig. 3, C. C. Wang speaking up at the Symposium, through his daughter Yien-koo.) Short of sitting him down in a lecture room and showing him slides--or, today, in front of a computer and calling up the images--there was no way I could convey to him the compelling--even, now, decisive--visual evidence for what I know to be true. And that wasn’t going to happen. Nor can I, now, sit my learned colleagues down in a lecture hall and show them with slides all the new evidence, which I believe to be overwhelming. I can only hope that enough of them will look at the new stuff of their own accord, and that some of them will say, even publicly: Yes, he’s right, the evidence is too clear and abundant for us to continue to ignore it.
Your long response is useful, then, in giving me clues to how a lot of our colleagues are going to respond--if they do so at all. I expect that some of them will choose that passive kind of response, or lack of it: “Let’s just pretend he isn’t there, and maybe he will go away.” I will go away, but (I hope) not before I see to it that Riverbank joins the great corpus of recognized Zhang Daqian fakes, and the whole affair becomes as public and familiar as the van Meegeren/Vermeer series of forgeries. My old friend Mr. Zhang, who was much more versatile and altogether a better painter than van Meegeren--besides being far more likeable as a person--deserves nothing less.
Yours, Jim
Jerome’s Last
dear jim,
indeed, we do see things differently, and there's a whole lot more variation out there, to stand in the way of the consensus you are hoping for. but i agree that you and i have gone far enough with this one case and you've heard more than enough from me about it over the years. you ought to be hearing from others instead, but i can't help with that. besides, like a newspaper focusing on bad news, this obscures the far more frequent times when we've been in agreement and when i've been grateful to have your support. in the meantime, i'll check out the j.d. chen paintings you mentioned (yes, i was at that symposium) and you can let me know if you think the xiaojing tu matches your "brickwork pattern."
all the best,
jerome
Jerome 2
Latest exchange:
Jim,
OK, I'm back on email. This morning, I had a half-hour talk with Freda, who is briefly at Princeton. I don't know if she is one of your designated 20 recipients or not and therefore whether or not she has seen you Addendum 2B. So I mentioned the matter in an indirect way, and not surprisingly, she commented that it was the technical studies that Mike Hearn had done of the materials which convinced her of the "earliness" (Song? Yuan?) of the painting. It is, of course, possible that this is a new painting on old, newly distressed silk. But her comment reinforces my sense that rather than trying to convince those of us who can't see the difference between 10th and 20th century in style that you do in the painting and don't know much about materials that you should try to convince the few who do know about materials to take your latest observations (still unseen by me; sorry!) into account with an open mind and see how they effect their sense of the overall equation. I can tell that your patience has pretty much run out, but all I can counsel is "patience." Let those who are knowledgable accept or, with the additional time it would take, try to refute your most recent claim and see what that comes to. I think that most of us would look on with genuine interest - I am not invested in any particular outcome but obviously find all of this enormously instructive, and I would like to continue learning from this case. Such a shame that John Winter is lost to us: there was a deeply knowledgable and eminently fair-minded player who could be a far better referee of the matter than I was. Is there no such other person around today?
Jerome
Dear Jerome,
Thanks for continuing to be engaged & advising me--this is all very helpful.
Yes, citing Mike’s study of the silk etc. is one way out. WF did that in his paper for the symposium, saying that it proved that Riverbank couldn’t possibly be a modern forgery by Chang Daqian. I cited this in my paper, and then the long footnote in his old “Forgeries” article telling how the Bodhisattva that is his main example there of Chang’s fakes was put through an exhaustive technical examination--the silk that is--at the Kyoto Nat’l Museum, and came through so positively that they were writing a scholarly article on it as a fine and reliable example of Tang-period silk--until they learned the truth. And WF concluded that we can’t trust technical exams, need to use our eyes; and I said that between the 1957 WF and the 1999 one, I would choose to believe the early one. And I still feel that way--he was right back then. The one person I know who has really made a serious study of the silk on which old Chinese paintings are done, Bob Mowry (he hasn’t published on this, although I’ve urged him to for years) wrote me--I cite this in my Addendum 1B and show his letter as I remember--wrote that even if the silk of Riverbank were really old, he wouldn’t accept it as an old painting. Likewise their clever trick of borrowing the BM “Juran” to hang beside it, and saying: Look, they don’t look alike! Therefore…
So…
Best, Jim
dear jim,
yesterday i went down to d.c. to see the jakuchu exhibition from shokokuji. super stuff. used to take students down to joe price's place to see his jakuchus, but i've waited a long time to see this fabulous batch. it's a monster success for the national gallery. once there, i immediately ran into mike hearn. it turns out, he's saving the "palace banquet" painting for his own garden paintings exhibition coming up, so that's why it's not going to shanghai.
john rosenfield accepted the freer medal last night, but they never announced this event so lots of us who were down there yesterday had train reservations that left too soon for us to attend. really stupid of them and what a shame for many of us.
tonight, i'm interviewing gu wenda onstage. this coming monday, tuesday, thursday we're hosting three talks by claudia brown on qianlong projects: southern tours and topographic paintings; collecting and the shiqu baoji; art and he siku quanshu project. that's the pace of my "sabbatical." this weekend, i'll try to watch your new riverbank lecture and give you my qualified feedback.
best, jerome
Dear John,
I just heard the news, and am writing belatedly to congratulate you, no. 12 to no. 13. (Today’s Friday the 13th; but I was born on one so it’s lucky for me.) Definitely a fully deserved, if anything belated, honor for a great scholar-teacher. I look forward to reading your acceptance talk. How I remember the occasions when we were together, and wish we could have been for this one--but I’m not traveling any more. Barely to Berkeley, where I am now. So, warmest wishes and congratulations, old old friend and very distinguished one, as now recognized. You join--who--Yashiro, Tanaka Ichimatsu, Soper and Lee who did both China & Japan. So only third, really, for Japanese art. It’s been a sparsely populated field, in which you have towered high.
Best, Jim
Wednesday the 18th? Wrote Jerome to send him most of John Rohrer letter, and my response.
Dear Jim,
I did not get to your Add 2B last weekend as hoped. Many the reasons: 3 Chicago talks coming up, lots of grad student stuff as the semester rolls to a close. Perhaps the coming weekend. But I should be low on your target list, as a mild-mannered academic who believes that stylistic analysis is just a part of true connoisseurship (you've gone the extra distance, with your long museum background; I haven't). Besides that, I am not intellectually committed to my post-post-connoisseurship, which embraces not coming to conclusions except in unusual cases (OK, this could be unusual). Anyhow, I think that instead of targeting know-nothings like myself (I don't know who else is on your list of 20), you should focus on the few at the "top" who really understand not just style but materials. What a loss when John Winter passed. But I understand that someone with lots of materials know-how is there at the Freer conservation lab -- don't know a name but I briefly asked Steve Allee about their staffing. And Fu Shen, who knows Zhang's life in forgery so well but didn't think this could be by him. (I know that Lucy Lo, who knew Zhang well and watched him work many times also doubts he could have done this.) Target Fu Shen, target Mike Hearn, and whoever it was at the Met who did the materials studies that Mike published. You have more to gain by each one of them than by 5 or 10 of me. Well, hopefully this weekend will buy me some more free time. If I get to listen, I could probably be of greater service to you by lawyer-like saying, here are the lingering weaknesses in your argument (my dear siblings are lawyers, and we've always benefitted by trying to disagree even when we agree).
Jerome
Dear Jim,
I hope to get around to all this today. But I cannot find your latest blog, the one you mention with illustrations of trees. Please resend. Thanks,
Jerome
Dear Jerome,
Go to my website jamescahill.info. At the left is a p;icture and a title: More About Old Mr. Zhang. .. Down below that is written: Read more. Click on that and the whole thing will appear. I can’t send it, or don’t know how, with the pictures in place, and they matter.
Thanks as always for taking time for me and my fusses.
Best, Jim
Kunikida Doppo: His Place in Meiji Literature
Introductory Notes to Kunikida Doppo Translation:
What follows is a translation I made in 1948 or 1949, while I was a language officer in the Army stationed in Seoul, Korea, of a short story titled Ummei Ronsha (or is it Ronja?) by the Japanese romantic-naturalist author Kunikida Doppo (1871-1908). How did I “discover” Doppo, and why did I translate his story? I was then secretly meeting weekly--sometimes more often--with a young Korean woman, Ms. Kim--secretly because the Koreans then were intensely opposed to “fraternization” between their women and U.S. servicemen. Ostensibly, we met for language lessons--I taught her English, she taught me literary Japanese--but of course those were only preliminary to lovemaking. Her favorite Japanese author was Kunikida Doppo, and we painstakingly worked through several of his stories--another that I also translated, and will post here later if I can find my translation, was “A Child’s Sorrow.” After I had returned to U.C. Berkeley to become sn undergrad in their Oriental Languages Dept., I was faced with producing a “scholarly paper” for the first issue of their honors-society journal Phi Theta Annual, and I put together one about Doppo, attaching to it this same translation, in what was really my first publication. But the old Phi Theta Annual is long forgotten, and I “republish” my translation here, with these happy memories as preface. (If you are still out there somewhere, Ms. Kim: I love you.) I claim no scholarly value for my translation, but it makes accessible a good story, even if one with a familiar denouement--some of you will guess it before it is sprung on you.
James Cahill, February 2, 2012.
KUNIKIDA DOPPO:
HIS PLACE IN MEIJI LITERATURE
AND AN EXAMPLE OF HIS WORK
Paper For Phi Theta, Oriental Languages Dept.
