Vanessa's Reviews > Kafka on the Shore
Kafka on the Shore
by
by

Few books have infected me with boredom-induced ADD, the desire to gnaw my own foot off at the ankle, and the state of mind you might experience if forced to sit upon a nest of hornets while watching your home being burglarized, but this was one of them. It took me until page 70 to stop wanting to hop up and rearrange the spice cupboard or my sock drawer every few sentences, but then the feeling returned at page 243. Only 224 pages to go! From then on, my hatred and resentment of this book progressively grew like a dead cow bloating in the heat.
“Kafka on the Shore� is a mess. It is such a mess that it makes my six-year-old son’s post-playdate bedroom look like Buckingham Palace. Loosely based on the Oedipus myth, and taking some obvious inspiration from Catcher in the Rye, this book seems to be little more than a random hodgepodge of ideas held together with pipe cleaners and raspberry jam.
There was so much to hate about this book. Here are just a few things:
1. Boring, unnecessary descriptions � that do nothing to further the story � of what people are wearing, what Kafka likes to do during his workout, what he decides to eat, what he is listening to on his Walkman, and so on. I wouldn’t have been surprised to read a monologue from Kafka along the lines of: “When I wipe my arse, I like to use just four squares of toilet paper, no more, no less. I count them out � one, two, three, four. Then I fold the length over once, and again. Equipped now with the perfect, handheld quilt, I wipe in a single, expert, sweeping motion � front to back. Examine the paper to determine whether I need to repeat the process. However, I would add that this is only if the paper is two-ply. For one-ply paper, I need a minimum of eight sheets, but only if they are of high quality. If not of high quality, the boy Crow reminds me, ‘Remember, you’ve got to be the toughest 15-year-old on the planet.’�
2. The gratuitous cat torture scene. Johnnie Walker (him off the whiskey bottle) has to cut the hearts out of living cats and eat them so that he can collect cat souls to make a special kind of flute. There is no freakin� point to this scene whatsoever � we never hear about Johnnie or his cat-flute again.
3. The annoying way characters � Oshima in particular � deliver sermons about philosophy, art, literature and classical music. It took me right out of the story (tangled mess though it was) and smacked of “Look at me � aren’t I clever?�
4. The screechy-preachy scene with the “feminist� caricatures in the library.
5. Hate to be ungroovy or whatever � but I just couldn’t stand any of the sex scenes, particularly with Miss Saeki, the 50-something librarian who gets it on over and over again with the 15-year-old protagonist even though he and she both know she might be his long-lost mother. Excuse me while I go mop the vomitus off of my living room wall.
After the first 100 pages I thought that I might end up giving this book three stars. Another 100 pages on, I decided two stars. By page 331 I decided one star, and by the end of this frustrating, pretentious, and completely unsatisfying book, I felt like I’d squandered so much of my precious life reading this pile o� doo-doo that I didn’t want to give it even one star. However, since Mr. Murakami knows how to spell (or at least, I’m assuming he does since this is a translation) I will relent.
In the end, love or loathing of a book is entirely subjective, and scores of critics loved this one. As for me, I feel that if I’d wanted to find meaning in a random jumble of junk, I would have had more luck going to the thrift store and sifting through the bric-a-brac box than wasting time on Mr. Murakami’s brain-omelette.
“Kafka on the Shore� is a mess. It is such a mess that it makes my six-year-old son’s post-playdate bedroom look like Buckingham Palace. Loosely based on the Oedipus myth, and taking some obvious inspiration from Catcher in the Rye, this book seems to be little more than a random hodgepodge of ideas held together with pipe cleaners and raspberry jam.
There was so much to hate about this book. Here are just a few things:
1. Boring, unnecessary descriptions � that do nothing to further the story � of what people are wearing, what Kafka likes to do during his workout, what he decides to eat, what he is listening to on his Walkman, and so on. I wouldn’t have been surprised to read a monologue from Kafka along the lines of: “When I wipe my arse, I like to use just four squares of toilet paper, no more, no less. I count them out � one, two, three, four. Then I fold the length over once, and again. Equipped now with the perfect, handheld quilt, I wipe in a single, expert, sweeping motion � front to back. Examine the paper to determine whether I need to repeat the process. However, I would add that this is only if the paper is two-ply. For one-ply paper, I need a minimum of eight sheets, but only if they are of high quality. If not of high quality, the boy Crow reminds me, ‘Remember, you’ve got to be the toughest 15-year-old on the planet.’�
2. The gratuitous cat torture scene. Johnnie Walker (him off the whiskey bottle) has to cut the hearts out of living cats and eat them so that he can collect cat souls to make a special kind of flute. There is no freakin� point to this scene whatsoever � we never hear about Johnnie or his cat-flute again.
3. The annoying way characters � Oshima in particular � deliver sermons about philosophy, art, literature and classical music. It took me right out of the story (tangled mess though it was) and smacked of “Look at me � aren’t I clever?�
4. The screechy-preachy scene with the “feminist� caricatures in the library.
5. Hate to be ungroovy or whatever � but I just couldn’t stand any of the sex scenes, particularly with Miss Saeki, the 50-something librarian who gets it on over and over again with the 15-year-old protagonist even though he and she both know she might be his long-lost mother. Excuse me while I go mop the vomitus off of my living room wall.
After the first 100 pages I thought that I might end up giving this book three stars. Another 100 pages on, I decided two stars. By page 331 I decided one star, and by the end of this frustrating, pretentious, and completely unsatisfying book, I felt like I’d squandered so much of my precious life reading this pile o� doo-doo that I didn’t want to give it even one star. However, since Mr. Murakami knows how to spell (or at least, I’m assuming he does since this is a translation) I will relent.
In the end, love or loathing of a book is entirely subjective, and scores of critics loved this one. As for me, I feel that if I’d wanted to find meaning in a random jumble of junk, I would have had more luck going to the thrift store and sifting through the bric-a-brac box than wasting time on Mr. Murakami’s brain-omelette.
2626 likes · Like
�
flag
Sign into ŷ to see if any of your friends have read
Kafka on the Shore.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
July 15, 2007
– Shelved
Started Reading
August 1, 2007
–
Finished Reading
Comments Showing 1-50 of 485 (485 new)
message 1:
by
J
(last edited Aug 25, 2016 12:07PM)
(new)
Aug 22, 2007 05:40PM

