What are talking about? In Norwegian Wood the narrator didn't have sex with the girl he grew up with. In Wind up Bird Chronicle the main character didn't have sex with May Kasahara, or with Nutmeg, or even with the Kano sisters. In After Dark, the only character who has sex is a minor character who rapes a Chinese prostitute.
There was this one quote in Norwegian Wood where the main character was like he couldn't lay next to this girl because then he would need to have sex with her.
I'm so relieved to see thoughtful responses in the comments here. Murakami's writing is beautiful and what he writes is often stereotypical, reductionist, and derogatory to women (and other marginalized groups). Both things can exist.
I completely and unequivocally agree. It would be erroneous to say that Murakami is a bad writer. He has a extremely fluid prose that naturally flows from word to word, allowing even the most detailed of descriptions become accessible. However, just because he is a talented writer does not make his treatment of female characters any less problematic! Thank you for your comment! I look forward to hearing more from you!
I haven't read a lot of Murakami, but reading Norwegian Wood did frustrate me. It frustrated me because I enjoyed his style and the way he builds his worlds, yet I was bothered by the portrayal of women. I think a large critique of his women characters isn't just that he sexualizes them, sometimes needlessly- it's that they seem to always serve as an agent of change or growth *for* a male character. You said something similar about them being the object of desire often. It seems like sometimes his women are almost props that serve just to expand the male character's perspective. And that makes the female characters rather 2-dimensional and wooden. It seems sexist to always make your women be responsible for changing or bettering the man, as if it is their job. I understand that the perspective is from the male gaze, but I don't know how much of his works are a case of creative choices or just his actual views. Extreme example, but: It's like reading American Psycho, you understand that the author isn't supportive of Bateman's actions or lifestyle, in fact the entire work is a rather obvious critique on toxic masculinity, competition, and consumerism. With Murakami, his female characters don't seem really real, and his portions of hyper-sexualized women or them being "teachers" to male characters don't seem to be any sort of critique. I'll eventually pick up another Murakami, but I had to take a break after Norwegian Wood. Is there any works of his that don't have women? Or have women but they aren't in a sort of role where the men need them for growth?
Completely agree with what you've said here. Sexism doesn't only take one form, it can manifest in so many various ways. Using women characters as pawns for the development of men, reliant on men, or only addressing them in passing is a clear disregard for women.
just a little curious, but if the story is about a guy, and a character doesn't help in any way effect the story of the protagonist in any way, then i don't see what else the character will do, its not about the character that has been introduced its about the effect of the character in the lead's life, and on the other hand if just for everybody's sake lets say a female character gets introduced but still doesn't effect the storyline or the character development or anything in that story, then won't that be actually biased.
@Kim Apuzzo Thank you for your comment! I completely agree with all of your points here! Unfortunately, Norwegian Wood probably contains his most well developed and interesting female characters and if you think they weren't that great then his writing may not be for you! In terms of recommendations, all of his works have women in them and only one of them (or at least half of it) is told from a woman's perspective and that is 1Q84. HOWEVER, I have scene a lot of criticisms from female criticism about his female perspective in the story so keep that in mind! In terms of other Murakami books you could read, I would say Colorless Tsukuru Tazaki and his years of pilgrimage is good in its treatment of women characters so I would start there!
I can 100% relate to what you’ve said, a few months ago, I read Norwegian Wood. I’ll be objective about it, I do admit that Murakami is a fantastic writer, the way his story has a grip right from the beginning, and you feel the melancholy while reading. There’s this particular scene when the protagonist of the book is walking and it’s later in the evening, a little dark. I remember feeling a little calm and lonely, that itself is a testament of what a great writer her is, but saying that, I detest the way woman are portrayed, made me feel uncomfortable. After a few months I read another book by him called Men without woman, it’s a collection of stories. DO NOT READ IT, you won’t like it, it’s more than misogynistic. I’m going to give Murakami another try, since I do own a copy of Kafka on the shore, if that makes me feel the same way, I’ll just live with the fact that his books are probably not for me.
I’ve read a fair few Murakami books, only fiction author I really read and enjoy the way he writes. However, I found myself sighing every other time a main character points out a female characters chest, mentions his own hardened member. It seems like every character has the same mindset which sometimes interferes with my imagination of the lead role, and I just picture Haruki Murakami as the main character. In The Wind Up Bird Chronicle, May Kasahara is a school girl and Toru mentions her sunbathing in a bikini and her sweaty body which feels inappropriate to read, which goes along with other examples you mentioned. I found this on Reddit, and the video is really interesting, you’ve got yourself a new subscriber.
First, thank you for the comment and subscribing! I hope you enjoy more of my videos! I completely agree that the more Murakami books you read, as well as the more you learn about him as an individual, the harder it becomes to separate himself from the main character. I understand that doesn't mean all he is observing is a direct reflection of his inner thoughts...but at a certain point when all of your main characters act and think the same way, you ultimately are those people; at least that is how I view his writing
Putting yourself in a characters mind doesn’t make the author to be that character. As a male yourself, a character in a book bejng male who is uncontrollably aroused by a woman and is turned on is a natural reaction? And having to explain it in a story through a protagonist doesn’t make it inappropriate. And is also a language and culture difference from reading authors on the west. It might get lost in translation or misinterpreted by a reader.
I don't understand why we're so quick to accept sexism compared to other prejudices. If he were a racist and that featured heavily in his books then nobody would think twice about refusing to read his books. His sales would be (rightfully) non existent or at least every low and we'd be comfortable calling him a bad person without so many people excusing it because he's japanese. Which is problematic in itself because it suggests that the Japanese in general are sexist and places the blame on Japanese culture rather than him in order to excuse his sexism. And its 2022, Japan is a first world country that has access to the Internet so I don't get how we can pretend there isn't any opportunity to educate himself, he has made it clear he doesn't care and won't change. Sexism is just as bad as any other prejudice, be it racism, homophobia, transphobia or ableism. Sexism just gets excused more because people are used to it and like to give people a free pass. In essence I think what's happening is that everyone knows he's deeply sexist (and there are very strong words regarding his clear attraction to young teenaged girls that I'll refrain from throwing around but that seem to me to be pretty clear cut), but nobody can be bothered to boycott him because its inconvenient.
Something I've noticed and just my personal life, those who are sexist usually have some kind of trauma in their childhood doesn't excuse anything, it's just something I've noticed. Have you noticed the same?
He is still a good author. He is sexist. You make a good point. I think many males in east are sexist. I am from India here i have seen many instances of sexism and misogyny as well. Patriarchal attitudes of many contribute to it
I don't really seperate the art from the artist anymore. To me it doesn't mean they are a terrible person, if they create a terrible character or has dark themes (ironic when they turn out to be terrible. yikes), but the artist still created that character and wanted to say and portray something from their own thoughts and experiences etc. Seperating the art from the artist, sound to me like the art materialized out of thin air and has no thought behind it. It just exists.
I agree, it's not about cancelling him. For me, more than "Is Murakami a sexist author", I feel it's more important that we as readers, can recognise the sexist tendencies in his writing. Having heard about Murakami for years from friends, this year, I finally started to read his work, with Norwegian Wood. I have to say that his writing really flows! I used to be an avid reader up until my university days. Then things got busy, and only recently have I been able to pick up reading again. However, it was a bit of a struggle, as most of my peers read non-fiction, and I was really slow at that. Norwegian Wood made me rediscover how I'm more of a fiction person. I finished it quickly, because his prose was easy to read & captivating, and I kept going back for more. Also some of the themes in the book did resonate with me well. Almost felt like the book came to me at the right moment in life. But for my life, I could not shake off the uncomfortable feeling of the male gaze. The book did feel like a male fetish fantasy in many parts. Despite Toru's languid personality, almost every female character seemed drawn to him, sexually. While Hatsumi is not attracted to him in a non-platonic manner, she still admires him. So the problem for me lies for impressionable young readers who sort of this internalise this kinda of mentality? After watching this video, I also have qualms with how Murakami refuses to even consider the critique. I'm still going to be reading a few of his other books, because Norwegian Wood didn't quite meet my expectations of the hype. I've finished After the Quake (way less male gaze-y), and am looking forward to Kafka on the Shore, for that magical realism. But you bet I'll be more mindful in looking out for any other sexist tendencies.
Honestly, as a female, I don't think Murakami is a sexist author. but I can't totally confirm as I read only four of his book: Norwegian woods, Kafka on the shore, men without women, and birthday girl. I think Murakami writes rather in a very frank way. As most of his characters are not ordinary and have a very complex way of thinking. If we see Watanabe which is my favorite character, his feeling of love toward Naoko leads to his sexual thoughts and the changing way he describes Naoko after their night together, at the beginning Watanabe never had any sexual thoughts toward Naoko, rather he described her in a very beautiful way. the Watanabe in the novel was the same till the end I didn't see any development in his character rather we came to understand Watanabe which we see as character development. In my opinion, Murakami's character doesn't develop when women enter their life but rather the character develops when they came to understand the women. and he writes a female character who forces the main character to think critically. which is in my own personal opinion. I also have read some books (all of them were recommended by booktok and loved worldwide by a lot of people) where a man assaulting women is shown as a sexy and manly way of men. His being mean and unreasonable showed as caring and a lot of stuff that piss me off. I am not telling everyone to have the same opinion but Murakami does a great job at describing any character. there are combinations of all types of characters some characters develop some don't. and not only male characters develop but also female characters. And I think people often get disappointed because they think that Murakami's works are stories. A story that describes the life of a character where opinion about the world changes, and they start to think in a different light. Which we often see in many novels where the character undergoes development. but in Murakami's work, he doesn't write a story but rather a phase of life, and even after the development, the characters stay the same as ever. nothing changes. He explains how we need to forget some events to keep on living but still keep that memory in the corner of our hearts.
Finally a comment that resonates with me !!. Even I am female and I love Murakami, I never once found his description of women to be sexist but rather bizzare that's all. I firmly stand with the fact that Murakami is not a sexist author !!
Hey man, good video. I just finished reading Kafka on the Shore and I found his story telling style extremely compelling and his take on magical realism very intriguing. However, it appeared obvious from one of the first description of a woman with her "perky breasts" that the book was written from the perspective of a precocious 15 year old. However, after having finished the book and seeing Miss Saeki and Sakura (?) (I'm terrible with names) having mostly been used as sexual objects through which the male protagonist develops I figured it was more than just the "perspective of a 15 year old". Around 4:20 you mention that it was the multitude of comments criticising the sexism that made you look back at his work in a more critical way and acknowledge their validity. I'm not as well versed in Murakami as you, but if it's the comments that first made you consider such a problem, I wonder how much you really paid attention to the character constellations while reading.
Meiko Kawakami is actually a very popular female, Japanese author. Two of her most well known books are Heaven and Breasts and Eggs. She also has an essay and a short story that I’ve heard are good. I have read both of the novels mentioned. They are amazing. I have finished two more of her books than Murakamki. I have tried to read Norwegian Wood, Kafka On the Shore, and one other that I can’t remember the title of. I have not finished those because the treatment of women made me very uncomfortable. Currently I’m reading Colorless Tsukuru Tazaki and I’m actually really enjoying it. After Dark is the only Murakami book that I’ve finished. I liked the style and feel a lot. This style is definitely different than Kawakami’s, but there is still a humane and emotional flare in her writing. Heaven is all about middle schoolers and bullying. It also made me uncomfortable as children are put in a sexual position. But it is obviously done to show how awful bullying is and Kawakami cares immensely for voicing that truth with that book. Breasts and Eggs has primarily all female main characters (with the exception of a male love interest, as far as I can remember). It is about a woman who is unsure of how her life is going and whether or not she wants to have children. She looks into all kinds of paths and sperm donors. Meanwhile her sister has insecurities regarding her body and wants breast implants. The sister’s daughter is mute and is working through navigating her youth while her mom is not really a stable parent. The time I read Kawakami’s books I was amazed at just how real and vulnerable they felt. I don’t typically read contemporary stories or ones without some sort of magic, but I own a copy of Breasts and Eggs and would love to read more of Kawakami’s work. I was rather surprised you didn’t know who she is because she is a popular author who has English translations (amongst a few others) and is discussed is some spheres of modern feminist literature. I was going to look at her interview with Murakami, but I forgot to 😂. However I’ll definitely do it now. I highly recommend reading Murakami, and I’m going to continue with Colorless Tsukuru Tazaki.
This was great but i can't believe you didn't talk about the last scene in Norwegian Wood, the one with Toru & Reiko ifykwim. It didn't make any sense whatsoever, I mean what was even the point of adding that out of nowhere? I was traumatized by that ngl
You've got the 'separating art from the artist' concept wrong. It isn't about determining whether or not the artist holds the same views as are expressed in his art, but whether we can forget the artist altogether and treat his/her art as an independent entity. Suppose Murakami is indeed sexist, does that make his work of any less worth?
My perspective on this is severely limited considering I've only read the first 170-ish pages of Norwegian Wood before I started losing steam because of my dislike of the main character but I still plan on finishing it when I find some spare time so I can give it a fair assessment as a whole. Even within that short span of time, however, I had already begun to notice a trend. Murakami's female characters are most definitely a tool to spark some sort of growth while his male characters only seemed to bring out the worst traits. He didn't treat his roommate very well and laughed about it with others then almost bragged about it in his inner thoughts. He condemned the other student's treatment of women when he went out but then engaged in the same actions (which was odd). Bringing up the passiveness of Murakami's characters just solidified my thoughts on what I had read so far. It's only through female characters that anything ever actually progresses and they aren't treated well in the process. It's annoying. That being said, these characters are fictional and the story isn't really meant to center around them. Using them as a plot device probably wouldn't come off so terribly if it weren't for the fact that it's so obvious and some readers seem to be able to relate to them (or at least relate to the things that happen to them) and don't appreciate it for obvious reasons. And that's completely fair. For Murakami to be so dismissive about it rather than at least acknowledge it only adds more fuel to the flame.
Agree. Toru comes off as such a "I'm a nice guy" type, yet he is constantly laughing at the expense of his roommate and criticizes his friend for how he treats women as objects but then takes advantage of other women characters when they're grieving.
I completely agree with all of your points! Murakami is a very difficult author to really get behind and Norwegian Wood exemplifies many of his faults as a character writer! I do think a lot of your observations here are very astute and I would love to see how they develop when, and if, you finish the book! I would argue that Tory is a better character in the first half than the second so if you didn't like him in the first half ohhhhh boy you are in for a treat!
We also need to consider the fact in 1Q84 where he made his female characters extremely strong and fierce. He also talked about the sensitive topics such as a domestic abuse. Where the two female characters in the book kill men whoever does harm to women. Why is this ? Not widely talked about??? Seriously I don't get people who says he is sexist, he's just writing in the perspective of his characters that's all !! If you think he is sexist, stop reading and find some mediocre author to read such as Colleen hoover.
i love how murakami writes because i get to see how men really sees women from their very own POV. it’s a depiction of reality. i am not expecting him to be a feminist, because in the real world not everyone are.
Yes exactly. I only just recently read 1Q84 and I didn’t find him problematic I found it a bit cringe or even funny sometimes because it just seemed so GUY like…Whether people want to acknowledge it or not, I just think he writes from an honest male perspective.
I really love Murakami's stories but I also find them so draining - I could only read one or two a year before getting Murakami burnout. Great discussion here, thanks for this video.
