Emending a Translation into
“Scrupulous” Translation:
A Comparison of Edward G. Seidensticker’s
Two English Renditions of “The Izu Dancer”

KATAOKA Mai
SOKENDAI (The Graduate University for Advanced Studies,
School of Cultural and Social Studies,
Department of Japanese Studies)This paper will explore how the translation strategy of Edward G. Seidensticker (1921–2007) shifted
between his two English versions of “The Izu Dancer” (1954 and 1997). As an undergraduate at the
University of Colorado, he majored in English Literature. Seidensticker joined the Navy Japanese
Language School during World War II and went to Japan as a member of the U.S. Marine Corps. After
the War ended, he gave up the idea he had of becoming a diplomat and started to translate modern
Japanese fiction. The literature of Kawabata Yasunari was one of his focuses throughout his career;among the works he translated, “Izu no odoriko” 伊豆の踊子 (The Izu Dancer) is of particularimportance. It was the very first Kawabata translation that Seidensticker attempted, and since he revised
it at the end of his career, it shows his changing approach and method as he matured as a translator.
Seidensticker published his first English rendition of Kawabata’s “Izu no odoriko” in Perspective ofJapan: An Atlantic Monthly Supplement in 1954, early in his career as a translator. Bold omissions,interpolations and modulations of the ST (source text, i.e. original text) were made in order to fit thework into the limited space given to him by the editor, but also to tailor it into a more accessible literaryform for general readers of that time, who still knew little about Japan. In 1997, however, he retranslated“The Izu Dancer”, this time as an unabridged translation for The Oxford Book of Japanese Short Stories.
All omitted parts were restored, interpolations removed, and further changes were made to bring the TT(target text, i.e. translated text) closer to the ST.
By comparing these two English translations of “The Izu Dancer,” this paper will illustrate the ways
in which Seidensticker’s 1997 translation strategy had shifted from that of 1954, focusing on omissionsof subsidiary episodes and characters, and the treatment of culture-specific items (CSIs). I will also
demonstrate how a translator’s attitude towards translation can change over time along with thematuration of skills, change in understanding of the ST, and more crucially, the social and cultural context
of the time when a work is being translated.
Key words: Edward Seidensticker, Kawabata Yasunari, literary translation, “The Izu Dancer”,
Perspective of Japan, abridgement, culture-specific items (CSIs), retranslation

総研大文化科学研究 第12号（2016） 83

Introduction

Recovering the Lost Theme and Kawabata’s

Translation Strategy and Editors as Quarter

Literary Quality

Masters

Recovering the Texture of the Original

Missing Episodes, Missing Characters

Translation and the Growing Cultural Recognition

Dramatizing Dialogue in Japanese Fiction

The Translator and His Evolution

A Translation That Spoils Readers

Towards More Scrupulous Translation

Omissions to Avoid Lowering Its WorthIntroductionof Kawabata, such as the contrast of age and youth

In 1954, an English translation of “Izu no
odoriko”

伊豆の踊子

by

a more accessible literary form for English readers

Kawabata Yasunari 川端康成 (1899–1972) appeared

and the translator carefully controlled the degree ofin Perspective of Japan: An Atlantic Monthly

exoticism acceptable to the targeted general public.

Supplement, which was published by Intercultural

As indicated in Noel Busch’s description about

Publications Inc. in co-operation with The Atlantic

the purpose of Perspective of Japan, target readerstranslator

Izu

was

Dancer)G.

for this issue were Westerners—Americans, inSeidensticker (1921–2007), who was later toparticular—who knew little about Japan.2) With

become renowned for contributing to Kawabata’s

these intended readers in mind, all of the literary

literary success worldwide, including Kawabata’stranslations compiled in this issue were adjusted

being awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature. The

and edited according to the translation criteria

literature of Kawabata was one of the focusesrequired. Moreover, clarity, simplicity and verbal

throughout his career, and among the works heaccuracy—the long inherited editing traditiontranslated, this “Izu no odoriko” was of particularamong The Atlantic’s editors—were also essential

importance—it was the very first Kawabata

elements that the translator had to take intotranslation that Seidensticker attempted. Bold

account.3)

Monthly.

The

(The

disappeared. The original text was transformed into

Edwardomissions that removed a couple of subsidiaryepisodes

and

that

unsatisfactory for the translator. Donald Richie, one

explained cultural contexts unfamiliar to readers,of Seidensticker’s close friends, confirms that it

and modulations of the source text that allowed

was “the then-editor of Atlantic who forced

more freedom in translation of the meaning, turned

Seidensticker to remove whole passages,” and he

the original work into a “story”, in which the plot

further notes that “the translator had long regretted

centred on the main protagonist and the little

having been made to do this.”4) To restore thedancer.1)

withtranslation, Seidensticker retranslated “The Izu

unattainable love, the depression of the protagonist

Dancer” in 1997 for The Oxford Book of Japanese

for being “a misfit, an orphan by nature” and the

Short Stories, this time as an unabridged version.

release from such pessimism were well-preserved

For this anthology of Japanese short stories,

in the English version. However, recurrent themes

significant changes were made compared with theThecharacters,

freshness

84 総研大文化科学研究 第12号（2016）

interpolations

The result of this editing process was ratherofromanceKATAOKA

Emending a Translation into Scrupulous Translation

first translation. Omitted parts were fully reinstatedwhich respect can readers witness translation

andupdated.

strategies enforced by this editing criteria, andInterpolations were also removed, and nuances ofmore crucially, the literary norm that the editors

words and the subtleties of Kawabata’s lyricaladhered to?

culture-specific

items

were

expressions were captured in a more sophisticatedAs Seidensticker points out, one problem thatmanner. The quality of this revised translation inarises in translating Kawabata’s literary works is

the last stage of his career shows Seidensticker’sthat it is often “difficult to grasp what he is talking

refinement of his skills and maturation as aabout,”6) since Kawabata’s writing style is full oftranslator. With a view that a translator’s strategy

ambiguities that emerge from complex sequences

can evolve over time, this paper aims to illustrateof words and lack of subjects in sentences. Thisin what way Seidensticker’s translation strategies

potentially could confuse English readers who areused in these two renditions of “The Izu Dancer”

used to reading sentences with clear presentationdiffer, and it further explores the elements thatof subjects, and moreover, it does not fulfill thetriggered such changes.

criteria imposed by The Atlantic’s editing tradition,
which seeks clarity and simplicity of the text. Since

Translation Strategy and Editors as

the presentation of the host of action is essential in

Quarter Masters

English sentences,7) Seidensticker adds subjects

Before moving on to discussing the translation

which are not present in the original whenstrategies employed in these two versions, let us

translating the Japanese literary works into

start by revisiting the translation criteria enforced

English. Below is a renowned passage often citedby editors. For translators, it is customary to adjust

as an example of Seidensticker’s mistranslation ofa translation according to the nature of media inthe subject. Towards the end of “The Izu Dancer,”which they are going to publish. In addition to thethe protagonist sees the dancer’s showing a sign ofmaximum number of pages or words set by editors

saying good-bye, but she ends up only giving him a

to balance the total number of pages of the issue orslight nod. Seidensticker translated one of theanthology, the purpose of each media determines

sentences, “さよならを云はうとしたが、それもtranslation criteria such as the tonality and the

止して、もう一ぺんうなづいて見せた,”

level of clarity that meets the assumed expectation

adding “I” to supplement the subject, which wasof target readers. James Laughlin (1914–1997), who

not in the original. However, it later becomes clear

was one of the editors that Seidensticker worked

that the subject added in this 1954 version was awith, says Perspective of Japan was a “collection of

mistranslation, and this sentence, “I wanted to say

sampling of the work of contemporary writers andgood-by, but I only nodded again”9) was revised inartists well established in their own countries but

the 1997 version to read “I could see that she

5)still too little known and valued abroad.”

