Special Issue: Edo Culture and Its Modern Legacy || The Samurai Ethic in Mayama Seika's Genroku Chūshingura

The Samurai Ethic in Mayama Seika's Genroku ChūshinguraAuthor(s): Brian PowellSource: Modern Asian Studies, Vol. 18, No. 4, Special Issue: Edo Culture and Its Modern Legacy(1984), pp. 725-745Published by: Cambridge University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/312347 .

Accessed: 22/09/2013 07:05

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Cambridge University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to ModernAsian Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 147.188.128.74 on Sun, 22 Sep 2013 07:05:36 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup

http://www.jstor.org/stable/312347?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


Modern Asian Studies, 18, 4 (I984), PP. 725-745. Printed in Great Britain.

The Samurai Ethic in Mayama Seika's Genroku Chtishingura

BRIAN POWELL

St Antony's College, Oxford

MAYAMA Seika was born in Sendai in I878 and came to Tokyo, after an unsuccessful start to a medical career, to try his hand at writing in 1903.1 A young writer needed a patron and literary mentor, if he was to have any hope of rising in the bundan, and Mayama set about finding one. He was rebuffed by Tokutomi Kenjir5, attached himself to Sat5 Koroku for about one year and finally became a monkasei of Oguri Ffiuy in I905. Under Ffiuy's tutelage, although the small difference in their ages and Mayama's strong character precluded a normal sensei/deshi relationship, Mayama Seika became a Naturalist writer of some note at the time. In six years, between 1905 and 191 I, he published nearly one hundred short stories, most in prestigious literary magazines. Frank description of life in the raw was a requirement of Naturalist authors and many of Mayama's works were strong in this quality. In particular his accounts of life in poverty-stricken agricultural communities of the Tahoku area, observed with a doctor's eye, and his accurate reproduction of the dialects of that region have been singled out as distinctive contributions to this genre of literature.

The next stage of Mayama's career begins with his withdrawal from the bundan in I911i, when his works were boycotted by the main publishing houses after he had taken fees from two different magazines for the same manuscript. Mayama moved to a suburb ofYokohama and for several years wrote comparatively little fiction. Instead he devoted himself to research into the works of Ihara Saikaku and published several studies about him. He also published articles on Sei Shanagon and Arai Hakuseki. Material circumstances, however, did not permit Mayama to spend many months in his study and in 1913 he accepted a salaried position with the Shachiku company as a shimpa playwright. Shimpa demanded large numbers of new plays whose popularity could be guaranteed and Mayama found himself adapting the most popular 1

Biographical details are taken from Nomura Takashi, 'Hyiden Mayama Seika', and 'Mayama Seika nenpu' in Mayama Seika tensh/u (K6dansha, 1975), bekkan I, 7-214 and 579-92?

00oo26-748X/84/o708-090o2$o5.oo ? 1984 Cambridge University Press.

725



726 BRIAN POWELL

newspaper serials for the stage. This rather pedestrian work continued until 1918, when he published his first historical play. Entitled Kugutsubune (The Puppeteers' Ship), it dramatized the mysterious circumstances surrounding the death of Minamoto no Yoritomo. It appeared later that considerable historical research had been undertaken by Mayama when preparing to write this play and Kugutsubune marks the beginning of the type of playwriting for which Mayama has since become famous. In it he combined the results of historical research with the playwriting techniques that he had learnt as a rapid producer of plays on demand for the shimpa theatre.

In 1924 Mayama published the play that is generally regarded as signalling his re-emergence as an accepted writer after the disgrace of thirteen years previously. The play had only two characters, It5 Genboku and Takano Chiei, both historical, and the title consisted simply of their two given names-Genboku to Chgei. The meeting between these two characters that is depicted in the play probably never took place, but there is a wealth of accurate detail about them as individuals, about their acquaintances and about the times in which they lived. This was to be the hallmark of all Mayama's plays from this year onwards. Most of the ninety plays that Mayama wrote between 1924 and I943 had historical personages as main characters and most were set in the Edo period. Until 1934 the major Edo plays concern nineteenth-century Japan, when Mayama's samurai heroes had to confront rapidly changing social and political circumstances. His attention was also drawn, however, to the early part of the Edo period, when the values by which his bakumatsu heroes lived and succeeded were first being given a definable form in the transition from war to permanent peace.

During these ten years, apart from a prolific output of plays, Mayama Seika published studies of various kinds almost every year. A few of them concerned post-Meiji Japan but the Edo period was clearly his major preoccupation. The subjects covered included Saikaku and Takizawa Bakin, Genroku place-names, the Sendai dialect, and many others.2 Among the forty or so articles which Mayama wrote during these years were some substantial pieces of academic research which have been recognized in academic circles. References to Mayama's work on Saikaku will sometimes be found in the bibliographies of recent studies of that author. Mayama was an indefatigable collector of old maps and he had a passion for establishing the correct readings of Edo place- names and the exact locations of places referred to in Edo literature.

Mayama Seika would have preferred to have been a scholar and the 2 See Maeda Kingor5, 'Mayam' Seika no Edo jidai kenkyiia, ibid., 320-61.



THE SAMURAI ETHIC IN GENROKU CHUSHINGURA 727

volume of his non-fictional, non-dramatic publications during this period testify to the energy which he expended on the side of his creative life which cost money rather than gained it. To the consternation of his family he would often spend his entire play royalties on books and maps, and the house is reported to have had full bookshelves in every room except the kitchen. Mayama had no formal connection with any university and seems to have made little use of university libraries. He had his own research collection and research assistants and would buy the materials he needed in secondhand book shops.

Much of this research into the Edo period was done specifically as preparation for writing plays and it was not published independently. Mayama's major statement of his views on the Edo period-the one for which he is best known--is embodied not in articles but in a series of

plays on the Chiishingura theme written between I934

and I94I. Eleven plays were published, two in unfinished form, and they appear as ten complete plays in the 1978 Collected Works.3 The first written was chronologically the last in subject matter, recounting incidents which occurred on the day on which the forty-six ronin committed seppuku. The last but one written (in 1940) has been the most popular and can be said to be incidental to the main story of the vendetta (Ohama goten Tsunatoyoky5); the only Ak5 ranin to appear is Tominomori Sukuemon and then only in a secondary role. The other plays show various phases in the development of the vendetta from the incident in Edo castle on 14 March 170i, to the successful attack on Kira Kazuke-no-suke's mansion on I4 December I702. In the course of this play cycle Mayama developed a distinctive view of the significance of the Ak5 affair and this will be the main subject of this paper. Mayama wrote no plays of note after completing his Genroku Chilshingura, as the cycle was called, and he died in 1948.

