第 26 号 2008 年 2 月 28 日
日本ナサニエル・ホーソーン協会事務局〒 156-8550 東京都世田谷区桜上水 3-25-40
日本大学文理学部英文学科内E-mail: hawthorne@c01.itscom.net
公式 HP: http: //home.b05.itscom.net /nhs-j /郵便振替 00190-1-66463

ご

挨

拶
会 長

當

麻

一太郎

去る 5 月，日本大学文理学部で開催された第 26 回全国大会には大勢の皆様のご参加をいただき，様々な研究問題が提起され，充実した大会になりました。島方洸一学部長はじめ加藤直人次長および学部当局，大会準備委員の先生方および事務局の先生方の多大なご支援とご協力によるものであり，ここに厚くお礼申し上げます。また，特別講演をされた
大井浩二先生はじめ研究発表をされた先生方，ワークショップおよびシンポジウムを担当された先生方，司会の先生方および本大会を支えてくださったすべての方々に感謝申し上げます。
第 27 回全国大会は，5 月 23 日
（金）・24 日（土）の両日，広島ガーデンパレスで開催されることになりました。大会準備委員の先生方および事務局の先生方を中心に充実した大会を目指したいと思います。本会場開催にあたりご尽力を賜った田中久夫先生，山本雅先生，山本典子先生，成田雅彦先生，高橋利明先生に感謝申し上げます。
第 25 号の Newsletter で「日本学術会議協力学術研究団体」の称号を受けたい旨のご報告をいたしました。結果は，すでに本協会のホームページでお知らせをしておりますが，平成 19 年 6 月 21 日付けで本協会が日本学術会議の協力学術研究団体として指定されました。つきまして，竹村和子先生には申請のご助言をいただいたことを，また萩原力先生には長きに亘って大切に保存された「設立趣意書」を提供していただいたことを，ここにご報告するとともに，お二人に感謝申し上げます。
私たちの団体が日本学術会議の協力学術研究団体として指定されたことは，会員の皆様の堅実なご活躍によるものであり，お互い喜びあいたいと思いますが，この喜びは設立準備会の先生方の色々なご苦労なくして甘受できなかったことでしょう。第 20 号の『事務局だより』「協会設立 20 周年を記念して」の中で萩原力先生は「協会設立の軌跡」と題して，
鴨川卓博先生は「協会設立の裏話（の一部）」と題して創立当時のことを記しておられますので，是非もう一度第 20 号の『事務局だより』を開き，川窪啓資前々会長が記されたように，先人の御苦労の跡を偲び，あわせて今後の発展に資していただきたく思います。
昭和 56 年 10 月 17 日，日本ナサニエル・ホーソーン協会の発起人（51 名）総会・設立総会の運びとなり，会則の決定，役員 ( 会長，副会長を含めて 16 名）が選出されたそうですが，付記いたしますと，昭和 56 年 8 月付けの設立趣意書には，設立準備会（順序不同・敬称略）として，阿野文朗，大井浩二，大庭勝，鴨川卓博，小山敏三郎，島田太郎，鈴木重吉，多久和新爾，萩原力，松山信直，三宅卓雄，師岡愛子，横沢四郎，13 名の先生方のお名前がありました。創立当初から色々労苦を重ねながら今日の隆盛の基礎をきづいてこられた発起人の先生方および役員の先生方と準備会の先生方に謝意を表します。
最後に，本協会が日本学術会議の協力学術研究団体に指定されたことを機に「ただひたすら願うことは，会員諸氏，
特に若手の方々が積極的に研究発表や『フォーラム』の原稿募集に応じて，活発な研究活動を展開していただくことです」という島田太郎前会長の強い想いが叶うことを願って，挨拶の結びとさせていただきます。

The Twenty-Sixth Annual Conference of the Nathaniel Hawthorne Society of Japan
Synopsis of Presentation
Billy Budd : Melville’s Hatred against Hawthorne
Eitetsu SASAKI（ Momoyama Gakuin University）
In his posthumously published Billy Budd（1924）, Herman Melville（1819-91）refers to the invert, the X man, as “a nut

not to be cracked by the tap of a Lady’s fan,” as an “exceptional” man, as a man “without vulgar alloy of the brute” but “dominated by intellectuality.” This X man is equivalent to the master-at-arms on the man-of-war Bellipotent, Claggart, a figure who“could even have loved [the Handsome Sailor, Billy Budd, or the innocent Baby Budd] but for fate and ban.” What holds Claggart back from enjoying same-sex love? What drives him to his policy of harassment? Do Claggart’s mentality and his perverted behavior toward Billy have something to do with Melville’s failed companionship with Hawthorne? I try to clarify Claggart’s [and / or Melville’s] inverted love and hatred for and against innocence, beauty, Billy, and Hawthorne.
When thinking of the patriarch system of “government through surveillance,” we can verify the importance of Claggart’srole as the-master-of-arms, the chief of the internal police on the man-of-war. The patriarchic order defended by Claggart is asociety quite opposite to the benign brotherhood, i.e., the fiercely competitive society, what the politico-psychoanalyst Grunberger characterizes as the anal hierarchic society. In the anal society, Claggart shows his persistency in refusing the（homo）
sexual, and in him this persistency is transformed into hatred.
Let us delve deeper into Claggart’s psyche, the pre-oedipally constructed and post-oedipally strengthened inward realm.
Discerning the speedy promotion of the new comer Billy and the ostensible partiality toward Billy in the paternal CaptainVere, Claggart responds with fright, fury, and the feeling that he has been supplanted by the youth and evicted from the paradise by the loved one [Vere]. In a way, Claggart has to acquiesce to exactly the same Biblical fate of a loser in the sibling competition for the attention and love of the parent. Claggart symbolically stands in exactly the same footing as an unloved elder
brother, resolute in vainly demanding of his father figure [Vere] the observance of primogeniture. After this demand is provento be impossible to realize, Claggart turns to the tactics of threatening the captain/father by converting himself into a satanic
Jacksonian Democracy practitioner or a claimer of equal treatment, a radical democrat in the <highly hierarchic warship / a
specious patriarchic institution / a symbolic nursery in the mock affectionate family>. He then reports to the captain that Billy
is a mutinous fomenter against the high-ranking officers. Claggart intends to arrange homosocial alliance with Vere and seeksin vain to share with Vere the same sentiment, the sentiment that they have a common enemy within. Claggart pretends to be
patriotic and loyal to his role, defining the androgynous Handsome Sailor, Billy as the archenemy of <imperial nation / its
agent warship / the captain of the warship / patriarchic family>. In overtly playing the pretended role of patriot and in trying tobring the Handsome Sailor to ruin, Claggart incurs Vere’s displeasure and dies without the love of either the fatherly captain or
the smug Baby Budd. It should also be added that Claggart’s demoniac motivation partly comes from Billy’s apparent smugness: smugness or self-sufficiency hinders the former’s hidden but genuine will to hold a brotherly thence democratic / homosexual relationship with the latter.
In the years leading up to the composition of Billy Budd, Melville was anxious to fortify his fragile authorial self by merging with larger beings. As it happened, these larger beings were America, a nation whose imperial policy of territorial expansion he detested, and Nathaniel Hawthorne, a nationally admired writer. In the author’s infatuated wooing to Hawthorne, we
see similarity between the Handsome Sailor and allegedly beautiful Hawthorne, between the smug Baby Budd and the reclusive Hawthorne, between the innocent Billy and the bashful Hawthorne. Melville held the idea of ruthless democracy, the radical democracy that would nullify the distinction between the genders and erase differences among the races, classes, and professional ranks, whereas Hawthorne, a personage with an established professional status as a canonical author, stuck to thestatus quo and came to fear Melville. Estranged by Hawthorne, Melville may have emphasized and identified with the abject
master-at-arms. Indebted to Claggart for the creative brio of Billy Budd, Melville explored Claggart’s perverted mentality, as
well as his own perverted mentality, and hurled a spate of resentful words against Hawthorne after Hawthorne’s death.

