5 ms·

Somehow I doubt one of the essays in this book is about how to write female characters in a way that isn’t creepy, and reductively sexual. Murakami’s writing i

Somehow I doubt one of the essays in this book is about how to write female characters in a way that isn’t creepy, and reductively sexual. Murakami’s writing is undeniably creative and interesting, but the way he writes women undermines the whole thing and I find it weird he gets a pass for that so much.

ggm 3y ago
I believe Michael Moorcock has an enduring discussion with women writers on this problem space, perhaps from a different perspective but I believe it forms part of their mutual discourse around the nature of feminism and pornography in new-age writing.
- sparkie 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - FranzFerdiNaN 3y ago
    That’s simple. It’s like comedy where punching down isn’t funny. Men have thousands of years of history proving they are a danger to women, so men writing about creepy men is just another reinforcement of that same old situation. 50 shades is more like punching up and thus acceptable. It’s nothing to do with “woke”, and there is still room for works about men being creepy fucks, the bar to cross is just much higher.
    - sparkie 3y ago
      [flagged]
  - chongli 3y ago
    It’s not really about how people are treated by the characters. It’s about perspective taking and relatability. 50 Shades is written by a woman, from the perspective of a woman, and it’s about her fantasies. Why wouldn’t women respond to that? What turns women off, in fiction, is seeing other women through the eyes of a male character. You can’t identify with a character from the outside like that.
    - sparkie 3y ago
      Ok, so invert the genders. "X is written by a man, from the perspective of a man, and it's about his fantasies. Why wouldn't men respond to that?" As I said, you can't please everyone. There is no universal audience. Wokeism is just an attempt to control culture. If your ideals align with the State you will be praised, and if they differ you will be criticized. The woke criticize books clearly aimed at adults, while simultaneously complaining when people express concern that books involving blowjobs and sexual contact with minors are being peddled to children. Receipts: https://twitter.com/ChelseaClinton/status/1651685293731246098 https://twitter.com/ChelseaClinton/status/165168529373124609... Children should not be exposed to this disgusting filth, let alone encouraged to read it, as is happening in schools. But the same debate is not necessary for adults. An adult can decide whether or not they want to read something, and if they are offended by something they can simply ignore it and move on. And regarding perspective, the author is Japanese, so it makes no sense to view his works through a lense of Americanization, and the bulk of Murakami's work is 20-30+ years old, so it is presentist to look at it with the ideologies of the current time.
astrange 3y ago
Murakami is just a more literary version of those boomer newspaper comics about how much they hate their wives and how all women are mysterious aliens from other planets. (Exception for Hard-boiled Wonderland, which doesn't have enough women to be weird, and also was accidentally plagiarized or something by the nearly identical anime Haibane Renmei.) His backstory of just deciding to open a jazz club in Tokyo as a college undergrad is… a lot more possible in Japan than the US, but is still a pretty boomer life story. Strangely, this doesn't stop people from assuming he's going to win a Nobel someday.
bluepizza 3y ago
Why does it undermine the whole thing? Isn't he allowed to be flawed? Does every author need to perfect and morally ideal? I would suggest take him as he is, including his flaws.
- becquerel 3y ago
  I dunno, I feel like if you're a novelist, it behooves you to do at least a passable job of representing half of human existence in your works. I see that more as an incredibly low bar to pass, not being 'perfect and morally ideal'. For me a flawed author is someone with wooden dialogue or unsatisfying endings, not a lack of interest in representing certain kinds of human beings authentically and seriously.
  - thicknavyrain 3y ago
    You're being downvoted, but you're absolutely right. Even though I personally enjoyed some of his books they'll never quite be in the same realm of those of my favourite authors because it's glaringly noticeable when characters that represent half of humanity are systematically written more poorly than the other half. It knocks the readability of a book like Hard Boiled Wonderland down from exceptionality and into the realm of guilty pleasure reading for me (and lessens my inclination to reread it).
  - version_five 3y ago
    Imagine how boring the world would be if every artist tried to conform to how you thought they should represent characters.
    - becquerel 3y ago
      [flagged]
  - bluepizza 3y ago
    I respectfully disagree. I prefer honest self expression above meeting any bars at all. A reader who is engaging critically with a Murakami book can't help but be creeped out and shocked by the dreamlike scenarios, including, as you mentioned, women that don't seem real, but also, most characters don't feel real. Intimate scenes are empty, unemotional, disconnected from reality. They are expressions of deep self obsession, where the whole world bends for a character. The result is disconnection and boredom. Characters that feel silly, dumb, unwise, ego obsessed. Still damn good books. The fact that they discuss this aspect is fascinating. I'd much rather have this aspect of humanity expressed, no matter how difficult it is, than to pretend it is not there. As someone else said in this thread, it is your time, and if you decide to not waste it on Murakami, that's fair. But if you ever decide to give it a second shot, I'd say don't expect any bars to be met. Just engage with it as it is.