Student Honour Society, by James Cahill, 1949
I. A Very Short Survey of Japanese Literature in the Later Meiji Period.
A. The Influence of the West.
Only a decade after the opening of Japan to the West, European Literature began to penetrate Japanese literary circles. The first Western novel to be translated into Japanese, Bulwer-Lytton’s “Ernest Maltrevers,” appeared in 1879, the twelfth year of the Meiji era. A flood of translations from various languages followed, and gave rise to a movement of reaction against traditional Japanese writing of the Bakin school. This was led by Tsubouchi Yuzo. Another writer of this period, Yamada Taketarō, inaugurated a movement to substitute the modern colloquial language for literary grammatical forms thus attempting to affect another break with the past. In the succeeding years, the new current of European influence swept over the Japanese literary world, bringing to it a hodgepodge of divergent styles and techniques, together with the revolutionary ideas of nineteenth century European political and social philosophy. The Japanese writer of the Meiju Period seems to have tried desperately to understand and absorb what he could of these, and inject them, sometimes only half-digested, into his own work.
By the third decade of Meiji, the dominant trend was that stemming from the English and German romantic writers, and the first of two important schools of Westernized literature in the Meiji era, the Roman-ha or Romantic School, was born.
B. The Romantic School.
The principal influences upon this movement were, naturally enough, the English romantic posts-Byron, Shelley, Wordsworth—and the Germans, Goeth and Schiller. Contemporary English writers, such as the Pre-Raphaelites, Rossetti and William Morris, and their spokesman on matters of aesthetics, Walter Pater, also exerted their influence in translation.
The characteristic literary form of the school was the shintaishi, or “new-style poetry,” which was concerned almost exclusively with the expression of emotional states. There were also novels produced, but of these it is difficult to say much; I have read none in the original, and the translators seem to have avoided them. From the summaries of a few given in the Kokusai Bunka Shinkōkai’s Introduction to Classic Japanese Literature, however, it is evident that their authors have carefully copied the worst features of their role models.
In his Introduction to Contemporary Japanese Literature, Yoshikazu Kataoka states that the romantic movement in Japan was short-lived because of “the peculiar social conditions of the country.” But it was only the Romantic School which was short-lived; the spirit of romanticism continued to dominate Japan’s literature long after her writers had chosen to call themselves by another name. One suspects that the death-blow to the school itself was actually given by the Western critics who appeared in Japanese translation telling how romanticism was being supplanted in the West by other literary movements—realism, naturalism, and all the other “isms” which flourished in the last decades of the century. The Japanese writers, already a half-century behind the Western world in becoming romanticized, could not afford to lag behind again.
C. The Naturalistic Movement.
When one reads an account of the situation of Japanese literature around the turn of the century and in the first decade following it, he sees a vision of the Japanese literary men drawing a complicated chart of the course of development which their literature should take—beginning with main currents, branching into a maze of small schools, movements rising and falling, revivals and reactions—then fitting themselves into it neatly, everyone in his proper place. Of course this is exaggerated, but it is the impression that remains when one has read of the Realists, the Aesthetes, the Decadents, the Satanists, the Neo-Romanticists, the Idealistic Romanticists, the Neo-Realists, the Romantic Naturalists and a host of others. Contrary to the usual practice, the designation seems to have preceded the works which is designated, and while no group of Western writers would be likely to style themselves “decadents,” the Japanese took pride in applying such terms to themselves and trying to produce works which fitted their chosen appellation.
It is probable that two forces combined to produce this peculiar situation of a priori literary criticism: the traditional Oriental system of artistic “schools,” to one of which the artist allies himself, making its aims and methods his own, combined with the influence of European literary criticism and its terminology.
The Naturalist School, which flourished in the fourth decade of Meiji, or from about 1897 to 1910, seems to have derived its name from a work of the English critic George Saintsbury dealing with late nineteenth century French literature-Zola, De Maupassant and others. The Japanese literary historians ascribe the formation of the school to the writers’ realization of the need for portrayal of actual conditions, instead of the theories and ideals of the romanticists. Like their models, they hoped to apply scientific methods of observation to the subject-matter of literature, to portray the world as it is, with no “editorial comment.” One of the early exponents of the movement, Kosugi Tengai, voiced their attitude as follows:
“Nature is Nature; there is no good, bad, beauty or ugliness; it is only that a certain person in a certain place at a certain time seizes a portion of this Nature and attaches to it the name ‘good’, ‘bad’, ‘beautiful’ or ‘ugly.’”
The Nippon Bungaku Zenshi (Complete History of Japanese Literature) divides the Naturalist School into three sub-schools:
1. The “Naturalists Proper”—a term used by Saintsbury to apply to Zola and his followers—those who attempted an objective scientific examination of human beings and their emotions.
2. The Impressionistic Naturalists, who concentrated on putting on to paper the writer’s impression of his subject. The model for this group was
De Maupassant.
3. The Romantic Naturalists—a name borrowed from Dosanquet’s “History of Aesthetics,” where it is applied to certain English writers from Wordsworth to Ruskin. Writers of this school are “romantic” in that they see Nature as a manifestation of the benevolence of God, and “naturalistic” in that they attempt to copy this Nature accurately. That is, they are romantic in outlook and naturalistic in method. The chief representative of this branch is Kunikida Doppo.
II. Kunikida Doppo.
A. Biographical.
In the first year of Meiji, an enterprising member of the Kunikida family, which was centered at Tatsuno, set out on a sea journey and was shipwrecked off the west coast of Chiba Prefectur, near the town of Chōshi. Instead of returning to his homeland, he settled there and married. Kunikida Kamskichi, later to become Kunikida Doppo, was one of a number of offspring of this union. He was born in the fourth year of Meiji, 1871.
When he was four, the family began to travel from place to place eventually settling in Yamaguchi. From the time he entered school until his death Doppo lead a lonely life. Shortly after he entered the Yamaguchi Middle School, his family moved away, leaving him along. According to reports of those who knew him as a boy, he was rebellious by nature, always getting into fights and scratching his schoolmates; this got him the nickname “Scratching Turtle.” He was small and weak, and this was his only method of defence.
When he was seventeen, he came to Tokyo and began to study English at the Tokyo Semmon Gakkō. Later he transferred to the Political Science Department, where he initiated a movement to have the principal of the school discharged and ended by being expelled himself.
By the time he had reached the age of twenty-two, he had opened a private school and was teaching English and mathematics. He soon left this, however, and began to lead a drifting existence, working as a newspaper reporter, teaching in schools, and contributing to a magazine called
Kokuman-no-Tomo (The People’s Friend.) At the age of twenty-five he married, but was deserted by his wife the following year. He married again at twenty-nine, and again the marriage lasted only a short time.
His first publication, aside from contributions to magazines, was a book of poems called simply Jojōshi (Lyrics.) His first collection of stories, Mushashino, appeared in 1898. Other collections follow this, and met with great; gradually he attained a position as one of the leading writers of his time. His stories, many of which were published originally in pictorial newspapers, were extremely popular. In 1908 he died at the age of 38, after years of illness, during which he continued to write prolifically.
B. His Place in Literature.
A perusal of the references to Kunikida Doppo in various Japanese histories of Meiji literature reveals the fact that he is not so easily fitting into a niche and given his place in the system as one would suppose from the foregoing. One critic, Kataoka Yoshikazu, maintains that he is fundamentally a romanticist who, when faced with the unpleasant aspects of human life, reacted in a way which produced works superficially naturalistic. The theoretical idealistic line of thought, he says, when obstructed by the disharmony of reality, caused him, in the person of his characters, to turn to fatalism, the concept of the human being pushed into a corner by malignant forces; or to try to gloss over the ruin of their lives by abandoning them to drunkenness or sensualism. But the objective attitude of “naturalism,” this critic says, is not present.
Another, Iwashiro Juntarō, points out the similarity between his works and the European naturalists’ “problem novels;” his plots are not concerned primarily with a hero, but with a problem which is usually in the form of an intellectual impasse rather than an emotional entanglement.
The most satisfactory way to obtain a view of his aims and ideals which is relatively free from this confusion of vague terminology is, of course, to read his own words. Toward the end of his life, he stated his belief on the position of the author in society very plainly.
“A writer is a man who sets down on paper truth, beauty, humanity. As such he is a teacher and friend to the common people. He should set down nothing but what he feels, sees, knows—things of this mysterious world.... He should be a vanguard for mankind as it rushes through the darkness of the world. Mankind, receiving from him this report of what he sees, feels and thinks, forget onward. Thus he fulfills the function of an oracle, passing the words of God to humanity.”
Here, to return once more to our picture of Doppo as combining two currents, we have the naturalistic portrayal of things as they are, and the romantic role of oracle or interpreter.
Another revealing passage is found in the preface to a collection of his poems called Doppo-gin (Songs of Doppo). Writing on the subject of form in poetry, he says:
“My opinions on poetic form are extremely free. The 5- and 7- syllable line is all right; the form which sounds like direct translation from Chinese poetry is all right; the form of the popular song or folk song is all right. I advocate the extensive use of Chinese compounds; the use of ‘pillow words’ can also be very effective in some cases. When a person is swept away by a state in which he can’t help uttering poetry, he is forced to make poems. If this happens, although the exterior form may look like prose, there will be fervour; it will be spontaneous poetic utterance, and furthermore it will have a strength which is difficult to match in the monotonous tones of 5- and 7- syllable verse.”
There is no mistaking the literary antecedents of this statement—with a few alterations, it might have come from the pen of one of the English romantic poets. The relegation of form to a position of comparative unimportance, the “divine inspiration” concept of poetic creation which sees poetry is a spring that flows forth spontaneously and cannot be dammed up – both are typically romantic.
