Natsume Soseki lesse la „Divina Commedia“ attraverso una traduzione in inglese con testo a fronte. (The Temple Classics)

　In modo particolare, egli tradusse in giapponese l’iscrizione sulla „Porta dell’ Inferno“ all’ inizio del Canto III, e riprende nel romanzo „La Torre di Londra“ (1905). Nel romanzo „Kusamkura“ (Il viaggio) (1906) Soseki usa l’episodio di „Paolo e Francesca“ (Canto V) come parodia.

　All’ inizio del romanzo „Shumi no iden“ (L’ereditarietà del gusto) (1906), Soseki usa l’immagine di „Cerbero“ del Canto VI dell’ Inferno: l’immagine di un gruppo di persone dilaniato da una muta di cani feroci, istigati da una divinità impazzita.

　Questo è es pressione della crudeltà della guerra, e io penso che egli ne abbia preso da Dante l’ispirazione.

　Soseki amava la moglie di suo fratello maggiore Toyo, come Paolo amava Francesca; ma essa mori quando Soseki averva 25 anni.

　Il suo interessamento anormale all’ episodio di „Paolo e Francesca“ va messo in relazione con quella cosa.

　Quando Soseki raggiunse l’età di 26 anni, cercò in tutti i modi di evitare di essere arruolato nell’esercito.

　Ciò dava molto pena alla sua coscienza, perchè il Giappone stava per entrare in guerra.

　Amava una donna che non dovera amare, e nonostante dovesse partire, si rifiutava di partecipare alla guerra; il rimorso per queste due cose erano un inferno nel suo cuore. Per Soseki, la „Divina Commedia“ rifletteva questo inferno interiore, come uno specchio. Questo è il motivo per cui l’immagine dell’ Inferno appare nei suoi romanzi.

　 Ōgai Mori, who was transferred to an army medical post at Kokura in Kyushu, a long way from Tokyo, introduced a summary of Machiavelli’s II Principe under the title of Jinshusaku from May to June, 1901. One opinion of his intention was expressed as follows:

　Jinshusaku was written as a result of Ōgai’s interest in the literary world of Tokyo. He had already studied the philosophy of Nietzsche which was then under discussion there and had found a close connection between Nietzsche and Machiavelli. Therefore it can be concluded that he responded to the current situation of literature in an indirect way by introducing Machiavelli’s thought into it.

　But when we consider the situation in which Ōgai was placed and investigate his favorite book Machiavelli’s Buck vom Fürsten, it seems that we may have to alter our opinion.

　Ōgai understood the central theme of II Principe rather negatively. But in his favorite book we can find words such as “Glück”, “Gelegenheit”，“Tapferkeit” and “Wille” underlined, so it seems that he was especially interested in the problem of fortune.

　Though Jinshusaku itself may not have had any direct relation to his literature, he must have thought about the problem of fortune discussed in it. Jinshusaku could be understood from this viewpoint.

　Un (1917) written by Ryûnosuke Akutagawa (1892-1927) is a short story, in which a young and an old man of the Heian era have a talk about the destiny and happiness of man in connection with an episode of a contemporary poor woman who comes to be blessed with wealth. This episode has its source in A Tale of a Poor Woman, one of the brief narratives contained in The Konjaku-monogatari-shû (今昔物語集) (1108 ?). Up to this day Un has been studied from the standpoint of its literary characteristics, pertaining only to this narrative in The Konjaku-monogatari-shû. But the narrative itself is only made use of by Akutagawa as a sheer subject-matter for his story. From this point of view, it is wrong to consider that the elucidation of A Tale of a Poor Woman is a sole key to the appreciation of Un in a literary way.

　The theme of Un, which presents its peculiar outlook on life in relation to the destiny and happiness of man, has a considerable resemblance to the thought of Maurice Maeterlinck (1862-1949). The composition of this work, chiefly made up of talks between a young and an old man, is, moreover, learned and adopted from the method of composition of Senzamani (1912), a short story by Maksim Gorjkij (1868-1936). In writing Un, Akutagawa was subject to the influence of Maeterlinck and Gorjkij, and Ôgai Mori (1862-1922) is considered to have acted as transmitter for Akutagawa.

　Akutagawa was affected in this manner by various literary arts of all ages and countries, and subjoined his own original ideas to it. Thus he succeeded in writing fine and superb historical novels and novelettes.

　The paper is composed of four chapters in the aggregate, that is, (I) The World of Un and The Konjaku-monogatari-shû , (2) The Theme of Un and Maeterlinck, ⑶ The Composition of Un and Gorjikij — Ôgai Mori and Ryûnosuke Akutagawa —, and (4) Ryûnosuke Akutagawa’s Method in Historical Novels. In the current issue, however, only the first half of the whole (the first chapter) is printed. The second half (the remaining three chapters) is to be printed in the following issue.

　Jusqu’à présent, on considère Eishun Murakami (1811-1892) comme le précurseur de l’étude de la langue française dans notre pays.