I agree with most of what you’re saying, but I do actually see the point of having the 13-year-old girl in Norwegian Wood be 13 rather than 18. This disturbing encounter, and more so its repercussions (mainly the fact that she was ostracized by the people in her neighborhood for allegedly having forced herself on a minor), are what cause Reiko to fall back into depression, to divorce her husband and ultimately move to the ‘clinic’ in the mountains, away from society. Had the 13-year-old girl been 18, this chain of events would not conceivably have happened: it would instead have been a case of “she said, she said” (why would everyone in the neighborhood necessarily choose to side with the 18-year-old’s side of the story?). People reacted so strongly because sexual activity between an adult and a minor is, on a societal level, seen as immoral regardless of whether or not it’s consensual. Most would therefore automatically side with the minor. I don’t really see how this would work if the girl were 18 - what would the point of contention be? I guess maybe Reiko could be condemned for (supposedly) entering into a homosexual relationship while being married, but I don’t think I’d buy the idea of her getting so flipped from that that she decides to divorce her husband and abandon her daughter. I think one of the reasons this caused her to go into a dark place was that she hated herself for having felt aroused by an underaged girl.
I appreciate that you took your time to make a really thoughtful critique of the argument that Murakami is a sexist author. I also appreciate that you didn't jump immediately into an attack on him based on your initial quotations from his books. I wish I had the time to be as thoughtful in my response, but I've got Colorless Tsukuru Tazaki sitting next to me and I'm chomping at the bit to hop back into it. A few points: most of the arguments that you put forward claiming Murakami's alleged sexism are based on his sexualizing female characters in his novels. You also point out that a few of them were underage (i.e. under eighteen). I don't think this is really a direct argument for sexism, although it could be an argument for a claim that he is attracted to underage women (or at least has a procilivity for depicting underage women in sexual roles in his novels). I appreciate that you concede that you are looking at this from an American point of view. This isn't a popular statement to make but here it is: in practically every society throughout most of human history, the age of consent did not exist. Virtually every culture primarily prized youth, daintiness, innocence, etc as direct indicators of a woman's sexual attractiveness -- things our gender-critical generation is quick to lump together into the category of "subordinate femininity". This is definitely from the male perspective, but again, the reality is that through most of human history, definitions of what was "attractive in a woman" meant "attractive to men." Please don't misunderstand me. I am not arguing that this is right, fair, or "not sexist". However, when we're talking about a writer like Murakami whose themes revolve heavily around lonely, alienated men; when the hero's journey for these men is to reconnect to their humanity; when so much of this is expressed through archetypal psychology, descending into the depths (think spiritual awakenings at the bottom of a well), and a sort of 'mystical journey'; I think we really ought to give Murakami a wider-than-your-average artistic license here. Does he portray women primarily as objects of male desire? Arguably. Does he himself view women primarily as objects of desire? Perhaps. Does that make him a sexist? Depends on your definition of the term. Personally, I enjoy his writing in no small part precisely because of how raw, honest, and flawed his characters are (and perhaps he is). They are not heroes. They are not villains either. They're just another atomised soul facing the behemoth of modern society, who end up flung into fantastical narratives that compel them to reconnect to their humanity. In my opinion, that is what makes them so relatable and that is what makes Murakami one of my favorite writers, warts and all.
I found this video a while ago after reading Norwegian Wood and really enjoyed it as his sexist tendencies are my only issues with Murakami. I've just rewatched it because I'm currently reading 1Q84. I really appreciate the sentiment that no artist/person is immune to criticism. Being aware of the negative aspects of artists might even allow us to better appreciate their art.
"This is where I might have lost some of you guys" no no, that's exactly where you got me. If you add all of it you can definitely get an insight into the way he sees the world, and honestly that interview were he says that he's not going to change the way he lives his life, reminds me SO MUCH of those who complain about younger generations being "snowflakes". I think there's always room for personal growth, no matter where in your life or personal journey you are, so I would definitely disagree with him on that one. I'm one to separate the artis from the art, but not the art from the artis because that person created it! It has a personal mark no matter what. With this I mean, knowing certain things about a person, changes completely the experience of seen a piece from them (movie, book, painting, song, etc.), and there are certain things I can't brush off because of who made it. Great video 👏 always giving me some food for thought!
I completely agree with your take on this. There are so many different components to take into account when considering the complexity of a person and how they write about the world. Murakami is my favorite author and would love to hear more of your perspectives on his work. Great job! :)
I've recently read Kafka on the Shore as an introduction to Murakami's works and tbh I find it rather bizarre and slightly problematic & I thought maybe it's because I'm not familiar with his writing style so I was giving it the benefit of the doubt and like you said, maybe case by case. Until I've come across your video and have gotten some sort of validation as to how I felt upon reading it as opposed to how booktubers regard it as fun, odd adventure story. Like why is nobody talking about the weird themes of incest and pedophilia. Although these are relevant to the plot and I swear I would have had no problem about it in the name of fiction, but how it was being laid into the text, of women's sheer credulousness and submission to the male character, and how they strike as mere accessories to the male character's arc felt really weird. Not to mention the unnecessary sexual encounters that are vividly described in the book. I live in Asia, maybe it's the culture of misogyny and to manifest it in a lot of his works really speaks a lot. I think it was engaging but that doesn't absolve the manifestations of sexism in his novels. The transgender character could be a redeeming factor, it had great potential, but the character build-up was poorly written and looked as though it was there for the sake of having one. I'm still going to read Norweigan wood though and see where it goes. Thanks for this video, very insightful!
His two most famous books have rape scenes and the characters doesn't even care about it and moved on. It's really frustrating especially because his writing style is great.
Yes I also was shocked how his characters reacted so unemotional to rape but as a woman who was raped I must say the males in real life also reacted like this so I must conclude males are just awful creatures without emotions
I think the uncomfortable scenes in norweigan wood are justified. Reiko is not just having sex with this girl, she is being raped by the young girl. This young girl is described as being like a sociopath who is extremely intelligent, she is not some innocent girl being taken advantage of by Reiko, she is a sociopath who is taking advantage of the fact that adults trust her so she can get what she wants with Reiko. Also, Reiko lives and thrives in an enviroment where going into past traumatic events in great detail is encouraged. You feel uneasy and dirty while reading the rape scene because that's how you're supposed to feel, that is what Reiko felt when the event happened.
Both comments I've left in response have disappeared 🙈 Third time's a charm? Reiko describes the child as beautiful and alluring from the moment she sees her. As an adult, she should've separated herself from the situation immediately. The child made non consensual advances (changed terminology to avoid this comment being flagged too), yes. It never should've gotten to the point of them in her room and Reiko shouldn't have put her hands on her.
I think the argument here of "it made you feel something because that was its intention and therefore it is justified" is a completely understandable argument but not necessarily the one I was making, which is completely okay! I think everything you described here is something that can be achieved without making the character so young. I don't particularly think its okay to sexualize a young girl character in any circumstance unless it plays a specific point or message in the novel (i.e Lolita). However, I don't believe the age of the character is required for that scene. Who knows, maybe I missed something but I really feel as though there aren't many justifications for the explicit sexualization of minors and I can't really pinpoint one here. Thank you for your comment!
Wow. Thanks for the hard work on this! All the interviews were new to me and so much reminded me of the victim mentality of older men when culture changes around them. I’ll always have a fond memory of encountering Wild Sheep Chase but book after book of the same male perspective has answered the question for me.
I’ve read a few of his books, and just finished his book of essays “Novelist as a Vocation.” In it he has an essay about his readers called “Who do I write for?” and his main point in the essay is that he doesn’t have a clear understanding of who his readers are because they span demographics like age, gender, location, background, etc. But, like your example from the Running memoir, he has one sentence that sticks out: “My readers are about evenly split between men and women, and apart from the fact that many of my women readers are quite beautiful-this is no lie-there’s no characteristic they all share.” It just seemed odd to me to call out that many of his women readers are beautiful. And he also discusses a few examples from young women readers who got in touch with him, including one who praised him for really understanding the emotions and interior lives of young women as represented in his novels. The final thing I’ll mention is that there is a little bit about his wife in this book, but not a lot. When he talks about selling his jazz cafe, leaving Japan because he was sick of the criticism against him and the Japanese publishing industry, he doesn’t mention his wife at all during those major life events. So it seems like through your examples and his examples, he often objectifies women and represents them in how they benefit (or don’t) men.
The first book of murakami that i read was Norwegian Wood. The reason i picked up that book was because many people talked about it. But, eventually i didn't like it. I was so upset because i had a big expectation from his most phenomenal work (at least in my country). Now, my question to myself is should i give him another chance?
I recently read Murakami's 1Q84 and hated it from the bottom of my heart. Even though the story was kind of interesting and the writing pretty good, it felt like the same things were repeated all the time and the story went nowhere. The main female character is poorly written and the author seems to have a tendency at sexualizing underaged girls, so I had to stop reading at some point. Let's say my experience with Murakami hasn't been too good as of now, and I seriously don't know if I'll keep reading his books. Great video anyway, it was really interesting to hear your thoughts on this!!
thank you so much for making this video especially because one of the comments that instigated it were mine. I think Murakami is sexist and also feels like he has a lot of weird fetishes. I really enjoyed his book after dark but south of the border, west of the sun was too much for me. I think I will read (with an open mind) Norwegian wood and Kafka mainly because I already own both of them but he is definitely not going to be a favourite any time soon. anyways I read some female Japanese authors because I wanted that sense of escapism Japanese lit has but without the sexism and I found some really good ones. id highly recommend kitchen by banana Yoshimoto and the housekeeper and the professor by Yoko ogawa. I think Murakami fans would love them but more importantly, these books might help them understand better just what their favourite is doing wrong. disclaimer tho, both these books aren't copies of Murakami plots in any aspects, they are very unique.
I don’t think you can separate the author from the art. Saying that, one thing is having one book (like Lolita) about that specific topic, but when is in all of its books that women are treated like that, you should reconsider. You can talk about those topics without being gross
You're right I'm from a vary diffrent culture and all i've read till recent were censored i was in shock when i read sex part. But i continued reading and the rest of book then i changed my mind
I've only read Hardboiled Wonderland so far, and I did not like the constant sexualization of the chubby girl, especially at moments that don't require those sexual introspection during the story. I was not exactly comfortable, but there were other times where there was the male gaze, like when he interacted with the librarian who ended up sleeping with him later on when ***spoiler: the main character was living his last day "alive" in the real world, :spoiler*** and I was not bothered by it. The question I have is is it inherently bad to have the male gaze in a book or sexualized characters, male or female? Sexuality is a part of this world, of life, and of the male experience in the case of Murakami. I don't think having a male gaze inherently makes something sexist, I think the problem with Murakami is that he isn't self aware or has given much thought. His male gaze rears in at really odd times and sometimes with teenage characters, and it's immersion shattering and disturbing, and he doesn't seem to realize any of it. I think he's someone who has reached the conclusion that prudish people just want to execute him for portraying sexual stuff, but really this is not about prudishness, he's kind of letting down his female characters and the potential they could reach in his novel. He's decided to settle on half well-written, but half objectified female characters, and this hurts his otherwise brilliant writing. Well, well-written might not be the right word, his works are more theme-focused than character-focused, and so his characters seem to be rather simple, but that doesn't mean his characters are badly written either, maybe a better word would be saying that his female characters are half "real" and half objects, unlike the male characters. His male gaze is so ingrained in him that he doesn't have the self awareness to understand where the criticism is coming from or how to write sexy stuff without appearing sexist.
you are so well articulated! I first read Murakami in my late teens, consuming probably as many as you and also getting a wind up bird tattoo. In my thirties, upon reread, there is so so much I can no longer identify with and feel really icky to me. I love his writing and I'm not criticizing it, there's just one too many 'cumming on the shape of a 13 year old girls ear while down a well' that makes me squirm now.
I recently bought Norwegian Wood because I was looking for something to relate to my current experience as a lonely college student. Now I'm a bit scared to read it
20:33 Okay, you said that you didn't understand why he suddenly brought up "young girls in revealing bikinis" and I've heard a lot of people online talking about how in Japan, revealing clothes is often seen as taboo, which could make sense why he points that out to the readers --more specifically, the Japanese readers. But then again, looking into it, I couldn't find anything saying bikinis are taboo in Japan, in fact, I found some threads saying that it is completely normal so long as you're on a beach. The only other nonsexual reason could be the very fact that they are "young girls" which I found an article online stating that some Japanese people feel that girls under the age of 18 should not wear them, but then again, one of them specifically mentioned that this ban should be meant for models. I can't say for certain if this will give any real reason for the motive behind the detail, but then again, nothing can really be said for sure without his direct comment.
your comments about "being american" and "not understanding japanese culture" threw me off so much i couldn't even finish the video. it's really weird how the topic is sexualization of (younger) women and you try to make it about "cultural differences" when, in reality, it's not. feels disrespectful towards many female japanese authors out there...
Ive read 4 Murakami books and honestly... he's not that great lol i read a lot of fantasy novels and so his plots aren't that interesting and his writing was repetitive and relied heavily on cliche phrases. I have no issues with people enjoying his books..but I just personally get passed the fact that all his female characters are either virginal good girl sex objects or literal prostitutes.
Even though I've only listened to 'Hard-Boiled Wonderland and the End of the World', the very beginning of '1Q84' (The author and the publisher guy talking about how the girls first reading/press event went was the last straw.) and read several book descriptions/reviews of his other works, for me it's already enough to never read him again. I quickly got the feeling his characters are just copy+paste or 2D-paper-cut-outs: strangely passive, lethargic men obsessed with breasts; hollow women assessing themselves in the mirror unless they serve as a plot device. With Murakami I personally can't seperate his (main, male) characters from himselve anymore, his gaze grosses me out, many of his descriptions feel creepy in the wrong way. There just comes a point when it simply IS the author and not the character(s) anymore. I mean, what if e.g. in almost every book a main character expresses a low opinion about gays/mentions stereotypes and they never change, no other character disagrees with them, or you have no gay character being the "counterweight" ... I'd eventually be suspicious of the author just showing their actual opinion on gay people - especially if they see the main character as a "parallel version" of themselves and take no clear stand when interviewed. I obviously didn't read enough by Murakami to judge his writing style, how valuable his work is for those who study literature or for Japanese literature, but I think he's a great example that it matters a lot why exactly you love an author/a story and a simple "OMG, he's so brilliant, everybody should read him." doesn't cut it.
I recently read Norwegian Wood and I agree with a lot of these comments. I had only heard of him when I decided to pick up one of his books at the book store, I had no idea of the sexism criticism. His prose is addictive and I LOVE the melancholic vibe he achieves, but as a sapphic woman I often felt very uncomfortable (I´ll get there). The women in this book gather around the main character as flies gather around shit (lol I´m sorry if this sounds unserious this is the only way I managed to express it), and they try to make him very special and mysterious, when the only vibe I got from him was that of a petulant man. He also can´t find out who he is or what he wants a lot of times, which is fine and the entire point of the book, that´s why I like the parts where he seems (to me) hyprcritical. In order to find out about himself and the world, he reflects upon stories he hears from women around him and, of course, we get to read them. I was very unimpressed with the "suicidal teen" trope, but it worked. Now, when we got to know about Reiko... that took a toll on me (Spoilers for Norwegian Wood): When Reiko opens up about her past, we discovered that she, a married adult woman, was "enchanted"/abused by a 13 year old lesbian that she used to teach how to play piano. The predatory lesbian trope, along with the age gap, and the jokes about the mc sexualizating it, made me really unconfortable to the point I had to put down the book for a couple of minutes. I understand that it´s an old book and old beliefs and tropes come with it, and I´m not personally damaged to the point of wanting to "cancel" Murakami, but I´m at a point in my life where it´s just... tiring. In the future, if anyone where to ask me about this book, I would warn them about this kind of content in advance. With that said, idk why I continued reading it. I give him kudos for that, I loved the atmosphere so much I just wanted to know where the mc would take me. I felt like I could breathe the landscapes. I´m thinking about giving the author another oportunity. (I think it´s well redacted but just in case: English is not my first language so I apologize if there are mistakes)
LMAO okay I did not get to the part where you talked about it in the video but YES I absolutely agree. I was also wondering about her telling the truth or not while reading it
Just because Murakami sexualises women does that make him sexist? And if some of his characters are underage, that could be a problem in its own right, but is it sexist?
