@article{oai:u-ryukyu.repo.nii.ac.jp:02004033,
 author = {仲地, 弘善 and Nakachi, Kozen},
 issue = {30},
 journal = {琉球大学語学文学論集},
 month = {Dec},
 note = {Despite the predominance of critical views that East of Eden has a "flawed" structure, that "the timshel theme" is not well integrated in the book, and that the Hamilton family episodes are not organically related to the Trask story, strange to say, East of Eden is widely read as an "interesting" and "impressive" story. How can we explain the contradiction which is claimed to exist between the "flawed" structure and the popularity of the story? Can we find a view which will establish that the relationship between the major subject matter and the constituent elements is what makes the story "interesting" and "impressive"? In this paper, I propose as a working hypothesis that Steinbeck's "nonteleological thinking" and "breaking through" concept is imbedded in the underlying design of the story, and this explains how "timshel" is integrated in the major subject matter of the story and how the Hamilton family episodes are contrasted with the Trask story in Steinbeck's "contrapuntal" design., 紀要論文},
 pages = {129--155},
 title = {『エデンの東』における主題と構成},
 year = {1985}
}