Page:Tayama Katai and His Novel Entitled Futon (Reece).pdf/129

 that is not an imitation of, despite the fact that Katai stated that he was initially inspired by this play? The reason for this conclusion is that, on close examination, proves to be a work of literary art by using "realistic" artistic devices for creating the impression of stark reality--something that has no counterpart in. For this reason, I am of the opinion that is fiction that was concocted by Katai, in spite of our findings that Katai actually had similar experiences to those of his hero, Tokio.

I am aware that my view differs somewhat from those of many of the leading critics of the Meiji era. Shimamura Hōgetsu praised Katai's, saying: "This piece is the bold confession of a flesh-and-blood man, a stark-naked human being," and Oguri Fūyō, one of Kōyō's disciples, also concurred with his evaluation of : "I regard the attitude of the author [Katai] who was able to confess and publish without misrepresentation or embellishment his psychological and emotional life as sincere." The novelist Masamune Hakuchō likewise expressed a kindred view to that of Hōgetsu in saying: "[Katai] is without affectation opening his heart," and Chikamatsu Shūkō, another novelist, also approved: "[Katai] depicted natural emotion."

Before hastening to procede to our next observation, let us stop and contemplate what Katai really wanted to set forth in, as such a review might shed some light on evaluating Hōgetsu and the other critics' points of view in variance with our finding on this matter.