KKS Kanajo 4
Text
そもそも、歌の様六つなり。唐の歌にもかくぞあるべき。その六種の一つにはそへ歌。大鷦鷯の帝をそへたてまつれる歌：
- 難波津に咲くやこの花冬こもり今は春べと咲くやこの花
といへるなるべし。二つにはかぞへ歌：
- さく花に思ひつく身のあぢきなさ身にいたつきのいるも知らずて
といへるなるべし。
- （これはただ事に言ひて、物にたとへなどもせぬものなり。この歌、いかに言へるにかあらん、その心、得がたし。五つにただこと歌といへるなん、これにはかなふべき。）
三つにはなずらへ歌:
- 君に今朝朝の霜のおきていなば恋しきごとに消えやわたらん
といへるなるべし。
- （これは物にもなずらへて、それがやうになんあるとやうに言なり。この歌よくかなへりとも見えず。「たらちめの親のかふこの繭ごもりいぶせくもあるか妹に逢はずて」、かやうなるや、これはかなふべからん。）
四つにはたとへ歌:
- 我恋はよむとも尽きじありそ海の浜の真砂はよみ尽くすとも
といへるなるべし。
- （これはよろづの草・木・鳥・獣につけて心を見するなり。この歌は隠れたる所なんなき。されど、初めのそへ歌と同じやうなれば、少し様をかへたるなるべし。「須磨の海人の塩焼く煙風を痛み思はぬ方にたなびきにけり」、この歌などや、かなふべからん。）
五つにはただこと歌:
- いつはりのなき世なりせばいかばかり人の言の葉嬉しからまし
といへるなるべし。
- （これは、事のととのほり、正しきを言ふなり。この歌の心。さらにかなはず。とめ歌とや言ふべからん、「山桜あくまで色を見つるかな花散るべくも風吹かぬよに」）
六つにはいはひ歌:
- この殿はむべもとみけりさきくさのみつばよつ葉に殿造りせり
といへるなるべし。
- （これは世をほめて神に告ぐるなり。この歌、いはひ歌とは見えずなんある。「春日野に若菜摘みつつよろづよを祝ふ心は神ぞ知るらん」、これらや少しかなふべからん。おほよそ、六種に分かれんことは、えあるまじき事になん。）
Now then, there are six types of poetry. This should be true of Chinese poems, as well. The first of those six types is the soe-uta. This poem comparing Emperor Oosasaki:
- Blooming in Naniwazu, this flower is hiding in the winter, but it will soon be spring, so bloom, this flower
should be it.
The second type is the kazoe-uta.
- The uselessness of putting my thoughts on the blooming flowers -- I didn't know that my illness had entered my body. (SIS 405)
should be it.
(This is simply stating things directly, and is not doing any kind of metaphor. How is this showing the style? The meaning is difficult to understand. This poem should fit in with the fifth style, tadakoto-uta.)
The third type is the nazurae-uta.
- For you, I wake up with the morning frost and depart, and with every longing for you I continue to vanish.
should be it.
(This is a comparison to something and stating it in terms of that thing. This poem does not seem to match well. A poem like "[Like the] silkworm hiding in the pod kept by parents, I am in the darkness unable to meet my lover" (SIS 895) should perhaps match better.)
The fourth type is the tatoe-uta.
- If I were to count my love it would never end; even if I counted all the grains of sand on the beach of Arisoumi.
should be it.
(This is showing your feeling by various plants, trees, and birds. There is nothing hidden in the given example poem. But, this is similar to the first soe-uta type, with just a slightly different style. "The smoke from the salt burning of the fisherwomen at Suma Bay is strong, and so it trails to unknown places" (KKS 708) This poem, perhaps, fits.)
The fifth type is the tadakoto-uta.
- If there were no lies between us, how happy would I be at their words! (KKS 712)
should be it.
(This refers to careful arrangement and propriety. Again, this poem does not match. Perhaps this should be a tome-uta. "I saw the beauty of the cherry blossoms to my heart's content -- in this world where the wind does not blow strong enough to scatter the flowers.")
The sixth type is the iwai-uta.
- This house is indeed splendid, with tiers like those of the multi-leaved sakikusa.
should be it.
(These praise the world or declare to the gods. The given poem does not seem to be an iwai-uta. "While picking young shoots in Kasuga Field, can the gods know my heart that praises everything in the world?" (KKS 357) This may slightly fit. It is impossible to divide poetry into six types.)
Notes
- six types
- The meaning of the word sama (type) is debated, but Takeoka and Katagiri agree that this does not match with the discussion in the Manajo and instead indicates the poetic qualities of the poem -- that is, what makes it more than just a sentence of 31 syllables. See the Analysis for more on the overall interpretation of the theory discussed by Tsurayuki; in the notes I will follow Takeoka's analysis (which is broadly accepted by Katagiri). He focuses on the interaction between the feeling (jo) of the poem and the scene (kei).
- should be the same
- Tsurayuki alludes to the traditional Chinese division into six types, found in a number of different poetic sources (most notably the Moshi seigi commentary on the Classic of Poetry). Why he phrases the statement this way is not clear. Either he is trying to spotlight his attempt to create six categories distinct from the Chinese categories, or he is referring to a lack of clarity in the Chinese sources as to the precise meaning and significance of the six styles.
- soe-uta
- This is derived from the verb sou, which is used in the MYS to mean "compare to." The example poem given is entirely "scene", with the "feeling" deriving from the metaphorical comparisons.
- Blooming in Naniwazu...
- This is the "naniwazu poem" referred to in Part 3. The poem itself is just about the flower in spring, but (at least in the supposed historical context) it is a metaphorical poem urging Nintoku to become Emperor.
