In a Grove by Ryunosuke Akutagawa
Quick answer: In a Grove by Ryunosuke Akutagawa: summary of all seven testimonies, the contested ending, themes of truth and ego, and the craft of the story's structure.
A samurai lies dead in a bamboo grove near Kyoto, and seven people, including the dead man himself speaking through a medium, give accounts of how he died that cannot all be true. Ryunosuke Akutagawa published In a Grove in 1922, and it remains literature's cleanest demonstration that testimony is autobiography: everyone reports the event that flatters their own story.
This is the tale Akira Kurosawa filmed in 1950 under the borrowed title Rashomon, which is why the phrase Rashomon effect now names exactly what happens in these pages. Students meet it in courses on narrative and on law; writers study it because it solves, and then deliberately refuses to solve, the puzzle every unreliable narrator story faces: who gets the last word.
The story in brief, all seven voices
The story is nothing but testimony: no narrator, no verdict, just statements made to a police commissioner. A woodcutter reports finding the samurai's body in a grove, killed by a single sword stroke to the chest, with a rope and a comb nearby but no sword. A travelling priest recalls passing the samurai on the road with his veiled wife and her horse. A police agent reports capturing the notorious bandit Tajomaru, thrown from that same horse and carrying the samurai's bow and arrows. An old woman identifies the couple: her daughter Masago and her son-in-law Takehiro, and begs the police to find the missing girl.
Then come the three accounts that detonate the case. Tajomaru confesses freely: he lured the couple into the grove, tied the husband, took the wife, and then, because she demanded one man die to erase her shame, freed the samurai and killed him in a duel of twenty-three strokes, a fight he describes with professional pride. Masago, found at a temple, tells it differently: after the assault, her bound husband's eyes held such cold loathing that she resolved they must both die; she stabbed him with her dagger, then failed to kill herself. Finally the dead man speaks through a medium: the bandit, he says, asked Masago to come with him, and she agreed, then demanded the bandit kill her husband; even the bandit was disgusted, and after both fled, the samurai took up the dropped dagger and died by his own hand, feeling someone later draw the blade from his chest. There the story stops. No account is confirmed, and the contradictions are never resolved.
The characters, or the witnesses
Every character exists twice: as a person in the grove and as the author of their own version.
Themes: truth as self-portrait
The exam reading says the story shows truth is relative or unknowable, and that will pass, but the stronger formulation is more precise: the story shows that people cannot narrate their own actions without defending their egos. Notice that all three principals confess to the killing. Nobody minimises; each claims the version in which they are most significant, the bandit dashing, the wife tragic, the husband honourable. Vanity, not deceit, is the solvent of truth here.
A sharper observation for an essay: the physical evidence quietly accuses everyone. The woodcutter's testimony mentions no sword at the scene, and the dead man's account ends with someone pulling the dagger from his chest, details suggesting theft and tampering even among the bystanders. Akutagawa plants just enough forensic grit to show that even the frame witnesses are unreliable, so the rot is total: there is no clean observer anywhere in the story, including, by implication, the reader.
The craft: structure does all the work
In a Grove has no narrator, no connective tissue, no adjudication: just seven documents in sequence. The order is the art. Akutagawa moves from periphery to centre, neutral witnesses first, then the three interested parties, and ends with the testimony that should be most authoritative, the victim's, delivered through the least verifiable channel imaginable, a medium. The design guarantees that certainty decreases as intimacy increases, which is the story's whole argument made structural.
For writers the transferable lesson is contradiction with discipline. Each version is internally coherent, emotionally distinct, and shares fixed points with the others: the grove, the rope, the assault, the dagger. Readers can hold the puzzle because the disagreements are few and load-bearing. If you attempt a multi-voice story for a competition, that discipline is what earns the ambiguity; Writory's judges mark structure as its own category, and an unresolved plot only scores when the design visibly chose the gaps.
Afterlife of a puzzle
Akutagawa adapted the situation from a twelfth-century Konjaku tale, in which the case is simple, and added the machinery of contradiction that made it modern. Kurosawa's 1950 film fused it with the setting of Rashomon, won the Golden Lion at Venice and an honorary Academy Award, and carried Japanese cinema to the world; courtrooms, psychology papers and newsrooms have used the phrase Rashomon effect ever since. The story is barely five thousand words long. Few texts have exported a concept so far on so little fuel.
What poets can take from this
- In exams, list the seven testimonies in order and note that the three principals all confess; that detail anchors the vanity reading.
- Use the missing sword and the drawn-out dagger as evidence that even bystander testimony is compromised.
- Name the structure: periphery to centre, with reliability falling as involvement rises.
- Credit the source correctly: the Rashomon effect comes from this story via Kurosawa's film, not from the story titled Rashomon.
- As a writer, fix a small set of shared facts before drafting contradictory accounts; ambiguity needs a skeleton.
- Give each voice a distinct self-image to protect; motive for distortion is what makes unreliability readable.
Try it yourself
Write a story told entirely in statements, interviews or messages about one disputed event, in which every speaker confesses to more than the others accuse them of, and let the physical evidence quietly contradict all of them.
Questions
What actually happens at the end of In a Grove?
The story never says. The bandit claims he killed the samurai in a duel, the wife claims she stabbed her husband herself, and the dead man's ghost claims suicide. Akutagawa ends on the medium's testimony without adjudicating, leaving the contradiction as the point.
What is the theme of In a Grove?
The impossibility of objective truth once ego enters testimony. Each speaker, including the victim, tells the version that preserves their self-image, so the story argues that accounts of events are really accounts of the people giving them.
How is In a Grove related to the film Rashomon?
Kurosawa's 1950 film takes its plot, the crime told through contradictory testimonies, from In a Grove, and its title, gate and rainstorm from Akutagawa's separate story Rashomon. The film adds a woodcutter's final version and a hopeful ending that the story does not contain.
By the Writory editorial team, reviewed by working poets. Updated July 2026.
Enter a Writory poetry contest
Enter the August contest and have your own poem read and scored.