I enjoy Murakami, even as a woman. I feel what a lot of people are missing is the patterns, sexualizing a character in a book isnt nessecarely "bad", but in these cases it is a reoccurring trope. The sexualization is shallow and not really integral to the message of the books. His female characters typically only exist to push the male characters forwards in their journey and the way they do that is without fail sexual.
@@cassandradoyle3609 To be honest, I can imagine that I would not enjoy a book written by a woman filled with unrealistic male sex-objects. But I hope there is a female Murakami out there that I would enjoy because I hope good literature is universal. So I'm interested to know what you do like about Murakami. Because if we imagine his books without the sex do they still work?
@@dagarbos Thank you for your reply! It's nice to see that people on the internet are still able to have productive conversations. I'm used to spendi ng time counting fallacies. The first Murakami book I read was Kafka on the Shore, I feel that that is important. If I had read Norwegean Wood my opinion may have been different. Generally I thought that the themes involving the concious and unconcious mind were interesting, and I feel like a big part of that in a lot of people is sexuality. Like in the way that people generally dont want to be homosexual because it's viewed negatively in society, but they cannot help it. They are not making a concious choice to be homosexual. Since Kafka is a teenage guy and horny he has these kinds of intrusive thoughts that he cannot control, and he has dreams like that. So I was interested in that concious vs unconcious aspect of the story. This is also present in The Colorless. As I read more Murakami I realised that the aspects that interested me so much , concious vs unconcious mind, dreams and reality, the fantasy aspects, all these things Murakami explored could only be explored in one way, through exploiting the sexuality of women. By having men unconciously or sometimes consciously take advantage of women. Generally I like the fantastical aspects of Murakami's novels, how he plays with dreams, but it disapponts me that he can only write it involving sex. Generally the answer to your question is that I dont know if his books work without the sex. Since he uses the trope so much, I cant tell you if he is capable (or willing) to include the elements of his books I love so much without the aspects I dont. Hopefully there is a "female Murakami" out there, or something similar. I will keep reading and let you know. 😊
@@cassandradoyle3609 No thank you for engaging. Most of the people commenting on this topic don't provide enough evidence to support their claims. I feel like sexism, as in being unfair or cruel to women, is a pretty serious allegation. If I thought an author's work was sexist I think I would stop reading them. To use my favourite book of his, the Wind-up Bird Chronicle, as the example I agree that the female characters are always sexualised and made instrumental to the male, and that this then presents an incomplete view of women. But I think that Murakami is writing this way not because he wants to malign women but because he wants to write about sex a lot. He may be presenting a one-sided view of the topic, but what he does present is true. I edited this comment to make more sense 🤭
Do you understand the difference between pedophilia and sexism? These two concepts are completely disjoint, yet persistently conflated in this analysis.
I believe that he is an extraordinary writer but personally I can't get through his books because they make me feel disgust. I've tried to read them and failed. The only thing I finished was a short story and I still didn't like it 🤷♀️
To me it's fairly simple, where there's smoke there's fire. If this many people, by far the majority of people that read even just one of his novels, get sexist and noncey vibes then there's a reason for that. The fact that it's so consistent and usually not framed as being wrong says to me it's clearly an accurate reflection of him as a person. But that still doesn't mean anyone can't enjoy his books, but I would say that giving him money is rather questionably ethical. We can agree not to support jk Rowling but Murakami gets a pass? Seems a bit hypocritical to me.
Nah. Most of Murakami’s readers are Asians and they also watch booktube. He’s not gonna get a really big leap if he keeps bashing this demo of audience. Wouldn’t be surprised if he caps his overall viewcount at some point.
I've only read a few Murakami books so far, "Men Without Women", "The Elehant Vanishes" and "1Q84", and I have actually felt there are also some feminist elements in his writing that I did not expect considering how patriarchal Japan is and has been as a country and culture. Is it possible to be feminist and sexist at the same time? Sure, there could be, since either the feminism or sexism - or the combination of both - could be non-deliberate, based on limited reflection or understanding on what defines either position; many who are sexist don't realise it, and many - some self-proclaimed feminists included - think feminism is something else than it is.
First of all, what does "sexist" even mean in this context? Why should it be viewed as problematic when a fictional story is basically the sum and the combination of the authors and his character's SUBJECTIVE experiences and attachment patterns? For example, if you are a male from a certain culture with certain experiences you will most likely have a certain view of women aswell as any other thing or phenomenon. What is the alternative, writing "objective" fiction with absolute no personal depth? What you are essentially asking of him is to not write honestly and personally. Which is a mortal sin in any artform. I just read "Men without women" and literally every woman is a cheater one way or the other! Is that sexist? No, he just chooses to write about the women who are. Also addressing the notion that he can't write women... so fucking what if he can't? Every writer has a blind side and does the best with the tools that he's got. Writers are humans, they are not machines.
Perfect..you nailed it. Murakami comes from a very different culture (🇯🇵) & west wants everything to be politically correct like you are having so many Forced Strong Female Characters who are better at everything and can do anything better than a male, Forced racial & culture representation in the name of entertainment these days.
I appreciate the Murakami books I've read alot. He lost me when he described a funeral scene in IQ84 and all that the female lead character thought of while burying her friend: I wish I had boobs like hers.
I have heard quite a lot about the author and really wanted to give his novels a go but then I read the reviews and how 'problematic' certain parts of his books are and I became uncertain. This video really answered a lot of my questions and I really like how you so cleanly and thoroughly dissected the issue and now, instead of venturing into unknown territory, I at least know what I will be dealing with. I came from an Asian background and grew up with Japanese and Chinese media influences and I can't wait to see how my read with Kafka on the shore will go, to really see if it's the cultural difference or that it is just Murakami himself. I still, however, expect to read a great writing. Thank you, cheers to the nice discussion. I appreciate it.
I think murakami is a sexist author and this video helped me finalize some thoughts on why. As jumbled as my explanation is, here it be: The fact that he says he doesn't write complex characters but writes complex women --that somehow magically support the male MC's growth-- makes me believe that he just doesn't realize he is sexist. He shakes off the pressing questions about sexism and just says essentially "ayyy I'm just writing here." It has been pointed out that his male characters hold his world perspective. He probably just sees women as creatures that develop men's growth, but not as humans themselves. I think the weird age sexualization thing is horrible, but is common in Japan. Some areas of Japan literally have the age of consent set to 12. I've seen theories that relate this pedophilic view of young girls to misogyny because young girls aren't able to "fight back" as easily, but serve the purpose of being a female. One can separate artists from art, but does it really matter at the end of the day? I like Murakami's books, but I recognize they have sexist elements to them. I think the important part is that it's talked about, like this video. By calling him sexist or "cancelling" him won't stop him from writing and won't stop his books from being bought because he's a good author. The problem is when people read these books and assume this is how the world (and women in it) are supposed to act/function. How to ensure that this does not become the case,, I have no idea lol. TL;DR: He's sexist, but just doesn't realize it because he doesn't really care about women like that. Japan and age of consent is extremely sus overall. Art from artist is a compelling argument on whether Murakami is sexist or not, but it's not him that reaches audiences it's his art.
critiquing a writer without the context of his or her cultural roots is lazy. not only are you going to inevitably apply your own worldview based on your own cultural background but you will also miss out on the context in which women in general are viewed in the culture that you are largely ignoring to make a point. is it really shocking that a rapist is written such that he didn't care about his female victim? how is that exactly problematic? and i can't stand the overuse of the word "problematic" in young people's vocabulary. there is one thing i'd like to point out that most critics (regarding the female characters issue in murakami's works) probably totally overlook or outright miss. there is a passage somewhere i think in the wind-up bird chronicle where the main character reads an article about oral sex where the gist of the article is that when women swallow the ejaculate, it's like absolute complete submission. what this tells me is that, murakami definitely is aware of how women are seen by society, and particularly by japanese society. an honest writer wouldn't pretend that his or her society is not "problematic". if you have some familiarity of how women have been treated in japanese society, nothing about murakami's works would remotely surprise you. oddly enough, murakami said before that norwegian wood isn't one of the works he is particularly fond of. i think he eventually dismissed it as his "romance" novel, where he sort of got carried away with the love story between toru and midori. edit: murakami praised mieko kawakami's short story "breasts and eggs" (not the novel version) saying it's like this illuminating primal work. i think that says a lot about why he almost never writes in the POV of women. i would rather a writer write about what he or she knows rather than pretend to be some kind of expert on something that's actually unfamiliar territory. there's nothing more pretentious or overbearing than a writer pretending to understand something that's clearly alien in terms of first-person knowledge. i appreciate how his attempts at describing women are mostly observational and not ever trying to write about what's "essential" about womanhood. he would give you vague or vivid context clues and never clumsily explain a female character. i don't think i've ever come across a passage where he explicitly tries to explain the core motive or drive of a woman. it's usually about the main male character trying to understand but usually failing at the attempt, which i think is an honest portrayal of an "average" male protagonist who isn't the archetypal hero who just magically resolves the dilemma of the story by the end of the book. i've read most of his works and it really isn't his thing to try and pin down "what" a woman is or "why" women do x, y or z. he also gravitates towards strange characters and circumstances, so it's not just the women in his stories that are strange but pretty much everyone.
it's not about being able to separate art from the artist. the idea that an author must be a good person to apreciate its art is ridiculous. When was the last time you read an author because he was a good guy? It's riddiculous also because there is no good or bad, that's just manicheist view of the world, and if you're interested in literature, you'll only be able to read things like Lord of the rings or the bible. Also, of course, there's a person behind each work, we can't deny that but if we can read, understand, analyse and appreciate a book we don't know anything about its author but the name, I think it's better we do it that way every time, because reading was never about having a friendly, personal relationship with its author. And finaly, yes, we can make it about the way we consume problematic artist so we don't support them financialy. But here's the thing: there is no conscious consummerism in capitalism. The sistem itself is problematic. And maybe the author is a "good guy", but the editor is not, or the translator, or some guy that's getting money from the purchase you make. The same can be said the other way around. Maybe the author is problematic, but there are a lot of people who makes a living from the books you purchase that are not. And what's the goal anyway, starve the author to death? one, that's not going to happen, and two, is it really fair to kill a man not because he killed a woman, not because he's a wifebeater, but because he kind of writes women in a bad light? is that gonna make us "the good guys"?
It doesn't really make sense to me to extend your reservations about certain scenes or characters in a work of fiction to the author himself. I can't imagine reading Murakami while concerning myself with identity politics. Interesting video nevertheless.
I've only read two books by him, first Kafka on the Shore, where I found the main character's fixation on sex with his mother weird, though I liked the book overall. Then I read Norwegian wood, and I almost dropped it halfway through, because of this cheap pron flavour - I just don't get why all the girls want to see the main character's pp, have sex with him all the time etc. But I finished it, and I still enjoyed it for the writing, atmosphere, and melancholic tone. Still, the sexual focus bothered me throughout, and often it felt pointless to the plot. That said, I don’t see much of an issue with most things you mentioned. For example, I think the girl had to be really young for Reiko’s story to work, because if she were 18 or older, it wouldn’t be as believable that she’d take piano lessons, and people wouldn’t be as judgmental about the situation. Reiko also likely wouldn’t expect something shocking from a 13-year-old as much as from an adult woman. For example, I think George R.R. Martin often portrays his female characters experiencing assault at young ages for shock value and impact, because the reader won't care about 20yo as much. The thing about pointing out breasts is valid, but tbf there're lots of times when he describes everything - such as clothes, hair, skin etc, plus I guess it might be a japanese thing (just remember an average anime fem character). And you can't deny that people, men and women, are just tend to point out things they find attractive, especially when young and exploring relationships. And ultimately, we're adults who can think for ourselves. We don’t have to view any of these characters as role models. Books overall are good, I personally don't care about the author that much.
i really think you missed a lot in that interview with kawakami which most likely has a lot to do with the fact that you don’t know her work. i think he answered her questions well and while that doesn’t mean he’s not sexist, i think it explained a lot. i agree with you on the sexualization of young girls but i think in terms of general sexism there’s an interesting cultural dynamic that people who aren’t from japan can’t completely understand. his female characters can be well written, notably in the short story “sleep”.
It’s frustrating. I’m glad some have covered this. But Japanese men also have to have signs around public areas to remind them to not sexually assault women and girls around them. So I think it’s a cultural issue and Murakami is a typical Japanese male hyper focused on women serving as humans to be used for pleasure or spiritual growth and not humans.
It says a lot about how he constructs many of his books that for a lot of people, the parts they remember the most clearly are the uncomfortable and uninsightful sexual moments
Correction: left wing, politically correct, woke, cancel culture supporting readers are a fearful cowardly lot, like the guy in this video. "Racist" "sexist" "Homophobic" "transphobic" ",ableist". I could almost hear him run out of breath as he was going through his list. BTW, what is an ableist someone that hates disabled people? I don't think I have ever met one of them, but whatever. What is the point of this video, to decide whether or not Murakami himself is sexist,or whether it is just that some of his male characters or some of his portrayals of female characters are sexist?WHO CARES? So let's assume for the sake of argument, that Murakami himself is sexist, then what, should he be cancelled, have his reputation ruined, lose his career and be sent out to sea on an iceberg? Art is A moral,that is how it should be. Whether the artist is a good person or a bad person is irrelevant, however you interpret those terms anyway. if the guy in this video wants to call Murakami a sexist,that's fine, but if he is one, that is no worse than if the garbage man in your neighborhood is a sexist. Artists like everyone else can hold any beliefs they want, and their art can express positive ideas or negative ideas, it's all good. The only thing an artist should feel obligated to do, is to be true to themselves.
I would agree that artists should definitely explore previously unexplored concepts and not always go for the safest option. I don't feel like that stance applies to this at all, however. An issue with Murakami is that he writes women in a way that makes them hardly feel like actual people with actual lives, but more as devices solely placed there to somehow alter the lives of the male characters in some way. Writing half the population as if they solely exist for the purpose of changing men's experiences is not an artistic risk, it's an artistic failure. In writing his female characters this way, Murakami is not purposefully venturing into the 'artistic unknown', he's simply showing that he's ignorant of the fact that women, too, are complex individuals with lives, aspirations, etc. of their own. I think it's rather dangerous to claim that people who criticize an artist are simply "fearful [and] cowardly", rather than to actively engage in a discussion regarding the points provided in said criticism.
Very articulate video on a controversial landmine of a topic. I'm only really getting into Murakami and love his writing while I also am cognisant of his more sexist and problematic habits
i hate it how all the time there is something about sex and all of that is shown like the man is the one who should get pleased. the character of norwegian wood is an asshole to women and it seems like murakami wants us to think like thats ok. i really want to read it but sadly i don't think i'll get through it considering it's so sexual.
