This year marks the 65th Anniversary of the release of the original Mothra (1961), directed by Ishiro Honda, one of the all-time greatest Japanese giant monster movies ever made. Produced by Toho Studios, home of Mothra, Godzilla, Rodan, and other iconic kaiju, Toho has chosen to commemorate this anniversary by declaring 2026 the year of Mothra.
For American fans, the celebration includes the debut English language publication of The Luminous Fairies and Mothra, translated by Prof. of Japanese literature Jeffrey Angles and published by the University of Minnesota Press. Angles previously translated a pair of novellas based on the first two Godzilla movies and also published by UMP.
For years, fans outside of Japan believed Godzilla (1954) and Mothra (1961) were based on novels or had received novelizations – books based on screenplays – like Delos W. Lovelace’s 1932 novel-length adaptation of the original King Kong (1933).
As it turned out, neither of these scenarios are exactly accurate.
With Godzilla, producer Tomoyuki Tanaka hired pulp-fiction writer, and cryptozoology aficionado, Shigeru Kayama to pen a story treatment for an original monster movie. Kayama’s treatment was later adapted into a screenplay and filmed in 1954 as Godzilla by Ishiro Honda. Subsequently Kayama wrote a pair of novellas, aimed at a young-adult audience, based on the first Godzilla movie and its sequel, to capitalize on the success of these films.
In contrast, Mothra’s route from prose to motion-picture was less circuitous but no less unorthodox. As recounted by Jeffrey Angles in his accompanying essay, in the summer of 1960 Tanaka approached novelist Shin’ichirō Nakamura for an original story treatment for a new kaiju movie to be helmed by Honda. Unlike Kayama, Nakamura had no familiarity with the science-fiction genre, being instead known for works like 1947’s Under the Shadow of Death, a lengthy meditation on the trials and tribulations of life in WWII era Japan. This made Nakamura an unlikely choice for Tanaka, but at the time the author was recovering from the death of his wife and the opportunity to work on a project which he perceived as ‘fun’ and ‘light-hearted’ appealed to him. He also decided to get two of his friends, poet Takehiko Fukunaga and essayist Yoshie Hotta, in on the project.
Together these three men wrote Mothra in round-robin style with Nakamura beginning the story, Fukunaga authoring the middle, and Hotta penning the conclusion. The result was subsequently published in the weekly magazine Asahi Weekly Supplement in January 1961 accompanied by an announcement that a film based on this story was currently in production at Toho – it would hit theaters less than six months later.
At only 44 pages, Mothra is more advertising than novella, but its often elegant prose and political subtext are significant. Angles’s essay, longer than the story itself, explores these themes. Like the original Godzilla, Mothra carries a political message. But while Godzilla references nuclear fallout, Mothra draws from the Anpo Protests of 1959/60 in which hundreds of thousands of Japanese citizens stormed the National Diet in Tokyo to oppose the ratification of the 1952 Security Treaty which abolished Japan’s right to offensive military action, allowed US forces to be stationed in Japan, and did not guarantee that the US would defend Japan if it was attacked.
As Angles demonstrates the authors of Mothra, especially Hotta who was an outspoken Leftist, filled their story with numerous references to the Anpo Protests. References which would be unavoidable to contemporary Japanese readers but are totally lost on a modern non-Japanese audience. Though perhaps a rather obvious one, which also constitutes one of the biggest differences between Nakamura’s Mothra and the subsequent Honda film, is that Mothra constructs her cocoon on the side of the Diet rather than Tokyo Tower. It is for this reason it is advisable that readers consult Angles’s essay before reading the story itself.
For those uninterested in politics, The Luminous Fairies and Mothra also offers a wealth of new lore for kaiju fans. Specifically, Fukunaga, in his middle portion, crafts an elaborate creation myth to explain the origins of Mothra, the fairies, Infant Island, and its people.
Another interesting topic is how exactly the authors of Mothra came up with such a fantastical premise. Like Nakamura, neither Fukunaga nor Hotta had any experience with, or apparent interest in, the science-fiction genre. So, what was their inspiration for a kaiju-sized moth and her fairy priestesses? Angles’s proposed answer constitutes one of the most fascinating and surprising parts of his essay. In short, Angles argues that Nakamura and co. got the idea for Mothra from Doctor Dolittle!
For those who have only seen the 1990s Eddie Murphy movies, the original Doctor Dolittle books by English children’s author Hugh Lofting are about much more than a physician who can talk to animals. Rather these books are filled with numerous fantastical, unusual creatures, leading cryptozoologist Karl Shuker to declare them foundational examples of the subgenre of cryptid-fiction. In the eighth book in the series, Doctor Dolittle’s Garden (1927), the good doctor befriends a house-sized moth.
The Doolittle books were extremely popular in post-war Japan, with the first one having been translated in 1941. Aside from the giant moth, Angles goes on to point out a number of other notable parallels between the Doolittle series and Nakamura and co.’s Mothra.
There is no question that English language kaiju fans owe Jeffrey Angles and the University of Minnesota Press a tremendous thanks for both translating and making these early works of kaiju-fiction commercially available at standard retail, rather than academic, prices. Angles’s essays, in particular, offer a wealth of new insights into the conception and development of Mothra and Godzilla, and are worth the price of admission alone. Let us hope that Mothra and Godzilla are only the beginning of a wealth of new translations of kaiju-related Japanese literature.
You must be logged in to post a comment.