Compared to other literature of the Heian period, the Torikaebaya Monogatari stands out as an unusual story. The reversal of gender roles that is central to the plot is a narrative device not found among other surviving monogatari from this era. Although seen as mere entertainment by many readers, Torikaebaya explores what it meant to be both a woman and a man in the Heian period. Another story that has a similar plot, although very far from Heian Japan, is the novel Orlando, written by Virginia Woolf. Orlando also uses gender reversal as a cornerstone of the narrative, and like Torikaebaya, this allows the characters to experience and contrast the reality of each gender. If you compare these two stories in terms of how genders are represented, some common themes emerge regarding literature written by women. However, to proceed from this perspective, the reader must make some assumptions regarding the Torikaebaya. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay The authorship of Torikaebaya Monogatari is uncertain and will most likely remain so. In the introduction to the English translation, Rosette Willig advances cases of both male and female authorship. She speculates that Meiji scholars concluded male authorship simply because "they found it inconceivable that a court lady could have concocted such an unsavory and degenerate plot." (Willig, 5) Despite this, there are some legitimate reasons to consider the question of female authorship. Willig states that the style of the Japanese original is "written in a typically feminine style" (Willig, 5), which, combined with the possibility of autobiographical elements, indicates that the story was written by someone who also experienced confusion of the characters. . I would like to add that the focus placed on the female character Chunagon in the first book and the preferred attention the character receives in the rest of the story demonstrate that the story was written from a female perspective. Therefore, even if authorship cannot be definitively established, the hypothesis of a female author is not without foundation, and this article will start from this premise. There is another question for the critical reader to consider before proceeding, and it is not unique to Torikaebaya. , but also in Orlando. This is the question of intentions, i.e. are these stories simply meant to entertain or do they contain implicit criticism embedded in the narrative? There is no doubt that both stories have much to recommend them in terms of enjoyable reading. The gender-reversal plot is quite intriguing, and both stories have survived to reach modern audiences (in the case of Torikaebaya much longer!), proof that there is something that lingers in the story. However, especially regarding Torikaebaya, modern audiences must be careful not to read into the narrative an intention that may not have been possible. That said, both stories have sections where criticism of imposed gender roles is explicit. By extension, these criticisms of gender roles are actually criticisms of the society that imposed them. So are these stories polemical, that is, attacking an established code or behavior? In Orlando's case, Virginia Woolf managed to record her intentions in her correspondence. I wasn't sure how far the mix of serious and silly succeeded - I mean, I partly meant it to be serious. (Langham, 236) If fantasy was the vehicle used by Woolf to express criticism of the patriarchal society in which she lived, perhaps it is valid to assume that the author ofTorikaebaya also used a fantastic narrative device to communicate dissatisfaction with the role. of women in society. Modern readers are unable to know the author's intentions with certainty, but only indirect criticism would be available to women writers of Heian Japan. I believe that the similar representation of gender roles in Torikaebaya and Orlando, as well as the plot device common to both stories, supports reading both stories as subtle criticisms. The way gender roles are portrayed in Orlando and Torikaebaya are quite similar. For example, when the female Chunagon is described as having the qualities of the male gender...the daughter was already quite mischievous at this point and was constantly out playing kickball and shooting arrows...she readily joined the rest of the men and joke with them as she pleased. (Willig, 15) When Orlando is described as having the male sex, he is described similarly. Once again they noticed that she hated housework, got up at dawn and went out into the fields before the sun rose. He could drink with the best and most welcome games of chance. (Woolf, 109) Both stories identify the male gender with rugged pursuits and a love of being outdoors. These qualities contrast with the way the female gender is presented to the reader. The male Naishi no Kami presents himself in this way when exhibiting the qualities of the female gender. Eventually his father put him to the study of literature and taught him appropriate subjects, but the boy, in his embarrassment, could not fix his attention on any of them. ... His father, amazed by such inclinations, constantly criticized him, until the unfortunate and intimidated boy was reduced to tears. (Willig, 14 years old) This is similar to the description of Orlando as a woman. He would burst into tears at the slightest provocation. She was no expert in geography, found mathematics intolerable, and harbored some tantrums more common among women than among men, such as that traveling south meant traveling downhill. (Woolf, 110) Here women are described as emotionally unstable and intellectually weak. Compared to descriptions of the qualities that characterize the male gender, the traits of the female gender are treated as less desirable and inferior. This inferiority is amplified when each character "changes" and takes on the female gender in the society where they were previously accepted as male. They no longer have the power and prestige that was given to them by virtue of exhibiting accepted male gender traits. In the case of the Chunagon woman, she is denied freedom of movement and participation in society as an individual; he now had to be a dependent. Chunagon had once sat beside the men in his father's house, and now he remembered what had been said and done then. Saisho, however, amiably interrupted these memories: "Do you like these things?" The embarrassed Chunagon didn't like hearing those words, but managed to feign indifference. (Willig, 122) Orlando faces a similar situation when society imposes an identity on her that matches her gender. The main charges against her were that she was dead and therefore could not hold any property whatsoever; that she was a woman, which amounted to the same thing... All her property was placed in Chancery and her securities held in abeyance while the cases were in litigation. She was therefore in a highly ambiguous condition, uncertain whether she was alive or dead, man or woman... (Woolf, 98) Like Chunagon, Orlando loses her wealth and with it her freedom. This is the implicit criticism contained in the representation of gender roles, according to which female identity is equivalent to a denial of the freedom she enjoys.