@inproceedings{oai:kokubunken.repo.nii.ac.jp:00001922,
 author = {戸松, 泉 and TOMATSU, Izumi},
 book = {国際日本文学研究集会会議録, PROCEEDINGS OF INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON JAPANESE LITERATURE},
 issue = {36},
 month = {Mar},
 note = {pdf, A celebratory exhibition and performance were both held at Ichiyō's memorial museum in the Taitō Ward this year as it is the year of the 140th anniversary of Ichiyō's birth. It may safely be said that the exhibition of the autograph manuscript of "Takekurabe"at the National Institute of Japanese Literature is swimming with the stream. Far from being a distant existence, it seems that we feel Ichiyō increasingly familiar to us. It is not only because her portrait is printed on the 5,000-yen note but also her autograph manuscripts have started appearing in full view and their value as sources has been reconsidered.    
Ichiyō ,who started writing as a novelist in the Meiji period, namely in the beginning of the type-printing era, left not only manuscripts but also a large quantity of drafts (miteikō) that looked like waste paper. It is said that they numbered in the thousands. It is said that Ichiyō's sister Kuniko, who knew Ichiyō 's struggle with writing, carefully preserved even her jottings. In the present day when modern publishing technology has changed dramatically, the manuscripts have drawn scholars' attention as valuable sources for new research on literature.
This manuscript is currently displayed at the National Institute of Japanese Literature and is the only final version of the text which is in nearly perfect condition. "Takekurabe"appeared intermittently in seven parts in the literary coterie magazine "Bungakukai"for one year and then appeared collectively in the commercial literary magazine "Bungeikurabu"published by Hakubunkan. In this presentation, I would like to explore the appeal of "Takekurabe"while indicating the issue of the autograph manuscript through the comparison between the text in "Bungakukai"and the text in "Bungeikurabu". It is a well-known fact that the contents of "Takekurabe"is quite simple. However, there are subtle differences between the two texts. As the story dynamically develops, I personally think that the text in "Bungeikuragu"is superior to the text in "Bungakukai". What is your opinion?
\n},
 pages = {1--19},
 publisher = {国文学研究資料館},
 title = {講演　「たけくらべ」自筆草稿を開く　――樋口一葉<書くこと>の領域――},
 year = {2013},
 yomi = {トマツ, イズミ}
}