Šéfredaktor ■ Editor Raoul David Findeisen (f)
Zástupcovia šéfredaktora ■ Associate Editors Jana Benická Martin Slobodník
Výkonní redaktori ■ Acting Editors Hana Bogdanová
Ľuboš Gajdoš František Paulovič
Redakčná rada ■ Editorial Board Wolfgang Behr   Asien-Orient-Institut, Universität Zürich Luboš Bělka   Ústav religionistiky, Masarykova univerzita, Brno Dušan Deák   Katedra porovnávacej religionistiky, Univerzita Komenského v Bratislave Bernard Faure  DepartmmtofEastAáanlanguagesandCultures, Columbia University, New York Michael Friedrich   Asien-Afrika-Institut, Universität Hamburg Marián Gálik    Ustav orientalistiky, Slovenská akadémia vied, Bratislava Martin Gimm   Abteilung Sinologie und Manjuristik, Universität zu Köln Imre Hamar   Orientalisztikai Intézet, Eötvös Loránd Tudományegyetem, Budapest Miloš Hubina   College of Religious Studies, Mahidol University, Bangkok Li Xuetao $H/P   Institute for Global History, Foreign Studies University, Beijing Olga Lomová   Ustav Dálného východu, Univerzita Karlova v Praze Miriam Lowensteinová   Ustav Dálného východu, Univerzita Karlova v Praze Josef Kolmaš    Ustav antropologie, Prírodovedecká fakulta, Masarykova univerzita, Brno Rotem Kowner   Department of Asian Studies, University of Haifa Lucie Olivová   Seminář čínských studií, Centrum asijských studií, Masarykova univerzita, Brno Yuri Pines   Department of Asian Studies, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem Irina Popova   Institute of OrientalManuscripts, Russian Academy ofSciences, St Petersburg Codru^a Sintonean  Departamentul de Studii Asiatice, UmversitateaBabe^-Bofyai, Cluj-Napoca Helmut Tauscher Institut für Südasien-, Tibet-und Buddhismuskunde, Universität Wien David Uher   Katedra asijských studií, Univerzita Palackého, Olomouc Alexander Vovin   Centre de Recherches linguistiques sur ľ Asie Orientale, Paris Susanne Weigelin-Schwiedrzik Institut für Ostasienwissenschaften, Universität Wien
Studia Orientalia Slovaca (SOS) je recenzovaný časopis vychádzajúci dvakrát ročne. Vydáva Univerzita Komenského v Bratislave, Filozofická fakulta, Katedra východoázijských štúdií, ICO 00397865, vyšlo v decembri 2017. Studia Orientalia Slovaca (SOS) is a peer-reviewed journal published semi-annually by the Department of East Asian Studies, Faculty of Arts, Comenius University in Bratislava, Slovakia.
Články v Studia Orientalia Slovaca sú indexované v database SCOPUS. ■ Articles in Studia Orientalia Slovaca are abstracted and indexed in SCOPUS.
© by Univerzita Komenského v Bratislave, Katedra východoázijských štúdií, Šafárikovo nám. 6, SK -814 99 Bratislava, Slovakia, 2017. EV 4938/14 ISSN 1336-3786
Studia Orientalia Slovaca
16 • 2 (2017)
Štúdie ■ Articles
Mapping Imaginary Spaces in Li Yongping's Jiling Chunqiu pf
(Jiling Chronicles)...................................................................................... 1
Carsten Storm
Chrysanthemum, Pine and Crane—Female Names of Meiji Period
Japan........................................................................................................... 39
Ivona Barešová
A Corpus Analysis of Legal Chinese—Final Thought............................ 69
Ľuboš Gajdoš
Proposal for a New Classification System for Modern Chinese
Characters.................................................................................................. 87
Tereza Slaméníková
Nö Sumidagawa and Jömri Futago Sumidagawa: Genesis of
a Story and of a Genre............................................................................... 107
Ivan R. V. Rumánek
Recenzie • Reviews
A. A. Rodionov, Guan Jixin zŘ%čM\, P. L. Grokhovsky (eds.), Problémy
literatur Dal'nego Vostoka [Issues of Far Eastern Literatures]................. 141
Marián Gálik
Koike, Seiji. Úvod do gramatiky moderní japonštiny [Introduction into
Grammar of Modern Japanese]................................................................ 147
Hana Bogdanová
O autoroch • List of Contributors with Contact Details........................ 151
No Sumidagawa and Jôruri Futago Sumidagawa: Genesis of a Story
and of a Genre
Ivan R. V. Rumánek
Nó Sumidagawa a džóruri Futago Sumidagawa: genéza príbehu a žánru
Resume Štúdia analyzuje vývoj v rámci klasických japonských divadelných foriem nó, džoruri a kabuki cez prizmu súvzťažnosti nó Sumidagawa zo začiatku 14. stor. a hry Futago Sumidagawa (Dvojčatá a rieka Sumida) zo začiatku 18. stor. Pokúša sa vystopovať proti prúdu času pôvodný príbeh, na ktorom je založený celý rad dramatických diel zvaný sumidagawa-mono, a zistiť približnú dobu možnej historickej udalosti. Analyzuje tiež pojem monogurui, obyčajne prekladaný prostredníctvom západoeurópskych jazykov ako 'šialenstvo', ale v nó majúci odlišný odtienok.
Abstract The study analyses the development within classical Japanese theatrical forms of nô, jôruri and kabuki, by focusing on the correlation of the early 14th century no Sumidagawa and early 18th century play Futago Sumidagawa (Twins at Sumida River). By attempting to trace back the original story on which the whole series of dramatic works called Sumidagawa mono was based, the approximate time of the possible historical event is established. It also analyses the theme of monogurui, usually translated as 'madness' but actually having a different quality in nó.
Key words Chikamatsu Monzaemon ■ derangement ■ Hanjo ■ jôruri ■ kokata ■ madness ■ monogurui • Motomasa ■ nó • raving ■ Sumidagawa ■ Umewaka
The nascent Edo period theatre forms of jôruri and kabuki drew on the existing nô drama tradition in many aspects. Nô is performing art in which both the written tradition and storytelling was presented on the stage. The written tradition includes all the literary corpus of classical poetry and prose, richly quotated and alluded to in what was regarded as the peak of literary mastery. Nô also adapted many well-known tales and legends from the oral tradition of the
io8 SOS 16 ■ 2 (2017)
blind biwa hoshi itflifefelSlJ storytellers and it was due to no that the knowledge of many of these legends spread on among the broadest sections of the population. Some of the stories might otherwise have long perished, but due to their being used as subject matter for no, many a legend got preserved, and has continued in Japanese culture, even living up to further adaptations at times. And this is the case with many joruri and kabuki adoptions of stories.
On the other hand, some plots used in the plays of the Edo period theatre might come from other sources, but have a common root with a story that has been adapted in no.
In their relation to no, stories used in Edo period drama can be divided into three groups: A—stories adopted from no; B—stories coming from other traditions; C—newly invented stories. Group C might be a purely hypothetical category, as, especially in Japanese culture, it is difficult to imagine a topic that would be completely new, without any relation to the existing tradition.
As far as group B is concerned, some of the stories from other traditions can be shared by no, and some can be regarded as independent from it: Bi—stories shared by no; B2—stories that do not appear in the no tradition.
It is by examining the relationship between groups A and Bi that the origins of a story can be established.
In Edo-period drama, stories that were familiar and well known due to a previous traditon (A and B), were termed as sekai it# ('worlds'). They represented the standard thematic settings, which the spectator was expected to know in advance. The sekai would be the context of a known story from the past, and the spectator would go to see the play in anticipation of seeing innovations in the form of plot twists called shuko Shuko were the products of the individual invention of the playwright himself. The dichotomy of sekai and shuko, articulated in kabuki theory, gradually expanded the confines of drama, ultimately becoming, in the end, a conventional aspect of the whole of popular fiction.
Whereas no concentrated on the lyrical essence of stories, similar to the classical short tanka fe.Sfc poems, the later oral narrative traditions sekkyo %%Ml and ko-joruri fhW^mWi which also stood behind the Edo period drama, enjoyed epic breadth and complex plots. This expansion of the narrative dimension can also be observed in the origins of the story of Sumidagawa.
Rumanek ■ No Sumidagawa and Joruri Futago Sumidagawa
109
1   The Sumidagawa story
Chikamatsu Monzaemon's play Futago Sumidagawa tt^RIHJII
was first performed 1720. It was the first in s series of his three murderer-hero plays, the genre which, as several others, belong to Chikamatsu's creative innovations in Edo period theatre.
