His male characters are great and complex only his women suck his stories are great and so is his prose decide for yourself if you can try to don't mind the horrible female characters if you like the elements I first mentioned
@@jellykd That's by far his worst book and he has at least one great female character, she's a kid though so no woman. Her name is May and she's from the wind-up bird chronicles. The others were so weird and useless.
@@namkia205 i personally think that murakami's female characters are more like hit or miss rather than straight up bad. For example Naoko was pretty complex and had a lot of depth, as well as Saeki from Kafka on the shore.
You guys build a form of dicatatorship which even artists are blamed if there was a really racist or sexist person i would agree with you but it is just stupid. Its just a form of art and experssion ıts nothing to be getting offended about.
A lot of people don't understand how others can get upset or feel uncomfortable about this things either, and say " Oh its just the way the world works " but forget that for a lot of them that is the continous reality and they're allowed to be upset by things that effect them directly while people who normally say that most probably never had an ounce of experience in such matter. After finding out how he sees women, I don't feel comfortable enough to continue reading his works because enough men sexualise women in real life, I don't need that in a fiction.
@@Ali-pk8qs Do you struggle to comprehend what was being said? Jack Edwards said that in an interview Haruki Murakami himself said that he sees women that way, not his characters.
Writing women in the eyes of men who objectify them is what you call 'can't write women' ? you failed to understand what is 'fictional writing' in the first place .
@@sirgawain6844 that’s jack’s whole point i think. You can interpret it as murakami intentionally writing the misgonystic thinking of a 19 year old for fiction’s sake, but the end of this clip kinda hints that murakami just thinks that way…
Literally reading Kafka On The Shore rn and yes, I love the metaphorical and philosophical stuff on it, yes, I think it's magical, but also yes, he's SHIT with women. It's just so confusing and honestly pulls me out of the story- like why is almost every scene with women HAS to talk about their vaginas or having intercourse?? Like usually that's no problem but when it happens almost every single time??? Jesus, Murakami. Literally any scene: so btw I have some important information- Murakami's women: OH YEAH ABOUT MY VAGINA, MY PERIOD, AND SEX LIFE- Like dude, genuinely, _w h a t?_
@@laurasalo6160which fine if that’s how he writes A woman in a singular book, but that’s how he has written women in all of his books. It’s just how he views women, not as people but as an amorphous vagina.
kafka on the beach is particularly disturbing because of the incest. like alright i get it. this is murakami's modern take on oedipus rex and his way of exploring the concept of fate and destiny. but at least oedipus didn't know he screwed his mom. kafka was like "who cares if she's my mom she's hot! i'll screw my sister too while i'm at it!" like bro 💀
He's been married to a woman for years, maybe that is all she talks about. Women write about the men they want, men write about the women they have known, especially the ones who have hurt them.
@@ahnmensch3115 dune is not for everyone and LOTR can be pretty slow at times. I would say they are actually fairly reasonable takes. Also, he never said they were bad or that he hated them; he just said they werent for him
Personally (as a woman) his writing doesn't necessarily make them tits on legs, but more like these mythical creatures, like you look at his male protagonists; they're all usually lonely and pathetic, and sad, and incompetent, and then this sexy, smart woman who has it all together and is like doing stuff off screen comes and makes him less pathetic; so to me it's like the misogyny is on the other end of the spectrum He portrays women as these mysterious mythical, amazing , creatures that are so above the men they encounter; he puts them in a pedestal thus not making them people either, but also not tits on legs (again to me) So it's more like the benin sexists I know who idealize women to the point of being flawless, so it's not good either, but I think that's why he seemed confused about being called sexist
yes exactly. the more you look at all his characters, the more you realize he only writes about strange characters. it would not make sense if he wrote about "realistic" women especially as a pov character and then all the men are these bizarre loners. there's an excess of strangeness that's always a core aspect of his main characters and to alter that to fit in to appease readers actually makes his writing somewhat insincere. pov women are simply not his forte and it's better when he writes them in the pov of a male character as it comes off more sincere, which is why people find that "problematic" because his men don't actually understand women no matter how much they are captivated by them. i much prefer it when i disagree with a writer's honesty than be coddled with what the writer perceives is the "correct way of thinking"
@@Givebackthescarf i think you misunderstand my comment. i read his characters like they don't understand women fundamentally. i do remember this character and that's exactly how i viewed the guy. this line of talk from real life men is not so uncommon. i've heard women be described in such a way by real life men, unfortunately. i don't think he has ever written a single male protagonist that has a proper understanding of women or women's nature. that's the core of this entire issue with murakami. people like yourself have a problem with the fact that he doesn't write from the POV of a gentleman. even the protagonist of the wind-up bird chronicle fundamentally doesn't understand why his wife left him, and that character is one of the more decent protagonists he wrote. the few times he attempted to write in the POV of a woman, i'm telling you, her female protags are very strange. it's better that he sticks to the POV of weird men. his portrayal of their befuddlement or misogyny towards women is actually pretty honest.
I wrote my Undergrad Dissertation last year on Murakami's portrayal of women in his Literature. It's suchhhhhh a problematic representation, that any sane person would find it hard to ignore.
i think cari can read put it best in one of her videos, where murakami's misogyny is so on the other side of the spectrum that, when interviewed about it, he literally has no idea it's misogynist. instead of hating women or seeing them as objects, he instead just does not understand them. at all. they're just these mythical fantastical creatures outside the realm of his understanding, which is still in the realm of misogyny and why his portrayal of women is still problematic because it's still dehumanizing
I don't really get what's so misogynistic about idealizing women. Our modern conception of love is literally born from literature and traditional songs or customs where women were portrayed as perfect or mythical incomprehensible beings
@@santiagomm3878 Not viewing women as humans who are nuanced with flaws and only seeing them as this sexualised perfection objectifies them. Women are real human beings, not just something sexy to look at. It also reinforces misogynistic stereotypes like beauty/sex is all a woman is good for.
@@btsislifeu6081 i think in English it's called First person singular, there are a few very charming stories, but damn those disturbing characterizations of women almost ruin the entire book for me
@@kejeso8736 it's not about going moral, if it was about that I wouldn't buy every book he writes, it's about the descriptions/lines about women literally making me cringe lmao and usually I like being uncomfortable when reading, but this wasn't an enjoyable experience in my opinion
True... Was never able to finish Kafka on the shore because of the way the writer describes women (every single time the protagonist sees a woman or even a girl).
this is probably one of his best works. definitely gives you an insight into how that type of objectification comes about. all in all, i'm glad this was the first one i read by murakami. i immediately realized that all his characters are bonkers especially the men. if you read his books with that perspective, this writer is one of the most honest, non-pretentious living writer you can come across in pretty much any bookstore.
@@maggyfrogWith what perspective, exactly? I'm not trying to argue or anything, by the way. I'm genuinely asking because I'm reading it right now and it's also my first of his works, but it's making me uncomfortable and confused. Not necessarily the "stop harassing me!" type of uncomfortable, but the "dude what the fuck?" type of uncomfortable. It breaks my immersion and pulls me out of the story. It's truly making me sad because the plot so far is so interesting.
I read kafka on the shore because it was so hyped up, and the way he wrote his women bothered me throughout the book. But the book is so incredibly overrated that I couldn't find too many negative opinions on it. Thinking maybe I judged too hard, I decided to give him another try and went for Men without Women. Now this book enraged me. Because every single woman was reduced to her looks, and while the men were all really average and at times even pathetic, they all somehow seemed to have way more character and personality than the women.
@@santiagomm3878 'No matter how you looked at her she was hardly a beauty, and there was something off-putting about her face', 'Beneath the white long-sleeved T-shirt under her jacket Kafuku could see her larger-than-average breasts.' 'Stuck-up, flat-chested, with a funny-looking nose and a nonet oo-wonderful personality'
I started reading one of his books a decade ago and I was so disturbed by his depiction of women and just… I couldn’t continue and I’m upset by it because I feel like I’m missing out but I just can’t keep reading something that makes me want to throw up on the author
HONESTLY SAME. Could not complete kafka on the shore and everyone likes him so much and i liked some aspects of the book so I wanted to read it but I just can't- i can't get over that part.
The problem is he does it in almost every other book. Sure you wanna portray a misogynist once, but once you start doing all the effing time it starts to become a problematic pattern. And remember women are also reading your books and it can be traumatic for us to be portrayed like that. I had to drop many murakami books because of how disturbed they'd make me feel.