Mayama's approach to the dramatic treatment of historical material would not be found exceptional in the general context of historical playwriting. His only published comment on the subject is in the form of a reply to an attack made on his play Kugutsubune by the novelist and literary theorist Nakazato Kaizan in a work entitled Rekishi shosetsu no honry in 1922. Mayama's indignant riposte was published in the Miyako Shinbun on 12 January 1923, and he defends his reliance on a less than impeccable source for an incident central to the play by explaining that the main documents, which he lists, are wanting or vague. No-one need be surprised to hear from a historical playwright that

... a playwright is not a rigorous historical scholar. There is nothing wrong 3 Ibid., I.



728 BRIAN POWELL

with his basing his conception of a play on powerful legends .... If one applies oneself immoderately to historical research and gets so bogged down in petty facts that one's imagination is fettered and one's works lose their human life, this is like deadening the spicy flavour of food with too much salt. What one produces in these circumstances can hardly be recognized as works of art.4

Mayama Seika allowed his imagination full scope in many of his plays, not least in Genroku Chishingura, but it is also true that he did apply himself 'immoderately to historical research' and he was devoted to establishing 'petty facts'. The two were not incompatible and the plays show both sides of the playwright's character. The former affected Mayama's general interpretation of any historical event treated in the plays, whereas the latter are confined mainly to the stage directions.

Mayama's stage directions are long and very detailed. One would need to be a specialist in Edo art and architecture, topography, social customs, language and history to be able to check the authenticity of the stage directions in Genroku Chishingura. One can only rely on scattered instances where a specialist has discovered that Mayama was right while others had been wrong. Most of the stage directions were for the benefit of the actors and the scene designers in the normal way (there were no directors in kabuki when Mayama was writing). There is much detail in the descriptions of each set and the appearance of characters. There is also, however, a great amount of information that cannot have been of direct use to those intending to perform the plays, except in so far as greater authenticity could be expected of actors with extensive know- ledge of the historical background to the plays. An additional reason for the inclusion of this extra, even superfluous, material was that Mayama was writing also for readers. His plays were published in monthly journals such as Ch/zi KIron in the 1920s and more popular monthlies (all from Kodansha), such as Kingu, in the I930s. (The whole Genroku Chishingura cycle was published in Kingu with the exception of 7ishi saigo no ichinichi, which appeared in Hinode.) Through these magazines, which all had large circulations, Mayama's plays reached large numbers of people who would only very rarely have had an opportunity to visit a theatre. It is said that many of these readers took delight in the historical detail of the stage directions. For example, at the beginning of Oishi saigo no ichinichi Mayama lists the seventeen ronin held at the Hosokawa house, giving their names, ages, functions, kokudaka and room of confinement. These details are included 'in order to give the readers a clearer impression'." It must have been primarily for the readers that

4 Mayama Seika, '"Rekishi sh/setsu no honry'" ni tsuite', quoted in ibid., XVIII, 136. 5 Ibid., 642.




reproductions of maps contemporary or nearly contemporary to the events of the plays were always included with the text. There are no less than thirty-five provided for the readers of Genroku chashingura.

Sources are sometimes quoted in the stage directions. For example, when describing Oishi Kuranosuke's house at the beginning of the third play, Saigo no daihyejJ, Mayama refers to the record of Kawahara Kan.6 Reference is made to three sources in the list of Ak5 ronin in the Hosokawa house mentioned above: AkJ bungench5, Ryiiei nikki and Hakushika monjo.' Three sources are also quoted when establishing the exact name of the famous inn at Fushimi Shumokumachi,8 and Mayama is sometimes credited with having discovered that Shumoku- machi is the correct reading rather than the conventional Shumokuch5. Not all the facts given in the stage directions are as well documented as this, and often there is simply a mention ofissho (one source). While this may seem unsatisfactory to the reader who has admired the scholarly nature of the stage directions where sources are quoted, one should be surprised that a playwright has quoted any rather than be disappointed that academic standards are not consistently maintained.

Mayama Seika is never knowingly inaccurate in the stage directions of his plays, and this statement would also apply to events described in the plays for which adequate sources exist. He seems to have taken Nakazato's criticism to heart and when he has to depart from the historical record for the sake of the play, he confesses this in a stage direction. For example, in Oishi saigo no ichinichi he states at one point that to suit the play he has set a scene in a room different from that in which historically it took place.9

The historical accuracy of Mayama's stage directions only has relevance here in so far as it may affect the historical accuracy of the portrayal of the events on the stage. It could be argued that Mayama's fastidiousness over his interior sets could just be a camouflage to lure his audience into believing that everything was as true as the patterns on the

fusumna. Against this it can be said that Mayama's stage directions placed considerable restraints on him. He could hardly describe from historical sources the appearance, age, social status, mien and even personal habits and idiosyncracies of his characters in the stage directions, and then portray all this differently when these same characters were enacting the events of the play. Considerable freedom of interpretation is still possible even given these limitations, and we shall see later that restraints on behaviour enforced by differences of status are not always observed. But one can suggest with some confidence that gross

6 Ibid., 93. 7 Ibid., 642. 8 Ibid., 2 I1-I2. 9 Ibid., 696.



730 BRIAN POWELL

distortions (such as abound in Kanadehon Chishingura) are not possible when so much background information is provided by the author.

