Complete and utter cult
I was interested to read this article the other day, as I'm currently halfway through Haruki Murakami's epic 1Q84 (the first book of it anyway). The bit that particularly struck me was that some reviewers apparently have a beef with him for only being interested in playing to his own fans rather than trying to win new converts to the great intellectual cause:
But the world of novels operates in reverse. Murakami is a great writer who can combine high quality with broad appeal. He's broken free from the insular world of "literary fiction" to join the cultural mainstream, to the disgust of some parts of that establishment.
Reading 1Q84 is like putting on a comfy old jumper. Like any good book it feels as though I've been reading it forever and when it's over my tube journeys will feel strange without it. And this is a novel featuring oddball characters, metaphysical plot points and strange parallel worlds where secondary moons suddenly appear in the sky. It's a tremendous skill to make something with this level of complexity so simple and pleasurable to read.
The same can't really be said of modern LitFic. Take Hilary Mantel’s Wolf Hall as an example: a great book without doubt, it contains some beautiful turns of phrase - some of which were so beautiful in fact that they required me to pause in order to fully admire them, thereby taking me completely out of the moment. It’s also told in what’s become the LifFic norm: not so much an A to B plot but as a first-person stream of consciousness which blends flashback and “present” to often confusing effect. And the level of detail and sheer number of characters requires readers who aren't au fait with the Tudor period to constantly flick back and forth to the family trees and dramatis personae at the front. Wolf Hall is not an easy read, however accomplished it may be. (And what the heck happened to the ending by the way?)
Meanwhile, Murakami's plots are frequently bonkers and yet this is never at the expense of readability. To me that's exactly what literature should be. The literary would would call me a philistine no doubt, but maybe it shouldn't be so quick to knock writers who have the balls to break free of its conventions.
"Murakami, now 62, has ceased being a novelist and has entered the dangerous world of literary phenomenon, a cult figure himself."On the surface, this would appear to make Murakami the literary equivalent of Radiohead, who now make esoteric electronica designed to appeal to a set few who - by implication - have outgrown hoary old concepts like choruses and hooks. Or perhaps Stewart Lee, who instead of telling jokes prefers to endlessly deconstruct them for his audience of delighted fellow pseuds.
But the world of novels operates in reverse. Murakami is a great writer who can combine high quality with broad appeal. He's broken free from the insular world of "literary fiction" to join the cultural mainstream, to the disgust of some parts of that establishment.
Reading 1Q84 is like putting on a comfy old jumper. Like any good book it feels as though I've been reading it forever and when it's over my tube journeys will feel strange without it. And this is a novel featuring oddball characters, metaphysical plot points and strange parallel worlds where secondary moons suddenly appear in the sky. It's a tremendous skill to make something with this level of complexity so simple and pleasurable to read.
The same can't really be said of modern LitFic. Take Hilary Mantel’s Wolf Hall as an example: a great book without doubt, it contains some beautiful turns of phrase - some of which were so beautiful in fact that they required me to pause in order to fully admire them, thereby taking me completely out of the moment. It’s also told in what’s become the LifFic norm: not so much an A to B plot but as a first-person stream of consciousness which blends flashback and “present” to often confusing effect. And the level of detail and sheer number of characters requires readers who aren't au fait with the Tudor period to constantly flick back and forth to the family trees and dramatis personae at the front. Wolf Hall is not an easy read, however accomplished it may be. (And what the heck happened to the ending by the way?)
Meanwhile, Murakami's plots are frequently bonkers and yet this is never at the expense of readability. To me that's exactly what literature should be. The literary would would call me a philistine no doubt, but maybe it shouldn't be so quick to knock writers who have the balls to break free of its conventions.
Comments