Show simple item record

Momotaro, or the Peach Boy: Japan's Best-Loved Folktale as National Allegory.

dc.contributor.authorHenry, David A.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2009-09-03T14:41:01Z
dc.date.availableNO_RESTRICTIONen_US
dc.date.available2009-09-03T14:41:01Z
dc.date.issued2009en_US
dc.date.submitteden_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/63637
dc.description.abstractThis dissertation argues that folktales, and in particular the Momotarō tale, were important to the construction of national identity in Japan through the interrelated discourses of minzokugaku, kyōdo kenkyū (local studies), and kyōdo kyōiku (local education movement). Yanagita Kunio (1875-1962) founded the discipline of minzokugaku in the first half of the 1930s around the questions: what are folktales, when did they originate, and what do they mean? These questions also guide my own study. Chapter One establishes the early modern history of Momotarō by focusing on the Edo period (1600-1868) when the tale rapidly gained popularity. I attempt to recover written and urban versions of the tale as a contrast to Yanagita’s vision of folktales as products of oral, rural culture. Chapter Two examines Iwaya Sazanami’s (1870-1933) adaptation Momotarō (1894) which is the single best known iteration of the tale. Published just before the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-1895, this adaptation appeared around the time that the tale began to be read as national allegory. In Chapter Three I examine Akutagawa Ryunosuke’s (1894-1927) parodic adaptation Momotarō (1925) and the essay behind it, Iwami Jutarō (1924), which explores narrative consumption and the ideological work of renarration. Chapter Four considers how Yanagita established minzokugaku by defining folktales theoretically in his 1933 work Momotarō no tanjō (The Birth of Momotarō) and practically in his 1936 guide Mukashibanashi saishū techō (1936, Folktale Fieldwork Guide). In Chapter Five, I look at how from 1930 onwards kyōdo kenkyū and kyōdo kyōiku were increasingly used to narrate local identities in ways that set these two discourses in opposition to Yanagita’s own nationwide, top-down folklore project. While Yanagita’s minzokugaku viewed Momotarō as a tale (mukashibanashi) that offered insights into the character of the Japanese people as a whole, the kyōdo kenkyū and kyōdo kyōiku movements explored Momotarō as a legend with relevance and ties to specific local areas. Chapter Six considers the tale’s use as nationalistic propaganda from the 1930s to 1945 which culminated in the production of Momotarō no umiwashi (1943, Momotarō’s Ocean Eagles) and Momotarō umi no shinpei (1945, Momotarō’s Divine Ocean Warriors).en_US
dc.format.extent2823976 bytes
dc.format.extent1373 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.subjectMomotaro Taleen_US
dc.subjectJapanese Literatureen_US
dc.subjectFolktalesen_US
dc.subjectMinzokugakuen_US
dc.subjectYanagita Kunioen_US
dc.subjectNational Allegoryen_US
dc.titleMomotaro, or the Peach Boy: Japan's Best-Loved Folktale as National Allegory.en_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.description.thesisdegreenamePhDen_US
dc.description.thesisdegreedisciplineAsian Languages & Culturesen_US
dc.description.thesisdegreegrantorUniversity of Michigan, Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studiesen_US
dc.contributor.committeememberIto, Ken K.en_US
dc.contributor.committeememberNornes, Mark H.en_US
dc.contributor.committeememberPincus, Leslie B.en_US
dc.contributor.committeememberRamirez-Christensen, E.en_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelEast Asian Languages and Culturesen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelGeneral and Comparative Literatureen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelHistory (General)en_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelHumanities (General)en_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHumanitiesen_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/63637/1/dahenry_1.pdf
dc.owningcollnameDissertations and Theses (Ph.D. and Master's)


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.