From your examination of the novel’s narrative point of view and historical context, and from your application of New Historical Theory as a critical lens, what do you think is Ogai Mori’s perspective of Japan and its relationship with the West at this time, and what aspects of the story have given you these ideas?

New Historical theory thinks about the retelling of history itself: “…questions asked by traditional historians and by new historicists are quite different…traditional historians ask, ‘What happened?’ and ‘What does the event tell us about history?’ In contrast, new historicists ask, ‘How has the event been interpreted?’ and ‘What do the interpretations tell us about the interpreters?’. New Historicism holds that we are hopelessly subjective interpreters of what we observe.

Applying a ‘New Historical’ Perspective in The Wild Geese:

The Wild Geese was written in a period of time where Japan was becoming increasingly aware of international influences and was understanding how to balance Western ideas with Japanese Culture. Ogai wrote The Wild Geese in 1912, around the time where Japan had established it’s adoption of things Western, however, this story was set in 1880, when Japan was still understanding the West. In this time, Ogai gained experiences in the East and in the West himself, where he grew to adopt the idea of resignation and antagonism towards naturalism. We can see how The Wild Geese is a culturally historical and personally historical product of this time in Japan. Culturally, this is seen in scattered references to the West, such as the Parasol Otsune sees Otama wearing which catalyses her suspicion, Suezo’s rejection of the imported canaries in preference for the native linnets, the characterisation of the scary and bad policeman’s Western Shoes.  I think the historical depiction of the timeframe is captured in Ogai’s personal implicit opinions of the Western Influence on Japan, for instance, when the novel mentions renovations to look civilized like “new boards over the ditch replacing the broken and warped ones” or a “racetrack/bicycle track created by an unusual transformation ruining the areas around a pond”, Mori seems to be skeptical as to how necessary these changes were, which would accord with the fact that Ogai became a staunch supporter of things Japanese later in his life. In the end, the author appears to be lamenting the fact that the area around a beautiful pond was sacrificed in the name of progress for what he feels was no good reason. These passages directly reflect a strong similarity between the feelings of the narrator and Ogai himself. From a new historic perspective, perhaps, the book represents the tension that Mori faced in his own life as he tried to balance the creeping influence of the West on Japan is reflected in the several instances of heightened tension in the book, for example, the dilemma between silence and communication (Otama-her father, Okada-Otama), Duty and Freedom (Okada’s education-Otama), or restraint and explicitness (Otama’s passion for Okada-her station as a mistress).

Mori’s narrative style and authorial intent:

“Mori employs embedded narrative… a convenient framework within which to tell a story, much like an oral storyteller might, by diminishing the narrator to all but essential elements, and alternating between characters within the first person perspective. The narrator is thus a nameless observer external to the events of the novel, devoid of accoutrements that add flesh to a character. As a minimalist construct that presents little to obstruct the reader from directly identifying with his experience as a voyeur, the narrator’s perspective easily draws the reader into the psychological mechanism of the novel.” (www.pacificdreams.org/)

1st person narrative, but 3rd person omniscient impersonal description for much of novel which allows the reader to forget about the person behind the voice.  However, the novel is framed by the retrospective, more personal tone of the narrator (writing 35 years after the event), and intrusive, judgmental, empathetic comments can be found scattered throughout the text.

Another way of looking at the novel then is to see it as not being about Otama, Okada and Suezo but actually about the narrator, as a character as well as storyteller, i.e. what we learn about him (despite being nameless) and how the way he tells the story reflects on his character.  For example, his explanation of how he got the information for the story does not explain his ‘knowledge’ of Suezo and Otsune’s relationship.  Clearly he uses poetic license and draws some parallels with his own life as we all do when we recount an event, but the narrator makes some huge imaginative leaps, as if creating his own Chinese style romantic story (but with a clear moralistic ending?).  This could also suggest his vicariousness, living out a fantasy through someone else’s experience (perhaps that’s what the writer is doing through the character of Okada who resembles him in some ways!)

How is Mori’s sense of authorial perspective on the influence of the West on Japan nuanced by narrative perspectives in the story?

Mori’s narrative perspective can be considered to shape the story into an allegory, which displays Mori’s authorial perspective.

Allegory, a symbolic fictional narrative that conveys a meaning not explicitly set forth in the narrative. An allegory may have meaning on two or more levels that the reader can understand only through an interpretive process.

As seen in the references to the West, we could argue that Mori told this story to elaborate on his own opinions of the relationship between Japan and the West. The allegory could be that the character of Otama is a representation of Japan, and her struggles to find her independence matched the struggle the country had to face regarding the western influence. Suezo, could be the Western ideals that trap people in it’s superficial need for grandeur and status. Mori’s ‘nameless observer’ narrative style helps to present this allegory, and his perspective, by taking an intimate but ‘bird’s eye view’ to discuss the pervasive effect of the West on Japan. An example of Mori packing his narrative perspective with some personal judgemental comments to highlight his authorial perspective. Mori’s reference to the killing of the snake, where Mori who has been well-versed in life in the East and the West, played with the connotation of a snake, which in the West is considered suspicious and sly, and in the East is considered a ‘creature that brings a divine curse’ or a ‘fresh world’ through the shedding of it’s skin. Here, we can see how Mori has subtly implied, through the perspective, how he believes that the Western influence on Japan has created a revolutionised country, however, he does not think highly of the permeance of Western ideals on how it has affected the fabric of Japanese society.

What do you think is Ogai Mori’s perspective of Japan and its relationship with the West at this time, and what aspects of the story have given you these ideas?

In summary:

•  Viewing Mori’s writing as a product (culturally to Japan & personally to Mori) of a historical period of time, as per the New Historic theory, we are shown how Mori implied his rejection of Western ideals and products, and discusses the dilemma’s faced in his society on adapting to Western behaviours or maintain their own, as seen in the inner tension in the lives of the characters.
• Through the use of narrative perspectives and points of view, Mori combines his own personal experience with the east and the west to demonstrate how he believes the West’s influence on Japan caused a rift between the common morals/ values of a Japan.