Seidensticker reading reflection

This speech by Edward Seidensticker touched on some very interesting topics that I felt he had a bit of a unique perspective on. Firstly, Seidensticker's reflection on his time with the author Kawabata brought up the conversation of ambiguity within writing. Ambiguity can be either intentional or unintentional and Kawabata's lack of clarity at times proved to be a significant challenge in Seidensticker's process. I can only imagine how frustrating it would be to have to ask clarification and only getting "Yes, it's ambiguous" as a response. With that answer, however, it forces the translator to question why a section might not be clear. If it is the author's intent, it is then the translator's duty to convey that confusion for the English reader.

Another topic that interested me was the difference in writing styles between Sino-Japanese and Heike Japanese. Seidensticker mentions that kokkyō and kunizakai are the same word read from the two styles. These terms were new to me and I had not considered that Japanese would be written in a way like this. Of course, I am familiar with Genji monogatari and have recognized a difference between modern and antiquated writing styles, but it is interesting to read Seidensticker refer to Kawabata's preference as "pure Japanese". It definitely adds another layer of nuance to the words knowing whether or not the original text had Chinese influence.

Tori