Atleast you're not trying to troll or insult murakami fans like some book tubers I know. I'm actually a lovecraft fan, a very overt racist in his time. I hate racists, but I can't help it but read n love his sense of horror and monsters. Even if murakami is sexist, i don't care. I have liked artists who have done worst. You just gotta love the art, not the artist. A quick joke when you talked about the quote from his nonfiction book... He just really appreciates the female form lmao
I just finished reading Norwegian Wood considering that it was one of the most popular books of Murakami. I was highly disappointed by the book and didn't like a single character. There were so many undigestible things that happened throughout the book. The main character was not interested or passionate about anything. The worst part was when *spoiler* Naoko died he thought about her body and how someone with such a soft body die. WTF Murakami. I don't think I ever wanna read that Authors book again
You seem focused on making the ages 18 to solve the problems. How does this solve any issues aside from making legal in an American context? Shouldn't it still be creepy by 18?
I think it comes down to cultural differences between the west and Japan. Just consider that the age of consent in Japan is 13 (although there has been some talk about raising it for some time now). Also I am not sure we can ignore the influence Christianity has had on how the west perceives lust and sexual desire as low, condemnable and overall negative (the whole idea of chivalry and abstinence as a virtue). Maybe what we perceive as inappropriate comments are seen by other cultures as a sign of healthy sexual prowess and virility. Japan is notoriously behind in addressing several social issues, including the role of women in society, if you think it is bad in the west, think again. He's also from an older generation which doesn't necessarily help.
I’m afraid my favourite author, Hideo Yamamoto (a mangaka), is also sexist and possibly transphobic(?) I’ve read as many of his works as I could get my hands on (the most notable and my favourites being Ichi The Killer and Homunculus) and all of them do have some questionably sexist scenes. While sexual deviancy, sexual violence, and just sex in general are very prevalent themes in his works it’s almost always inflicted on or focused around a female character. There is some exception I feel when it comes to Ichi The Killer, but that is only because one of the main characters is heavily suggested to be a gay man. In almost all of his works he seems to deliberately choose to include shots of female character’s crotches, breasts, legs, etc. When this happens it usually makes sense contextually and isn’t just thrown in there completely out of nowhere, but still feels very unnecessary. Not to mention the excruciatingly drawn out scenes of intense sexual violence and physical abuse many of his female characters are subjected to, which sometimes times feel completely unnecessary also. Typing all this out it feels pretty safe to say that he is, but I’m trying my best to convince myself that he is not. Just kinda disappointed. About the transphobia: Gender identity and fluidity is in my opinion a less obvious but still reoccurring theme in his works, which I find very interesting. As a transgender male, I for a long time held his characters who were suggested to be trans in a very positive light. However, after re-reading some of his stuff I’m not so sure if it was that positive at all. **spoilers for Homunculus coming up btw** The best example of a character that is suggested to be transgender in Hideo Yamamoto’s stories is from Homunculus. If you’ve read it you know who I’m talking about, and if you haven’t but would want to start one day it’d be pretty obvious who anyways. That character, after presenting in public as a woman for the first time in her life, dismisses it all saying that she doesn’t experience gender issues to another character (who was the one that had originally encouraged her to present that way in public), and claims that what she wanted wasn’t to be a woman but just to be beautiful. Which would have been fine if it wasn’t so painfully obvious that that wasn’t the case. The character who encouraged her to go out like that also just said to her that she wasn’t a woman just like bluntly and it was never addressed again. I remember the girl character and her backstory of growing up as a transgender person and a transgender child whose parents were afraid being so important to me since I had never seen someone who had to experience the world like me represented in media at all. It was so comforting to see that my favourite author who had written my favourite story in the world, Ichi The Killer, which was so violent and horrific and out there, could also write delicately and what seemed at the time to me so genuinely about a girl finding her identity. I really don’t know anymore though I’m gonna stop here :(
Haruki Murakami is my favorite living author. That said, I believe his feet should certainly be held to the fire a bit with regards to the way he writes women. Most of his female characters exist only to lead the male protagonist along in the story and be an object of sex at the male’s disposal. We can marvel his work and be critical of it at the same time.
So, I disagree on a few things. First I don't think sexualizing female characters is equal to objectifying them. I wouldn't go as far as saying mentioning their beauty is a way to glorify them. In my opinion it definitely shows some kind of obsession from Murakami. I would say we have to separate the main characters from the author but it really strucks me how much sex scenes he adds. And it's also true for female main characters (I'm thinking about aomame and the weird useless sex scenes). I feel like he mostly wants to show sex is a natural need that men and women shouldn't been ashamed to have. I do not see a hierarchy made between men and women. I feel like he wants to show they need each other. He also seems kind of supportive of the LGBT community considering the treatment of oshima in Kafka on the shore. I'm aware some sex scenes are very disturbing, like in Norwegian Wood as you said with the 13 years old girl and the scene with Naoko but It looks like they are meant to be disturbing. I do not think he normalizes these behaviors to make them acceptable and justify himself. In my opinion he leaves the interpretation to the reader, to question them, and honestly it seems to work considering how much we talk about it. The things is, even if the male gaze in his work is disturbing I do not see it as a way to to change the moral of his readers. It's up to us thinking what we want about his characters' behaviors. He doesn't seem to care what we think about it, and to be honest I think he's right writing that way. At the end of the day I don't think litterature is meant to be a moral compass. I can understand that from a woman perspective the female characters are sometimes unlikeable and you can't identify to them. But so do I with the male characters. It doesn't prevent me from enjoying the complexity of the work and the reason is that I don't take his stories as example for real life Because this stories happen in the real world doesn't mean the world should be presented as you would like it to be (or even as it really is). The point of fiction in to have the freedom to tell the stories you want in my opinion Now you can throw in the trash everything I said if it's one day proven that Murakami have had questionable behaviors and that his works were meant to change the reader's mind about them. If he really has a disgusting mind that would change how I judge and analyse his work obviously
My friend and I read Kafka on the Shore for our book club a few months back and the sexual content of the novels made me SO uncomfortable. I enjoyed the book but it was definitely because the introspection of the novel and not the content
A lot of this is fair, some of it annoyed me, some of it made me angry even. I have only read a few Murakami novels but I am familiar with most of the stuff you touched on here. The Norwegian Wood thing, yeah, that was uncomfortable and weird. I don't remember how graphic the sexualization was, but I think that's certainly pushing the boat out by anyone's standards. That said, for me this character was someone who had been taken advantage of at a low point and had her inner weakness and darkness cultivated in her by a supposedly innocent child - the exact inverse of the relationship they were supposed to have, where the older woman tutors the younger one and brings out the best in her. This idea that she was lying about the whole thing I think is just some weird conspiracy theory, I don't really get that. As such, it doesn't really make sense that she's an adult, I mean it's laughable honestly that this makes just as much sense if the girl is 18. Still though, its just playing it a bit fast and loose with child sexualization for me, I'm not gonna go ahead and outright defend it. And I do remember really hoping she wasn't gonna have sex with the main character when I saw it going that way, just started to feel like a shitty anime a bit. With regards to Colourless, I can see there's a bit of a taboo element to this scene but I really think it boils down to a non-issue. This is not like the case in Norwegian Wood, because a 13 year olds (at least before the horrors of the modern age) are assumed to not be sexually active or... "have developed sexual psychology" I guess, whereas when two 16/17 year olds have sex it's no big deal. As such, a scene depicting the dream representations of two 16/17 year olds having sex with the dream avatar (of unspecified age) of a ~22 year old (is that right?) who knew them when they were all that age, and who feels ashamed of the dream after, that's just a non-issue to me. Speaking of non-issues, noticing and appreciating in passing girls in bikinis is definitely in that category. I know you address that this may seem like a nit pick but that really doesn't change the fact that it does. There is also the fact that female characters are often a vehicle for growth in male characters. I say fact because I think that's totally true, I'm not disputing it, I just don't think it's necessarily a problem as long as it's taken for what it is. A limitation, sure, but not a moral failure. Was Mr. Rochester not a vehicle for Jane Eyre's growth? Are the Bronte sisters sexist authors? There is an element of this in all main - secondary character relationships, male or female, Murakami or otherwise. What angers me is the idea that Murakami should recognise this as a moral failure "causing harm" (???) to his (almost exclusively grown up adult) female audience and that he should repent and change his ways over this. This is just one manifestation of this toxic attitude within online book review spaces - my suggested videos right now includes '40 "problematic'" Authors I Won't Read...', and I think that sums up the tone. No wonder Murakami takes offence to this attempt to subjugate his intellectual freedom as an author. No wonder, even, that he likens it to the persecution of academics during communist revolutions that occurred during his own lifetime. I also don't understand why you have not included redeeming points or counter-arguments, bar a passing reference to the fact that his female characters are fleshed out and have their own agency and ideas, which I feel was brushed over hugely given the video's topic. You mention other books which have problematic themes that you could bring up, including After Dark, but don't think to mention it as a counterexample of a Murakami story that focuses on the personal growth of a female protagonist? Or the recurring motif of independent, strong-willed female characters in his stories? Obviously you are a genuine Murakami fan and not out to make a hit-piece, your tone and your other videos make that clear, but the actual content of this video is exactly like a hit-piece and I just don't understand why. I think a lot of this evaporates away when you step out of American prudishness and demonization of male sexuality (not the child sexualization of Norwegian Wood, to be clear). There is a (very good) novel called "The Virgins" by Pamela Erens centred around high school seniors in 1979-80 which contains vivid descriptions of sex between 16/17 year olds and their bodies, male and female. She is not on trial here, nor should she be. It is a truly sad thing that Murakami cannot be afforded the same respect, and that so many men (and women, of course, in a different way) are made to feel ashamed of their sexuality.
I don't agree that he is a sexist author. To me it seems, like many male authors, he struggles to understand how to write female characters. The cultural differences also have to be mentioned, I've read many books from many languages and I have to say the ages of sexual maturity is a broad spectrum of acceptability. Even in America we have characters like Tina Belcher from Bob's Burgers or we have the lead character from Turning Red where both are 13yo girls who are finding their sexuality and its the main or major focus of their characters, sure we might not include sex scenes but it has to be mentioned. Also I personally believe that a lot of people know that teenagers are having sex and by avoiding the topic all together we do them a great disservice in the same way a lack of sex-ed doesn't them no favors.
Do you think struggling to understand female characters and being sexist are mutually exclusive? Further, in the case of turning red or Tina, do you feel as though this is a sexualization of these characters? Or, as I would posit a story about sexuality, but not one that is sexual in itself.
Murakami try not to write pointless sexualization and/or make every characters like the same music everytime; Beatles and other bands of that era, classical composers, or jazz musicians challenge (IMPOSSIBLE)
Hey, sorry I'm late to discussion. When reading Norwegian Wood I stumbled across some post (or was it Leave By Leave's video?) questioning Reiko's character. Of course, sexualizing a 13-yo (if I remember correctly) should not be done, yet making her older would make Reiko more reliable. In some part, we have that "older" women in Naoko. Toru doesn't know exactly what happened between Naoko and Reiko, same as he doesn't know with the other girl. I got away from this, that Reiko could be narcissistic and unreliable. However, if this was intended, it should have been more obvious or there should have been more hints to excuse Reiko's background story.
It is one thing to write in this way about women if (i) such viewpoint serves a purpose (i.e. one of the themes of a book might be the two dimensional viewing of female characters by the narrator) (ii) it happens in one or two books by the author. My problem with Murakami is that the over-sexualization of women, their characterlessness, the problematic treatment of minor girls is a reoccurring trait of his books. Moreover: there is no judgement passed on the narrator for his actions and views on women. It is treated as a circumstance, like the setting of the story or the features of the main character. It is normalized to a shocking degree. I think that is the part where you become suspicious, that such treatment of fictional women isn't just problematic on paper (and should not be just waived off as a little flaw in an otherwise great book), but is probably a symptom of something much more real and sinister. One day I think some facts about Murakami will come to light, and no one will be able to say "oh we did NOT see that coming".
Guess what, the world is sexist bc it is compiled of highly individual and subjective perspectives of beautifully flawed ppl with their individual attachment patterns. If you take away that from a novelist and his characters, what's left is cardboard cutouts. It is a non-topic for me. I don't understand this preoccupations with labels, in particuraly when it comes to Murakami. We could also say his protagonists are stereotypical while his female characters are elusive and unpredictible which makes him a poor writer of male characters?
So far i only read that book about the guy being in the cabin in the wood and seeing the sheep man, but thats not having many women, which ight be a blessing i he secualizes all female characters. Also a man going in a cabin in the woods to think about his midlifecrisis iin not as eird as his other premises. Bu him refuing to tone problematic choices down , which even lovecraft did, is a choice too.
His work definitely borders on pedophilloic and is outrightly sexist I can’t even make it through one of his works without being extremely uncomfortable. I own three of them and have read two but will neverrr buy anything buy him again. I feel like everything positive he brings to the table other authors can do (some better) with none of the weirdness. People just hook onto him because his name is so familiar.
I am sorry....I don't like his writing style and Norwegian Wood was a terrible story 😅 but I am very particular about the type of stories I like. And I get why a teenage boy or...young man would like his stories. Not my thing.
I love Murakamis writing but I hate how he makes every female character have sex with the main character like wtf
What are talking about? In Norwegian Wood the narrator didn't have sex with the girl he grew up with. In Wind up Bird Chronicle the main character didn't have sex with May Kasahara, or with Nutmeg, or even with the Kano sisters. In After Dark, the only character who has sex is a minor character who rapes a Chinese prostitute.
There was this one quote in Norwegian Wood where the main character was like he couldn't lay next to this girl because then he would need to have sex with her.
This is so true with Norwegian Wood
I'm so relieved to see thoughtful responses in the comments here. Murakami's writing is beautiful and what he writes is often stereotypical, reductionist, and derogatory to women (and other marginalized groups). Both things can exist.
I completely and unequivocally agree. It would be erroneous to say that Murakami is a bad writer. He has a extremely fluid prose that naturally flows from word to word, allowing even the most detailed of descriptions become accessible. However, just because he is a talented writer does not make his treatment of female characters any less problematic! Thank you for your comment! I look forward to hearing more from you!
100% this! I love what I've read of Murakami's work. His writing is completely worth reading. But it's flawed and sexist. Both things can coexist.
@@colorlesswonderland whenever I read comments about Murakami it seems that we all forget that what we're reading is a translation.
Stereotypical sure but how is it reductionist and derogatory?
@@colorlesswonderlandwhat was so honestly so problematic about his women? I liked each of his female characters I think they were all interesting.
I read the thumbnail as “is murakami the sexiest author”…. Hmmmmm. Now I wonder what he looks like.
Unfortunately he looks like an middle aged teacher xD
the answer is yes
I haven't read a lot of Murakami, but reading Norwegian Wood did frustrate me. It frustrated me because I enjoyed his style and the way he builds his worlds, yet I was bothered by the portrayal of women. I think a large critique of his women characters isn't just that he sexualizes them, sometimes needlessly- it's that they seem to always serve as an agent of change or growth *for* a male character. You said something similar about them being the object of desire often. It seems like sometimes his women are almost props that serve just to expand the male character's perspective. And that makes the female characters rather 2-dimensional and wooden. It seems sexist to always make your women be responsible for changing or bettering the man, as if it is their job.
