 |
| Tomomi san who sat next to me at a cafe impressed me with all of her pink items! |
In response to
Vincent’s comment, this is the continuation from the last post.
I think it’s
fair to say the Roggendorf’s quote is one sided if it isn’t negative.
I again read the
previous lines from the quote on P. 109 of the book, Roggendorf compares two
ideas: Rafcadio Hearn’s and Spencer’s.
But it is unclear to me what exactly he compared with. Roggendorf was German and studied in London
before coming to Japan, and later he returned and studied a few more years to
become a professor in English at Sophia University in Japan.
Another negative
word I have to point out among the previous lines is this: Hearn was not as cultured. This blows me away. Again, such statement is unclear what Roggendorf
compared with. Himself? Hearn’s contribution to the introduction of
the Japanese literature and culture to the west is singularly important. He married a local woman from a samurai
family which enabled him to know the culture from the bottom up.
At the
introduction to his future wife, Hearn said to the go-between that she was
ugly, but as he got to know her, his love to her deepened. To their married dwelling, she brought her
entire family. Many samurai were
contrary to their proud faces. They were
very poor. The things Hearn hated such
as she and her family helped him dress although he could dress by himself
because he was not a child, but he said if that gave them pleasure, he would
let them. The family members were also
grateful for him, but I guess they could not express their gratitude other than
helping him dress and undress or doing chores around the house. What a thoughtful man Rafcadio Hearn
was! Was he cultured? Yes, he was in my opinion.
Obviously,
Roggendorf wouldn’t have put so much effort in learning Japanese if he didn’t
see great benefits from it. I’m sure his
achievement was like conquering Mt. Everest.
Maybe when he wrote the book, he was quite frustrated. Living in the foreign culture like Japan, I
can understand.
Anyhow, Japan
has been functioning all these years using nothing but the Japanese
language. All the important and not so
important documents are all written in Japanese. That means all the critical thinking in Japan
has been done in Japanese. Thank
goodness, we still speak and write in Japanese daily.
I think how exactly people speak or write depends on the needs and the
ability of the speaker or writer in any language.
About exactness, I’ve written a blog on the Japanese usage of
subject and object before. If you and
your wife/husband are alone in a room facing each other, and you say “I love
you,” she/he understands you. But if you
omit “I” and “you,” English speakers do not understand. They probably feel frustrated and demand us
to be more specific. This is
unfortunate.
Let’s take a moment to think.
Let’s take the grammar, tradition and habit out and think pure
logic. In above situation, wouldn’t you
agree that you and I are not needed to understand each other? Don’t forget, we are eliminating the base
thinking of the grammar, tradition and habits.
You’ve just said goodbye to them.
Remember? Try to be as pure as
you can be on the logic itself.
When the needs of being exact become habitual for centuries, I think
people forget the original logic. The
evidence of that habit probably can be seen when we compare some love letters
of the Chaucer’s time and the modern times.
I checked a bit although not love letters. I’ve compared the poems by Chaucer and a
modern American poet once although it’s not enough sampling for a scholarly
statement. The latter had many more
articles and subject and objects in her poems compared to Chaucer’s.
So, the tendency is wanting to be exact in English, and it has been increasing. I’m only stating the phenomenon, not talking good
or bad. But we ought to know this
ongoing growth under our consciousness.
And this habit is infectious, and we tend to forget the original logic.
So, what am I suggesting to you?
This is my recommendation to high level writers and readers. The people who do not care about
this matter do not count for obvious reason.
Think of this issue deeper and try not to use many articles like a and
the, and subjects and objects as much as possible to experiment in your poems
or creative writing. You won’t know the
result right away, but if you try a number of times over certain period, you might discover something; worthwhile.
We are habitual animals. We can stop and think what's under our consciousness. For instance, I think your readers' minds will work harder to figure out what
you write if they really care to read your interesting contents. It enhances our and their imagination. Try it and find out and let me know.
Of course, this is not recommended in writing a critical manual to
save people’s lives and so forth.