The attitude which Doppo wanted most to cultivate, he said, was one of continual surprise at the mysterious phenomena of the universe. He wanted to face the world naked, having cast off all restraints of habit and custom, to be sensitive to the wonders of Nature. In this we hear unmistakable echoes of “The world is too much with us---.” And these echoes are accounted for when we read of Doppo’s devotion to Wordsworth, from the time he was a teacher of English in Kyūshū, and of how in his imagination he transformed the countryside of Japan into the English Lake Country.
The spirit of his writing, then, is that of Wordsworth; the technique of narrative, on the other hand, owes much to the Russian novelists, chiefly Turgenev and Tolstoi, whom he acknowledges to be important influences upon his work. The underlying feeling of tragedy – in the case of his novelette
“The Fatalist” this amounts to morbidity—is akin to the gloom which pervades Russian fiction.
One characteristic of Doppo’s stories which strikes the occidental reader as a serious flaw is the practice of leaving his characters, at the end of his stories, in a state of despair or impotent helplessness instead of either solving their problems or showing the tragic results of their failure to solve them. This exasperating habit of creating complex situations and then leaving them unresolved appears to be characteristic of modern Japanese plot structure, and is manifested in the typical ending of a Japanese serious motion picture, which shows its characters solving their dilemma by boarding a plane to Manchuria, there to begin a new life. It leaves one with the feeling which would result from seeing a production of Hamlet which omitted the last act and left its hero undecided as to the best course of action.
From the fact that it occurs most commonly in modern Japanese literature, one might suppose this practice to be an importation from the West, perhaps from the Russians, who are guilty of it on occasion. But I think it is more likely that it arose in Japan, as it probably did elsewhere, as a reaction to all unnatural and artificial plot-endings, to the unnecessary violent death, the dues ex machina, the forced solution – and, as commonly happens with reactions, it went to the opposite extreme, to the point where, for an unnatural resolution of the situation, there was substituted a total lack of any resolution at all.
Of course Doppo would answer that he is portraying actual conditions, and that the real world is full of loose ends and unfinished plots. But, whatever the naturalists may say to the contrary, art and life must be distinguished; and however accustomed the reader may be to unresolved situations in his own experience, he demands that a work of art be rounded off in some satisfying manner. So, although we can thank our author for not relying upon the traditional Japanese expedient of suicide in order to dispose of his characters, we can also wish that his conclusions were a bit more conclusive.
In examining the influences upon Doppo, we have until now totally ignored one important factor: the remains of the truly Japanese literary tradition surviving in this period.
In the case of Kunikida Doppo, these remains are hard to discern. Of Tokugawn fiction, nothing remains; whatever Japanese elements are there seem to be derived from the poetry of Japan rather than its prose. One can speak of a delicate atmospheric quality in his descriptive passages—of a pleasantly melancholy nostalgia – of imagery which reminds one of the haiku and tanka poets—but of nothing concrete. But it is this poetic quality, however, undefinable, which is my chief excuse for offering this translation. Without it, the works of Doppo could be called Japanese only in language and locale.
Bibliography:
Homma Hisao: Maiji bungakushi.
Iwaki Juntarō: Meiji Taishō no kokubungaku. Tōkyō, 1931.
Iwaki Juntarō: Keiji bungakushi, Tōkyō, 1932.
Kataoka Yoshikazu: Kindai Nippon no sakka to sekuhin. Tōkyō, 1939.
Kokusai Bunka Shinkōkai: Introduction to classic Japanese literature. Tōkyō, 1948. (In English)
Kokusai Bunka Shinkokai: Introduction to contemporary Japanese literature. Tōkyō, 1939. (In English)
Niyajima Shinsaburō: Meiji bungaku junikō. Tōykō, 1932.
THE FATALIST*
I.
Toward the middle of autumn, with winter coming on, the ocean beaches become desolate, unfrequented, and the figures of visiting townspeople are rare. Even Kamakura beach, so popular in the summer months, is all but deserted when the summer passes; besides the year-round residents such as myself, it is unusual to see on it anyone except the village children, the beach-combers, the men who fish with hand-drawn nets, or the peddlers walking along the shore.
On an afternoon at this time of the year I took my usual walk near the Nameri River, and climbed to the top of a steep sand-dune; but, the cold north wind penetrating my clothes, I soon descended to its base and looked about for a sunny spot where I could lie comfortably and read my book. Finding no suitable place nearby, I walked around among the sand hills and at last came upon what I wanted.
Here the sand dune fell away sharply, forming a miniature cliff precariously held up by grass roots. If one sat in the network of these roots, leaning back against the sand cliff and resting his right elbow on a conveniently-placed rise, it gave him much the same feeling of ease as sitting in a sofa.
I took out the novel I had brought and began to read. The sky shone with the brightness of the sun. From where I sat I could not see the ocean, or hear any voices; only the dull, heavy sound of the waves rolling on to the shore. Within a short time, I had become completely absorbed in the book.
*The text is that of the Gendai Nippon bungaku zenshu, Tokyo, 1928-31, vol. 15: “Kunikida Doppo Shu” pp. 82-95.
Suddenly hearing a noise, I raised by head and saw a person standing four or five yards away. I had no idea when or whence he had come, and it was quite as though he had issued forth from the depths of the earth. I looked at him in surprise; he was about thirty, a thin figure with a long face and a high nose. From his general appearance and the quality of his clothes, he might have been taken at first glance for a person from one of the summer houses nearby, or for a gentleman stopping in a travelers’ hotel.
As he continued to stand there and stare at me fixedly, the look in his eyes made me more surprised and a little uneasy. It wasn’t strong enough for the angry look of one confronting an enemy, and was too dull for a look of mistrust or suspicion. But there was something disquieting about it, something which differed from the simple curiosity of one stranger regarding another.
Thinking to myself what a strange fellow this was, I stared back at him for some time. At last he cast his eyes downward to the sand and began to walk about silently, step by step, never leaving the hollow in which I sat, but only circling inside it, and from time to time glaring at me grimly.
Under circumstances so strange as these I became more uneasy and decided to move away. I stood up and climbed to the top of the sand dune, then looked back to see this strange man throw himself suddenly on to the place where I had been sitting! Instead of looking after me as I have expected, he rested his arms upon his raised knees and buries his face between them.
The unnaturalness of his actions made me want to stay and watch; so I spread myself a seat of dry grass near the edge and again began to read my book, raising my head occasionally to peer over at him.
He remained motionless for some time. When I had waited for almost ten minutes, he got to his feet with the strengthless movements of a sick man, wheeled around where he stood until he faced the sand cliff, and fell to digging into his base with his right hand.
The object he dug out was a large bottle. He took a handkerchief from his pocket and wiped the sand from it, produced a small cup, pulled the cork from the bottle and gulped down the bottle, and, holding the cup in his hand, raised his head proudly and looked into the sky.
After this he drank another cupful. He looked about and seemed to see me watching him. Still with the cup in his hand, he walked toward me in long strides, with a force in his walk that differed greatly from his previous appearance of weakness. For a moment I thought of rising and fleeing, but quickly changed my mind and continued to sit there as he came to my side and said in a hoarse voice, with a strange smile,
“Were you watching what I did just now?”
“Yes, I was, “ I answered clearly.
“Do you think it’s alright to pry into people’s secrets?” he asked, smiling still more suspiciously.
“No, I don’t think it’s alright.”
“Then why do you pry into my secrets?”
“I think I’m free to read a book here if I please.”
“That’s beside the point,” he said, looking for a moment at my book.
“I don’t see that it’s beside the point at all. Whatever we want to do, so long as we don’t harm other people, we’re both free to do. I you have a secret, I should think you would take more care to keep it secret in the first place.”
At this he became restless and began to scratch his head as if he would tear out his hair.
“That’s so, that’s so. But that’s as secret as I could make it—“
He was silent for a time, then continued more coolly. “I was wrong in blaming you; but could you please keep what you have just seen a secret, as a favour to me?”
“Of course I’ll keep it a secret, if you want. After all, it’s no concern of mine.”
“Thank you. In that case, I can feel at ease. But I’ve really been very rude, suddenly accusing you like that.” He apologized meekly, dropping his former aggressive attitude. I felt rather sorry for him, and said,
“There’s nothing to apologize about; I just thought it so strange when you stood over there in front of me and looked at me like that, that I sat down here and watched you out of curiosity. To tell the truth, I was spying on you; but if you say it was a secret, I’ll keep your secret safe, you needn’t worry.”
He looked into my face silently, then said, “Yes, you’re a person who will keep a secret. How about it, will you have a cup of my liquor?”
“Liquor? No thanks; for my part, I think it better not to drink.”
“Not to drink! Not to drink! Of course it’s better. If I could get along without drinking, it would certainly be better for me. But I go on drinking. That’s my destiny. What about it, isn’t our meeting and talking like this even a strange sort of destiny, determined by fate, and won’t you have a cup of my secret liquor on the strength of that, just a cup?”
“All right, if you put it that way, I’ll have a drink.” As soon as I said this, he jumped to his feet and walked quickly to the place where I had first seen him. I followed behind.
II.
“This is high class brandy. I’m not a person of expensive tastes myself, but I went up to Tōkyō the other day, to the Kameya store on the Ginza, and secretly bought three bottles of the very best, bringing them back here and hiding them. One is gone already, and the empty bottle thrown into the Nameri River. This is the second; the third is still buried in the sand. When that’s gone, I’ll go buy more.”
I took the cup which he held out to me and sipped the brandy slowly, listening to what he was saying. And As I listened, I couldn’t help becoming more and more curious about him. But I had no thought of entering into his secret.