ggm 3y ago

I believe Michael Moorcock has an enduring discussion with women writers on this problem space, perhaps from a different perspective but I believe it forms part of their mutual discourse around the nature of feminism and pornography in new-age writing.

sparkie 3y ago
[flagged]
- FranzFerdiNaN 3y ago
  That’s simple. It’s like comedy where punching down isn’t funny. Men have thousands of years of history proving they are a danger to women, so men writing about creepy men is just another reinforcement of that same old situation. 50 shades is more like punching up and thus acceptable. It’s nothing to do with “woke”, and there is still room for works about men being creepy fucks, the bar to cross is just much higher.
  - sparkie 3y ago
    [flagged]
- chongli 3y ago
  It’s not really about how people are treated by the characters. It’s about perspective taking and relatability. 50 Shades is written by a woman, from the perspective of a woman, and it’s about her fantasies. Why wouldn’t women respond to that? What turns women off, in fiction, is seeing other women through the eyes of a male character. You can’t identify with a character from the outside like that.
  - sparkie 3y ago
    Ok, so invert the genders. "X is written by a man, from the perspective of a man, and it's about his fantasies. Why wouldn't men respond to that?" As I said, you can't please everyone. There is no universal audience. Wokeism is just an attempt to control culture. If your ideals align with the State you will be praised, and if they differ you will be criticized. The woke criticize books clearly aimed at adults, while simultaneously complaining when people express concern that books involving blowjobs and sexual contact with minors are being peddled to children. Receipts: https://twitter.com/ChelseaClinton/status/1651685293731246098 https://twitter.com/ChelseaClinton/status/165168529373124609... Children should not be exposed to this disgusting filth, let alone encouraged to read it, as is happening in schools. But the same debate is not necessary for adults. An adult can decide whether or not they want to read something, and if they are offended by something they can simply ignore it and move on. And regarding perspective, the author is Japanese, so it makes no sense to view his works through a lense of Americanization, and the bulk of Murakami's work is 20-30+ years old, so it is presentist to look at it with the ideologies of the current time.

astrange 3y ago

Murakami is just a more literary version of those boomer newspaper comics about how much they hate their wives and how all women are mysterious aliens from other planets. (Exception for Hard-boiled Wonderland, which doesn't have enough women to be weird, and also was accidentally plagiarized or something by the nearly identical anime Haibane Renmei.) His backstory of just deciding to open a jazz club in Tokyo as a college undergrad is… a lot more possible in Japan than the US, but is still a pretty boomer life story. Strangely, this doesn't stop people from assuming he's going to win a Nobel someday.

bluepizza 3y ago

Why does it undermine the whole thing? Isn't he allowed to be flawed? Does every author need to perfect and morally ideal? I would suggest take him as he is, including his flaws.

becquerel 3y ago
I dunno, I feel like if you're a novelist, it behooves you to do at least a passable job of representing half of human existence in your works. I see that more as an incredibly low bar to pass, not being 'perfect and morally ideal'. For me a flawed author is someone with wooden dialogue or unsatisfying endings, not a lack of interest in representing certain kinds of human beings authentically and seriously.
- thicknavyrain 3y ago
  You're being downvoted, but you're absolutely right. Even though I personally enjoyed some of his books they'll never quite be in the same realm of those of my favourite authors because it's glaringly noticeable when characters that represent half of humanity are systematically written more poorly than the other half. It knocks the readability of a book like Hard Boiled Wonderland down from exceptionality and into the realm of guilty pleasure reading for me (and lessens my inclination to reread it).
- version_five 3y ago
  Imagine how boring the world would be if every artist tried to conform to how you thought they should represent characters.
  - becquerel 3y ago
    [flagged]
- bluepizza 3y ago
  I respectfully disagree. I prefer honest self expression above meeting any bars at all. A reader who is engaging critically with a Murakami book can't help but be creeped out and shocked by the dreamlike scenarios, including, as you mentioned, women that don't seem real, but also, most characters don't feel real. Intimate scenes are empty, unemotional, disconnected from reality. They are expressions of deep self obsession, where the whole world bends for a character. The result is disconnection and boredom. Characters that feel silly, dumb, unwise, ego obsessed. Still damn good books. The fact that they discuss this aspect is fascinating. I'd much rather have this aspect of humanity expressed, no matter how difficult it is, than to pretend it is not there. As someone else said in this thread, it is your time, and if you decide to not waste it on Murakami, that's fair. But if you ever decide to give it a second shot, I'd say don't expect any bars to be met. Just engage with it as it is.