The events ofGenroku 14, 15 and 16 (1701, 1702 and 1703) which so

engaged the creative and investigative energies of Mayama Seika were in bald outline as follows.x0 At I I.oo am on 14 March 1701, in the Matsu no Jr5ka of Edo castle,just before important ceremonials surrounding the visit to the fifth shjgun Tsunayoshi of envoys from the Imperial Court at Kyoto, Asano Takumi-no-kami Naganori, lord (53,000 koku) of the fief of Ak5 in the province of Harima and master of ceremonies for the day, drew his wakizashi and struck Kira Kozuke-no-suke Yoshinaka on the shoulder and forehead. Kira was from a family which, although its kokudaka was relatively low, had high status through its traditional function as overseer of ceremonial (klke). The shogunate judged the incident to have been one ofninjJ (attack-that is, one-sided, as opposed to kenka--a quarrel between two persons) and for the crime of forgetting where he was and attacking another without reason (denchi o

habakarazu, ri-fujin ni kiritsuke-soro dan) Asano was ordered to commit seppuku forthwith. His castle and lands in the fiefofAk6 were to be forfeited and the name of his family would cease to exist. Although the sentence was carried out immediately at the Edo residence of Tamura Ukyodayu Tateaki (30,000 koku), it was nearly a fortnight before the sh6gun's emissaries arrived at the castle ofAk6 (Kariya-j6) to take over the fief from Asano's retainers. In the meantime they (some 350 of them) debated what to do. Some wished to resist to the death whatever forces the shogun might send, others to follow their lord in seppuku, others to hand over the castle as ordered. The karJ of Ak6 was Oishi Kuranosuke Yoshio and he quickly petitioned for the re-establishment of the family under the dead Asano's younger brother, Daigaku, already registered as Asano's heir. There was no hope of this petition being granted so soon after the crime had been committed and, about three hundred of the retainers, now rgnin, having melted away, the remaining fifty or so handed over the castle. It appears that they had by this time made a pact to avenge their lord by attacking Kira. There was then a long period of waiting and planning. A radical group wanted the attack to take place as soon as possible. Oishi counselled delay until the result of the petition was announced. If the house ofAsano was re-instated, there would be no point in revenge-indeed, revenge would then mean irrevocable extinction. Finally on 18 July I702, the bakufu sent Daigaku into the custody of the main Asano house in Hiroshima, thus effectively rejecting the petition. There was now nothing to prevent the attack on Kira

'o See Tahara Tsuguo, AkJ shijirokushi-ron (Yoshikawa K6bunkan, 1978), pp. i-6i.



THE SAMURAI ETHIC IN GENROKU CHUSHINGURA 73I

taking place and on 14 December I702, forty-seven of the original band of ranin successfully entered Kira's residence by force, killed him and took his head. Early the next morning (the I5th) they presented the head (shirushi) before the grave ofAsano in the grounds ofSengakuji and then surrendered to the authorities. They (now forty-six, as one had absconded) were split up into four groups and each group was assigned to the custody of a trusted daimyJ. They waited for sentence until 4 February 1703, when the shogun's representatives called at the four mansions and announced that the sentence was seppuku. The forty-six ronin disembowelled themselves the same day.

The popular theatre of the time was quick to dramatize any spectacular event and two weeks after the final seppuku a stage version of the story was presented at an Edo theatre." A number of other versions followed over the years until in 1748 the play cycle which everyone knows-Kanadehon Chishingura-was written by Takeda Izumo, Miyoshi Sharaku and Namiki Senryui for the puppet theatre. This

Chfishingura is regarded in Japan as a masterpiece and has been performed frequently over the past two centuries by both the puppet and the kabuki theatres. Between the mid-eighteenth and the end of the nineteenth century more than seventy other dramatizations of the story were performed, and in the modern period the forty-seven have been celebrated on radio, television and the film in addition to yet further stage versions. Mayama Seika is therefore not at all unique in his choice of subject. What distinguishes his Chishingura from all the others except Kanadehon is that on three occasions in the post-war period a whole month's kabuki programme has been devoted to his cycle. The most recent example was in April 1981, when six of the ten plays were presented every day at the Kabuki-za in Tokyo.

There is perhaps little prose-writing as tedious to read as accounts of the plots of kabuki plays. The plots themselves tend to be rather complicated, with numerous sub-plots and involved relationships among characters which have to be explained. The theatrical magazines ofpre-warJapan evolved a special genre of writing to solve this problem. Given the name Mita mama (Just as I saw it) these articles, by combining quotation with narrative, aimed to convey the essential flavour of any new play. No such artistic expertise is claimed here and the reader must bear with the necessarily flat nature of the prose which will be used. One of Mayama Seika's strengths as a playwright lies in the forcefulness of his dialogue and it is particularly difficult to summarize his plays

"' See Donald H. Shively, 'Tokugawa Plays on Forbidden Topics', in Brandon (ed.), Chushingura (Hawaii, I982), pp. 33ff.



732 BRIAN POWELL

adequately. Three plays from the cycle which have been very infre- quently performed have been omitted in the summaries (Fushimi Shumokumachi, Kira-yashiki uramon and Sengakuji), but they are mentioned in the succeeding comments.

The first play ofGenroku Chushingura is entitled Edojo no ninjo (The Attack in Edo Castle, published second in January I935) and covers the time from the moment after Asano's attack on Kira to just before his seppuku at the Tamura residence. There is therefore an immediate contrast with Kanadehon Chilshingura, where the attack takes place towards the end of Act (or 'Play') III. In the classical version the events leading up to the attack are described in great detail, but there is no historical record which shows clearly why Asano should have drawn his sword on Kira. In Mayama's text the curtain opens on the entry of a group of flustered daimyJ. They are in full ceremonial dress, as the Imperial envoys are waiting and the shogun is about to appear, and are clamouring to know what frightful incident has just occurred. They are pacified by attendants and a few moments later Kira is helped along the passageway at the back of the stage (so that he is only seen where thefusuma are open). Mayama is therefore placing no emphasis on the fact of the attack, which has happened offstage just before the play begins. Asano is then brought in and forced to give up the

wakizashi with which he has

wounded Kira. He is at first greatly agitated that he has not achieved his object in trying to kill Kira. Okado Denpachir6 (metsuke, acting as

6metsuke) begins his investigation and is disgusted to hear that Kira made no move to draw his own wakizashi. He later expresses this disgust again in front of shogunal representatives, who commend Kira's forbearance and convey the sentence of immediate seppuku on Asano. Okado is further incensed when he sees the arrangements which have been made at the Tamura residence for the seppuku. An additional insult is to be directed at Asano by making him commit seppuku in the garden, not inside the house as would befit a daimy5. But Okado does succeed in allowing a retainer ofAsano's, Kataoka Gengoemon, to conceal himself in the garden, and he and his lord exchange a final look of farewell. Asano, deeply moved, calls for his last words to be recorded: that his retainers may well feel that there is room for doubt and suspicion. The curtain falls as Asano recites his death poem.

