History as it is
or
History ignored?
The search for a definition of
“Historical” fiction in Meiji
Japan
Luca Milasi
(“Sapienza” University)
1
“Ｈｉｓｔｏｒｙ” in Japan: a long tradition

Nara period (714-794):
Kojiki 古事記 (Record of Ancient Matters) [712 ca.]
• A retelling of the creation of Japan and the legendary first
sovereigns, from Jinmu to Oojin (660. B. C. to A.D. 310 in the
legendary history)
Nihon Shoki 日本書紀 (Chronicles of Japan) [720]
• Compilation of many elements in the guise of history, largely to
justify the line of sovereigns (laid down in Chinese).
2
“Ｈｉｓｔｏｒｙ” in Japan: a long tradition
– Pt. II

According to its preface, the Kojiki was set down from the
recitation of memorized matter by a Lady-in-waiting, Hieda no
Are 稗田阿礼. The Kojiki, one of the first documents in Japan’s
literary history, was virtually unknown for centuries due to the
complexity of that time’s writing system.

In the XVIII and XIX Century there have been three successive
views of the Kojiki and the Nihon Shoki: they were venerated as
national scriptures, then dismissed as worthless fabrications, and
lastly, as a result of closer examination by philologists, these have
been viewed as a mixture of historical facts and mythology.
3
“Fiction in Ancient Japan”: the
beginning of the novel form?

Genji Monogatari 源氏物語 [The tale of Genji], a
long work by Murasaki Shikibu (D. ?1014), a lady at the
court of emperor Ichijo. Probably completed in its
present form by A.D. 1009.

Though the present arrangement of chapters, as well as
authorship of the last few chapters have often been
questioned, Genji Monogatari is considered to be one of
the world’s finest and earliest novels. Some argue that
Murasaki is the world’s first modern novelist.
4
Fiction in Ancient Japan II

Murasaki Shikibu’s success as an author of fiction is a
phenomenon occurring after the inclusion of Genji Monogatari in
a “new” literary canon. Meiji writers who would later turn out to
be advocates of a new historical fiction greatly contributed to
promote the formation of this new canon in their critical
reviews.

Before the models of the modern psychological novel and
historical novel were avaliable to Japanese intellectuals, even an
antecedent of the fictionalized, psychological novel such as Genji
Monogatari had been regarded as narrating historical evidence
andh its author, though later revered as the first great writer of
“fiction” in Japan, had been occasionally criticized for her choice
to focus on an illicit liason occurring in the royal house which
actually has no historical basis.
5
The formation of a new Literary
canon: Criticism in Meiji Japan