What's traumatic about an objectifying depiction of fictional women in a fictional setting? Even if it disgusts you that doesn't take away anything from the overall message and beauty of his works
@@santiagomm3878 fiction mirrors and is intricately linked to reality and fiction also holds the power to deeply influence people. Also what he writes about women in his book is not his unique fictional creation, objectification of women is a very real thing which can trigger unpleasant emotions. I’m not promoting censorship but rather inclusivity.
@@santiagomm3878 I never said anything about the beauty of the message tho and if that’s a compromise some readers are willing to make, then sure. Some will be bothered , some won’t be bothered. But all I’m asking is male writers should try and start to look at women as humans and not objects
@@meghna7057 you are not promoting inclusivity in incentivizing people not to read Murakami. Poetry is fiction in the sense that it's literature and not factual. Poetry can be really about anthing. That's justa n example. His books aren't just the historical reality of Japan, they are also, in a way, lyrical in nature
All of his books have this objectifying. Norwegian Woods has a sex scene where a 40-year-old gets raped by a 13-year-old, a girl that is suicidal but also wants to have sexual experiences all the time despite not loving him and Midori, who loves going to BDSM cinema and wants to be thought about when the protagonist is masturbating. Hard Boiled Wonderland has the secretary in the hallway, only described by her hips. Wild Sheep Chase has the iconic "The girl who everyone had sex with, but no one knew her name". And this weakness is jarring, as for the rest, he is a wonderful writer. But that element is problematic.
@@prachiagarwal8271it's not that bad, I read Norwegian wood recently and it was a really nice read. I wasn't a huge fan of all the sex, majority of it was unnecessary but didn't detract too much from it imo
Just started Norwegian Wood and in the first 20 or so pages he mentions how much weight Naoko has lost in just a year and how she looks so much prettier now, so I’m glad to hear it’s widely known he has some problematic takes. That description of her rubbed me the wrong way immediately.
How about the end of the book? The main character fucking Naoko’s nurse after she dies just because she was an option threw me off badly, it was so disgusting.
@@santiagomm3878you're a die hard Murakami fan and it's sad you can't see what's wrong in his works because you're a fan. Being a fan is fine, being one who can't see flaws is not. It's just being stupid.
(I feel like I should preface this by saying I’m a guy) I love the idea of murikami’s style, a dreamlike, ethereal attitude to writing where you’re allowed to have loose connections, unconscious symbolism and nonsensical experiences, but after having read a couple of Murikami’s books, to me he is shielded a bit from actual criticism because of that style/attitude. Like if I finish Kafka on the Shore and think, “Well I get that there’s an Oedipus complex going on but don’t really get anything else that the book is trying to do,” the common response from pro-Murikami people is, “it’s not *supposed* to make sense. You should explore what it means to encounter something that doesn’t make sense consciously.” And while that could be true sometimes, it can also be a cop-out to actual criticism. To be perfectly honest, “It’s not supposed to make sense” is an unacceptable defense to criticism 99.9% of the time it’s said about anything.
Saying that it doesn't make sense is not really a defense, but more of an explanation. The same way that one could say a book has "bland or stereotypical characters" but in actuality, the author wrote them purposefully bland and stereotypical for "this and that reason". Doesn't automatically make the reader enjoy it more, bland is still bland, nonsensical is still nonsensical, but one should at least still consider the writer's intent behind that choice to possibly find more that'll help you enjoy it.
@@Rash23215 that word is being thrown around at people to the point its cringe and annoying. Tell me, are you gonna call me or him a racist too? No wonder people bitch about liberals so much.
@@Rash23215come on man lol I’m reading Norwegian wood and I will say while the portrayal of the women in the book is very sexualised the 2 main women in the book are actual characters who besides the over sexualisation are very well written
@@rthraitorThat's exactly it. Like, obviously he writes good but the oversexualizing ruins it for me. It's like watching a good show but the fanservice is just too much.
Literally reading Kafka On The Shore rn and yes, I love the metaphorical and philosophical stuff on it, yes, I think it's magical, but also yes, he's SHIT with women. It's just so confusing and honestly pulls me out of the story- like why is almost every scene with women HAS to talk about their vaginas or having intercourse?? Like usually that's no problem but when it happens almost every single time??? Jesus, Murakami.
I’ve only read one book, from this Author titled “Men Without Women” maybe it went over my head. But after reading his book I felt his views were more on the contrary. As if the stories followed men who could “not” live without women. This book I’m speaking of in particular seemed to paint a picture, from a males perspective, on how women had this mystic beauty about them and how fickle their hearts were, how men needed women. It just seemed as if this book was more appreciative of women in general than misogynistic.
but viewing women as mystic creatures (=dehumanization) and fickle (=shallow) are basically the tenets of misogyny… and when most people say men can’t live without women, they tend to mean that women carry whole households on their ‘fragile’ lady shoulders like it’s normal and natural, not that men need them to have deep conversations with. appreciating women because they are beautiful objects, working horses, or fertile goddesses is plain misogyny
Hmm. As a women I quite like Murakami. Whether the perspective is misogynistic is irrelevant because it it isn't portraying them. It is portraying his lonely distorted patriachal male characters. Apart from that he is an excellent writer and the windup bird chronicle is a spectacular book.
Tbh it’s curious for me as a woman to read this, it’s like those morbid things you like, like murder mysteries.It’s a new perspective and reading it just expands on it, its super insightful for me. And well would I respect him and all, no probably not, but knowing its his genuine pov is what makes it so curious, like watching what goes on inside a manic person’s brain
The hunger games thing is exactly how I feel like I was big into it when it was popular but the world does not appeal to me enough to jump back in. Dystopian trilogies at that time really did it for me but they were satisfying on their own, don’t need anymore
People who say he can’t write women haven’t read much murakami. His short stories featuring female leads are some of the best portrayals of women ever committed to a page. Also he said a lot more in that interview on the subject, and the interviewer, an author herself, credited him for his story Sleep, and said it was the best writing of a woman by a male author that she’d ever read
Strongly disagree, It's not wrong at all and he doesn't owe you or anyone a change on how he writes adult female characters just saying not hating. Let's not forget that there are romance books by other authors that sexualize adult male characters but no one ever complains about it. I don't believe that the sexualization of women to cater to men is a bad thing at all and if that's how he wants to write his woman characters i am more than ok with it. Just because certain people don't like the way he writes his woman characters dosen't mean it is neccesarily morally wrong or problematic.
Read "Sleep" by Murakami. Mieko Kawakami speaks about it significantly in that interview. It follows a female main character and is absolutely extraordinary. It adds an even more curious layer to this discussion.
as a woman, you guys are overreacting about this. and completely neglecting the depth at which he portrayed characters like naoko in norwegian wood. he created this depth of a character who truly resonated with me as a teenage girl, and now men and so many others are just dismissing him as having “portrayed women badly/sexually”. the sensuality in the book, for me at least, was aesthetically beautiful as well as empowering. the reductionism is this claim that he objectified women is so dissapointing & im sick of people dismissing his work because of it
I agree! When looking at a character, we want to see the world from the character’s eyes, not how the author sees it..And I agree with what you said about it being very sensual.
Well said. Fiction should be a place where an author is free to express himself but also get into the headspace of characters that are different from himself. People shouldnt judge an author by characters actions or way of thinking. Harukis books are not autobiographical.
I think you are neglecting the depth of Murakami and his readers here. Reading thru some of that interview Jack mentioned that the end here, he and the interviewer have very different perspectives on his characters. He doesn't think his portrayals are sexist but his opinion isn't automatically correct because he's the writer. Our writing is always going to have our unconscious biases. He writes from his lived experience as a man in a society known for how people must conform. Some readers may dismiss all his works because of that sexism and like... what is wrong with that? There are many other authors out there with equally as meaningful characters or interesting stories that will resonate with that reader better. Other readers will be able to look past the sexism or accept it as part of his perspective and enjoy the story nonetheless. Others will not see it as sexist, like he doesn't.
Women don’t have to force themselves to appreciate the work of a sexist author. Just like black people for instance don’t have to force themselves appreciate the work of a racist author. Authors aren’t above scrutiny and criticism.