The 'second messenger' of the second play, Daini no shisha (The Second Messenger, published fourth in March I935) is the one who will bring definite news to the castle at Ak6 where Asano's retainers are anxiously waiting. It is five days after the ninja and the chief retainer Oishi Kuranosuke is supervising the winding-up of the affairs of the fief.




Against the opposition of Ono Kurobei he is insisting that as high a percentage as possible is repaid to the fief's creditors, mainly farmers and merchants. It will reflect on the honour of their dead lord if this is not done. To this end the main house at Hiroshima (540,000 koku) is asked for a large loan. Kuranosuke's fourteen-year-old son, Matsu- no-j5, begs his father to be allowed to perform early the manhood initiation ceremony ofgenpuku, so that he can take his place with the other retainers, but Kuranosuke refuses. The messengers arrive with details of the shlgun'sjudgement on Asano and of the seppuku itself. They cannot say how bad Kira's wounds are. Finally the Ak6 retainers stationed in Kyoto also appear and assure Kuranosuke that no-one at Court has suggested that Asano has been guilty of disrespect or irreverence (fukei) towards the Imperial throne. Kuranosuke, who has been much worried by this possibility, is overjoyed to hear that there is

sympathy for Asano in court circles, and the play ends as he makes obeisance towards Kyoto.

Saigo no daihy~jo (The Last Great Council, published third from May 1935) brings the story up to the final decision to take revenge-except that no such decision is openly taken. It is now about a fortnight since the incident and the retainers are still discussing what to do. So far Kuranosuke has not given any lead and criticism of him is mounting. In front of Kuranosuke's house there now arrives Izeki Tokubei with his

fourteen-year-old son. Izeki, a former Aka retainer, had been sent away in disgrace from the han as a r6nin for misconduct twenty years before, but hearing of his former lord's calamity has returned to join the other retainers in dying for him. There is an emotional confrontation between Kuranosuke and Tokubei, who had been boyhood friends (had played on 'bamboo horses' together), but Kuranosuke will not let Tokubei into the castle. Later in one of the main rooms of the castle Kuranosuke entertains highly-placed visitors who urge him to hand over the castle

peaceably. He is angry with them, because they are only consulting their own interests in proffering this advice, and they will not tell him what Kira's state of health is. This information is vital to Kuranosuke if

revenge is to be contemplated. The news that Kira is alive and well is brought a few minutes later by two Ak6 retainers from Edo and the final conference takes place. Not without hesitation all fifty-six remaining retainers pledge themselves to obey Kuranosuke in all things, but only after he has declared that of course he can never forget that Kira lives. Vendetta is not mentioned, but it is clear that they all take this for

granted. Kuranosuke leaves the darkened castle to find Tokubei beside his dead son. Tokubei plunges his sword into his own stomach, begging



734 BRIAN POWELL

Kuranosuke to tell him that revenge will be taken. Kuranosuke confides to the dying ronin that he intends to defy the laws of the land. Tokubei dies, and Kuranosuke sadly leaves the castle that has been the centre of his life.

The fourth play, Fushimi Shumokumachi (published eighth in Sep- tember I939) has been surprisingly unpopular in that the seventh play of Kanadehon Chashingura on the same theme--Kuranosuke's feigned dissoluteness--is frequently performed before enthusiastic audiences. This is a highly colourful episode and perhaps Mayama's version pales in comparison with the splendours of the Gion under Tadayoshi in the classic play. By contrast the next play in the Genroku Chashingura cycle has been the most popular. Entitled Ohama goten Tsunatoyo-ky6 (Lord Tsunatoyo at his Ohama Estate, published ninth in spring I940), it discussed the morality of vendetta and the feelings of both high and low towards a possible revenge by the Ako ronin. None of the main personalities connected with the vendetta appear, but the play is important to the cycle dramatically in providing a social and political underpinning to the plans of the ronin. It is now a year since Asano's attempt on Kira's life and in a spacious estate facing the sea (Ohama goten) K6fuk6 Tokugawa Tsunatoyo is enjoying the Girls Festival with all the ladies and serving women of his household. Tsunatoyo is destined to become the sixth shogun Ienobu, but studiously avoids any involve- ment in politics at this time in case ambition should be imputed to him and his house threatened. His beloved and beautiful consort, Okiyo, also appears in this play, as does Ejima, one of his serving women later to be famous for a much publicised love-affair with the actor Ikushima Shingor5. Okiyo's (adopted) elder brother, Tominomori Sukuemon, wants to observe the women's frolics through a gap in the hedge (sukimi)--a pastime popular among the townsmen of the period but unusual in a samurai. Tsunatoyo, who learns of the request, remembers that he is one of the Ak6 ronin and thinking that there must be an ulterior motive connected with the vendetta readily accedes. Tsunatoyo himself is in a dilemma, as his wife's family (Konoe Kanpaku) has asked him to urge the shogun to grant the petition to restore the house of Asano, something he is obviously hesitating to do. We learn why in the next scene, where Tsunatoyo confronts his teacher Arai Kageyu (Hakuseki) with the problem. Kageyu will not commit himself, but actively encourages Tsunatoyo to his conclusion that he wants to let the rgnin have their revenge-and then agrees wholeheartedly with him. So Tsunatoyo will not recommend the petition. However, he wants to know whether there is in fact a revenge plot, as rumour has it, or not, and




he brings Tominomori Sukuemon in to try to find out from him. The difference in status between the two men is immense, but whatever

Tsunatoyo does, he cannot get Sukuemon to give any information. He taunts Sukuemon with Kuranosuke's dissipation and tells him about the petition, which he says he intends to support. Sukuemon reacts desperately to this, and Tsunatoyo now has his answer. The last scene of the play is set behind a nJ stage, on which is to be performed a nJ play as part of the day's celebrations. Kira K6zuke-no-suke is due to dance in this play and Sukuemon had wanted to peep in order to obtain a sight of Kira's face, as not one of the ronin knew what he looked like. After the scene with Tsunatoyo, however, an agitated Sukuemon has decided to take matters into his own hands and kill Kira on the spot. He thrusts with a spear at the heavily costumed figure whom he believes to be Kira; they fight, and as Sukuemon is disarmed, the nI actor reveals himself to be Tsunatoyo. He berates Sukuemon, telling him that a revenge without honour is no revenge, and has him thrown out of the grounds.