“When I came here a while ago and unexpectedly found you invading my private sanctuary, it gave me quite a shock; I though you an impudent fellow, coming here and violating the privacy of my liquor-cache, forcing your way unasked into my drinking party, and then sitting here looking innocent and reading a book—that’s why I stayed and watched you instead of going away,” he went on. In the look of his eyes it seemed to me I could see his truly mild, honest nature, and by now he had become in my mind a pathetic rather than a suspicious figure. So I answered, smothering a laugh, “
“That’s true; otherwise you’d have had no reason to glare at me like that. It certainly was a bitter look.”
“No, not really bitter—just unsympathetic. I was cursing fate, which had caused someone to come and plant his posterior on my hidden bottles of brandy. No, it sounds pretty dreadful to say “cursing”—actually I didn’t take such a terrible view of it as that. It’s really the other way, you know it’s fate that’s cursing me. Do you believe in fate? Yes, in fate. Here, have another cup.”
“No, thanks, I’ve had quite enough,” I said, handing him back the cup. “I’m not a fatalist myself.”
He took another cup of brandy myself, and said, his breath redolent of alcohol, “Then you’re an accidentalist?”
“I believe only in the law of cause and effect.”
“But it isn’t just a matter of the causes originating with human beings and the effects descending upon their heads; there are also many cases of people receiving effects brought about by causes outside of human power. In such cases, surely you feel the superhuman force known as fate?”
“I feel an other-than-human force, but it’s a natural one. Since I believe that the natural world operates only in accordance with the law of cause and effect, I don’t see how you can attach any such mysterious appellation as ‘fate’ to this force.”
“Aha, I understand. Then you think that there’s nothing mysterious in the universe, you think that the significance of human life in this universe is simple and clear, you think that two and two make four, that everything fits together perfectly. I’ll tell you, your universe has no solidity, it’s flat. For you the boundless, the infinite, aren’t matters of any great urgency, which you need ponder deeply or regard with any awe or even interest. You belong to the company of mathematicians who want to the infinite into a series of continuities and express it by a formula!”
Following this outburst, he heaved a sign as if in pain, and continued in an icy, sneering tone.
“But actually that’s a good thing—in my words, you’re one who’s blessed by fortune, and in your words I’m the unfortunate recipient of an adverse effect.”
“Well, I think I’ll be going on now,” I told him, getting up to leave. At this he pulled me back in consternation.
“You’re not angry, are you? If I’ve said something that offended you, I beg your pardon. I myself suffer so much from these stupid, worthless thoughts that I was just babbling them out indiscriminately. But somehow I felt that I wanted to talk to you freely, and I became feverish. I suppose you’ll laugh at me for it, but I feel it was a strange destiny that brought us together here. Won’t you sympathize with me and talk a little longer, just a little more?”
“But I haven’t anything in particular that I want to talk about –“
“Oh, don’t say that, stay here a little while longer! Why do I say such unreasonable things to you? It is because I’m drunk? It’s fate, that’s what it is, fate. Good; if you haven’t anything to talk about, I’ll do the talking and you listen. Won’t you just listen, please? To the story of how I have been cursed by fate?”
No one could have helped being moved by this painful cry. I sat down again and said, “Of course I’ll listen. I’ll listen to whatever you have to say, if you don’t mind telling me.”
“You’ll listen? Then I’ll begin – but you’ll have to remember as I speak that I’m a person who has been led astray by a strange destiny. If you want to call it cause and effect, that’s all right too. Only the causes and effects have their origin outside of human will; and if you knew how, on that account, one young man has fallen into unlimited misery. I think you would agree that it’s not unreasonable of me to think of it as a force of destiny. Well then, I’d like to ask you: Suppose there were a man here, walking along aimlessly, and suddenly a stone were to come flying from an unknown point, hit him on the head and kill him; and suppose that by his death his wife and children were brought to the verge of starvation, and that parents and children were caused to fight among themselves, involving them in a terrible tragedy ending even in bloodshed. Do you think it possible for such a situation to exist in this world?”
“Whether it does exist or not I don’t know; but it could exist, that I believe.”
“I thought you would. Well, there you have a case of terrible misery being inflicted upon human beings by a completely unforeseeable cause, by what seems like mere chance. My own case is exactly that; it’s as if I were being played with an almost unbelievably malign force of fate. I call it that, because there’s no alternative explanation in which I can believe,” he sighed. “But will you really listen to me?”
“Certainly I shall. Please go on.”
“Then let’s begin with this liquor. You probably think it strange for me to be drinking like this, but actually alcohol is used very commonly in the world as a soporific or to cause forgetfulness. The reason I hide it in the sand like this is that the situation in my home forces me to keep my drinking secret; also, this place is so quiet and cheerful that whatever poisonous devil of fate comes to spy upon me, he can’t cast his dark shadow here. This place suits my spirit perfectly; when I lie down here, consign my body to the power of the alcohol and gaze high up into the sky, my soul becomes free. The violence of the alcohol further damages my already weak heart; the final result of it, I expect, will be my self-destruction.”
“Do you mean you’re looking forward to suicide I asked, appalled.
“Not suicide but self destruction. Fate wouldn’t allow even my suicide. You know, one of the tools used most skilfully by the devil of fate is called ‘bewilderment. ‘ Bewilderment changes sadness into suffering , and then causes this suffering to multiply upon itself. Suicide requires determination; how could a man who is suffering from bewilderment resolve to take such a step? So there is no way of escaping from this dull heavy pain, bewilderment, except the dull way of self-destruction.” The shadow of hopelessness moved across his face as he spoke.
“I don’t know what reasons you may have, but it wouldn’t be right for me, if I knew a person were going to commit suicide, to do nothing but stand by and watch. That you call self destruction is no different from suicide,” I said.
He smiled and answered, “But a person is free to kill himself if he wants.”
“Perhaps so, but a person is also free, or rather obligated, to prevent this if he is able.”
“All right, go ahead. I don’t really want to destroy myself, you know; and if, after hearing my story through, you can devise a plan to save me, nothing will make me happier.”
Hearing this, I couldn’t remain silent. “Good,” I said. “Please tell me everything. This time it’s I who make the request.”
III.
My name is Takahashi Shinzō (the young man began), but the family name, Takahashi, is an adopted one; by original family name was Ōtsuka. I shall begin then, with the time I was still known as Ōtsuka Shinzō , son of Ōtsuka Gozō. Perhaps you have heard of him—he was a judge in the Tōkyō Court of Appeals, and was rather well-known in the world. He was an upright man, and went to great pains to educate me properly. However, the unfortunate fact was that, from the time I was a child, I hate learning of any sort, and liked nothing better than to withdraw into the shadows and indulge in idle dreams.
I remember when I turned twelve; it was the end of spring, and almost all the blossoms had fallen from the cherry trees in the garden. I can still recall clearly the way the few faded petals still remaining on the twigs would be loosened by the wind and flutter down in twos and threes through the new leaves. I would sit on the stone steps leading to the storeroom and gaze out over the garden in my usual state of abstraction, as the evening sun, shining in slanting rays through the spaces between the trees, seemed to cast a further hush over the ever-quiet garden. In such golden moments, as I stared fixedly, there arose in my youthful mind a feeling at once very pleasant and very sad; I suppose it was the so-called spring fever. I don’t think anyone who knows the strangeness of the human heart, though, will deny that even a child can feel in his breast the melancholy arising from the quiet evenings of springtime.
At any rate, I was that sort of child. My father Cozō worried terribly over this, and was always railing at me as “his little Buddhist monk”, or shouting that if it was a priest I wanted to be, he’d send me off to the temple. My younger brother Hidesuke, on the other hand, was a thoroughly spoiled child. He was two years younger than I, and resembled my father physically in being powerfully built. His temperament was also quite the opposite of mine.
When my father scolded me, my mother and my brother would stand by watching and laughing. My mother Otoyo was a woman of few words; she was amiable in appearance, but firm is disposition. She never actually scolded me, but neither did she indulge me with any show of affection; she simply left me alone altogether.
Whether this temperament of mine came naturally, or whether it was the fault of being placed as a child within unnatural confines and being forced to lead such a life of loneliness, I don’t know. My father, as I have said, suffered much anxiety over me. But this anxiety was not the usual care of a father for his child; he would often grumble at me, “Since you went to the trouble of being born a boy, be a boy. There’s no point in my raising an effeminate child.” In these words I could have seen the first indications of my strange destiny; but I was too young to be aware of this.
At this time my father was chief judge of the Okayama District Court, so the Ōtsuka family was still living in Okayama; it was a long time later that we moved to Tōkyō. One day I had gone into the garden as usual and was sitting on the roots of a pine tree, when suddenly my father came to my side and said, with a serious look on his face,
“What are you thinking about? If that’s your natural disposition, there’s nothing we can do about it; but I have a great dislike for such dispositions. Cheer up, boy, show some spirit!”
I remained silent, unable to raise my face. At this my father sat down beside me, and said in a lowered voice,
“Shinzō, you haven’t heard anything from anybody, have you?”
Since I had no idea what he was talking about, I looked into his face, surprised, and unconsciously my eyes filled with tears. The expression of my father’s face changed when he saw this, and he lowered his voice still more.
“There’s no need to hide it; if you’ve heard, it would be better to say so. In that case, I have some things to tell you myself. Come on, it’s better not to hide it; you’ve heard something haven’t you?”
At this point my father appeared to be greatly perturbed, and even his voice differed from its unusual tone. I became frightened, and began to sob more violently.
“Tell me! If you’ve heard, say so! Why are you hiding it?”
The way he glared into my face made me still more frightened, and I could do nothing but apologize in a tearful voice, “I’m sorry, I’m sorry.”
“There’s no reason to apologize. I was just wondering if you hadn’t heard something strange, and if that weren’t the reason why you’re always sitting around here in a daze. If you haven’t heard anything, so much the better. Tell me honestly, now! What have you heard?”
