This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poetry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of poetry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoetryWikipedia:WikiProject PoetryTemplate:WikiProject PoetryPoetry articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project, participate in relevant discussions, and see lists of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 01:06, May 17, 2024 (JST, Reiwa 6) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LiteratureWikipedia:WikiProject LiteratureTemplate:WikiProject LiteratureLiterature articles
Does the Keene source really claim Tosa Nikki was written anonymously?edit
Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
I highly doubt this. In the book, the narrator does claim to be a woman, even though Tsurayuki was male, but Tsurayuki published the book signed and written in his own handwriting. We know this because Tsurayuki's original apparently survived up to the 15th century, being transcribed by other poets and being presented to powers-that-be along the line. In any case, the book was so obviously modeled after Tsurayuki's tenure as the governor of Tosa that he could not possibly have expected to retain anonymity even if he had wanted to. 125.206.34.203 (talk) 01:28, 7 September 2013 (UTC)Reply
It doesn't matter. If the text was written anonymously (and it was -- the first sentence claims to be written by a woman, but that's about it) and we have reliable secondary sources that say this, then we should still include it. Making readers think that Ki no Tsurayuki wrote it as Ki no Tsurayuki isn't going to do us any good.
As an aside, you are the same person who made the other edits attributed to your IP like [1], [2], [3], [4] and [5], right? If so, you seem like a good-faith editor, but I'd recommend you register a username. Another user in the same IP range has a history of going around finding little things in my edits to criticize, or otherwise undoing said edits. He is ... not very popular around here, to say the least, and I'll admit when I first saw the above post I was a little suspicious.
Only just come to the talk page after a few additions, so surprised to see discussion from yesterday. Regarding "he could not possibly have expected to retain anonymity", Tsurayuki had a big entourage with him when returning and he was pretending that the writer of the diary was a part of that entourage. Regarding other factors, he might not have expected to retain anonymity, but it was certainly written as anonymous.--Rsm77 (talk) 12:25, 8 September 2013 (UTC) I've never heard that it was actually signed by Tsurayuki. --Rsm77 (talk) 12:28, 8 September 2013 (UTC)Reply