Futago Sumidagawa is an example of how Chikamatsu built his play around aparticular no play which comprised the fourth act, adapted and refashioned as a dance drama. »Chikamatsu closely followed the outline of the no and used some quotations, yet some slight alterations are made to fit his overall plot.*1 This overall plot is an extension of the core no lyrical topic to an epic five-act drama and this comparison will show differences in the authorial approach to the same topic as treated in no and in Edo-period drama. No represents elegant yet touching feelings while the Edo period drama shows cruelty on the stage. No is in this respect close to the Greek tragedy in which violence should not appear on the stage, only be related by a messenger or eye-witness. As will be shown, joruri has full depiction of the young boy's suffering at his abductor Sota's house, being beaten to death, and the moving reaction of Sota's wife who tries to save him. After the last words of Umewaka's account about himself and his posthumous wish (much the same as the report given in the no by local people), he dies just at the moment that his rescuer goblin Takekuni arrives.
Death and bereavement are building stones of the Sumidagawa story. About the death, Ikai Takamitsu wrote that »in Sumidagawa, the final part shows a chance meeting of a parent with a child across the borderline of this and that worlds, so there is a kind of religious healing involved. Death in no is often something required for salvation«. Ikai compares this with the further development seen in later kiriai no and leading up to the Edo period drama where »the death is the end, and if there was to be any 'healing' here, it was the preservation of one's honour, of approval, praise, the securing of good name«.2
1 Andrew C. Gerstle, ed., Chikamatsu 5 Late Plays (New York-Chichester; West Sussex: Columbia University Press, 2001), 40.
2 Ikai Takamitsu f;H"$5:#jE, Kiriaino no kenkyu SI^Htjro^f 55 [Research of Fighting no]. Tokyo: Hinoki Shoten 2011), 82.
no
SOS 16 ■ 2 (2017)
For anyone familiar with the well-known story of the classical no Sumidagawa, it is a surprising discovery to see that the later joruri play by Chikamatsu Monzaemon provides further unexpected details concerning identities of the characters and events preceding the main plot known from the no. This can be viewed in the dichotomy of sekai (classical setting) - shuko (innovations) in which shuko is the surprising and new. The sekai in this case is the plot known from the no Sumidagawa.
The plots in no are an integrated blend of the lyric and epic (narrative), usually representing a lyrical climax of the source story in two-act plays {niba mono).
Sumidagawa, however, is not a two-act play and there is no ai kyogen narrative interlude, so all of the story we have is found in the main body of the play. The grief-stricken mother is in search of her lost child who she fears might have been abducted by slave traders supplying labour to the developing eastern and northern parts of Japan. She comes 'down' as far as the Sumida River (in present-day Tokyo) in the then remote Eastern Regions (Azuma M), mentioning only randomly that she is from the Imperial Capital (i. e. Kyoto). The ferryman takes her to the other bank, telling her the story of the grave seen across the river. It belongs to a boy from the Capital, brought here by slave traders a year ago, and, when the boy's identity is revealed, the mother tragically confesses that this is the very son she has come searching for.
Besides the powerful lyrical charge of this play, all that is known epically (narratively) is that the mother comes from Kyoto's Kita (Northern) Shirakawa At SJII location, the northern part of the area of Higashiyama (foot of the Eastern Hills), and the son's name was Yoshida Umewakamaru, of noble birth and the only son of his father who died early. The play is about tragedy, the suffering of the mother deranged over missing her lost son. The derangement (monogurui $$£\^) disperses when she comes to her senses after fully realizing the discovered thruth and her own situation. She is eventually prevailed to engage in the religious ceremony of chanting Buddha Amitabha's name as she is persuaded that it would make her deceased son happy to see his mother praying for his salvation in the Western Paradise. While chanting, she experiences the fleeting sensation of seeing her son. This is the lyric and epic (narrative) framework that underlies the no play—the sekai for the later adaptation.
Rumanek ■ No Sumidagawa and Joruri Futago Sumidagawa
in
On the other hand, Chikamatsu's joruri Futago Sumidagawa (Twins at the Sumida River), which is the three centuries younger counterpart to the no play, includes a broad range of shuko, providing a whole panoply of characters, family conditions and a detailed continuous thread of events leading to the eventual revelation at the Sumida River in Act Four. Names of people are made known, the Yoshida family appears an nth century courtier clan in close relation with the Imperial Court, the family seat is indeed in Kita Shirakawa, and the course of events and the role of the characters in the core 'river scene' differs, shifting their mutual connections and placing the whole story in a different light.
This study will focus on establishing the relationship between the story of the 'Sumida no' and that of the 'Sumida joruri'. Did Motomasa, the author of the former, pick up just the lyrical apex of a broader story and use it as material for his no play? And did the later traditions operate with the entirety of the original broader narrative tradition, crowned, in 1720, by Chikamatsu Monzaemon who created an all day programme historical play for Takemoto-za, the Osaka joruri theatre he was writing for? These are the questions addressed by this study.
The no Sumidagawa certainly represents the kihonkei? the 'original form' from which, supposedly, all further Sumidagawa mono (works on the Sumidagawa mother topics) developed. Nishino Haruo states that there appeared many Sumidagawa mono both in joruri and kabuki.4 They include sekkyo (religious and miracle tales), ko-joruri (early joruri drama) and early kabuki W$$i& plays. Even the joruri Futago Sumidagawa was later adopted by kabuki again, and, as already mentioned, one of its exceptional elements is that it was Chikamatsu's first play in which he used his prototype of a murderer hero. This authorial intention led him to pick up this topic (sekai—theme) for creating a hero of a new model for the ever-growing range of joruri characters.
3 Matsuzaki Hitoshi 4&|llnH_ et a/., eds., Chikamatsu joruri shu Ge. Shin Nihon koten bungiku taikei 92 jH&ftFSiMM K„ ff 0 4^ A'ftzfc^A^ 92 [Chikamatsu's Collected Joruri III] (Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1995), 2.
4 Nishino Haruo WBT'?Ftt, ed., Tokyoku hyakuban. Shin Nihon koten bungiku taikei 57 wjCft W#0 0? 0 4^ A'jfe^C^A^ 57 [Hundred no Plays] (Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1998), 738.
112
SOS 16 ■ 2 (2017) 2   The no Sumidagawa
Motomasa is generally accepted to be the author of the no Sumidagawa, chiefly based on Zeami's own reference in the Sarugaku dangi treatise which is the record of Zeami's talks on no. He mentions the creative dispute he and Moromasa, his eldest son had regarding the staging at the end of the play. Zeami suggested that it could be interesting to do this scene without the child actually appearing on the stage at all, an opinion opposed by Motomasa who preferred a realistic solution. Due to this disagreement over staging, there are three existing productions of this emotional climax. In the first, only the son's voice is overheard by the mother while she chants the Amidabutsu mantra. The role can also be enacted by a child actor (kokata -fjf) either as an offstage voice during the final repetitions of the mantra, or—in Motomasa's way—by really appearing on the stage.
Unlike Zeami's monogurui no (plays with derangement, see below) Motomasa avoided reunion or showing the art of dance in a kusemai shodan. Motomasa was a highly talented offspring of the Kanze no dynasty, his grandfather Kan'ami being the founder of the classical no which Zeami, Kan'ami's eldest son, brought to full development and grandeur. To Zeami's own personal bereavement, his eldest son, the highly gifted Motomasa died prematurely when he was just over 30 in 1432. Not much is known about his creative methods or sources he would have drawn upon for subjects of his new plays. As Royall Tyler states, no written source for the play Sumidagawa has been found,? and similarly, all that Nishino Haruo has to say regarding the source is that similar stories of children abducted by slave traders and of women coming to the East in search of their children must have been numerous.6 Nishino further mentions the Ninth Section of The Tale of Ise (Ise monogatari) as the background for the miyakodori motif.
The Tales of Ise belongs to the genre oiuta monogatari S^Hn ('tales on songs'), basically short narrative commentaries depicting the situation in which a certain
5 Royall Tyler, Japanese No Dramas (London: Penguin Books, 2004), 251.
6 Nishino Haruo in Yokomichi Mario $ui H-ffltt and Omote Akira S^, eds., Tokyokushul. Nihon koten bungiku taikei 40. wjtftft I. B 4- A'jfe^C^A^ 40 [Collected no Plays I] (Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, i960), 385.