Workshop

What Is Signified by the Reworking of the Original“Alice Doane”into“Alice Doane’s Appeal”?
Tsutomu, IWATA（Kyoto Koka Women’s University）“Alice Doane’s Appeal” comprises three components:（1）the story of a love triangle among unrecognised twins and theirsister that results in murder in 17th-century Salem,（2）a stroll to Gallows Hill in Salem described by a Hawthornian narrator
and two young women, and（3）the historical evocation of Salem witch hangings related by the narrator in the final scene.
Hawthorne wrote the first component, the original “Alice Doane,” in his college days or just after the graduation, and about ten
years later, probably in 1834, he rewrote it into the present version. What does the rewriting signify?
As Felt and Loggins clearly show, the first component is evidently related to an incest case which occurred in 1680 in theauthor’s maternal lineage, the Mannings. On the other hand, it is well known that the author’s paternal ancestor, John Hathonre, was directly involved as a magistrate in Salem witch trials narrated in（3）. Thus it can be presumed that in the reworking the author added the shameful witch persecution on his paternal side to the sexual crime on his maternal side.
What, then, can be said about the second component, a stroll to Gallows Hill taken by the narrator and two young women?
Judging from a number of biographical facts in this section, it would not be too far-fetched to interpret the narrator and two
young women as Hawthorne himself and his sisters, Elizabeth and Maria Luisa. From this viewpoint, the reworked version
seems to have the framework in which the three siblings with both Hathonre and Manning blood in their veins are looking
back over the wrongdoings of their maternal and paternal ancestors from the top of Gallows Hill.
In my hypothetical interpretation, however, there is another implication in the Gallows Hill tour section. The pairing ofyoung women as seen in this section also appears in some of Hawthorne’s other tales written in about the same period, suchas “Sights from the Steeple”（1829）, “The Haunted Mind”（1834）, “The White Old Maid”（1834）. Curiously enough, thesetales and sketches commonly have a strong sexual atmosphere, and one hint or two which seem to connect that sexual atmosphere with the author himself. For instance, Colonel Fenwicke in “The White Old Maid,” based on the historical figure John
Fenwick（1618-83）, has much in common with Hawthorne’s paternal ancestor, William Hathonre, and therefore can be interpreted as William’s symbol. Of course, this interpretation can never be made by a reader who has never heard of the historical
Fenwick: It is a coded expression that makes sense only for those who know. Taking this coded expression of Hawthorne’s, it
may be said that the Hawthornian narrator in “Alice Doane’s Appeal,” standing on Gallows Hill, may look over his ancestors’
past not merely as the descendant of a witch persecutor but also as the scion of an incest perpetrator.

A Pathographical Sketch of Nathaniel Hawthorne
Based Chiefly on “Alice Doane’s Appeal“Yasuhiro, YAMANAKA. MD（Emeritus professor of Kyoto University）（Director of Kyoto Hermes Institute, Kyoto, Japan）
I am a psychiatrist and psychotherapist with almost no knowledge of Nathaniel Hawthorne. Invited to participate in thisworkshop, I read “Alice Doane’s Appeal”（abbr. ADA）, some of his other tales and novels, and a couple of critical works on him
such as F. Crews’ The Sins of the Fathers, and G. Erlich’s Family Themes and Hawthorne’s Fiction, and have acquired the impression that Hawthorne is not merely a great writer but also a psychologically and pathographically interesting person.
In ADA, Hawthorne took up a literary technique called “Rahmenerzählung,” which is often used when the author conceals some secret in the contents of the story. Hawthorne also introduced the theme of unnoticed twins into this tale, whichevidently involves an incestuous connotation, for Leonard Doane, loving his sister Alice with an alleged brotherly love, kills
his unknown twin, Walter Brome, from jealousy, as he boasts of having seduced Alice. Judging from his biographical facts, it
seems clear that Hawthorne harbored incestuous feelings about his elderly sister. In The Sexual Perversion and Abnormality（1951）, Allen classifies people susceptible to incest into the following five groups:（1）the mentally handicapped who cannotunderstand social taboos about sexuality,（2）problem drinkers who have lost self-control with excessive alcohol,（3）those
who suffer from progressive paralysis or dementia,（4）family members who, separated from each other as small children, reunite after a long separation, and（5）family members who have to live together for poverty or other reasons. Hawthorne
might have belonged to type（5）.
On the other hand, Hawthorne was tortured by a deep sense of guilt because one of his ancestors had served as a preliminary judge in the so-called Salem witch trials in 1692.
All these things considered, we may safely conclude:（1）In writing ADA, Hawthorne may have sought to exorcise himself of his ancestor’s guilt relating to the witch hangings.
（2）Hawthorne may have regarded his own father’s early death as Heaven’s vengeance against the ancestor’s witch persecution, as suggested by the illusion which Leonard is subject to after killing Walter. I think it less likely that Hawthorne associated his father’s death with his subconscious patricidal desire.
（3）Moreover, Hawthorne may have tried to sublimate his incestuous desire toward his elderly sister. About twenty-fiveyears later, ADA was sublimated once again, and evolved into his masterpiece The Scarlet Letter.

Reading“Alice Doane’s Appeal”as a Narrative of the Salem Witchcraft of 1692
Mamiko KOMIYAMA（The Center for Asian and Pacific Studies, Seikei University）
My presentation focused on the two-layered narrative structure of the short story “Alice Doane’s Appeal”（1835）, and inparticular, the interaction between its outer and inner narratives; that is, the story “Alice Doane’s Appeal” itself and an allegorical tale about incest titled “Alice Doane” that the narrator reads inside the story. By scrutinizing the setting of this narration
as well as the title of the outer narrative “Alice Doane’s Appeal,” I argued that the two fictional narratives work on each otherto arouse the reader’s interest in the historical past, namely the Salem Witchcraft Trial of 1692. （Hereinafter I shall refer to“Alice Doane’s Appeal” as “ADA” and “Alice Doane” as “AD”）
Gallows Hill covered with poisonous wood-wax, is the setting for the narration of “AD,” and serves to remind the readerof the Salem Witchcraft Trial. The narrator informs his two female listeners that the martyred victims of the witchcraft trial
are buried in this hill. In the meantime, he further facilitates their attention to the trial by attributing the origin of the woodwax to the “unhallowed bones” of “the wizard” that appears in “AD.” However “AD” is a tale about murder and incest that has
nothing to do with the Salem Witchcraft Trial. Hence the narrator can successfully accomplish his goal only after he moves tothe story about the trial itself and thus for the first time arouses his listeners’ fear.
While the narrator moves from “AD” to the witch trial story to gain his listeners’ attention to a historical incident, Haw-

thorne molds the title “Alice Doane” into “Alice Doane’s Appeal” to achieve the same purpose. His addition of the legal term“appeal” immediately draws attention to the diametric endings of the two stories introduced by the narrator: in “AD” Alice’s
appeal to her innocence is accepted, whereas in the witch trial story the victims’ appeal is rejected. I would argue that Hawthorne juxtaposed these two opposing results of the appeals to awaken the reader to the repressed history of the Salem Witchcraft Trial, or the unvoiced voice of the trial’s martyrs.

