26 pages • 52 minutes read
Jun’Ichirō Tanizaki, Transl. Thomas J. Harper, Transl. Edward G. SeidenstickerIn Praise of Shadows
Nonfiction | Essay / Speech | Adult | Published in 1933A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Literary Devices
Contrast
Contrast is the main rhetorical device employed throughout Tanizaki’s essay, as the significance of his argument hinges on the differences that he draws out between Japan and the West. There is no universal understanding of darkness and light, as they are employed differently across different cultural contexts and can produce vastly conflicting meanings. Indeed, Tanizaki continually marks contrasts between Japan and the West that show how the former built productive relationships with darkness and shadows, while the latter constantly worked to eradicate darkness and move toward increasing levels of light. This contrast is shown across multiple examples, such as the architecture of homes and the use of everyday objects. He also expands it to a series of other contrasts: grime versus cleanliness; loudness versus quietude; and an embrace versus a rejection of the past.
Imagery
This essay rests on a strong use of imagery that employs expressive and figurative language to connect the mundane to the spiritual. There is a highly subjective quality to many of Tanizaki’s arguments that relies on imagery to help the reader fully grasp the significance of shadows to Japanese culture. While one can clearly notice the basic aesthetic difference between shoji and Western glass windows, for instance, Tanizaki continually uses expressive language that elevates his subject matter to the spiritual or abstract plane. For example, he shows that the dispersion of light and the maintenance of shadows can connect one to a higher plane of peacefulness and suspension in time. These moments are repeated often throughout the essay to encourage readers to immerse themselves in these experiences and understand that they inform a way of seeing and feeling that extends to all aspects of life. For instance, Tanizaki describes “darkness seen by candlelight” as a “repletion, a pregnancy of tiny particles like fine ashes, each particle luminous as a rainbow” (34).
Rebuttal
Tanizaki is aware that some readers may find his arguments unconvincing. To confront this issue, he provides responses to possible counterarguments that he anticipates. One of his main rebuttals rejects the idea that if an object is hidden or obscured, this must mean that it is not truly beautiful enough to be put on display. For Tanizaki, this position fails to understand that Japanese aesthetics is based on the relationship of certain materials with the surrounding light and shadow, rather than on isolated objects in and of themselves. This rebuttal also serves as support for some of the essay’s main arguments, such as the ideas that beauty is not universal but culturally specific, and that Japanese culture is more connected to its surroundings than Western cultures are.
Point of View
Tanizaki makes it clear that he writes to convey his own point of view on Japanese aesthetics and the encroachment of Western ideas. Although he pulls on a wide variety of sources and a knowledge base that is rooted in different cultural forms, he does not attempt to hide the subjective nature of his arguments. This is clear in the beginning of the essay when he transitions into a story of building his own home; he includes his personal experiences at various sites, such as restaurants, temples, and remote villages. These personal reflections demonstrate how important this topic is to Tanizaki, as well as his penchant for finding profound moments of beauty among the mundane. Moreover, he often weaves his personal anecdotes with his larger arguments, such as when he comes across a newspaper article on elderly English women who feel that older times were better. Tanizaki uses this as a starting point to discuss the desire for the past as an ongoing issue across different cultures—not only in Japan; this provides nuance to his argument.