I understand that the perspective is from the male gaze, but I don't know how much of his works are a case of creative choices or just his actual views. Extreme example, but: It's like reading American Psycho, you understand that the author isn't supportive of Bateman's actions or lifestyle, in fact the entire work is a rather obvious critique on toxic masculinity, competition, and consumerism. With Murakami, his female characters don't seem really real, and his portions of hyper-sexualized women or them being "teachers" to male characters don't seem to be any sort of critique.
I'll eventually pick up another Murakami, but I had to take a break after Norwegian Wood. Is there any works of his that don't have women? Or have women but they aren't in a sort of role where the men need them for growth?
Completely agree with what you've said here. Sexism doesn't only take one form, it can manifest in so many various ways. Using women characters as pawns for the development of men, reliant on men, or only addressing them in passing is a clear disregard for women.
just a little curious, but if the story is about a guy, and a character doesn't help in any way effect the story of the protagonist in any way, then i don't see what else the character will do, its not about the character that has been introduced its about the effect of the character in the lead's life,
and on the other hand if just for everybody's sake lets say a female character gets introduced but still doesn't effect the storyline or the character development or anything in that story, then won't that be actually biased.
@Kim Apuzzo Thank you for your comment! I completely agree with all of your points here! Unfortunately, Norwegian Wood probably contains his most well developed and interesting female characters and if you think they weren't that great then his writing may not be for you! In terms of recommendations, all of his works have women in them and only one of them (or at least half of it) is told from a woman's perspective and that is 1Q84. HOWEVER, I have scene a lot of criticisms from female criticism about his female perspective in the story so keep that in mind! In terms of other Murakami books you could read, I would say Colorless Tsukuru Tazaki and his years of pilgrimage is good in its treatment of women characters so I would start there!
I can 100% relate to what you’ve said, a few months ago, I read Norwegian Wood. I’ll be objective about it, I do admit that Murakami is a fantastic writer, the way his story has a grip right from the beginning, and you feel the melancholy while reading. There’s this particular scene when the protagonist of the book is walking and it’s later in the evening, a little dark. I remember feeling a little calm and lonely, that itself is a testament of what a great writer her is, but saying that, I detest the way woman are portrayed, made me feel uncomfortable. After a few months I read another book by him called Men without woman, it’s a collection of stories. DO NOT READ IT, you won’t like it, it’s more than misogynistic. I’m going to give Murakami another try, since I do own a copy of Kafka on the shore, if that makes me feel the same way, I’ll just live with the fact that his books are probably not for me.
@@colorlesswonderland Isn't After Dark also told from a woman's perspective?
I’ve read a fair few Murakami books, only fiction author I really read and enjoy the way he writes. However, I found myself sighing every other time a main character points out a female characters chest, mentions his own hardened member. It seems like every character has the same mindset which sometimes interferes with my imagination of the lead role, and I just picture Haruki Murakami as the main character. In The Wind Up Bird Chronicle, May Kasahara is a school girl and Toru mentions her sunbathing in a bikini and her sweaty body which feels inappropriate to read, which goes along with other examples you mentioned.
I found this on Reddit, and the video is really interesting, you’ve got yourself a new subscriber.
First, thank you for the comment and subscribing! I hope you enjoy more of my videos! I completely agree that the more Murakami books you read, as well as the more you learn about him as an individual, the harder it becomes to separate himself from the main character. I understand that doesn't mean all he is observing is a direct reflection of his inner thoughts...but at a certain point when all of your main characters act and think the same way, you ultimately are those people; at least that is how I view his writing
Putting yourself in a characters mind doesn’t make the author to be that character. As a male yourself, a character in a book bejng male who is uncontrollably aroused by a woman and is turned on is a natural reaction? And having to explain it in a story through a protagonist doesn’t make it inappropriate.
And is also a language and culture difference from reading authors on the west. It might get lost in translation or misinterpreted by a reader.
Ewww creepy.
@@kidcalAroused by children? 🤨 And you men wonder why we love to cheat on you
@@mittag983 "you men" you should avoid any dreams of being a writer
As someone who is obssesed with Murakami's writing, all his characters not just females are all weird and problematic.
Finally
Nah, the dude is a creep when it comes about writing women, if you cannot see that then you are also a lil bit weird too
I don't understand why we're so quick to accept sexism compared to other prejudices. If he were a racist and that featured heavily in his books then nobody would think twice about refusing to read his books. His sales would be (rightfully) non existent or at least every low and we'd be comfortable calling him a bad person without so many people excusing it because he's japanese. Which is problematic in itself because it suggests that the Japanese in general are sexist and places the blame on Japanese culture rather than him in order to excuse his sexism. And its 2022, Japan is a first world country that has access to the Internet so I don't get how we can pretend there isn't any opportunity to educate himself, he has made it clear he doesn't care and won't change.
Sexism is just as bad as any other prejudice, be it racism, homophobia, transphobia or ableism. Sexism just gets excused more because people are used to it and like to give people a free pass.
In essence I think what's happening is that everyone knows he's deeply sexist (and there are very strong words regarding his clear attraction to young teenaged girls that I'll refrain from throwing around but that seem to me to be pretty clear cut), but nobody can be bothered to boycott him because its inconvenient.
This is an excellent point.
Something I've noticed and just my personal life, those who are sexist usually have some kind of trauma in their childhood doesn't excuse anything, it's just something I've noticed. Have you noticed the same?
@@scoobydoo_forever No, most men are at least a bit sexist and many are very very sexist. They aren't all just having a trauma response.
Because racism was always meant to oppress and subject. Sexism is an extreme version of gender roles which are practiced for both genders
It's because everyone understands hating women.
He is still a good author. He is sexist. You make a good point. I think many males in east are sexist. I am from India here i have seen many instances of sexism and misogyny as well. Patriarchal attitudes of many contribute to it
I don't really seperate the art from the artist anymore. To me it doesn't mean they are a terrible person, if they create a terrible character or has dark themes (ironic when they turn out to be terrible. yikes), but the artist still created that character and wanted to say and portray something from their own thoughts and experiences etc. Seperating the art from the artist, sound to me like the art materialized out of thin air and has no thought behind it. It just exists.
I agree, it's not about cancelling him. For me, more than "Is Murakami a sexist author", I feel it's more important that we as readers, can recognise the sexist tendencies in his writing.
Having heard about Murakami for years from friends, this year, I finally started to read his work, with Norwegian Wood. I have to say that his writing really flows! I used to be an avid reader up until my university days. Then things got busy, and only recently have I been able to pick up reading again. However, it was a bit of a struggle, as most of my peers read non-fiction, and I was really slow at that.
Norwegian Wood made me rediscover how I'm more of a fiction person. I finished it quickly, because his prose was easy to read & captivating, and I kept going back for more. Also some of the themes in the book did resonate with me well. Almost felt like the book came to me at the right moment in life.
But for my life, I could not shake off the uncomfortable feeling of the male gaze. The book did feel like a male fetish fantasy in many parts. Despite Toru's languid personality, almost every female character seemed drawn to him, sexually. While Hatsumi is not attracted to him in a non-platonic manner, she still admires him.
So the problem for me lies for impressionable young readers who sort of this internalise this kinda of mentality? After watching this video, I also have qualms with how Murakami refuses to even consider the critique. I'm still going to be reading a few of his other books, because Norwegian Wood didn't quite meet my expectations of the hype. I've finished After the Quake (way less male gaze-y), and am looking forward to Kafka on the Shore, for that magical realism. But you bet I'll be more mindful in looking out for any other sexist tendencies.
Honestly, as a female, I don't think Murakami is a sexist author. but I can't totally confirm as I read only four of his book: Norwegian woods, Kafka on the shore, men without women, and birthday girl. I think Murakami writes rather in a very frank way. As most of his characters are not ordinary and have a very complex way of thinking. If we see Watanabe which is my favorite character, his feeling of love toward Naoko leads to his sexual thoughts and the changing way he describes Naoko after their night together, at the beginning Watanabe never had any sexual thoughts toward Naoko, rather he described her in a very beautiful way. the Watanabe in the novel was the same till the end I didn't see any development in his character rather we came to understand Watanabe which we see as character development. In my opinion, Murakami's character doesn't develop when women enter their life but rather the character develops when they came to understand the women. and he writes a female character who forces the main character to think critically. which is in my own personal opinion.
I also have read some books (all of them were recommended by booktok and loved worldwide by a lot of people) where a man assaulting women is shown as a sexy and manly way of men. His being mean and unreasonable showed as caring and a lot of stuff that piss me off. I am not telling everyone to have the same opinion but Murakami does a great job at describing any character. there are combinations of all types of characters some characters develop some don't. and not only male characters develop but also female characters.
And I think people often get disappointed because they think that Murakami's works are stories. A story that describes the life of a character where opinion about the world changes, and they start to think in a different light. Which we often see in many novels where the character undergoes development. but in Murakami's work, he doesn't write a story but rather a phase of life, and even after the development, the characters stay the same as ever. nothing changes. He explains how we need to forget some events to keep on living but still keep that memory in the corner of our hearts.
Finally a comment that resonates with me !!. Even I am female and I love Murakami, I never once found his description of women to be sexist but rather bizzare that's all. I firmly stand with the fact that Murakami is not a sexist author !!
Hey man, good video. I just finished reading Kafka on the Shore and I found his story telling style extremely compelling and his take on magical realism very intriguing. However, it appeared obvious from one of the first description of a woman with her "perky breasts" that the book was written from the perspective of a precocious 15 year old. However, after having finished the book and seeing Miss Saeki and Sakura (?) (I'm terrible with names) having mostly been used as sexual objects through which the male protagonist develops I figured it was more than just the "perspective of a 15 year old". Around 4:20 you mention that it was the multitude of comments criticising the sexism that made you look back at his work in a more critical way and acknowledge their validity. I'm not as well versed in Murakami as you, but if it's the comments that first made you consider such a problem, I wonder how much you really paid attention to the character constellations while reading.
Meiko Kawakami is actually a very popular female, Japanese author. Two of her most well known books are Heaven and Breasts and Eggs. She also has an essay and a short story that I’ve heard are good. I have read both of the novels mentioned.
They are amazing. I have finished two more of her books than Murakamki. I have tried to read Norwegian Wood, Kafka On the Shore, and one other that I can’t remember the title of. I have not finished those because the treatment of women made me very uncomfortable. Currently I’m reading Colorless Tsukuru Tazaki and I’m actually really enjoying it. After Dark is the only Murakami book that I’ve finished. I liked the style and feel a lot.
This style is definitely different than Kawakami’s, but there is still a humane and emotional flare in her writing. Heaven is all about middle schoolers and bullying. It also made me uncomfortable as children are put in a sexual position. But it is obviously done to show how awful bullying is and Kawakami cares immensely for voicing that truth with that book.
Breasts and Eggs has primarily all female main characters (with the exception of a male love interest, as far as I can remember).
It is about a woman who is unsure of how her life is going and whether or not she wants to have children. She looks into all kinds of paths and sperm donors. Meanwhile her sister has insecurities regarding her body and wants breast implants. The sister’s daughter is mute and is working through navigating her youth while her mom is not really a stable parent.
The time I read Kawakami’s books I was amazed at just how real and vulnerable they felt. I don’t typically read contemporary stories or ones without some sort of magic, but I own a copy of Breasts and Eggs and would love to read more of Kawakami’s work.
I was rather surprised you didn’t know who she is because she is a popular author who has English translations (amongst a few others) and is discussed is some spheres of modern feminist literature. I was going to look at her interview with Murakami, but I forgot to 😂. However I’ll definitely do it now.
I highly recommend reading Murakami, and I’m going to continue with Colorless Tsukuru Tazaki.
This was great but i can't believe you didn't talk about the last scene in Norwegian Wood, the one with Toru & Reiko ifykwim. It didn't make any sense whatsoever, I mean what was even the point of adding that out of nowhere?
I was traumatized by that ngl
You've got the 'separating art from the artist' concept wrong. It isn't about determining whether or not the artist holds the same views as are expressed in his art, but whether we can forget the artist altogether and treat his/her art as an independent entity. Suppose Murakami is indeed sexist, does that make his work of any less worth?
My perspective on this is severely limited considering I've only read the first 170-ish pages of Norwegian Wood before I started losing steam because of my dislike of the main character but I still plan on finishing it when I find some spare time so I can give it a fair assessment as a whole. Even within that short span of time, however, I had already begun to notice a trend. Murakami's female characters are most definitely a tool to spark some sort of growth while his male characters only seemed to bring out the worst traits. He didn't treat his roommate very well and laughed about it with others then almost bragged about it in his inner thoughts. He condemned the other student's treatment of women when he went out but then engaged in the same actions (which was odd). Bringing up the passiveness of Murakami's characters just solidified my thoughts on what I had read so far. It's only through female characters that anything ever actually progresses and they aren't treated well in the process. It's annoying.
That being said, these characters are fictional and the story isn't really meant to center around them. Using them as a plot device probably wouldn't come off so terribly if it weren't for the fact that it's so obvious and some readers seem to be able to relate to them (or at least relate to the things that happen to them) and don't appreciate it for obvious reasons. And that's completely fair. For Murakami to be so dismissive about it rather than at least acknowledge it only adds more fuel to the flame.
Agree. Toru comes off as such a "I'm a nice guy" type, yet he is constantly laughing at the expense of his roommate and criticizes his friend for how he treats women as objects but then takes advantage of other women characters when they're grieving.
I completely agree with all of your points! Murakami is a very difficult author to really get behind and Norwegian Wood exemplifies many of his faults as a character writer! I do think a lot of your observations here are very astute and I would love to see how they develop when, and if, you finish the book! I would argue that Tory is a better character in the first half than the second so if you didn't like him in the first half ohhhhh boy you are in for a treat!
@Rachael's Reading Nook His actions are definitely in line with the theme of self-destruction on play in the story!
It's normal for straight men to find beautiful women attractive. Especially beautiful women in bikinis. Nothing sexist about it.
I liked the intro. I’m interested on reading his books. I’ll make sure to start with Norwegian wood first. Thanks again man! Love the channel
Thank you so much for the kind words it really means a lot! I will keep trying to make cool intros then haha!
We also need to consider the fact in 1Q84 where he made his female characters extremely strong and fierce. He also talked about the sensitive topics such as a domestic abuse. Where the two female characters in the book kill men whoever does harm to women. Why is this ? Not widely talked about??? Seriously I don't get people who says he is sexist, he's just writing in the perspective of his characters that's all !! If you think he is sexist, stop reading and find some mediocre author to read such as Colleen hoover.
i love how murakami writes because i get to see how men really sees women from their very own POV. it’s a depiction of reality. i am not expecting him to be a feminist, because in the real world not everyone are.
Yes exactly. I only just recently read 1Q84 and I didn’t find him problematic I found it a bit cringe or even funny sometimes because it just seemed so GUY like…Whether people want to acknowledge it or not, I just think he writes from an honest male perspective.
I really love Murakami's stories but I also find them so draining - I could only read one or two a year before getting Murakami burnout. Great discussion here, thanks for this video.
Yeah I feel the same way, the most I can do in a year is 4 of his books
Draining?! I find his books life giving. I could read them all the time.
I agree with most of what you’re saying, but I do actually see the point of having the 13-year-old girl in Norwegian Wood be 13 rather than 18.
