Talk:The Tale of the Bamboo Cutter

note from User:Chinasaur

Article based entirely on ISBN 4770023294 (The Tale of the Bamboo Cutter, Donald Keene (translator))

References in popular culture

There are quite a few references on this page to media that just happens to contain a character by the name of Kaguya. Shouldn't references be related to The Tale of the Bamboo Cutter as opposed to those that just coincidently contain a character of the same name? —Preceding unsigned comment added by NapalmRenn (talk • contribs) 18:36, 6 December 2007 (UTC) There also appears to be a reference in Mystery Dungeon Shiren the Wanderer 3 DS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:647:4100:10E2:8807:F53B:E2F0:99CC (talk) 18:01, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Mount Fuji

Mt. Fuji contains this:

Perhaps the most popular folk etymology about the name of Fuji-san is the one that claims that the mountain's name means "Mountain Abounding with Warriors," according to which the name is written with the Chinese characters 富士山 ("abundant, ample; rich, wealthy" + "scholar, gentleman; soldier" + "mountain"). This is the standard way of transcribing the name of Fuji-san in Modern Japanese. The folk etymology of "Mountain Abounding with Warriors" has often been associated with a story that appears in the ancient and eternally popular Taketori Monogatari (竹取物語, Legend of the Bamboo Harvester), which is also known as "Kaguya-hime-no Monogatari" (かぐや姫の物語, Legend of Princess Kaguya). The main characters in this legend are Taketori-no Okina (竹取翁, the Old Man who Harvests Bamboo), Kaguya-hime (かぐや姫, Princess Kaguya) - a mysterious girl, discovered inside the stalk of a great bamboo plant by Taketori-no Okina when she was a tiny babe, who is said to be from Tsuki-no Miyako (月都, semantically "The Capital of the Moon," or phonetically "The Capital of Tuki") and who has unusual hair that "shines like gold"), and the reigning Tennō （天皇, Heaven Emperor, i.e. the Emperor of Japan). To make a long story short, the Tennō falls in love with the strangely beautiful Kaguya-hime and asks her to marry him, but Kaguya-hime does not accept the Tennō's request; her behavior becomes increasingly more erratic until an embassy of "Heavenly Beings" arrives at the door of the Bamboo Harvester's house, where Kaguya-hime has resided ever since she was found in her infancy by the Bamboo Harvester. The heavenly entourage takes Kaguya-hime back to Tsuki-no Miyako against her will, and the forlorn Tennō dispatches an army of soldiers to the tallest mountain in Japan, the great mountain of Suruga (Suruga is the ancient name of a region that is now part of Shizuoka Prefecture; it is the region where Mt. Fuji is located). The mission provided by the Tennō to the army is to climb to the summit of the great mountain and to burn a letter from the Tennō to Kaguya-hime there, with the hope that his message would reach the now distant "princess." The image of the innumerable soldiers of the Tennō's army ascending the slopes of Mt. Fuji is said to have been immortalized by naming the great mountain "Fuji-san" (富士山, "Mountain Abounding with Warriors"). The Legend of the Bamboo Harvester is nearly identical in form to a Tibetan tale of a similar name, and some researchers believe that the Japanese legend may have been drawn from the Tibetan one, perhaps through ancient contacts with China. Of course, the part of the legend that relates to the name of Mt. Fuji is unique to the Japanese version.

This needs to be merged in. --Carl 10:39, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

authorship?

who wrote the original Japanese version? this is critical —The preceding unsigned comment was added by NickDupree (talk • contribs) 08:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

not known. --LittleTree 02:32, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

The one that is commonly known as "original" was written down back in early Heian period by some noble person but we don't really know who he is. There is some guess we can make on who he is (some characters are named with nicknames of contemporary nobles so he at least knew them) but it's not, and never will be, conclusive. Many early books were usually written down by a group of people as the scarcity of paper made the making of a book into something like a state-sanctioned project. Making the matter worse, on the Man'yōshū, there is a poet by a bamboo cutter who sung about a heavenly maiden meaning that it's quite likely the proto-story already existed back then. --Revth 08:59, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Meaning of "Kaguya"

What is the meaning of the word "Kaguya"? --User:Angie Y.

