Seriously, what the fuck is it about this novel that people like so much? Murakami must have an obsession with breasts as he can’t go more than five paragraphs without mentioning it.With 1100 pages in this piece of shit, I was expecting it to AT LEAST have a better story.Prose is also mediocre trash.
>>23631577>read a translation>complain about author's proselmao
>>23631577a met a Japanese literati in Shinjuku and he told me the only good book Murakami wrote was Norwegian Wood.
>>23631585>try to look smart>reveal yourself to be a pseudlmao
>>23631585Still shit
>>23631577People hate it, though. It's regularly ranked among the worst of his novels. What people like are stories like Sputnik Sweetheart and Norwegian Wood.
There were a lot of parts I enjoyed but I agree it needed to come together in a much better way. The two moons thing was interesting, and the image of the little people coming out of the sleeping person's mouth was really intriguing and eerie. I remember liking the bouncer guy, as well as the sleepy detective doing the stakeout thing. But for a novel of that size it really did not get there in terms of satisfaction
>>23631577It’s the typical Murakami novel (minus Norwegian Wood, that one is a bit of an outlier) but waaayyy too long. I don’t remember specifically how it ended but it left an impression of disappointment. Murakami is fun and is what he is but it’s a bit torturous to slog through a doorstopper book of his, especially as the ending is unsatisfying. I will always maintain that TWUBC is one of the best times I’ve ever had reading a book. He scratches a certain itch that other writers can’t scratch. I think people get into him expecting something different and that’s why some hate him
>>23631577How does one cope with being filtered by Murakami? I once saw a person throwing Norwegian wood away while shouting 'aaaah the fucking Beatles'. And literally everyone tries to small talk me on Murakami, and I have to make excuses time and again BC I haven't read a single book of his. How does one cope with this?
If you notice only breasts, then your IQ is no better than 84.
>>23631895my literary low point was reading murakami novels. you really are not missing anything. murakami novels are for people unwilling to engage in ideas, people with no intellectual curiosity. all they care about is the "kino"
>>23631922holy shit...
>>23631577>Murakami must have an obsession with breasts as he can’t go more than five paragraphsYou have convinced me to read this book.
>>23631937I cracked that one open all by meself. Breasts are nice, but one must see through them.
>>23631895Murakami is popular basically because>thing :/>thing, Japan :oI remember seeing somewhere, I think the back of my copy of Norwegian Wood, that Murakami is considered a controversial author in his homeland. When I looked into it over a decade ago, the only "controversy" I saw appeared to be difficulties pigeon-holing him as either "pop lit" or "actual art." Using different terms, of course, but the point was it seemed his "strength" was just that his prose is mildly better than the average light novel. There isn't much to set Murakami aside from e.g. NISIOISIN.Harold Bloom has that infamous line twisting the meaning of Stephen King's thing about children who like Rowling growing up to be adults who like King. When I was 15 I read a lot of Palahniuk and Irvine Welsh, and when I was 18 I read a lot of Murakami. I think the idea is similar. You aren't reading Murakami because he's "good"; you're reading him because people who don't read think he's "good" and recommended accordingly.Having said that, I enjoyed most of all I've read from him. But I also enjoy Bleach and Naruto as a 30-year-old.
>>23632091>enjoying narutoWhat did you get out of old Nurutu?
so are you demoflat or rebooblican
>>23631585babbelfag detected
>>23631696>Sputnik Sweetheartthe only murakami i read and it really put me off him
You can safely discard anything Murakami wrote after Kafka on the Shore.
