For Wednesday: Akutagawa, “Under the Sword” Stories

Be sure to read the following 3 stories: “Dr. Ogata Ryosai,” “O-Gin,” and “Loyalty” and answer TWO of the following…

Q1: Two of these stories are unique for their mixing of East and West, Buddhism and Christianity. What side does Akutagawa seem to be on in each one (or in different ones)? Are these anti-Western stories, or does he use the West to criticize Eastern values and ideas? How can we tell?

Q2: “Loyalty” is a very Japanese story, as it concerns the elaborate ceremonial rites of etiquette that bind the various classes of society. Even death, in these stories, has to follow the proper procedure! Based on this, why might a madman be particularly troubling to members of this society? Do you feel Shuri is doing this on purpose; does he know what he’s doing?

Q3: Akutagawa’s narrators are one of his trademarks, particularly someone like Dr. Ogata Ryosai, who doesn’t really “get” the big picture. How do the narrators in one or more works inadvertently see ideas we might otherwise miss, or place a satirical spin on the characters or events?  

Q4: A very ‘non-Western’ attribute of each of these stories is the ending. Nothing necessarily dramatic or surprising happens at the end, and some of the stories lack what we would consider a compelling plot. Why do you think these stories are so minimalistic, more anecdotes than true stories? And why might the endings, which frustrate Western readers, actually be important to the story as a whole? 

Short Paper #2: A Hero of Our Time

The influence of a vital person vitalizes, there’s no doubt about it. The world without spirit is a wasteland. People have the notion of saving the world by shifting things around, changing the rules, who’s on top, and so forth. No, no! Any world is a valid world if it’s alive. The thing to do is to bring life to it, and the only way to do that is to find in your own case where the life is and become alive yourself” (Campbell, The Power of Myth)

For your Short Paper #2, I want you to step out of the ‘non-Western’ bubble and examine a hero or heroine you think is relevant to 21st century American culture. This figure should be fictional so we can read how his or her character, action, and origin represents values and ideas central to our culture. Remember, even the most universal hero comes from a specific time and place, and the more we peer into his or her origins, the more we can understand what this culture believed in. For example, Rama is literally a god, so his actions must represent the basic principles of Hinduism in a way that the average reader of the book could understand (and learn from). And don’t forget the “anti-hero/heroine”! Most of Akutagawa’s ‘heroes’ are of the anti-hero variety, especially someone like the painter Yoshihide, who represents specific cultural values through the ‘heroic’ creation of the Hell Screen.

PRESENTATION: Instead of writing a typical paper, I want you to prepare a handout for the entire class that addresses some or all of the following ideas:

• The hero/heroine’s origin
• The hero/heroine’s virtues or powers
• The hero/heroine’s symbolism (what he/she represents)
• The hero/heroine’s actions (what they do that can inspire us—or we can learn from)
• The hero/heroine’s universality: can anyone understand them, or is it more limited to a specific culture/time?
• The hero/heroine’s connection to our class: how does he/she relate to some of the characters we’ve met in this class?

You will then present this hero/heroine to the class using the ideas in your handout and at least some visual aid. This could be another handout, a powerpoint or Prezi slide or two, a video clip, You Tube, etc. Just make sure we can see some aspect of this hero to complement your discussion. Your presentation only has to take 5-10 minutes, though you can go a bit longer. The goal of this paper is simply to share your ideas with the class and generate a discussion about modern-day ‘heroes’ and their importance to our society.

DUE THE WEEK OF MARCH 7^th: We’ll sign up next week to see who presents on which day, but we will present on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday.

For Wednesday: Akutagawa, "Hell Screen" (pp.42-73)

Answer TWO of the following...

Q1: How does “Hell Screen” share with stories like “Rashomon” and “In a Bamboo Grove” a very cynical view of human nature? According to these stories, why is there no fundamental difference between a thief, a painter, and a lord? Why might the moral of “Rashomon,” that “All I can do is become a thief” be the moral for all of these stories?

Q2: The painter, Yoshihide, claims that he can only paint what he has personally observed with his own eyes—and nothing else. This often leads him to observe rather gruesome spectacles, such as rotting corpses and chained prisoners (and at the end of the story, something even worse). Responding to criticisms of this practice, he responds, “Other painters are such mediocrities, they cannot appreciate the beauty of ugliness” (48). Despite his depraved character, why might this be a very “non-Western” sentiment, and a valid philosophy of art itself?