- should be it
- This phrase, occurring after each of Tsurayuki's examples, means something like "should be appropriate as an illustration of the poetic style."
- kazoe-uta
- These seem to be mono no na ("names of things" poems), found in KKS volume 10 and SIS volume 7. These poems conceal words within them, and sometimes the meaning of the poem itself has nothing to do with the word being concealed. Takeoka thinks the name derives from "scatter," meaning that the "scene" is scattered around the poem with the poem itself being entirely "feeling."
- The uselessness...
- The topic listed in the SIS for this poem is tsugumi (the "dusky thrush" bird), which is hidden in the poem in the words omoi-tsuku mi no" (the voicing can be different). In addition to this, the word ajikinashi" also includes aji (another type of bird), and itazuki (sick) also means a kind of arrow, and has tazu (crane). Finally, iru represents the sickness "entering" the body but also the shooting of the arrow. As mentioned in the previous note, this is an example of a mono no na poem where the subject of the poem itself has nothing to do with the words hidden in the poem.
- This is simply stating...
- All of the kochu annotations in this section are interpreting Tsurayuki's explanations as if he were using the six styles exactly as described in the Moushi seigi preface, which is most likely a misunderstanding of what Tsurayuki was trying to do. See the Analysis for more details.
- nazurae-uta
- This type of poetry also depends on wordplay through metaphor; Takeoka associates it especially with poetic prefaces (jo-kotoba) and pivot words (kakekotoba). The "feeling" is patterned into the "scene" with the use of metaphors. The difference between this and the kazoe-uta is that the latter does not use metaphors but simply conceals the words.
- This poem does not seem to match well...
- The writer of the kochu seems to have been following the Chinese models, thinking that this style of poetry needs to express feelings that are difficult to state openly, using natural metaphors.
- tatoe-uta
- Takeoka describes this as a poem that pairs the "feeling" and the "scene" in the two halves of the poem, in either order. He gives KKS 509 as an example. Katagiri seems to think there needs to be an explicit comparison such as the "even if..." in the example poem. The ancient annotator, again basing their analysis on the Chinese models, thinks there has to be something hidden in the poem and relates it closely to the first style of poetry.
- tadakoto-uta
- These are poems that focus entirely on the "feeling" or the "scene," with no metaphors or symbols. Katagiri's reading may indicate that it has to be a poem of the poet's thoughts, while Takeoka seems to allow direct descriptive poems as well.
- This refers to careful arrangement...
- The annotator may have interpreted tada as "proper" rather than "direct," but is once again influenced by the Chinese models.
- tome-uta
- What the annotator means by this term is not clear. Both Katagiri and Takeoka tentatively interpret it as "seeking", based on the "dream world" like atmosphere of the given poem.
- iwai-uta
- This style is usually described as simply a "celebratory" poem, but both Takeoka and Katagiri think that it's more complicated than this. Katagiri thinks it's difficult to be sure, but he offers the tentative theory that the poet's feelings are being expressed by an unclear phrase that had become a fixed, archaic expression associated with traditional folk legends. Takeoka applies his "feeling"/"scene" system here too, analyzing this type as one where the feeling and scene are suffused into one whole. His analysis of the example poem is that the direct expression is all "scene" but the choice of unusual words shows the "feeling" of the poet.
- sakikusa
- The exact meaning of this word is uncertain.
Analysis
This section is one of the most difficult and debatable parts of the preface -- even the "ancient commentary" had difficulty understanding or accepting what Tsurayuki was trying to do. Broadly speaking there seem to be three general opinions on this section:
- Tsurayuki's six styles are supposed to be the same as the six Chinese styles
- Tsurayuki was trying to create a new set of six styles using the Chinese styles as a model, but didn't really succeed
- This represents Tsurayuki's most insightful and original contribution to Japanese poetics and should be taken seriously as a way to interpret the KKS as a whole
The first opinion is found mostly in commentaries prior to the 18th century, and goes back as early as the "ancient commentary" included with the preface -- like that commentator, many have accepted that Tsurayuki was using the Chinese categories as-is, but either misunderstood them or just wasn't able to apply them well to the Japanese poems.
The second opinion is the most common since Kagawa Kageki (Kokin wakashu seigi), but scholars differ on how useful Tsurayuki's sixfold division is. Some (such as Kageki) consider it completely worthless as a tool to understand Japanese poetry, while others think it is an interesting artifact of Heian-era poetics but ultimately not a complete success.
The third opinion is a minority one, but Takeoka Masao is a strong proponent of the view. He spends a great deal of time unpacking the specifics of each poetic type and ends with the statement that this should prompt a re-evaluation of the KKS as a whole. As stated above in the notes, his theory takes the "feeling" and "scene" as derived from Part 1 of the preface, and applies that to the six styles. He connects this with the theories given in the Bunkei hifuron essay on Chinese poetry.
Takeoka is particularly critical of alternate approaches that try to completely replace Tsurayuki's classification with the scholar's own six-fold (or a different number) styles, saying that this represents a refusal to try to understand what Tsurayuki was doing.
Katagiri also accepts the basic idea that we need to seriously evaluate Tsurayuki's attempt at the styles rather than dismissing it. He takes as his base the six example poems given, but for the most part his analysis seems to line up fairly well with Takeoka's, at least for the first five styles. He does not go as far as Takeoka's claim that this represents a fundamental tool that we should use to analyze the entire KKS.
The problems raised by this section of the preface are unlikely to ever be completely solved, because so much of the interpretive methodology depends on your opinion of how well Tsurayuki succeeded at classifying Japanese poetry into six styles.