This disturbing encounter, and more so its repercussions (mainly the fact that she was ostracized by the people in her neighborhood for allegedly having forced herself on a minor), are what cause Reiko to fall back into depression, to divorce her husband and ultimately move to the ‘clinic’ in the mountains, away from society. Had the 13-year-old girl been 18, this chain of events would not conceivably have happened: it would instead have been a case of “she said, she said” (why would everyone in the neighborhood necessarily choose to side with the 18-year-old’s side of the story?). People reacted so strongly because sexual activity between an adult and a minor is, on a societal level, seen as immoral regardless of whether or not it’s consensual. Most would therefore automatically side with the minor. I don’t really see how this would work if the girl were 18 - what would the point of contention be? I guess maybe Reiko could be condemned for (supposedly) entering into a homosexual relationship while being married, but I don’t think I’d buy the idea of her getting so flipped from that that she decides to divorce her husband and abandon her daughter. I think one of the reasons this caused her to go into a dark place was that she hated herself for having felt aroused by an underaged girl.
I totally agree
I appreciate that you took your time to make a really thoughtful critique of the argument that Murakami is a sexist author. I also appreciate that you didn't jump immediately into an attack on him based on your initial quotations from his books. I wish I had the time to be as thoughtful in my response, but I've got Colorless Tsukuru Tazaki sitting next to me and I'm chomping at the bit to hop back into it.
A few points: most of the arguments that you put forward claiming Murakami's alleged sexism are based on his sexualizing female characters in his novels. You also point out that a few of them were underage (i.e. under eighteen). I don't think this is really a direct argument for sexism, although it could be an argument for a claim that he is attracted to underage women (or at least has a procilivity for depicting underage women in sexual roles in his novels).
I appreciate that you concede that you are looking at this from an American point of view. This isn't a popular statement to make but here it is: in practically every society throughout most of human history, the age of consent did not exist. Virtually every culture primarily prized youth, daintiness, innocence, etc as direct indicators of a woman's sexual attractiveness -- things our gender-critical generation is quick to lump together into the category of "subordinate femininity". This is definitely from the male perspective, but again, the reality is that through most of human history, definitions of what was "attractive in a woman" meant "attractive to men."
Please don't misunderstand me. I am not arguing that this is right, fair, or "not sexist". However, when we're talking about a writer like Murakami whose themes revolve heavily around lonely, alienated men; when the hero's journey for these men is to reconnect to their humanity; when so much of this is expressed through archetypal psychology, descending into the depths (think spiritual awakenings at the bottom of a well), and a sort of 'mystical journey'; I think we really ought to give Murakami a wider-than-your-average artistic license here.
Does he portray women primarily as objects of male desire? Arguably. Does he himself view women primarily as objects of desire? Perhaps. Does that make him a sexist? Depends on your definition of the term. Personally, I enjoy his writing in no small part precisely because of how raw, honest, and flawed his characters are (and perhaps he is). They are not heroes. They are not villains either. They're just another atomised soul facing the behemoth of modern society, who end up flung into fantastical narratives that compel them to reconnect to their humanity. In my opinion, that is what makes them so relatable and that is what makes Murakami one of my favorite writers, warts and all.
Agree 🤍🌼
I found this video a while ago after reading Norwegian Wood and really enjoyed it as his sexist tendencies are my only issues with Murakami. I've just rewatched it because I'm currently reading 1Q84. I really appreciate the sentiment that no artist/person is immune to criticism. Being aware of the negative aspects of artists might even allow us to better appreciate their art.
"This is where I might have lost some of you guys" no no, that's exactly where you got me.
If you add all of it you can definitely get an insight into the way he sees the world, and honestly that interview were he says that he's not going to change the way he lives his life, reminds me SO MUCH of those who complain about younger generations being "snowflakes". I think there's always room for personal growth, no matter where in your life or personal journey you are, so I would definitely disagree with him on that one.
I'm one to separate the artis from the art, but not the art from the artis because that person created it! It has a personal mark no matter what. With this I mean, knowing certain things about a person, changes completely the experience of seen a piece from them (movie, book, painting, song, etc.), and there are certain things I can't brush off because of who made it.
Great video 👏 always giving me some food for thought!
Ohhhh his photo is right there.
I completely agree with your take on this. There are so many different components to take into account when considering the complexity of a person and how they write about the world. Murakami is my favorite author and would love to hear more of your perspectives on his work. Great job! :)
I've recently read Kafka on the Shore as an introduction to Murakami's works and tbh I find it rather bizarre and slightly problematic & I thought maybe it's because I'm not familiar with his writing style so I was giving it the benefit of the doubt and like you said, maybe case by case. Until I've come across your video and have gotten some sort of validation as to how I felt upon reading it as opposed to how booktubers regard it as fun, odd adventure story. Like why is nobody talking about the weird themes of incest and pedophilia. Although these are relevant to the plot and I swear I would have had no problem about it in the name of fiction, but how it was being laid into the text, of women's sheer credulousness and submission to the male character, and how they strike as mere accessories to the male character's arc felt really weird. Not to mention the unnecessary sexual encounters that are vividly described in the book. I live in Asia, maybe it's the culture of misogyny and to manifest it in a lot of his works really speaks a lot. I think it was engaging but that doesn't absolve the manifestations of sexism in his novels. The transgender character could be a redeeming factor, it had great potential, but the character build-up was poorly written and looked as though it was there for the sake of having one. I'm still going to read Norweigan wood though and see where it goes. Thanks for this video, very insightful!
His two most famous books have rape scenes and the characters doesn't even care about it and moved on. It's really frustrating especially because his writing style is great.
Which all?
Yes I also was shocked how his characters reacted so unemotional to rape but as a woman who was raped I must say the males in real life also reacted like this so I must conclude males are just awful creatures without emotions
I think the uncomfortable scenes in norweigan wood are justified. Reiko is not just having sex with this girl, she is being raped by the young girl. This young girl is described as being like a sociopath who is extremely intelligent, she is not some innocent girl being taken advantage of by Reiko, she is a sociopath who is taking advantage of the fact that adults trust her so she can get what she wants with Reiko. Also, Reiko lives and thrives in an enviroment where going into past traumatic events in great detail is encouraged. You feel uneasy and dirty while reading the rape scene because that's how you're supposed to feel, that is what Reiko felt when the event happened.
Both comments I've left in response have disappeared 🙈 Third time's a charm?
Reiko describes the child as beautiful and alluring from the moment she sees her. As an adult, she should've separated herself from the situation immediately. The child made non consensual advances (changed terminology to avoid this comment being flagged too), yes. It never should've gotten to the point of them in her room and Reiko shouldn't have put her hands on her.
I think the argument here of "it made you feel something because that was its intention and therefore it is justified" is a completely understandable argument but not necessarily the one I was making, which is completely okay! I think everything you described here is something that can be achieved without making the character so young. I don't particularly think its okay to sexualize a young girl character in any circumstance unless it plays a specific point or message in the novel (i.e Lolita). However, I don't believe the age of the character is required for that scene. Who knows, maybe I missed something but I really feel as though there aren't many justifications for the explicit sexualization of minors and I can't really pinpoint one here. Thank you for your comment!
@@colorlesswonderland I get your point! Keep up the videos, I'm loving the Murakami content, I just started 1q84 😁
@@FraserAngus Thank you so much!! Enjoy 1Q84 it is definitely...an experience
Wow. Thanks for the hard work on this!
All the interviews were new to me and so much reminded me of the victim mentality of older men when culture changes around them.
I’ll always have a fond memory of encountering Wild Sheep Chase but book after book of the same male perspective has answered the question for me.
Really great video and examination
. So many of my thoughts are already stated in others comments so ill just pop in the comments and say Great review
the fact you’re even willing to engage with the question is great! good video
I’ve read a few of his books, and just finished his book of essays “Novelist as a Vocation.” In it he has an essay about his readers called “Who do I write for?” and his main point in the essay is that he doesn’t have a clear understanding of who his readers are because they span demographics like age, gender, location, background, etc. But, like your example from the Running memoir, he has one sentence that sticks out: “My readers are about evenly split between men and women, and apart from the fact that many of my women readers are quite beautiful-this is no lie-there’s no characteristic they all share.” It just seemed odd to me to call out that many of his women readers are beautiful. And he also discusses a few examples from young women readers who got in touch with him, including one who praised him for really understanding the emotions and interior lives of young women as represented in his novels. The final thing I’ll mention is that there is a little bit about his wife in this book, but not a lot. When he talks about selling his jazz cafe, leaving Japan because he was sick of the criticism against him and the Japanese publishing industry, he doesn’t mention his wife at all during those major life events. So it seems like through your examples and his examples, he often objectifies women and represents them in how they benefit (or don’t) men.
The first book of murakami that i read was Norwegian Wood. The reason i picked up that book was because many people talked about it. But, eventually i didn't like it. I was so upset because i had a big expectation from his most phenomenal work (at least in my country). Now, my question to myself is should i give him another chance?
I recently read Murakami's 1Q84 and hated it from the bottom of my heart. Even though the story was kind of interesting and the writing pretty good, it felt like the same things were repeated all the time and the story went nowhere. The main female character is poorly written and the author seems to have a tendency at sexualizing underaged girls, so I had to stop reading at some point.
Let's say my experience with Murakami hasn't been too good as of now, and I seriously don't know if I'll keep reading his books.
Great video anyway, it was really interesting to hear your thoughts on this!!
Love your videos 💗
thank you so much for making this video especially because one of the comments that instigated it were mine. I think Murakami is sexist and also feels like he has a lot of weird fetishes. I really enjoyed his book after dark but south of the border, west of the sun was too much for me. I think I will read (with an open mind) Norwegian wood and Kafka mainly because I already own both of them but he is definitely not going to be a favourite any time soon.
anyways I read some female Japanese authors because I wanted that sense of escapism Japanese lit has but without the sexism and I found some really good ones. id highly recommend kitchen by banana Yoshimoto and the housekeeper and the professor by Yoko ogawa. I think Murakami fans would love them but more importantly, these books might help them understand better just what their favourite is doing wrong.
disclaimer tho, both these books aren't copies of Murakami plots in any aspects, they are very unique.
I don’t think you can separate the author from the art. Saying that, one thing is having one book (like Lolita) about that specific topic, but when is in all of its books that women are treated like that, you should reconsider. You can talk about those topics without being gross
Thanks for the detailed video, I highly appreciate it.
He is really problematic
If he is not sexist then I dont know what exactly make sb a sexist
Pls define sexist
You're right
I'm from a vary diffrent culture and all i've read till recent were censored i was in shock when i read sex part.
But i continued reading and the rest of book then i changed my mind
I've only read Hardboiled Wonderland so far, and I did not like the constant sexualization of the chubby girl, especially at moments that don't require those sexual introspection during the story. I was not exactly comfortable, but there were other times where there was the male gaze, like when he interacted with the librarian who ended up sleeping with him later on when ***spoiler: the main character was living his last day "alive" in the real world, :spoiler*** and I was not bothered by it. The question I have is is it inherently bad to have the male gaze in a book or sexualized characters, male or female?
Sexuality is a part of this world, of life, and of the male experience in the case of Murakami. I don't think having a male gaze inherently makes something sexist, I think the problem with Murakami is that he isn't self aware or has given much thought. His male gaze rears in at really odd times and sometimes with teenage characters, and it's immersion shattering and disturbing, and he doesn't seem to realize any of it.
I think he's someone who has reached the conclusion that prudish people just want to execute him for portraying sexual stuff, but really this is not about prudishness, he's kind of letting down his female characters and the potential they could reach in his novel. He's decided to settle on half well-written, but half objectified female characters, and this hurts his otherwise brilliant writing. Well, well-written might not be the right word, his works are more theme-focused than character-focused, and so his characters seem to be rather simple, but that doesn't mean his characters are badly written either, maybe a better word would be saying that his female characters are half "real" and half objects, unlike the male characters. His male gaze is so ingrained in him that he doesn't have the self awareness to understand where the criticism is coming from or how to write sexy stuff without appearing sexist.
you are so well articulated! I first read Murakami in my late teens, consuming probably as many as you and also getting a wind up bird tattoo. In my thirties, upon reread, there is so so much I can no longer identify with and feel really icky to me. I love his writing and I'm not criticizing it, there's just one too many 'cumming on the shape of a 13 year old girls ear while down a well' that makes me squirm now.
I recently bought Norwegian Wood because I was looking for something to relate to my current experience as a lonely college student. Now I'm a bit scared to read it
Read it, it helped me a lot!
Did you tried reading Osamu Dazai's No Longer Human?
20:33 Okay, you said that you didn't understand why he suddenly brought up "young girls in revealing bikinis" and I've heard a lot of people online talking about how in Japan, revealing clothes is often seen as taboo, which could make sense why he points that out to the readers --more specifically, the Japanese readers. But then again, looking into it, I couldn't find anything saying bikinis are taboo in Japan, in fact, I found some threads saying that it is completely normal so long as you're on a beach. The only other nonsexual reason could be the very fact that they are "young girls" which I found an article online stating that some Japanese people feel that girls under the age of 18 should not wear them, but then again, one of them specifically mentioned that this ban should be meant for models. I can't say for certain if this will give any real reason for the motive behind the detail, but then again, nothing can really be said for sure without his direct comment.
your comments about "being american" and "not understanding japanese culture" threw me off so much i couldn't even finish the video. it's really weird how the topic is sexualization of (younger) women and you try to make it about "cultural differences" when, in reality, it's not. feels disrespectful towards many female japanese authors out there...
Ive read 4 Murakami books and honestly... he's not that great lol i read a lot of fantasy novels and so his plots aren't that interesting and his writing was repetitive and relied heavily on cliche phrases.
I have no issues with people enjoying his books..but I just personally get passed the fact that all his female characters are either virginal good girl sex objects or literal prostitutes.
Even though I've only listened to 'Hard-Boiled Wonderland and the End of the World', the very beginning of '1Q84' (The author and the publisher guy talking about how the girls first reading/press event went was the last straw.) and read several book descriptions/reviews of his other works, for me it's already enough to never read him again.
I quickly got the feeling his characters are just copy+paste or 2D-paper-cut-outs: strangely passive, lethargic men obsessed with breasts; hollow women assessing themselves in the mirror unless they serve as a plot device.
With Murakami I personally can't seperate his (main, male) characters from himselve anymore, his gaze grosses me out, many of his descriptions feel creepy in the wrong way. There just comes a point when it simply IS the author and not the character(s) anymore.
I mean, what if e.g. in almost every book a main character expresses a low opinion about gays/mentions stereotypes and they never change, no other character disagrees with them, or you have no gay character being the "counterweight" ... I'd eventually be suspicious of the author just showing their actual opinion on gay people - especially if they see the main character as a "parallel version" of themselves and take no clear stand when interviewed.
I obviously didn't read enough by Murakami to judge his writing style, how valuable his work is for those who study literature or for Japanese literature, but I think he's a great example that it matters a lot why exactly you love an author/a story and a simple "OMG, he's so brilliant, everybody should read him." doesn't cut it.
Yeees. His writing makes me uncomfortable.
I loved this analysis.
I recently read Norwegian Wood and I agree with a lot of these comments. I had only heard of him when I decided to pick up one of his books at the book store, I had no idea of the sexism criticism. His prose is addictive and I LOVE the melancholic vibe he achieves, but as a sapphic woman I often felt very uncomfortable (I´ll get there). The women in this book gather around the main character as flies gather around shit (lol I´m sorry if this sounds unserious this is the only way I managed to express it), and they try to make him very special and mysterious, when the only vibe I got from him was that of a petulant man. He also can´t find out who he is or what he wants a lot of times, which is fine and the entire point of the book, that´s why I like the parts where he seems (to me) hyprcritical. In order to find out about himself and the world, he reflects upon stories he hears from women around him and, of course, we get to read them. I was very unimpressed with the "suicidal teen" trope, but it worked.
