Article Analysis 3 - 0 views
-
historical reality, and yet fictionalized enough to give readers a taste of the spirit of the times.
-
Kyle Myers on 23 Jan 11Extremely similar to Musashi.
-
-
narrative is extremely engaging, with much attention paid to battles (not surprising for that day and age), but also to Hideyoshi's preference for diplomacy over war, and his grandiose plans to build a new nation.
-
one step ahead of his most cunning enemies, he is loyal to a fault, and able to generate faith and goodwill in himself
- ...6 more annotations...
-
Branislav L. Slantchev's purpose of discussing Eiji Yoshikawa's, Taiko, is to relate this work to Yoshikawa's more popular title, Musashi, and to also show the few faults Yoshikawa has made in his writing. Slantchev's opinion is that since so few people know of Yoshikawa, those who are familiar will become enthralled and find his work flawless. Slantchev is one of the few to finally go against the majority critical opinion and voice his personal issues with Yoshikawa. The article begins with a general summary of Taiko with an explanation of the tale as one that is about bringing "prosperity to the ravaged land is an inspiring, if bloody, tale of courage, imagination, and political intrigue." This statement already sets up the beginning with the multiple literary similarities between Taiko and Musashi. The article even discusses the "historical reality" still being "fictionalized." Nevertheless, Slantchev still continues to praise Yoshikawa when speaking of the engaging narrative and attention to battles until he reaches the character development. Slantchev argues, "Hideyoshi is so likable, he appears terribly one-dimensional." This statement is supported by the fact that even though the main character, Hideyoshi, has a "monkey face" he is still able to have success when it comes to the opposite sex. Slantchev recommends many other novels that would actually contain a more balanced point of view. Ultimately, Slantchev still ties his argument back to how Yoshikawa is still a stunning author that has the ability to write a complex mixture of "loyalty, honor, calculation, and greed that is bound to baffle the foreigner." There is a perfect consistency of admiration as well as points of dissatisfaction within the article. Thorough evidence is provided for all of the arguments made. Slantchev does appear to possess a slight bias in writing his article, as he occasionally slants his writing in comparing Taiko to Musashi almost too often. Al