I didn’t know what I could have done to cause such anger in my father, but only thought vaguely that it must have been some terrible transgression, and I continued to say in a faltering voice, “I’m sorry. I’m sorry.”
“Fool! Blockhead! Who asked you to apologize? Twelve years old and you still cry like a girl!”
Dreadfully alarmed at being shouted at like this, I looked into my father’s face without being able to stop my crying. For a long time he was silent, looking at me steadily; then he too began to sob, and said gently,
“You needn’t cry, I won’t ask you anymore. Come, let’s go inside.” This was all he said, but his words were filled with affection.
It was after this incident that my father began to avoid speaking to me. It was also after this that a cloud of darkness settled over my spirit. This was the moment when the devil of fate implanted his claws firmly in my heart.
My father’s words preyed upon me unbearably. The average child would have forgotten them soon. I not only never forgot them, but pondered without rest over why my father had asked me such a question; if it could perturb him to such a degree, I thought, it must be a matter of great importance. An in my mind here grew the belief that this matter was somehow concerned with me.
Why this was I don’t know. Even now I think it strange. What was it that made me believe my father’s questions had anything to do with my own self? I think perhaps it was because, just as a person who lives in darkness develops the power to see things clearly in dim light, so does a young person such as myself, placed in unnatural circumstances, come to recognize easily the dark shapes which lie sunken in the depths of this unnaturalness.
But it was only much later that I was able to seize upon the true nature of these dark shapes. As much as I thought about the scene with my father, I could never bring myself to question him in return; and if course it was even more impossible to ask my mother. In this condition, I passed painful days and months.
At the age of fifteen I was sent away from home to board at a middle school. But there is something else I should tell before continuing. Next to the Ōtsuka home there was a large mulberry field, and on the edge of it a small shingle-roofed cottage. In this lived an old couple, with their daughter, who was at that time sixteen or seventeen. They had been at one time a great family, but now the only remaining trace of their wealth was the mulberry field. I know them sell, and one day they taught me how to play the game of go. A few days later I happened to mention this to my father and mother at the dinner table. My father, who usually paid little attention to my doings, suddenly became angry and scolded me, and my mother looked at me with frightened eyes. The odd may in which they exchanged glances game me a strange and uncomfortable feeling.
Why I should avoid go I learned later; and the time when I learned it was the beginning of my overpowering by fate, and of the agony which I have undergone.
IV.
When I was sixteen, my father was transferred to Tōkyō, and the whole Ōtsuka family, except myself, moved with him. I was left behind as a boarder at the Okayama Middle School. When I look back over the three years spent there, I realized that these school years are all I have really known of life in this world. The students were all friendly and kind toward me. There I recovered freedom of mind, and escaped, if only temporarily, from under the hand of destiny. There the perplexities and suspicions I had been harbouring all but disappeared, my melancholy temperament was dissipated like the melting snow, and I took on the cheerful aspect natural to one my age.
But in the autumn of my eighteenth year, I suddenly received a letter from my father ordering me to come to Tōkyō. My mind, so long untroubled, was thrown into confusion; my first thought was to write back asking that I be allowed to continue as I was for at least one more year, until my graduation day. But I thought better of this, and left immediately for Tōkyō. Arriving there, I made my way to the house on Goji Street and was received by my father in his room.
“The reason I called you so suddenly, “he began, “is that I have something important to take up with you. How would you like to begin studying law?”
The suggestion was the last I could have expected. I stared at my father in surprise, and could not open my mouth to utter a word.
“To tell the truth, I was thinking of telling you in the letter, but decided to call you here and put it directly rather than take a roundabout way. I suppose you were expecting to continue middle school until you graduated, and perhaps you were even looking forward to college; but you should realize that the sooner a man becomes independent and manages his own affairs, the better. So, beginning tomorrow, you are to enter a private law school. In three years you’ll graduate and take your bar examination. When that’s over with, I’ll take you to the office of a lawyer, a good friend of mine, and you’ll be under his care for the next four or five years, during which time you’ll receive practical training in law practice. If you manage to become independent and open your own office within that time, that’s to your credit; you’ll have become a gentleman and made a place for yourself in the world before you’re thirty. What do you think, isn’t that the best way?”
It was little wonder that I was appalled rather than pleased by my father’s words. For they were the words of a stranger, showing no more than the kindness of a stranger. This was the affection shown by a schoolmaster to a dependent student. My father Ōtsuka Gozō had returned to his natural state. Unconsciously, he had come to express his real nature in this way. For three years he had put me aside, and for three years had only his true son, Hidesuke, at his side to love; and the days and months of these three years, drawing him closer to the grave, the gate through which men return to their original condition, had brought back to him his inherent nature. But he was not yet able to recognize this change in himself, and was still trying to see in himself the father he had been before, and in me the child I had been.
I could see that this was not the place to tell my father of my own hopes or ambitions, so I merely replied briefly that I would follow his wishes and left the room.
Not only had my father changed, but also my mother’s manner toward me had altered. The passing of the days made firmer in my mind the belief that there existed a great secret, which concerned myself but was being kept from me. And the more I observed the behaviour of my parents toward me, the more perplexed did I become.
At one time it occurred to me that my suspicions might be nothing but the products of my own unnatural way of viewing things; then, unluckily, there arose before me the incident which had taken place in the garden when I was twelve, the scene with my father. When I thought of this, and added to it later indications, suggestions, suspicions—I could no longer doubt the existence of this secret which hung over me.
While suffering this mental anguish I was attending the law school. After about three months had passed, the day came when I determined to face my father and put to him the question, once and for all, of the existence or non-existence of this secret. I returned from school at dusk, and, after finishing dinner, went to my father’s room. I found him sitting under a lamp, writing letters. When he saw me he took up his writing brush, to indicate that he was busy, and asked,
“What do you want?”
I seated myself next to the charcoal brazier at his side, and was silent for some time. I could see through the winder that the sky, which had been dark with heavy rain clouds, had finally begun to release a drizzling shower, and a little later I heard the sound of sleet hitting upon the eaves. My father put down his brush and turned to me deliberately.
“What is it you want?” he asked quietly.
“There’s something I’d like to ask you about.”
My father seemed to grasp the significance of the situation from these few words, and his voice became more stern. “What is it?”
“Father, am I really your son?” As I had made up my mind beforehand and mentally rehearsed this moment, I asked him point blank.
“What!” My father’s eyes lighted up with anger, but then his face softened. “Why do you ask me such a thing? It is because you think I haven’t treated you as a father should? Is that the reason?” he asked.
“No, father, that isn’t the reason at all. But I’ve had doubts about myself for a long time—I don’t know exactly why—and I’ve worried so much over it that I thought I’d ask you. If it’s a secret and you don’t think it would do me any good to know, you don’t have to tell me anything, but I’d like to know the truth,” I declared firmly, in a low voice.
My father sat for a long time with his arms folded, thinking; then he raised his head slowly. “I’ve known you had suspicions about your origin, and I intended to tell you the truth eventually. Now that the question has arisen from your side, I think it’s best to tell you and get it over with.”
But the truth as my father told it to me was only this: At the time when my father held the position of judge in the Yamaguchi District Court, he had a friend named Baba Kinnosuke, with whom he often played go. The two of them were bound together by great intimacy, and went about like brother. This Baba was a remarkable man, and was respected by my father for many unusual qualities, beside his proficiency at the game of go. His only child was myself.
Ōtsuka Gozō was at that time thirty-eight, and his wife thirty-four: they had begun to resign themselves to childlessness, when suddenly Baba became ill and died, and his wife soon followed her husband from this world, leaving behind them a two-year-old boy. Fortunately for this child, he was taken by the Ōtsuka family and raised as their son; I suppose the reason for this was divided between memory of the friendship with Baba and compassion for this helpless orphan.
My true parents had both been young—the father thirty-two and the mother twenty-five—at the time of my birth. Through some complication arising from the fact that I had been born before my mother had registered from her domicile with that of Baba, my birth had not been reported officially; for that reason, Ōtsuka Gozō was able to register me as his own son immediately after taking me into his care.
“Soon after that,” my father continued, “I left Yamaguchi, so that there are very few people living who know that you are not really my child. My wife and I have tried throughout to raise you exactly as if you were our true son. Moreover, it will be the same in the future—I don’t want this to warp your viewpoint, and I hope you will continue to think of use as your parents. Hidesuke is our own son, but he knows absolutely nothing of what I have just told you. I trust you will always treat him as your younger brother, and do what you can for him.” He spoke tenderly, and before I had time to see his aged eyes fill with tears, I had begun to cry myself.
I promised my foster-father never to reveal this matter to anyone, and that I would invent some pretext to go to Yamaguchi, in order to visit the graves of my true parents. After promising again to keep the secret, I left the room.
The months which followed this revelation were calm in comparison with those which had preceded it. My father also seemed to feel more easy for having uncovered this hidden aspect of our relationship. When I thought of the kind treatment I had received from my foster-parents, my heart would fill with love for them. No longer troubled by uncertainty, I worked more diligently at my studies. I was determined to gain independence as soon as possible and part from the Ōtsuka family, leaving the inheritance, the right of the oldest son, to Hidesuke.
Three years passed quickly, and I graduated from the law school. But, in accordance with my father’s suggestion, I continued to study for another year before taking the bar examination; with the result that, when I did take it, I passed with such unexpected honours that my foster father, rejoicing over my success, used his influence to get me a position in the law office of his friend Dr. Inouye.
So I had become a lawyer, made a place for myself in the world as my father had foretold, and settled down to the routine of going to the office in the Kyōbashi district every morning and returning each night. If I had continued this routine until the present day, I should have realized my father’s purpose completely; I should be leading a normal life now, and looking forward to the enjoyment of a successful career.