“Radiant night” or perhaps in a more romantic sense “Shining brightly in the night.” This seems to be a reference to her golden hair or IMO her fair skin seems radiant in the night as is the full moon. Also note: it is not uncommon to name a girl after the first beautiful thing the parent sees after her birth, such as Akane for a beautiful sunset; or in the case of Kaguya-hime, the radiance of the full moon.70.32.125.72 08:37, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Why "night"? As far as I know, "ya" of "Kaguya" does not mean night. In a text, Kaguya was written as 赫映 [1], therefore, just "radiant" or "shining" would be fine. Or, "shining glow" if you would like. --LittleTree 02:03, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I've mainly seen it written as 輝 myself, which is a more modern character also with the essential meaning of "radiant" . The game Imperishable Night does have it as 輝夜, but that's probably just creative license. -Seventh Holy Scripture 04:58, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

The Kaguyahime manga has it as 輝夜 as well...it might be coincidental, but... _dk 07:35, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I have seen only かぐや in modern texts. I am interested in seeing 輝. Could you give a reference? If you see 輝夜 in modern creations, it must be just an ateji, I would say. --LittleTree 00:29, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

The verb “kagayaku” [輝く / かがやく] means “to shine, glitter, sparkle” or perhaps “to scatter light.” Her full name is “Nayotake no Kaguya-hime” [弱竹のかぐや姫], which can approximately be translated as “The Light-Scattering Supple Bamboo Princess” or “The Princess of the Scattering of Light by Supple Bamboo.” I think it’s noteworthy that “kagu-” is the Japanese-style reading of 輝, while “ya” is the Chinese-style reading of 夜. As LittleTree wrote above, the addition of 夜 in some retellings is indeed likely to be an ateji (kanji used for phonetic value, irrespective of its underlying meaning).

Metonyme (talk) 23:30, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Variants or details?

I have yet to find the entire story in its original form translated into English. (And I am not paying $50.00 for the reference book.) I have seen shorter versions of the tale told with a few different or new details. E.g. Kaguya-hime grew from a thumb sized infant into full grown womanhood in only three months time; or, it was the emperor’s son and not the emperor himself who tried to court her. It is difficult for me to tell if they are from the original tale or if they are of more modern origin. Any juicy details that can be added to this article would be much appreciated.70.32.125.72 08:37, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

According to this Japanese text [2], the bamboo cutter found a three-inch person. She grew up into adolescence in three months. Two of the five suitors were prince, that is, emperor's son. Then, after she managed to reject the five, the emperor heard about that and became interested in her. He tried to bring her to the court but she refused. Thus, what 70.32.125.72 wrote seem to be details rather than variants, but note that there is no known original book, that is, even the known oldest story might be an integration of older variants. --LittleTree 02:28, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

There are many variants of this legend, some having different details. But this is true with most folk stories. There are two separate shorter versions alone in Royal Tyler's Japanese Tales. 4.84.14.205 06:40, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Chang'e

Connections

It's original research at this point, so I can't mention it in the article, but did anyone find this myth bears similarities to the tales in Chang'e (mythology)? -Seventh Holy Scripture 04:58, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

That's what I thought at first too. In fact, I first thought this myth is a corruption of Chang'e...guess not. _dk 07:33, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, some people have pointed it out, but I have no reference here. --LittleTree 00:45, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

"Main telling"

The Chinese legend of Chang'e can be traced to the second century BCE.

Even assuming this dating were accurate (spoiler: it isn't), it would be worth mentioning that the vast majority of pre-Qin Chinese literature was lost during Qin Shihuang's purges and then the burning of Xianyang and/or Epang Palace. Being first attested to the 2nd century BC wouldn't mean that's the earliest it could be traced (and, again, it already can).

According to the main telling of the legend, a xian named Chang'e came to Earth, thereby losing her immortality. To get it back, she stole the elixir of immortality from the Queen Mother of the West, then fled to the Moon.