What the hell are you all talking about!? murakami books barely have characters, male or female, and they all exist in some liminal space. I think it's a little much to call him misogynistic just because his books arent really about characters. I just finished Wind-Up Bird and the male protagonist has almost zero going on, his whole life is focussed on getting a back woman who barely likes him. As a western, i also think we can be a little arrogant in think we can instantly pick up a translation of a japanese book and instantly understand all the cultural nuiance. We are talking aboit a country who on just raised the age of cinsent from 13 to 16... That doesnt sit right where im from (UK) but can we really condemn a whole culture for viewing things differently to us?
Okay. Valid point (from a female perspective). But is a man responsible for the right representation of women? I myself have difficulties finding books written by women where I find a true, in depth representation of what it is like to be a woman. Don't even get me started on the most famous female writers right now (with mainly female following) that portray women as doormats who can take any treatment as long as their 'love' interest looks good. Recently I was reading Clarice Lispector and that's when I realized how rare it is to find a woman who truly captures the depths and many angles of women (if you have other recommendations, please share). So, while calling men out for their problematic portrayal of women, also call out female authors for their lack of representation of the 'topic' they are experts in.
If a man is incapable of writing over 50% of the population well, that'a a major writing flaw. I would say men are absolutely responsible for being able to write a woman character that is as well written as his male characters and not as some kind of object (sexual, on a pedestal, etc). It's the bare minimum to expect men to understand that women are human too, and it's not the responsibility of women to teach men the most basic kind of empathy. Also, if the women writers you're reading is Sarah J Maas or Colleen Hoover or etc . . . then that's like going into a Marvel movie trying to understand the nuances of men. It's silly popcorn. Absolutely nothing wrong with enjoying or reading or writing that stuff, but it's not supposed to be a deep exploration of human nature. It's fun escapism. No one (or mostly no one) is looking for men to understand the "mysterious inner goddess" or whatever (honestly this idea that women are so hard to write or so mysterious is baffling to me, like just write a good character but has boobs, how hard is it?), but just to give their women characters equal treatment as the men. That they don't just exist to serve male characters and aren't wholly defined by some sexist stereotypical role. They should have their own goals, dreams, agency, and personality - they should get to be funny and gross and sexual and asexual and right and wrong and fucked up and admirable as all the male characters. Like, take Brandon Sanderson. He's praised for his women characters and critiqued for not having good characters because his characters aren't that deep, but his women get equal treatment as his men (especially as he goes along). No one is asking for the perfect character, just equal treatment. It's really the bare minimum and it's pathetic so many male writers can't even do that.
@@toriwork8891 I mean yeah, I do fully agree with you that women should be represented well. My point is though, that we should expect it from both genders. I do not read Colleen Hoover (I have listened to one book to my greatest regret) and I realized that some women can be more misogynistic than men. True, as writers they are not writing in the same genre nor are on the same league, but I do not agree that the content of her books should not weigh as heavy as Murakami's. In fact her books are mainly read by teenagers who still have to develop a perspective on relationships between men and women, whereas the readers of Murakami are mostly adults who understand context and a character's perspective.
Which Murakami books are you referring to precisely? I have read several of the author ( A Wild Sheep Chase, The Elephant Vanishes, danse danse danse, Kafka on the Shore ), and I have never felt this misogine side which seems to be denounced here. In my comprehension the female characters most of the time embody the archetypal spirit guide for the protagonists of his stories
@@Ryo-jb4zn instead of looking down on me by telling me that I need to educate myself, perhaps you could construct an argument that is not authoritative and explain by example how Murakami is a mysogynist author?
He describes women as if they're walking sex objects, legs, ass, breast, vagina, other times a beauty which doesn't seem human, even when describing minors. Adult characters talking and thinking of minors sexually isn't okay. If you couldn't tell you just didn't want to.
@@nondescript4311 his writing style is deeply introspective and centered around the male protagonist, which can result in less development of other characters, including women. And if the female characters are hypersexualized, one-dimensional and serve mainly to facilitate the journey or personal growth of the male protagonist, it is because the surreal and magical realism elements of his stories inherently create more abstract and symbolic characterizations. His representation of women does not correspond to contemporary feminist standards, but reflects a particular narrative style.
In After Dark, which is my favorite Murakami novel, I genuinely felt like the women were well written. I have fellow women in my life that acted and thought and behaved like those characters. Maybe it's just my interpretation, and it's been around 3 years since I last read After Dark- but I loved that novel and didn't feel like there was a lot of problematic misogynistic content outside of how the "bad" characters were acting which was on purpose. I don't negate the idea that he likely does write women badly but honestly- I think it's just a flaw Murakami has, and all writers have them. I'll have to read Kafka on the Shore because so many people seem to have that specific gripe with that book- maybe my perspective will change then.
Terry Pratchett is still the best I've seen of male authors writing women. They're different ages, sizes, have a wide variety of goals and desires, have real relationships and make real mistakes. 11/10, still my favorite.
lol yeah, I really enjoy Murakami’s work but I absolutely get the impression that the sexism is just coming from him and not an intentional characterisation
But the liberation of *fiction* shouldn't be restricted, no? I am a woman myself and i live my whole almost 30 years of life in south east asia has no problem at all reading all of his works. I'm not offended with what he said in his *novel*. People should have the freedom to decide for themselves to support his books. Remember that people's preference is very diverse. Afterall book should be enjoyable. I think it's not your place to judge the right and wrong way of thinking when people reading his book
I'm southeast asian too and I agree with you 100%. People cancelling everything is the reason why everything is so bland today. Movies books etc... art is meant to be unrestricted. They should write their own book but of course it's just easier to destroy someone else's
John Banville, on the other hand, has received acclaim for how we writes women. Then he opens his mouth in interviews and makes you wish you had a Time Machine* for before he said problematic garbage that taints his work in your memory. Often even good writing isn’t enough. So many messy writers. *I know Time Machine isn’t capitalized in this context, but my iPhone didn’t get the memo.
OK sorry for the excessive number of poems I’m too lazy to copy into a single one, but I really wanted to say how important your remark on working with metre first, before venturing into free verse, is: the same goes for art. All the great painters that broke from the Academy and have been the unfair target of poorly educated artistic scrutiny could and did draw to the Academic standards. They weren’t “painting like 5 year olds,” they had already excelled at structure before they intentionally and ideologically broke from it. And this also reminds me of Gordon Ramsay who, when someone on Hell’s Kitchen made a “deconstructed dish” to show him, was furious anyone would do deconstruction before they could prepare the actual dish to perfection. Paraphrasing, he said “Be able to make the constructed dish before deconstructing it.” I think that advice works across every imaginable field, not just the arts-in-the-general-sense. I can’t imagine anything it wouldn’t apply to. All this rambling to say: great and valuable advice! I’ve loved both of your poetry videos, I’ll check the others on another night. Keeping my fingers crossed you’ll upload more on literature!
I'm sorry but I feel like this is an opinion that gets repeated infinitely because it has become popular to say that "Murakami's a mysoginist" and if you don't state that, you're automatically morally deranged. And although everyone's entitled to their own opinion, as someone who has read almost all of Murakami's production and is studying japanese literature at univetsity, I think his writing has been misjudged by young mainstream audiences. Even if there are some frequent doubtious comments about women's breasts etc., Murakami is well known for his basic male protaginsts who live boring lives and in those contexts the female characters are actually the most interesting ones: the women in his books are ambitious, complex and precious keys to the hidden world of his magical realism type of style. They make his books move.
Not to mention that i think a more apt phrase than "Misogyny" is "Fantasising". Murakamis female character's often appear smarter/more mature than his male character's. It reminds me a bit of how Dostoevsky's female character's are often written as angelic "saviours" so to speak. Realistic? Not really. Misogynistic? I really doubt it. Not to mention Murakami has had a stable marriage since 1971. If he was some sort of weird sex pest in real life I'd be more inclined to listen to the claim that he's misogynistic, but that doesn't seem to be the case.
My favourite portrayal of women have to be by Rabindranath Tagore.. he was way ahead of his time and his women characters are so vulnerable and yet so strong
I think murakami has done justice to both female and male characters in the book. Like kafka meets the girl on the bus and she sort of guides him helps him in some way to get out of the holds the same way In wind up bird Toru has May kashara that is always guiding him. So for me i personally feel he writes great females characters as well !