reply
|
flag

You completely missed everything that was wonderful about this book, and about Murakami's writing in general. His power comes from mixing the mundane with the divine. Your ass-wiping scenario is hilarious, and of course dead-on accurate; this is the mundane, the way to make the reader understand and relate to the characters. We know what it's like to wipe our asses, and whether we admit it or not, whether we plan it or not, we all have a particular system to it. It's written in simple language to draw us in to the fascinating detail of the most basic facts of our shared experience. (And just who is Crow anyways? Answer that and you can unlock much of the book.) As for the divine, I will use your example of the "cat-torture" scene. Johnnie Walker in fact turns out to be a major plot point in several ways. For one, Johnnie Walker's real identity is a key to Kafka's life and contributes to his flight. Also, the cat torture is THE motivator for Nakata's trip. Yes, it's horrible, but it's supposed to be horrible, to the characters and the readers. It's one of the central events of the book. To say it's gratuitous suggests you must've missed a good 50 pages out of the middle of the novel. Calling this book a mess is like describing a Picasso painting as "something with brown paint on it." Did you happen to notice that there was some art there?

For me, with regard to art, literature, music, theater etc - it comes down to "Did it move me?"/"Did it speak to me?"/"Did I like it?" A piece of art doesn't have to fulfill all three - one is enough for me, but "Kafka" didn't even hit one. Wait a sec - maybe that's not entirely true: it moved me to tears of boredom.
Anyway, as I said in my review, love or loathing of a book (or painting/opera/insert art form here) is entirely subjective. Because something is "art" does that mean we have to say we liked it even if that is not true, or recommend it if we hated it?

If it's going to be disconnected and wandering and offensive and mundane, at least it could be no longer than 210 pages, right?






Read it anyway. It is a beautiful journey. Pure genius. Vanessa didn't like it? So what? Let her go back to Harry Potter.


hope you enjoy "new moon". leave the serious reading to the rest of us.



I think you review is vulgar and not funny at all.
You should just read Desperate Housewives chronicles.

There’s an expression: “ars celare artem� or “the art that conceals art� that, I think, sets a standard for metaphysical novels. For example, I think we experience “ars celare artem� when we lose ourselves to a fantasy world of an artist's creation and then put the work aside, only to find a whole new perspective on our own world. With this book I could never get sufficiently removed from the looming presence of the author and his seemingly bizarre and twisted fantasies to become truly immersed in his world.
In general, I think that a work of literature, like any work of art, needs to transcend the personal involvement of the artist (author) in order to truly succeed. And this is where I think "Kafka on the Shore" falls way-short.