Absolutely none of this is involved in the main telling of the legend, historically or presently. It's unclear if the offline Japanese source is just incredibly low quality or (more likely) being misrepresented here, but the Chinese story is abundantly sourced on its own, has its own fairly thorough article, and the present account here is simply wrong in nearly every particular. — LlywelynII 12:28, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Inter racial migrations

this is the story of a bamboo cutter who had a caucasion mistress, and bore an baby with blonde hair. this was so rare at the time that a legend was made of it. he couldn't tell the truth because he was married. the mother supported the baby with gold, and gave the bamboo cutter gold. She was probrably a visiting royal or explorer. the baby couldn't stay and be a princess in japan because she wasn't of those people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eequalsemceesquared (talk • contribs) 20:04, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Evidence?Andycjp (talk) 10:00, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I see no evidence at all that this is the case. Certainly there is no historical evidence to my knowledge of visiting caucasian dignitaries during this era. NapalmRenn

The conceited interpretation of the Westerner. A classic book does not have information to be blond.60.40.12.137 (talk) 14:09, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Proto-science fiction?

Seriously? That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. The Kaguya tale is many things, but it is not science fiction of any sort. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.54.18.150 (talk) 04:27, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Soooo....people living on the moon and travelling back and forth to Earth doesn't ring any kind of science fiction bell for you? Okayyyy... 118.92.221.7 (talk) 07:05, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

About the last quest of Kaguya for the marriage

Hello. I found a bad transration. That is the seashell treasure of the swallows (It's original word is ja:燕の産んだ子安貝 in Japan). The 子安貝 is Takaragai (ja:宝貝, "the treasure and seashell") in Japan. The ja:宝貝 is the Cowry in English. And Kaguya said Give me the cowry type of the egg of swallows !!. Nobody can understand it and she escaped to marry. --58.85.19.159 (talk) 14:42, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Small quibble

I love this story. It says here that "In some versions of this tale, it is said that she was sent to the Earth as a temporary punishment for some crime..." Since she was only a tiny baby when she arrived on Earth, I don't really see how she could have previously committed any sort of crime... 86.160.211.153 (talk) 02:56, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

In some versions of this tale, it is said that she was sent to the Earth as a temporary punishment for some crime, while others say it was for safety during a celestial war.

Where are these sources of information? It is not described in "Man'yōshū (c. 759; poem# 3791)" and "Konjaku Monogatarishū (volume 31, chapter 33)". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.39.42.118 (talk) 02:00, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

First Text to Describe Travel to the Moon

I removed this sentence:

Specifically, it is among the first texts of any culture to imagine that the Moon is an inhabited world and describe travel between it and the Earth.

It's utter hooey. The Syrian Greek author Lucian of Samosata described travel from earth to the moon in his novella "True History" in the second century AD. 214.3.138.234 (talk) 17:04, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

The blond hair is false information.

The beautiful black hair shined like a moon.60.40.12.137 (talk) 13:51, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Not a folktale

This article is, quite frankly, garbage. The work is a piece of courtly fiction, written by and for members of the 9th or 10th century aristocracy; this is not the same thing as a folk tale. Any article that begins with an error like that has an uphill battle from there, but we find it moves even further downhill, with an overly-long and childish "fairy tale"-type recounting of the narrative (which I haven't analyzed in detail but I'm sure includes elements borrowed from popular children's books not found in surviving texts of the work or scholarly publications), a dubious claim that "Taketori no Okina" is a traditional folk hero mentioned in previous works (the source is in Japanese, but the Wikipedia editor who wrote this seems unaware that "Taketori no Okina" -- literally, "an old bamboo-cutter" -- isn't some guy's name, so I have no idea how this made its way into the article), and then an utterly massive section titled "adaptations", but most of them being more like the infamous "in pop culture" trivia lists that Wikipedia was famous for back in the day. These pop culture references are mostly not to the original tale (much less are they "adaptations" of it) -- they are to the Japanese popular culture concept of "Kaguya-hime", which developed over centuries and has a mysterious history that might be linked to the "original" text of the novel, or might have more in common with the version appearing in the Konjaku Monogatari (which was translated in full by Royall Tyler, more recently than most translations of the Taketori Monogatari I might add).

