It is difficultperhaps impossiblefor a writer to say anything about his own work. All he has to say has been said as fully and as well as he can in the body of the book itself. If he has failed to make his meaning clear there it is scarcely likely that he will succeed in some pages of preface or postscript. And the author's mind has another peculiarity which is also hostile to introductions. It is as inhospitable to its offspring as the hen sparrow is to hers. Once the young birds can fly, fly they must; and by the time they have fluttered out of the nest the mother bird has begun to think perhaps of another brood. In the same way once a book is printed and published it ceases to be the property of the author; he commits it to the care of other people; all his attention is claimed by some new book which not only thrusts its predecessor from the next but has a way of subtly blackening its character in comparison with its own.

作家が自分の作品について何かを言うのは難しいたぶん不可能だ作家は言うべきことはすべて、作品の中でしっかり述べている。もし作家が作品の中で自分が言いたいことを明確に出来なかった場合、序文や追記で何ページ使おうが上手く説明することはできない。そして著者の心には、序文とは相反する、もう一つの風変わりな性癖がある。それは、親スズメが子スズメに辛くあたるように、自分の作品にも辛くあたる。ひとたび若鳥が飛べるようになると、 雛たちは飛ばなくてはならないのだが、巣から飛び立つ頃には、母鳥はおそらく次の雛のことを考え始めている。同じように、ひとたび本が印刷され出版されると、本は著者の所有物という性質を失う。著者は自分の著書を他人の手に委ねてしまう。彼のすべての注意は新しい作品に向けられる。新しい作品は次の作品から前作品を追い出すだけでなく、新しい作品を通して前作品と比較してそれとなく悪く言うのが普通である。 

It is true that the author can if he wishes tell us something about himself and his life which is not in the novel; and to this effort we should do all that we can to encourage him. For nothing is more fascinating than to be shown the truth which lies behind those immense façades of fictionif life is indeed true, and if fiction is indeed fictitious. And probably the connection between the two is highly complicated. Books are the flowers or fruit stuck here and there on a tree which has its roots deep down in the earth of our earliest life, of our first experiences. But here again to tell the reader anything that his own imagination and insight have not already discovered would need not a page or two of preface but a volume or two of autobiography. Slowly and cautiously one would have to go to work, uncovering, laying bare, and even so when everything had been brought to the surface, it would still be for the reader to decide what was relevant and what not. Of Mrs. Dalloway then one can only bring to light at the moment a few scraps, of little importance or none perhaps; as that in the first version Septimus, who later is intended to be her double, had no existence; and that Mrs. Dalloway was originally to kill herself, or perhaps merely to die at the end of the party. Such scraps are offered humbly to the reader in the hope that like other odds and ends they may come in useful.


But if one has too much respect for the reader pure and simple to point out to him what he has missed, or to suggest to him what he should seek, one may speak more explicitly to the reader who has put off his innocence and become a critic. For though criticism, whether praise or blame, should be accepted in silence as the legitimate comment which the act of publication invites, now and again a statement is made without bearing on the book's merits or demerits which the writer happens to know to be mistaken.One such statement has been made sufficiently often about Mrs. Dalloway to be worth perhaps a word of contradiction.The book, it was said, was the deliberate offspring of a method. The author, it was said, dissatisfied with the form of fiction then in vogue, was determined to beg, borrow, steal or even create another of her own. But, as far as it is possible to be honest about the mysterious process of the mind, the facts are otherwise. Dissatisfied the writer may have been; but her dissatisfaction was primarily with nature for giving an idea, without providing a house for it to live in. The novelists of preceding generation had done little―after all why should they?―to help. The novel was the obvious lodging, but the novel it seemed was built on the wrong plan.Thus rebuked the idea started as the oyster starts or the snail to secrete a house for itself. The little note-book in which an attempt was made to forecast a plan was soon abandoned, and the book grew day by day, week by week, without any plan at all, except that which was dictated each morning in the act of writing.The other way, to make a house and then inhabit it, to develop a theory and then apply it, as Wordsworth did and Coleridge, is, it need not be said, equally good and much more philosophic. But in the present case it was necessary to write the book first and to invent a theory afterwards.