Special Lecture

Two“Scribbling”Englishwomen in America: Frances Kemble and Catherine Hopley
Koji OI（Professor Emeritus, Kwansei Gakuin University）
Citing Nathaniel Hawthorne’s notorious phrase, “the damned mob of scribbling women,” in his Birds of Passage（1984）on
the writings of five ninetieth–century Englishwomen traveling in America, Richard Mullen insists that, though many male au-thors paid but scant attention to women writers, “today anyone with an interest in the history of women could find few bettersources than the travel books of these ‘scribbling women’.”It would be interesting to see how the American South is portrayed by two “scribbling” Englishwomen, Frances Kemble（1809-1893）and Catherine Hopley（1817-1911）, in their travel books. Touring in the United States as a famous actress,
Kemble met and married a rich Philadelphian, Pierce Butler, in 1834. She visited her husband’s plantation in Georgia in
1838-1839 and recorded her impressions and observations of daily life there in her diaries, which were published for the firsttime in 1863 under the title of Journal of a Residence on a Georgian Plantation. While living in the South as a governess from1860 to 1862, on the other hand, Catherine Hopley was forced to move from one place to another when the Civil War broke out
and observed the horrible scenes of war as a “neutral British subject.” After returning to England, she published her Life in
the South: From the Commencement of War by a Blockaded British Subject in 1863, the year when Kemble’s Journal finally cameout.
Kemble’s diaries were written as letters to her friend and confidante, Elizabeth Sedgwick, whose sister-in-law, Catharine
Maria Sedgwick, was admired by Hawthorne as “our most truthful novelist.” （Incidentally, Kemble was on friendly terms with
the Hawthornes while they were living in Lenox., Massachusetts.） Though she never sent the letters to Elizabeth, Kemble
gave in them a detailed description of what she saw and heard on her husband’s plantation, where more than six hundred
slaves were treated as mere beasts of burden. She experienced what might be termed the shock of recognition when she cameinto direct contact with the peculiar institution and never tired of talking about “this accursed system of slavery,” “my abhorrence of the theory of slavery,” “the fundamental wrong of slavery” and “the horrible injustice of this system of slavery.”She deeply sympathized with the miserable slaves flogged mercilessly by their drivers and overseers, of course, but she
also began to realize that she was not much different from her husband’s slaves because she was a feme couverte subject to Mr.
Butler as her legal owner. As she watched her husband behaving toward his slaves as an arrogant tyrant, she felt he had been
degraded in her eyes and began to lose her respect for him. When she first came to the Georgian plantation, she wrote that “Ishould like the wild savage loneliness of the faraway existence extremely if it were not for the one small item of ‘the slavery’.”
But she gradually came to convince herself that no Garden of Eden was to be found in the South where the system of slavery
was firmly established.
In 1863 Kemble decided to publish her Journal in order to refute the opinion among the English readers that Harriet
Beecher Stowe’s Uncle Tom’s Cabin drew an exaggerated picture of the evils of slavery. In a letter to the editor of the London
Times, she wrote that “of its truth and moderation as a representation of the slave system in the United States, I can testify
with the experience of an eye-witness, having been a resident in the Southern States, and had opportunities of observationsuch as no one who has not lived on a slave estate can have.” Kemble evidently intended to corroborate Stowe’s account of
the living conditions in the South by her own firsthand observations of the slavery on the Georgian plantation.
On the other hand, Catherine Hopley arrived in 1854 at the age of thirty-six and, while living with one of her relatives in
Ohio, she obtained a good position as governess at a private family in Virginia. At first she hesitated in going to the South because, as a reader of Uncle Tom’s Cabin, she was afraid she might encounter a group of “lacerated figures limping and toiling totheir daily task, with the cruel task-master and his frightful whip bringing up the rear.” Even when she found no such horrorsof slavery at her first Virginia family, she told herself that “these are the Shelbys of the country” and continued to believe that
she would have every chance of witnessing the sufferings of the slaves. But, failing to meet with any flogging scenes as described in Uncle Tom’s Cabin, she confessed at the end of her book that “in the two years and a half between six of the slaveStates, exclusive of Maryland, I had never seen nor heard of corporeal punishment.” Her personal experiences were totallydifferent from those of Frances Kemble, who showed in her Journal that the flogging of slaves was an everyday occurrence ona plantation.
In July 1860 Hopley was called back to England. Though she simply mentioned that “duty seemed to recall me to my native land,” it was, as Richard Mullen explains, to hear the trial of her brother, Thomas Hopley, who, as a schoolmaster, had
killed a slow pupil while flogging him as a punishment for laziness and obstinacy. Thomas was found guilty of manslaughterand sentenced to four years’ imprisonment. It seems to be a strange irony of fate that she went back to England only to findthat her own brother had brutally flogged his pupil to death when, just before her departure, she had declared that “So I left myfirst Virginia home, without once experiencing that dreaded shock to one’s nerves and sympathies, in witnessing the ‘horrible
sufferings of those miserable slaves’.”Though Kemble defended the veracity of Uncle Tom’s Cabin, Hopley refused to accept Stowe’s novel as a reliable guidebook to the system of slavery and, in spite of her status as a “neutral British subject,” she eventually found herself committed
to the Southern cause. And, on the last page of Life in the South, she went so far as to encourage her readers to “regard withmore leniency and justice the people of the SOUTHERN CONFEDERACY.” In the sense that Life in the South offers a kind ofcounterstatement to Uncle Tom’s Cabin, it can be regarded as a companion volume to Caroline Hentz’s novel, The Planter’s
Northern Bride（1854）, in which Eulalia, the heroine, who comes from the North and, like Frances Kemble, marries a richplanter, gradually casts away all her Northern prejudices and attaches herself to the traditional way of life in the South.
When she writes in her Introduction to Life in the South that “Those writers, who, during the last few years, have flooded
the book mart with sensation tales of slavery, have injured the cause which they, no doubt, sincerely thought to serve,” Hopley
seems to be directly criticizing Stowe’s Uncle Tom’s Cabin and indirectly Kemble’s Journal, which was published in the same
year with her own book. But Hopley herself can hardly be called a fair and accurate observer of the American South in that
she asserted that, in spite of Kemble’s testimony as an eyewitness, there was no such thing as the flogging of slaves in theslave-holding States. By pondering on two diametrically opposite views of the peculiar institution advanced by Kemble andHopley in their travel books, we are made to newly recognize the difficulty of trying to understand not only Southern culture
but also American culture in general from the standpoint of a foreign student.