wanted to say goodbye, but she only nodded again”

Considering the fact that Seidensticker also

[italics mine].10) Although such a case illustrates

participated as one of the editors in this translationthat Japanese to English literary translation is

project, there is no doubt that he had to take thisprone to misidentification of subjects, it shows how

goal into account and it naturally influenced his

the translator attempted to meet the editor’stranslation strategy for “Izu no odoriko.” Then, in

preference for clarity in the translation process.11)

8)

by

総研大文化科学研究 第12号（2016） 85

potential

me as she opened the door.”15) The first part of themodifications and comments from the editor’s side,

sentence is blended with the latter part byto avoid cuts and corrections that could lead to therephrasing the sentence with “the heat” as aThetranslator

had

to

assume12)

loss of writing style unique to the author.

subject. On the other hand, J. Martin Holman,

There is another inevitable change in translation

another translator of “Izu no odoriko,” faithfully

that needs to be mentioned—modulations toadheres to this shifting narrative point of view inmaintain the consistency of the narrative point of

his translation, “[t]here was a hearth in the middle

view. For example, in the scene when the oldof the floor of her room. When she opened thewoman leads the protagonist to another room to letsliding door, the hot air flowed out.”16) However,him dry his clothes, his point of view moves

one should keep in mind that the year Holman

around. In the source text, there is an open fire in

published this translation (“The Dancing Girl of

the room to which the old woman leads him, andIzu”) was 1997, when a number of Japanese modern

then once s/he opens the sliding door, the heat offictions were readily available in the U.S. market.

the fire flows out (“その部屋には炉が切ってあっMoreover, unlike the case of Seidensticker, hisて、障子を明けると強い火気が流れて来た” ).

translation was published in the form of a book, not

In this case, the scene is portrayed as if the

as a part of magazine targeting general readers.

13)

protagonist looks into the room from the ceiling,

Sato Hiroaki, a Japanese to English literaryreminding us of the fukinuke yatai 吹抜屋台

translator and a scholar, once related that after amethod observed in Japanese paintings. The

translator submits a translation of a literary work to

viewpoint of the narrator floats up in the air, yet it

a U. S. publisher, s/he would receive the copyedited

instantly goes back to the body of the protagonist

manuscript. Requests from copyeditors vary, yet inas soon as s/he opens the sliding door to feel the

addition to the correction of notations to conform

heat coming out from the room. Such a point ofwith the standard style of the publisher, they tend

view that constantly moves around is what Itasaka

to ask for rewriting of “obscure texts (fumeiryō na

Gen calls “shifting point of view” (視点の移動) in

bubun 不明瞭な部分)” and “contradictions in the

his Nihonjin no ronri kōzō 日本人の論理構造 (Theillustration of the scene (byōsha no mujun 描写の矛

Logical Structure of the Japanese),14)

and translators

盾),”

17)

which are applicable to the cases mentioned

are required to traverse this difference ofabove. However, although editors’ corrective forces

perspectives, from the Japanese narrative point of

were one of the influences, Seidensticker’sview that freely moves around so that one cannot

translation choices show it was more than just thegrasp from which angle or position the narrator is

editor’s style and taste.

viewing the scene, into that of the English, in which
the narrator has to illustrate the scene from one

Missing Episodes, Missing Characters

fixed point in an organised manner. As a result ofApart from translation requirements set bythis translation strategy, English readers who are

editors, what makes Seidensticker’s translation

used to consistent narrative point of view will not

distinctive is the removal of some episodes andbe confused.

characters. In the scene in which the protagonist

Seidensticker fills this gap by translating thisencounters the old man of a tea shop sitting cross-sentence as “[t]he heat from the open fire struck

legged beside an open fire, a clear contrast between

86 総研大文化科学研究 第12号（2016）

KATAOKA

Emending a Translation into Scrupulous Translation

the young protagonist and the old man is drawn.

bundles of bamboos, the hero and Eikichi remark

The young protagonist that freely travels aroundthat they would be good for walking sticks. Hearing

with the troupe highlights the age and ugliness of

this, the dancer gets a stalk of bamboo for the hero.

the man, who has long suffered from palsy, unable

When Eikichi tells her to take it back as stealing

to travel to anywhere. Such contrasts of age versus

the biggest one would be easily spotted, she comes

youth, beauty and ugliness, which are essential

back to them, this time with another bamboo

motifs in Kawabata’s literary works, are completely

smaller in size. All these troubles that the dancer

omitted in Seidensticker’s translation. In the 1954

took and her conversation with Eikichi are signs ofversion, the protagonist led by the old woman toher attraction to the protagonist; however, thesethis room, simply sits back behind the fire and dries

scenes are again omitted in the translation. Due tohis kimono alone. In a similar manner, the oldthis selective elimination of conversations among

woman, who travels back to Mito with her

secondary characters, the focus on the direct

grandchildren, and the day labourers that ask theinteraction between the dancer and the protagonist

protagonist to take care of her—all of them are

speeds up the development of the plot.

absent. Thus, the chance to demonstrate his

Another pattern of omission is the removal of

goodness acquired through this journey to Izu, andparts that disrupt the smooth development of thethe opportunity to act as a “nice” person just likeplot. For example, the hero imagines the dancer inthe dancer once defined him as being “nice”, area dusky room, in which a light hung directly above

completely lost in this earlier translation. As seen

the sliding doors dimly illuminates his room and thein these cases, the translator significantly reduces

room next to his. The translator deletes thisthe variety of secondary characters appearing in his

description of the room, where the protagonist

1954 version, and the complexity of the plot is

thinks of the dancer alone. Such details of thesimplified along with this alternation.

surrounding environment often generate synergetic

Not only secondary characters, but episodes andeffects in conveying the emotional states ofinteractions among these characters, which seem

characters. Nevertheless, this element is removed

not directly related to the main plot, are also

and the contrast of darkness and light that shows

eliminated. When a man of forty running a poultry

the depth of his struggle thinking about the dancer

business tries to touch the dancer, her motheris reduced. Although one might consider that sostops him, emphasizing that “[n]o one has touched

many themes, motifs, and details crucial to “The18)This scene serves to further strengthen the

Izu Dancer” are “lost” in the process of translation,

image of her purity and virginity. Although thethese examples illustrate how Seidensticker’s

dancer asks the man to read Adventures of the Lord

selective removal of these elements mentionedof Mito for her, he soon leaves the inn right after

above create the dramatic unity expected for an

this warning from her mother. This is how theEnglish story. Because of the absence of secondary

distance between the dancer and the protagonist

characters and subsidiary episodes that could havesuddenly gets closer when he reads rest of thepotentially diverted English readers’ attention, thestory to her. However, these details are completely

focus on the main protagonist and the dancer isomitted in Seidensticker’s earlier translation. So is

more closely retained.

her.”the episode related to a walking stick. Looking at

Such omissions are not limited to the case of

総研大文化科学研究 第12号（2016） 87

“The Izu Dancer;” Seidensticker employs a similar

the elements mentioned above shows how thestrategy of omissions in other abridged translations.

translator fills the gap between the Japanese andIn the case of his English translation of “Shōshō

the English novel, and how he attempts to meet the

Shigemoto no haha” 少将滋幹の母 (The Mother ofneeds of general readers of that time, who expect

Captain Shigemoto, 1956), a short novel by Tanizaki

the completeness of an English short novel, even

Junichirō 谷崎潤一郎 (1886–1965),

in cases of translated literature.