Rumanek ■ No Sumidagawa and Joruri Futago Sumidagawa
113
waka poem, or a set of poems, were composed. The Ninth Section is a short narrative about 'a man from the Capital' who sets out with a couple of friends to the East as he feels himself not fit to live in the Capital and looks for a new 'country' (province) to live in. Though nowhere stated clearly, it came, by tradition, to be generally taken for granted that the 'man from the Capital', hero of The Tales of Ise, was the historical figure of Ariwara no Narihira (825-880), the famous womanizer of Japanese antiquity whose half-male half-female figure also appears in the earliest kabuki skits of Izumo no Okuni. At the end of their journey they find themselves on the shore of a big river called Sumida. Feeling anxious about how far they have come, they become nostalgic for the Capital. Then the voice of the ferryman calls to them »Get onboard now, it is getting dark«, and they embark with sad feelings. Taking notice of unfamiliar white shore birds with red bills and legs, they enquire of the ferryman who tells them that they are called miyakodori which can translate as 'birds from the Capital'. The name of the birds catches the interest of the sensitive courtiers and alluding to it, the hero composes a poem upon which all aboard wept: »If your name be true, then I will ask you something. Say, Capital birds, of the one who has my heart: does she live or has she died? {nanishiocpaba/izakoto to(pamu /'miyakodori/'waga onto<pu <pito-qxi /ari-ya nashi-ya-to7).«s
The Ise tale, obviously, adds to the poetic context of the both Sumida plays. The mother, from Kyoto, would have preferred the ferryman to have responded, as in the Tales of Ise, with »Get on board now, it's getting dark«. Instead, he says, rather coarsely, »1 won't take you onboard unless you show us a bit of raving {deranged woman's dance}«. She expects that anyone along the Sumida River should of course be familiar with the Ise story to the same extent as the cultured people of the Imperial Capital are. This presupposition, the slight irony of which has the subtlety typical of no, proves wrong as the ferryman initially does not know
7 I use the international phonetic transcription letter <p to represent the historical consonant of the (4 column. It reflects the original bilabial voiceless fricative (lipito-ipaA around the year 800 when the syllabic writing system of Japanese was being established. However, very soon it turned into a voiced allophone p intervocalically ([<pito-|3a]). The voiceless value remained mostly limited to the word-initial position where it gradually delabialized into the modern [h] (hito-wa).
8 Joshua S. Mostow and Royall Tyler, transl. and eds., The Ise Stories (Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 2010), 36.
ii4
SOS 16 ■ 2 (2017)
what she means. Nevertheless, he gradually realizes and catches on in the end. While enriching the lyrical and figurative set-up of the no story, it is obvious that the Ise tale does not have any direct connection to the epic, narrative line of the Sumidagawa story.
Thus, no particular source to the Motomasa no story has been identified. With view to the further development of the story, this can mean two things. The first possibility is that Motomasa used a story he knew from other sources or traditions; the story, outside the no tradition, continued to exist in the other traditions until it was referenced in the later surviving source material, postdating the creation of the no play. This would be the Bi type of play (stories shared by no). The other possibility is that the no story is Motomasa's own authorial creation, and with the popularity of the play, the story was enriched with ever further details added to it—made up or borrowed from elsewhere—by later authors who adopted the no story in their own traditions. These traditions included storytelling and songs, as well as further possible no adaptations, extant or vanished, which all led to the Futago Sumidagawa play we have today. This would be the A type ('stories adopted from no').
Elements known to have been added to the 'original story' by the beginning of the ijth century (pre-Edo period) are: a) the framework of the me sodo 'MWMSM (crisis in a grand household) in the house of Yoshida; b) the existence of Umewaka's younger brother Matsuwaka; c) appearance of the tengu goblin who abducts the lattery d) (possibly) fusion of Sumidagawa and Hanjo story (see the following section).
To these, the further century into the ijoos added: a) Hanjo as the mother of one of the two brothers; b) the slave trader is also Umewaka's murderer; c) reign of Emperor Horikawa (1086-1107).
The newly developed kabuki theatre in Edo enhancedthe theme of slave trading,10 and several Edo kabuki Sumida plays established the general dramatic practice that the slave trader responsible for the sad end of Umewaka should have some grave and tragic circumstances. The eventual tragedy, termed as shu-gproshi iSt, the
9 Matsuzaki et al., ChikamatsujorurishuGe, 2.
10 Shirakata in Gerstle, Chikamatsu 5 Late Plays, 37.
Rumanek ■ No Sumidagawa and Joruri Futago Sumidagawa
"5
killing of one's own lord, is, however, rendered rather as coincidence or fate. This can be seen as the prototype for Chikamatsu's future murderer-hero.11
According to Matsuzaki Hitoshi,12 the accommodation of the story in the reign of emperor Horikawa (1086-1107) is first seen in Sumidagawa monogatari, a sekkyo joruri which came out as kanazoshi {R^s J^-p" in 1656 (Meireki 2). The Horikawa period as the historical background to the story was subsequently taken up by further works of ko-joruri (pre-Chikamatsu joruri).
The above-mentioned Sumidagawa monogatari of 1656 is also the earliest extant work representing the bridge between no and Chikamatsu. Further works on this topic are oral narrative sekkyo Sumidagawa and Hanako koi monogurui, Yamato Tosanojo's ko-joruri Sumidagawa and Kaganojo's ko-joruri Sumidagawa of 1690. The elements added in the joruri plays of this period of mid- to late-1680'.? are: a) Hanjo does not die but is reunitedwith Matsuwaka; b) the villain slave-trader role has become more prominent.1'
3   Chikamatsu's Sumida story—towards the joruri
In Chikamatsu's Futago Sumidagawa, the original plot of the Motomasa no is placed in the Fourth Act. In the conventional no performance of the Edo period, Sumidagawa was ranked among 'the fourth pieces' {yobanme-mono Flilr 0 h (D). In this way, the position of the no events within the joruri play corresponds exactly to this as an example of the direct mutual correspondence between the five act structure of historical plays (jidaimono B^ffttj (D) in joruri (and kabuki), and the five play programme (gobandate Ti.^fiLX) in no. This fivefold structural pattern became established in the Edo period.
In Chikamatsu, the mother of the lost child is called Hanjo, an element added, as seen above, in the course of the 17th century. There is no such name mentioned in the Motomasa no. The origin of this addition is to be found in another no story: one of Zeami's well-known no was called Hanjo. In it, the main character, a singing girl Hanago is, in her longing for the gentleman she has fallen in love with,
11 Hirata in Ibid., 37.
12 Matsuzaki et al, Chikamatsu joruri shiiGe, 3.
13 Shirakata in Gerstle, Chikamatsu 5 Late Plays, 37.
ii6
SOS 16 ■ 2 (2017)
compared to Hanjo, the famous lady Pan of China. The latter was the mistress of Former Han emperor Cheng who abandoned her for another, and in her longing she made her proverbial fan. Similar to the no Sumidagawa, the origin of the story behind the no Hanjo is not known. J4 The name of the girl's lover is given— Yoshida, and he is a courtier from the Capital. The same surname was given in the Motomasa no as the identity of the dead boy. It is conceivable that the presence of another Yoshida in the story of the no Hanjo might have offered itself as a 'literary marriage', taking the Yoshida man of Hanjo and the father of the Sumidagawa boy as one and the same person and, consequently, identifying the Sumidagawa mother as Yoshida's lover Hanjo. This would make the background all the more juicy, because the Sumidagawa boy would have been the offspring of a secret love affair. The Sumidagawa mother would thus appear as not the first wife of the father Yoshida, but his mistress. Tyler notes that popular fiction and later theatre 'immediately confused' Hanjo with the Sumidagawa mother. He attributes the fusion of the two characters to an early date, and, beside the coincidence of surnames, suggests the journey to the East as another possible common topic for the two stories to merge.1? Near the place where the girl Hanago might have lived at Nogami in Gifu prefecture, the presentday notice on the grounds of Shinnen-ji temple conveys the local history in this way:
This place is called Nogami. Of old ... the Yoshida Minor Captain ... stopped here and formed a bond with Hanago, the girl who served him. When he left, he told her that if their child was a boy she should name him Umewaka-maru, and as a keepsake he left her his fan... When Umewaka-maru grew up a little he travelled east to look for his father, and in time, his anxious mother followed him. On reaching Mokubo-ji in Edo {which did not yet exist in Zeami's time}, she learned that Yoshida had gone up to Miyako {the Imperial Capital—Kyoto}, and that Umewaka-maru had died and was now buried at the temple. Distraught, Hanago returned to Nogami, where she worshipped the image of Kannon on Kannon-yama and died insane...16
14 Yokomichi, Tökyokushül, 350.
15 Tyler, Japanese NöDramas, 109.
16 Ibid., no.
Rumanek ■ No Sumidagawa and Joruri Futago Sumidagawa
117
Apparently, the local rendering of the legend represents another peculiar blend of the Hanjo and Sumidagawa stories. Edo did not exist then, but Mokubo-ji on the eastern bank of the Sumida River is the temple at which the boy of the no Sumidagawa is reported to be buried, too. Tyler writes that the temple claims to have been founded in 977 as a result of a miraculous apparition at the boy's tomb, although its existence is more likely to be connected with the rise of Edo in the 16th century.1? Nevertheless, the 977 date here is of importance: it suggests that the core root of the story was an occurence that happened before the year 977. If this dating was to be taken at face value, the connection with the Ise Tales might have been very close. With Narihira living until 880, and, provided the alleged apparition of the dead boy happened before 977, Narihira's visit to that place might have been a relatively recent event at the time of the mother's visit. It might still be a fresh, if not living memory both in the Capital and (supposedly at least) at the banks of the Sumida River. This would be enough for the Sumida mother to expect Narihira's visit there would still be in fresh memory of the local ferryman. This suggests that the original Sumida mother story took place in the early Heian period.