しかし、もしダロウェイ夫人という)作品が純粋にかつ単純に読者に敬意を払うあまり、読者が見逃したものを読者に指摘する事ができなかったり、または読者が求めるべきものを読者に提案することができないならば、作品は無罪を先送りにしたり批判家になっている読者にたいしてはより分かりやすく話してもよいとは言うものの批評は、賞賛であれ非難であれ、出版行為が招く合法的な意見として黙って受け入れられるべきであるが、時折本の長所や短所に関係なく、作家が(その意見は)間違っていると偶然知ってしまうような意見が述べられたりする。ダロウェイ夫人については、そのような発言が おそらく反論としての価値があるほど何度もなされてきた。この本は、ひとつの方法からよく考えられて生み出されたと言われてきた。著者は、当時流行している小説の形式に不満があり、物乞いしてでも、借りてでも、盗んでも、あるいは彼女自身とは別物を作ることさえした、と言われてきた。しかし、心の神秘的な作用に関して(自分の気持ちに)正直に言えば、事実は逆であるたしかに作者は不満を持ち続けていた、しかし彼女の不満は、主としてアイデアを与えながらしかるべき形式を与えない自然(作者一般)に対しての不満であった。先行世代の小説家たちは、 ―結局、何故彼らが手助けすべきだったか?―ほとんど手助けしなかった。その小説は明らかに宿泊施設なのだがその小説は間違った設計図で建てられたように見えた。このようにそのイデアは、カキやカタツムリが自分自身のため家を分泌し始めるように非難された。計画を立てるために用意された小さなノートは直ぐに捨てられ、そして作品は毎朝の執筆活動で口述されたものを除いて、日に日に、週を追う毎に全く計画性もなく成長した。もう一つの方法は、ワーズワースやコリッジがしたようにまず家を建ててから家に合わせた作品を書く、理論を展開してからそれを適用する手法、言うまでもな、同じように優れた方法でより哲学的である。しかし、ダロウェイ夫人では、まず作品を書き、あとから理論展開する必要があった。 

  If, however, one singles out the particular point of the book's methods for discussion it is for the reason given―that it has been made the subject of comment by critics, not that in itself it deserves notice. On the contrary, the more successful the method, the less it attracts aHe is concerned only with the effect of the book as a whole on his mind. ttention. The reader it is to be hoped will not give a thought to the book's method or to the book's lack of method. Of that most important question he is a far better judge than the writer. Indeed, given time and liberty to frame his own opinion he is eventually an infallible judge. To him then the writer commends Mrs. Dalloway and leaves the court confident that the verdict whether for instant death or for some years more of life and liberty will in either case be just.


                                  VIRGINIA WOOLF.

    LONDON, June,1928





 " HE was so commanding a presence, so curious and inquiring, so responsive and expansive, and so generous and reckless of himself and of his own, that every one said of him : ' Here is no musty savant, but a man, a great man, a man on the heroic scale, not to serve whom is avarice and sin.' "So James speaks with affection of his own teacher Agassiz, and the words fitly describe the impression he himself made upon his students and associates. There was none who did not come under the spell of his personality, none who did not look forward eagerly to every fresh work from his pen. There was such a sense of life and reality in all that he wrote that reading his works had, in a peculiar sense, the charm of personal intercourse. It was like meeting the man himself and sharing in his faith, his enthusiasm, his vision.