Play six follows closely an earlier play by Kawatake Mokuami and has the title Nfanbuzakayuki no wakare (Farewell in the Snow at Nfanbu Hill, published sixth in December I938). It is now 13 December 17o2, eighteen months after Asano's seppuku and there is still no sign of a revenge plot. Public opinion is becoming impatient, and the scholar Hagura Itsuki, who had studied with Kuranosuke under It6 Jinsai, is particularly angry about it. Meeting with some of the older Ak6 retainers in a snowy Sengakuji, he pours scorn on Kuranosuke for his inactivity. They have nothing to say to this. After Hagura's exit, Kuranosuke himself comes on and is surprised to see the r~nin. It is a memorial day for the dead Asano and Kuranosuke, having come to Edo from Kyoto-and this in itself is significant-is paying his respects. So are they, but Kuranosuke had given express orders that they were not to go to the temple, so as not to arouse any suspicions that a revenge might be imminent, and he vents his anger on them for disobeying his orders. The next scene takes place in the nakayashiki of the Miyoshi branch of the Asano house, where Asano's widow, now the nun Y6zen'in, lives. Kuranosuke comes to visit her--in fact to say farewell--but to her grief and frustration he will still not admit that there are any plans for revenge. She angrily rejects his request to be allowed to burn incense for Asano, saying her dead husband would not be pleased at this empty gesture from a worthless retainer. Sadly, Kuranosuke leaves after entrusting his travel poems, written on the way from Kyoto, to one of her senior retainers. As he walks away from the house, Y6zen'in calls from a window. She has read the poems, understood Kuranosuke's thoughts



736 BRIAN POWELL

and wants to wish him well. One of the forty-seven comes up to Kuranosuke with the news that Kira will definitely be at home the next night, and the plot is set.

There are then two plays which were performed only a few times up to the end of the war and not at all since. Kirayashiki uramon ( The Rear Gate of the Kira Residence, published fifth in July I938) and Sengakuji (published tenth in December I94I) both concern the events of the revenge attack itself. In the former, small groups of tired and very human r6nin discuss outside the gate how the attack has gone inside and in the latter the head of Kira is presented to the grave of Asano.

There follows Sengokuyashiki (published seventh in January 1939). The deed having been accomplished, the forty-six present themselves at the residence of the Jmetsuke Sengoku H6ki-no-kami Hisanao. They are surrendering to the due process of law and Sengoku is arranging for them to be put into the custody of various daimy6. Although earlier in the play he has shown his obvious pleasure at the successful revenge, he has an investigation to conduct and now in his official capacity he asks for details of the attack and reasons why the law has been broken. The former he receives in abundance to his manifest satisfaction, and he seems finally convinced by Kuranosuke's explanation of why the attack took place at all: the ranin felt that Asano would not have drawn his sword aware of the terrible consequences of doing so, without having been intolerably provoked; he died regretting that he had failed to kill Kira, and they believed they had to do it for him. However, punishment is inescapable, and the various groups of ronin are escorted away. Kuranosuke and his son Chikara are assigned to different groups and Chikara assures his father that he will die well.

The last play is unusual in that it treats of events of the last day in the lives of a group of seventeen ranin, including Kuranosuke, who are in the custody of Hosokawa Etchfi-no-kami. Kanadehon Chushingura and most other versions of the story had stopped after the attack on Kira. The most notable exception to this had been by Fukuchi Ochi, in the Meiji period. Mayama's play is entitled Oishi saigo no ichinichi (&ishi's Last Day, published first in March I934). The forty-six are heroes and Oishi's group at least is being well treated by Hosokawa. The latter's fifteen-year-old son visits the ronin-a great honour to them as they are officially criminals awaiting sentence-and asks for some token by which to remember such noble samurai. Kuranosuke advises him never to forget his first impulse, as this is probably free of baser considerations such as loss or gain (shoichinen o wasureru na). The central scene of the play is between Kuranosuke and a young girl Omino, who has come into




the mansion disguised as a man. She had been promised to one of the ronin, Isogai Jiurzaemon, but on the day of their formal betrothal--the day before the attack on Kira's house, as it happened--he had disappeared. She now wants to know whether she has simply been used or whether Isogai really had feelings for her. Kuranosuke will not bring her and Isogai together because he is afraid of the effect on Isogai's spiritual preparation for death, but she finally convinces him and, as the arrival of the shogun's representatives, bearing the sentence, is announced, Kuranosuke summons Isogai. Isogai denies that he knows Omino until Kuranosuke mentions a koto plectrum which he has observed Isogai keeping carefully. It is Omino's, and she now realizes that Isogai had genuinely been in love with her. The seventeen ronin then assemble to hear sentence and ArakiJizaemon, metsuke, reads it to them. It is seppuku and Kuranosuke expresses the gratitude of all of them; but he is clearly not satisfied. Araki, abandoning his official position and speaking as a private individual, informs Kuranosuke that Kira's heir has been dispossessed for cowardly behaviour in not assisting his father and that the name of the house has been extinguished. Kuranosuke and the others express delight that justice has been done. In the last scene they file out to seppuku past a room where Omino has stabbed herself. Isogai assures her that he will soon be following her in death. The curtain falls as Oishi's name is called.

In Ohama goten Tsunatoyo expresses to Sukuemon the hope that bushid6 will be revived after fifteen years of Genroku peace by the actions of the Ako ronin. What kind of bushid6 was represented by Mayama Seika's ranin in the execution of their revenge and in their actions from that time until their punishment by self-inflicted death?