There are some obvious discrepancies between the Nogami notice and the no Hanjo. In the no Hanjo, the longing girl had been asked by Yoshida to wait for his return from the East that very autumn. Having waited for him for what seems to her all too long, and under the impression that he must have let her down, she sets off to the Capital to look for him. However, Yoshida does stop at the brothel on his way, though somewhat belated, and finding out that his lover has left for Kyoto, he hurries off in search for her. They meet in a final scene that turns into a direct allusion to (one could even say 'homonymy' or 'homophony') the well-known episode of prince Genji's visit with lady Yugao. The Nogami notice does not suggest any such reunion, stating instead that the son, born to 'Hanjo', set out to search for his father as soon as he was old enough to undertake such a journey. The mother followed him later on, only to find out that Yoshida had »gone up to Miyako« and Umewakamaru was dead. Should we try to arrange the events and make up a time axis, we could admit that, first the two lovers really found each other in Kyoto, and it was only later, presumably on government duties, that
17    Ibid., 253.
n8 SOS 16 ■ 2 (2017)
Yoshida travelled to the East again (perhaps his regular business). When he did not return after a long time, the son set out to search for him.
The names Yoshida and Umewakamaru might have been a mere, yet powerful coincidence through which the Hanjo story started to be associated with the Sumida story in what I would call 'the virtual world of no stories'. The Nogami legend is of interest because the two stories we know from two separate no plays get into direct connection. 'Two stories', that is, from the nopoint of view! For later renderings inlcuding Chikamatsu's play, they are one story. Of course we may take into account the presumption that the two stories got linked together only later. But it cannot be excluded that, rather, it was the other way round: the story might have been originally one.
Considering these two possibilities, it could be conjectured that it was not the two stories subsequently linked together by name coincidences (Fig. 1) but that it was one story divided into two (Fig. 2). Though Hanjo was written by the father Zeami and Sumidagawa by the son Motomasa, in consideration of the fact that the latter died prematurely when his father was in his late 60s, it is not unimaginable that, in hunting for fascinating stories, the father and son drew two epico-lyrical cores from the Hanjo-Yoshida legend and shared it mutually for two separate plays. Viewing the situation from this perspective, Motomasa's Sumidagawa would come out as a kind of a 'sequel' to Zeami's Hanjo.
Zeami's Hanjo does not mention pregnancy, or the father's wish that the son should be named Umewakamaru. The second (Fig. 2) hypothesis would mean that Zeami hid away this circumstance on purpose, in order to leave the material to Motomasa, as well as to render the no Hanjo a more complete, rounded structure. The girl being pregnant would leave the story open, its future unsettled and the ending a question mark. Being as it is, the plot of the play is fully independent. This would also account for why the Sumidagawa moter came to be called Hanjo.
Rumanek ■ No Sumidagawa and Joruri Futago Sumidagawa 119
Figure 1
Hypothesis I. The two stories subsequently linked together by name coincidences. Ai— Motomasa's Sumidagawa; A2—Zeami's Hanjo; A—combined HanjoSumida story.
Figure 2
Hypothesis II. One story dividedinto two. A—combinedHanjoSumida story. Ai — Motomasa's Sumidagawa; A2—Zeami's Hanjo.
As shown in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2, consideration of the both stories can be done in two different lines - one would be the hypothesis of'two stories merged into one', the other being the view of'one story divided into two'.
4   Chikamatsu's Sumida play
The account now will focus on Chikamatsu's Tutago Sumidagawa, his innovations, a summary of the main modifications differentiating the Edo play from the no and an analysis of some key differences. These will be followed by an analysis of the
120
SOS 16 ■ 2 (2017)
acts of the play with respect to Gidayu's theory of five acts, and an overview of no quotations used in the play.
We will start with a list of additions made by Chikamatsu. His own innovations were: a) integration of the various subplots into a coherent narrative; b) Sota's crime is not merely coincidence or fate but the direct consequence of causes emanating from his actions;18 c) the special emphasis on and development of the oiesodo play framework;^ d) the symbolic use of the Hiyoshi Shrine (as the demon gate), Mount Hira (as the tengu abode), and of'the monkey' (as a god's messenger); e) developing themes of madness and love of parent and child through allusion to 25 no and 3 kyogen plays; f) realistic portrayal of obsession leading to madness; g) the introduction of a villain and murderer as a hero;20 h) Umewaka and Matsuwaka as twins; i) the plot with the treasured scrollpainting of the carp and the tengu.
The slave trader appears as the 'hero' protagonist in Chikamatsu. This is a critical leap in joruri for which almost certainly Edo kabuki was Chikamatsu's inspiration. He took the Edo kabuki outlaw figure and set him in the traditional joruri moralistic world, analyzing the nature of his crime.21 Sota was originally a retainer of the Yoshida house, but was accused of stealing money from his lord and dismissed, a circumstance which brought him into the desperate world of selling kidnapped children. Not knowing that Umewaka is his former master's son, he kills him in a tragic fit of rage. Yet, on finding out the dead boy's identity, he turns into a hero by cutting his belly in self-sacrifice. This is an almost Passion-like scene, showing his heroic will to pay for his crime by becoming a tengu in order to find the twin brother of the boy.
To sum up the above account, some motifs can be identified as the main points of difference between the original no play and Chikamatsu's Futago Sumidagawa: 1. the existence of a twin brother; 2. the departure of Umewaka to the East is not to search for his father because he did not return, but in fear after spoiling the precious scroll, and his father was killed soon afterwards; 3. the character
18 Shirakata in Gerstle, Chikamatsu 5 Late Plays, 37.
19 Hara Michio in Ibid., 37.
20 Gerstle, Chikamatsu 5 Late Plays, 38.
21 Ibid.
Rumanek ■ No Sumidagawa and Joruri Futago Sumidagawa
121
of the ferryman is connected with the anonymous slave trader in the form of a married couple Sota and Karaito;    4. the slave trader is buriednext to the boy.
So, in contrast to Motomasa, Chikamatsu's play has two brothers, two married characters, and two graves.
While the no is elegant and in its own restricted manner full of touching emotions, the Edo-period drama, rich in pathos in its own way, also does not refrain from expressly depicting cruelly on the stage. It fills in the void left untouched by no in order to present the full aspects of life realistically. It is minutely descriptive in its representation of Umewaka's suffering at Sota's house, showing the horrific beating that killed him, and the desperation and pathos of Sota's wife as she tries to save him. In his last words, Umewaka talks about himself and suggests a posthumous wish. The full significance of this wish is only understood against the background of the no, where his last words are quoted in full by the local people, and so the previous knowledge of this point was obviously taken for granted by the playwright. Having uttered his last words, Umewaka dies, the tragedy of which is enhanced by the fact that it happens just a moment before the arrival of his potential rescuer, Takekuni.
If compared further with the story in the Nogami notice, another motif surfaces: 5. in the Edo-period drama, Hanjo apparently returned to Kyoto, unlike the Hanjo of the Nogami notice, who is reported to have returned to Nogami and died there insane.
5  Analysis of some key differences between the Sumidagawa noandjoruri
5.1 The name of the boy One of the chief differences between the no and the Edo period play is that the child hero—Umewaka, appears as a twin in the latter. This reminds us of another sibling couple, the well-known sisters in the no Matsukaze; they are an example of a shite-tsure pair in which the two are hardly discernible from each other, behaving rather as what Nishino Haruo called »double-shite« for the most of the play, except for the moment in which Matsukaze seems more attached to the lingering memory of their lover than Murasame. In the Edo-period drama, the 'new' twin son is eventually the one who replaces the murdered brother who was
122
SOS 16 ■ 2 (2017)
the Yoshida heir. This was the result of the composite process of gradually elaborating on the original material.
5.2    Monogurui ^j£E V ^—raving, derangement or madness? There is a difference in how the two plays treat monogurui, usually translated as »madness«. Monogurui is different in no and in the Edo-period drama where its realistic portrayal makes it very close to real madness.
In no, the main hero (shite) of some monogurui plays shifts the meaning of the word kurue (kurucpe) when asked by the side-role figure (waki) to kuruu (kurucpu) for them. While the waki obviously takes the kuruu shite for an entertainer and the word kuruu for dance and song, the verb kuruu often changes in the shite's subsequent utterances.22 She dances not the kurui as an entertainment but her dance comes out to be a unique and unrepeatable expression of her innermost feelings.2'
In the joruri, before the mother comes into sight on stage, the tengu Hokaibo says he has been accompanying her for »these last few days« and brings testimony about her madness from grief for her lost son: »sometimes she imagines she sees him, falls into a craze, and collapses«24 (hflhflo feil^ffi^"ClE#^^Jv').2?