But I was, first and foremost, an ill-fated child. Pitfalls almost beyond anyone’s imagination were opening up before me, and the devil of fate was already pushing me cruelly onward toward my downfall.
V.
In addition to his Toyko office, Dr. Inouys also had a branch located in Yoohama, and when I reached the age of twenty-five, he put me in charge of this branch. In name I was still Dr. Inouye’s subordinate but in reality I was the same as independent. You might say it was a quick rise in the world for one my age.
There was in Yokohama a grocery store called the Takahashi, which was doing a prosperous business at that time. The owner was a widow by the name of Ume, who had lost her husband two or three years before, and was living in comparative luxury with her daughter Satoko. I visited their house many times in connection with a lawsuit I was handling, and in the end Satoko and I fell in love. To put it shortly, within a half-year we had reached the point where we could not bear to be apart for any long interval of time. A marriage was arranged with Dr. Inouye as go-between and I took my leave of the Ōtsuka family, becoming the foster son of Mrs. Takahashi.
It may sound strange for me to say that Satoko was not a beautiful girl; she had the sort of countenance that attracts men’s eyes, a charming, round face. To speak plainly, she loved me very much; but as her excessive love for me has turned out to be a great factor in the cause of my subsequent mistery, it would have been far better if she had not loved me so much, nor I been so fond of her.
My foster mother Ume was at this time about fifty, but appeared to be something less than forty. She was a handsome woman of small stature who had succeeded well in preserving her beauty. And when I say that she was a woman of violent temper but a simple and honest character, you can probably guess from the description that she was somewhat deficient in wisdom. When she was cheerful, which was most of the time, she would laugh and talk in a loud voice; but occasionally she would appear with a fearfully solemn face, and would speak to no one for half a day or more. I had been aware of this peculiarity before becoming her foster son; but after I married Satoko and begun to eat and sleep in the Takehashi home, I discovered another strange thing.
This was that every night about nine o’clock, my foster mother would shut herself up in her room, and would kneel motionless, concentrating, praying to the picture of the god Fudō Myōō surrounded by the flames of the Buddhist hell, which hung in her alcove. She would remain in this posture, gazing fixedly at the picture and murmuring to it some invocation, until ten or eleven o’clock, sometimes until after midnight. She would perform these devotions for a longer time and with particular fervor on the evenings following her gloomy days.
At first I said nothing about this, but one day out of curiosity I questioned Satoko about her mother’s strange actions. She waved her hand to me silence me, lowered her voice and said, “Don’t talk about that. It began about two years ago. If you speak to Mother about it, she just goes into a bad humour and won’t say a word, so it’s better to pretend not to notice anything. I think she’s going a bit out of her mind.” Since she seemed to attach little importance to the matter, I didn’t question her.
But one evening about a month after that, when we had finished dinner and were sitting around the table talking, her mother suddenly asked, “How long do you think the vengeful ghost of someone you’ve wronged with continue to haunt you before it disappears?”
Satoko spoke calmly, as if to dismiss the subject. “In the first place, there isn’t any such thing as a vengeful ghost. That’s nothing but superstition.”
Her mother turned to her angrily. “Don’t be impudent! Who are you to know about such things? You’ve never even seen a ghost. That’s why you say there aren’t any.”
“Have you seen one, Mother?”
“I certainly have.”
“You have? Was it making a terrible face? I wish I could see one too.” Satoko was still trying to tease her mother out of her seriousness. But instead the old woman became more angry, and her face changed colour.
“You say you want to see a ghost! Of all the impertinence! I won’t stand for any more of it!” She got to her feet in a rage and stamped out of the room.
I said to Satoko, “What’s wrong with your mother? If we aren’t careful...”
Satoko looked uneasy. “I’m really worried about her. There’s something queer going on her mind, and I wish I know what it was.”
“Her nerves seem to be in bad condition,” I said. But by the next morning, everything was the same as before. Mrs. Takahashi had spend much of the night praying to Fudō, but to this we were to accustomed that we gave it no particular thought.
One afternoon in May of this year I returned home from the office two hours earlier than usual. The day was cloudy, and the interior of this house dim; my stepmother’s room was especially dark. I had something to discuss with her, and, without bothering to knock, I slid open the door and stepped into the room. She was sitting all alone beside the charcoal brazier, but when she saw my face she began to cry out in terror, “Ah, ah, ah, ah”, and tried to rise to her feet, then fell back to a sitting position from which she stared at me, her face white. I thought she had a fainted, and rushed to her side.
“What is it, what’s the matter?”
When she heard my voice, she moved a little and lowered her eyes.
“Oh, it was only you—I thought – I thought it was---“ She put her hand on her breast, which was still shaking from the shock, and again looked into my face as if there were something unnatural about it.
“What happened to you?” I asked in surprise.
“You came in so suddenly, I thought it was someone else. You gave me a frightful shock.” She lay down on her bed and was silent.
This incident seemed to aggravate my stepmother’s nervous disorder; she now not only prayed to Fudō Myōō, but bought charms and talismans and pasted on the walls of her room pictures of lesser-known deities, most of whom I had never heard of. What was even more strange, she was no longer content with simply believing in Fudō herself, but was continually urging me to believe in Fudō, she only answered,
“Don’t ask questions, just believe, for, my sake. I won’t be at peace until you do.”
“If it will make you feel easier, Mother, I’ll believe as you say; but wouldn’t Satoko do better than I?”
“Satoko wouldn’t do at all. It’s nothing that concerns her.”
“Then it’s something that concerns me?”
“Oh, don’t ask questions, just believe, for Heaven’s sake.”
Satoko, who was standing nearby and listening, was astonished. “What a strange thing to say, Mother! What sort of connection would Fudō-sama possibly have to you and Shinzō, but not to me?”
“That’s why I’m asking you to believe; if I could tell you the reason I wouldn’t have to ask you!”
“But that’s ridiculous, asking Shinzō to believe in Fudō-sama, trying to talk a person of this day and age into such a belief.”
“If that’s the way you feel about it, it I won’t ask you again.
I tried to pacify her anger and spoke more gently. “It isn’t that I refuse to believe in Fudo-sama; but really, Mother, won’t you tell me the reason why I should? I have no idea what it is, but surely it’s nothing you wouldn’t want your own stepson to know.”
She sat thinking for a long time, then sighed deeply and said in a low voice, “There’s only this to tell, and don’t breathe it to a living soul. When I was still young, and before I married Satoko’s father, there was a young man who was always after me to marry him, following me everywhere and telling me how much he loved me. But I wouldn’t have anything to do with him. So he sickened and died. But on his deathbed he cursed me, and said all sorts of terrible things. Of course I didn’t feel any too good about that, but after I married I didn’t give it much more thought. Well, since my husband’s death, that man’s ghost has come back to haunt me, it’s appeared before me many times, glaring at me with a ghastly look on its face; and it’s trying to cause my death even now. When I pray to Fudō-sama hard enough, the ghost gradually fades away and disappears. But the strange thing is,” and she lowered her voice still more, “lately this ghost seems to have taken possession of Shinzō!”
“How terrible!” Satoko knitted her bow in mock-horror.
“That’s the truth, sometimes Shinzō’s face looks to me exactly like the face of the ghost!”
That was a reason, it appeared, why she was trying to persuade me to believe in Fudō-sama. But somehow I couldn’t bring myself to pretend a belief I couldn’t feel; so, together with Satoko, I tried various arguments to convince her that such things as ghosts don’t exist; but to no avail. She believed so firmly and unshakably in this ghost that she became too much for me to handle. Thinking that such a peaceful place as Kamakura might serve to quiet her nerves, we succeeded in persuading her to come here last May, and rented for her a small summer house near the beach.
VI.
When Takahashi Shinzō had reached this point in the story, he stopped for a moment, raised his head and looked sadly into the west, where the sun was now setting. His expression of melancholy changed to a grimace of pain, and he quickly poured another cup of brandy and drank it.
I don’t have the courage (he went on) to continue my story in detail; I shall give you the fact bluntly and briefly, and you may add to them what you wish to conjecture.
Takahashi Ume, my foster mother, is my real mother, the mother who gave birth to me. My wife Satoko is my half-sister by a different father. Well? If that isn’t a manifestation of fate, what is it? If you want to call even that the law of cause and effect, go ahead. But I, who find myself placed without my knowledge under its power, can feel only bitterness toward the operation of so cruel a law in our universe.
The way I came to know these facts was simply this. About a month after bringing my stepmother to Karakura, I had some legal affairs to accomplish in Magasaki, and intended to stop off at Yamaguchi, Hiroshima and other places along the way. When I came here to Karakura and mentioned this to her, she looked frightened and told me not to go to Yamaguchi. However, since I had it in my mind to visit the graves of my parents, I stopped there as I had planned.
As my foster father Ōtsuka Gozō had told me previously of the location of the shrine where they were buried, I found it with no trouble. But there I came upon only the grave of my father Baba Kinnosuka; the grave of my mother, who was supposed to be buried with him, was not to be seen. I was troubled over this, and asked an old priest whom I met nearby to show me the grave of the wife of Baba Kinnosuke. I asked about the two as if they were old acquaintances, of course revealing nothing of my own connection with them.
The old priest answered that I wasn’t likely to find the grave of Baba’s wife Onobu. During the period of Baba’s illness, he said, she had entered into suspicious relations with a go pupil of his, a certain wealthy merchant of the town; and, disregarding the fact that her desertion of him caused Baba’s sickness to become more serious, she had in the end run off with this merchant, leaving behind an infant hardly yet weaned. The priest further related how my father had cursed my mother in his illness, and how, on the verge of his death, he had entrusted his only child to Ōtsuka Gozō.