19)

whereas thisstory consists of eleven chapters in the original,
Seidensticker chose to translate only two chapters

Dramatizing Dialogue in Japanese Fiction(Chapter IX and X). The most frightening andHaving looked at this example of anotheruncanny episode in this work, where the father ofabridged translation by Seidensticker, the case of

Shigemoto visits the graveyard and mediates,“The Izu Dancer” in 1954 shows more dynamic andfollowed

thecomplex translation strategies are at work.

protagonist and his father on Buddhist teachings,

Seidensticker dramatizes the plot and characters,

are the focus of this abridged translation. However,notother episodes that serve as prologues for thesemodulations. Some of the characters in this version

selected episodes, including the protagonist’s

have slightly different characteristics from that ofmother’s affair with Heiju and the banquet for thethe original, and some aspects of their personalities

Prime Minister where his mother was taken away,

are emphasized to make the plot development andare not translated. In addition, settings such as the

dialogues among characters more engaging. For

historical background of the Heian period andinstance,minute details of the lifestyle at court narrated by

odoriko as “the little dancing girl” and “little girl”“the writer” are not included in this translation.

from the beginning of the story, even at the stage

Seidensticker also skips the episode in the middle

when the hero still thinks of her age as aroundof these two chapters, in which the narrator speaks

sixteen or seventeen because of the way sheof a setsuwa (Japanese mythical spoken story) thatdresses herself as at the prime of her beauty. It isis closely related to his father’s meditation. The

not until she runs out to the edge of the platform atsecrets of why his father acted in this manner, andthe hot spring without covering her body, not eventhe reason for his attraction to the Buddhist

with a towel (Section 3), that he realizes she is stillteaching that he spoke of are untold in this English

a child. However, in the case of the 1954 version,translation. The translator explains the reason forthis repetitive notion of her being “little” highlights

this abridgement, saying that since this work tends

her innocence and purity from a much earlier stage.

to digress to an essay-like narrative in the middle

Just like the little dancer, the case of her motherof the story, having this type of narrative in theserves as a more significant example of such awork labelled as a “novel” might confuse English

characterization. Although she is simply described

readers. Thus, the abridgement allowed him toas yonjūdai no onna 四十代の女 (a woman in her

enhance the clarity of Tanizaki’s writing style in theforties)21) in the source text, she is characterized inoriginal while avoiding this “unusual literary form”

Seidensticker’s translation as “[a] stern-looking

by

the

conversation

between20)

according to the Western notion of the novel.

Seidensticker’s translation strategy that omits

88 総研大文化科学研究 第12号（2016）

only

throughomissions,

Seidensticker

butrepeatedly

also

via

translates

woman of about forty.”22) By inserting the adjective“stern-looking,” this assumed characteristic of theKATAOKA

old woman contributes to creating a tension with

Emending a Translation into Scrupulous Translation

more engaging interactions among characters.

the protagonist when his distance with the dancer

These adjustments throughout the translation

suddenly gets closer in the latter part of the story.

and omissions described above help to create theIt more vividly portrays her cautiousness anddramatic unity in “The Izu Dancer.” This earlier

protectiveness

translated English version shows that whereas

whenevermen

approachherdaughter.

more literal and direct translation is likely to be

Another modification that further dramatizes thisperceived as a rather plain text for general readers,story can be seen in the change of tonality; their

Seidensticker’s translation fulfils the completenessdialogues are transformed into more active

as a story expected by English readers of that time.

exchanges and the level of interaction among the

The dramatic unity that emerged from thesecharactersonceadaptations in the process of translation turned thedescribed that “Japanese are supposed to be

text into a more accessible literary form for theincreases.

As

Seidensticker
23)

suspicious of the too overt emotion,”

the range ofemotional ups and downs of characters in JapaneseEnglish readers who were unfamiliar with Japanese
literary works.

fiction is relatively small compared with that ofEnglish fiction. In the source text of “The Izu

A Translation That Spoils Readers

Dancer,” exclamation and question marks are rarely

Along with omissions that influence the structureused in the dialogues and emotional dynamics ofof the story, modulations of details in the earlier

characters do not appear on the surface. Instead,translation merit attention, especially in terms ofreaders are expected to detect this emotional

the treatment of Seidensticker’s culture-specifictransition through situational factors such as theitems (CSIs). In this translation of “The Izu

flow of narratives, detailed portrayal of characters,

Dancer,” one notices there are only a few CSIs suchand depictions of surrounding scenery. In order to

as samisen and Noh written in italics,26) and despite

avoid this monotonous tonality in the dialogue,

the fact that a number of cultural terms unfamiliar

Seidensticker uses exclamation and question

to the English general public are embedded in thismarks. Moreover, the briskness of sentences andwork, readers can follow the story undisturbed byslightly exaggerated expressions create more

the texture of italics. Seidensticker’s approach tointeractive dialogues. The warm and gentle

eliminate elements that might disturb the narrative

invitation of the dancer, “あんなに大きく見えるん

flow can be seen in his avoidance of using footnotes.

ですもの、いらっしゃいましね,”

she

He also limits the number of Japanese specificsees the image of Oshima Island in the distance, isterms that are as yet unfamiliar to the English

translated into a more eager invite, as “[s]o big!

readers by translating these items into more

You will really come, won’t you?”25) By turning theacceptable words. For example, kikubatake 菊畑

sentence into a shorter expression with an(chrysanthemum garden) is translated simply as

exclamation mark, the degree of her amazement at“the flowers” and its specific flower name is notseeing Oshima is heightened, and her eagerness isreflected in the English translation. Because it iswell-conveyed by having a tag question at the end

described with a more general and broader term,of the sentence. Such modulations that transformthe flower garden that readers would imagine would

the dialogue into a more dramatic expression create

not be of chrysanthemums, but a field covered with

24)

when

総研大文化科学研究 第12号（2016） 89

the mix of flowers that they can easily associatetranslator’s own perception) will be discussed later27)

in greater detail when this text is contrasted with

with the word, “flowers.”

Also, for the translationof go 碁, Seidensticker uses “checker/chess.”the full version published in 1997.

Instead of sitting on tatami mats to enthusiasticallyplay a Go match with the paper merchant, thisOmissions to Avoid Lowering Its WorthEnglish version leads readers to imagine that

What one cannot ignore in the 1954 version are

players are sitting on chairs to play chess. As thisomissions of scenes that are overtly obscene orcase has shown, translating CSIs by replacing themregarded as discriminatory in English culture. The

with English equivalents was another translation

problem of bowdlerization is often discussed in thestrategy of Seidensticker.

context of translation, especially in the case of

In addition, Seidensticker also omits a number oftranslating modern Japanese fiction. Seidensticker

proper nouns. The hero stays at Shuzenji andis also criticized for such a bowdlerization in the

Yugashima hot spring, but these details aretranslation of other Kawabata’s literary works. For

summarized as that he spent “three nights at hot

example in Snow Country, the main protagonist,

28)

springs near the center of the peninsula.”

The

Shimamura tells the geisha Komako how his

sense of Japanese travel to stop by various locations“finger” remembered her. However, Seidensticker

is transformed into the Western style of travel, in

replaces this word with “hand” to rewrite thewhich one sets a certain destination. For English

sentence into a less astonishing expression inreaders of that time, these unknown places about

English.31)

which they had no associations, images, orThough the degree of bowdlerization was lessinformation, surely would have confused them.

significant, the earlier version of “The Izu Dancer”

Thus, the translator controls the frequency of thesewas no exception. In the scene in which the dancer

proper nouns in the text. Although one could

reveals her naked body at the hot spring in her

supplement

andchildlike innocent manner, in order to say

information by adding explanatory footnotes, thesomething to the protagonist and Eikichi across thetranslator wrote that since the target for this issue

river, the English translation of this scene, “[i]t wasthesemissing29)

associations

he wanted to avoid

the little dancer,” completely dismisses a phrase ingiving readers needless holdbacks for reading these

the source text, “手拭もない真裸だ”32) (not eventexts caused by detailed descriptions or footnotes

covered with a towel, she was completely naked).