The realization of the death of her son is one of the crucial points of the Sumidagawa topic. Ikai compares no and Chikamatsu's plays from the point of view of Buddhist thought and death. In no, Buddhism is not about attaining Buddhahood as a result of troubles in this world, but about enabling a ghost or spirit of the dead to become a Buddha because they are not able to do it by themselves. Chikamatsu presents death as the natural result of complications in
22 Yamanaka Reiko |il H-1   ~F, Nö no enshutsu - sono keisei to hen'yö ftä <D fgi tu • -Ir <D M JjJc t [Staging nö—Forms and Transformations] (Tokyo: Wakakusa Shobö, 1998), 40.
23 Ibid., 41.
24 Jöruri translations in brackets are those by Andrew Gerstle in Gerstle, Chikamatsu 5 Late Plays, 41-117.
25 Jöruri quotations of the Japanese original from Matsuzaki etal., Chikamatsu jöruri shü Ge.
Rumanek ■ No Sumidagawa and Joruri Futago Sumidagawa
123
the hero's fortunes and is by itself the tragic end of his or her life, while in no, death means »an interruption, not the end, of life«.26
It is important to note that in no, monogurui is not really madness. Motomasa's Sumidagawa is characterized as zyobanme madwoman realistic (genzai no Siffif b) play. The 'realistic' in this context means that all the main characters are real people, none of them being supernatural. Sumidagawa is also the epitome of the monogurui genre. It was probably Zeami who created a new theme of'elegant madness' in no which Tyler translates as »raving«. Within this theme, due to the suffering, the person behaves in a strange way, often resembling a dance which, to a certain extent, appears amusing, both to the person herself and to the onlookers. The suffering person can even take up dancing and singing to serve as her livelihood during her sorrowful journey, by which the suffering takes the external form of 'amusement' in the sense of amusing others. This development in the meaning of the word monogurui is due to Zeami, who tried to produce 'mad' characters who were not repulsive or deplorable wretches but pleasing, even amusing (in the elegant sense) for his elevated audiences to look at. Hare prefers to translate monogurui as derangement: »Derangement, then, makes for interest, removing human characters (or their ghosts) from the dimension of normal human existence so that they can be considered furyu {in the sense of 'elegant'}; their derangement, therefore, can be cast in onori rhythm without seriously violating its traditional conventions.*2?
Thus, Zeami's raving characters would, in their sorrow, choose to tear their normal social bonds, change their daily routine and set off for a different way of life, either on a journey to look for their lost beloved, or giving way to their suffering in singing and dancing. The literal translation of the words of the ferryman in the no Sumidagawa (»If so, I will stop the ferryboat for a while and let nsseeabirofrharmadness« ft-fe n ^fettHf.   Uf h < MZ'gfcX, /jMP^g
26 Ikai Takamitsu f;H"$5:#jE, »Hiyugenno no shoso to chuseibungei to no sokansei j55#t3S6<l'l3 t ^ftttiCS t roffiKIfft« [Elements of Non-Yugen no and Their Connection to Medieval Arts] Hosei daigaku daigakuinhakushigakuironbun: Jinbunkagakukenkyuka &IiScA^A^KIl!:l:^in»ti ~5t ' K~£.P\-#f56P\- [Doctoral Dissertations at Hosei University, Series of Research in Humanities], No 174, March, 2007 , 259.
27 Thomas Blenman, Zeami's Style. The Noh Plays of Zeami Motokiyo (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1986), 170.
124
SOS 16 ■ 2 (2017)
-k%tz. 5 1^ <S "C{gl)28 would probably sound bafflingly inconsiderate and derisive, even callous, without this background knowledge. The same can be seen in the no Hanjo (in Tyler's translation): »Why are you not raving today? Come, rav£ and entertain us!«29 (MtX^rB i^gftfci-go MS 5 ffiOfc).
In Chikamatsu, the word monogurui returns to its original meaning of a realistically rendered madness. The noble elegance of no is gone, and so are the more delicate connotations painstakingly elaborated and attributed to words and facts basically denoting the less appealing sides of reality. Edo theatre abandoned the yugen or elegance of no and returned to the realistic, even rough depiction of life. In Chikamatsu, madness is madness, and his Hanjo, the Sumidagawa mother, is really mad, not only deranged or raving in dance the way her no predecessors were. Besides, there is also the madness of Sota: initially in the pursuit of a courtesan he has madly fallen in love with, and later in his quest for money, in which no trace whatsoever of an 'elegant' madness could be identified. »Chikamatsu was interested in individual personality and the causes and consequences of madness and crime, and so Hanjo and Sota are fully developed, complex figures«.3°
6   Five acts q/Tutago Sumidagawa
In his Preface to The 1687 Gidayu Collection ofjoruri Scenes, Takemoto Gidayu, a colleague of Chikamatsu's, stipulated the characteristics of the five acts of an Edo period jidaimono play that mirrored the fivefold no play program— gobandate. It was the first articulate treatise about the five acts of joruri as corresponding to the five-no performance.'1 The following account will show how they apply for Futago Sumidagawa.
28 No quotations of the Japanese original from Koyama Hiroshi /hlilSiife etal, eds., Tokyokushul, II. Nihon koten bungaku zenshu fS[fti4 I., II. 0 4< A'ftl&^rfeft [No Plays I, II] (Tokyo: Shogakkan 1975).
29 Tyler, Japanese No Dramas, 115.
30 Gerstle, Chikamatsu 5 Late Plays, 38.
31 mmzm-t *>-m r »w *> u^n, =m r     <o mm. mm r »w *> m? and
Rumänek ■ No Sumidagawa and Joruri Futago Sumidagawa
125
In the first act, the drama starts at the Hiyoshi Shrine, with a scene depicting a consecration ceremony in preparation for building holy torii gates. Here, a conflict arises between lord Yoshida, member of the Fujiwara clan, and his brother-in-law Momotsura regarding the felling of sacred trees. Meanwhile, at the Yoshida seat in Kita Shirakawa, Yoshida's two sons, Umewaka and Matsuwaka, meet for the first time, and so do their respective mothers, Yoshida's main wife and Yoshida's mistress Hanjo—originally »a courtesan from a house in Nogami».32 It comes to light that the brothers, looking alike, are actually twins and are both Hanjo's sons. A tengu goblin, which has been causing trouble to lady Yoshida for some time, raises an uproar by taking on the appearance of lady Yoshida. In trying to kill the tengu, Yoshida kills the true lady Yoshida by mistake, and Matsuwaka is abducted by the tengu. Momotsura, who is the brother of the deceased lady, uses this tragedy as a pretext to openly plot against lord Yoshida. Ceremony, sacred trees, the eventual reconciliation at the meeting of the brothers and mothers are the elements required by the character of the first act which, according to Takemoto Gidayu, should be of auspicious mood.
The second act starts idyllically and ends drastically. It begins with a romantic scene, in which lord Yoshida and Hanjo take a boat outing in the beautiful lotus pond in their fine garden which becomes the setting for the whole act. The Yoshida and Momotsura have been entrusted by the Emperor with taking turns in the custody of a precious Chinese scroll, allegedly painted by the ancient Han emperor Wu himself. It is Yoshida's turn now and he accepts the custody of the scroll, and relates its interesting history. He says that the emperor left out the eye of the carp for fear it might get alive and jump off the scroll. It was brought to Japan in the early 8th century, when it was given to Yoshida's ancestor as a gift from the Tang emperor Xuanzong 5£tk (r. 7i3~756) to the Japanese court. The
3L§£ R GO^FfJ" Y) Rfl^Sr. Takemoto Gidayu tt^lt^C^, »Jokyo yonen Gidayu danmonoshu" E¥JI±^S#3Ä« [Love in Act I, Fighting in Act II, Woe in Act III, Travel in Act IV, Questions-and-Answers in Act V], in Nihon shomin bunkashi-ryöshüsei VII. -Ningyöjoruri 0 4^fffi K^CftStSÄhic VII. AWfry&iM [Sources to History of Japanese Folk Culture], edited by Geinöshi Kenkyükai 35#tä5tyrtf 56^ (Tokyo: San'ichi Shobö, 1975), 130-134. The following account is based on translation and interpretation in Gerstle, Chikamatsu 5Late Plays, 16-18. 32    Gerstle, Chikamatsu $ Late Plays, 53.
126
SOS 16 ■ 2 (2017)
boat outing on the lake combines with the motif of the carp in a 'lotus song' rich in metaphors and allusions (see below).
Umewaka is lured by Kageyu, Momotsura's spy, to paint in the eye, upon which the painted carp really comes to life and jumps off the scroll into the pond; the precious imperial artefact is thus destroyed and the honour of the Yoshida house is in danger. Umewaka flees in fear. Urged by Yoshida who is taken captive by Kageyu, the loyal servant Gunsuke manages to pursue the carp across the pond and up the waterfall (an important and well-known Chinese motif—carp swimming up a waterfall and becoming dragon). After a fierce fight, he plucks out the carp's eyes, upon which the carp returns to the scroll. The honour of the Yoshida house is restored, yet Yoshida ends up murdered by Kageyu after all. Gunsuke kills Kageyu and sets off to look for the boys. The finale corresponds exactly to the warrior and battle character prescribed for the second act.
