When asked about his detached writing style, Murakami himself said that it "comes from my having a strong desire to write, but having nothing to say." This struck me because it is very much opposed to the way I have conceived of creative writing, specifically through that one popular Fitzgerald quote "don't write because you want to say something, write because you have something to say." Of course, I do believe that Murakami has something to say in his works, and his works do indeed convey, if anything, an insight into Boku's view of the world. But just in considering how Murakami views his own process, about stripping back everything he didn't want to write about and realizing there was nothing left, conveys the idea that Murakami thinks of his process, at least early on, almost as arbitrary. Rubin, however, adds an extra layer to this by speaking to Murakami's discipline, to the fact that he was determined to write something, even if he didn't feel like he had anything to say. The result of this is Boku, a laid back character who doesn't seem to have very set in stone convictions or views on the world, a lost man who half the time doesn't even feel real to himself, and yet his perspective and commentary on relationships, media, and historical events/figures are very much present. Finally, I found it interesting how Rubin makes the distinction between the Murakami who writes, the creative Murakami, and the other Murakami who just lives his life, who is laid back. In the few stories we've read by Murakami, there is always this motif of Boku feeling like there is another him, it is present even in the spaghetti story, and perhaps this speaks to how Murakami himself feels— how there is the normal him, and the writer him.
No comments:
Post a Comment