Symposium

The American Renaissance and Transnationalism
Following the recent transnational turn in the study of nineteenth-century American literature, this symposium reexamined the literary or ideological interactions between the antebellum American novelists and Britain. In the introduction, Nishitani（moderator）gave a brief survey of the above-mentioned scholarly trend, referring to Jun Furuya’s historical and politicalanalysis of American（trans）nationalism in his Americanism（2002）, and Paul Giles’ comparative study of American and British writers in his Transatlantic Insurrections（2001）and Virtual Americas（2002）. Three of the following speakers discussed
the social and cultural environment in England that had made and unmade the literary reputation of Nathaniel Hawthorne andHarriet Beecher Stowe there; and one speaker traced Herman Melville’s idea of the transnational identity, focusing on representations of the body in his fictions.

Hawthorne’s Transnationality
Hiroaki OHSUGI（Prof. Emeritus/Miyazaki University）
After his graduation from Bowdoin College, Hawthorne confined himself to “Castle Dismal” on Herbert Street in Salem
for almost 11 years, to concentrate on writing. During his deliberate seclusion from the actual life, a new boom of transatlantic
travels and inspections was growing to flourish on both sides of the Atlantic, but he had no interest at all in such jaunty trips
and wrote more than thirty accomplished stories. Some of them were highly praised in 1836 by the English critic Henry F.
Chorley, and he kept on writing more stories and sketches, but his name was not known so much in England until Ticknor &Fields published The Scarlet Letter in 1850.
The English novelist Mary Russell Mitford read a copy of it sent by Fields and was instantly attracted to its author so
deeply that she praised him in her Recollections of a Literary Life（1852）, quoting long paragraphs not from The Scarlet Letterbut from The House of the Seven Gables（1851）. Her letters addressed to Fields were later collected in his Yesterdays with Authors（1872）and in 22 of 47 of them she craved to see Hawthorne, though her wish could not be fulfilled.
What caught her heart so strongly and transnationally were his perfect style as a writer and his seriousness to be a genuine writer, even after his dismissal from Salem Custom House in 1849. His inner decision to be strong and able could be seenin Ethan Brand in “The Unpardonable Sin”（1850）who plunged in the purgatory fire for his eternal rebirth.

The Transnational Body in Melville’s Fiction
Takuya NISHITANI（Kobe University）
In Herman Melville’s later works, the fusion of diverse ethnic identities is often conceived in corporeal terms. For instance, in Moby-Dick（1851）, when Ishmael wakes to find Queequeg’s hand thrown over him in the bed, he remembers astrange experience in his childhood. He was shut up in his room by his step-mother as a punishment. When he woke up aftera few hours’ sleep, he found that a phantom form sat beside his bed and that its “supernatural hand” was in his hand. Though
this sense of a double body, or physical dislocation, lies at the bottom of Ishmael’s discordance with the world, it goes awaywhen he finds “a melting” in himself, being one with Queequeg.

The three “diptych” stories written in the 1850’s offer interesting examples of transatlanticism in Melville. In the English

sections, the narrator shares food and drinks with other people, or mingles with the crowd; his body is opened up to the outside world. In the American sections, however, there prevails a sense of sterility and self-enclosedness, as seen in “The Tartarus of Maids.” It is by this contrast in physical sensations that Melville emphasizes the sickness of his own country.
Israel Potter（1855）is a novel set in the period of the American Revolution. The protagonist, captivated by the British
Army, makes his escapes in disguise, but is soon found out to be a Yankee; he never succeeds in looking like a British, or acquiring a transatlantic body. This does not mean, however, that the novel presents a definite American national identity. Paul
Jones, an American war hero, has tattoos on his arm like a New Zealand warrior’s. Israel gazes surprisedly at them in the darkroom. This is a kind of reenactment of Ishmael’s first night with Queequeg, but Jones’ body does not represent a fusion of ethnic identities but the savage nature of America. This contradiction points to a radical question: “Is it possible to be truly transnational?”

Harriet Beecher Stowe and Transatlanticism
Suzuko SHINDO（Nagoya Keizai University）
Harriet Beecher Stowe’s influence on countries beyond the Atlantic Ocean cannot be overemphasized from the transatlantic viewpoint.
The sale of Uncle Tom’s Cabin, published in 1852, accelerated in England and spread throughout the European continent.
In addition, once the novel was dramatized in New York in the summer of 1852, it began to be performed in the main cities ofEurope, where a cultural and commercial world-wide phenomenon called “Tom mania” prevailed. A more socially significant
event occurred in response to UTC in the form of the Stafford House address together with 500,000 women’s signatures forthe purpose of liberating American slaves. Seventeen years after UTC, an essay entitled “The True Story of Lady Byron’sLife” was published in the Atlantic, in which Stowe revealed the fact that Lord Byron had an incestuous relationship with his
half-sister Augusta Leigh. This essay was so heavily criticized on both sides of the Atlantic that the magazine lost a readershipof 15,000.
In the middle of the 19th century, the same revolutionary atmosphere could be found on both sides of the Atlantic. It isnoteworthy that women like the Duchess of Sutherland, Harriet Martineau, Fanny Kemble, Mrs. Browning and George Eliot,
who were all involved, more or less, with the current social movements inspired each other, corroborating with Harriet
Beecher Stowe.

Henry Fothergill Chorley: Discovery of Hawthorne in Victorian EnglandMari MIZUNO（Kyoto University）
The importance of Henry Fothergill Chorley in the formation of the “American writer” Hawthorne cannot be overstated,the former being the first British critic of the latter.
Hawthorne’s debut on the British art scene coincided with the burgeoning of journalism in the Victorian England, inwhich the weekly Athenaeum played the main role in orienting the public’s taste in fine art, music and literature. While writing
thousands of reviews of Romantic music for this periodical, Chorley also kept track of Hawthorne’s whole creative career that
extended even after his death. His earlier nine reviews of Hawthorne’s fictions are generally of favorable nature in defiance ofgeneral unpopularity of Hawthorne and his contemporary American writers over the Atlantic, and show profound understanding of the latter’s imaginative power. However, his later reviews and a memoir show perplexity at Hawthorne’s creative genius, mysterious misanthropy, unexpectedly genial person, and acerbity towards the English nation in his notebooks. Hawthorne’s response in the forms of letters and notes, in turn, show his oscillation between obsequiousness towards his understanding reviewer and acrimony towards his “Old Home,” that is, England and her haughty people.
Thus, the transatlantic negotiation between Hawthorne and his English reviewer constituted, if partly, the milieu in which
the former developed his literary creation.

