The Makioka Sisters (1946-8), Junichiro Tanizaki’s UNESCO-stamped novel, was a puzzler. It has two conceptual levels. One of them took me quite a while to figure out. The other was clear early on.
The stuff of the novel is not the ordinary life of the bourgeois Osaka family in the title, but the events of ordinary life. Holidays, restaurant meals, trips to Tokyo, the terrible Kobe Flood of 1938, illnesses, that sort of thing. This novel has more variety of illness – beriberi, dysentery, gangrene, scarlet fever, and many more – than any novel I can remember, yet not implausibly so. It is all perfectly plausible.
The narration is distant and the prose is fairly flat. There is little description, little metaphor. What struck me the most was the evenness of the tone. Every event is told with the same emphasis. The flood, a natural disaster that killed hundreds, receives more pages but the same rhetorical weight as a meal at a favorite sushi restaurant. The sushi chef gets two long paragraphs, and is never seen again:
She first gave them a description with gestures: he looked like the dwarf with the enormous, mallet-shaped head one sees in illustrations to horror stories; he turned customers off most haughtily, and he attacked a fish with his carving knife as though it had insulted him. (2.30, p. 293, tr. Edward Seidensticker)
Hey, that has description and metaphor! I know, it is not a typical sentence. How about this:
He always used white Kobe vinegar, never yellow Tokyo vinegar, and always a thick soy sauce not seen in Tokyo. He offered only fish taken before his very eyes, so to speak, here along the shores of the Inland Sea. (293)
A list of fish follows. The writing is precise and thick with stuff, counting etiquette and customary behavior as a kind of “stuff.”
Here, this passage is more typical:
To forget the sadness [of the younger sister moving out], they would go to Kobe every other day or so and search out old movies and new movies, and sometimes they even saw two movies a day. Among the movies they had seen in the last month alone were Bagdad, Das Mädchen Irene, Hélène, Burgtheater, Boys’ Town, and Suez. (3.12, 383)
As much as I enjoyed the list of films from around the world, the word “among” shows how this narrator works.
How about some interiority, while in line at the beauty shop:
Sachiko looked nervously at her sister, silent and dispirited. Might Yukiko faint with hunger? Would she be able to stand the ordeal of a permanent wave? (3.30, 491)
Tanizaki has a powerful sense of anti-climax. Here is the end of a chapter where something almost melodramatic has happened:
Then, as if she remembered something, she opened her cosmetic case – she tried not to let [her daughter] see – and poured the cap of the pocket flask a third full of brandy. (2.18, 239)
One more:
Sachiko had been taking down [from a radio broadcast] recipes said to be good for the season. Now someone was reciting a Nō play.
“Would you turn it off, please, Koi-san?”
“Wait. Look at Bell.” Taeko pointed her jaw at the cat, asleep by Sachiko’s feet.
Bell was drowsing happily in the warmth from the stove. Taeko had noticed that its ears twitched at each drum beat. Only the ears were affected, it seemed, by a reflex of no concern to the rest of the cat.
“What do you suppose does that?”
“Very strange.”
They watched, fascinated, as the ears twitched an accompaniment to the Nō, and when the Nō was finished Taeko turned off the radio. (3.12, 385)
And the novel just moves on like this, for five hundred pages. Donald Keene, in Japanese Literature: An Introduction for Western Readers (1953) wrote that “Here, then, is a true roman fleuve, a slow and turbid river of a book, which moves inevitably and meaninglessly to its close” (108).
Meaninglessly! To a reader interested in Japanese culture, many episodes – the sushi restaurant, the cherry blossom festival, the firefly hunt, you name it – are deeply interesting. Are they more interesting than the equivalent passage in, say, an oral history of 1930s Japan? Does fiction of this type have any advantage over non-fiction? I have some doubts. But tomorrow I will try to undo “meaninglessly” by looking at the Big Irony.