Q3: “Hell Screen” contains a curious doubling: both the painter and the monkey are named Yoshihide. Even though the monkey is named after him as a joke, in the story itself, it serves a larger purpose. What role does the monkey serve in the story, and how might it help us ‘see’ the true character of the painter?

Q4: The narrator of this story has a character all his own, as he tells the story in fits and starts, and makes commentary throughout. Why do you think he is so captivated by this story, and how might his manner of telling the story color how we read and understand it?

For Monday: Akutagawa's Stories

For Monday, there are no questions, but I will spring an in-class response on you when you arrive based on the following stories (pp.3-41 in your book):

* Rashomon
* In a Bamboo Grove
* The Nose
* Dragon: The Old Potter's Tale
* The Spider Thread 

As you read, think of connections between these stories and Kwaidan, as well as to the previous stories we've encountered. See you then! 

For Friday: Questions for Kwaidan (1965)

NOTE: These questions are for the two stories from Kwaidan we watched on Monday-Wednesday, "The Woman of the Snows" and "Hoichi the Earless." Even though we have about 10 minutes left on the last story, you've seen enough to answer these questions for our discussion on Friday. 

Answer TWO of the following for Friday…

Q1: According to these stories, what relationship do common people have with the spirit world? What do spirits want with men/women? Is it similar to what we find in The Ramayana, which is also populated by many demons/spirits?

Q2: Both stories concern the importance of an oath or of keeping one’s word. Though neither example is ‘fair’ in modern terms, why do you think this was so important for the culture? Why would the spirits demand such an impractical oath?

Q3: Though ‘non-Western,’ and specifically, Japanese, do these stories resemble any Western stories you might be aware of? Are these stories somewhat universal in their lessons and beliefs? Can we relate…or do they require enough translation to make them ‘exotic’?

Q4: In the second story, we also get a glimpse at the afterlife—the spirits of the Emperor and his soldiers who call on Hoichi, the musician, to play for them. What kind of ‘hell’ or ‘heaven’ does it envision? Is this anything like what we glimpsed in The Epic of Gilgamesh? What might it say about the values and beliefs of this culture? 

Critical Paper #1: due Feb 29th by 5pm

Critical Paper #1: The Finger Pointing at the Moon

“All of this effort has been not to attain personal satisfaction for you or me. It was to vindicate the honour of the Ikshavhu race and to honour our ancestors’ codes and values.” (Narayan 148).

THE RESPONSE: Are heroes in these cultures supposed to celebrate our human virtues and failings…or are they supposed to function as metaphors for divine ideals and concepts? In other words, do we read the heroes literally, as people who literally did this and did that and inspire us by their example (even if they fail in doing so), or do we read them as a symbol that leads to an idea?

Remember the Buddhist idea of the finger pointing at the moon: the finger is not the moon, it’s just a way to direct our attention to the moon. In the same way, is a hero a HAND or a MOON? What are we supposed to be looking at? This question is complicated by history and culture (removed in time and place) and by the different authors themselves, who might not completely agree with one another. It is your task to decide how we can best appreciate these heroes and understand the importance of this ancient literature.

THE SOURCES: Use both The Epic of Gilgamesh and The Ramayana to help you answer this question. You must quote from each book and use examples to illustrate your ideas about the role of heroes in ancient Non-Western culture. You can also use our next two works, the film and Rashomon, but try not to focus on these, since we’ll have time to write about them later.

ALSO, I want you to use at least 2-3 outside sources that can help broaden your perspective and understanding on heroes, Non-Western literature, or the cultures/religions in question. Some sources you might consider are:

• Other works related to Gilgamesh and Sumerian literature (such as the ones printed in the back of our book of Gilgamesh)
• Works related to Hindu spirituality, such as The Bhagavad Gita, The Upanishads, or The Dhammapada (in our library, and the other Honors class is using them—ask them to help you!)
• Articles or books about Gilgamesh or The Ramayana which you can find through EBSCO or in our library
• Articles or books on heroes, myths, and legends (Joseph Campbell’s The Power of Myth, The Hero With a Thousand Faces, etc. are great resources—in our library)
• Films that focus on Non-Western culture and heroes/myths: there are many films of The Ramayana, for example, which you can find on-line
• REQUIREMENTS: 5-6 pages, double spaced; cite sources consistently in one style (MLA, APA, etc.); Due Monday, February 29^th by 5pm 

For Wednesday: Last Questions for The Ramayana

Answer TWO of the following...

