Haruki Murakami

Writes books I've been reading. Books I love reading.

I don't agree with everything Haruki Murakami writes. Some of his ideas annoy me. His characters think a lot, sometimes too much, sometimes to the point where they are so self-referential it is bothersome. Sometimes I say to myself, "I've thought of that." And I don't enjoy reading too many things I've already thought about. But, his characters don't cross into the aggravating zone of over-self-consciousness as often as they could, which is surprising because a lot of characters in a lot of books do.

Each of Murakami's characters openly offers their impressions of the other characters either from the outside-in or the inside-out. Sometimes descriptions will start with a physical symbol - maybe a pair of mismatched earrings - and the observing character describes what the symbol means. He or she will explain how the mismatched earrings define the other person. He or she may comment on how the observed keeps her shoulders mostly upright, yet slouches slightly when sitting. She wants to be seen as strong, he will say, but when she is away from the crowd, sitting and eating, she lets her shoulders rest. He says "She is not an inherently strong person, but she tries."

Murakami takes his time and I admire that. I have so much appreciation for those auteurs that take their time. They aren't pressured by standards and they don't conform to what is expected of them, as defined by their job: novelist, director. They aren't trying to rebel, they are just comfortable - and insistent - on doing it their way. They spend time on the details and the mood. They move through stories at the pace they want. They are bold. Their films have the utmost effect on me. David Lynch is an example of an artist that takes his time.

We all know that modern fiction, be it movie-making, novel-writing, screen-writing, etc., is pushed to be fast paced. Pushed by the businessman, the producer, the dollar and all its associated charts and calculations. Rule 1 in writing to get published is writing to keep the story going. Every action has an effect; an effect that moves the story. It's Hollywood, it's books, it's how you get paid.

Murakami spends time describing almost everything: characters, settings, feelings, words, thoughts, glances, hand shakes. Unlike wordy filler or incomprehensible symbolism that fill the pages of every book on the high-school AP Literature reading lists - Dickens, Dickinson, the lot - Murakami's words are not hard. No Old English, large words, unforgivable run-ons, layered analogies - though surely their are metaphors - are road blocks not included. All that I listed are undoubtedly important - Shakespeare is a genius, right? - but they take training to read. I'm new to the art. And even after training, it takes so much energy to read through.

I'm not saying Murakami's books are easy, like they are stupid, for young adults, or not thoughtful. They are definitely thoughtful. Most of all, though, they are relaxing.

I've never held a book that felt so much like gentle meditation. I find myself picking up the book just to relax. It's a new concept to me, a child in the Age of Technology - you know. Most books I read for the knowledge they have, i.e. the non-fiction I have around. How to Use Your Camera and Not look Like a Fool. That sort. Otherwise, I enjoy books that are intelligent, witty, and exciting, like Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom. But I sink into Murakami's books. I rest my head in them. I don't have to think if I don't want to. I could, the book offers much to learn from, but I'm not forced to. Most of it comes naturally.

Murakami writes a lot in passive voice - something I've always been told not to do. That's his style. He shows when he wants, then goes when he wants.

Maybe I don't always want to be in the middle of an action verb. Maybe I don't have the energy to follow a jumping, fighting, rocking, socking, pick-pocketing, master of movement.

When Murakami describes a room, I don't have a hard time imagining it. To me, this is unusual. When most writers start describing something, I usually start skimming the page until something important happens. His storytelling creates a whole new frame of mind. I am not rushing to the action, I am wading in the water of a pleasant stream on a sunny day explaining to five year old brother how much I enjoy the yellow glint on the clouds and the pink haze over the daisies. His book sets a mood that you fall into. Like a dream. Like a good night's sleep, I've never had a problem falling in.

Sometimes I say to myself: 'He puts too much Murakami in his characters.' His writing is too easy, he just writes about himself. I say, "His characters are all the same. They think a lot and are very intuitive, just like an author." But then I read more of his characters. Though they all possess the gift of keen people-watching, they are much different. They all have different back stories. They come from different places, eat different foods, and wear different clothes. And then again, they all contemplate loneliness and the importance of social interactions. Many have similar goals in life. To get away for a night. Or forever. They are different. They aren't. I don't know. They are so compelling, though.

Sometimes I think: "Does he rewrite anything?" His books feel like rough drafts. He just seems to go with flow. He just says what feels right at the moment. He moves on when he's ready to move on. I think, "Does he even plan?" I'm sure he does, he is a professional writer, he must plan. I can't imagine it, though. His writing style conflicts with planning.

If I wrote a book and I knew that my character was on his way to a train, he would be there pronto. I don't have the patience to detail the scenery. But, if I never specify where my character is heading, I feel that I would have no problem describing the scenery. I could explore my character's setting and also his path. The details arrive from the lack of a goal.

But this can't be how Murakami works. It wouldn't work. He must plan or the book would never have a satisfying ending. It would just end and nothing would have happened. That isn't necessarily bad, see Godard, see Neo-Realism, but I just don't think that's how Murakami works. Plus, he usually tells two or more stories at once and then ties them together as the book progresses.

I don't think he writes a few hundred pages and then quits when nothing is left to write. This made me realize that this man is really smart. I'm in awe of him; his self-control, his care. He cares about everything.

But all writers care about heir writing, right? Maybe to a certain extent, but I mostly disagree. Most have money, publication, and other people's ideas lingering in the back of their mind. Ideas that work. Ideas that sell. At the end of the day they can say "I wrote that" and "I know my writing inside and out" but it isn't pure. It isn't them. Or it is them but they are just someone else.

Murakami writes softly.

Incidentally, he is associated with the man who created my favorite video game, Earthbound. Shigesato Itoi isn't a video game guy and he only worked on four games: the Mother series and a bass-fishing game. He's a journalist and essayist. The pair co-authored a book of short stories called Yume de aimashou ("Let's meet in a dream"). I think I'll pick that up next.

The short list of Murakami's books that I've read or am currently reading. And he's already inspired a blog post.

After the Quake.
After Dark.
Kafka At the Shore.

Links:
Haruki Murakami

Shigesato Itoi
Earthbound