Ok, I love Murakami's work, but I loved this review too. It was honest, nonjudgmental and unpretentious.

The cat-flute scene is actually extremely important to the story, because it sets 3 things into motion:
1) Nakata can no longer talk to cats.
2) Johnnie Walker = Koichi Tamura = Kafka's dad.
3) Nakata leaves town.
The femenist scene was basically a way for Oshima to reveal his gender status, and I personally enjoyed the scene, and it didn't strike me as "preachy" at all. I thought it was more mocking preachy people out there.
That said, this is probably the best review I've read by someone with a conflictinc opinion. Nice job.

I agree. God what is it with people? If you don't agree with the review FINE, but belittling insults are just pathetic! I like Murakami generally but currently having a hard time getting through this. This isn't for lack of being a serious reader (as someone said about the reviewer) or because I can't read basically, its because I'm NOT enjoying it. Shame because I thought wind up bird was pretty awesome. This just isn't! Only half way through though so that view could change.

"If i can't get instant satisfaction, this is not for me".. well, thats life.













To whoever said they have learned to put down a book. Yes, I had to learn this too. I could be on to better things! I had to put down Stephen King's The Gunslinger. Totally felt uncultured/uncool after that but I've recovered now :)
LOL loved your review and bravo for even reading books of this genre, I would have ended my reading at the synopsis.

That chic-lit comment up there is humorous. Appreciation of literature varies with human preference, so this self claimed "literature connoisseur" shouldn't generalize in such bold strokes of ignorance.

John's messages are for pretenious idiots.
I could leave it at that, if I apply your reasoning, but I shan't because I disagree with it. Having invested time in reading your message, I still think your view is idiotic, this is a subjective experience, but out of respect to other readers and John himself I shall elaborate why I think his opinion is idiotic.
Others reading my review of your message, may agree or disagree but atleast they are expanding some energy into trying to understand another's logic and have something to go on. Whereas with your approach, they don't, John is an idiot and no explanation has been advanced.
The same reasoning could be applied to reading reveiws. Vanessa having taken time to read the book, is entitled to write whatever her personal feelings may be. She has taken the time to write elaborately and extensively why she dislikes the book, an experience others come online to enjoy, because upon completion they like to read another's review and see if anyone shared similar thoughts. Isn't that the purpose of a book site to bring readers closer together and encourage literary debates.
Better approach may be displaying some of that wide reading experience, and addressing which parts of the review you dislike and why, leading to a more constructive debate and who knows you might even get Vanessa or other readers to conform to your opinions, like some readers may have conformed to mine :).
Happy reading.
I could leave it at that, if I apply your reasoning, but I shan't because I disagree with it. Having invested time in reading your message, I still think your view is idiotic, this is a subjective experience, but out of respect to other readers and John himself I shall elaborate why I think his opinion is idiotic.
Others reading my review of your message, may agree or disagree but atleast they are expanding some energy into trying to understand another's logic and have something to go on. Whereas with your approach, they don't, John is an idiot and no explanation has been advanced.
The same reasoning could be applied to reading reveiws. Vanessa having taken time to read the book, is entitled to write whatever her personal feelings may be. She has taken the time to write elaborately and extensively why she dislikes the book, an experience others come online to enjoy, because upon completion they like to read another's review and see if anyone shared similar thoughts. Isn't that the purpose of a book site to bring readers closer together and encourage literary debates.
Better approach may be displaying some of that wide reading experience, and addressing which parts of the review you dislike and why, leading to a more constructive debate and who knows you might even get Vanessa or other readers to conform to your opinions, like some readers may have conformed to mine :).
Happy reading.

Glad you agree, but no need to sulk mate and miss the point entirely. It's subjective to each interpretation and what arbitrary measure they decide, in presiding one book over another. Even professional review panels, give their reason and criticism when selecting a winner in a certain genre. ŷ is very personal, if you are going to criticise a review then make sure it is on literary grounds, show us where Vanessa has got it wrong and people may not hold that opinion about you. It's very easy to call something good/bad but harder to explain why, if you can't make the effort don't attack a reader's reading habit and come across a snob, because just reading xyz amounts of books doesn't automatically give you the priviledge to do so. Attacks without substance, will only earn you that label.