The third act, in which pathos and tragedy is the theme, shows a tribunal at the Imperial Palace dealing with the inheritance of the Yoshida estate. In this act, Momotsura tries to wrest control of the estate, denigrating the distraught Hanjo, Yoshida's mistress and mother of the two boys, who is starting to show clear signs of madness. Then the locale shifts to the shores of the Sumida River where Sota, a slave trader, continues with his business against the will of the wife who has been trying to dissuade him from his ways. Umewaka is one of his recent purchases, and in a fit of anger over the boy's stubbornness, Sota beats him to death. This most poignant scene ends in the arrival of Takekuni, former Yoshida's councillor, who comes in search of the boy. On learning that the boy was Umewaka, the son of his former master, Sota commits seppuku in penitance, in order to become a tengu so that he might find Matsuwaka and restore the Yoshida family.
The travelling fourth act starts in the province of Sanuki, on the island of Shikoku. Here, Gunsuke comes in search for Matsuwaka and fights with a yamabushi (mountain ascetic) who turns out to be a tengu wanting to help him. Then, there is Hanjo travelling to the east. At the Sumida River, Hanjo meets a widow, Karaito, who ferries people across the river. Karaito tells her the story of the two mounds on the other bank. It turns out that this widow's deceased husband was Umewaka's killer Sota, and that he is burried next to his victim. Learning about her son's death, Hanjo wants to drown herself in the Sumida, but
Rumanek ■ No Sumidagawa and Joruri Futago Sumidagawa
127
the tengu into which Sota turned after his seppuku, appears, with Matsuwaka in his arms, and asks her to accept him as a substitute for Umewaka. This course of events corresponds to Gidayu's rule that the fourth act should lead the heroes »from the depths of tragedy through the hell of vengeance up to the realm of hope in Act Five«.»
In the auspicious conclusion of fifth act, Karaito and Hanjo arrive at the Yoshida estate in Kita Shirakawa and their men defeat Momotsura. Matsuwaka is restored as the heir at the Yoshida estate and the festive mood expresses itself in a firework celebrations followed with an epilogue depicting the glamour of the
festival.
7   No quotations
Futago Sumidagawa is a jidaimono play which in particular engages in intertextuality. As was common practice, besides the no Sumidagawa as the core topic, Chikamatsu used quotations from many other no plays. Some of them seem purely ornamental, yet most of them have direct bearing on the topic and add intertextual depth to the meaning of the passage they embellish. Futago Sumidagawa contains allusion to as many as twenty five no, besides three kyogen plays. 34 The following overview by acts lists some of the no quoted and the connotations these quotations are part of. First act:
Nue: tengu goblins and the horror their appearance inspires; Hanjo: linking lady Hanjo to Yoshida; Shunnei: love between two brothers;
Hotoke no hara: the gorgeous, if short-lived, glory so similar to the cherry blossom. Second act:
Kantan: paradise-like garden and the peace it provides soon to be ended;
Hanjo: autumn fan as symbol of abandonment;
ToKihi: woman's beauty contrasted against the lotus flowers.
Lotus song of the second act:
33 Gerstle, Chikamatsu $ Late Plays, 122.
34 Ibid., 33.
128
SOS 16 ■ 2 (2017)
Kinuta: fear lest love vows become shallow;
Tokusa: picking the lotus flowers - like cutting the scouring rush and alluding to the theme of a lost son;
Taema: mandala from lotus flower strands made by a lost daughter. Third act:
Tamamba: as inconsistent utterances of a woman gone mad; Miidera: mother missing a lost son.
In the second act Lotus song, the images combine with the unuttered meanings hidden behind the allusions, to form an intertextual succession of meanings parading before the listener. The uttered and the unuttered are of equal significance here. Mere allusions are equally eloquent as metaphors. They evolve the theme of lotus flowers from the Western Paradise, through three forms of obsessions hampering the attaining of Paradise, to a devoted nun weaving a mandala out of lotus flower strands, and attaining the saving grace of Amida. »Thus from being a metaphor for erotic beauty, the lotus image becomes a symbol of a pure heart untouched by the concerns of the mundane worlds
8   The no Sumidagawa and the fourth act of thejoruri
If set within the traditional gobandate performance, the no Sumidagawa would have exactly the same place in the programe as the Sumidagawa scene has in Chikamatsu's Futago Sumidagawa—it would appear as the 'fourth piece' iyobanmemono). This shows how much Chikamatsu's dramaturgical methods reflected the underlying no model. Integrated in the joruri play, the classical no text is maintained and followed very closely, with some adjustments made in order to accommodate it into the overall course of the Edo period play.
What follows is a detailed comparative analysis of both versions, word by word, to disclose Chikamatsu's method in integrating a no play into his own work, and to display how he used the no text (shisho) for his own needs and intentions.
35    Ibid., 443.
Rumanek ■ No Sumidagawa and Joruri Futago Sumidagawa
129
In the fourth act of Chikamatsu's play, after Hokaibo's first referring to the symptoms of the mother's madnes, she appears, asking Hokaibo about Umewaka and offering a bamboo twig to the gods in prayer. When Hokaibo tries to awake gods, spirits and tengus with a prayer and console the mother with words expressing sympathy with her sorrowful journey, she says: »Look, my dearest child is there, over there!«'6 There is no such exclamation in the no; the story of the no has not yet even started by this time. There is only one example where the mother shouts a similar sentence in the no, a moment which, according to some Japanese scholars, is the moment of waking up from her monogurui derangement.
The joruri mother now starts singing a song, the words of which disintegrate in her deranged mind into the radicals by which their respective Chinese characters are written. Words lose their meanings, noone listens to her enquiries or to the story of her life. The song continues in a geographical lyric depiction of the far away distance she is resolute to wander and she ends with the poignant, highest pitch cry »Oh, my dearest Umewaka, dear Umewaka!«37 Her steps are described by the narrator as she arrives at the Musashi plain. Since Musashi is the plain across which the Sumida River flows, these lines signal to the spectator that the mother has reached the supposed goal of her journey (though she herself does not know it yet).
It is here where the plot of the joruri starts to overlap with that of the no. The narrator introduces Karaito, the widow who ferries travellers across the Sumida River, and alludes to (not quoting exactly) the lines declaimed in the no by the chorus on behalf of the mother:
Joruri narrator:»{...} the Sumida, which courses the plains of Musashi and Shimosa.
[...}«nm t Tit© fcffi 5 5 m m) 11„
(The corresponding no chorus is »She has arrived at the Sumida River, which is between the provinces of Musashi and Shim6sa«, jftjUcWS t T^ff)^ t^fe <S ^
A conspicuous difference is that the timing in the joruri action runs a bit ahead of that in the no. This is the first instance of this phenomenon, which, as will be seen, happens several times. The no words (by chorus) are not uttered here but appear later, as will be seen below, to accompany the mother reaching the
36 ^^a^^a^ri^
37 &ib^LrotS^f-^„ i^tS#r„
130
SOS 16 ■ 2 (2017)
bank of the river. The words will appear again in the joruri as well, but the joruri first has the mother urged on by the call from Karaito: »Weary pilgrim, let me ferry you across«. The mother leaves Hokaibo and what follows is a quotation from the same place in the no:
Joruri narrator & no chorus: »A parent will travel {a myriad miles}{...} for love of a
child [...}«cfs^fix t>m>t\ (±j .
Althoug the end of the line differs here, the 'stage ku' syllabic metre (7-5) stays the same:
Joruri narrator: »the ends of the earth« CRifiJpc'C L©/^d^5 hA/). No chorus: »never able to forget him, so one hears« Cf-^iStLSi t HH < h © -&). The metre here is the stage ku ('stanza'), the fundamental syllabic unit for no poetic passages. It has the syllabic structure of'7 + 5' and has been inherited from no in Edo period drama.
In the joruri, this passage is followed by one more ku followed by the arrival-at-the-Sumida^, the proclamation of reaching the frontier and the goal, the end of the journey:
Joruri: »She has arrived at the Sumida River« (lffiP3jl|(i^^$|n^) while in the no, the »Aparent will traveU passage, which is a 2 ku low pitch song (sageuta), is then followed by 7 ku sung as a high pitch song (ageuta), before reaching the same proclamation mentioned above: »She has arrived at the Sumida River, which is between the province of Musashi and Shimosa / She has arrived at the Sumida River«. No: »She has arrived at the Sumida River« (R|H )W K h M t K (t X> ) (repeated). The language slightly differs in style, typically on the final verb: tsukinikeri {no) vs tsukitamau (joruri).