Book News
Political Heat and Hawthorne
Kazuko TAKEMURA (Ochanomizu University)
The United States is at present intensely heated up with the presidential election. The Democratic candidate BarakObama says in his campaign, “We are not as divided as our politics suggests; that we are one people; we are one nation.” This
statement presumably alludes to the famous address, “A house divided against itself cannot stand,” which was made by Abraham Lincoln at the Republican State Convention in the Springfield, Illinois, in 1858, quoting from the Bible, Matthew 12:25.

The period when Hawthorne wrote was highly political on the eve of the Civil War, when public opinion was divided on slavery,
the tariff issue, religious matters and so forth. His works, which apparently stand aloof from his contemporary political climate, are actually furnished with public concerns --- though in a covert way--- such as the tariff issue in “The Custom House,”
expansionism and the class issue in The House of Seven Gables, the suffrage movement in The Blithedale Romance, etc. Even
his stories treating past historical episodes such as “Legends of the Province-House,” “Endicott and the Red Cross,” “My,Kinsman, Major Molineux,” and “The Gray Champion,” etc. as well as his children s books on American history can be considered to express, though recounting history, his viewpoint of the nation's formation going on in his time.
,
Matthew S. Holland s book published in 2007, Bonds of Affection: Civic Charity and the Making of America --- Winthrop,
Jefferson, and Lincoln, locates Hawthorne in the political and affective stream in America starting from the founding period and,lasting through the Civil War and thereafter. Holland finds America s principle for nation formation in Christian love and charity and its political version, civic charity, picking up its “three founding moments,” which are embodied in three types of states,
manship of Winthrop, Jefferson, and Lincoln. He confines Hawthorne s engagement with this trend to the author's fictional
treatment of Winthrop mainly in The Scarlet Letter, and “fusions of philosophical liberalism and Christian agapism,” which hesays “still seem very much with us in American civic life” (14), have not necessarily led to the realization of freedom andequality in the real politics in the States. Instead, they have produced and/or fortified double standards in terms of race, gender, and religion in some way in American history. Rather it could be said that it is Hawthorne who penetrated the dark side ofsuch a politico-religious conglomerate and represented it in his narratives like “The Gentle Boy.” But, all the more owing tothis, his commitment to “bonds of affection” in American political history seems to have to be studied further through investi-

gation of his personal and authorial involvement in his contemporary politics and politicians.
,
In this sense, Richard J. Williamson s The Impact of Franklin Pierce on Nathaniel Hawthorne: Friendship, Politics, and the,
Literary Imagination, can be read as a case study of Hawthrone s political engagement. Williamson, delineating the Haw,
thorne-Pierce friendship cherished in their college days [Chap. 1], analyses the politician s influence on the writer found in“Fanshawe [Chap. 2], the Life of Franklin Pierce [Chap. 3], the unfinished Septimus romances [Chap. 4], and the dedication andprefatory letter, ‘To a Friend,’ published in Our Old Home (1863) [Chap. 5].” It is significant to make further investigations,,based upon his biographical details, of Hawthorne s later incomplete works and personal documents in terms of his conflict between his artistic imagination and his political views in the turbulent days just before the war.
Samuel A. Schreiner Jr. published a book on the New England circle in the mid-nineteenth century, The Concord Quartet:,
Alcott, Emerson, Hawthorne, Thoreau, and the Friendship That Freed the American Mind, following Philip McFarland s Haw,,
thorne in Concord (2004), Megan Marshall s The Peabody Sisters (2005), Cecile Anne de Rocher s Elizabeth Manning Hawthorne,(2006), and Susan Cheever s American Bloomsbury (2006). This is an interesting introduction to the American intellectualgroup and their mutual association rather than an academic research on transcendentalist writer/thinkers. But Hawthorne's
ambivalent attitude towards the Civil War is introduced in a long quotation from his letter to Horatio Bridge. The index is
massive and useful.
2007 has seen several reprinted editions of the books published in the nineteenth century and the early twentieth century,
concerning Nathaniel Hawthorne, which include H. A. Page s Memoir of Nathaniel Hawthorne with Stories Now First Published,,,in This Country (1872), Joseph W. Symonds s Nathaniel Hawthorne: An Oration (1878), Evangeline Maria Johnson O Connor s
An Analytical Index to the Works of Nathaniel Hawthorne with a Sketch of His Life (1882), Horatio Bridge’s Personal Recollections,,
Of Nathaniel Hawthorne (1893), Moncure D. Conway s Life of Nathaniel Hawthorne (1890), Annie Fields s Nathaniel Hawthorne,(1899), and Nina E. Browne s A Bibliography of Nathaniel Hawthorne (1905). Hawthorne studies appears to have shifted fromtextual readings of his work to investigations of the socio-political climate of his days and after.

Books on N. Hawthorne published in 2007 in the U.S. (The asterisk indicates the books
published in 2006, which were not included in my 2006 booklist.),
Bloom, Harold, ed. Bloom s Modern Critical Views: Nathaniel Hawthorne (Updated Edition). Ed. Harold Bloom. New York:
Chelsea House Publishers.
Bosco, Ronald A. and Jillmarie Murphy. Hawthorne in His Own Time: A Biographical Chronicle of His Life, Drawn from Recollections, Interviews, and Memoirs by Family, Friends, and Associates. U of Iowa P.
Bridge, Horatio. Personal Recollections Of Nathaniel Hawthorne. Whitefish, MT: Kessinger Publishing, LLC.*
Browne, Nina E. A. Bibliography of Nathaniel Hawthorne. Whitefish, MT: Kessinger Publishing, LLC.
Conway, Moncure D. Life of Nathaniel Hawthorne. Whitefish, MT: Kessinger Publishing, LLC.
Fields, Annie. Nathaniel Hawthorne. Whitefish, MT: Kessinger Publishing, LLC.
Holland, Matthew S. Bonds of Affection: Civic Charity and the Making of America --- Winthrop, Jefferson, and Lincoln. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown UP.
Mather, Edward. Nathaniel Hawthorne: A Modest Man. 1940. Whitefish, MT: Kessinger Publishing, LLC.
,
O Connor, Evangeline Maria Johnson. An Analytical Index to the Works of Nathaniel Hawthorne, with a Sketch of His Life. Whitefish, MT: Kessinger Publishing, LLC.
Page, H. A. Memoir of Nathaniel Hawthorne, with Stories Now First Published in This Country. Whitefish, MT: Kessinger Publishing, LLC.
Person, Leland S. The Cambridge Introduction to Nathaniel Hawthorne. Cambridge UP.
Schreiner Jr., Samurl A. The Concord Quartet: Alcott, Emerson, Hawthorne, Thoreau, and the Friendship That Freed the American
Mind. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.*
Stearns, Preston F. The Life and Genius of Nathaniel Hawthorne. Boston: Indy Publish. com.
Sterling, Laurie A. Bloom’s How to Write about Nathaniel Hawthorne. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea House Publishers.
Symonds, Joseph W. Nathaniel Hawthorne: An Oration. Whitefish, MT: Kessinger Publishing, LLC.
Williamson, Richard J. The Impact of Franklin Pierce on Nathaniel Hawthorne: Friendship, Politics, and the Literary Imagination.
Lewiston, NY: The Edwin Mellen P.*
Woodberry, George Edward. Nathaniel Hawthorne. Bibliobazaar.