Well, not all writers would be feminists or portray characters in a sane way. We should just accept it, thats how he writes. And like it or not his writing has an amazing charm. And as a male specimen of the human race, I feel that his writings in many ways resound to me!
Well, I really agree that his portrayals of women are quite bad. But at the same time we are talking about a man in his 70's coming from a society (the Japanese society) which is still today very much based on strong patriarchal values (at least more than many western countries). Yes, Japan in recent years has evolved a lot regarding gender equality, and no, I'm not trying to totally justify him, but that is a fact. So instead of trying to pretend of him to change what he writes (which is highly improbable) we as readers we should recognise and support other female authors, like the already mentioned Mieko Kawakami: she is a great author, as Murakami himself also said, but obviously she has a different perspective on womanhood and society. I personally, as a young cis woman, really resonated with what she has written. Same goes with the great work of Banana Yoshimoto. I highly recommend both! (Of course I also like Murakami, simply women's point of view is not his thing)
i think what murakami tries to do is make it more disturbing with his disturbing portrayal of women, like intentionally. But it would have been great if in some of his novels he took a different aproach.
Most of the women characters in his novels are built in such a way that most men likes them to be. Sorry, but that's how I see it. I don't see it as problematic-and wouldn't jump to that political correctness bandwagon, which is rather pathetic-but I think some men find it hard to swallow that they tend to objectify women. Men likes to think of women as mystical creatures creatures, they like the thrill of the chase, or the idea that a woman is an "idea" or a puzzle that needs to be solved. But at the same time, they don't like rejection so they settled with women who is available or can be easily reached.
Murakami is literally million years old man raised and lived his whole life in an asian (patriarchal) country with deep and complex hierarchy system. What would you expect?
A critical and rational view of the world instead of a world view that was forced down his throat and he just accepted it? Perhaps because he enjoys and agrees with it tbh
Whether he's misogynistic himself, although disappointing, is irrelevant to whether portraying the female characters from the perspective of a misogynist in the books is believable and actually works. And I'd say it does work 🤷🏾
He is an exceptional writer, and no other auther that I know of can capture his level of intense emotion. Also, he can write women with depth.. Not Because he oversexualize them that me he can't make them feel real at times. I hate how he sexualize everything, but he gives alot more than what he takes.
when will people understand that the author’s opinion and his writings should be separated? why couldn’t Murakamu’s novels have acquired meaning that wasn’t intended by the writer or even contrary to his views?
I just finished reading My first book from Murakami. Unfortunately it was Kafka on the Shore. I am not picking another book by him. I just can't. I gave him the benefit of doubt at first. It was just too incesty. The whole damn book right from the start. I dreaded reading the Kafka's part. I liked Nakata's quite a lot but it was only because Nakata didn't have any sexual feelings so there was minimal objectifying of women. It only happend in the later half of the book because of the character named Hoshino. I just have a lot to say about the book...........
What people aren't understanding is such portrayal of women in one or two books or a couple of stories can be justified as "requirement" for the story or the character. But if that's the ONLY way he can portray women then that's when it becomes problematic. Sure it is art, but that doesn't mean you have no responsibility as an artist about what your perpetrating in the society. People really need to understand nuance. Things are hardly ever black and white.
I love that his books are so brilliantly written and they still trigger women. I mean why are you reading it if you don’t like it. If you don’t like it don’t read it. It’s literally as simple as that but no women need to bitch and moan and shame it because they don’t agree with the angle he takes. That’s his prerogative as an author. Get over yourselves ladies. Go read your chick lit if it bothers you so much.
Any recommendations of Murakami which doesn’t this misogynistic views? Because i read kafka on the shore and really like it, but had to skip every time a woman was in the scene because his portrayal of them makes me nauseous.
It's my least favourite part of Murakami's work. I enjoy other aspects of his novels, but that aspect is always a heavy thorn in my side when I'm reading him. Did Hemingway fall flat on his face so that Murakami could get up and merely crawl?
Honestly im so tired of people making excuses for this guy. If you can't write women then you aren't a good writer. I dont care how ~aesthetic~ his books look in your instagram pictures, he's a one trick pony.
This take, I totally agree with. If you can only write one type of character, story and theme over and over, and not even depict an entire gender without objectifying them, then you aren't a very good author. You might have some good qualities, but you're a one-trick pony.
Murakami’s 1Q84 is like a massive justification for one male character to be a pedophile. I finished that book and swore never again would I read something by him.
that's what i hate from murakami hahah but damn no author can describe loneliness and heartbreak THAT DEEP AND BEAUTIFUL
His male characters are great and complex only his women suck his stories are great and so is his prose decide for yourself if you can try to don't mind the horrible female characters if you like the elements I first mentioned
@@namkia205 Wow interesting, I didn't find his male characters very complex, although I've only read norwegian wood and didn't like it very much.
@@jellykd That's by far his worst book and he has at least one great female character, she's a kid though so no woman. Her name is May and she's from the wind-up bird chronicles. The others were so weird and useless.
@@namkia205 Imo the women in After Dark were written pretty well
@@namkia205 i personally think that murakami's female characters are more like hit or miss rather than straight up bad. For example Naoko was pretty complex and had a lot of depth, as well as Saeki from Kafka on the shore.
It’s good that you’re looking at the cultural and historical lens through which he viewed the world. A cloudy, misogynist lens it was, apparently.
I am not western and I am not sure what is going on there really sorry for you.
You guys build a form of dicatatorship which even artists are blamed if there was a really racist or sexist person i would agree with you but it is just stupid. Its just a form of art and experssion ıts nothing to be getting offended about.
better than sheltering yourself into thinking everyone has sunshine and rainbows for morals 🤷🏻♀️
A lot of people don't understand how others can get upset or feel uncomfortable about this things either, and say " Oh its just the way the world works " but forget that for a lot of them that is the continous reality and they're allowed to be upset by things that effect them directly while people who normally say that most probably never had an ounce of experience in such matter.
After finding out how he sees women, I don't feel comfortable enough to continue reading his works because enough men sexualise women in real life, I don't need that in a fiction.
@@Ali-pk8qs Do you struggle to comprehend what was being said?
Jack Edwards said that in an interview Haruki Murakami himself said that he sees women that way, not his characters.
That's why his books without women or where they aren't the focus are the best he just can't write women 💀
Which ones are the ones where he doesnt mention women? Bc i would like to read those and not the other ones
@@micaeladiaz8418I liked the strange library, it’s just a short story of his
Writing women in the eyes of men who objectify them is what you call 'can't write women' ?
you failed to understand what is 'fictional writing' in the first place .
@@sirgawain6844Tf are you even saying 💀
@@sirgawain6844 that’s jack’s whole point i think. You can interpret it as murakami intentionally writing the misgonystic thinking of a 19 year old for fiction’s sake, but the end of this clip kinda hints that murakami just thinks that way…
Literally reading Kafka On The Shore rn and yes, I love the metaphorical and philosophical stuff on it, yes, I think it's magical, but also yes, he's SHIT with women. It's just so confusing and honestly pulls me out of the story- like why is almost every scene with women HAS to talk about their vaginas or having intercourse?? Like usually that's no problem but when it happens almost every single time??? Jesus, Murakami.
Literally any scene: so btw I have some important information-
Murakami's women: OH YEAH ABOUT MY VAGINA, MY PERIOD, AND SEX LIFE-
Like dude, genuinely, _w h a t?_
Maybe he once had to suffer a female just like that.
@@laurasalo6160which fine if that’s how he writes A woman in a singular book, but that’s how he has written women in all of his books. It’s just how he views women, not as people but as an amorphous vagina.
@@laurasalo6160begone, incel
kafka on the beach is particularly disturbing because of the incest. like alright i get it. this is murakami's modern take on oedipus rex and his way of exploring the concept of fate and destiny. but at least oedipus didn't know he screwed his mom. kafka was like "who cares if she's my mom she's hot! i'll screw my sister too while i'm at it!" like bro 💀
He's been married to a woman for years, maybe that is all she talks about. Women write about the men they want, men write about the women they have known, especially the ones who have hurt them.
I've never seen Jack have an unreasonable or bad take on anything if I'm being honest
He doesn't like the lord of the rings......
@@GB81247 fair enough
yeah, his takes on Lord of the Rings and Dune are questionable.
he thinks dune is bad....