30)

to explain every CSI and the cultural background.

Also the sentence right after this, “若桐のやうに

Whereas Holman (1997) takes a different approach

足 の よ く 伸 び た 白 い 裸 身 を 眺 め て,”from Seidensticker and faithfully transplants thesetranslated as “I looked at her, at the young legs, atproper nouns from the source text into the English

the sculptured white body.”34) The translator turns

version, Seidensticker tries to deliver a Japanese

her youthfulness, fresh as a young paulownia tree,

image that would be acceptable and accessible forand suppleness of her long legs into an European-

the English readers who knew little about Japan.

styled sculpture, and her body is transformed from

This use of CSIs that matches with the level ofthe organic into the inorganic. By taking thiscultural recognition among the general readers ofapproach, Seidensticker avoids using the wordthat time (though this relies solely on the

hadaka 裸 that express the sense of nakedness too

was “the general public,”

90 総研大文化科学研究 第12号（2016）

33)

is

KATAOKA

Emending a Translation into Scrupulous Translation

directly, and he portrays the beautifully figured

too much attention to this unique aspect ofbody of the dancer as a “sculpture” that indirectly

Japanese culture, which might potentially become aconveys the image of the nakedness of her body in

disturbance in delivering the literary quality of thisa more artistic manner. However, the sense of thework to English readers.

bareness of her body and her innocence expressed

Recovering the Lost Theme andin the original disappears.
Furthermore,

Seidensticker

removestheKawabata’s Literary Quality

portrayal of women that might be morally

Approximately 40 years later, Seidensticker

disagreeable in the target culture. For example,

retranslated the text, this time in full, unabridged

references to dancers, which lower the status ofform (1997). One of the key changes in this later

women and can be perceived as offensive andversion was the restoration of missing characters

discriminatory, are removed. On their way toand lost motifs, including the episode related to the

Oshima, the dancer runs back to the hero andold man who was supposed to appear at the

Eikichi, who were walking far behind the women.

beginning of this trip. He now returns to the tea

She tells them that they found a spring and they are

shop, and the portrayal of this character leaves thewaiting for him to use it first. In the source text,

strong impression of contrasts with the protagonist,

her mother mentions how the water can get dirty

which are essential for Kawabata’s literary works.

once women touch it (“女の後は汚いだらうと

Age versus youth, ugliness in contrast with beauty思って”).

However, this part is omitted in thisare now present in this revised version. Althoughearlier version and Seidensticker translates it as

the omission of episodes and characters in the“[w]e didn’t think you would want to drink after weearlier version was selective in order to transform

35)

36)

had stirred it up.”

The specific reference tothe story into more accessible literary form for an

women is removed, and only the fact that the water

English audience, Seidensticker’s retranslation of

becomes muddy once they start stirring it up is“The Izu Dancer” in 1997 scrupulously follows thetranslated. Even in the 1997 version, Seidensticker

structure of Japanese fiction that narrates the

avoids this direct association between dirtiness andsequence of events that seems unrelated to the main

women, and he retranslates it as “[w]e didn’t thinkplot at first glance. By translating the scenes andyou’d want to drink after a bunch of women had

details37)

stirred it up.”omitted

in

the

first

version,richerAlthough he adds the missing

associations of images and motifs are brought to life.

reference to the women, he skilfully integrates two

Also, when discussing translations of literary

separate elements of the sentence, “手を入れるとtexts, one easily dismisses the fact that a

濁る” and “女の後は汚い,” hiding the expression

translator’s interpretation can change over thethat lowers women’s status. In one of his essays on

years and that translation strategy may also evolve

translation, Seidensticker argues that “it requires aaccordingly. The very first literary work offundamental decision on how much the translator

Kawabata that Seidensticker read was Maihime 舞

may tamper with the words of the original to avoid

姫, serialized in The Asahi Newspaper from 1950,

lowering its worth—affronting its dignity, so tothen he moved on to Yukiguni 雪国 (Snow38)

speak.”For him, these adjustments in the processof translation were necessary to avoid attracting

Country).39)

Althoughthemesof

Kawabata’s

literature such as the combination of beauty and

総研大文化科学研究 第12号（2016） 91

ugliness, the contrast of freshness and decay wereparagraph as it is in the source text. Also, symbols

already interwoven within these stories, it was not

such as dashes, dots, and semicolons, which rarely

until the appearance of Nemureru bijo 眠れる美女

appear or do not appear at all in Japanese texts, are(House of the Sleeping Beauties, 1960) that one

minimized in this retranslation. As can be seen in

could confirm these themes as being crucial inthese adjustments, Seidensticker attempts to bring

Kawabata’s literary works. As Biguenet and Schulte

the translation closer to the literary form of theremark in The Craft of Translation that “[a]ll acts

source language. Also, in the dramatization ofof translation begin with a thorough investigation

dialogues, he shows one of these returns to theprocess,”40)oforiginal text. Seidensticker deletes exclamation and

Seidensticker’s reading experience, his revisits ofquestion marks as much as possible in this later

the text, and realization of recurrent themes inversion and dramatic effects created in the earlier

Kawabata’s works over the years, are crucial inversion decrease. The translated text is drawn

considering the shift of his attitude towards

closer to the emotional level delivered in the source

translation. Moreover, how his understanding of

text. Although less emotional than it might be, theKawabata’s literature deepened over the years cantranslator tries to move the text back to the literary

be observed in Seidensticker’s description ofform used in the source text.

of

the

readingthehistory

Kawabata’s writing style. The translator used toAlong with such a decrease of dramatic effects,

consider Kawabata’s literary work as a kind of

Seidensticker recovers the texture of the original inhaiku, relating that “he gives us quick glimpses ofthis version through more literal translation. For

beauty and with them a chilling suggestion thatexample, the translation of a sentence, “「ありが41)とう。」と云ふ言葉が咽にひつかかつて出なかっemptiness lies beyond,”

but later, his descriptionof Kawabata’s literature
42)

changes and it

is

たのだ。”

43)

was at first translated as “I could think

He noticed that the gradualof nothing more appropriate to say.”44) Here, thedevelopment and transition created from theinterpretation of the Japanese original is used as

sequence of episodes were vital in delivering thetranslation and only the result of the word of thanks

literaryThe

being caught in his throat is narrated in thisrestoration in the revised translation allowed him

sentence. However, the hero’s inability to articulate

to capture this literary form and its quality.

a word of gratitude for being nervous and upset is

exemplified as renga.

qualityof

Kawabata’s

works.

not well-conveyed in the English translation.

Recovering the Texture of the Original

Seidensticker updates this sentence as “I foundIn addition to the restoration of omitted parts,that a simple word of thanks caught in my throat”45)

Seidensticker also restores the texture of thein his 1997 retranslation. “Being caught in myoriginal and such rearrangements can be seen at

throat” portrays the emotional state of the herothe various levels in his retranslation. At themore delicately by using the English equivalent

structural level, he followed the rules of English in

expression.

terms of the division of paragraphs in the earlier

modified to allow readers to interpret the sentence

version and restructured the paragraphs to keepwith their own liberty in this updated version.

Theover-translated

sentenceisthe logical consistency. However, in the later

Another example in which Seidensticker emends

version, he matches the beginning of a new

the translation into more literal translation can be

92 総研大文化科学研究 第12号（2016）

KATAOKA

Emending a Translation into Scrupulous Translation

observed in his translation of the following

tries to materialize what is behind it—the text’s

sentence:

attention to the detail, its literary form, andexpressions unique to the author and Japanese[ST]: 彼女は眩しさうにくるりと寝返りして、

culture.