Firstly the environment in which their bushid6 had to operate is not portrayed very favourably. As we have seen, very little emphasis is placed on the quarrel between Asano and Kira; the villain of the affair is not Kira, who simply played the coward, but the system of government that can commend the actions of the coward while summarily punishing with death the partner to the quarrel who drew and used his wakizashi, the last defence of a samurai's honour. In Saigo no daihyojJ Kuranosuke has his son find out how many daimy6 have been dispossessed under the present regime and he expresses surprise at the number.12 Minor infractions of the rules can lead to heavy punishment, and there is a feeling of insecurity among the daimyJ that is epitomized by Tsunatoyo's dissipation and the frantic efforts of the attendants at the very beginning

12 Ibid., 130. A similar comment is made by a different character in Daini no shisha, ibid., 74.



738 BRIAN POWELL

ofEdojJ no ninjJ to calm the flustered lords in their own interests. In the same scene with Matsu-no-j6 Kuranosuke estimates that about thirty thousand samurai have lost their livelihoods as a result ofTsunayoshi's disenfeoffments. In NJanbuzaka he expresses his belief, having now seen what it is like to be a rgnin, that a samurai's lot is a miserable one, and there are many other references to the privations suffered by ronin. In Daini no shisha Kuranosuke is very concerned about the effects of the abolition ofAk5 on the other classes ofsociety, who would have relied on the currency issued by the han and not usually negotiable outside. It is implied that the large number of fief abolitions that took place under Tsunayoshi (though one of his predecessors outdid him) must have caused widespread hardship. Although the Ako ronin themselves never criticize the shogunate, the rule of Tsunayoshi is portrayed as arbitrary and lacking in humanity.

Life is difficult for a samurai under this system, however exalted or humble he may be. Tsuanatoyo complains how fettered a daimyo is by petty rules and restrictions.13 When Kuranosuke hears that Monzae- mon, Tokubei's son, has had his forelock shaved (hangenpuku) in order that as a samurai he may join his father in dying for the house of Asano, he tells him it would really be best to go home. It is going to be very hard for samurai to be suitably employed in the future; no longer can they live by the sword alone. Kuranosuke tells Monzaemon that there is now nothing as unenviable as the lot of a samurai.14

Most of the opinions on the state of the times quoted in the plays are those of characters with whom the audiences and the readers would be

expected to be strongly in sympathy, for example, Tsunatoyo and Kuranosuke. One can be reasonably sure that they accord closely with Mayama Seika's own judgement of the era. This does not mean that in writing a rather positive account of the Ak5 vendetta he was investing the ronin with an unhistorical revolutionary character. Mayama's general approach to the attack on Kira's mansion is interesting in this respect.

Throughout the cycle Mayama appears to be avoiding as much as possible the question of why the ranin avenged their lord by killing Kira. For Takeda Izumo and his colleagues in writing Kanadehon Chi'shingura it was easy. Yuranosuke is present at the seppuku and Hangan whispers 'Avenge me!' just before he dies. Kuranosuke was in Ak5 at the time of the ninjJ incident and could not possibly have travelled to Edo in time. Asano's last words are all recorded and they are ambiguous. Mayama does not depart from the historical record at this point, and his ronin have

13 Ibid., 290. 14 Ibid., 14I.




no mandate for revenge. There is no clear statement of the motivation of the ronin in Genroku Chishingura until the ninth play of the cycle, Sengoku

yashiki. In this play Mayama can avoid the question no longer. Sengoku Hoki-no-kami, as a representative of the government, must find out why the forty-seven broke the law. This is the central question which he directs repeatedly at Kuranosuke. To borrow Tanabe Akio's metaphor, Kuranosuke always answers peripherally.15 He denies any rancour against the government because, apart from the attack itself, everything was done according to the law and to safeguard propriety. (For example, the forty-six on the way from Kira's house in Honjo to Sengakuji avoided Ryagokubashi where they might have disturbed a

daimy5 procession going to the castle.) He denies any conspiracy, because no-one was forced to join or assist. They wore no armour during the attack, and they harmed no women or fugitives from the fighting. They took the utmost care to avoid causing a conflagration by not carrying torches themselves and by checking scrupulously all the lanterns in the Kira house after the attack was completed. But of course they had committed murder and Haki-no-kami loses his temper at Kuranosuke's evasiveness. Finally Kuranosuke has to admit that, although everything else about the vendetta can be explained rationally-with ri-the impulse itself must have come through the

emotions-j-.16 Kuranosuke

uses the phrase shuji aitanomu bushi no ninjo. This is difficult to translate neatly into English. To retain as much of the meaning as possible one would have to suggest something like: 'the human emotions of samurai which lords and retainers can expect from one another.'

Apart from this strong emotional bond between Asano and his retainers, there was in Kuranosuke's case another non-logical impulse towards revenge. Throughout Cishi saigo no ichinichi great stress is laid on the concept of shoichinen, one's first thought. As Kuranosuke says to Hosokawa's son, this first thought is precious because it is probably free of all calculation.'7 As Kuranosuke is about to go to his death, his penultimate line in the whole cycle is: Kore de shoichinen ga todokimashita ('With this my first thought has been realized.') There is an interesting semi-contradiction in the combination ofshoichinen and tsuranuku, which Kuranosuke uses elsewhere in this play. Shoichinen is the first impulsive thought (which in Kuranosuke's case was evidently revenge), whereas tsuranuku implies carrying something through very deliberately. The process of the revenge killing of Kira was deliberate and carefully

'5 Tanabe Akio, Mayama Seika (Hokuy6sha, 1976), p. i45. 16 Ibid., p.150. 17 Zenshki, I, 671.



740 BRIAN POWELL

planned, but it was an impulse and an emotional reaction which started it off.

One of the main questions to which Mayama Seika addresses himself in Genroku Chi'shingura is how samurai could live in the social and political conditions ofGenrokuJapan and still retain their dignity and honour as samurai. If like Mayama one is not preoccupied with the revenge itself, the forty-seven ronin as a group under the control of Kuranosuke provide one answer to this question, and Kuranosuke is the highest embodiment of the ideal in practice. Old-style bushi such as Tokubei are rejected. Kuranosuke understands well the feelings that have prompted Tokubei to come back to Ak5 after twenty years to die for his lord, and he breaks down as he refuses the help offered. He tells Monzaemon that 'the time has now come when your father Tokubei's old-style loyalty is of no use to the world."8 There is a reason why Kuranosuke cannot give recognition to Tokubei's obvious sincerity. To enlist the support of a disgraced ronin would reflect on the honour of his dead lord. Similarly the so-called radical group (kyishin-ha) among the Ak5 retainers are several times shown by Kuranosuke to be lacking in wisdom. Their courage is commendable, but in Saigo no daihyljJ Kuranosuke pointedly reminds them of how Kira's residence is surrounded by the houses of relatives and friendly daimy5.19 If they failed in an immediate attack, this would of course bring disgrace; if they succeeded, they would effectively have destroyed any possibility of the Asano house being re-instated, and Takumi-no-kami's own humiliation would remain unaltered.

