Done with this.
I tried to keep my post simple. My post about how this book, like everything Murakami writes, is so great. But the complexity of this book defeats any attempt in that direction.
The great Russian critic M.M. Bakhtin once defined the novel as a work which is characterized by its ‘polyphony and unfinalizability’. Simply speaking, a novel is a form which allows a writer to speak in many voices, or at least many forms of the same voice, and is a work which has no binding moral code or sense of finality, even as you finish the story it tells. Each character can then be seen as a symbol for an idea, and even though his story comes to an end, when seen through Bakhtin’s lens the end will be ‘forced’ since what the symbol stands for is an edifice which has no ending in normal human terms. While one may be tempted to say that the same is true for all forms of writing, Bakhtin (very successfully) contrasts the free-flowing novel with the fixed nature of the epic with its rigid morals.
Why was this verbal diarrhoea important? Because Murakami, in his infinite wisdom, manages to bring together these two forms with all their trappings to flesh out tales of a calm vibrancy which is expansive in scope but yet intensely personal. He plays around with concepts of reality, morality, the supernatural and what-not and still manages to keep it close enough so that you, dear reader, will never feel left out. Which is something I cant do in one small post. And i'm not even that profound :(
I think that studying his background can help me understand his writings better, but irl stuff stops me. And yes, 1Q84 is the better book, don't ask me why, I just feel it.
With this, my goal for next months book fair is decided. I am going to buy some more of Murakami. Happy reading!