掌で顔を隠したまま布団を辷り出ると、廊下に坐り、「昨日はありがたうございました。」と、Translation and the Growing Cultural

綺麗なお辞儀をして[…]Recognition

46)[First version]: Abruptly, still hiding her face, sherolled over, slipped out of bed, and bowed low
47)

Not

only

capturingdetails

of

the

text,

Seidensticker also attempts to incorporate thebefore me in the hall.

growing recognition of Japanese culture over the[Revised version]: As if dazzled by the morning

years in the unabridged version. The list of culture-light, she rolled over and slipped out of bed, her

specific items in the glossary of Japanese terms at

hands still against her face. Then she knelt on

the end of Perspective, which includes words such as

the veranda and thanked me for the evening

sake, Samurai, and yen, reveal how little the48)

before.

American general readers knew about Japaneseculture in 1954 compared with today. However, in

In the earlier version, the action of the dancer isthe 1997 version, changes of perception towards

much swifter and speedier than the original to theJapanese culture can be observed—it is not aextent that it is almost comical. However, in thecompletely foreign culture anymore. Seidensticker

revised version, the reason for her hiding her facestops using italics completely in this version andis well-captured by having the phrase, “as if dazzled

the degree of foreignness of the text is reduced. He

by the morning light,” and every step of her actions

also restores Japanese specific items back to theiris scrupulously translated. Such a shift oforiginal forms. The example quoted in the earliertranslation strategy shows his changing viewsection, “chess” as the translation of go 碁 is now

towards translation. Referring to “A Model Contract

replaced with the Japanese original term, “Go”.

for Literary Translations” (翻訳出版のための模範

Similarly, gomoku narabe 五目並べ (previously

契約例) suggested by PEN America, Seidensticker

translated as “checker”) in the 1997 version is

mentions the importance of the “exactness” of theretranslated as “Go board”. Needless to say,translation by arguing that “anything in the original

Seidensticker translated Meijin 名人 (The Mastershould not be omitted and nothing should beof Go), which was published by Knopf in 1972.50) In

added,”

linguistic

addition, the presence of other translations of

Such a more disciplined approachmodern Japanese fiction including Kawabata’s

towards translation that developed over the years

available by then on the English market might haveis reflected in this revised translation. As theseencouraged him to use Japanese terminology morecases have shown, Seidensticker tried to bring theboldly in the later revised version of “The Izu

translation closer to the original as much as

Dancer.”except49)differences.

changesdue

topossible in this 1997 revised rendition; however,Not only limited to “Go”, the “flowers” are now

rather than just simply bringing the text back to theturned into “chrysanthemums”, just like the author

source text via literal translation of the surface, hedescribed the scenery as kikubatake 菊畑 in the

総研大文化科学研究 第12号（2016） 93

original. Change of pronunciation is another pointinterpreted meaning, Seidensticker attempts toto note; samisen is now transcribed and pronounced

prioritize reconstructing the effect that delivers

as “shamisen” with the delicate “h” sound, which

lyrical expressions of Kawabata closely intertwined

is closer to the actual Japanese pronunciation.

with visual effects, rather than simply narrating one

Seidensticker once mentioned that “since Englishof the possible interpretations chosen for thisreaders are sufficiently familiar with the lifestyle oftranslation. One of the most challenging phrases toJapanese today, you don’t have to ‘spoil’ readers intranslate, “情緒的な姿が私の胸を染めた” is a51)

good example of this. The two versions arethat manner anymore.”

As he points out, if

readers are “familiar” with Japanese culture to acompared below:

certain extent, the translator does not necessarily
have to bring the source text closer to the readers[First version] A thoroughly appealing little

in terms of the translation of Japanese specificfigure. I felt a bright surge of happiness as I

items.

looked down at her.53)

However,

there

are

some

exceptions.

In[Revisedversion]The

recumbent

figuretranslating Kawazu no kōjōnushi no musuko 河津のseemed to flow toward me, a surge of light and

工場主の息子 (the son of Kawazu-factory owner),color.54)

Seidensticker omits this specific name of the town
in Izu (Kawazu 河津) and translates the phrase as

In the earlier version, his own interpretation of “胸“the son of an Izu factory-owner”—the accessible

を染める,” “a bright surge of happiness” is used as

52)

proper noun is used even in this later version.

a translation. However, this is only one of theAgain, this further highlights Seidensticker’s

possible interpretations that the translator selected.

differentin

The emotion that emerges and gradually grows incomparison with Holman: whereas Holman puts

this scene is not limited to “happiness”. On thethe emphasis on delivering the image of Japan as it

other hand, in the revised version Seidensticker

was when this work was written, the focus of

uses “a surge of light and color.” “Surge”, which

Seidensticker was more on the readers. He again

was also used in the earlier version, gives thematches with the constantly evolving and growing

image of emotional sensations that the hero felt,

image of Japan by controlling the frequency of the

but this time, it is a surge of “light and color,” not ofuse of such terms. Although moving closer to the“happiness”. By including these two new elements,

source text, Seidensticker still keeps readers in“light and color,” the phrase aptly captures themind even in this revised version.

visual aspect of the word 染める that involves aapproachtowardstranslation

wider range of emotions applicable to this scene.

The Translator and His Evolution

Thus, readers can associate this phrase, “a surge of

The updates made in this full version were notlight and color” with a certain type of emotion

limited to the restoration of elements essential forwhich is not specified by the translator. Whereas

conveying

Kawabata’s

the emotional aspects of the protagonist was theliterature. Retranslating the “effect” embedded infocus in the first version, he sheds light on more

the text was one of the key improvements in thistangible aspect of this expression in the later

revisedversion. By retranslating this phrase as, “[t]hetheversion.

literary

Instead94 総研大文化科学研究 第12号（2016）

value

of

of

translatingtheKATAOKA

recumbent figure seemed to flow toward me, a

Emending a Translation into Scrupulous Translation

original.

surge of light and color,” he reconstructs a similar

In addition to finding a word that encapsulates

effect as in the original, by illustrating the visual

the nuance of the original, there are fixed

aspect of the protagonist’s emotional state.

translations of words that Seidensticker established

Seidensticker’s skill in translating the dialogue

through a series of translated works. In thealso improved in the later version. He uses

previous version, rōka 廊下 tends to be translated

contracted words to render colloquial expressions

as “hall” more often than “veranda.” However, into differentiate them from the rest of the text, andlater works such as The Sound of the Mountainalso to create more dynamic flow in their(1970), “veranda” is more decidedly used, almost

conversations. In addition to the use of contracted

like an automatic conversion, and this translation iswords, he utilizes another strategy to distinguishalso used in the revised version of “The Izu

the dialogue from rest of the text; he adds variance

Dancer.” In sum, in the course of his translationin the word “mother”. In the previous version, in

experience, he found and utilized consistently

Eikichi’s part, he says “[t]hey couldn’t get away

certain terms that best describe specific Japanese

55)

from mother;”however, it is updated with theitems.

capitalized “Mother” in the later version while

One last improvement in this revised translation“mother” rendered in lower-case is still used forthat should not be forgotten is Seidensticker’s

the narrative. By using both “mother” andcorrection of mistranslations. Just like other“Mother,” not only does Seidensticker differentiate

translators

the conversational language from rest of the text,

Seidensticker was no exception and he updated

but it also adds variance to the text.

these

cannotmistranslations

avoid
with

mistranslations,more

accurate

In addition, years of experience as a translatortranslation, including the correction of the problem

allowed Seidensticker to make better word choicesof subject mentioned above. Other updates include

to capture the meaning of the source text in thecorrecting the translation of “a package of mints”

retranslation. For example, on the way to Oshima,(kōchū seiryōzai 口中清涼剤) called Kaoru, thatthe hero chooses the shortcut, “胸上りの木下路,”

Eikichi bought as a gift for the protagonist, which

which is steeper, slippery with dead leaves, andwas previously translated as “a bottle of cologne”

hard to climb up. Seidensticker translates thisin the first version. As these changes have clearlyphrase as “so steep now that climbing it was likeshown, emends made in the 1997 version show not

climbing hand-over-hand up a wall”

56)

in the firstversion, but later he updates it with “so steep that57)

climbing it was like scaling a wall.”only his changing view towards translation, but also
his evolution and maturation as a translator.