@@ahnmensch3115 dune is not for everyone and LOTR can be pretty slow at times. I would say they are actually fairly reasonable takes. Also, he never said they were bad or that he hated them; he just said they werent for him
Personally (as a woman) his writing doesn't necessarily make them tits on legs, but more like these mythical creatures, like you look at his male protagonists; they're all usually lonely and pathetic, and sad, and incompetent, and then this sexy, smart woman who has it all together and is like doing stuff off screen comes and makes him less pathetic; so to me it's like the misogyny is on the other end of the spectrum
He portrays women as these mysterious mythical, amazing , creatures that are so above the men they encounter; he puts them in a pedestal thus not making them people either, but also not tits on legs (again to me)
So it's more like the benin sexists I know who idealize women to the point of being flawless, so it's not good either, but I think that's why he seemed confused about being called sexist
tbh tho, it is a reflection of the way many japanese men treat women...
yes exactly. the more you look at all his characters, the more you realize he only writes about strange characters. it would not make sense if he wrote about "realistic" women especially as a pov character and then all the men are these bizarre loners. there's an excess of strangeness that's always a core aspect of his main characters and to alter that to fit in to appease readers actually makes his writing somewhat insincere. pov women are simply not his forte and it's better when he writes them in the pov of a male character as it comes off more sincere, which is why people find that "problematic" because his men don't actually understand women no matter how much they are captivated by them. i much prefer it when i disagree with a writer's honesty than be coddled with what the writer perceives is the "correct way of thinking"
So like a Japanese 'Manic Pixie Dream Girl'?
@@Givebackthescarf
i think you misunderstand my comment. i read his characters like they don't understand women fundamentally. i do remember this character and that's exactly how i viewed the guy. this line of talk from real life men is not so uncommon. i've heard women be described in such a way by real life men, unfortunately.
i don't think he has ever written a single male protagonist that has a proper understanding of women or women's nature. that's the core of this entire issue with murakami. people like yourself have a problem with the fact that he doesn't write from the POV of a gentleman.
even the protagonist of the wind-up bird chronicle fundamentally doesn't understand why his wife left him, and that character is one of the more decent protagonists he wrote.
the few times he attempted to write in the POV of a woman, i'm telling you, her female protags are very strange. it's better that he sticks to the POV of weird men. his portrayal of their befuddlement or misogyny towards women is actually pretty honest.
@@maggyfrogamen!
What a treat, Jack and Nathaniel in the same room!! The collab we didn’t know we needed 😊
I wrote my Undergrad Dissertation last year on Murakami's portrayal of women in his Literature. It's suchhhhhh a problematic representation, that any sane person would find it hard to ignore.
seem not very sane to me, poor baby woke
Would you let me read it please?
I've only noticed after it fucked me up😬
😂 Congratulations woke clown! You found something outrageous..
That's exactly what Art is about
Grow up, and have fun in your gorgeous bubble world
Omg yes
Oooh my god, i knew i wasn't crazy for thinking he just can't write female characters.
i think cari can read put it best in one of her videos, where murakami's misogyny is so on the other side of the spectrum that, when interviewed about it, he literally has no idea it's misogynist. instead of hating women or seeing them as objects, he instead just does not understand them. at all. they're just these mythical fantastical creatures outside the realm of his understanding, which is still in the realm of misogyny and why his portrayal of women is still problematic because it's still dehumanizing
You clearly don't know the definition of misogyny... You should have said "sexist".
Cope
Misogyny is by definition hating women. So, simply by your definition, you are wrong. Sexism, that's more adequate.
I don't really get what's so misogynistic about idealizing women. Our modern conception of love is literally born from literature and traditional songs or customs where women were portrayed as perfect or mythical incomprehensible beings
@@santiagomm3878
Not viewing women as humans who are nuanced with flaws and only seeing them as this sexualised perfection objectifies them. Women are real human beings, not just something sexy to look at. It also reinforces misogynistic stereotypes like beauty/sex is all a woman is good for.
His latest book of short stories has SO many disturbing lines about women that it's been months and I still can't finish it
Will you please tell me the name of these short stories i want to read them
@@btsislifeu6081 i think in English it's called First person singular, there are a few very charming stories, but damn those disturbing characterizations of women almost ruin the entire book for me
If one has to go so moral when reading literature, the best thing to do is not reading at all. Calm down a bit.
If one has to go so moral when reading literature, the best thing to do is not reading at all. Calm down a bit.
@@kejeso8736 it's not about going moral, if it was about that I wouldn't buy every book he writes, it's about the descriptions/lines about women literally making me cringe lmao and usually I like being uncomfortable when reading, but this wasn't an enjoyable experience in my opinion
True... Was never able to finish Kafka on the shore because of the way the writer describes women (every single time the protagonist sees a woman or even a girl).
Stop being so sensitive.
Don’t finish it unless you also like incest and pedophilia ✌️
@@YatashaPenguin Stop being so dismissive
this is probably one of his best works. definitely gives you an insight into how that type of objectification comes about. all in all, i'm glad this was the first one i read by murakami. i immediately realized that all his characters are bonkers especially the men. if you read his books with that perspective, this writer is one of the most honest, non-pretentious living writer you can come across in pretty much any bookstore.
@@maggyfrogWith what perspective, exactly? I'm not trying to argue or anything, by the way. I'm genuinely asking because I'm reading it right now and it's also my first of his works, but it's making me uncomfortable and confused. Not necessarily the "stop harassing me!" type of uncomfortable, but the "dude what the fuck?" type of uncomfortable. It breaks my immersion and pulls me out of the story. It's truly making me sad because the plot so far is so interesting.
I read kafka on the shore because it was so hyped up, and the way he wrote his women bothered me throughout the book. But the book is so incredibly overrated that I couldn't find too many negative opinions on it. Thinking maybe I judged too hard, I decided to give him another try and went for Men without Women. Now this book enraged me. Because every single woman was reduced to her looks, and while the men were all really average and at times even pathetic, they all somehow seemed to have way more character and personality than the women.
Exactly. too overrated. from the second he described Sakura i KNEW just exactly what kind of Author he is.
@@MiyukiixxZ right??!
You didn't understand his style of writing, that's fine, but don't call him overrated when all you got from his books was annoyance
@@santiagomm3878 Oversexualizing women is not a style
@@santiagomm3878
'No matter how you looked at her she was hardly a beauty, and there was
something off-putting about her face',
'Beneath the white long-sleeved T-shirt under her jacket Kafuku could see her
larger-than-average breasts.'
'Stuck-up, flat-chested, with a funny-looking nose and a nonet oo-wonderful personality'
I started reading one of his books a decade ago and I was so disturbed by his depiction of women and just… I couldn’t continue and I’m upset by it because I feel like I’m missing out but I just can’t keep reading something that makes me want to throw up on the author
you're so sensitive
@@santiagomm3878 I am, yeah
@@santiagomm3878 you're so dismissive and not understanding
HONESTLY SAME. Could not complete kafka on the shore and everyone likes him so much and i liked some aspects of the book so I wanted to read it but I just can't- i can't get over that part.
The problem is he does it in almost every other book. Sure you wanna portray a misogynist once, but once you start doing all the effing time it starts to become a problematic pattern. And remember women are also reading your books and it can be traumatic for us to be portrayed like that. I had to drop many murakami books because of how disturbed they'd make me feel.
What's traumatic about an objectifying depiction of fictional women in a fictional setting? Even if it disgusts you that doesn't take away anything from the overall message and beauty of his works
TRUE. Never gonna try reading his books again.
@@santiagomm3878 fiction mirrors and is intricately linked to reality and fiction also holds the power to deeply influence people. Also what he writes about women in his book is not his unique fictional creation, objectification of women is a very real thing which can trigger unpleasant emotions. I’m not promoting censorship but rather inclusivity.
@@santiagomm3878 I never said anything about the beauty of the message tho and if that’s a compromise some readers are willing to make, then sure. Some will be bothered , some won’t be bothered. But all I’m asking is male writers should try and start to look at women as humans and not objects
@@meghna7057 you are not promoting inclusivity in incentivizing people not to read Murakami. Poetry is fiction in the sense that it's literature and not factual. Poetry can be really about anthing. That's justa n example. His books aren't just the historical reality of Japan, they are also, in a way, lyrical in nature
All of his books have this objectifying. Norwegian Woods has a sex scene where a 40-year-old gets raped by a 13-year-old, a girl that is suicidal but also wants to have sexual experiences all the time despite not loving him and Midori, who loves going to BDSM cinema and wants to be thought about when the protagonist is masturbating. Hard Boiled Wonderland has the secretary in the hallway, only described by her hips. Wild Sheep Chase has the iconic "The girl who everyone had sex with, but no one knew her name". And this weakness is jarring, as for the rest, he is a wonderful writer. But that element is problematic.