No-one could prevent instinctive acts to satisfy honour on the spur of the moment, but in any situation where there was time, the social consequences of any course of action had to be considered carefully. The instinctive act would inevitably occur and would reveal plainly the mettle of the man. The confrontation between Okado Denpachir5 and the shogun's representatives in Edojo no ninjo shows how important Mayama Seika thought such instinctive actions were. Okado is prepared to risk his job and perhaps much else (one pre-war critic thought he could not have lasted three days20) to prove to the shogunate how wrong it was to commend Kira's lack of response to Asano's attack. He lectures Kat6 Etchui-no-kami on the importance of wakizashigokoro, although the difference in kokudaka between them is about 24,000 koku.21 He laughs at the thought that Kira forgot his wakizashigokoro and implies that maybe this essential component of samurai honour has been lost

'8I Ibid., 140-I. 19 Ibid., I77. 20 Otani Seifu, 'T~geki shoshun k5gyJ', Engei gah6 (February, 1935), p. 38. 21 Zenshk, I, 38.



THE SAMURAI ETHIC IN GENROKU CHUSHINGURA 741I

sight of by the shogunate itself. He goes as far as to ask the bakufu for a 'samurai-like judgement'. By contrast Asano had earlier refused to give up his

wakizashi, describing it as mi no saigo o mamoru katanaja--the blade that is one's last defence.22 In extremis the short sword was to defend or kill oneself, and however peaceful the times, no samurai worthy of the title could possibly forget it.

The ideal blend of qualities is represented by Kuranosuke in Genroku Chishingura. He has not always been popular with kabuki critics, who especially in the pre-war period have objected to his sermonizing and air of superiority. The fact that Kuranosuke spends so much of his time lecturing on the right course of action and correcting the errors of his ranin suggests strongly that he is a mouthpiece for the author. He is depressingly right all the time and his only mistake (petitioning for Daigaku) is one for which, despite his own self-strictures, most others would praise him.

No-one doubts after reading Genroku Chishingura that his wakizashigokoro is intact. He is a man ofhonour, and he is afraid of a debased honour that leads to praise among men. He will not grant his son's request for an early genpuku partly because the world would praise him for doing so.23 To Kuranosuke the plot to kill Kira gives the Asano retainers the opportunity to prove themselves men again after the humiliation of leaving the castle as ronin under the eyes of the bakufu envoys. At the last meeting in Saigo no daihydj5 Kuranosuke refers to 'walking a dangerous path as men' (nanshi to shite no kenso no michi o ayumitai).24 At Sengakuji after the attack on Kira's house Kuranosuke explains that Y5zen'in is wrong to express concern for the sufferings which the ranin have undergone because of the hasty act of their worthless lord, her dead husband. 'Retainers must make their way in the world as men (nanshi).' 'The most important thing to a man (otoko) is the reputation he has after his death.' This does not mean fame; it is the 'sincerity (makoto) of a man (nanshi) who proves himself to the full'.25 On one of the very rare occasions when Kuranosuke uses any word for revenge he states quite plainly that shisei wa daiichi, katakiuchi wa daini ('acting with sincerity comes first, revenge second').26

Kuranosuke accepts the hierarchical ordering of society and at no point tries to change it. He accepts the shogunal judgement on Asano and expressly forbids the r5nin publicly to criticize the shogunate. He reveres the Emperor and one of his early anxieties is that the ninj5 will be seen by the Court as irreverence. Once the rYnin have killed Kira and become criminals-famous and admired criminals--Kuranosuke insists

22 Ibid., 21I. 23 Ibid., 132. 24 Ibid., 180. 25 Ibid., 562-4. 26 Ibid., 245.



742 BRIAN POWELL

that they act like any other criminals. He will not countenance the idea of the seventeen rYnin in the Hosokawa house having an audience (medori) with Hosokawa's son, as this was out of the question for criminals. For the same reason he rejects a suggestion that they should don ceremonial dress, as would normally be required before the son of a daimyJ. So, formally at least, Hosokawa Naiki 'passes through' the room where they are, and the rules of behaviour according to status have not been offended against.27 Just as Oishi Kuranosuke is respectful towards superiors, so he has a strong sense of responsibility for social inferiors. His efforts to lessen the effects of fief abolition on the farmers and

townspeople ofAk5 have been mentioned above. After the first alarming reports from Edo it is in everyone's interest that order should be maintained. Kuranosuke is reviled by some Ak5 samurai as hiru andon (a lantern at midday, something useless), but he is quite content, as this simply indicates that nothing is amiss in the han. When the bakufu's forces arrive, he hands over the castle peacefully, causing as little dislocation as possible to the lives of the general population of Ak6.

Kuranosuke's consciousness of status and strict observance of propriety in dress and behaviour are extensively verbalized in the plays, and this sometimes creates an impression of sanctimoniousness. He would hardly have become as popular among post-war kabuki audiences as he has unless this somewhat grim side had not been softened by more human qualities. For all his sternness Kuranosuke frequently gives way to emotion in Genroku Chishingura. Confronted with a situation which touches him deeply, he weeps readily: when the r6nin put their unconditional trust in him; when he bids farewell to YUzen'in; when Sengoku's interrogation is over and the rYnin realize that their mission is finally completed, and on many other occasions. Kuranosuke has rejected Tokubei's old-style loyalty, but when this loyalty drives Tokubei to commit seppuku, Kuranosuke is so affected that he reveals to his old friend that he intends to break the law--to no-one else does he speak so frankly of his intentions. In the last play he gives in to Omino's passionate appeal to be allowed to see Jirozaemon. Perhaps this is the most significant revelation of his emotional side, as he knows that as a result Jir6zaemon, and probably some of the others too, may lose their composure before death. Seppuku has to be beautiful, but Kuranosuke is prepared to risk damaging this beauty.

