Zeami understands training to be "a molding block [kata-gi f]  in order to master such things as singing, dancing, acting and imitating."22 Training, generally speaking, then means to put one's body into a certain "form" [katag].23 Specifically, it means an acquisition of various performing techniques [wazah] by means of appropriating modalities of one's body. It is a process of bodily acquisition [taitoku i]. In Zeami's scheme of "training," appropriation of "singing and dancing" [nikyoku j] constitutes a prerequisite for learning to "imitate" [monomane k], for without a complete mastery of basic ways of comporting one's body appropriate for a song that is designed for a given series of bodily movements, one cannot "imitate" authentically the movements and the accompanying ethos peculiar to "a woman, man and elder" [santai l ].Training qua imitation then comes to mean an appropriation of various modalities of one's body.

　　 "Imitation" as understood by Zeami is rather unique. He recognizes two types of "imitation".24 One is the "style without mastery" [mushū-fū m].  Mushū-fū, literally translated, is a style without a subject. We see in this literal translation Zeami's consistent understanding of "training", that is, to put one's body into a certain "form," for it clearly indicates that an actor qua subject cannot allow an interference of his subjective inclinations to influence the process of training. This point is easily understandable, for in the training of any martial art (for example, karate), one does not learn first how to theorize intellectually various techniques before he learns to move his body in order to achieve a perfect form of bodily action or to trigger an automatic
　

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

P.405
　

response to an attack. The other type of "imitation" is an imitation with the' "style with mastery" [yushū-fū n].  Again, a literal rendition of yushū-fū  reveals what Zeami really intended to convey by this term. It is a performing "style with a subject." At first, a beginning actor learns to "imitate thoroughly his master,"25 and, hence, in practice "bracketing," as it were, his own subjectivity. But as he subjects himself to a rigorous, cumulative training, he comes to '"own what is imitated" and "become what is imitated"26 ,

　　 A uniqueness of Zeami's understanding of "imitation" lies in his recognition of the transformation from the "style without mastery" to the "style with mastery." Through an appropriation of various modalities of one's body, this transformation is said to be effected. Moreover, "if one truly becomes and enters into what is being imitated, after a [complete] mastery of imitation, there is no [intention of] mind which attempts to imitate."27 Accordingly, "imitation" for an actor with the "style without mastery" can be interpreted as a prescription for acquiring various modalities that are the performing techniques. Henceforth, the training qua imitation is a necessary condition for attaining to the "style with mastery." Seen in this manner, this prescription is a process of appropriation for a novice or aspiring actor.

　　 The practical meaning of the training in the Noh drama lies in effecting a transformation from the "style without mastery" to the "style with mastery." The two types of "imitation" thus understood are also reflected in Zeami's notion of "flowers." He distinguishes basically two types of "flowers": the one is that which blossoms temporarily and withers away like a natural flower, that is, the flowers that are dependent upon and subject to the acquisition of performing techniques for their expression. Zeami writes:

all these [flowers] are apparent to the eyes, but, since they blossom from out of the performer's techniques, there is soon the time for them to wither away.28

And the other type is the "true flower" whose "principle of both blossoming and withering away should be in accord with a person"29 . The "true flower" is a full blossom of one's artistic achievement that is a culmination of one's training. An obvious contention here is that a "true flower" cannot be expressed by an actor with "the style without mastery"; for the expression of beauty by means of "the style without mastery" is achieved through performing techniques that are merely the bodily modalities.

In actuality, this transformation of the styles corresponds roughly to Zeami's hierarchical division of the "artistic ranks" into nine stages.30 "Artistic ranks" may be understood as an "objective" evaluation of actor's performing techniques that express a relative degree of beauty. Zeami conceives of the "nine artistic ranks" as attainable in terms of a progressive ascent of appropriation. The more one appropriates various modalities of performing techniques, the more he approximates a perfect beauty that is the "true flower."