What follows is the same event seen by two different ferryman types, and the later rendering also through the prism of familiarity with the previous development: the no ferryman, supposedly a man, teases the deranged woman saying that he will not let her onboard unless she 'raves' for him. The joruri 'ferryman' is a widow who shows empathy, and understanding between the two women is immediately established. The mad woman lavishes her gratitude on the ferry widow by alluding to what she would have said (i. e. was supposed and expected to on the basis of the familiar no archetype) but what she, luckily enough, need not. Thus this passage in the joruri becomes a double allusion or a double reinterpretation—
Rumanek ■ No Sumidagawa and Joruri Futago Sumidagawa
131
'double' because the no exchange is an allusion to the Ise tale and the joruri exchange is an additional comment on this no exchange. The no mother is expecting the ferryman to say what the legendary Ise monogatari ferryman had said to Narihira, and shows dissatisfaction when this fails to happen, while the joruri mother is thankful to the ferry woman for not saying what the no ferryman would have said, andfor-nothaving to say what she would otherwise have to say in response, as will be shown below. Thus the character estranges herself for a while from her identity embedded in the plot, offering a playful game of detachment which enables her to comment on the situation from outside, from the position of the spectator familiar with 'what comes now in the no' and surprised that 'it is not going to happen now'. This is a narratological change of focus: from the character-bound focalizor she temporarily becomes an external narrator-and-focalizor. This starts, however, with a strange twist, unexpected and seeming rather inconsiderate before it is explained, probably an expression of another spell of the mother's madness and absorption in her confused thought. The no mother gets hurt at this place by the inconsiderate words of the ferryman when she would rather have him allude to the literary legend, while the joruri mother, after the estrangement comment, expresses relief that the widow is gladly offering to take her across the river. (In the ensuing exemplification, the 'estrangement comment' is in bold type, underlined are passages directly alluding to sentences in the no, and DIRECT QUOTATIONS are in capitals.) Joruri
Ferry woman: »Have you such worries? How pitiful you look! If you wish to cross the river, I'll gladly row you across. Quick, please come aboard«. Hanjo: »Though both of this same world, how different are our hearts. I ask you to ferry me to the other shore, but how insensitive you are, ferryman, to say that since I am a mad woman speaking the cadences of a court lady. YOT T WA NT ME TO PERFORM SOME CR A ZY A NTTC S for you BEFORE YOIT'TX TAKE ME ACROSS, (sung) HOW HORRTBEEr YOTT FERRYMAN OF THE SITMTDA RTVER. THE DA Y IS growing DARK. Why will you not allow me on board? To refuse is to go against your trade. You bumpkin. I was about to shame you with language of this sort, but you immediately welcome me aboard. Such a gentle person! How delightful«.
And now the underlined part in the original and its no counterpart:
132
SOS 16 ■ 2 (2017)
Joruri mother: ffi   ^g^T Jj/ti"f(Jjfrfc^iir C fc^Ut
No ferryman: ja?ff?tfiffe^. JEtST (2r ©JH^ (iJ|*3:_Dl
No mother: 9 fcT^ftEBBJIItft^ft   (J H talfflfetjfrfcffcft t n5-<
The main difference is that in the no, the last sentence is literally: »After all, I am also a 'person from the Capital', and to be told 'do not get onboard'—a ferryman at the Sumida River should not be saying such unexpected words.« There is also a slight difference in that the no text ommits the haya ('fast' and 'already') in the quotation the day isgettingdark of the ferryman's call from the Ise tale, while the joruri text quotes it in full: »hi mo (haya) kurenu«.
Although the no mother, in her distraught state, oversensitive to external stimuli, is upset by the ferryman's reaction and dissatisfied with its not being 'according to the Ise legend', nevertheless her words maintain the supposed Kyoto sense of decorum. Her emotional reaction is only betrayed by expressions of gentle, delicate disapproval like utateya ('how horrible' or 'strange') and oboyenu ('unexpected'). This delicacy impresses the ferryman who realizes that, though mad, this woman is still, after all, a 'person from the Capital', and changes his attitude from boisterous unthoughtfulness to polite admiration.
The conversation in the no then turns to the Narihira legend. His poem about the 'birds from the Capital' is quoted, which leads the mother to a high-pitch song (ageuta) inspired by the verses of the poem, and at its end, she begs the ferryman again to take her onboard.
In the joruri in contrast, the mother expresses her relief that the ferry woman should not be the boorish ferryman she would have expected, and, overwhelmed by her kindness, she starts, in no chanting, telling her about the purpose of her journey. She asks to be taken aboard in a direct quotation of the two no stanzas: »Your boat is small, but please let me come on board, kind ferryman« (M "Cf5 < H, ^i" £      ^iS^F). The stanza that follows is a stylistic repetition
Rumanek ■ No Sumidagawa and Joruri Futago Sumidagawa
133
and is slightly different in the two plays: The stanza that follows is a stylistic repetition and is slightly different in the two plays:
Joruri mother: ioMPM^^M^o HWIn^o »Have the kindness and let me kindly come on board, please«.
No mother: £ <9 t X (ift^TIlSU^^0 »So let me kindly come on board, please«.
Only now comes the turn for the Narihira history in the joruri, when the ferry woman refers to it in words similar to the no. Quoting the poem, she says she, too would like to ask things of someone from the Capital she knew long ago. It remains a soliloquy which is neither in response to nor answered by the mother whom the ferry woman helps to get on board.
Both in the joruri and no, it is now, from the ferry boat, that the mother first oversees what is eventually proven to be her son's grave. In the no it is a willow near which a crowd hasgathered (for the chanting of the Amida mantra), and in the joruri it is »a pine and a willow aligned over a memorial tablet«. Enquiring about it, she is told the sad story that will soon reveal that her arrival coincides with the first anniversary of the tragic end of her son's life.
The no mother is mercifully spared the cruellest circumstances to which the joruri mother is fully exposed. The no narration of the ferryman only speaks of the fatigue of the journey which the abducted delicate boy from the Capital could not endure, and one leg failing him, the slave traders just left him there. Local people tried to cure him but it was in vain, and when it seemed the end, they asked him who he was. He said his surname—Yoshida, and that he was the only son of a father who died, leaving his mother to raise him alone. The son's last wish was to be buried by the road, so that his grave might be touched at least by the shadow of someone who might come from the Capital, and that a willow tree be planted there for his memory.
The narration of the joruri ferry widow starts with the grave of »a sinner who died seeking forgiveness«, a former samurai who had fallen for a courtesan and stole money from his lord. Banished, he and his wife came here, and unable to survive otherwise, he fell into trafficking in stolen children. A year ago he killed himself »and the pine stands as a memorial at his grave*. Then she continues with the story of the other grave, narrating how the boy was kidnapped and then beaten up by the trader whose cane »cut him to the bone«.
134
SOS 16 ■ 2 (2017)
The boy's last words are more concrete in the no; in the joruri, his speech is metaphoric and emotional: »1 am from the capital but will now become dust far away in Azuma. (high pitch) My mother knows nothing of my fate and wastes away pitifully, (cadence) anxiously waiting for my return, (sung) T T.ONG TO T>E TN THE PROTECTIVE SHADOW OF THE ARMS OF THOSE T LOVE TN THE CAPTTAL«
The last sentence (in capitals) is a quotation of the first half of his last sentence in the no: ig)AO£fit)&o^ L 9 ^(D^Ut V) [d^JifcT,
L-5 V\CW&W.&X Mfrl »T long to he in the protective shadow of the arms and legs of those who might come from the capital, so please bury me under a mound by the road and plant a willow there for a sign«.
The sentence is unfinished in the joruri. Without its latter half, it does not make much sense by itself, so here Chikamatsu clearly counted on the general knowledge of these words and the audience's familiarity with all the connotations. A hint, in a half-sentence was enough (or was deemed enough) to evoke in the spectator the complete image, and the entirely of the background. Thus, the joruri half-sentence is more of a comment, a reference to no rather than an active utterance of the protagonist.
The tragedy is—the widow goes on—that the trader was a former retainer of the child's family. »Although he knew nothing of this connection, he commited a crime against heaven, killing his own master, the worst of all crimes«. He then took his own life, is buried next to the boy, and the woman finally confesses to being the trader's widow. She ferries travellers across the river for no charge, trying to offer prayers for the 'souls' of her husband. And she asks the deranged woman to offer a prayer for the boy.
In the no, the mother takes a longer time, one whole dialogue, to realize, and fully come to terms with the fact that the boy in the story is her son. The way she says this is very oblique and slow, expressing her lingering doubts which she would like to leave unstirred perhaps: ^(Dij]^^r. -t, n ©JfMI^A^S^f-T(i £ ^ h ^ t cfc o »That young boy, would he be the very son this raving woman has been looking for?«
Grief-stricken, she can hardly walk and the ferryman, now fully sympathetic, helps her get off and shows her to the grave.