　Dès 1848 (1ère année de Kaéi), il se met à étudier le français, seul, sans l’aide de qui que ce soit, et, en 1854 (7e année de Kaéi), il rédige le Sango-Benran (Vocabulaire trilingue: français-anglais-hollandais et français-anglais-allemand), premier livre de français publié au Japon, livre qui a influé dans un certain sens sur le développement de l’étude de la langue française.

　Cependant, à mon avis, Eishun ayant arrêté le projet de rédiger le Sango-Benran, s’est éloigné par la suite du projet initial pour s’inspirer des oeuvres de Shôzan Sakuma (stratégiste, 1811-1864). C’est sur l’avis de ce dernier qu’il avait commencé l’étude du français, et c’est finalement en prenant pour modèle les dictionnaires inédits de Shôzan Sakuma, Zôtei-Oranda-Goi (Dictionnaire hollandais-japonais) et Kôkoku-Dôbunkan (Dictionnaire plurilingue), qu’il a rédigé le Sango-Benran.

　Cela revient à dire, je crois, qu’on doit tenir compte de l’existence et de l’influence de Shôzan Sakuma pour apprécier avec exactitutude le mérite d’Eishun Murakami comme le précurseur de l’étude du français au Japon.

　Three Japanese writers have adapted their work from the plays of Eugene O’Neill. Soichiro Tanaka’s Chiheisen no Kanata, taken from the title of O’Neill’s play, Beyond the Horizon，appeared in the “Engeki” in March, 1923; Masao Kume’s Kikyorai or The Home-Coming taken from the same play Beyond the Horizon appeared in the “Josei” from October through December, 1924; and Tomoyoshi Murayama’s Hatsukoi or First Love appeared in the “Teatro” in January, 1937.

　Tanaka’s adaptation was made to adapt O’Neill’s play for a Japanese theater, the “Shingekiza”; however, as he stated in the postscript, it is nearly a translation from the original. Although Japanese names were used for characters and places, the plot is a reproduction of the original. The only difference is that the dialogue is shortened to put the adaptation on the small stage.

　Kume’s interest in literature — in realism, humanism and lyricism —modified O’Neil’s tragedy as melodrama. Although at that time pessimistic Russian literature was the dominant influence in Japan, Kume’s attitude was that the Japanese should be optimistic toward their future. Therefore, the triangular love affair of the original was new and idealistic for Kume; he stressed this situation in his own play and ended it with a happy departure.

　Under the oppression of Japan’s military aristocracy, a leftist, Murayama, was forced to vow not to write socialistic literature if he wished to get out of jail, Since he was married, his father-in-law’s attractive character motivated him to write of his in-law's family. Coincidently, when he read Ah, Wilderness! in English, he found many similarities between his in-law’s family and the family in the original.

　Because of the restrictions on his activity, he chose O’Neill’s domestic comedy to camouflage his intention from the eyes of the special secret service police authority. From his resistance to the established system, he created a problem in which he described a very liberalistic family against the feudalistic and aristocratic surroundings of Japan at that time. At the request of a theater group, the “Shinkyo Gekidan”, the draft of First Love was made so that they could perform it as a one act play.

　Kanoko Okamoto (1889-1939) seems to be influenced by nobody and is a very unique woman-writer in modern Japanese literature. However, Shakespeare casts a shadow on this most original, self-concentrated novelist. One example of this is her short story called Natsu-no-yo-no-yume (1937).

　She is said to have been motivated to write this story by seeing a Shakespearian picture, A Midsummer-Night’s Dream. But what she produced is seemingly utterly different from the Shakespearian play. However when we compare these two works closely, we can discern their similarity as well as their difference. In short, she borrowed the background, the framework, and the romantic atmosphere from the Shakespearian play, but as for the characters and the theme of love, there she introduced herself.

　In the short story, Saiko plies between her brother’s home and her fiancé’s. One night, she meets her brother’s friend, Makise, who is the counterpart of Oberon, and soon comes to talk with him as often as possible in his large and pretty garden. Here, the garden can be compared to the forest on the outskirts of Athens. On the night before Saiko’s marriage, Makise tells her about his philosophy of love, saying that he would like the ideal situation in which a man and a woman understand each other so thoroughly as to be able to live peacefully in the world of love by just exchanging whistles like two birds on a branch, without being immersed in sexual love. He adds that this state of love can be found only in fairy-land. Saiko agrees with him and gives him, through her innocence, naivety, and her romantic way of thinking, what he needs most — that is, the inspiration and encouragement to do the great work of his life — without being his lover.

　Thus, in this short story, Kanoko Okamoto, expressed what she thought of ideal love between men and women, and what she believed to be the true role of a woman towards a man; but within Shakespearian framework. But that she had to depict this ideal state of love in a fairy world shows her grief that after her own troubled life with love, she could not yet reach the ideal state of love, in real life.