 「 彼はとても威厳のある風貌で、好奇心と探究心が強く、敏感で、自分自身自分のことに太っ腹で無頓着であったので、誰もが彼のことをこう言った『ここにいるのは古臭い学者ではなく、ひとりの男、偉大な男、英雄的規模の男で貪欲で罪深い者に仕えないこのように、ジェイムズは自分の師匠アガシズのことを愛情を込めて語っています、そしてその言葉は彼自身が彼の学生や仲間に与えた印象を適切に説明しています 。彼の人柄に魅了されなかった者はいなかったし、彼の新しい作品を楽しみにしなかった者はいなかった。彼が書いたすべての作品には生命感と現実感があったので、彼の作品を読め、特殊意味で個人的関係の魅力が持てた。それは、彼自身に会って、彼の信仰熱意ビジョンを共有するようなものだった。


  One does not think of James as a man with a philosophy, but rather as one who cleared the decks for all future philosophising. Late in life, to be sure, he labelled his view " pragmatism," modestly declaring this to be a " new name for some old ways of thinking," and dedicating the book in which the view was presented to John Stuart Mill, from whom he first learned the " pragmatic openness of mind." But he is careful to explain that the word stands for a method, and for a theory of truth, rather than for a system of philosophy. And when the view was launched and began to have followers, instinctively he shrank from the use of the label. When a philosophy, even his own, had been ticketed and had become one among many philosophical isms, it began to lose some of its vitality.

 ジェームズは哲学というよりも、将来の全ての哲学的な考察為に準備していた人と捉えられている。晩年、確かに彼は自分の見解をプラグマティズムと名付け、これを「古い思考方法にかわる新しい名称と控えめに宣言し、そして彼が最初に 「実用的な心の開放」を学んだジョン・スチュアート・ミルその本を献呈した。しかし彼はこの言葉が哲学体系というより、方法や真理の理論を意味すると注意深く説明してい。そして、この見解が世に送り出され、信者を得るようになると、彼は直感的にその名称を使うのを避けた。彼自身でさえも、哲学がレッテル付けされ数多くの哲学主義中の一つになってしまったとき、彼の哲学はその活力を失い始めた。


  At very rare intervals in the history of philosophy there have appeared thinkers who, like William James, are too real to be readily classified ―thinkers who cut under the distinctions that divide men into schools. When they appear they always speak the language of the people for the simple reason that they are interpreting life as real men live it with a freshness of vision unknown in the schools. The influence of William James has probably travelled further and gone deeper than that of any other American scholar.Into the languages of all Selected Papers on Philosophy civilised peoples his works have been translated, and every where they have met with instant recognition. Honorary degrees, honorary memberships in learned societies and academies, all manner of scholarly distinctions poured in upon him from all quarters.And yet by far the larger part of his published works consists of essays and addresses first delivered to popular or semi-popular audiences; and even his most technical performance, his classic work in psychology, is singularly simple and direct and free from technicalities, and withal readable. The fact is significant, and explains in part the secret of his hold upon his contemporaries. He did not have tucked away in his den some profound and recondite system clothed in the polysyllabic profundity which learning too often affects, which, on occasion, he condescended to translate, in diluted doses, for the benefit of laymen. For, though writing for the people, he was never a populariser.His profoundest thought is in these pages. He could not help being simple and clear, for he lived close to reality in its concrete fulness ; and he could not help writing for the people, and not for a special academic guild, because he believed in the people,and because, furthermore, he believed in the mission of philosophy to help the people to interpret life and to lay hold of life's ideals, and thus to " know a good man when they saw him."




 James tells us that it was the hours he spent with Agassiz that " so taught him the difference between all possible abstractionists and all livers in the light of the world's concrete fulness " that he was never able to forget it. And the term which, by preference, he used to describe his position was"radical empiricism," a phrase which shows the importance he ascribed to method in philosophising.How far removed this method is from that which commonly passes for empiricism one can best find out by reading the last chapter in his larger Psychology. Without going into details, it is enough here to note that for him the method meant simply a recognition of the fact that " the truth of things is after all their living fulness."To lay hold of the facts in their living fulness was what he meant by being radically empirical. But the facts of human nature are so intimate and so familiar that they usually escape observation.Or if they chance to be called to our attention, they are apt to be summarily lumped together under some familiar caption, or forthwith named and classified in a conventional way, and thus disposed of. James could always"see the familiar as if it were strange," and was thus peculiarly fitted for the role of explorer and observer of the familiar, but little known, facts of the inner life. Moreover, he appreciated as few have done the extent to which words and phrases, dogmas and ready-made principles of classification, blind men's vision and dull their senses. To the facts of experience with which psychology and ethics deal he brought the artist's skill in pure appreciation of values, and he possessed a rare gift for describing what he saw. His special contributions to psychology, and his significance in philosophy, are alike due to this trait.