Q1: In The Ramayana, most things are not what they seem, particularly if they look too good to be true. Rama is warned that Ravana’s turncoat brother, Vibishana, is clearly an “asura,” an evil spirit who will bring him harm; therefore he must kill him and fulfill his duty as a hero (who came to earth, after all, to stop Ravana and all asuras). Why does Rama instead decide to spare him even at the risk of being betrayed later on? Does this go against his dharma as a warrior or his mission as a god?

Q2: Toward the end of his life, Ravana is warned “Sooner or later retribution comes. Do not be contemptuous of men or monkeys” (126). Why does he continue to fly in the face of dharma and pursue his “impure work”? If we read this entire story on a more allegorical/metaphorical level, what human impulse might Ravana represent for the book’s readers?

Q3: What do you make of the passage that describes Ravana’s death? How might this reflect Rama’s earlier encounter with Vali? How might this passage also help explain the concept of maya in Hindu thought?

Q4: Clearly the most controversial part of the book is Rama’s rejection of Sita after his long struggle to regain her. How do you read this passage in terms of Rama being not only a great hero, but the god Vishnu himself? Why demand this of a wronged woman? Does this passage relate to anything else we’ve read in the book concerning women? (related to this, how does Narayan seem to read it)? 

For Monday: Narayan, The Ramayana, Chs.5-7

Q1: On Friday, we discussed a passage from The Bhagavad Gita which read, “work which is done with a confused mind, without considering what may follow, or one’s own powers, or the harm done to others, or one’s own loss, is a work of darkness.” How might this passage illustrate a specific passage in Chs.5-7? Be specific and briefly discuss its significance.

Q2: When Rama attacks Vali from behind a bush, delivering a fatal blow, Vali asks, “When strong men commit crimes, they become heroic deeds?” (101). How does Rama defend himself against claims of injustice against Vali and a betrayal of his own code? Has he committed a selfish act, one based on “impure knowledge”? Or is Vali’s way of understanding this act limited?

Q3: In Chapter 5, Narayan writes, “The fates were at work and this was to be a crucial moment in their lives. Normally, Rama would have questioned Sita’s fancy, but today he blindly accepted her demand” (82). How should we read this passage? Did the gods intervene and make Rama “weak,” or is this Rama’s humanity showing through? Can everything in the book be explained away by karma?

Q4: How does the character of Hanuman—though a monkey—embody many key Hindu beliefs about individual identity and duty? Why might he also be a cultural metaphor for the role of a hero himself? (indeed, in Hindu thought, Hanuman is almost as important as Rama).

For Wednesday: Narayan, The Ramayana, Chs.3-4

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: As we discussed on Monday, Narayan is not an academic, so he views his work more as a retelling than an actual translation. This allows him more latitude to interpret the story and add his own interpolations and glosses. Where does he do this in Chs. 3 and 4, and how does it add to the story—esp. for a modern audience?

Q2: In Chapter 3, Rama claims that “A word given is like an arrow, it goes forward. You cannot recall it midway” (54). What situation is he responding to  here, and how does this underline the fundamental concept of dharma (which translates to “the essential order of things, an integrity and harmony in the universe and in the affairs of life that cannot be disturbed without courting chaos”)? 

Q3: What role do women seem to play in The Ramayana? From Sita, to Kayeki, to the demon Soorpanaka, they all share certain characteristics and emerge as very distinct characters (maybe more so than the men). As Western readers, do we read these portrayals as somewhat misogynist (anti-women)? Or are they merely playing the roles required of them in this culture? Do they relate at all to the women in The Epic of Gilgamesh?

Q4: In Chapter 1, Rama has to kill a female demon, and in Chapter 4, his brother, Viswamithra has to mutilate Soorpanaka. Both deeds can be seen as quite horrific and certainly beneath the hero of a great epic. How does the work justify these acts? How could men, traditionally the protectors of women in this culture, inflict such savagery upon them?