Post by Mina Kaneko on Sept 9, 2015 13:46:13 GMT
I understood "The Bonfire,” by Kunikida Doppo to be about the ephemeral nature of human life within a greater natural world (impermanence, or mujo). Lyrical yet spare in its language, it uses images of nature to speak more philosophically about life itself, and in this way it reminds me much of a haiku. The story starts off with very specific descriptions of the river bank, a place with “dead reeds bristling,” where “ice that formed unseen…remained unmelted” and with a “cold wind [that] tears through its branches.” We’re given a portrait of a place that appears sad and desolate (we’re told the fisherman who passes by is not spirited, does not sing, laugh), and we’re given scenes of various people who have come in and out – a child on the seashore waiting, or “a farmer shouldering his hoe,” a “fisherman or farmer who plies his oar in loneliness” – glimpses of people and moods passing by this space (32).
The story then shifts to a slightly longer episode of a group of carefree boys playing, trying to build a fire. Fire is, in both the case of the children and also in the case of the old wanderer, a source of excitement, symbolizing life, passion. After a futile attempt, for example, the boys see another fire across the way in Izu, and this revives their spirits – the boys “danced wildly and clapped and sang,” the passage says (33). They become excited, determined to create their own, and fire appears to be alive, to represent life. Similarly, the aged wanderer, who has been traveling in the dark cold, finds solace in the fire that he finds. He then also reflects on an old fireside, which was joyful, and compares it to the one now, which is “full of sorrow,” and immediately pushes those thoughts away by saying to himself, “Past is past. Now is now” (34). It tells us of the man’s nostalgia and current sadness, the inevitable and unchangeable movement of time.
The end of the story cements the idea of human life (and fire) being extinguished by nature, that all living things perish. As the man leaves and continues on, the fire emits a “feeble glow” into the “desolate gloom of night” (35). Already, the fire that brings joy is fading, helpless against the darkness. It then ends by saying: “The boys’ fire, the old man’s footprints, were erased by the eternal waves” (35). The joy the boys felt, as they laughed and played carefree, the sadness and gratitude the old man felt, as he sat by the fire and reflected back on his life, while those moments are the ones we relate to, they’re in a moment “erased.” By contrast, the waves are described as “eternal,” or lasting – just as the river bank is the constant in this story, the waves too are the remaining, unchanging, outlasting force.
There are two sentences in particular that were intriguing and alluded to Shintoism or Buddhism, and were somewhat enigmatic for me. Listing them here below. What did you make of either of these? Did it change the meaning of the story for you?
“Could it be that in this fire, was the image of another as it burned long ago, and with it sons and grandsons long unseen? (34).
“For this is the grove of Holy Rokudai that even now, after seven centuries, calls forth pity.”
Discussion Questions:
1. There are two sentences in particular that are intriguing and allude to Shintoism or Buddhism. Listing them here below. What did you make of either of these? Did it change the meaning of the story for you?
“Could it be that in this fire, was the image of another as it burned long ago, and with it sons and grandsons long unseen? (34).
“For this is the grove of Holy Rokudai that even now, after seven centuries, calls forth pity.”
2. In this translation, the beginning of the story (as the scene of the river bank is set up) is written in present tense, while the episode of the boys and the story of the aged wanderer are written in past tense. Why do you think the author (or translator) chose to write this way?
The story then shifts to a slightly longer episode of a group of carefree boys playing, trying to build a fire. Fire is, in both the case of the children and also in the case of the old wanderer, a source of excitement, symbolizing life, passion. After a futile attempt, for example, the boys see another fire across the way in Izu, and this revives their spirits – the boys “danced wildly and clapped and sang,” the passage says (33). They become excited, determined to create their own, and fire appears to be alive, to represent life. Similarly, the aged wanderer, who has been traveling in the dark cold, finds solace in the fire that he finds. He then also reflects on an old fireside, which was joyful, and compares it to the one now, which is “full of sorrow,” and immediately pushes those thoughts away by saying to himself, “Past is past. Now is now” (34). It tells us of the man’s nostalgia and current sadness, the inevitable and unchangeable movement of time.
The end of the story cements the idea of human life (and fire) being extinguished by nature, that all living things perish. As the man leaves and continues on, the fire emits a “feeble glow” into the “desolate gloom of night” (35). Already, the fire that brings joy is fading, helpless against the darkness. It then ends by saying: “The boys’ fire, the old man’s footprints, were erased by the eternal waves” (35). The joy the boys felt, as they laughed and played carefree, the sadness and gratitude the old man felt, as he sat by the fire and reflected back on his life, while those moments are the ones we relate to, they’re in a moment “erased.” By contrast, the waves are described as “eternal,” or lasting – just as the river bank is the constant in this story, the waves too are the remaining, unchanging, outlasting force.
There are two sentences in particular that were intriguing and alluded to Shintoism or Buddhism, and were somewhat enigmatic for me. Listing them here below. What did you make of either of these? Did it change the meaning of the story for you?
“Could it be that in this fire, was the image of another as it burned long ago, and with it sons and grandsons long unseen? (34).
“For this is the grove of Holy Rokudai that even now, after seven centuries, calls forth pity.”
Discussion Questions:
1. There are two sentences in particular that are intriguing and allude to Shintoism or Buddhism. Listing them here below. What did you make of either of these? Did it change the meaning of the story for you?
“Could it be that in this fire, was the image of another as it burned long ago, and with it sons and grandsons long unseen? (34).
“For this is the grove of Holy Rokudai that even now, after seven centuries, calls forth pity.”
2. In this translation, the beginning of the story (as the scene of the river bank is set up) is written in present tense, while the episode of the boys and the story of the aged wanderer are written in past tense. Why do you think the author (or translator) chose to write this way?