I say this because this article has serious issues that need resolution. Normally I would do it myself, but I have neither the energy nor the time at the moment, and it seems that soon I will no longer be even allowed. But while these issues have been with the article for years, it would seem, one user who has edited it over thirty times in those years and has never attempted to address them, has been edit-warring with me over whether "notes" are the same as "references" and "references" are the same as a "bibliography", giving me links to Wikipedia guidelines that have nothing to do with what he/she apparently think they say, forcing me to waste more time reading these guidelines (most of which have no broad acceptance within the community of editors who write our articles, it would seem) and trying to figure out what exactly the user meant by linking me to them. Please focus on the article content rather than on petty disputes like this: if you have the inclination to fix the article's many issues, do so; if you don't, then please stay out of the way of those who are trying.

Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 18:17, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @User:Fukumoto: Again, neither CITESHORT nor FNNR say anything that support your recent edits; I could revert you a third time and stay within 3RR, forcing my version on the article for the next 24 hours (you have already reached three reverts), but that would be gaming the system. I will instead engage you in dialogue. Please explain to me why you think the reference list should be labeled "Notes" and the list of books cited in said references list should be labeled "References". You previously cited WP:FNNR in your edit summary: this didn't make any sense, as the only thing FNNR has to say on the subject is that in articles that are biographies of authors the term "bibliography" can be ambiguous (this clearly isn't the case here). You then changed your mind and started citing WP:CITESHORT; this completely baffles me, as this is a guideline on how to format citations, and briefly mentions (but does not prescribe) one citation style in which your preferred wording is used. However, as I already demonstrated, this wording is not optimal for this article, as there is a lot of material (the name of the 1592 manuscript I referred to, for instance) that should be dealt with in footnotes, which would ideally be kept separate from the reference list. Scholarly journal articles don't generally make this distinction, but that's because scholarly journal articles aren't expect to cite sources for every single factoid they discuss -- scholars have more credibility granted them than Wikipedia editors.

So ... yeah. Your way doesn't make sense, and the guidelines you are citing (which, again, were written by a small cadre of Wikipedians, probably none of whom have ever written or even read a Wikipedia article on classical literature, in a failed attempt to be descriptive of the common practice among article editors) have nothing to do with the points you are making.

Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 19:02, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Well, I thought it is you who is insisiting to the specific format that "Bibliography" instead of "References". I don't mind if you are to improve the article content, instead of format. --Fukumoto (talk) 18:48, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

No, you reverted my attempts to improve the format (again, separate sections for "references", "notes" and "bibliography", and possibly "further reading" is the optimal format for this type of article), and your rationale made no sense. And the above comment doesn't even make sense -- are you saying you will revert me again if I attempt to improve the article format? or are you saying that improving the article content is a prerequisite to be allowed improve the format? I have already met that requirement -- I fixed a disastrous factual error in the opening paragraph. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 19:02, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Okay. I will not revert anymore. --Fukumoto (talk) 19:34, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Just a note that very little of this has been cleaned up and, on its face, much of it still should be. The section on Chang'e is certainly almost entirely mistaken (see above). — LlywelynII 12:30, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Adaptations

The manga and anime reference to the story are longer than the article itself. This section needs to be severely cleaned up. -Xcuref1endx (talk) 02:44, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

The claim that "Kaguya-sama: Love is War" is an adaptation of the bamboo cutter tale is without citation and might be perceived as a contentious by some, specially if unsupported. Vanovino (talk) 22:56, 19 August 2021 (UTC) User Vanovino, 5:57, 19th august 2021

Perhaps the Touhou mention in Adaptations should shortened and/or moved

The section about the Touhou character seems a bit long for an adaptation. I'd expect such detail on the page for the character (which exists, as part of a list). In fact, this explanation is larger than the blurb of that page!