Now, when we got to know about Reiko... that took a toll on me (Spoilers for Norwegian Wood): When Reiko opens up about her past, we discovered that she, a married adult woman, was "enchanted"/abused by a 13 year old lesbian that she used to teach how to play piano. The predatory lesbian trope, along with the age gap, and the jokes about the mc sexualizating it, made me really unconfortable to the point I had to put down the book for a couple of minutes. I understand that it´s an old book and old beliefs and tropes come with it, and I´m not personally damaged to the point of wanting to "cancel" Murakami, but I´m at a point in my life where it´s just... tiring. In the future, if anyone where to ask me about this book, I would warn them about this kind of content in advance.
With that said, idk why I continued reading it. I give him kudos for that, I loved the atmosphere so much I just wanted to know where the mc would take me. I felt like I could breathe the landscapes. I´m thinking about giving the author another oportunity.
(I think it´s well redacted but just in case: English is not my first language so I apologize if there are mistakes)
LMAO okay I did not get to the part where you talked about it in the video but YES I absolutely agree. I was also wondering about her telling the truth or not while reading it
Just because Murakami sexualises women does that make him sexist? And if some of his characters are underage, that could be a problem in its own right, but is it sexist?
I enjoy Murakami, even as a woman. I feel what a lot of people are missing is the patterns, sexualizing a character in a book isnt nessecarely "bad", but in these cases it is a reoccurring trope. The sexualization is shallow and not really integral to the message of the books. His female characters typically only exist to push the male characters forwards in their journey and the way they do that is without fail sexual.
@@cassandradoyle3609 To be honest, I can imagine that I would not enjoy a book written by a woman filled with unrealistic male sex-objects. But I hope there is a female Murakami out there that I would enjoy because I hope good literature is universal.
So I'm interested to know what you do like about Murakami. Because if we imagine his books without the sex do they still work?
@@dagarbos Thank you for your reply! It's nice to see that people on the internet are still able to have productive conversations. I'm used to spendi ng time counting fallacies.
The first Murakami book I read was Kafka on the Shore, I feel that that is important. If I had read Norwegean Wood my opinion may have been different. Generally I thought that the themes involving the concious and unconcious mind were interesting, and I feel like a big part of that in a lot of people is sexuality. Like in the way that people generally dont want to be homosexual because it's viewed negatively in society, but they cannot help it. They are not making a concious choice to be homosexual.
Since Kafka is a teenage guy and horny he has these kinds of intrusive thoughts that he cannot control, and he has dreams like that. So I was interested in that concious vs unconcious aspect of the story. This is also present in The Colorless.
As I read more Murakami I realised that the aspects that interested me so much , concious vs unconcious mind, dreams and reality, the fantasy aspects, all these things Murakami explored could only be explored in one way, through exploiting the sexuality of women. By having men unconciously or sometimes consciously take advantage of women. Generally I like the fantastical aspects of Murakami's novels, how he plays with dreams, but it disapponts me that he can only write it involving sex.
Generally the answer to your question is that I dont know if his books work without the sex. Since he uses the trope so much, I cant tell you if he is capable (or willing) to include the elements of his books I love so much without the aspects I dont.
Hopefully there is a "female Murakami" out there, or something similar. I will keep reading and let you know. 😊
@@cassandradoyle3609 No thank you for engaging. Most of the people commenting on this topic don't provide enough evidence to support their claims. I feel like sexism, as in being unfair or cruel to women, is a pretty serious allegation. If I thought an author's work was sexist I think I would stop reading them.
To use my favourite book of his, the Wind-up Bird Chronicle, as the example I agree that the female characters are always sexualised and made instrumental to the male, and that this then presents an incomplete view of women. But I think that Murakami is writing this way not because he wants to malign women but because he wants to write about sex a lot. He may be presenting a one-sided view of the topic, but what he does present is true.
I edited this comment to make more sense 🤭
Great video!
Do you understand the difference between pedophilia and sexism? These two concepts are completely disjoint, yet persistently conflated in this analysis.
I believe that he is an extraordinary writer but personally I can't get through his books because they make me feel disgust. I've tried to read them and failed. The only thing I finished was a short story and I still didn't like it 🤷♀️
To me it's fairly simple, where there's smoke there's fire.
If this many people, by far the majority of people that read even just one of his novels, get sexist and noncey vibes then there's a reason for that. The fact that it's so consistent and usually not framed as being wrong says to me it's clearly an accurate reflection of him as a person.
But that still doesn't mean anyone can't enjoy his books, but I would say that giving him money is rather questionably ethical. We can agree not to support jk Rowling but Murakami gets a pass? Seems a bit hypocritical to me.
Holy shit, this is a really good video. Your way of explaining things is fantastic, you deserve more views.
Nah. Most of Murakami’s readers are Asians and they also watch booktube. He’s not gonna get a really big leap if he keeps bashing this demo of audience. Wouldn’t be surprised if he caps his overall viewcount at some point.
@@koldemperor8474 What does that have to do with what I wrote?
thank you for this!
I've only read a few Murakami books so far, "Men Without Women", "The Elehant Vanishes" and "1Q84", and I have actually felt there are also some feminist elements in his writing that I did not expect considering how patriarchal Japan is and has been as a country and culture. Is it possible to be feminist and sexist at the same time? Sure, there could be, since either the feminism or sexism - or the combination of both - could be non-deliberate, based on limited reflection or understanding on what defines either position; many who are sexist don't realise it, and many - some self-proclaimed feminists included - think feminism is something else than it is.
1q84 has a lot of sex scenes, each one justified in it own way. I feel he took off one sex scene of the book, the Mayumi death.
First of all, what does "sexist" even mean in this context? Why should it be viewed as problematic when a fictional story is basically the sum and the combination of the authors and his character's SUBJECTIVE experiences and attachment patterns? For example, if you are a male from a certain culture with certain experiences you will most likely have a certain view of women aswell as any other thing or phenomenon. What is the alternative, writing "objective" fiction with absolute no personal depth? What you are essentially asking of him is to not write honestly and personally. Which is a mortal sin in any artform.
I just read "Men without women" and literally every woman is a cheater one way or the other! Is that sexist? No, he just chooses to write about the women who are. Also addressing the notion that he can't write women... so fucking what if he can't? Every writer has a blind side and does the best with the tools that he's got. Writers are humans, they are not machines.
Pretty decent points actually
Perfect..you nailed it. Murakami comes from a very different culture (🇯🇵) & west wants everything to be politically correct like you are having so many Forced Strong Female Characters who are better at everything and can do anything better than a male, Forced racial & culture representation in the name of entertainment these days.
I appreciate the Murakami books I've read alot. He lost me when he described a funeral scene in IQ84 and all that the female lead character thought of while burying her friend: I wish I had boobs like hers.
I have heard quite a lot about the author and really wanted to give his novels a go but then I read the reviews and how 'problematic' certain parts of his books are and I became uncertain. This video really answered a lot of my questions and I really like how you so cleanly and thoroughly dissected the issue and now, instead of venturing into unknown territory, I at least know what I will be dealing with. I came from an Asian background and grew up with Japanese and Chinese media influences and I can't wait to see how my read with Kafka on the shore will go, to really see if it's the cultural difference or that it is just Murakami himself. I still, however, expect to read a great writing. Thank you, cheers to the nice discussion. I appreciate it.
I never liked his books. Thanks for summarising everything here
I think murakami is a sexist author and this video helped me finalize some thoughts on why. As jumbled as my explanation is, here it be:
The fact that he says he doesn't write complex characters but writes complex women --that somehow magically support the male MC's growth-- makes me believe that he just doesn't realize he is sexist. He shakes off the pressing questions about sexism and just says essentially "ayyy I'm just writing here." It has been pointed out that his male characters hold his world perspective. He probably just sees women as creatures that develop men's growth, but not as humans themselves.
I think the weird age sexualization thing is horrible, but is common in Japan. Some areas of Japan literally have the age of consent set to 12. I've seen theories that relate this pedophilic view of young girls to misogyny because young girls aren't able to "fight back" as easily, but serve the purpose of being a female.
One can separate artists from art, but does it really matter at the end of the day? I like Murakami's books, but I recognize they have sexist elements to them. I think the important part is that it's talked about, like this video. By calling him sexist or "cancelling" him won't stop him from writing and won't stop his books from being bought because he's a good author. The problem is when people read these books and assume this is how the world (and women in it) are supposed to act/function. How to ensure that this does not become the case,, I have no idea lol.
TL;DR: He's sexist, but just doesn't realize it because he doesn't really care about women like that. Japan and age of consent is extremely sus overall. Art from artist is a compelling argument on whether Murakami is sexist or not, but it's not him that reaches audiences it's his art.
I love Haruki Murakami's works.
critiquing a writer without the context of his or her cultural roots is lazy. not only are you going to inevitably apply your own worldview based on your own cultural background but you will also miss out on the context in which women in general are viewed in the culture that you are largely ignoring to make a point.
is it really shocking that a rapist is written such that he didn't care about his female victim? how is that exactly problematic? and i can't stand the overuse of the word "problematic" in young people's vocabulary.
there is one thing i'd like to point out that most critics (regarding the female characters issue in murakami's works) probably totally overlook or outright miss. there is a passage somewhere i think in the wind-up bird chronicle where the main character reads an article about oral sex where the gist of the article is that when women swallow the ejaculate, it's like absolute complete submission. what this tells me is that, murakami definitely is aware of how women are seen by society, and particularly by japanese society. an honest writer wouldn't pretend that his or her society is not "problematic". if you have some familiarity of how women have been treated in japanese society, nothing about murakami's works would remotely surprise you.
oddly enough, murakami said before that norwegian wood isn't one of the works he is particularly fond of. i think he eventually dismissed it as his "romance" novel, where he sort of got carried away with the love story between toru and midori.
edit:
murakami praised mieko kawakami's short story "breasts and eggs" (not the novel version) saying it's like this illuminating primal work. i think that says a lot about why he almost never writes in the POV of women. i would rather a writer write about what he or she knows rather than pretend to be some kind of expert on something that's actually unfamiliar territory. there's nothing more pretentious or overbearing than a writer pretending to understand something that's clearly alien in terms of first-person knowledge. i appreciate how his attempts at describing women are mostly observational and not ever trying to write about what's "essential" about womanhood. he would give you vague or vivid context clues and never clumsily explain a female character. i don't think i've ever come across a passage where he explicitly tries to explain the core motive or drive of a woman. it's usually about the main male character trying to understand but usually failing at the attempt, which i think is an honest portrayal of an "average" male protagonist who isn't the archetypal hero who just magically resolves the dilemma of the story by the end of the book. i've read most of his works and it really isn't his thing to try and pin down "what" a woman is or "why" women do x, y or z. he also gravitates towards strange characters and circumstances, so it's not just the women in his stories that are strange but pretty much everyone.
Using culture as an excuse is lazy
@@hbsupreme1499
the blatant disregard of cultures outside one's own is incredibly self-centered.
20 mins in and i have not heard a single reason why he is sexist
it's not about being able to separate art from the artist. the idea that an author must be a good person to apreciate its art is ridiculous. When was the last time you read an author because he was a good guy? It's riddiculous also because there is no good or bad, that's just manicheist view of the world, and if you're interested in literature, you'll only be able to read things like Lord of the rings or the bible. Also, of course, there's a person behind each work, we can't deny that but if we can read, understand, analyse and appreciate a book we don't know anything about its author but the name, I think it's better we do it that way every time, because reading was never about having a friendly, personal relationship with its author. And finaly, yes, we can make it about the way we consume problematic artist so we don't support them financialy. But here's the thing: there is no conscious consummerism in capitalism. The sistem itself is problematic. And maybe the author is a "good guy", but the editor is not, or the translator, or some guy that's getting money from the purchase you make. The same can be said the other way around. Maybe the author is problematic, but there are a lot of people who makes a living from the books you purchase that are not. And what's the goal anyway, starve the author to death? one, that's not going to happen, and two, is it really fair to kill a man not because he killed a woman, not because he's a wifebeater, but because he kind of writes women in a bad light? is that gonna make us "the good guys"?
It doesn't really make sense to me to extend your reservations about certain scenes or characters in a work of fiction to the author himself. I can't imagine reading Murakami while concerning myself with identity politics. Interesting video nevertheless.
People are entitled to write books with unsympathetic characters. That is why it's called fiction and people have imagination.
I think it’s just hard for woman to get into the mind of a man and murakami just thinks like a man.
I've only read two books by him, first Kafka on the Shore, where I found the main character's fixation on sex with his mother weird, though I liked the book overall. Then I read Norwegian wood, and I almost dropped it halfway through, because of this cheap pron flavour - I just don't get why all the girls want to see the main character's pp, have sex with him all the time etc. But I finished it, and I still enjoyed it for the writing, atmosphere, and melancholic tone. Still, the sexual focus bothered me throughout, and often it felt pointless to the plot.
That said, I don’t see much of an issue with most things you mentioned. For example, I think the girl had to be really young for Reiko’s story to work, because if she were 18 or older, it wouldn’t be as believable that she’d take piano lessons, and people wouldn’t be as judgmental about the situation. Reiko also likely wouldn’t expect something shocking from a 13-year-old as much as from an adult woman.
For example, I think George R.R. Martin often portrays his female characters experiencing assault at young ages for shock value and impact, because the reader won't care about 20yo as much.
The thing about pointing out breasts is valid, but tbf there're lots of times when he describes everything - such as clothes, hair, skin etc, plus I guess it might be a japanese thing (just remember an average anime fem character). And you can't deny that people, men and women, are just tend to point out things they find attractive, especially when young and exploring relationships.
And ultimately, we're adults who can think for ourselves. We don’t have to view any of these characters as role models. Books overall are good, I personally don't care about the author that much.
i really think you missed a lot in that interview with kawakami which most likely has a lot to do with the fact that you don’t know her work. i think he answered her questions well and while that doesn’t mean he’s not sexist, i think it explained a lot. i agree with you on the sexualization of young girls but i think in terms of general sexism there’s an interesting cultural dynamic that people who aren’t from japan can’t completely understand. his female characters can be well written, notably in the short story “sleep”.
It’s frustrating. I’m glad some have covered this. But Japanese men also have to have signs around public areas to remind them to not sexually assault women and girls around them. So I think it’s a cultural issue and Murakami is a typical Japanese male hyper focused on women serving as humans to be used for pleasure or spiritual growth and not humans.
It says a lot about how he constructs many of his books that for a lot of people, the parts they remember the most clearly are the uncomfortable and uninsightful sexual moments
I think the role of the artist is to go where all else fear to tread. And readers are a fearful, cowardly lot.
Correction: left wing, politically correct, woke, cancel culture supporting readers are a fearful cowardly lot, like the guy in this video. "Racist" "sexist"
"Homophobic" "transphobic"
",ableist". I could almost hear him run out of breath as he was going through his list. BTW, what is an ableist someone that hates disabled people?