この方法が、一般的に経験主義として通用することとどれほどかけ離れているかは、諸君が彼の大著『心理学』の最後の章まで読めばわかる。詳細を述べることなく、ここでは、彼にとって方法とは「物事の真実は結局その生きている充足感である」という事実の認識を単に意味すると記すだけで十分である。その生きている充足感の中に事実を置くことは、彼が元来経験的と意味することであった。 しかし、人間性真相は非常に馴れ馴れしくとても身近なので、通常は観察を逃してしまうまたは、それらが私たちの注意を呼び起こす機会があった場合、それらはいくつかの馴染みのある見出しの下に手短にまとめられやすい、または従来の方法ですぐに名前が付けられて分類され、そしてこのように整理される。 ジェームズは常に「身近なものを不思議なものであるかのように見る」ことができそしてこのように、内面生活のあまり知られていない身近事実を探求し観察するという役割に特に適していた。 さらに、彼は、単語と、教義分類の既製の原則、盲人視野盲人の鈍い感覚に至るまで観察した者はこれまでほとんどいなかったと評価した。心理学や倫理学が扱う経験の事実に、彼は芸術家の技術を価値の純粋な評価に応用しそして彼は彼が見たものを記述できる稀な才能を持っていた。心理学に対する彼の特別な貢献、そして哲学における彼の意義は、この特性に起因する。


  The first lesson of radical empiricism is that the mind never is merely a passive spectator, never is merely a receptacle for data supplied from without. Such a way of viewing experience is to mistake for the mind what a real mind never is, and for data what real data never are. In a striking passage James writes : " The world's contents are given to each of us in an order so foreign to our subjective interests that we can hardly by an effort of the imagination picture to ourselves what it is like. We have to break that order altogether and by picking out from it the items which concern us, and connecting them with others far away, which we say' belong ' with them, we are able to make out definite threads of sequence and tendency; to foresee particular liabilities and get ready for them; and to enjoy simplicity and harmony in place of what was chaos. . . . Can we realise for an instant what a cross-section of all existence at a definite point of time would be ?While I talk and the flies buzz, a sea-gull catches a fish at the mouth of the Amazon, a tree falls in the Adirondack wilderness, a man sneezes in Germany, a horse dies in Tartary, and twins are born in France. What does that mean? Does the contemporaneity of these events with one another and with a million others as disjointed, form a rational bond between them, and unite them into anything that means for us a world ? Yet just such a collateral contemporaneity, and nothing else, is the real order of the world. It is an order with which we have nothing to do but to get away from it as fast as possible.

As I said, we break it; we break it into histories, and we break it into arts, and we break it into sciences; and then we begin to feel at home. We make ten thousand separate serial orders of it, and on any one of these we react as though the others did not exist."

