It’s interesting how to people can have two diametrically opposed views on one book. Like you I had problems with the interviews, they came across as the same facts, told from slightly different angles & not always that. .Also the way that individuals still attempted to follow their routines as per normal, regardless of their injury, some couldn’t breathe, some blind, yet still as though set on autopilot tried to get to their offices to maintain some perceived equilibrium. But what shone through for me was Murakami’s input although miniscule, the way he highlighted the paths that led to this disaster like some inevitable crossing of ways. Then there was his perspective how he took us out of the microscopic & refocused us on his culture, asking questions, like why had they forsaken traditional family & the inherent values to become automatons rushing headlong into slavedom to technological consumerism & modernity,alienated from from their own people & culture. I also like the way this tied in with other Japanese authors I had read such as Shusaku Endo & Yukio Mishima & also to a certain extent Natsuo Kirina. Thanks & sorry for the waffle although didn’t agree with your post, it made me re-evaluate my thoughtsParrish.
I thank you for sharing your point of view on this book. It was the last book I read in a readathon and that's probably not the best time to be reading a book like this one. I was disappointed to find this nonfictional book to be so different from Murakami's fiction, which I find surprising and intriguing. But reading your thoughts on this book recast my views of the book and now I see it in a different way. Thank you.
Comments, comments, comments! How I love comments! (And followers, too, if you want to make me even happier!)