I don't think I have ever met one of them, but whatever. What is the point of this video, to decide whether or not Murakami himself is sexist,or whether it is just that some of his male characters or some of his portrayals of female characters are sexist?WHO CARES? So let's assume for the sake of argument, that Murakami himself is sexist, then what, should he be cancelled, have his reputation ruined, lose his career and be sent out to sea on an iceberg? Art is
A moral,that is how it should be. Whether the artist is a good person or a bad person is irrelevant, however you interpret those terms anyway. if the guy in this video wants to call Murakami a sexist,that's fine, but if he is one, that is no worse than if the garbage man in your neighborhood is a sexist. Artists like everyone else can hold any beliefs they want, and their art can express positive ideas or negative ideas, it's all good. The only thing an artist should feel obligated to do, is to be true to themselves.
I would agree that artists should definitely explore previously unexplored concepts and not always go for the safest option. I don't feel like that stance applies to this at all, however. An issue with Murakami is that he writes women in a way that makes them hardly feel like actual people with actual lives, but more as devices solely placed there to somehow alter the lives of the male characters in some way. Writing half the population as if they solely exist for the purpose of changing men's experiences is not an artistic risk, it's an artistic failure. In writing his female characters this way, Murakami is not purposefully venturing into the 'artistic unknown', he's simply showing that he's ignorant of the fact that women, too, are complex individuals with lives, aspirations, etc. of their own. I think it's rather dangerous to claim that people who criticize an artist are simply "fearful [and] cowardly", rather than to actively engage in a discussion regarding the points provided in said criticism.
@@Blorboy I see your point. I guess I would stop short of saying the author is ignorant. I feel the book should defend itself.
Very articulate video on a controversial landmine of a topic. I'm only really getting into Murakami and love his writing while I also am cognisant of his more sexist and problematic habits
i hate it how all the time there is something about sex and all of that is shown like the man is the one who should get pleased. the character of norwegian wood is an asshole to women and it seems like murakami wants us to think like thats ok. i really want to read it but sadly i don't think i'll get through it considering it's so sexual.
Atleast you're not trying to troll or insult murakami fans like some book tubers I know.
I'm actually a lovecraft fan, a very overt racist in his time. I hate racists, but I can't help it but read n love his sense of horror and monsters.
Even if murakami is sexist, i don't care. I have liked artists who have done worst.
You just gotta love the art, not the artist.
A quick joke when you talked about the quote from his nonfiction book...
He just really appreciates the female form lmao
I just finished reading Norwegian Wood considering that it was one of the most popular books of Murakami. I was highly disappointed by the book and didn't like a single character. There were so many undigestible things that happened throughout the book. The main character was not interested or passionate about anything. The worst part was when *spoiler* Naoko died he thought about her body and how someone with such a soft body die. WTF Murakami. I don't think I ever wanna read that Authors book again
You seem focused on making the ages 18 to solve the problems. How does this solve any issues aside from making legal in an American context? Shouldn't it still be creepy by 18?
Ur and adult
@@hbsupreme1499 imo it's still creepy if you're waaay older than 18.
I think it comes down to cultural differences between the west and Japan. Just consider that the age of consent in Japan is 13 (although there has been some talk about raising it for some time now).
Also I am not sure we can ignore the influence Christianity has had on how the west perceives lust and sexual desire as low, condemnable and overall negative (the whole idea of chivalry and abstinence as a virtue). Maybe what we perceive as inappropriate comments are seen by other cultures as a sign of healthy sexual prowess and virility. Japan is notoriously behind in addressing several social issues, including the role of women in society, if you think it is bad in the west, think again. He's also from an older generation which doesn't necessarily help.
Have you read any Michel Houellebecq?
I’m afraid my favourite author, Hideo Yamamoto (a mangaka), is also sexist and possibly transphobic(?) I’ve read as many of his works as I could get my hands on (the most notable and my favourites being Ichi The Killer and Homunculus) and all of them do have some questionably sexist scenes. While sexual deviancy, sexual violence, and just sex in general are very prevalent themes in his works it’s almost always inflicted on or focused around a female character. There is some exception I feel when it comes to Ichi The Killer, but that is only because one of the main characters is heavily suggested to be a gay man. In almost all of his works he seems to deliberately choose to include shots of female character’s crotches, breasts, legs, etc. When this happens it usually makes sense contextually and isn’t just thrown in there completely out of nowhere, but still feels very unnecessary. Not to mention the excruciatingly drawn out scenes of intense sexual violence and physical abuse many of his female characters are subjected to, which sometimes times feel completely unnecessary also. Typing all this out it feels pretty safe to say that he is, but I’m trying my best to convince myself that he is not. Just kinda disappointed.
About the transphobia: Gender identity and fluidity is in my opinion a less obvious but still reoccurring theme in his works, which I find very interesting. As a transgender male, I for a long time held his characters who were suggested to be trans in a very positive light. However, after re-reading some of his stuff I’m not so sure if it was that positive at all. **spoilers for Homunculus coming up btw** The best example of a character that is suggested to be transgender in Hideo Yamamoto’s stories is from Homunculus. If you’ve read it you know who I’m talking about, and if you haven’t but would want to start one day it’d be pretty obvious who anyways. That character, after presenting in public as a woman for the first time in her life, dismisses it all saying that she doesn’t experience gender issues to another character (who was the one that had originally encouraged her to present that way in public), and claims that what she wanted wasn’t to be a woman but just to be beautiful. Which would have been fine if it wasn’t so painfully obvious that that wasn’t the case. The character who encouraged her to go out like that also just said to her that she wasn’t a woman just like bluntly and it was never addressed again. I remember the girl character and her backstory of growing up as a transgender person and a transgender child whose parents were afraid being so important to me since I had never seen someone who had to experience the world like me represented in media at all. It was so comforting to see that my favourite author who had written my favourite story in the world, Ichi The Killer, which was so violent and horrific and out there, could also write delicately and what seemed at the time to me so genuinely about a girl finding her identity. I really don’t know anymore though I’m gonna stop here :(
If his stories are soo horrific, then why make him your fav author?
@@DewDewHoney because I’m a fan of horror and he does it very well
Haruki Murakami is my favorite living author. That said, I believe his feet should certainly be held to the fire a bit with regards to the way he writes women. Most of his female characters exist only to lead the male protagonist along in the story and be an object of sex at the male’s disposal. We can marvel his work and be critical of it at the same time.
So, I disagree on a few things.
First I don't think sexualizing female characters is equal to objectifying them. I wouldn't go as far as saying mentioning their beauty is a way to glorify them. In my opinion it definitely shows some kind of obsession from Murakami. I would say we have to separate the main characters from the author but it really strucks me how much sex scenes he adds. And it's also true for female main characters (I'm thinking about aomame and the weird useless sex scenes). I feel like he mostly wants to show sex is a natural need that men and women shouldn't been ashamed to have. I do not see a hierarchy made between men and women. I feel like he wants to show they need each other. He also seems kind of supportive of the LGBT community considering the treatment of oshima in Kafka on the shore.
I'm aware some sex scenes are very disturbing, like in Norwegian Wood as you said with the 13 years old girl and the scene with Naoko but It looks like they are meant to be disturbing. I do not think he normalizes these behaviors to make them acceptable and justify himself. In my opinion he leaves the interpretation to the reader, to question them, and honestly it seems to work considering how much we talk about it.
The things is, even if the male gaze in his work is disturbing I do not see it as a way to to change the moral of his readers. It's up to us thinking what we want about his characters' behaviors. He doesn't seem to care what we think about it, and to be honest I think he's right writing that way.
At the end of the day I don't think litterature is meant to be a moral compass. I can understand that from a woman perspective the female characters are sometimes unlikeable and you can't identify to them. But so do I with the male characters. It doesn't prevent me from enjoying the complexity of the work and the reason is that I don't take his stories as example for real life
Because this stories happen in the real world doesn't mean the world should be presented as you would like it to be (or even as it really is). The point of fiction in to have the freedom to tell the stories you want in my opinion
Now you can throw in the trash everything I said if it's one day proven that Murakami have had questionable behaviors and that his works were meant to change the reader's mind about them. If he really has a disgusting mind that would change how I judge and analyse his work obviously
My friend and I read Kafka on the Shore for our book club a few months back and the sexual content of the novels made me SO uncomfortable. I enjoyed the book but it was definitely because the introspection of the novel and not the content
A lot of this is fair, some of it annoyed me, some of it made me angry even. I have only read a few Murakami novels but I am familiar with most of the stuff you touched on here. The Norwegian Wood thing, yeah, that was uncomfortable and weird. I don't remember how graphic the sexualization was, but I think that's certainly pushing the boat out by anyone's standards. That said, for me this character was someone who had been taken advantage of at a low point and had her inner weakness and darkness cultivated in her by a supposedly innocent child - the exact inverse of the relationship they were supposed to have, where the older woman tutors the younger one and brings out the best in her. This idea that she was lying about the whole thing I think is just some weird conspiracy theory, I don't really get that. As such, it doesn't really make sense that she's an adult, I mean it's laughable honestly that this makes just as much sense if the girl is 18. Still though, its just playing it a bit fast and loose with child sexualization for me, I'm not gonna go ahead and outright defend it. And I do remember really hoping she wasn't gonna have sex with the main character when I saw it going that way, just started to feel like a shitty anime a bit.
With regards to Colourless, I can see there's a bit of a taboo element to this scene but I really think it boils down to a non-issue. This is not like the case in Norwegian Wood, because a 13 year olds (at least before the horrors of the modern age) are assumed to not be sexually active or... "have developed sexual psychology" I guess, whereas when two 16/17 year olds have sex it's no big deal. As such, a scene depicting the dream representations of two 16/17 year olds having sex with the dream avatar (of unspecified age) of a ~22 year old (is that right?) who knew them when they were all that age, and who feels ashamed of the dream after, that's just a non-issue to me.
Speaking of non-issues, noticing and appreciating in passing girls in bikinis is definitely in that category. I know you address that this may seem like a nit pick but that really doesn't change the fact that it does.
There is also the fact that female characters are often a vehicle for growth in male characters. I say fact because I think that's totally true, I'm not disputing it, I just don't think it's necessarily a problem as long as it's taken for what it is. A limitation, sure, but not a moral failure. Was Mr. Rochester not a vehicle for Jane Eyre's growth? Are the Bronte sisters sexist authors? There is an element of this in all main - secondary character relationships, male or female, Murakami or otherwise. What angers me is the idea that Murakami should recognise this as a moral failure "causing harm" (???) to his (almost exclusively grown up adult) female audience and that he should repent and change his ways over this. This is just one manifestation of this toxic attitude within online book review spaces - my suggested videos right now includes '40 "problematic'" Authors I Won't Read...', and I think that sums up the tone. No wonder Murakami takes offence to this attempt to subjugate his intellectual freedom as an author. No wonder, even, that he likens it to the persecution of academics during communist revolutions that occurred during his own lifetime.
I also don't understand why you have not included redeeming points or counter-arguments, bar a passing reference to the fact that his female characters are fleshed out and have their own agency and ideas, which I feel was brushed over hugely given the video's topic. You mention other books which have problematic themes that you could bring up, including After Dark, but don't think to mention it as a counterexample of a Murakami story that focuses on the personal growth of a female protagonist? Or the recurring motif of independent, strong-willed female characters in his stories? Obviously you are a genuine Murakami fan and not out to make a hit-piece, your tone and your other videos make that clear, but the actual content of this video is exactly like a hit-piece and I just don't understand why.
I think a lot of this evaporates away when you step out of American prudishness and demonization of male sexuality (not the child sexualization of Norwegian Wood, to be clear). There is a (very good) novel called "The Virgins" by Pamela Erens centred around high school seniors in 1979-80 which contains vivid descriptions of sex between 16/17 year olds and their bodies, male and female. She is not on trial here, nor should she be. It is a truly sad thing that Murakami cannot be afforded the same respect, and that so many men (and women, of course, in a different way) are made to feel ashamed of their sexuality.
I don't agree that he is a sexist author. To me it seems, like many male authors, he struggles to understand how to write female characters. The cultural differences also have to be mentioned, I've read many books from many languages and I have to say the ages of sexual maturity is a broad spectrum of acceptability. Even in America we have characters like Tina Belcher from Bob's Burgers or we have the lead character from Turning Red where both are 13yo girls who are finding their sexuality and its the main or major focus of their characters, sure we might not include sex scenes but it has to be mentioned.
Also I personally believe that a lot of people know that teenagers are having sex and by avoiding the topic all together we do them a great disservice in the same way a lack of sex-ed doesn't them no favors.
Do you think struggling to understand female characters and being sexist are mutually exclusive? Further, in the case of turning red or Tina, do you feel as though this is a sexualization of these characters? Or, as I would posit a story about sexuality, but not one that is sexual in itself.
Nah, he is actually just sexist.
Murakami try not to write pointless sexualization and/or make every characters like the same music everytime; Beatles and other bands of that era, classical composers, or jazz musicians challenge (IMPOSSIBLE)
Hey, sorry I'm late to discussion. When reading Norwegian Wood I stumbled across some post (or was it Leave By Leave's video?) questioning Reiko's character. Of course, sexualizing a 13-yo (if I remember correctly) should not be done, yet making her older would make Reiko more reliable. In some part, we have that "older" women in Naoko. Toru doesn't know exactly what happened between Naoko and Reiko, same as he doesn't know with the other girl. I got away from this, that Reiko could be narcissistic and unreliable. However, if this was intended, it should have been more obvious or there should have been more hints to excuse Reiko's background story.
interesting conversation
i feel like a lot of his portrayal of women is very similar to the scott pilgrim movie.
It is one thing to write in this way about women if (i) such viewpoint serves a purpose (i.e. one of the themes of a book might be the two dimensional viewing of female characters by the narrator) (ii) it happens in one or two books by the author. My problem with Murakami is that the over-sexualization of women, their characterlessness, the problematic treatment of minor girls is a reoccurring trait of his books. Moreover: there is no judgement passed on the narrator for his actions and views on women. It is treated as a circumstance, like the setting of the story or the features of the main character. It is normalized to a shocking degree. I think that is the part where you become suspicious, that such treatment of fictional women isn't just problematic on paper (and should not be just waived off as a little flaw in an otherwise great book), but is probably a symptom of something much more real and sinister. One day I think some facts about Murakami will come to light, and no one will be able to say "oh we did NOT see that coming".
did you just accuse murakami of being a p3dophile without a shred of evidence? this is the problem with society today.
Guess what, the world is sexist bc it is compiled of highly individual and subjective perspectives of beautifully flawed ppl with their individual attachment patterns. If you take away that from a novelist and his characters, what's left is cardboard cutouts. It is a non-topic for me. I don't understand this preoccupations with labels, in particuraly when it comes to Murakami. We could also say his protagonists are stereotypical while his female characters are elusive and unpredictible which makes him a poor writer of male characters?
So far i only read that book about the guy being in the cabin in the wood and seeing the sheep man, but thats not having many women, which ight be a blessing i he secualizes all female characters. Also a man going in a cabin in the woods to think about his midlifecrisis iin not as eird as his other premises.
Bu him refuing to tone problematic choices down , which even lovecraft did, is a choice too.
19q4 is a feminist novel come on
His work definitely borders on pedophilloic and is outrightly sexist I can’t even make it through one of his works without being extremely uncomfortable. I own three of them and have read two but will neverrr buy anything buy him again. I feel like everything positive he brings to the table other authors can do (some better) with none of the weirdness. People just hook onto him because his name is so familiar.
I am sorry....I don't like his writing style and Norwegian Wood was a terrible story 😅 but I am very particular about the type of stories I like. And I get why a teenage boy or...young man would like his stories. Not my thing.