Rumanek ■ No Sumidagawa and Joruri Futago Sumidagawa
i35
The reaction is different in the joruri where the mother asks about the name of the boy only after the widow's narration has come to an end, and, learning his name was Umewaka, son of ason Yoshida no Yukifusa, she says: ta^-^fl ^ -ir# <S fSc-f" =t o »Then that was my son«, and rushes madly to the grave. This time, the object of this cry is not a rumour hard to accept, a phantasm as before; now it really refers to her son—to the reality of his being long dead.
On the way to the grave, when the mother bursts into tears, the ferry person in both plays says, in different words, »So you are the mother of the boy!«, and tries to lead the mother's train of thought towards the transcendence. Grief will not help him, nor will lamentations, better say a prayer for his soul. (»1, too, shall pray for the salvation of my husband's sinful souk, adds the joruri character.) The mother is urged to chant the Amida mantra. Yet, unable to concentrate on anything else but her mourning, she falls to the ground, weeping and wailing. In the joruri, the ferry widow begs forgiveness for her husband's crime and falls to the ground, too.
In the joruri, the mother alone, and in the no urged by the ferryman's sentence »would not the dead rejoice at seeing his mother about to pray for him?«, she takes up the hammer and the bell. Her »lamentations turn into a clear voice« (no) of the Namu Amidabutsu prayer, joined in the no by the pious crowd. The text of the prayer is the same in both dramas, while the joruri text has two more Namu Amidabutsus.
The joruri spectator was spared the suspense which the no spectator was yet to undergo, because in the joruri, it is now that the mother asks the ferry widow if she too has heard the voice of a child? It surely was Umewaka and it was coming from the mound. The ferry widow confirms she has the same impression, and suggests that the mother chant alone now. Then, both plays overlap again in a nearly identical phrase:
Joruri narrator: PBBJIIIgitPjfejata J!l< ft^Rt-?: »The wind and waves of the Sumida, do grow calm«.
No mother: mm)\\U(D&B,hpALXm^X »The wind and waves of the Sumida add their voices«.
There are three more mantras in the no, and five more mantras in the joruri, before the no mother poetically comments: & LjlUi(i\ ffiH hi^-kWi^X »the bird from the capital, famous for its name, adds its voice« while the joruri mother already metaphorizes her anticipation: MWkfr bf? ffiHo ^^r»©HH/j^
136
SOS 16 ■ 2 (2017)
J; (5 L- t »What joy to hear his voice again, my little bird from the capital Let me hear it once again«.
Only now does the no mother overhear her son's voice that seems to come from the mound, starting the exchange which in the joruri has occurred earlier: the ferryman suggests that he would stay silent now and let the mother chant alone. And before resuming the chant, she says the sentence also used earlier in the joruri as a nearly exact quotation: ^~—^ ^-irllfl^J; L-tj"jl »Let me hear the voice once again«. Meanwhile, in the joruri, the narrator already announces a figure of a child emerging from the shade of the willow. In the no, it takes one more mantra by the mother and two more by the child actor before the chorus comments that, during the chanting, an apparition has come to be seen, and the mother in the both plays shouts:
Joruri mother: fijffi .fcfSc-f'^o   »Umewaka, is that my child?«
No mother: fe^(iS^5iZ^°   »Over there, is that my child?« In the no, even the
child speaks: fS^T J; L-Sll'/j^i: »Is it you, mother?«
They try to embrace but the shadow fades away each time the mother attempts to approach it, reappearing and disappearing again.
This is where the no comes to an end, the ghost disperses as the final chorus recites, in the pivot word figures, about the night, fading away with the daybreak, going away (both the ghost and the night) without trace, leaving only the desolate mound on the plain of reeds and, alas, nothing else at all.
The joruri scene of the ghost's disappearance has its own independent metaphoric structure, probably also motivated by the fact that the action is not yet ending. There is no definitive end of the night or beginning of a new daybreak, nor the figurative extending of the metaforic view from the initial detail of the mound onto the whole plain. Here, it is disappearance like foam on the Sumida River, with only »the soft sound of the spring wind remaining in the willow branches«. The setting remains, the story continues. The willow by the mound is still there, and so is the river, and now the joruri mother, in another fit of grief, wants to drown herself in it, when, however, a cloud appears, and the tengu bringing Matsuwaka marks the happy turn in the life of the desolated mother. The auspicious fifth act of the joruri can ensue.
Rumanek ■ No Sumidagawa and Joruri Futago Sumidagawa
!37
9 Conclusion
This was a a detailed comparative analysis of two dramatic versions of the same story, with their differences and overlappings, disclosing Chikamatsu's creative method exemplifying the appropriation of no in Edo-period drama. From the point of view of origins of genre, Futago Sumidagawa epitomizes three independent lines in what would be a chart or 'tree' of the formation of kabuki. The first 'branch' leads directly from no to kabuki, while the second represents an indirect line of development from no via joruri towards kabuki. The third 'branch' is represented by Chikamatsu's creative method in which he draws on a specific no play: he chose a well-known no play and incorporated it, virtually in its entirety, into the structure of his long five-act jidaimono. His play Sumidagawa symbolically embraced a complete no performance, the gobandate of which was taken over by joruri, and set the adopted no play into exacly the same slot where it would have appeared if this really was a full no programme.
The plot is actually based on two no plays, Sumidagawa and Hanjo, but, as shown in the analysis, the story might actually have been one originally, Motomasa's no Sumidagawa being a sequel to Zeami's no Hanjo.
The no play Sumidagawa did not remain the same when incorporated in the joruri: it underwent a metamorphosis, being subjected to creative amendments and adjustments which have been revealed through this detailed textual comparison. Chikamatsu used the text of a well-known no drama, integrating it into a large-scale play which was to become the first of his three murderer-hero plays.
We may ask why Chikamatsu picked up just this topic (sekai, 'theme') for creating a hero of a new model for the ever-growing range of early modern drama characters. One of the reasons can be that the fate of Umewakamaru was one of the most well-known and most emotionally moving deaths in the collective memory of Japanese literature. Chikamatsu sought to render the moral repercussions of a crime more powerful by depicting Umewakamaru's death graphically at the hands of a cruel, murdering slave-trader. The poignancy was thus intensified by the moral dimension of guilt. Furthermore, Chikamatsu escalated the suffering of the mother by having her fully exposed to the details of her son's brutal death. In this way, the crime of the murderer was displayed before the eyes of the spectators, in order to affront their senses and raise their anger at
i38
SOS 16 ■ 2 (2017)
the injustice. The play thus made them experience the full moral consequences of the murder and subsequent suffering.
What was the solution Chikamatsu offered to redeem the crime? One was for the murderer to kill himself and be reborn as a helping tengu goblin. Another aspect, having the murderer buried next to his victim, is reminiscent of the Buddhist reconciliation offered by classical no like Atsumori, where the killing warrior and the killed one both eventually »reposed on the Lotus Flower«. One more aspect of reconciliation is the encounter of Umewaka's mother and the ferry woman Karaito. As a powerful dramatic device, the identity of Karaito is only to be disclosed later, to the surprise both of Hanjo and the spectator, and it becomes another vehicle for reconciliation. The viewpoint of the murderer's widow contributes to the multifaceted aspects of guilt when she begs forgiveness for her husband's crime.
The mother's range of feelings is far greater in the Edo-period drama than allowed in the no version, with its convention of restraint. We know what she had been through before, and in the end she is offered a substitute for Umewaka by the hands of his killer's spirit. This happy ending is in contrast with the calming of the emotions through the 'fizzling out into vagueness' typical of no endings of Zeami and his contemporaries, but similar to no's structure of a full programme that ends auspiciously. »Chikamatsu expected this knowledge to enhance the experience of this act, giving us both the tragedy of the loss of a child and the recovery of his twin, who was thought to be lost foreveno8
In the Sumidagawa—Futago Sumidagawa comparison, no represents elegant lyricism and the essence of the story while Edo-period drama presents a full narrative with a range of action, including cruelty on the stage. No is in this respect close to the ancient Attic tragedy in which violence should not appear on the stage, only be related by a messenger or eye-witness. The joruri play has a graphic depiction of Umewaka's suffering, being beaten to death, and the moving reaction of Sota's wife who tries to save him.
Formally, the creative adaptation by the playwright can be seen in several places where the joruri rendition moved ahead of the no in unravelling the plot.
38    Gerstle, Chikamatsu 5 Late Plays, 40.
Rumanek ■ No Sumidagawa and Joruri Futago Sumidagawa
139
This phenomenon could be interpreted as the joruri's intention to provoke the interest of the spectator presumably familiar with the no version. This allowed the expected action to come earlier than anticipated, thus causing a surprised 'already?' reaction, and not leaving the spectator bored by a well-known, even hackneyed, topic.
The aim of this analysis was to show how powerful the adaptations of older no plays in Edo-period drama can be. The model that was utilized in the case of Chikamatsu's Futago Sumidagawa was reused countless times, over and over again, not only in the Edo-period drama but in prose genres, and moved on the legacy of the genesis of genre.
Masaryk University in Brno, Japan Studies Seminar