革命的な経験主義の最初のレッスンは精神(心の中)は決して単なる受動的な傍観者ではくそして、決して外部から供給されるデータのための単なるに受け皿ではない。経験を見るそのような方法は、本当の心が決してそうではないことを心と思い違えをすること、そして本当の情報が決してそうではないことを情報と思い違えすることである。目を引く一節で、ジェームズは次のように書いています。世界の内容は私たち一人一人に順番立てて与えられ私たちの主観的な興味とかけ離れているので私たちは、想像力を働かせることで、それがどのようなものかを自分自身の心に描くことほとんどできません。私たちはその秩序を完全に打破しなければならず、その中から私たちに影響する項目を選び出しそれらを遠く離れた他のものと繋ぎ合わせる、このことを私たちはそれらに『帰属する』と呼ぶ、ことで私たちは順序と傾向の明確な撚り糸を読み取ることができ、特定の障害を予知したり、それらに備えることができ、そして混沌としていたものの代わりに、単純さと調和を楽しむことができる. . . 私たちは、ある特定の時点存在するすべての物横断面がどんなものであるかを一瞬ではっきりと理解することができるだろうか?私が話をし蠅が羽音を立ててぶんぶん飛んでいる間、アマゾンの河口ではカモメが魚を捕まえ、アディロンダックの荒野ニューヨーク州北東部の森林保護区の一部)では木が倒れ、ドイツでは男がくしゃみをし、タタール(韃靼)地方では馬が死に、フランスでは双子が生まれている。それは何を意味しているのだろうか。それぞれが互いにそして他の百万もの相手との間に起きた互いに無関係なこれらの出来事の同時発生性が、それらの間に論理的な繋がりを形成し、そしてそれらを私たちにとってひとつの世界を意味するものと結びつのだろうか?しかし、まさにそのような並んで進む同時発生性こそが、それ以外の何ものでもなく、世界の真の秩序である。それは私たちが関わらない秩序で、できる限り早くそこから逃げ出すしかない秩序なのである。私が言ったように、私たちはそれを壊します。 私たちはそれを歴史に分解し、芸術に分解し、科学に分解します。 そして、私たちはくつろぎを感じ始めます。私たちはそれを1万に分けて連続番号を付けた、そしてこれらのどの1つにも私たちはあたかも他のものが存在しないかのように反応してしまうのです。


 Other philosophies had indeed noted this truth before.But hitherto philosophy has been too much influenced by the model of mathematics and physics, and has thus tended to think in terms of the contrast between form and matter.To-day biological sciences are in the ascendant, and they furnish a safer model for philosophy inasmuch as they bring us nearer to the facts in their concrete fulness. The contrast is between the living and the dead; and life means growth,development, progress, and time is of the essence of experience.The complexity of experience upon which James laid stress was that which it receives in its time dimension. The time quality of experience is its most significant trait.Everywhere we find fluency and continuity, and in all our interpretations, scientific as well as philosophical, the practical categories are dominant.Our philosophy is essentially forward-looking, and must measure values in results, truth values as well as moral values. Hence James was not interested in truth in the abstract, but rather in the actual process of truth-getting― in what happens when an idea is accepted as true; and he noted that ideas passed for true in proportion to their serviceableness in guiding us through the tangled complexity of experience, in making us at home in the world in which we daily live, and thus masters of it. Science itself was a human construction for human ends. And when it gave itself airs, became sacrosanct and absolute, as it did in the positivism of Herbert Spencer,and in the name of science proceeded to rule out of court all those facts and values of the spiritual life which do not admit of verification through the senses, it ceased to be science, and became a sheer philosophical dogmatism. It was in fact no better than those pretentious idealisms which in the name of abstract reason made all things parts of one inclusive whole, made the world a "block universe," fixed, eternal, perfect, and left no room for what makes life for the individual significant freedom, choice, novelty, and progress.

  確かに、他の哲学は以前よりこの事実に気づいていた。 しかし、これまで哲学は、数学や物理学のモデルに影響をうけてきた、そしてこのように形と物質の対比の観点でこのように考える傾向があった。今日では生物科学が日の出の勢いであるそして生物科学はわたしたちに事実を具体的な満足したものにより近づけてくれるので、哲学にとってより安全なモデルを提供する。 生者と死者の間には際立った違いがある、生とは成長、発展、進歩を意味するそして時は経験の本である。ジェームズが力説した経験の複雑さは、それがもつ時代の次元で察知するそのものであった。経験の時間的な質最も重要な特性である。(質の高い体験時間が最も重要な特性)。





