When
thinking about how to break up the blogs for Shusaku Endo, we came up with the
following topics: life and biography, his relationship and experiences with
Catholicism, etc. Well, I am the “etc.” category. And how fitting! This blog
post will talk about the supplemental reading assigned for tomorrow – or as I
tend to write it in my planner, “Read Silence for tomorrow, etc.”
Before
delving into the supplemental reading piece, it seems like maybe we should no a
bit more about the author. The author happens to be Endo’s wife, Junko Endo.
Well, after a trusty Google search, here is what I came up with about the life
of Junko: she studied at Keio University, where she met Endo, they were married
in 1955, and together they had a son in 1956. And that’s about it.
Unfortunately, there is not too much information readily available about her
life and scholarship. Fortunately, we do know that she actively wrote about
Endo’s literature and defending his works after his death.
She authored the
supplemental reading in response to an article by Father Yoji Inoue. The original article was
published in an issue of Kaze (Wind), a Christian magazine, which meant that it likely reached a number of Christians that had
already read Silence and cherished it. Junko knew that she had to correct the
assumptions of Father Yoji Inoue and prevent his anecdotes from spreading like
wildfire in a community that respected the literary works of Endo. Though they
were the thoughts of an American priest, his bold statements and propagation of
the message surely would have caught the eyes of many.
Who would have
thought that one simple translation could make such an impact on how the story
was interpreted? When I read the passage myself, I was confused as to why the fumie
would be commanding Rodrigues to trample on him. I even entertained the
idea that Rodrigues was hearing demonic influences that were encouraging him to
apostatize. And that is not so uncommon in Catholic teaching – take Judas or
any of the Bibilcal characters that Jesus casts demons out of, for example.
However, after reading the article by Junko I now realize that when accounting
for this translational error, the message of the fumie takes on an even
more Catholic understanding. For if the original text in Japanese reads, “You
may step on me.” instead of “Trample! Trample!”, then the actions of Rodrigues
should be viewed in a different light. In that light, we see that the fumie
or the voice of Jesus is reaching out to Rodrigues in his suffering. In
response to the differences in translation and possible meanings, Junko writes:
“Some advise me to ask the English translator to revise the passage. Others maintain that the word "trample" more powerfully expresses the profound love of a mother who is ready to forgive even the harshest deed of her child. In the view of the latter, "Trample!" conveys the tension in that scene better than would weaker constructions such as "You may step on me." I have not formed a conclusion yet.”
"For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through him." – John 3:17
A Catholic understanding
holds that the Passion of Jesus was saving grace enough for our sins, and
Christ continually outdoes himself every time He offers himself for the sake of
our well-being. Rodrigues ironically experiences this through his own apostasy.
What do you think about
the different translations? Was Rodrigues just livin’ on a prayer (and hoping he was at least halfway there?) that he was
doing the right thing or did he know that God was reaching out to him to ease
his suffering through the fumie?
P.S. - I couldn't resist the Bon Jovi temptation. Apparently, it was the theme for the day. Enjoy!
----
Sources:
New American Bible: The
Catholic Youth Bible
This is a fantastic post! It's amazing how big an impact a single word can have on our understanding of the entire novel. There is certainly a big difference between the imperative and permissive forms of the verb "to trample." I agree that Christ saying "You may trample" better conveys a Catholic understanding of the ending than "Trample!" In the latter, the implication is that Christ is mandating the act of apostasy, whereas in the former Christ is merely permitting it. I think this parallels the classic Catholic response to the often-asked question "If God is all-good, then why is there evil?"--God does not cause evil, He permits it. Like you, I wonder if this isn't what Endo is getting at in Silence's otherwise quite depressing ending.
ReplyDeleteThat one word aside, though, I think the translator, William Johnston (who also wrote the book's preface), did a fantastic job. It's hard to imagine that the book was originally written in Japanese!
Great parallel there, Joe. I hadn't thought of it that way before. Is it possible that this is also the response to the tried and true question - "Why does God make people to suffer?" In short, one Catholic response is that God does not create suffering for us as if we were pawns in His game, but rather he allows suffering to happen in the world as an opportunity for His followers to show mercy. I went to a talk earlier this semester called Theology on Tap. There the young priest that was presenting said, "The best response the Catholic Church has for why there is suffering in the world and why God allows it to happen is no response at all. No words spoken. Rather, the best response the Church has is the compassion and actions of Her devout followers."
ReplyDeleteThis is a great discussion. Thanks for the great posts Elizabeth -- and for the excellent musical references. I would just like to take this moment to remind everyone that Bon Jovi got their start in... -- that's right, you guessed it. The 1980s.
ReplyDeleteLoved the Bon Jovi reference. Kudos. I also really like how you spend time talking about issues with translation. It reminds me of another English class I'm taking about the author Primo Levi. Levi is a Holocaust survivor and has written several memoirs about his experience and its aftermath. Two of his books that deal with his time at Auschwitz and his journey home to Italy were orginially written as "If this is a Man" and "The Truce." However, when translated for an American audience, the translator changed them to "Survival in Auschwitz" and "The Reawakening." Both sound MUCH more optimistic than the tone Levi wanted to convey. Apparently the publishers didn't think Americans would read Holocaust books unless they sounded "happy." A happy Holocaust book. That's just messed up if you ask me. It's an interesting point you brought up, Liz, because it goes to show you how big of an impact the translator can have on the tone and interpretation of a work.
ReplyDeleteLiz, I really enjoyed this post as it truly does conjure up thoughts in my head about the word trample and what it could possibly mean. The way you took the trample meaning, and your personal ideas about how it relates to Jesus giving himself for us, just as He said He would is spot-on.
ReplyDeleteI know this is a little late for me to chime in, but reading this reminds me of the imperative in the Gospel that we Oh so painfully shout every Palm Sunday "Crucify him, crucify him!" To this, the Gospel tells us, Christ continues to hold his silence. The permissive translation presented by Junko seems to strongly echo this Christ-like permissiveness. He is so willing to give of himself because "We know not what we do." Phenomenal insight in this post!
ReplyDelete-Patrick