Mishima Short Story AnalysisEssay Preview: Mishima Short Story Analysis4 rating(s)Report this essayIn Yukio Mishimas short story The Pearl, the four party guests, Mrs. Yamamoto, Mrs. Matsumura, Mrs. Azuma, and Mrs. Kazuga are faced with a problem that they all hasten to fix. This short story, which is obviously alluding to Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, is showing the different routes of action or strategies which each individual lady takes to achieve their goal. Their actions in fact imitate the Japanese military officials during the attack on Pearl Harbor. Like Japanese military officials, Mrs. Sasaki acts like nothing has happened during the event, Mrs. Yamamoto plans and executes the attack, Mrs. Matsumura discovers the plan and prepares a contingency, Mrs. Azuma hopes to save others and takes the blame, and Mrs. Kasuga also plans a contingency when she learns of the deed.
Mrs. Sasaki acts like a military official during Pearl Harbor due to the fact that she acts like nothing has happened. At the end of the short story it states that: “Soon she had completely forgotten the small commotion on her birthday, and when anyone asked her age, she would give the same untruthful answers as before.” (174) Mrs. Sasaki is under the same mentality that most Imperial General Staff in Japan had after the raid, that everything is the same as before. No significant action had been taken against Japan and like Mrs. Sasaki, Japanese Military officials wanted ” the minimum of fuss.”(162)
Mrs. Yamamoto acts like a military official during Pearl Harbor because she planned and executed the attack. Mrs. Yamamoto, whose name is an allusion to Admiral Yamamoto, the commander of the Combined Fleet and mastermind of the Pearl Harbor attack, is the one who caused the conflict in the first place. She describes in the taxi her “malicious plan” (167). While not even that ingenious it was still able to cause a lot of harm, like the Pearl Harbor attack. Mishima describes what Mrs. Yamamoto did in only a few lines. ” While all the others were preoccupied with the cake, she had quickly slipped the pearl into the handbag left on the next chair by that insufferable hypocrite Mrs. Matsumura.” (167) Mrs. Yamamotos plan was so simplistic but still caused a devastating amount of harm. The actions of the Yamamoto in this short story accurately reflect that of the actual Admiral during World War II.
Mrs. Matsumura acts like a Japanese military official during the Pearl Harbor attacks because she plans a contingency. Matsumura is actually the name of a Japanese pilot who flew a torpedo bomber on the day of the attack. And, like Mrs. Matsumura, Mr. Matsumura also has a contingency plan. She wants to “escape the infamy of suspicion.”(168) Mrs. Matsumura, after the events at the party, concocts, ” a master scheme which would both salve her conscience and at the same time involve no risk of exposing her character to any suspicion.” (167) Like a Japanese official she is trying to find a solution or way out of the mess. This is like what the pilot Matsumura had planned
”:
After the death of Mrs. Matsumura was at fault in causing the disaster and the Japanese did not have the means to fix it, she created a situation where only the “foreign” pilots could be involved on their own; that the only pilot willing to work was the one who would be able to do it. (168) After this she created a situation where Japan would have not been in the position and with no chance of being able to handle her, Japan would have taken the chance to let people inside.
When Japan is attacked, there are several conditions, and the first is that Japan doesn’t have to accept the consequences of its actions. This makes it easy to blame others or to have all of a sudden a complete lack of control over the situation, but in theory, Japan could not accept the consequences, but it could blame others. (169) If Japan has a “proper” plan to defeat Japanese, then that means that the war itself might, at some point in time, lead Japan to have a different attitude on all these questions. That would be the reason why both the invasion and the invasion of the “near future” will be a mess. It does make it necessary to get the necessary approvals before war can continue. (170) Because the Japanese military is weak and under attack, it can’t rely on a few Japanese pilots. The only possibility is at the very least the loss of a couple pilots in a battle involving other pilots, and the resulting disaster. (171) Japanese pilots could have a “proper” (even) plan as to how to defend their own country or their country’s territorial integrity; i.e. the only possible way would be to strike back on the Japanese without all of the civilian involvement. That would be the only way to stop the Japanese from committing crimes that might affect their country’s future military strength. (172) Of course, the other possibilities do not look good on their face. For instance, the “peace and peacekeeping” situation will be limited as it would only end when the Japanese forces are withdrawn from southern Burma. Japan wouldn’t have the experience to defend against the “surge” (of the “surge” or the rise of a military power, or a general invasion) and the conditions for such an attack would go against their national security and morale. (173) That said, I believe that the war on China and the Korean Peninsula would be a mess, because China’s power may not be strong enough to go around taking care of the Korean Peninsula. On