This conversation is a very memorable scene, symbolic of the ideological divisions of the late 1960s and early 1970s. It takes place after a lecture at a university. Immediately after Kenzaburo Oe's lecture, the narrator is surrounded by several students who ask him, "Do you enjoy listening to Oe? The students were obviously not pleased to hear him talk about Yukio Mishima. The students were clearly on the side of Yukio Mishima and showed hostility and cynicism toward Oe's liberal position. This exchange vividly reflects the atmosphere of ideological conflict that existed in the intellectual community at that time.

This conversation is a very memorable scene, symbolic of the ideological divisions of the late 1960s and early 1970s. It takes place after a lecture at a university. Immediately after Kenzaburo Oe's lecture, the narrator is surrounded by several students who ask him, "Do you enjoy listening to Oe? The students were obviously not pleased to hear him talk about Yukio Mishima. The students were clearly on the side of Yukio Mishima and showed hostility and cynicism toward Oe's liberal position. This exchange vividly reflects the atmosphere of ideological conflict that existed in the intellectual community at that time.

In the midst of the Cold War structure and rapid economic growth, Japanese society was shaken by the violent confrontation between the left and the right, between democracy and nationalism. Oe faced head-on issues such as war responsibility, the atomic bomb, the emperor system, and discrimination, and emphasized ethics and dialogue through "words. Mishima was at the opposite end of the spectrum, attempting to prove his principles through "action," centering on bushido and loyalty to the emperor. His suicide by ritual suicide in 1970 was also the final theatrical expression of his reexamination of the relationship between the state and culture.

The student's question to the narrator, "Do you enjoy listening to Oe? The students' question to the narrator, "Do you enjoy listening to Oe?" goes beyond mere preference and contains a condescending look at intellectuals who only use words and a provocation to liberal intellectuals who do not take action. For them, Mishima was a "true intellectual" who embodied their ideals. Which is the true power to move society, the power of speech or the power of action? This question still casts a deep shadow over Japan's spiritual history.

This scene is a symbolic condensation of the conflicts and mental fault lines among intellectuals in postwar Japan. Deep social tectonic shifts lurked behind the quiet conversation.