I think this should be radically shortened (also link to the character page, not merely the Touhou page) and the contents merged into the character page. I mean, this is a nice blurb with useful links, but at IMO the wrong page!

However, as I'm a new user and this isn't my expertise, I'd prefer having explicit go-ahead before I actually do this. (also, 'moving' stuff cross-pages seems like a non-trivial edit) (This is more for me to learn what's appropriate, less for 'damaging' the article, I'm aware of reverts. This is an opportunity for more experienced users to quickly comment if this is ok or not (with more explanation than reverting))

Thanks.ShearedLizard (talk) 11:25, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

what this girl looks like is there photo?

want to see the girl in photo Siuk yuredn (talk) 01:37, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

What constitute 'Modern updates and reworkings of the original story'

There is someone who removed Kaguya-sama: Love Is War as one of the modern updates and reworkings of the original story. I am not sure how different it is from many other series on the list but there is definitely some elements of the original story in Kaguya-sama: Love Is War beyond just names of characters. Kaguya-sama: Love Is War is also ongoing so it might get more from the original story as the story progress or go further away from it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HHHIsMyHomeBoy (talk • contribs) 23:16, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

As with other entries in the list, a reliable source is needed to make that claim. — Goszei (talk) 04:18, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Blonde/pale hair?

Was she actually blonde in any of the original story variants? It often crops up in media, but it could just related to her lunar theme.

Her historical basis was from a noble family and married to Emperor Suinin.

Emperor Seinei was albino so at least some Japanese nobles had a gene for it.

Maybe that's too tinfoil hat. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tabbycatlove (talk • contribs) 14:39, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

This is how the old Japanese illustration of Taketori Monogatari looks like. They all have black hair.

http://library.rikkyo.ac.jp/digitallibrary/taketori/contents/emaki_01.html 2400:4150:8542:4500:D020:CB2B:6568:C38A (talk) 23:48, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

This article buzzed on Japanese Twitter as a puzzling article

https://twitter.com/anna___mann/status/1579414535072423936

This article has been buzzing on Japanese Twitter as a strange and puzzling article. See Twitter above.

The article gives a strange impression in several respects, and one of the reasons may be that it refers to the introduction of a movie based on Taketori Monogatari as its source.

"The Tale of the Princess Kaguya". The Source Weekly. Bend, Oregon. 2014. Retrieved 11 May 2020.

→It's like the tale of Superman except way more Japanese and melancholy.

It is nice to associate the tragedy of Superman with Studio Ghibli's Kaguyahime movie. But this description differs from the general impression the Japanese have of the original Taketori Monogatari.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tale_of_the_Bamboo_Cutter#Background

→Kaguya's story also has similarities to a modern superhero origin story, especially that of Superman.

It is an interesting description, but it seems inappropriate as information to be written in the "background" section. Even if you write it in other section, it would be nice to have better references.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tale_of_the_Bamboo_Cutter#Background

→A manuscript illustration also depicts a round flying machine that resembles a flying saucer.[4]

https://twitter.com/maho01264512/status/1254246678560821249

The last scene of Taketori Monogatari as the general Japanese imagine it is like the above. It is not a flying saucer. (Even if there were such an illustration, it would not be a common image.)

^ Richardson, Matthew (2001). The Halstead Treasury of Ancient Science Fiction. Rushcutters Bay, New South Wales: Halstead Press. isbn 978-1-875684-64-9. (cf. "Once Upon a Time". Emerald City (85). Retrieved 2008-09-17.)

→Here too is an ancient Japanese folk tale that tells how a princess of the moon people is adopted by a humble bamboo cutter. That even comes with an illustration: as Richardson says, flying saucers have developed quite a bit since the 10th Century, And of course there is The Ebony Horse, Scheherazade's enchanting story of a robot mount.

It may be possible to relate Taketori Monogatari to the history of science fiction. But the article's description of the flying saucer is puzzling.

I used machine translation. I hope this text helps people editing this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2400:4150:8542:4500:D020:CB2B:6568:C38A (talk) 23:29, 10 October 2022 (UTC)