No one besides myself knows that this Onobu and Takahashi Ume are one and the same person. Even I have no definite proof of it. But when the priest described Onobu, I realized immediately that this was the woman I had hitherto known as my foster mother.
My first thought was to die there at Yamaguchi. At that moment, truly at that moment, I was firmly resolved to commit suicide; and I see now that It would have been better for me had I carried through that resolve.
But instead I returned home. For one thing, I wanted to seek for some definite proof of what I believe. For another, I was drawn back by my love for Satoko. It’s no use telling me that since Satoko is, after all, my sister, my marriage to her contradicts moral laws. I am still unable to think of Satoko as a sister.
There is nothing stranger than the human mind. The abstract word “immoral” cannot prevail over the reality called “love.” This is what I meant then I said that the great love between Satoko and myself was one of the factors which have brought me to the state in which you find me.
I took Satoko in my arms and cried, I cried again and again. I fell into the same frenzy which tormented my mother. But it was Satoko who was to be pitied. To Satoko everything was obscure, an enigma through which she could only wander in bewilderment. At length she came to believe with my mother in the vengeful ghost; and even now, at the house in Yokohama, the two of them are probably absorbed in praying to the god Fudō Myōō. Satoko herself knows nothing of the form of this ghost; she only knows that her mother and husband are both tortured by it, and is trying in all sincerity to save them.
I have done everything I could to avoid meeting my mother, and she has no wish to see me again. I suppose this is because, when she looks into my face, she sees the face of the ghost of Baba. Small wonder, when I am the child of that ghost!
Since she is my mother, I suppose I should love her as a mother. But when I think of how she deserted my father when he was on the brink of death, of how she left me lying on the bed of a dying man to run off with her secret lover, there arise within me malevolent emotions and hateful thoughts better left unspoken. In my ears I can hear the voice of my dead father, cursing her. In my eyes I can see him, his body wasted by sickness, clasping to him the thoughtless child and weeping unmanly tears. And hearing this voice, seeing this figure, I myself am inspired with the vengeful spirit of the ghost.
If anyone besides my mother should see me as I sometimes lean against a pillar in the dusk of evening, should see my staring eyes, my tortured breathing, as I glare bitterly into the darkening sky, he would probably turn and flee. My mother, on the other hand, would faint.
However, when I think of Satoko, I feel neither hatred nor anger, but only sink into a fathomless sadness, in the depths of which love and hopelessness are struggling, one against the other.
It was this autumn that I began to drink. I had seldom before in my life held a liquor cup in my hand; but now, to escape for short periods of time from the torture of my thoughts, I began to drink regularly, in spite of the pleas of Satoko.
One day last September I had drunk as much as I possibly could and was lying, half-conscious, in the middle of the living room floor, when my mother suddenly and unexpectedly arrived from Kamakura, and called Satoko to her room to talk to her alone. Even though drunk, I realized that her purpose in coming was more serious than that of a mere visit. About an hour later Satoko returned to my room, her eyes red from crying.
“What’s the matter?” I asked. She fell down at my side and began to cry again.
“Did your mother tell you to get a divorce from me?” I asked in an angry voice.
She turned to me in consternation. “But whatever Mother says, you don’t need to worry about my leaving you. She’s out of her mind, so don’t pay any attention to her, don’t take her seriously, please—for my sake!” she said in a shaking, tearful voice.
“I can’t let her say things like [that] to you!” I got to my feet unsteadily and went to my mother’s room, falling against the walls of the corridor on the way. I burst in upon her suddenly, followed by Satoko, who hadn’t time to stop me. I sat down heavily in front of my mother.
“I understand you’ve told Satoko that she and I should get a divorce, and
I’ve come to find out why. It’s not that I care about the divorce- in fact, I’ve been hoping for that myself. But tell me the reason, I want to know the reason.”
I abandoned myself to my drunkenness and drew nearer to her. She stared into my eyes, and their gleam seemed to pierce to her soul. She was unable to speak.
“I want to know the reason,” I persisted. “Could it be because you feel uneasy when you look at me, because I’m possessed by this ghost you’re always telling us about? It’s little wonder you feel uneasy. I am the son of that ghost.”
My mother looked at me for a moment more, and her face changed colour. Then she fled, running from the room without saying a word. When I awoke from my drunken sleep, Satoko was leaning over me, studying my face with a worried expression. Mother had already returned to Kamakura.
My mother and I have not met again since that time. I took her place here in the house at Kamakura, and she is now living in Yokohama; Satoko travels back and forth between us, nursing the two of us, trying sincerely to solace our pain—as if it were the sort which could be solaced—forcing herself deliberately to believe in the ghost that haunts us, but still unable to understand the true nature of the torments which afflict us.
I have been forbidden to drink liquor both by Satoko and by my doctor; but, considering my position, do you really think it unreasonable that I resort to drinking brandy in secret?
For all my strength has been drained from me by the devil of fate, leaving me not even the strength to commit suicide; I have become a spiritless thing able only to wait for my own self-destruction, making no effort to save myself.
Now that I’ve given you a brief account of my life up to the present, I should like you to consider the course of that life and to regard it from my viewpoint. Can you possibly take such a cold, mathematical view as to ascribe these happenings entirely to the law of cause and effect? My own mother the enemy of my father, my beloved wife my own sister! These are bitter circumstances. They are also my destiny.
If there is anyone who can rescue me from this destiny, I will follow his teaching reverently. That man will be my saviour.
VII.
I had listened in silence to the young man’s story, and even after he had finished I couldn’t speak for some time. Here truly was a person who had fallen into a situation of such tragedy as I had never imagined!
“Why don’t you get a divorce from Satoko?” I asked him.
“That would only create a new situation to replace the old. The situation as it stands wouldn’t be cleared away.”
“Of course not. But there’s nothing you can do about that.”
“That’s why it’s fate. Divorce wouldn’t erase the fact that my mother brought about the death of my father; divorce wouldn’t change my love for the sister whom I have made my wife. Since that which has happened in the past can’t be erased by human power, man has no means of escaping from the power of fate.”
We shook hands and bowed to each other silently; thus I parted from this unfortunate man. The last rays of the sun were casting vivid colours on the clouds; and silhouetted against them, as I looked back, was the lonely figure of the Takahashi Shinzo, the fatalist, standing at the top of the sand dune and looking far off into the sea. I never saw him again.
Huang Xiao and Liu Shanshan: A Forthcoming Book on Chinese Paintings of Gardens
A Forthcoming Book on Chinese Paintings of Gardens
What follows is the text, in English translation and in the original Chinese, of a Postscript written by two young Chinese scholars: Huang Xiao who is a Beida (Peking U.) grad student working with his professor Cao Xun on the history of gardens, and Huang’s wife Liu Shanshan. It is a Postscript to a book we have “co-written” on Chinese paintings of gardens, which will be published soon. I have enjoyed working with them, and have learned more than my aged head can really absorb--their contributions have gone far beyond my own old academic interest in this kind of painting to give rich content to the book. I mean to devote one video-lecture in the second series, Gazing Into the Past, to Chinese paintings of gardens--based on an old lecture on the subject that will also be included (in Chinese) in the book, but using, of course, the much greater number and quality of visuals that this new medium allows. I should add that this new video-lecture series, subtitled Scenes from Later Chinese Painting (but also to include a few lectures on Japanese Nanga painting), will begin to be posted online, for free viewing again, after the first series (A Pure and Remote View), all twelve lectures plus a Postlude and two Addenda, have been finished and posted--and that should be quite soon. So, keep watching.
James Cahill, Jan. 2, 2012
Postscript
Co-authoring this book with Professor James Cahill is an adventure for us.
It all started in last spring when Professor Cao Xun(曹汛) mentioned that an album of a garden scenes published in Yuan Zong (園綜) is excellently rendered. According to a record on the garden represented in this album, he assumes that the fourteen leaves published in Yuan Zong could be part of a much more completing album. He asked us to help him search for the album. Not long after that, we came cross Professor Cahill’s The Distant Mountains in Sanlian bookstore in Beijing. When we came back and read the book, we found the album of Zhi Garden (止園)in it. Professor Cahill devoted a chapter to discuss the artist who painted this album, but the leaves in it are also not complete. Meanwhile, Professor Cao happened to read Cahill’s article about Zhi Garden in YiyuanDuoying(藝苑掇英). So he suggested us to contact with Professor Cahill directly about the album.
We wrote Professor Cahill an email in Chinese without much expectation of instant response. However, the next morning when we log in our email, we are thrilled about two emails from Professor Cahill, each of which is as long as four-or-five pages. He said that although both The Distant Mountains and The Compelling Image were written a long time ago, he has never stopped concerning on Zhi Garden. He tried to mail a Chinese expert a copy of several leaves of the album for advice, but unfortunately the expert could not found the answer to his questions. He was so excited by our discovery of the record and he would like to send us the pictures of the whole album if it is helpful for our research. The end of the emails made us ashamed, which said that he is looking forward to hearing from us again, but he prefer our writing in English to Chinese, even in poor English since English is much easier for him to read.
Our encounter with Professor Cahill started from the album of Zhi Garden. From then on, we corresponded frequently with him; his sharp mind and instant responses impressed us. But what touched us most is his generosity. Cahill said from beginning that he want to publish the whole album of Zhi Garden in China for further research. Moreover, he would like to provide us other pictures of garden paintings he collected for many years for publication, which would promote the research in this area. Maybe since then, he might have already thought about collaborating with us about a book. He encouraged us to contact with Yang Le, an editor he has been working with in SanLian publishing house. Merely Four days later, we met Yang Le to discuss this book project.
