I was intrigued by the section on Empress Jito who was the first empress to rule over the human world. She had an army of servants at her command, and the rule over the divine world (seen when the mountain and river gods presented her offerings). What changes led to the increase in the societal acceptance of female rulers that we see in this reading?
It's interesting to compare the lament for Princess Asuka with the laments for Prince Kusakabe and Prince Takechi. The laments emphasized the political-mythical significance of their deaths because both princes were successors to the throne when they died. The lament for Princess Asuka, by contrast, features personal lament and her husband's love and grief. The portrayals of the courtiers in all three laments are especially intriguing. Prince Kusakabe's lament ends with the note "the prince's courtiers do not know where to go" as "[the prince] does not speak his morning words" and the courtiers have no more commands to follow. Similarly, the first short poem dedicated to Prince Takechi begins with the line, "He has left to rule the celestial heavens," and the second poem ends with the almost identical note as in the lament of Kusakabe, "the courtiers are lost and do not know which way to go." Courtiers experience a sense of loss and confusion because the authority that once gave them orders has departed for the other world. Princess Asuka's lament grieves in the voice of her courtier, and the courtiers "have no way to give him solace and do not know what we can do." Here they are lost because the Princess's husband (her "magnificent lord") feels overwhelming grief for his loss. How to understand these different portrayals of lament in relation to gender?
The “Poems on the Death of His Wife” and “The Lament for Princess Asuka” in the Man’yō-shū seem to tie the idea of nature together with death. What seems to be the relationship between nature and death in these poems? How does the cycle of nature help or challenge the way protagonists in these poems deal with death?
I was really fascinated by the poems of Hitomaro's wife, regardless if they were autobiographical or fiction. In "Poems on the Death of His Wife", I found the topic of this forbidden love to be intriguing and was extremely fascinated by the metaphors and imagery as I continued to read the poem; it was emotionally provoking and does a great job in taking the reader through the relationship. This made me wonder if forbidden love was actually an occurrence in real life? What were society's rules when it came to having a relationship? Additionally, there appears to be a theme surrounding death of loved ones, which can also be seen in Kojiki, and was I wondering where did the theme come from? What transpired during this time that led to constant writing about the death of a loved one?
The poems of the Man'yōshū were written around the same time as the Kojiki. However, there was a stark difference in how women were described and viewed. In the Kojiki, the bodies of women were depicted as vile, especially when their deaths were described. However, in the Man'yōshū, there was a lack of this perspective. Instead, the poems would rarely focus on their bodies. Why is this distinction present between the Man'yōshū and the Kojiki?
While reading Manyoshu it was interesting that there was a crystal clear connection between the emotion and the nature, such as falling leaves as death and sadness, and not only emotion but with the conceptual beliefs such as heaven to the âme was astonishing for me. One thing I came up as a question was whether these connection with nature was intentionally created or not to make the connection with Shinto beliefs. In Shinto the belief of nature worship was one unique feature, and I wondered whether these connection with nature was simply brought from China or Japanese had recreated to get accepted by Japanese Shinto believers.
Through the reading “Silkworms and Consorts in Nara Japan” it was fascinating to learn about the interplay between religion, politics, and the sericulture industry and how sericulture shaped societal structures. Silk production had wide economic importance as a symbol of status and authority and how “silk and woven fabrics closely approximated the production of money itself” (p. 115). With silk production as a means of wealth and women playing a central role in the production of silk by operating the looms that made fabric and being responsible for the extremely labor intensive of feeding mulberry leaves to silkworms, how did the integration of sericulture into religious and political practices reflect and shape the role of women in society during this time (as they are large contributors to wealth)?
While reading Manyoshu, it was interesting that there was a crystal clear connection between the emotion and the nature, such as falling leaves as death and sadness, and not only emotion but with the conceptual beliefs such as heaven to the âme was astonishing for me. One thing I came up as a question was whether this connection with nature was intentionally created or not to make the connection with Shinto beliefs. In Shinto ,the belief of nature worship was one unique feature, and I wondered whether this connection with nature was simply brought from China or Japanese had been recreated to get accepted by Japanese Shinto believers.
Reading the poems written by Hitomaro, I thought they were all really well written and liked how he used words to portray his thought. I especially liked the one about him missing his wife. However, when reading this poem and other poems of his such as the one where he writes of the news of his wife being dead and others, he uses, at least the english translation, many of the same words, such as sleeves, leaves, seaweed. My question is are these key objects an important part of Japan's tradition and that these words mean more than what they are?
On page 39, it states that “the Manyoshu was a cultural production of the aristocracy,” suggesting that poetry, much like in other historical contexts, was primarily the domain of the privileged and educated. This context provides a foundation for understanding why Yamanoue no Okura’s poem "Dialogue with the Impoverished" stands out in the Manyoshu and in Japanese poetry as a whole. As the book explains, the poem is often interpreted as a dialogue “between a poor man and an even poorer man,” and as it apparently has been theorized prior, the first speaker might not actually be impoverished. Instead, he could be lamenting his lack of higher rank and approaching poverty from a more detached perspective, thus "looking at poverty as an outsider" (page 58). This interpretation suggests that the poem might not be a direct representation of the lived experience of poverty but rather a reflection on social status and hierarchical distinctions. Given this context, how does the portrayal of poverty in Okura’s poem give light to the socio-economic and class structures of the time? Are there other examples in the Manyoshu or traditional literature where poverty is depicted from a perspective that challenges or reinforces the dominant social hierarchies?
"Hitomaro's poem begins with a mythological narrative of how sovereignty over heaven and earth was initially divided. This account differs from the more familiar mythology of the Kojiji and the various creation myths recorded in the Nihon shoki. In Hitomaro's account, the first god-ruler of the " land of rice and reed plans" was Tenmu himself, who was sent down from heaven to rule. Within this framework Kusakabe becomes not just the heir to the ruler but also the heir to a "heavenly lord," and thus his death acquires mythological significance."(Pg 42, last paragraph).
Taida, Ichiro. A Pioneer of Classical Studies in Japan, Shigeichi Kure: A Focus on His Translations. Classical Receptions Journal, vol. 7, no. 2, 2015, pp. 260–275.
This source is an analysis on the movement of literature into Japan, rather than the other way, which is what we usually study. I thought it brought a new perspective on how Japanese society integrates foreign stories, rather than spreading their own. This paper talks about the impact Shigeichi Kure had on classical studies in Japan, especially through his translations. Kure played a big role in bringing works like Homer’s Iliad and Greek myths to Japanese readers. He had a unique method of translation because he used two main approaches: foreignization and domestication With foreignization, Kure tried to stay as close as possible to the original vibe of the texts. He used old-fashioned Japanese words and writing styles to recreate the feeling of ancient Greek and Roman works. His choices made readers feel like they were stepping back in time, preserving the poetic and cultural depth of the originals. He even played with rhythm and word choice to mirror the structure of the classics. At the same time, Kure made the stories relatable for Japanese readers with domestication. He wove in elements of traditional Japanese culture, like references to the Manyoshu and kabuki theater, and used Buddhist and Chinese idioms to add familiar touches. This mix helped readers connect with these foreign works on a deeper level. While some people found his style too complicated, Kure’s work is a significant contribution to classical Japanese literature. Thanks to Kure, generations of readers and scholars have access to a whole new world of classical literature. If I could read Japanese I would love to see Kure’s foreignization and domestication in action!