Journal essays published in 2007 in the U.S.

Benditt, Theodore M. “Revenge.” Philosophical Forum 38. 4: 357-63.
Berry, Bryan. “Henry James and the Heavenly Light.” First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion & Public Life 167: 34-37

Bonnet, Michéle. “Consuming Tragedy and ‘the little cannibal’ in ‘The House of the Seven Gables.’” ATQ 20.2: 481-97.
Brouwers, Anke. “The New Mother: Maternal Instinct as Sexual Liberation in Victor Sjöström’s The Scarlet Letter (1926).”
Quarterly Review of Film and Video 24. 3: 249-66.

Bryant, John. “Melville Essays the Romance: Comedy and Being in Frankenstein, ‘The Big Bear of Arkansas,’ and Moby-Dick.”
Nineteenth-Century Literature 61.3: 277-310.
Colacurcio, Michael J. “ “Artificial Fire”: Reading Melville (Re)-reading Hawthorne.” Nathaniel Hawthorne Review (hereinafterreferred to as NHR) 33. 1: 1-22.
Doyle, Laura. “ ‘A’ for Atlantic: The Colonizing Force of Hawthorne’s The Scarlet Letter.” American Literature 79. 2: 243-73.
Fraden, Rena. “Suzan-Lori Parks’ Hester Plays: In the Blood and Fucking A.” Massachusetts Review 48. 3 434-54.

Fuller, Randall. “Hawthorne and War.” New England Quarterly 80. 4: 655-86.
Greven, David S. “In A Pig’s Eye: Masculinity, Mastery, and the Returned Gaze of The Blithedale Romance.” Studies in American Fiction 34.2: 131-59
Griffin, Gerald R. “Review of American Bloomsbury: Louisa May Alcott, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Margaret Fuller, Nathaniel Hawthorne, and Henry David Thoreau: Their Lives, Their Loves, Their Work.” New England Quarterly 80. 4: 721-23.
Heath, William. “Merry Old England and Hawthorne’s “May-Pole of Merry Mount”.” NHR 33.1: 41-71.
Holland, Matthew S. “Remembering John Winthrop--Hawthorne’s Suggestion.” Perspectives on Political Science 36. 1: 4-14.
Jamil, S. Selina. “Carnivalesque Freedom in Hawthorne’s Young Goodman Brown.” Explicator 65. 3: 143-45.
Kandell, Jonathan. “The Berkshires.” Smithsonian 38-2: 66-73.

Leddy, Chuck. “Review of American Bloomsbury: Louisa May Alcott, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Margaret Fuller, Nathaniel Hawthorne, and Henry David Thoreau--Their Lives, Their Loves, Their Work.” American History 42. 3: 68-70.
Montgomery-Fate, Tom. “Review of American Bloomsbury: Louisa May Alcott, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Margaret Fuller, Nathaniel
Hawthorne, and Henry David Thoreau: Their Lives, Their Loves, Their Work.” Christian Century 124. 10: 39-41.
Narayama Chandran, K. “The Hawthorne Aspect of T. S. Eliot’s Coriolan.” Orbis Litterarum 62. 1: 58-70.

Parsons, Elaine, “Review of Race, Slavery, and Liberalism in Nineteenth-Century American Literature by Arthur Riss.” NHR 33.
1: 72-75.
Tompkins, Kyla Wazana. “EVERYTHING ‘CEPT EAT US’: The Antebellum Black Body Portrayed as Edible Body.” Callaloo
30. 1: 201-24.
Wallace, James D. “Hawthorne’s Glimpses of English Poverty.” NHR 33. 1: 23-40.
White, Charles Dodd. “Hawthorne’s Edward Randolph's Portrait.” Explicator 66. 1: 9-11.

White, Charles Dodd. “Hawthorne’s My Kinsman, Major Molineux.” Explicator 65. 4: 215-17.

Books to be added to my 2006 list.

Greven, David. “In a pig’s eye: masculinity, mastery, and the returned gaze of The Blithedale Romance.” Studies in American
Fiction 34. 2: 131-59.
Lee, Jee Yoon. “‘The Rude Contact of Some Actual Circumstance’: Hawthorne and Salem’s East India Marine Museum.” ELH
73. 4 : 949-73.
Meyer, Richard E. “Death possesses a good deal of real estate”: references to gravestones and burial grounds in Nathaniel
Hawthorne’s American Notebooks and selected fictional works.” The Literary Imagination 39. 1: 1-28.

支部研究会だより
東京支部研究会
東京支部研究会は年 6 回を予定し，そのうち 1 回を読書会としています。開催月・曜日は原則として，7，10，11，12，
2，3 月（会場：日本大学文理学部）で，時間は 3:00~5:00p.m. です。
△ 2007 年 10 月 27 日（土）：10 月例会
司

会：佐々木

研究発表：内堀

英哲 氏（桃山学院大学）
奈保子 氏（お茶の水女子大学・院）

ホーソーン作品における＜フェア・マン＞と身体表象

10

△ 2007 年 12 月 22 日（土）：12 月例会 ＜読書会＞
司
会：川村 幸夫 氏（東京理科大学）
発 表 者：川村幸夫 氏

森山

敬子 氏（学習院大学・院）

内堀

奈保子 氏（お茶の水女子大学・院）

高木

さゆり 氏（日本大学・院）

冨樫壮央 氏（麗澤大学・非）T e x t ：Millington, Richard H., ed.
The Cambridge Companion to Nathaniel Hawthorne.
（New York: Cambridge UP, 2004.）（高橋利明記）中部支部研究会
研究会は年 3 回，原則として 2 月，7 月，11 月を予定しておりますが，都合により 3 月と 12 月に開催しました。
△ 2007 年３月 17 日（土）場
所：東海学園大学 三好キャンパス
発
表：倉橋 洋子氏（東海学園大学）
題
目：「ホーソーンとセーレム－セーレムの先祖と家庭」
司会：溝口 健二氏（大同工業大学）△ 2007 年 7 月 22 日（日）：午後 1 時から場
所：東海学園大学 三好キャンパス
発 表 者：溝口 健二氏（大同工業大学）
題
目：「『草の葉』以前のホイットマン－印刷見習工から書き手を目指して」
司
会：竹野 冨美子氏（名城大学・東海学園大学非常勤）△ 2007 年 12 月 8 日（土）：午後 2 時から場
所：名城大学発 表 者：竹野 冨美子氏（名城大学・東海学園大学非常勤）
題
目：「19 世紀における『大理石の牧神』の評価について」司
会：中村 栄造氏（名城大学）（倉橋洋子記）関西支部研究会△ 2006 年 12 月 23 日（土・祝日）：15：00
場

所：関西大学文学部英文合同研究室

研究発表：（1）中西佳世子氏（京都大学・院）「賞賛すべき魔女ヘスター―緋文字の魔力と呪縛」
司会：増永俊一氏（関西学院大学）（2）福岡和子氏（京都大学）「ポウ文学とコンテキストの不在」
司会：岩田強氏（京都光華女子大学）
例会後，「スッポン」にて懇親会を開催。
△ 2007 年 3 月 31 日（土）：14：30
場