  Ideals again were not decorations of life in the abstract, highly polished moral ornaments; they were the practical tools of good living. They were not to be measured by the noble language in which they were expressed, nor yet by the subjective feelings or emotions they aroused, but by the way they worked, by what they actually accomplished in the prosaic world of dust and dirt and brute fact, for the betterment of character and of the conditions of human life. The truth is that our life, intellectual and moral, is at every turn ruled by ideals, and back of all ideals lies faith ―a faith involving a certain element of risk from which none can escape.And much of James's work is spent in defending the faiths by which men actually live, by testing them in the only manner in which their truth can be tested, by the way in which they express themselves in life.



 James also possessed in a wonderful degree what might be called sympathetic imagination ―the ability to get as it were on the inside of the other fellow's vision ; and whenever he ran across, in the work of another thinker, however humble and obscure, evidence of some fresh and original interpretation of genuine experience, he heralded it as a veritable discovery.It was a new document to be reckoned with. He was, in fact, singularly free from what he has called " a certain blindness in human beings."How free, a reading of the Varieties of Religious Experience will show. The essay in which he discusses this blindness is, as he says, more than the piece of sentimentalism that at first sight it might appear to be. "It connects itself with a definite view of the world and of our moral relations to it." That view is the pluralistic or individualistic philosophy according to which " the truth is too great for any one actual mind, even though that mind be dubbed ' the absolute,' to know the whole of it. The facts and worths of life need many cognisers to take them in. There is no point of view absolutely public and universal." The practical consequence of this philosophy is, he adds, the " well known democratic respect for the sacredness of individuality."

ジェームスはまた、共感的想像力と呼ばれる素晴らしい能力持っていた―その能力は、いわば他の仲間の考え方の内側を手に入れる能力。つまり別の思想家の仕事で、どんなにつまらなくて曖昧であろうと正真正銘の経験が幾分新鮮で独創性に富んだ解釈の証拠に出くわしたときはいつでも彼は紛れもない発見としてそれを公表した。それは、無視できない新しい記録文であった。 彼は、実際には、彼が「人間のある種の盲目」と呼んでいるものから特に免れていた

宗教的経験の多様性 を読めば、その自由さがわかるだろう。彼がこの盲目を論じたエッセイは、一見すれば感傷主義作品にみえるかもしれないが、彼に言わせればそれ以上である。





 Perhaps the chief reason for the popularity of James's philosophy is the sense of freedom it brings with it. It is the philosophy of open doors; the philosophy of a new world with a large frontier and, beyond, the enticing unexplored lands where one may still expect the unexpected ; a philosophy of hope and promise, a philosophy that invites adventure, since it holds that the dice of experience are not loaded.The older monistic philosophies and religions present by contrast stuffy closed systems and an exhausted universe. They seem to pack the individual into a logical strait-jacket and to represent all history as simply the unfolding of a play that was written to its very last line from the dawn of creation. These old absolutisms go with the old order of things.




 James is an interpreter of the new order of democracy. The most important and interesting thing about a nation, or an historic epoch, as about an individual, was, he held, its " ideals and over-beliefs." And if he is our representative philosopher of democracy, it is not because of his individualism, his appreciation of the unique,the uncommunicable, his hospitality of mind, his respect for humanity in its every honest manifestation, his support of the doctrine of live and let live, his tolerance of all that was not itself intolerant; it is not because of his insistence that professions be measured by their " cash value " in experience, and men by their ability to " make good "; but it is, above all, because of his skill in interpreting those ideals and over-beliefs of his nation and epoch. For these are the things that save democracy from vulgarity and commercialism, that preserve the higher human qualities, and insure for the citizens of a free land the fruits of civilisation― more air, more refinement, and a more liberal perspective.