Kuranosuke is portrayed, therefore, as a samurai who has fully adjusted to the new age while retaining his humanity. How accurate a picture this is historically is difficult to determine. There have been

27 Ibid., 668.




many different theories about the Ak5 affair and although there is near-contemporary source material in some quantity, there is still much scope for individual interpretation. One of the latest reconstructions is by Tahara Tsuguo and Mayama's version of events for which there are sources (i.e. excluding such incidents as, for example, the Kuranosuke/ Omino confrontation) is quite close to Tahara's. In one point, however, the emphasis seems to be different. Tahara lays great stress on oie no shisJ as Oishi Kuranosuke's basic motivation. The radical group wishes to avenge Asano quickly because of its members' close relationship to the

man--their lord. Kuranosuke is more anxious to do what is right for the house. In Tahara he takes the petition very seriously and it remains important to him for rather longer than in Genroku Chishingura. As we have seen, in the play cycle he later blames himself for having submitted the petition at all. There is no doubt that Mayama Seika understood the force and significance ofoie no shisJ. In 1926 he had written a play whose main theme is exactly this problem (Meikun gy6j~ki, Record ofa Wise Lord), but, whatever the correct historical interpretation is, he preferred to emphasize other, more personal, aspects ofbushid6in Genroku Chishingura.

In one respect Mayama added a new element to the Chishingura story, and he has been heavily criticized for it. This is the loyalist scene at the end of Daini no shisha. The play was written in 1935 and it is inevitable that discussion of this scene sometimes links it with the

political circumstances of mid- 1 93os Japan. The record of productions of Daini no shisha reinforces this image of the play. It was performed seven times between 1935 and the end of the war, and it has only been performed twice since. The critics in the 1930s made much of this scene, praising its inclusion in the play, saying how much it contributed to Kuranosuke's character, and referring (in January I939) to its 'especially deep significance at this point in time.'28 The audiences evidently found it impressive as well, as they are reported to have greeted it with great applause and much anguished sobbing. In I971 on the occasion of the second and up to now last production of the same play, a critic wrote that it vitiated the whole cycle. He quoted a proverb to the effect that one little slip can destroy the results of one hundred sermons.29 Suddenly with the performance of this one passage in this one play Genroku Chlishingura becomes a pale reflection of what he hoped it would be.

Historically it is at least plausible for Kuranosuke to have viewed with

28 Adachi Tadashi, Chkgai sh6gy6 (January 1939), quoted in Mayama Seika zenshki

(K6dansha, 1940o), gepp5 I (October, 1940o), 14. 29 Inomoto Shigetami, 'Kaitei hotei no genkai', Engekikai (January, 1971), 25.



744 BRIAN POWELL

such alarm the prospect of Asano being judged guilty offukei. Yamaga Soko, who regarded the Imperial line as of great importance to Japan, had spent many years at Ak5, both as a teacher of military arts and later as a political exile. Kuranosuke in his youth had been one of his pupils and might have been expected to have absorbed some of his political ideas. In addition, there were connections between Kuranosuke's family and that of the Konoe Kanpaku, and characteristically Mayama has Tsunatoyo list these in great detail in Ohama goten.30

This passage in Daini no shisha and others in the cycle have led Donald Keene to detect a general resonance of the i930s in Genroku Chish- ingura.31 Tsurumi Shunsuke, in the discussion concerning this paper in the Colloquium, referred to Mayama Seika as left-wing, and this opinion can be heard from a number of Japanese modern historians. The vice-president of Sh6chiku wrote in the programme of the I98I production of the cycle: 'Through these plays I wanted the Japanese of

today..,. to consider how the people of the real Genroku period avoided becoming befuddled by the peacefulness of the age and lived lives marked by sincerity.' Mayama Miho, Mayama Seika's daughter, remembers how narrowly she escaped being sent to work in a cigarette factory because of the idealistic Marxism of her father in the 192os, and she sees a strong anti-militarist theme in Genroku Chashingura (she directed the 1981 production).32 The records of productions of individual plays in the cycle can be used to show that the pre-war audiences and the post-war audiences-or at least as perceived by the theatre managers-have taken what they have wanted from Genroku Ch/shingura.

Such differing interpretations ofMayama Seika's play cycle may only attest to its quality as a piece of drama. A play will only survive over periods of great change, such as modern Japan has experienced, if each age can find something to respond to in it. It is not clear exactly what Mayama intended to convey in Genroku Chaishingura, as he wrote very little about it. However, some assessment must be made if his presentation of the samurai ethic is to be considered as a legacy of Edo culture-the general theme of the Colloquium.

On the basis of the description of the ethic as attempted above, it is difficult to believe that Mayama was identifying positively with what was happening in 1930sJapan. We would have to equate the forty-seven

30 Zenshii, I, 305-6. 31 Donald Keene, 'Variations on a Theme: Chushingura', in Brandon (ed.), Chush-

ingura. 32 Interview, 28 April 1981.




ronin with the Japanese army in Manchuria or the Young Offcers in Japan itself, and there are many indicators that this was far from Mayama's mind. There are several plays in the corpus which express anti-war feelings, and the best known of these-Kuga sh/sa-is set in China in 1931. The ronin are not attempting to subvert the established government in any way and there is a repeated emphasis throughout the cycle on the avoidance of social disorder in the prosecution of the vendetta. The r5nin preserve their honour as men in an age where this is becoming increasingly difficult and, together with the public opinion which is behind them but not courted by them, cause a government which has acted arbitrarily to change its mind. Reduced to these terms (and if we can accept that Mayama has played down the fact of the murder as much as possible), this is a reasonably healthy message to take to any society.

This is not to say that Mayama was successful in conveying this message, which is a different problem, or that he himself was not susceptible in weaker moments to a more popular type ofbushidJ. Genroku Ch/shingura presents a complex picture of the samurai ethic at the time of Tsunayoshi. The more simple responses to crisis, which could have changed one's fortunes overnight in the Sengoku period, are shown here to be inadequate in a time of established peace and settled social organization. Kuranosuke has not lost his sense of honour or his capacity to react instinctively, but there is a strong element of social responsibility in his character and it is this which guides the revenge to its successful conclusion. Oishi Kuranosuke is Mayama Seika's hero, but audiences reserve much of their applause for Okado Denpachir5, who tells the bakufu what a samurai is, Tokubei with his 'old-style loyalty', and Tsunatoyo with his encouragement of honourable revenge from nearly the highest position in the land. Mayama could hardly have intended it otherwise.



Documents

Special Issue: Edo Culture and Its Modern Legacy || The Samurai Ethic in Mayama Seika's Genroku Chūshingura