How Does Mishima Create A Loss Of Identity

This particular passage was chosen because it details the climactic moment within Mishima’s novella where Noboru and his friends, acting on their sense of betrayal by Ryuji, lure him to an abandoned military based on the pretext of hearing him recount stories of his life at sea, and end by poisoning him. This extract encapsulates a great deal of the thematic concerns and literary motifs which are present in the main body of the narrative, and brings the entire work to an abstract, almost mystical, resolution. I will attempt to demonstrate how certain aspects of this work may pertain to certain events in the author’s life, and how the spectre of the authors own meticulously planned suicide a few years later resides in the highly ritualised death

Here it is possible that Mishima is using the imagery of Fusako’s tears as a counterpoint to the notion of the Grand Cause, something that would lead him to a ‘life bereft of motion’. However, this in itself is not certain. The ‘gallant women’s tears’ may in fact refer to an abstract concept of The Sea, as a woman whose ‘sweet heavy power’ propels him towards the ‘pinnacle of manliness’. The notion of manliness is something which features heavily throughout the novel- it is the reason why the Noboru and his friends at first admire Ryuji, yet conversely, after learning that he is in fact a romantic, it is also the reason why they murder him. Manliness is something that was incredibly important for Mishima, who spent his entire life concealing his latent, closeted homosexuality through practising masculine and manly pursuits such as martial arts and militarism. Yet Ryuji’s masculine desire, his ‘dark longing’, for what we can only presume is a heroic death at sea is made impossible by his decision to marry. It is difficult to ascertain where the author’s allegiance lies. A few years later, after attempting a fascistic coup d’état, Yukio Mishima committed Seppuka (ritual suicide) after his own deranged, sentimental, archaic notions on the progression of Japanese society were rejected. With the benefit of hindsight, this fact of his biography may suggest that the author’s own end was a realisation of his character’s

Initially, it serves the purpose of reminding the reader of the youth, and perhaps naivety, of the group of young boys- that their perverted sense of justice and their ideal of ‘objectivity’ is merely a product of their childishness. Yet, conversely, when we examine the Leader’s question in more detail- the meaning is changed entirely. Three words, no added pleasantries, or unnecessary language- only what is required to trick the victim into drinking the poison which will kill him. It is the essence of objectivity. The leader does not say something unless it is necessary to their cause and this suggests that these boys- dismissed, as simple children by all of the adults around them, possess more cunning and intelligence than the rest of the