The proposal of co-authoring a book with Professor Cahill is far beyond our expectation while it is a great temptation for us to write a book about garden paintings. In the café located at the second floor of San Lian, Yang Le explained why Professor Cahill has paid so much attention to the album of Zhi Garden. He insists on the album of Zhi Garden is a master piece, but he has never convinced people successfully that the album is a representation of a real garden. What Yang Le said resonated with us. Most gardens remained in China changed dramatically from what they used to be. Even the gardens built in Ming Dynasty were rebuilt and changed in the late Qing Dynasty. If we want to see what the gardens looked like in their heyday, we could only tend to the paintings and literatures. However, to what degree that the representation of garden in paintings or literatures is truthful to the actual gardens? Are these garden paintings merely the imagination or exaggeration of the ancient people? To what degree? Chinese specialists of ancient architecture, even those familiar with the history of painting, are often confronted by foreign scholars at international conferences, “Does what you said ever exist?” “How reliable is old paintings?” “What is your evidence?”
Then, we started our journey of pinning down the gardens according to the paintings and literatures. It is a joyful journey full of thoughtful surprises. We are new to the field of art history; but fortunately our guide, Professor Cahill, is the best scholar in this field. He selected almost all the paintings discussed in this book. For some of them, he didn’t say much, but every hint he gave us opens a window, leading us to see the world we had been blind to. We have learned a lot from his keen insight of Chinese paintings. Under his guidance, the paintings reveal more and more information, as if all the painters are his old friends, and he is already familiar with every move of them, and understand what they meant. On the other hand, the research methods we learned from Professor Cao Xun—Source of History&Chronology textual study is a useful tool to study Chinese garden history. We worked very hard to find textual evidences of every garden we were writing about. This process is as interesting as the detectives investigate cases. Whenever finding a new clue, we were excited and felt that we were a step closer to the truth. For many times, we dig into the ancient books, looked up google earth, and searched for traces of the gardens from the paintings. Every time when we walked through grassy wild field scattered with stink garbage, stood by the ruins of gardens, deciphered discernibility of the lotus pools , or the ancient trees which should not grow in the fields, we can still feel the sense of the gardens used to stand there.
Yet when we come back to the paintings, we are confused again. They seemed to laugh at us. Are the paintings more reliable to reflect the appearance of garden than a piece of ruined wall or a deserted pond? Doesn’t the painter’s representation of a garden precisely reflect the image of the garden in the mind of its owner? Is there something more revealing than inscribed title and poems on the paintings that could display the moods of the gardens? Just as the representation eyes and brows of beauties in paintings of beauty transcend the beauties themselves and became the abstract embodiment of them, doesn’t the spirit of garden lie in the representation of garden paintings that were reproduced again and again? However, did the beauty and spirit ever exist? What are the evidences?
Just before we are about to finish this book, we found the location of Zhi Garden at the satellite imagery of Google Earth, which we have dreamed about for so many times. We are astonished by high buildings and shopping mall stood at the site of Zhi Garden. But the painting of Zhi Garden reminds us of its former days. There seem boats sailing again along the river bank, which were transformed into modern road. The misty lakes and dreamlike pavilions seems as if emerging again above the treetops , hailing us cordially: “Look, we are still here! We did exist, and will always survive in the painting and as well as on the over-changing earth!”
When Professor Cahill heard that we have sought out the site of Zhi Garden, he laughed and said, “I always know it exists.” Forests and springs can be imperishable because of the spirit of brush and ink, and gardens can be handed down only in paintings. This is exactly the case.
Huangxiao and Liu Shanshan
Sep. 25th, 2011in Tsinghua Garden
跋
與高居翰先生共同寫作本書的經歷堪稱一次奇遇。
事情起於去年年初,有天曹汛先生在聊天時提起《園綜》書前的一套園林冊頁,說這套繪畫水準相當高,他已經找到了園記,感覺全圖遠不止書中收的那14幅,很希望能看到全部作品,囑我們幫忙留意。不久,我們在書店閒逛,看到三聯新出版的高居翰作品系列,買了本《山外山》回去一翻,《止園圖》赫然正在其中,書中專辟一章對冊頁作者加以評述,不過所收繪畫仍然不全。後來曹先生又在《藝苑掇英》上看到高居翰對《止園圖》的介紹,便提議與高居翰先生直接聯繫,詢問圖冊的訊息。
我們對此事的可行性半信半疑,便很偷懶地用中文給書上的郵箱發了一封信,並未抱太大希望。不料第二天一看郵箱,竟接連收到兩封回信,長達四、五頁之多!高居翰在信中說,雖然《山外山》和《氣勢撼人》是很多年前寫的,但他從未停止對止園的關注,他曾將部分圖片送給中國的園林專家,向他們請教,可惜一直未果,園記的發現實在是一件令他興奮的事,如果有研究需要,他很願意提供完整圖冊的電子檔。信的結尾頗令我們汗顏,高居翰說,我期待著你們的回復,不過下次請千萬用英文給我寫信,哪怕是蹩腳的英文也行,我讀中文實在太吃力了。
與高居翰的相遇就自《止園圖》開始。起初每天都要往返許多次信件,我們對老先生的思維之敏捷、反應之迅速歎為觀止,然而最讓我們感動的還是他對於研究資料的慷慨無私。從一開始,高居翰就說過,希望可以把《止園圖》在中國完整發表,以供學者研究之用;後來他又提出,既然要給我們郵寄資料,他還有些多年搜集所得的園林繪畫,也願意一併寄給我們,將它們公諸於世,以推動該領域的研究。大概就在此時,老先生已開始醞釀一起寫作的計畫,並安排我們與三聯的編輯聯繫。從初次寫信到我們前去三聯,見到一直與他合作的楊樂編輯,只有短短四天時間。
合作的提議是我們始料未及的,然而寫一本關於園林繪畫的書,卻對我們具有極大的誘惑力。在三聯書店二樓的咖啡廳裡,楊樂向我們解釋了高居翰對止園的情結。對《止園圖》的過分推崇使他頗受到一些非議,畢竟其中部分冊頁是他本人的藏品,而他始終沒能讓人們相信畫中所繪是一座真實的園林。楊樂的話也引起了我們的共鳴,目前所能見到的園林,即使始建年代很早,也都在晚清有過重修或重建,其中大部分已經面目全非,若要追尋園林早期的鼎盛景象,便不得不求助於圖像、文字等作品。但其中有多少是真實?又有多少僅是古人的想像和誇張?即使是對古代圖像有深入研究的中國古建築專家,也常在國際會議上受到外國學生的詰問:“你所說的這些真的存在過嗎?繪畫到底有多大的可信度?證據在哪裡?”
於是我們開始了尋找畫中園林之旅,這一旅程充滿了愉悅和驚喜。我們對於藝術史這一廣博的領域僅是剛剛涉足,幸好為我們充當導遊的是這一領域最棒的學者。本書選用的繪畫作品基本都是高居翰推薦確定的,他對於畫作的提示有時不多,但每一句都能在我們眼前打開一扇門,引導我們看到以前一直視而不見的世界。他對於繪畫作品的精准把握與敏銳洞察,更是令我們受益匪淺,在他的指引下,畫作揭示出越來越多的訊息,仿佛那些畫家都是他的老友,而他早已熟悉友人的一舉一動,能從中讀出豐富的含義。同時,曹汛先生力倡的史源學、年代學研究方法提供了一把利器,我們努力為書中的每座園林尋找相關的文獻證據,這個過程也如同偵探破案一樣有趣。每當發現一條新線索,都讓我們興奮異常,感到距離苦苦追尋的真相又近了一步。無數次在古籍中爬梳思索,在穀歌地圖上細密搜查,尋找著那些畫中園林的痕跡。每次踏著令人掩鼻的垃圾,穿過野草齊肩的荒郊,站在廢棄的園林遺址上,看到那些依稀可辨的蓮花池,或本不該出現在田間地頭的古樹,仍能讓我們真切的感覺到那些園林依稀尚存的氣息。
而當我們回到畫作本身,我們時常又迷惑了。那筆墨間流轉的意韻似乎在嘲笑著我們的努力,難道繪畫不是比一截殘牆、一泓廢池更接近真實的園林嗎?難道畫家所描繪的,不正是主人心目中園林的樣子嗎?難道畫面上耐人尋味的題款與詩文,不是更能揭示出園林的意境嗎?就如同在美人圖中被反復描繪的相似的眉眼已經超越了美人本身,成為抽象的美的存在,園林的精神,不也正在這些被反復描繪的園林繪畫之中嗎?但是,這些精神和美真的曾經存在過嗎?證據,證據又在哪裡?
在本書即將完稿之際,我們終於在衛星地圖上找到了讓我們魂牽夢縈的止園。那些拔地而起的高樓和摩登時髦的購物中心讓我們面面相覷,瞠目結舌。然而止園的繪畫讓我們又看見這裡昔日的風景,那如今已被填平為通途大道的河岸上仿佛又有帆船在遊動,縹緲的湖水,夢境般的樓閣又從樹梢間浮現出來,向我們大聲叫著:“看,我們仍在這裡,我們一直存在著,在畫上,也在這滄海桑田的國土上!”
而高居翰聞訊則笑著說:“我早就知道。”翰墨精靈,林泉藉以不朽,園以圖傳,正此謂耶。
黃曉 劉珊珊
2011 年9月25日晚于清華園
More Articles...
Latest Work
-
Conclusion
VI Conclusion It is time to draw back and look, if not at the whole Hyakusen, at as much of him as we have managed to illuminate in this study. Dark areas remain, and doubtless many distortions, but...Read More...
Latest Blog Posts
-
Bedridden BlogBedridden Blog I am now pretty much confined to bed, and have to recognize this as my future. It is difficult even to get me out of bed, as happened this morning when they needed to...Read More...