所：関西大学文学部小会議室

11

研究発表：（1）中村善雄氏（長岡技術科学大学）「身体の解読とアナモルフィックな眼差し―探偵小説としての『七破風の家』―」
司会：井上久夫氏（聖和大学）（2）小久保潤子氏（広島国際学院大学）「黄金のレトリック― The House of the Seven Gables におけるフィービーの機能」
司会：比名和子氏（甲子園大学）△ 2007 年 12 月 15 日（土）：14：30
場

所：関西大学百周年記念会館第 4 会議室

研究発表：西谷拓哉氏（神戸大学）「メルヴィル『レッドバーン』における成熟と喪失―「モリヌー少佐」との対比を通して―
司会：丹羽隆昭氏（京都大学）
例会後，関西大学正門横円形建物 4 階「チルコロ」にて懇親会。
（入子文子記）九州支部研究会
第 26 回△ 2007 年 3 月 31 日（土）：14：00 ～ 16：30
会場：北九州市立大学 E-702

シンポジウム司

会：乘口

眞一郎氏「ホーソーンと女性たち」

発 表 者：松尾祐美子氏「ホーソーンと働く女性」

高島まり子氏「ホーソーン作品における，母子関係の元型的成長－

大杉博昭氏「ルイーザ・メイ・オールコットとホーソーン」『緋文字』を中心に」

第 27 回△ 2007 年 7 月 7 日（土）：14：00 ～ 17：00
会場：北九州市立大学

大学院棟（3 棟）218 教室

（1）発

表：村田

希巳子氏（北九州市立大学・非）『おじいさんの椅子』- 歴史とロマンスの狭間で

司

会：川下

剛氏（九州大学大学院）

（2）発

表：乘口

眞一郎氏（北九州市立大学）“The Intelligence Office”に於ける plot と characters の分析司会：城戸光世氏（北九州市立大学）

総会：16：00 ～ 17：00①

役員の交代（承認）②

会則の改定（承認）③

会計報告と予算の使い方の検討

第 28 回△ 2007 年 9 月 29 日（土）：13：30 ～ 16：30
会（1）発

場：福岡大学文系センター
表：生田

15 階第 7 会議室

和也氏（九州大学大学院）

12

司
（2）発

Tarring and Feathering を読む：“My Kinsman, Major Molineux”
会：高橋 勤氏（九州大学）
表：吉成 類子氏（九州大学大学院博士後期）“What Maisie Knew” パールの磁力

司

会：村田

希巳子氏（北九州市立大学・非）

（3）発

表：川下

剛氏（北九州市立大学・非）『緋文字』再読司

会：青井格氏（近畿大学九州工学部）

第 29 回△ 2007 年 12 月 1 日（土）：13：30 ～ 16：30
会
（1）発
司
（2）発

場：北九州市立大学大学院棟（3-218 室）
表：青井 格氏（近畿大学九州工学部）“Young Goodman Brown” における歴史と教義
会：川下剛氏（北九州市立大学・非）表：稲冨 百合子氏（活水女子大学）
The Marble Faun における芸術と人種問題

司

会：乘口

眞一郎氏（北九州市立大学）

（3）発

表：高野

泰志氏（九州大学）『緋文字』と性の表象
司

会：城戸光世氏（北九州市立大学）

研究発表終了後，恒例の忘年会を行った。
会場

門司港地ビール工房（門司区東港 6-9）
（高島まり子記）

編集室だより倉橋洋子編集長の後を受け，この度『フォーラム』の編集を担当させていただくことになりました。よろしくお願い申し上げます。編集室では現在 13 号を準備中で，今号は論文 2 編に書評数点を掲載の予定でおります。最近投稿が少ないことが残念ですが，学会が日本学術会議協力学術研究団体の指定を受けたことでもあり，是非会員の皆様からの積極的な投稿が増えることを願っております。
編集委員：川窪啓資，倉橋洋子，竹村和子，増永俊一，佐々木英哲，成田雅彦（編集長）『フォーラム』12 号会計報告（2006.9 － 2007.8）
支出繰越金
589,605『フォーラム』12 号発行費
内訳 印刷費（600 部）『フォーラム』12 号費用
700,000
封入手数料（236 件）
郵送費（236 件）
利息
1,160
振り込み手数料（2 件）
収支合計
1,290,765
通信費『フォーラム』残部送料支出合計
残高798,033
収入（482,307431,550
7,507
43,250

）
1,365
1,340
7,720
492,732

編 集 室：〒 214-8580 川崎市多摩区東三田 2-1-1 専修大学 8432
成田雅彦研究室気付

日本ナサニエル・ホーソーン協会編集室（成田雅彦記）13

資料室だより
今年から来年にかけて書誌リストの再整理を計画しています。新しい情報などございましたらお知らせください。また，論文等ご執筆の折には，ぜひともご一報ください。資料室を充実させていきたいと存じておりますので，今後とも皆様方のご協力をお願いいたします。
住所：278-8510（郵便物は郵便番号のみで届きます）
千葉県野田市山崎 2641 東京理科大学理工学部教養科

川村（幸）研究室内

日本ナサニエル・ホーソーン協会資料室
電 話：04-7122-9219（川村（幸）研究室直通）
04-7122-9158（教養科事務室直通）
e-mail：kawmyuk@rs.noda.tus.ac.jp( 川村幸夫記 )事務局だより1.『事務局だより』第 26 号をお届けします。今回も＜ Book News ＞として竹村和子氏から原稿をお寄せいただきました。
2. 第 26 回全国大会を無事終えることが出来ました。会場校の日本大学文理学部長をはじめ，大会の運営にご協力をいただいた教職員の方々に御礼申し上げます。
3. 第 27 回全国大会は平成 20 年 5 月 23 日
（金）・24 日（土）に決定し，大会会場は広島ガーデンパレスに決定しました。
4. 新名簿をお届けします。名簿記載事項に変更，訂正がありましたら，ご一報ください。
5. 新入会員を歓迎いたします。ご推薦下さい。
この NHSJ Newsletter とともに振替用紙が同封してある場合は，会費をまだお納めいただいていないことをお知らせするものです。それを用いてご送金ください。なお，振替用紙をもって領収書に換えさせて頂きます。別の領収書をご必要な際はご一報ください。
6. 本協会宛で下記の書籍が贈呈されました。ご報告します。
（ 1 ） 阿野文朗 Miscellaneous Encounters: Collected Essays on Nathaniel Hawthorne（松柏社 ､2007）（ 2 ） 伊藤詔子「喪失とレジスタンスの語りの空間―ヘンリー・ソローとリンダ・ホーガン」『エコトピアと環境正義の文学―日米より展望する広島からユッカマウンテンへ』スコット・スロヴィック / 伊藤詔子 / 吉田美津 / 横田由理編著（晃洋書房、2008）（ 3 ） 城戸光世「人口のエデン、廃墟のアメリカ― J・F・クーパーとホーソーンのユートピア批評」『エコトピアと環境正義の文学―日米より展望する広島からユッカマウンテンへ』スコット・スロヴィック / 伊藤詔子 / 吉田美
津 / 横田由理編著（晃洋書房、2008）（ 4 ） 小林史子『非対立を抱くアメリカ作家たち－バース，デリーロ，ミルハウザー，ホーソーン』（彩流社，2007）（ 5 ） 進藤鈴子「イーディス・ウォートン『夏』－生と死の狭間で」『語り明かすアメリカ古典文学 12』アメリカ文学の古典を読む会編（南雲堂，2007）（ 6 ） 鈴木孝「トウェインを旅する楽しさを満喫」『マーク･トウェイン研究と批評』第 5 号，
日本マーク･トウェイン