These sound really disturbing! I recently got two of his books but now I'm seriously scared about starting them.
@@prachiagarwal8271it's not that bad, I read Norwegian wood recently and it was a really nice read. I wasn't a huge fan of all the sex, majority of it was unnecessary but didn't detract too much from it imo
Thank you for the warning. I am NEVER going to read this author now.
@@georginatolandwhy not reading it first and having your own lmao
@@georginatoland do you ever form your own opinions?
Omg ☺️ Love to see you engage in a conversation. How interesting to see you two together ✨
And then he writes from the perspective of a woman (1q84) and it's literally the same take - that was it for me
Just started Norwegian Wood and in the first 20 or so pages he mentions how much weight Naoko has lost in just a year and how she looks so much prettier now, so I’m glad to hear it’s widely known he has some problematic takes. That description of her rubbed me the wrong way immediately.
I DNF'd that book and the movie.
How about the end of the book? The main character fucking Naoko’s nurse after she dies just because she was an option threw me off badly, it was so disgusting.
Don't women care just as much about their appearance and criticize each other even more then men?
@@santiagomm3878It's just a generalization. Not everyone is like this.
@@santiagomm3878you're a die hard Murakami fan and it's sad you can't see what's wrong in his works because you're a fan. Being a fan is fine, being one who can't see flaws is not. It's just being stupid.
(I feel like I should preface this by saying I’m a guy) I love the idea of murikami’s style, a dreamlike, ethereal attitude to writing where you’re allowed to have loose connections, unconscious symbolism and nonsensical experiences, but after having read a couple of Murikami’s books, to me he is shielded a bit from actual criticism because of that style/attitude. Like if I finish Kafka on the Shore and think, “Well I get that there’s an Oedipus complex going on but don’t really get anything else that the book is trying to do,” the common response from pro-Murikami people is, “it’s not *supposed* to make sense. You should explore what it means to encounter something that doesn’t make sense consciously.” And while that could be true sometimes, it can also be a cop-out to actual criticism. To be perfectly honest, “It’s not supposed to make sense” is an unacceptable defense to criticism 99.9% of the time it’s said about anything.
Saying that it doesn't make sense is not really a defense, but more of an explanation. The same way that one could say a book has "bland or stereotypical characters" but in actuality, the author wrote them purposefully bland and stereotypical for "this and that reason".
Doesn't automatically make the reader enjoy it more, bland is still bland, nonsensical is still nonsensical, but one should at least still consider the writer's intent behind that choice to possibly find more that'll help you enjoy it.
I've read 3 books from him thus far. I found his portrait of women can be described as "fantasizing" rather than "objectifying". Maybe it's just me.
It's not just u.... There are many mysoginists like u....
@@Rash23215 that word is being thrown around at people to the point its cringe and annoying.
Tell me, are you gonna call me or him a racist too?
No wonder people bitch about liberals so much.
@@Rash23215come on man lol I’m reading Norwegian wood and I will say while the portrayal of the women in the book is very sexualised the 2 main women in the book are actual characters who besides the over sexualisation are very well written
@@Rash23215cry about it
@@rthraitorThat's exactly it. Like, obviously he writes good but the oversexualizing ruins it for me. It's like watching a good show but the fanservice is just too much.
It happens in every single one of his books
"Tits on legs." Yep. That's exactly right.
Literally reading Kafka On The Shore rn and yes, I love the metaphorical and philosophical stuff on it, yes, I think it's magical, but also yes, he's SHIT with women. It's just so confusing and honestly pulls me out of the story- like why is almost every scene with women HAS to talk about their vaginas or having intercourse?? Like usually that's no problem but when it happens almost every single time??? Jesus, Murakami.
The main character is a 15 year old boy, contemplate what that means.
omg two of my favorite RUclipsrs
currently reading kafta on shore and i can understand your points
Funny, insightful, and fantastic editing! Subscribed ❤️
So this "murakami depiction" of women as being problematic and misogynistic is a concrete and undeniable fact?
It's pretty obvious for anyone with more than dog level intelligence.
Wow these were some great questions! I really enjoyed your conversation
Love the cooperation with Jack
I'm a woman and fucking love Murakami but he's sooo problematic in this sense
Ever found something NOT disturbing your rosy bubble world?
Art isn't about pleasuring the narrow minded or intolerant hypocrite!
Now go berserk.. 😅
Such an easy throwaway word
I’ve only read one book, from this Author titled “Men Without Women” maybe it went over my head. But after reading his book I felt his views were more on the contrary. As if the stories followed men who could “not” live without women. This book I’m speaking of in particular seemed to paint a picture, from a males perspective, on how women had this mystic beauty about them and how fickle their hearts were, how men needed women. It just seemed as if this book was more appreciative of women in general than misogynistic.
but viewing women as mystic creatures (=dehumanization) and fickle (=shallow) are basically the tenets of misogyny… and when most people say men can’t live without women, they tend to mean that women carry whole households on their ‘fragile’ lady shoulders like it’s normal and natural, not that men need them to have deep conversations with. appreciating women because they are beautiful objects, working horses, or fertile goddesses is plain misogyny
Every time I see two guys like this call something problematic it makes me want to read it more.
Hmm. As a women I quite like Murakami. Whether the perspective is misogynistic is irrelevant because it it isn't portraying them. It is portraying his lonely distorted patriachal male characters. Apart from that he is an excellent writer and the windup bird chronicle is a spectacular book.
Tbh it’s curious for me as a woman to read this, it’s like those morbid things you like, like murder mysteries.It’s a new perspective and reading it just expands on it, its super insightful for me. And well would I respect him and all, no probably not, but knowing its his genuine pov is what makes it so curious, like watching what goes on inside a manic person’s brain
This is the first time I’ve seen a video where Jack hasn’t mentioned his literature degree
The hunger games thing is exactly how I feel like I was big into it when it was popular but the world does not appeal to me enough to jump back in. Dystopian trilogies at that time really did it for me but they were satisfying on their own, don’t need anymore
That girl in after dark, the one that's going abroad to study, was pretty cool.
What a great vid!
People who say he can’t write women haven’t read much murakami. His short stories featuring female leads are some of the best portrayals of women ever committed to a page. Also he said a lot more in that interview on the subject, and the interviewer, an author herself, credited him for his story Sleep, and said it was the best writing of a woman by a male author that she’d ever read
I have one of his books on my shelf. I definitely don’t feel like reading it even more. I don’t have the patience for stock characters.
Strongly disagree, It's not wrong at all and he doesn't owe you or anyone a change on how he writes adult female characters just saying not hating. Let's not forget that there are romance books by other authors that sexualize adult male characters but no one ever complains about it. I don't believe that the sexualization of women to cater to men is a bad thing at all and if that's how he wants to write his woman characters i am more than ok with it. Just because certain people don't like the way he writes his woman characters dosen't mean it is neccesarily morally wrong or problematic.
Read "Sleep" by Murakami. Mieko Kawakami speaks about it significantly in that interview. It follows a female main character and is absolutely extraordinary. It adds an even more curious layer to this discussion.
as a woman, you guys are overreacting about this. and completely neglecting the depth at which he portrayed characters like naoko in norwegian wood. he created this depth of a character who truly resonated with me as a teenage girl, and now men and so many others are just dismissing him as having “portrayed women badly/sexually”. the sensuality in the book, for me at least, was aesthetically beautiful as well as empowering. the reductionism is this claim that he objectified women is so dissapointing & im sick of people dismissing his work because of it
thank you for the explanation
it's funny how everyone finds something in everything and connects it to misogyny these days... 😢😢
I agree! When looking at a character, we want to see the world from the character’s eyes, not how the author sees it..And I agree with what you said about it being very sensual.
Well said. Fiction should be a place where an author is free to express himself but also get into the headspace of characters that are different from himself.
People shouldnt judge an author by characters actions or way of thinking. Harukis books are not autobiographical.
