Ryivnosuke Akutagawa's In A Grove

What is real? Is there one reality or are there many? What influences the reality? These are the recurring questions that were raised while reading Ryūnosuke Akutagawa’s In a Grove. It was confusing to read the seven characters' accounts of the “reality” of the murder case. Specifically, given that each character’s description of the murder differed, from insignificant details to major plot lines, I was conflicted on the truth of the matter. In this way, the subject of metaphysics surfaces as I ponder whether there can be multiple realities regarding one truth, and, if so, what causes something to have various realities. The story suggests that there can be more than one reality. As mentioned earlier, there are discrepancies among each character’s …show more content…
I compared and contrasted creation theories, derived from science, various religions, and cults, that are perceived as the truth. For example, some believe that God created the world, though others believe in another creation theory such as the Big Bang Theory. An immense number of beliefs, surrounding the same matter, contradict each other and convey different realities of the beginning of the world. Each theory is presumed as the truth by different groups which make it their reality. In terms of the story, Takehiko’s murder and Masago’s rape brings about different versions of the reality given that the prime characters that are involved in the crime state different accounts of the same event. The complexity of varying realities can be discovered in my real life as well because there are many occurrences in which I have a completely distinct sense of reality about a situation, in comparison to others that experienced the exact same situation. For instance, I recall writing a reflection about my group’s dynamic after completing a culminating project. I noted the group worked efficiently and cooperatively, with minimal disputes and tension. Although I was certain that my reflection accurately represents the reality of the group dynamic, I was confounded after secretly reading a group member’s response, which opposed and rebutted the ideas in my reflection. …show more content…
To exemplify, Masago’s account of the murder includes her killing Takehiko while saying, “I am determined to die, but you must die too. You saw my shame. I can’t live you as you are.” This dialogue is only applicable to Masago’s version of reality because of her desire to account honor by attempting to die with her husband. Nonetheless, Takehiko’s reality differs from Masago’s as he is inclined to maneuver the truth to present a reality that encompasses his moral values and knowledge on what it means to be honored. To specify, as a trained samurai, Takehiko thinks that to preserve any remaining honor, we must suicide before there is another chance for his honor to be tarnished. In this way, our version of reality is altered based on our different perceptions, desires, and background knowledge, fostering an individual’s recount of reality to be unique. In other words, the reality of the truth is open to interpretation; thus, everyone is bound to have their version of reality. This brings forth the notion that different versions of one reality can