In theprevious version, the sentence was too lengthy,

Towards More Scrupulous Translation

trying to describe the state of 胸上り. However, in

The focus of translation strategies back in 1954,

the revised version, he summarizes “hand-over-when Seidensticker introduced “The Izu Dancer”

hand up” with “scaling,” which means, “to climb,

to the English audience, was to produce a

58)

He found a wordtranslation that acceptable and accessible to thethat can convey the meaning with just one word,

general public. Yet, as he translated more works ofwhich best corresponds to the nuance in the

Kawabata and other Japanese authors over the

get over (a wall or the like).”

総研大文化科学研究 第12号（2016） 95

following years, his skill as a translator improved,of ‘Izu no odoriko’, I have no objection. In terms ofand in the later unabridged version of “The Izu

the methods and parts to be abridged, I’ll leave it toDancer,” he attempted to deliver the literary qualityof Kawabata literature via scrupulous translation.

you,” (Yasunari Kawabata, personal correspondence
to Edward Seidensticker, 20 October, 1954).
2) Noel Busch, “Japan Speaks to America,” inOne of the reasons behind this move towards more

Perspective

literal translation was, the change of the target

Supplement, ed. Faubion Bowers et al. (New York:

readers that Seidensticker had in mind when heIntercultural Publications, 1954), 4.

translated the text. While his focus was more on
general readers back in 1954, he wrote in 1991 thatofJapan:

An

Atlantic

Monthly3) For the history and tradition in editing The Atlantic,
see The Atlantic and its Makers (Boston: The
Atlantic Monthly Press, 1919).

of more concern to him were now critics, scholars

4) Donald Richie, Japanese Literature Reviewed (Newand writers, describing that there were not

York: IGG Muse, 2003), 308. The editor of The

numerous “general readers” in the case of Japanese

Oxford Book of Japanese Short Stories (Oxford:

Literature.59) The shift of translation strategy acrossthe two versions of the English renditions seems toOxford University Press, 1997), Theodore Goossen
also confirms as follows: “Prof. Seidensticker told
me that he was given a set number of words as acorrespond to this change in attitude towards

maximum, so he had to trim his translation totranslation that led him bring the translation closer

squeeze it into that space. As a result, he was very

to the source text. In addition to such a change,other external elements such as the increased
recognition of Japanese culture, and the growing

happy to restore the translation to its full length for
the Oxford collection.” (Theodore W. Goossen,
personal communication, 30 May, 2015)5) James Laughlin, “A Gateway to Japan,” inavailability of modern Japanese fiction by the time

Perspectiveof retranslation of “The Izu Dancer,” encouraged

Supplement, ed. Faubion Bowers et al. (New York:

Seidensticker to update the translation of CSIs
closer to the original, to produce the text that doesnot“spoil”

theaudience

anymore.

This

chronological shift of translation strategies between
the two versions also reveals how a translation canbe influenced and shaped by constant negotiation,
not only with the language that one translates the
text into, but also with editors and readers who areofJapan:

An

Atlantic

Monthly

Intercultural Publications, 1954), 2. Laughlin was an
American

poet

and

also

the

presidentofIntercultural Publications Inc. He also founded New
Directions, a publishing company in 1936.
6) Edward

Seidensticker,

Kawabata

Yasunari,”

“On
in

Nagai

Words,

KafūandIdeas,

andAmbiguities: Four Perspectives on Translating fromthe Japanese, ed. Donald Richie (Chicago: Imprint
Publications, 2000), 23.
7) For further description on the lack of subjects inJapanese, see Tetsuo Anzai, Eigo no hassō (Tokyo:

surrounded by cultures that constantly change.

Chikuma Shobō, 2000). Also, Hiroshi Tsukimoto

Note: All translations of passages from Japanesematerials are my own.

theme in his Nihonjin no nou ni shugo wa iranai(Tokyo: Kōdansha, 2008).
8) Yasunari Kawabata, “Izu no odoriko,” in Izu noNotes1) Thetakes neuroscientific approach in discussing thisodoriko, (1969: reprint, Tokyo: Nihon Kindai
letterfrom

Kawabata

addressed

toSeidensticker shows that Seidensticker worked on

Bungakukan, 1969), 317.
9) Yasunari Kawabata, “The Izu Dancer: A Story,” inthis abridgement with the author’s permission. The

Perspective

parts to be omitted were completely left to the

Supplement, trans. Edward Seidensticker and ed.

translator’s judgment: “Regarding the abridgement

Faubion Bowers et al. (New York: Intercultural

96 総研大文化科学研究 第12号（2016）ofJapan:

An

Atlantic

MonthlyKATAOKA

Publications, 1954), 18.

Emending a Translation into Scrupulous Translation

view, see Ann Banfield, Unspeakable Sentences:

10) Yasunari Kawabata, “The Izu Dancer: A Story,” inNarration and Representation in the Language of

The Oxford Book of Japanese Short Stories, trans.

Fiction (Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1982). In

Edward Seidensticker and ed. Theodore W. Goossen

the section, “Violations of narrative consistency”,(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997), 147. This

she argues that “[c]onsistency is demanded by the

mistranslation of subject is an interesting case thatreader of the text, in the sense that it is part of theshows a translator can be an influence to the author.

internalized set of rules with which the reader

It made the author realize that how the lack ofapproaches the text and which creates the

subject can lead to ambiguous sentences that invite

expectations he has of it.”: 216.

misunderstandings and confusions of the readers.

18) Kawabata, “The Izu Dancer,” 140.

For the detailed reference, see Yasunari Kawabata,19) Other examples for such an abridgement include,“Izu no odoriko no sakusha,” in Kawabata Yasunari

Yukio Mishima, “Death in Midsummer,” Japan

zenshū vol. 33 (Tokyo: Shinchōsha, 1982), 224.

Quarterly 4.3 (1956): 315–40.

11) Seidensticker, “On Nagai Kafū,” 23. In this talk,20) Seidensticker, Nihonbun no honyaku, 205.

Seidensticker says, “you are always conscious of21) Kawabata, “Izu no odoriko,” 276.

editors. They are constantly looking over your22) Kawabata, “The Izu Dancer: A Story,” 12.

shoulder”. He further mentions the influence of23) Edward Seidensticker, “On Trying to Translate

editors as follows: “In the case of a writer like

Japanese,” in The Craft of Translation, ed. John

Kawabata, who is sometimes rather murky, you are

Biguenet and Rainer Schulte (Chicago: The

not allowed to give an adequate representation of

University of Chicago Press, 1989), 152.

this because the editor is there telling you to be24) Kawabata, ‘Izu no odoriko’, p. 304.

clear, telling you to stand up and say what you25) Kawabata, ‘The Izu Dancer: A Story’, p. 16.

mean”.

26) Seidensticker and Anzai, Nihonbun no honyaku,

12) For the difference of editing tradition between the

165.

