3 ms·

> sadly not surprised he struggled with mental and substance abuse. His books read in a way that often feature a character somewhat removed from reality or in s

> sadly not surprised he struggled with mental and substance abuse. His books read in a way that often feature a character somewhat removed from reality or in some form of psychosis. The idea of what is real or not real is explored over and over again Don't take that is an indicator, Haruki Murakami often reads similarly and he seems to be a well adjusted person.

DiggyJohnson 3y ago
I think it’s can still be relevant analysis without you having to point out that it’s not a binary indicator.
- kevviiinn 3y ago
  But then that means the analysis isn't correct, it wouldn't be an indicator at all
  - BobbyJo 3y ago
    What about it not being a binary indicator invalidates the analysis? Dick's writing was obviously a byproduct of his mental state. That's where writing comes from. Just because someone else made similar works in a different mental state doesn't invalidate that.
    - kevviiinn 3y ago
      No, it definitely invalidates that conclusion
ajkjk 3y ago
This comment is probably unnecessary but I've been reading tons of Murakami lately so here's a take: Murakami's main schtick, I realized, is to write in the style of a hard-boiled detective novel, like Raymond Chandler (who he has often cited as an influence / obsession)... except that instead of the protagonist being a literal private investigator who wanders the city and meets people to solve the mystery of a murder, it's a disconnected man who wanders the city solving a mystery that's like, how to connect with people or how to get over a sense of loss or something. The world is mysterious, like how in a detective novel with corruption and intrigue and stuff, but it feels like it's that way because of how mysterious human connection is to his protagonists. Philip K Dick, on the other hand, writes a mysterious world that makes some paranoid idea he had actually real. They're superficially similar but, I think, not really actually coming from the same place at all.
- throwaway290 3y ago
  This sounds accurate, yeah. Take appreciated.

DiggyJohnson 3y ago

I think it’s can still be relevant analysis without you having to point out that it’s not a binary indicator.

kevviiinn 3y ago
But then that means the analysis isn't correct, it wouldn't be an indicator at all
- BobbyJo 3y ago
  What about it not being a binary indicator invalidates the analysis? Dick's writing was obviously a byproduct of his mental state. That's where writing comes from. Just because someone else made similar works in a different mental state doesn't invalidate that.
  - kevviiinn 3y ago
    No, it definitely invalidates that conclusion

ajkjk 3y ago

This comment is probably unnecessary but I've been reading tons of Murakami lately so here's a take: Murakami's main schtick, I realized, is to write in the style of a hard-boiled detective novel, like Raymond Chandler (who he has often cited as an influence / obsession)... except that instead of the protagonist being a literal private investigator who wanders the city and meets people to solve the mystery of a murder, it's a disconnected man who wanders the city solving a mystery that's like, how to connect with people or how to get over a sense of loss or something. The world is mysterious, like how in a detective novel with corruption and intrigue and stuff, but it feels like it's that way because of how mysterious human connection is to his protagonists. Philip K Dick, on the other hand, writes a mysterious world that makes some paranoid idea he had actually real. They're superficially similar but, I think, not really actually coming from the same place at all.

throwaway290 3y ago
This sounds accurate, yeah. Take appreciated.