I think you are neglecting the depth of Murakami and his readers here. Reading thru some of that interview Jack mentioned that the end here, he and the interviewer have very different perspectives on his characters. He doesn't think his portrayals are sexist but his opinion isn't automatically correct because he's the writer. Our writing is always going to have our unconscious biases. He writes from his lived experience as a man in a society known for how people must conform. Some readers may dismiss all his works because of that sexism and like... what is wrong with that? There are many other authors out there with equally as meaningful characters or interesting stories that will resonate with that reader better. Other readers will be able to look past the sexism or accept it as part of his perspective and enjoy the story nonetheless. Others will not see it as sexist, like he doesn't.
Women don’t have to force themselves to appreciate the work of a sexist author. Just like black people for instance don’t have to force themselves appreciate the work of a racist author. Authors aren’t above scrutiny and criticism.
What the hell are you all talking about!? murakami books barely have characters, male or female, and they all exist in some liminal space. I think it's a little much to call him misogynistic just because his books arent really about characters. I just finished Wind-Up Bird and the male protagonist has almost zero going on, his whole life is focussed on getting a back woman who barely likes him. As a western, i also think we can be a little arrogant in think we can instantly pick up a translation of a japanese book and instantly understand all the cultural nuiance. We are talking aboit a country who on just raised the age of cinsent from 13 to 16... That doesnt sit right where im from (UK) but can we really condemn a whole culture for viewing things differently to us?
Actually, that's a false premise, because the thirteen law its a choice most prefectures, the age is sixteen or seventeen
Deeply problematic obviously but I admire the mans honesty. She gave him a scapegoat and he doubled down instead lol
Okay. Valid point (from a female perspective). But is a man responsible for the right representation of women? I myself have difficulties finding books written by women where I find a true, in depth representation of what it is like to be a woman. Don't even get me started on the most famous female writers right now (with mainly female following) that portray women as doormats who can take any treatment as long as their 'love' interest looks good. Recently I was reading Clarice Lispector and that's when I realized how rare it is to find a woman who truly captures the depths and many angles of women (if you have other recommendations, please share). So, while calling men out for their problematic portrayal of women, also call out female authors for their lack of representation of the 'topic' they are experts in.
If a man is incapable of writing over 50% of the population well, that'a a major writing flaw. I would say men are absolutely responsible for being able to write a woman character that is as well written as his male characters and not as some kind of object (sexual, on a pedestal, etc). It's the bare minimum to expect men to understand that women are human too, and it's not the responsibility of women to teach men the most basic kind of empathy. Also, if the women writers you're reading is Sarah J Maas or Colleen Hoover or etc . . . then that's like going into a Marvel movie trying to understand the nuances of men. It's silly popcorn. Absolutely nothing wrong with enjoying or reading or writing that stuff, but it's not supposed to be a deep exploration of human nature. It's fun escapism. No one (or mostly no one) is looking for men to understand the "mysterious inner goddess" or whatever (honestly this idea that women are so hard to write or so mysterious is baffling to me, like just write a good character but has boobs, how hard is it?), but just to give their women characters equal treatment as the men. That they don't just exist to serve male characters and aren't wholly defined by some sexist stereotypical role. They should have their own goals, dreams, agency, and personality - they should get to be funny and gross and sexual and asexual and right and wrong and fucked up and admirable as all the male characters. Like, take Brandon Sanderson. He's praised for his women characters and critiqued for not having good characters because his characters aren't that deep, but his women get equal treatment as his men (especially as he goes along). No one is asking for the perfect character, just equal treatment. It's really the bare minimum and it's pathetic so many male writers can't even do that.
@@toriwork8891 I mean yeah, I do fully agree with you that women should be represented well. My point is though, that we should expect it from both genders. I do not read Colleen Hoover (I have listened to one book to my greatest regret) and I realized that some women can be more misogynistic than men. True, as writers they are not writing in the same genre nor are on the same league, but I do not agree that the content of her books should not weigh as heavy as Murakami's. In fact her books are mainly read by teenagers who still have to develop a perspective on relationships between men and women, whereas the readers of Murakami are mostly adults who understand context and a character's perspective.
It's not about depth. it's about respect and Murakami apparently never heard of it.
As someone who has read more Murakami than any other author this is truly hilarious, makes me wonder if we read the same books.
Which Murakami books are you referring to precisely?
I have read several of the author ( A Wild Sheep Chase, The Elephant Vanishes, danse danse danse, Kafka on the Shore ), and I have never felt this misogine side which seems to be denounced here. In my comprehension the female characters most of the time embody the archetypal spirit guide for the protagonists of his stories
They're coming up with unnecessary criticism out of thin air basically
If you never noticed it you seriously need some lessons and education on critical thinking, analysis and misogyny.
@@Ryo-jb4zn instead of looking down on me by telling me that I need to educate myself, perhaps you could construct an argument that is not authoritative and explain by example how Murakami is a mysogynist author?
He describes women as if they're walking sex objects, legs, ass, breast, vagina, other times a beauty which doesn't seem human, even when describing minors. Adult characters talking and thinking of minors sexually isn't okay. If you couldn't tell you just didn't want to.
@@nondescript4311 his writing style is deeply introspective and centered around the male protagonist, which can result in less development of other characters, including women. And if the female characters are hypersexualized, one-dimensional and serve mainly to facilitate the journey or personal growth of the male protagonist, it is because the surreal and magical realism elements of his stories inherently create more abstract and symbolic characterizations. His representation of women does not correspond to contemporary feminist standards, but reflects a particular narrative style.
I’m glad I’m not the only one being let down with book lovers! I also didn’t feel a connection with the plot
finally, SOMEONE SAID IT.
that is very japanese of him.
i also noticed that when i read kafka on the shore and felt pretty umcortable. Sad to know this extends to other books too..
When you read just one or two of his books it feels intentional but then when you read more it just gets gross
In After Dark, which is my favorite Murakami novel, I genuinely felt like the women were well written. I have fellow women in my life that acted and thought and behaved like those characters. Maybe it's just my interpretation, and it's been around 3 years since I last read After Dark- but I loved that novel and didn't feel like there was a lot of problematic misogynistic content outside of how the "bad" characters were acting which was on purpose. I don't negate the idea that he likely does write women badly but honestly- I think it's just a flaw Murakami has, and all writers have them. I'll have to read Kafka on the Shore because so many people seem to have that specific gripe with that book- maybe my perspective will change then.
Hilarious tbh. I cracked up when he had the female protagonist sad about her friend “and her prefect tits” being gone from the world
I just finished the enchantress of Florence and yeah i think we have the same problem there wasn't one redeeming female character in that entire book
The reason I start reading again is haruki murakami …i just love him
Terry Pratchett is still the best I've seen of male authors writing women. They're different ages, sizes, have a wide variety of goals and desires, have real relationships and make real mistakes. 11/10, still my favorite.
lol yeah, I really enjoy Murakami’s work but I absolutely get the impression that the sexism is just coming from him and not an intentional characterisation
But the liberation of *fiction* shouldn't be restricted, no? I am a woman myself and i live my whole almost 30 years of life in south east asia has no problem at all reading all of his works. I'm not offended with what he said in his *novel*. People should have the freedom to decide for themselves to support his books. Remember that people's preference is very diverse. Afterall book should be enjoyable. I think it's not your place to judge the right and wrong way of thinking when people reading his book
I personally see the author not as "wrong" but as less insightful and narrow-minded. Immediately reduces their value.
I'm southeast asian too and I agree with you 100%. People cancelling everything is the reason why everything is so bland today. Movies books etc... art is meant to be unrestricted. They should write their own book but of course it's just easier to destroy someone else's
We are also free to criticize any art.
He can have an opinion just like u
John Banville, on the other hand, has received acclaim for how we writes women. Then he opens his mouth in interviews and makes you wish you had a Time Machine* for before he said problematic garbage that taints his work in your memory. Often even good writing isn’t enough. So many messy writers.
*I know Time Machine isn’t capitalized in this context, but my iPhone didn’t get the memo.
Hes a genius. The way he potrays characters is part of what makes him great.
