How was your understanding of cultural and contextual considerations of the work developed through the interactive oral?

Work: "The sailor who fell from grace with the sea" - By Yukio Mishima

During the discussion, several aspects of the novel were presented in the class. The book was set against the backdrop of Post World War II, where Japan was taken over by USA. After the war, Japan faced a drastic change upon social and cultural aspects creating a dilemma between retaining traditional Samurai culture and Westernization. We felt this conflict had been examined in this book where it showed a study of contrast between land and sea, glory and nihilism, companionship and isolation through the shifting perspective of the story’s three main characters, Fusako, Ryuji and Noburu.

After this discussion, it appeared that Mishima placed great emphasis on the Westernization of Japan in his novel. Through Ryuji’s character, he initially represents the Old Japan yet gives up these values to be with Fusako who embraces Western values, depicted through the furnishings in her house and the goods she sells in her shop. I found this discussion very interesting as many people had different sentiments on some aspects of the novel. Considering the death of Ryuji, Noburu’s actions could be seen as a reflection of his attitudes towards those people who were so easily influenced by Western ideals and rejected the traditional Japanese values following the American occupation.

Mishima has used a variety of imagery, motifs and metaphors. The ambience of ‘emptiness’ in Noburu’s house emphasized the loss of traditional values as Western ideals began to overlap. Mishima managed to capture the contextual and historical movement of Westernization through the imagery he used. Moreover, we discussed about the theme of limited perspective depicted through Noburu’s spying of his mother in a peephole. This metaphorically represents Noburu’s limited knowledge towards adulthood, even though he believed himself to be an omniscient child.

Hong Kong has indeed shown a retainment of their own culture and traditional buildings even under British control. Growing up between the lines of two different cultures, Western and Chinese, it had definitely affected me in aspects of my cultural values, mind-set, and most importantly, my life style. In a similar manner, Westernization has affected Noburu’s mind-set and cultural values. He throws away his traditional Japanese ideals and flows in with the Chief’s gang, which represents the Westernized individuals under the influence of the Americans. Although Mishima constantly rejects the happening of Westernization in Japan, we believed Japan has changed for the better under America’s control, as they became one of the most powerful countries in Asia for their technologies and have a soaring economy.

It was difficult for us to conclude whether Mishima’s attraction to patriotism of imperial Japan was true. Although he holds an Samurai Spirit of Japan’s past, he still remains to be amongst the western culture, as he dressed in Western clothes and lived in a Western-style house. I thought ound Mishima’s sentiments on Westernization I was really intrigued by the fact that Mishima identified himself as an patriot of imperial Japan and rejected Westernization, and yet in his novel, he has presented a powerful attraction towards westernization shown through the character of Ryuji. Although Mishima was deeply attracted to the nationalism of Japan, he dressed in Western clothes and lived in a Western-style house in order to gain recognition. Through the comparison between Fusako, holding the ever present western ideals, and Ryuji, who represents the old Japan, Mishima has projected how Japan was once powerful and retained their traditional bushido code of glory and honour, yet the values were demolished right after the Westernization - shown through the killing scene of Ryuji. I think you need to explain this more accurately - Ryuji is initially representative of pld Japanese values but gives these up to be with Fusako who embraces Western values, depicted through the furnishings in her house and the goods she sells in her shop. Mishima’s decision to have Noburu kill Ryuji at the end of the novel could be seen as a reflection of his attitudes towards those people who were so easily influenced by Westernisation and rejected the traditional Japanese values following the American occupation.

It was easy to unravel the cultural context of the novel. During the period of post World War II, USA took over Japan and Westernized the country. People’s life style and mind-set were also influenced by the West and even Emperor Hirohito’s power were taken away by the Americans. On the other hand, I found that the conflict of how Mishima rejects the Western ideals a difficult perspective to understand. Personally, I think that the Western influence on Japan generated a positive effect and managed to create a better environment for Japan, with powerful technologies and a soaring economy.

Mishima has used a variety of imagery, motifs and metaphors in his novel. The ambience of ‘emptiness’ in Noburu’s house emphasizes the loss of traditional Japanese values as Western ideals began to overlap. He also used the motif of the sea to portray the quest for glory that Ryuji was striving to pursue, alluding back to the Samurai code. With contrast of the weight and solidification of the shoreline, it indicated that Ryuji gradually abandons the traditional values (sea), and stepped on the westernized land for a change, creating the representation of the idea, East meets West. Moreover, the scene where Noburu tried to peek through a small hole metaphorically displays his limited perspective towards the adulthood, even though he believed himself to be an omniscient child. Can you adapt these previous two paragraphs to indicate how the information relates to the ideas you discussed in the conversation?

Hong Kong still retained their own culture and traditional buildings and temples under the British control. I strongly disagree with the perspective held by Mishima, where he rejected Westernization. We can still adapt the westernization, yet at the same time, keeping our own identity and culture.

A little confusing - rephrase?