Early critical works (essays):
Tsubouchi Shōyō (1859-1935),
Shōsetsu Shinzui 小説真髄
(Essence of the Novel) [1885]
•
Mori Ōgai (1862-1922),
Ima no Shoka no Shōsetsuron wo Yomite
•
今の諸家の小説論を読み
て
(On reading the Latest Theories on the Novel form) [1889]
6
Literary Criticism of the Early Meiji
Period:
Criticism (hyōron) was clearly one of the main concerns of
intellectuals in the “Era of the Enlightenment” (The Meiji
period, 1868-1912). ōgai took up his career as a critic of
literature right after his return from a prolonged stay in
Germany, with the publication of essays on the Daily Yomiuri.
In shorter essays, he dealed mainly with brief exposure, and
criticism, of Zola’s Naturalism. Shortly thereafter, he constituted
the group Shinseisha (The New Voices Society), and in October 1889
the group founded a new magazine, ‘Shigarami-zoshi’ (‘The Weir’).
The group was soon to become very active in promoting the
understanding of Western literary movements, especially
Naturalism and Romanticism. ‘Shigarami-zoshi’ enjoyed a rather
large circulation at the time.
7
The formation of a new Literary canon: Criticism in Meiji
Japan – Pt. II
•
Mori ōgai (1862-1922), Ima no Shoka no Shōsetsuron wo Yomite (On reading the Latest
Theories on the Novel form) [1889]:
《 As we have already stated, debate on the matter [the value of Zola’s theories] leads
to this conclusion: making use of Anatomy and Science as a basis for the creation
of fiction may not be such a wrong idea, yet, one cannot help feeling that
scientific results may not alone constitute good material for fiction, in the manner
Zola has attempted to do in his ètudes. Scientific results are the real world, but do
writers really have to content themselves with wandering within the limited
boundaries of such a world? It is my opinion that, while science may be good
material to base upon for a novel, it is only through the power of imagination that
best results are achieved with such [poor] material. In this respect, we have to note
that (…) Zola has dismissed the latter to serve the former. (…)
We may assume that applying the rules of the realistic novel too strictly leads, as a
matter of fact, to a mere, uninteresting imitation of the real world, with no artistic
merit at all.
This, in my opinion, accounts for the failure of the Naturalists’ efforts as works of
art.》
8
•
Tsubouchi Shōyō (1859-1935), Shōsetsu Shinzui 小説真髄 (The
Essence of the Novel) [1885]
(…)
The main business of the novel is human nature. Social conditions and behaviour rank
second. By "human nature", I mean man's sensual passions, what Buddhism calls the
one hundred and eight appetites of the flesh. All human beings, even those who are
wise and good, are creatures of carnal lusts. Sages and fools alike harbour evil desires-what sets a man apart as good or wise is simply that he suppresses them, and uses the
exercise of his reason or the strength of his conscience to drive away the hounds of
passion.
(…)
A novelist is like a psychologist. His characters must be psychologically convincing. Should
he contrive to create by his own invention characters at odds with human nature, or
worse, with the principles of psychology, those characters would be figments of his
imagination rather than human beings, and not even a skilful plot or a curious story
could turn what he wrote into a novel. Such characters are like marionettes. They seem
at a quick glance just like a group of real people moving about, but the spell is instantly
broken when closer inspection reveals both the operator and the mechanism. Similarly,
a novel at once loses its charm if it becomes obvious that the author is behind each
character pulling strings to direct his movements.
9
•
Mori Ōgai, Ima no Shoka no Shōsetsuron wo Yomite ( On Reading the
Latest Theories on the Novel, continued):
(…)
Nonetheless, excessive Idealism in art, which is the opposite of Naturalism, has
its flaws too. We may think of Romanticism in Germany, or the yomihon of the
Japanese pre-modern period: both these literary genres wander quite too far
from the real world. Great long novels are, for instance, Genji Monogatari, and
then, Bakin’s Hakkenden and Bishonenroku, while in China we have
masterpieces such as Shuihuzhuan. In Germany, we find Goethe’s “Wilhelm
Meister” as well as “Titan”, by Jean Paul.
(…)
The method of psychological introspection has widely spread since the end of
the last century, along with the newly emerging philosophical theories on
Realism; this is easily understood looking in history recordings. (...) The fact
that since the very first days of the newborn realistical novel, the method of
psychological analysis has allowed writers to obtain the finest results in
portraying their characters’ inner nature needs to be emphasized. Yet, it is my
opinion that these tendencies towards investigating human behaviour have
not emerged in the literature of Asia only after the introduction of Shoyo’s
theories: it has been held as an opinion by some critics (hihyōka) from both
Japan and China that a few of such [fine] literary products had already
appeared.
10
A New Debate: The foundation for a
thorough reform of Japanese fiction
Shinseisha was constituted at a point of Meiji’s cultural life when magazines had begun
to play a major role as media for spreading the ‘new’ tendencies in the world of
literature, but is worth noting that, unlike many literary reviews on the new
proposals, in his early essays both ōgai and Shōyō deliberately choose not to deal
with criticism of one single piece of work, they tend to construct a theory of
literature as a whole.
It has also to be noted that, in discussing early literary theories Meiji intellectuals
display a strong tendency to employ terms clearly derived from the Classical
tradition in a somewhat broader sense. The extent to which an innovation in the
concept of fiction is promoted by Meiji’s prominent critics at this stage is not
easily determined.
After the publication of ‘Shigarami-zoshi’ is discontinued, ōgai has to move to the
front, and upon his return he resumes his activity founding the magazine
‘Mesamashikusa’.
At this stage of his career ōgai becomes famous for the forums (gappyô) he organized
and hosts – mostly at his house in the Kanda quarter, the Kanchôrô – with many
important writers and intellectuals of the period. The first of these very particular
reviews, ‘Sannin Jōgō (‘The blabbering of three people’), serialized from March
1896 on, has become famous for the appraisal of Higuchi Ichiyō (18721896),which earned her a firmer reputation as a writer. Also, ōgai’s criticism
towards the Naturalist School becomes sharper.
11
Towards a clear definition of
“Historical Fiction”
By the time that the Meiji literati had begun a process of
re-evaluating classical fiction, centuries of devoted
study had identified “fictional” past events with real
ones, even though fictionalized history does not obey
the rules of historiography. Revaluation estabilishing
the primacy of classical masterpieces such as Genji
Monogatari was primarily lead by the twelfth-century
writers. The conscience of a “superiority” of fiction
based on historical truth and records grows when
criticism of the Japanese “Naturalist” School becomes
sharper.
12
Towards a clear definition of Japanese
“Historical Fiction” – Pt. II

Mori Ōgai, Rekishi sono mama to Rekishibanare 歴史そのままと歴史
離れ (History as it is and History Ignored) [January 1915]:
《There has been considerable discussion, even among my friends, as to whether
or not my recent works that make use of actual historical figures can be
considered as fiction. At a time when there has been no shortage of scholars
who, under the aegis of an authoritarian ethic, insist that novels should be
written in some particular fashion or other, rendering a judgment becomes
rather difficult. I myself recognize in the works I have written considerable
differences in the degree to which I have taken an objective point of view
about my own material. (...)
The kind of work I am now writing does differ from the fiction of other writers.
I have not in my recent historical works indulged in the free adaptation and
rejection of historical fact common to this type of composition. (...)
Why? My motives are simple. In studying historical records, I came to revere the
reality that was evidenced in them. Any wanton change seemed distasteful to
me. This is one of my motives. Secondly, if contemporary authors can write
about life “just as it is” and find it satisfactory, then they ought to appreciate a
similar treatment of the past。》
13
An attempt at definition:

Given the complexity of Japan’s long tradition of writing fiction,
even Japanese modern literature that sprung out after the reform
of fiction that occurred in Meiji Japan needs to be assessed not
only by the usual criteria applied – plot, characters, setting,
theme, and tone – but also by cultural considerations. More
specifically, it has to be noted that even the “new” concept of
Historical fiction that Meiji writers promoted, although
influenced by Western models, encompasses that traditional
conception in East Asian poetics which included history as a
major constituent of “Literature” ( Bun 文 ). Great Modern
writers such as Ogai or Rohan relied heavily on Chinese
historiography’s style and contents for creating their own late
historical fiction.
14