U.S. and Japanese publishers, see Hiroaki Sato,

27) Another possible reason for this generalization canYakusenai mono (Tokyo: The Simul Press, 1996),

be the avoidance of association with exotic and103. He describes that whereas the editors in theromanticized depiction of Japan prevalent since theU.S. sometimes suggest the cut of whole chapter or

pre-war. Pierre Loti’s Madame Chrysanthème had arewriting parts of the text even to the renownedhuge impact in shaping the feminized image ofwriters, Japanese editors would not take such a step

Japan in the US. For the further detail, see chap. 1

towards the established writers.

in Naoko Shibusawa, America’s Geisha Ally: Race,

13) Kawabata, “Izu no odoriko,” 277.

Gender, and Maturity in Re-Imagining the Japanese

14) For this “movement of point of view,” see chap. 9

Enemy (Cambridge: Harvard University Press,in Gen Itasaka, Nihonjin no ronri kōzō (Tokyo:
Kōdansha, 1971).
15) Kawabata, “The Izu Dancer: A Story,” 12.

2006).
28) Kawabata, “The Izu Dancer: A Story,” 12.
29) Seidensticker repeatedly mentions this “general16) Yasunari Kawabata, “The Dancing Girl of Izu,” inreaders (ippan dokusha 一般読者)” as target for his

The Dancing Girl of Izu and Other Stories trans. andtranslation. In later years, such readers are more

ed. J. Martin Holman (Washington: Counterpoint,

clearly specified as follows: “[t]he consumer is of1997), 5.

course the reader, or the collective body of readers.

17) Sato, Yakusenai mono, 103. As one of theIts most numerous segment is composed of thoseexamples for contradictions in the illustration of thecalled the general readers.” (Edward Seidensticker,

scene, he notes that how his copyeditor mentioned“Translation: What Good Does It Do?,” in Literary

he could not grasp the composition of the fort

Relations East and West: Selected Essays, ed. Jean

portrayed in Mutsuwa ki 陸奥話記 (Legends of the

Toyama and Nobuko Ochner [Honolulu: University

Samurai) that Sato translated. For the discussion ofof Hawaii Press, 1991], 178). It is also interesting toconsistency/ inconsistency of narrative point ofobserve the difference of assumed readers between

総研大文化科学研究 第12号（2016） 97

the authors’ and that of the translator. See the44) Kawabata, “The Izu Dancer: A Story,” 12.

example of writers such as Murakami Haruki as a45) Kawabata, “The Izu Dancer,” 129.

comparison. He considers these readers, what he46) Kawabata, “Izu no odoriko,” 294.

calls as “imagined readers (kakū no dokusha 架空の47) Kawabata, “The Izu Dancer: A Story,” 15.

読者)” as “the whole (sōtai 総体)” in his Shokugyō48) Kawabata, “The Izu Dancer,” 137.

to shite no sakka (Tokyo: Switch Publishing, 2015).

49) Seidensticker and Anzai, Nihonbun no honyaku,30) Seidensticker and Anzai, Nihonbun no honyaku,

178.
50) It is also worth noting that when The Master of Go

134.
31) Donald Richie et al., “Round-Table Discussion,” inwas published, the underline was added in the title

Words, Ideas, and Ambiguities: Four Perspectives onunder ‘Go’ to indicate it as being italicized, but inTranslating from the Japanese, ed. Donald Richie

later versions, this underline was removed.
51) Edward Seidensticker, “Translation of the Genji(Chicago: Imprint Publications, 2000), 83.
32) Kawabata, “Izu no odoriko,” 289.

monogatari, Here and There,” in Sekai no naka no33) Ibid.

nihonbungaku, ed. Toru Haga, Sukehiro Hirakawa34) Kawabata, “The Izu Dancer: A Story,” 14.

and Keiichirō Kobori (Tokyo: Tokyo University35) Kawabata, “Izu no odoriko,” 307.

Press, 1973), 128.
52) In response to Etō Jun’s lecture for the Japan36) Kawabata, “The Izu Dancer: A Story,” 17.
37) Kawabata, “The Izu Dancer,” 143.

Society of London, in which he mentioned that cuts38) Edward Seidensticker, “On Retranslation,” Japanof proper names which carry rich connotations in
the translation of modern Japanese fictions are

Quarterly 7.4 (1960): 490.
Hibbett,

deplorable, Seidensticker stresses his view that

“Nihonbungaku no honyakusha, nihonbungaku wo

maintaining all of these “outlandish” proper nouns

kataru,” in Seiyou no Genji, nihon no Genji (Tokyo:

for most American and European readers in the

Kasama Shoten, 1984), 206.

translation would look “cluttered” and “gibberish.”39) Edward40) John

Seidensticker

BiguenetandandHowardRainerSchulte,ed.,

introduction to The Craft of Translation, by John

(Seidensticker, “Translation: What Good Does It
Do?” 180.)

Biguenet and Rainer Schulte (Chicago: The

53) Kawabata, “The Izu Dancer: A Story,” 15.

University of Chicago Press, 1989), ix.

54) Kawabata, “The Izu Dancer,” 137.

41) Edward

Seidensticker,“The

Conservative55) Kawabata, “The Izu Dancer: A Story,” 16.

Tradition,” in Perspective of Japan: An Atlantic56) Ibid.

Monthly Supplement, ed. Faubion Bowers et al. (New57) Kawabata, “The Izu Dancer,” 142.

York: Intercultural Publications, 1954), 73.

58) J. A. Simpson and E. S. C. Weiner, ed., The Oxford

42) Edward Seidensticker, Nagareyuku hibi (Tokyo: Jiji
Tsūshin Shuppankyoku, 2004), 211. Such a changeof understanding towards Kawabata’s writing frombeing haiku to renga can be seen in his translator’sEnglish Dictionary. 2d ed. XIV. (Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1989), 563.
59) Seidensticker, “Translation: What Good Does It
Do?”, 178.

note at the end of “One Arm” published in theJapan Quarterly in 1967. In this note, he exemplifies
Kawabata’s writing as of “renga linked verse” by

Bibliography

describing his style as “episodic” and how “tinyAnzai, Tetsuo. Eigo no hassō. Tokyo: Chikuma Shobō,lyrical episodes” are stringed together. He further

2000.

emphasizes that “[t]he linking, the relation of

Banfield, Ann. Unspeakable Sentences: Narration andepisode to preceding and following episode, is more

Representation in the Language of Fiction. Boston:

important than the over-all form.” (Yasunari

Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1982.

Kawabata, “One Arm,” trans. Edward Seidensticker,

Biguenet, John, and Rainer Schulte, ed. Introduction

Japan Quarterly 14.1. (1967): 71)

to The Craft of Translation, by John Biguenet and43) Kawabata, “Izu no odoriko,” 276.

Rainer Schulte, vii–xvi. Chicago: The University of

98 総研大文化科学研究 第12号（2016）

KATAOKA

Chicago Press, 1989.

Emending a Translation into Scrupulous Translation

Ambiguities: Four Perspectives on Translating fromBusch, Noel. “Japan Speaks to America.” In Perspectiveof Japan: An Atlantic Monthly Supplement, edited by
Faubion Bowers, James Laughlin, Eleanor Peters,
Edward Seidensticker, and Kenneth Yasuda, 4. New

the Japanese, edited by Donald Richie, 69–88.
Chicago: Imprint Publications, 2000.
Sato, Hiroaki. Yakusenai mono. Tokyo: The Simul
Press, 1996.
Seidensticker, Edward. “The Conservative Tradition.”

York: Intercultural Publications, 1954.
Howe, M. A. De Wolfe. The Atlantic and its Makers.