協会編（南雲堂，2006）（ 7 ） 鈴木元子「アフリカはどこに存するのか－『雨の王ヘンダソン』試論」『ソール・ベロー研究－人間像と生き方の探求』日本ソール･ベロー協会（大阪教育図書，2007）（ 8 ） 高梨良夫「エイブラハム・カハーン『デイヴィッド・レヴィンスキーの向上』－ジュダイズムとアメリカニズ
ム」『語り明かすアメリカ古典文学 12』アメリカ文学の古典を読む会編（南雲堂，2007）（ 9 ） 巽 孝之「ウィリアム・ギブスンの廃墟空間」『エコトピアと環境正義の文学―日米より展望する広島からユッ
カマウンテンへ』スコット・スロヴィック / 伊藤詔子 / 吉田美津 / 横田由理編著（晃洋書房、2008）（10） 中垣恒太郎「シャーウッド・アンダーソン『貧乏白人』－『貧乏白人』における女性像」『語り明かすアメリカ古典文学 12』アメリカ文学の古典を読む会編（南雲堂，2007）（11） 中垣恒太郎「グリーン・シティ―一九世紀ユートピア小説と万国博覧会における未来像」『エコトピアと環境正14

義の文学―日米より展望する広島からユッカマウンテンへ』スコット・スロヴィック / 伊藤詔子 / 吉田美津 / 横田由理編著（晃洋書房、2008）（12） 西谷拓哉「メルヴィルの小説における死と感傷－一八五〇年代の短篇に見る反センチメンタル・レトリック」『アメリカン･ルネサンスの現在形』増永俊一編著（松柏社，2007）（13） 丹羽隆昭『クルマが語る人間模様－二十世紀アメリカ古典小説再訪』（開文社出版，2007）（14） 丹羽隆昭「「成熟」から回顧する「熱狂」－『ウオールデン（Walden, or, Life in the Woods）覚え書き』」『アメリカ
ン・ルネサンスの現在形』増永俊一編著（松柏社，2007）（15） 福岡和子『「他者」で読むアメリカン・ルネサンス－メルヴィル・ホーソーン・ポウ・ストウ』（世界思想社，
2007）（16） 増永俊一「「アメリカン･ルネサンス」の現在」，「「ディセンサス」を生きる－ホーソーンと時代と表現と」『アメ
リカン・ルネサンスの現在形』増永俊一編著（松柏社，2007）（17） 矢作三蔵訳著『美の芸術家

ホーソーン』（開文社出版，2008）（18） 山本典子訳，スザンナ・ローソン『ルーシー・テンプル』（渓水社，2007）（19） 吉田美津「ヘテロポリス・ロサンゼルス」―『オレンジ回帰線』と「第三世界」化する都市空間の未来」『エコト
ピアと環境正義の文学―日米より展望する広島からユッカマウンテンへ』スコット・スロヴィック / 伊藤詔子 /吉田美津 / 横田由理編著（晃洋書房、2008）（高橋利明記）第 27 回全国大会のお知らせ
日時：2008 年 5 月 23 日
（金）・24 日（土）

場

所：広島ガーデンパレス〒 732-0052 広島県広島市東区光町 1-15

特別講演，シンポジウム，ワークショップのテーマ，またお引き受けいただける先生方が決定しましたので，ご報告いたします。
特 別 講 演： 魔女狩りとホーソーンの創作技法
山本雅氏（広島市立大学）

シンポジウム：ホーソーンと 19 世紀社会運動
司会・講師

高尾

直知氏（中央大学）

講師

増井

志津代氏（上智大学）

講師

荒木純子氏（青山学院女子短期大学）講師

新井景子氏（東京大学・院）

ワークショップ：「僕の親戚モリヌー少佐」を読む
司会・講師

増永

俊一氏（関西学院大学）講師

鈴木

元子氏（静岡文化芸術大学）

講師

村田希巳子氏（北九州市立大学・非）

15

顧

問

阿野文朗（東北大名誉教授）
島田太郎（昭和女子大）鴨川卓博
萩原 力（専修大名誉教授）

松山信直（同志社大名誉教授）

師岡愛子（日本女子大名誉教授）
役

会長

川窪啓資（麗澤大）牧田徳元（金沢大名誉教授）員

當麻一太郎（日本大）

事

務

局

高橋利明

副会長

丹羽隆昭（京都大） 矢作三蔵（学習院大）

鈴木孝（日本大）

監事

進藤鈴子（名古屋経済大） 辻谷岡朗（日本大）理事

秋葉祥子（松山大）勉（東北学院大） 入子文子（関西大）

中村文紀（玉川大・非）川村幸夫（東京理科大）倉橋洋子（東海学園大）堀切大史（日本大・非）齋藤幸子（川村学園女子大）会

佐々木英哲（桃山学院大）

編

集

計

齋藤幸子

室

成田雅彦

高島まり子（鹿児島女子短期大）佐々木英哲

高橋利明（日本大）資料室

竹村和子（お茶の水女子大）成田雅彦（専修大）
西前

川村幸夫

川窪啓資

倉橋洋子

竹村和子

増永俊一

大野美砂（千葉商科大）奈良裕美子（明治大・非）孝（岡山大） 西村千稔（北海学園大・非）増永俊一（関西学院大）松阪仁伺（兵庫教育大）

国際渉外室

高尾直知（中央大） 中村文紀

大会準備委員

齋藤幸子

川村幸夫

成田雅彦

西谷拓哉（神戸大学）

高橋利明

2006 年度 日本ナサニエル・ホーソーン協会 （会計報告）（2006．4．1 ～ 2007．3．31）
収入
会費
賛助会員
雑収入
利息
計

950,000
50,00069,125452
1,069,577

支出
編集室費
大会費
大会準備委員会費
印刷費
国際渉外室費
謝礼費
支部研究会費
（東京
（中部
（関西
（九州
通信費
事務費
人件費
雑費
計

700,000
130,1450
182,000
10,00050,00077,00045,000）6,000）
20,000）6,000）
61,1008,804
55,0000
1,274,049

前期繰越金
収入計
計
支出計
次期繰越金

1,714,231
1,069,577
2,783,808
1,274,049
1,509,759

キャッシュポジション
郵便貯金
1,509,759

上記の通り相違ありません
2007 年 3 月 31 日

会計

齋 藤 幸 子

監事辻祥 子
進 藤 鈴 子

監査の結果，上記の通り相違ないことを証明します
2007 年 4 月 1 日

監事

16