 James was a firm believer in democracy. But he held that democracy was still on trial, and that no one could tell how it would stand the ordeal. "Nothing future," he writes, "is quite secure; states enough have inwardly rotted; and democracy as a whole may undergo self-poisoning. But, onthe other hand, democracy is a kind of religion, and we are bound not to admit its failure.Faiths and Utopias are the noblest exercise of human reason, and no one with a spark of reason in him will sit down fatalistically before the croaker's picture. The best of us are filled with the contrary vision of a democracy stumbling through every error till its institutions glow with justice and its customs shine with beauty. Our better men shall show the way and we shall follow them. . . . The ceaseless whisper of the more permanent ideals, the steady tug of truth and justice, give them but time, must warp the world in their direction."

ジェームズは民主主義を固く信じていた。しかし、彼は、民主主義はまだ試験の段階であり、それがどのように厳しい試練に耐えるかを誰も言うことができないと考えた彼は「未来はない」 ということはとても安全であると書いている。それは「十分に内部で腐敗している状態であり、そして民主主義は全体として自家中毒を起こす可能性がある。しかし、他方では、民主主義は一種の宗教であり、私たちはその失敗を認める義務はない。信仰やユートピアは人間の理性の最も高貴な行使であり、一かけらの理性のない人は誰も悲観論者(詐欺師)の絵の前に宿命的に座ることはないだろう。私たちにとって最も良いことは、その制度が正義に輝き、その関税が美しく照らすまであらゆる誤りを通してつまづきながら、民主主義が反対の展望に満ちていることです。我々の中のより優れた人間がその道を示すだろう、そして我々は彼らに従わねばならない . . . 永続する理想の絶え間ない囁きと、真実と正義の安定した絶え間のない争いが、時間を与えて 世界をその(争いの)方向に歪めてしまう。」

                         CHARLES M. BAKEWELL.




















同窓会で 会うたびに
心の声で 幸せかと 問へば
頭の中で 幸せよと 聞こえる
今幸せなだけ 私の心は痛む

















ある日ゼウスの息子 アポロンは弓矢で遊んでいるエロスを馬鹿にした。それに激怒したエロスは「金の矢」でアポロンを、近くで川遊びをしていた河神ペーネイオスの娘 ダプネーを「鉛の矢」で射抜いた。



世界征服を企む謎の国際的秘密組織 ショッカーは、エロスの持つ能力に目を付け、絶世の美女プシュケ を仮面ライダー・プシュケに改造しダプネーに変身させて、悲しみに落ち込んでいたエロスのもとに送り込んだ。












店は隣町の繁華街のさらに奥、ネオン街の片隅にあり、赤いネオン看板で 「竜宮」とある。




乙姫は丈太郎の顔を見ながら嬉しそうにグラスを渡し「さあ召し上がれ」とにドン・ペリニヨン ロゼを注いだ。

















The Trial for Murder(殺人裁判)の翻訳が見つかった。

前回、チャールズ・ディケンズ「十三人」に関して、「The Trial for Murder」の翻訳者が他にいないかと探していました。

ディケンズがらみで ”GOAST STORIES” を探していて、

" Victorian Goast Stories " の原著がPDFが無料で提供されているのを見つけた。

早速 " Victorian Goast Stories " をダウンロードして製本した。


ヴィクトリア朝幽霊物語(松岡光次 編訳)が見つかった。




この本の中に「The Trial for Murder」の翻訳殺人裁判がある。


これで「The Trial for Murder」の翻訳は私を含め4人になった。



松岡光次氏は「殺人裁判」(ヴィクトリア朝幽霊物語 第二話)


と題名こそ違うが元の作品は「The Trial for Murder」である。









私が翻訳した「The Trial for Murder(殺人裁判)」だった。




チャールズ・ディケンズ(Charles Dickens)

の翻訳作品集成(Japanese Translation List) ameqlist にも出ていない。

これで「The Trial for Murder」の翻訳は(私の他に)2人いることが分かった。

もう一人は、小倉多加志 氏で「殺人事件公判」(月刊ペン社「恐怖と幻想」第二巻)がある。