In Perspective of Japan: An Atlantic Monthly
Supplement, edited by Faubion Bowers, James

Boston: Atlantic Monthly Press, 1919.
Itasaka, Gen. Nihonjin no ronri kōzō. Tokyo: Kōdansha,

Laughlin, Eleanor Peters, Edward Seidensticker,
and Kenneth Yasuda, 72–73. New York: Intercultural

1971.
Yasunari Kawabata. “The Dancing Girl of Izu.” In The
Dancing Girl of Izu and Other Stories. Translated
and edited by J. Martin Holman, 3–33. Washington:

Publications, 1954.
———.

Nagareyuku

hibi.

Tokyo:Jiji

Tsūshin

Shuppankyoku, 2004.
———. “On Nagai Kafū and Kawabata Yasunari.” InCounterpoint, 1997.
———. “The Izu Dancer,” In The Oxford Book of

Words, Ideas, and Ambiguities: Four Perspectives on

Japanese Short Stories. Translated by Edward G.

Translating from the Japanese, edited by Donald

Seidensticker and edited by Theodore W. Goossen,

Richie, 18–34. Chicago: Imprint Publications, 2000.

129–148. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.

———. “On Retranslation.” Japan Quarterly 7.4———. “The Izu Dancer: A Story.” In Perspective of(1960): 487–90.

Japan: An Atlantic Monthly Supplement. Translated———. “On Trying to Translate Japanese.” In The

by Edward Seidensticker and edited by Faubion

Craft of Translation, edited by John Biguenet andBowers, James Laughlin, Eleanor Peters, Edward

Rainer Schulte, 142–153. Chicago: The University

Seidensticker, and Kenneth Yasuda, 12–18. New

of Chicago Press, 1989.
———.“Translation of the Genji monogatari, Here andYork: Intercultural Publications, 1954.
———. “Izu no odoriko.” In Izu no odoriko, Reprint.

There.” In Sekai no naka no nihonbungaku, edited

275–319. Tokyo: Nihon Kindai Bungakukan, 1969.

by Toru Haga, Sukehiro Hirakawa and Keiichirō———. “Izu no odoriko no sakusha.” In Kawabata

Kobori, 115–128. Tokyo: Tokyo University Press,

Yasunari

zenshū

vol.

33,

209–264.

Tokyo:———. “Translation: What Good Does It Do?” In

Shinchōsha, 1982.
———.

“One

Arm.”

TranslatedbyEdwardSeidensticker, Japan Quarterly 14.1 (1967): 60–71.
———.

Personal

1973.

correspondencetoEdwardSeidensticker, 20 October, 1954.
Laughlin, James. “A Gateway to Japan.” In Perspectiveof Japan: An Atlantic Monthly Supplement, edited by

Literary Relations East and West: Selected Essays,edited by Jean Toyama and Nobuko Ochner, 177–
184. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1991.
Seidensticker, Edward G., and Tetsuo Anzai. Nihonbun
no honyaku. Tokyo: Taishūkan Shoten, 1983.
Seidensticker,

Edward,andHowardHibbett.

Faubion Bowers, James Laughlin, Eleanor Peters,“Nihonbungaku no honyakusha, nihonbungaku wo

Edward Seidensticker, and Kenneth Yasuda, 2. New

kataru.” In Seiyou no Genji, nihon no Genji, 205–

York: Intercultural Publications, 1954.

218. Tokyo: Kasama Shoten, 1984.

Mishima, Yukio. “Death in Midsummer.” Japan
Quarterly 4.3 (1956): 315–40.
Murakami, Haruki. Shokugyō to shite no sakka. Tokyo:

Switch Publishing, 2015.
Richie, Donald. Japanese Literature Reviewed. New
York: IGG Muse, 2003.
Richie, Donald, Edward Seidensticker, Edwin
McClellan, Howard Hibbett and John Nathan.
“Round-Table Discussion.” In Words, Ideas, andShibusawa, Naoko. America’s Geisha Ally: Race,
Gender, and Maturity in Re-Imagining the Japanese
Enemy.

Cambridge,

Massachusetts,

London:Harvard University Press, 2006.
Tanizaki,

Junichirō.

“The

Motherof

Captain

Shigemoto.” In Modern Japanese Literature: An
Anthology, edited by Donald Keene, 387–397.
Rutland, Vermont, Tokyo: Charles E. Tuttle
Company, 1965.

総研大文化科学研究 第12号（2016） 99

———. “Shōshō Shigemoto no haha.” In Tanizaki
Junichirō shū. vol. 2. 343–392. Tokyo: Tsukuma
Shobō, 1956.
Tsukioto, Hiroshi. Nihonjin no nou ni shugo wa iranai.

100 総研大文化科学研究 第12号（2016）

Tokyo: Kōdansha, 2008.
Simpson, J. A., and E. S. C. Weiner, ed. The Oxford
English Dictionary. 2d ed. XIV. Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1989.

KATAOKA

Emending a Translation into Scrupulous Translation

エドワード・サイデンステッカーの翻訳手法とその変遷―「伊豆の踊子」の英訳初版および改訂版を例として―
片岡
総合研究大学院大学

真伊

文化科学研究科

国際日本研究専攻

本稿は、第二次世界大戦後に日本文学の英訳に貢献したエドワード・サイデンステッカー（1921–2007）が、川端康成の小説「伊豆の踊子」を英訳・再翻訳するにあたり、どのように異なる翻訳手法を用いたかを考察したものである。サイデンステッカーはコロラドに生まれ、大学で英文学を専攻した後、第二次世界大戦中にアメリカ海軍日本語学校で日本語を学んだ。アメリカ海兵隊の一員として日本の地に初めて足を踏み入れた後、終戦後に一旦外交官を志すもののその道を諦め、英語圏での日本文学の紹介に尽力した。サイデンステッカーが手掛けた翻訳作品のうち、川端文学は彼の翻訳作品群の中核をなすものであり、中でも「伊豆の踊子」は、初期に取組んだ翻訳作品として、また改訂を行なった最後の翻訳作品として、サイデンステッカーの翻訳手法を検討していくうえで欠くことの出来ない作品である。
サイデンステッカーによる「伊豆の踊子」の最初の英訳は、1954年に『アトランティック・
マンスリー』の『パースペクティヴ・オブ・ジャパン』と呼ばれる付録冊子に掲載された。大
胆な起点テクスト（ST: source text、原文）の削除や省略、調整などを特徴とするサイデンステッカーの訳は、誌内の限られたスペースに掲載するという編集者により課せられた条件のためのみならず、日本のことをほとんど知らない一般読者層を想定した、英語圏でも受容されやすい
文体や形式への抄訳・変更を行っている。しかし、サイデンステッカーは、1997年にThe
Oxford Book of Japanese Short Storiesのため、「伊豆の踊子」を再翻訳している。この改訳版の英訳文は、省略部分を元に戻し、また加筆を取払うことにより、原文に寄り添った英訳へとその姿形を変えている。
このような変化を含む二つの異なる版の翻訳を比較検討することにより、本稿では、訳者自身が言うところの「読者を甘やかす」翻訳から「几帳面な」翻訳への推移を、主に周縁のエピソードや登場人物の削除、そしてテクスト内の異文化要素（CSIs: Culture Specific Items）に焦点をあて考察する。また、こうしたアプローチに反映されている翻訳者の姿勢の変容についても触れ、翻訳者としてのスキルの向上や原文解釈の深化、そして英語圏での日本文化の認知のされ方の変化などを含む、訳文および翻訳者を取り巻く文化的・社会的背景が翻訳に与えた影響についても論じる。
キーワード：エドワード・サイデンステッカー、川端康成、文学翻訳、「伊豆の踊子」、『パースペクティヴ・オブ・ジャパン』、抄訳、異文化要素（CSI）、再翻訳

総研大文化科学研究 第12号（2016） 101