User:Gh2109/sandbox

Background
Ōgai first published “The Dancing Girl” in 1890, based on his experiences as a medical student in Germany from 1884 to 1888. On the incorporation of Ōgai’s experiences into the narrative of “The Dancing Girl,” literary scholar Christopher Hill notes that while some scholarly interpretations of the story have argued that the narrative is autobiographical, Ōgai based the story off of other students he knew during his time in Germany and that “The Dancing Girl” should therefore not be read as an autobiographical account of Ōgai’s own life. As well, Ōgai wrote “The Dancing Girl” during Japan’s Meiji era, which saw Japan undergo significant transformation. “The Dancing Girl” has been noted for its reflection of the Meiji era and its societal values and conflicts. On Ōgai’s incorporation of Meiji values and conflicts, literary scholar Tomiko Yoda writes: “The text has been often cast as a birth-cry of the modern self, wrought in the conflict of modernity versus tradition, the East versus West, and individual desires versus repressive rules and regulations of society,” reflecting changes to Japanese society during the Meiji era.

“The Dancing Girl” has also been noted as an example of the development of modern Japanese literature during the Meiji era, with Ōgai's story cited as an example of neoclassical literature and for its use of first-person narration, a prevalent feature of modern literature in the 19th century.

The "Maihime" Debate
"The Dancing Girl" has been noted for sparking literary debate between Ōgai and writer and literary critic Ishibashi Ningetsu. Shortly after the publication of “The Dancing Girl,” Ningestu published a critical evaluation of the story, notably critiquing what he saw as inconsistent characterization of the story’s central character, Ōta. Ōgai responded to Ningestu’s critique, defending his characterization of Ōta, and the two would continue on a correspondence in which they debated Ningetsu’s criticisms of “The Dancing Girl.”

Literary scholar Miyabi Goto notes the importance of Ōgai and Ningestu’s debate for the continued growth of Japanese literature during the 19th century. On the context of the debate in Meiji Japan, Goto writes: “Many Meiji elites thus conceived of criticism as a distinct, fundamentally different practice from literature, assigning the former the vital role of nurturing the latter” and uses the Ōgai-Ningestu debate as an example of the development of Japanese literature through criticism.