OK sorry for the excessive number of poems I’m too lazy to copy into a single one, but I really wanted to say how important your remark on working with metre first, before venturing into free verse, is: the same goes for art. All the great painters that broke from the Academy and have been the unfair target of poorly educated artistic scrutiny could and did draw to the Academic standards. They weren’t “painting like 5 year olds,” they had already excelled at structure before they intentionally and ideologically broke from it. And this also reminds me of Gordon Ramsay who, when someone on Hell’s Kitchen made a “deconstructed dish” to show him, was furious anyone would do deconstruction before they could prepare the actual dish to perfection. Paraphrasing, he said “Be able to make the constructed dish before deconstructing it.” I think that advice works across every imaginable field, not just the arts-in-the-general-sense. I can’t imagine anything it wouldn’t apply to. All this rambling to say: great and valuable advice! I’ve loved both of your poetry videos, I’ll check the others on another night. Keeping my fingers crossed you’ll upload more on literature!
I'm sorry but I feel like this is an opinion that gets repeated infinitely because it has become popular to say that "Murakami's a mysoginist" and if you don't state that, you're automatically morally deranged. And although everyone's entitled to their own opinion, as someone who has read almost all of Murakami's production and is studying japanese literature at univetsity, I think his writing has been misjudged by young mainstream audiences.
Even if there are some frequent doubtious comments about women's breasts etc., Murakami is well known for his basic male protaginsts who live boring lives and in those contexts the female characters are actually the most interesting ones: the women in his books are ambitious, complex and precious keys to the hidden world of his magical realism type of style. They make his books move.
I absolutely agree with you
Ambitious? Complex? The male character might be sort of pathetic but the women are all just sexdolls.
Not to mention that i think a more apt phrase than "Misogyny" is "Fantasising".
Murakamis female character's often appear smarter/more mature than his male character's. It reminds me a bit of how Dostoevsky's female character's are often written as angelic "saviours" so to speak. Realistic? Not really. Misogynistic? I really doubt it.
Not to mention Murakami has had a stable marriage since 1971. If he was some sort of weird sex pest in real life I'd be more inclined to listen to the claim that he's misogynistic, but that doesn't seem to be the case.
Preach!
My favourite portrayal of women have to be by Rabindranath Tagore.. he was way ahead of his time and his women characters are so vulnerable and yet so strong
Tbf, even if it was intentional he might've just pulled a g move and said it wasn't intentional to spite the interviewer.
I think murakami has done justice to both female and male characters in the book. Like kafka meets the girl on the bus and she sort of guides him helps him in some way to get out of the holds the same way In wind up bird Toru has May kashara that is always guiding him. So for me i personally feel he writes great females characters as well !
Well, not all writers would be feminists or portray characters in a sane way. We should just accept it, thats how he writes. And like it or not his writing has an amazing charm. And as a male specimen of the human race, I feel that his writings in many ways resound to me!
Well, I really agree that his portrayals of women are quite bad. But at the same time we are talking about a man in his 70's coming from a society (the Japanese society) which is still today very much based on strong patriarchal values (at least more than many western countries). Yes, Japan in recent years has evolved a lot regarding gender equality, and no, I'm not trying to totally justify him, but that is a fact. So instead of trying to pretend of him to change what he writes (which is highly improbable) we as readers we should recognise and support other female authors, like the already mentioned Mieko Kawakami: she is a great author, as Murakami himself also said, but obviously she has a different perspective on womanhood and society. I personally, as a young cis woman, really resonated with what she has written. Same goes with the great work of Banana Yoshimoto. I highly recommend both! (Of course I also like Murakami, simply women's point of view is not his thing)
nobody:
authors in the back of their books:
i think what murakami tries to do is make it more disturbing with his disturbing portrayal of women, like intentionally. But it would have been great if in some of his novels he took a different aproach.
As a woman, i enjoyed reading murakamis afterdark…didn’t read anything else from him tho
A lot anime writers do this too. I wonder why.
Literally I love his books and writing but goddamn I wish he didn’t write about women like that (as a woman myself 😭)
Most of the women characters in his novels are built in such a way that most men likes them to be. Sorry, but that's how I see it. I don't see it as problematic-and wouldn't jump to that political correctness bandwagon, which is rather pathetic-but I think some men find it hard to swallow that they tend to objectify women. Men likes to think of women as mystical creatures creatures, they like the thrill of the chase, or the idea that a woman is an "idea" or a puzzle that needs to be solved. But at the same time, they don't like rejection so they settled with women who is available or can be easily reached.
Murakami is literally million years old man raised and lived his whole life in an asian (patriarchal) country with deep and complex hierarchy system. What would you expect?
That’s sooo true.
A critical and rational view of the world instead of a world view that was forced down his throat and he just accepted it? Perhaps because he enjoys and agrees with it tbh
An adult level of critical thinking that leads to him realising that the other half of the human population also deserves respect?
Whether he's misogynistic himself, although disappointing, is irrelevant to whether portraying the female characters from the perspective of a misogynist in the books is believable and actually works. And I'd say it does work 🤷🏾
He is an exceptional writer, and no other auther that I know of can capture his level of intense emotion. Also, he can write women with depth.. Not Because he oversexualize them that me he can't make them feel real at times. I hate how he sexualize everything, but he gives alot more than what he takes.
I find that westerners are the most disturbed by this- it has a lot to do with reading it through western lens
Oh no I really wanted to read Norwegian wood but this is making me doubt it 😭 Should I still go for it?
as someone who is reading men without women i would definitely agree that this book is definitely sexist in so many ways
when will people understand that the author’s opinion and his writings should be separated? why couldn’t Murakamu’s novels have acquired meaning that wasn’t intended by the writer or even contrary to his views?
I just finished reading My first book from Murakami. Unfortunately it was Kafka on the Shore. I am not picking another book by him. I just can't. I gave him the benefit of doubt at first. It was just too incesty. The whole damn book right from the start. I dreaded reading the Kafka's part. I liked Nakata's quite a lot but it was only because Nakata didn't have any sexual feelings so there was minimal objectifying of women. It only happend in the later half of the book because of the character named Hoshino. I just have a lot to say about the book...........
Pls i was so shocked then the character mentioned it could be his sister made me wanna vomit
What people aren't understanding is such portrayal of women in one or two books or a couple of stories can be justified as "requirement" for the story or the character. But if that's the ONLY way he can portray women then that's when it becomes problematic.
Sure it is art, but that doesn't mean you have no responsibility as an artist about what your perpetrating in the society.
People really need to understand nuance. Things are hardly ever black and white.
Yeah mostly If an author is spreading a view it’s cause they think like that.
Unless they portray the opposite on purpose but then address it
eastern countries have problematic views about women in general. women are almost secondary.
I love that his books are so brilliantly written and they still trigger women. I mean why are you reading it if you don’t like it. If you don’t like it don’t read it. It’s literally as simple as that but no women need to bitch and moan and shame it because they don’t agree with the angle he takes. That’s his prerogative as an author. Get over yourselves ladies. Go read your chick lit if it bothers you so much.
I'm confused, what does the no mean? that he actually thinks about women the way he portrays them in his books?? or no its for the plot?
Any recommendations of Murakami which doesn’t this misogynistic views? Because i read kafka on the shore and really like it, but had to skip every time a woman was in the scene because his portrayal of them makes me nauseous.
You are a ridiculous person.
I guess this is still the cultural norm in Japan
It's my least favourite part of Murakami's work. I enjoy other aspects of his novels, but that aspect is always a heavy thorn in my side when I'm reading him. Did Hemingway fall flat on his face so that Murakami could get up and merely crawl?
Honestly im so tired of people making excuses for this guy. If you can't write women then you aren't a good writer. I dont care how ~aesthetic~ his books look in your instagram pictures, he's a one trick pony.
Most other things he's exceptional at though
This take, I totally agree with. If you can only write one type of character, story and theme over and over, and not even depict an entire gender without objectifying them, then you aren't a very good author. You might have some good qualities, but you're a one-trick pony.
Hes the creator and we are the audience. If you don't like it, leave.
You sound painfully dumb
@@kathleen9774 silence, hole
Murakami’s 1Q84 is like a massive justification for one male character to be a pedophile. I finished that book and swore never again would I read something by him.
Oh my good gracious, it's fiction. Romance novels. We talking about the portrayal of men?
Jack should probably remove the Nietzsche quote from his goodreads then
Jack is so pretty 😂
If anyone can recommend some RUclipsrs that recommend mysteries/thrillers (etc), I would greatly appreciate it 😊