1Q84, am I a pleb or what?

[Anonymous No.6815989]

Ok /lit/, I just finished Murakami's "opus" and to be honest it was full of puss ( if the author can use terrible puns, why can't I?). I didn't like the characters at all, maybe with the exception of the director's secretary, which is the only character that appears in this whole book whose characteristics and appearance aren't shoved down your throat every second page. ( even this is a bit doubful, as her clothing is also too heavily commented on.)
The sex scenes are just to bland and feel like coffee stains on the pages, there to add flavour but just get in the way. Muh taboo and muh chrayzee sexuality is so overplayed it's funny.
The mystical and fantastical world of 1Q84 is so badly fleshed out, especially the two moons bit, I mean come on why didn't she ask anyone about it for so long?
I have all the patience in the world but please, the book is as bloated with useless detail as an overly zealous skyrim mod.
Could one of you explain what was good in this book, because all the positive reviews it's been getting are making me feel stupid for not understanding a "deep plot", when for me the plot was kinda like a bellybutton, shallow and it stinks most of the time.

[Anonymous No.6816037]

1Q84 is incredibly polarizing. /lit/ seems to think it's not one of Murakami's best, and more often than not, his worst. Actual literary scholars and critics almost unanimously declare 1Q84 to be his masterpiece. I suggest you come back to this one when you mature.

[Anonymous No.6816065]

>>6815989
It's a very weak book.
Really it's love pulp tier. Worthless. Not literature.

[Anonymous No.6816089]

Wow, thanks for the candid answers, and I have to say I'm incredibly amazed that you guys didn't give me a hard time about my writing style, I tend to overuse embelishments and simile is my favourite figure of speech, giving my post a distinct childish tone.

[Anonymous No.6816831]

>>6816089
It's refreshing to see humility here.

[Anonymous No.6816987]

thought it was pretty good until the final 3rd and then it became a chore to finish. ushikawa mostly sucked ass, hated reading his parts.
don't get why he introduced all these supernatural things that ended up not being important in any way.
too much walking back and forth just barely missing each other. felt like an eternity.

i haven't read murakami in a few years but i feel like a lot of his books fall apart/get boring as fuck down the stretch. or maybe it's 2 deep 4 me, whatever

[Anonymous No.6818206]

>>6816987
same, the 3rd volume/part was just tedious with ushikawa ever so slowly piecing together shit for pages and pages, shit the reader is already extremely familiar with. and yeah, the supernatural stuff was not concretely explained but i went along with it because symbolism or whatever.

as far as your point about being boring, i agree somewhat, i've enjoyed his shorter novels like Norwegian Wood due to the plot/time seemingly moving quicker.

[Anonymous No.6818916]

From my experience (and in order I've read them):

Hard Boiled Wonderland and the End of the World: 8/10
Norwegian Wood: 7/10
Wind Up Bird Chronicle: 6/10 (although I do want to reread it as I find it the most interesting)
Kafka on the Shore: 5/10


Are all of his books just so samey that his style is wearing off on me or what?

[Anonymous No.6818917]

>>6815989
Japanese John Green.

[Anonymous No.6818922]

>>6816037
>Actual literary scholars and critics almost unanimously declare 1Q84 to be his masterpiece
[citation needed]

>>6818917
you've only read Norwegian Wood, haven't you? protip: it's his worst book

[Anonymous No.6818929]

Can someone shop the "fuck my shit up" hairdo onto this pic for Murakami threads? The man must be delusional to keep writing so poorly. I swear Wind-Up Bird is his only halfway decent novel.

[Anonymous No.6818977]

>>6815989
It's shit for so many reasons.

Reading it, you feel like it had no editor....there is so much unnecessary and extraneous stuff. It's like some hack who loved Murakami decided to write a Murakami-eqsue book.

[Anonymous No.6818993]

>>6816037
>only scholars can determine the worth of a book.

[Anonymous No.6819003]

>>6818929
Kafka On The Shore was also alright.

Great choice for a "fuck my shit up" pic, though.

[Anonymous No.6819011]

>>6816037
>Tokyo Anal Dynamite is incredibly polarizing. /mu/ seems to think it's not one of Gerogerigegege 's best, and more often than not, his worst. Actual music scholars and critics almost unanimously declare Tokyo Anal Dynamite to be their masterpiece. I suggest you come back to this one when you mature.
nice and toasty bait you got, just gonna nab me a piece

[Anonymous No.6819064]

>>6819011
>Tokyo Anal Dynamite
But that is their best, as is 1Q84 Murakami's.

[Anonymous No.6819072]

I enjoy him for what he is, but in no way does he deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as the most of the authors discussed on this board. On the scale of literary merit, his writing is a little bit closer to bisexual vampires and teenage wizards than 700-page peripatetic journeys through random cities in Europe. Anyone who doesn't see this is retarded.

[Anonymous No.6819263]

>>6819072
Not to many writers of bisexual vampires and teenage wizards are perennial contenders for the Nobel Prize in Literature. Now, you can go and debate the meaning and quality of the award, and indeed, it is not always representative of the best literature has to offer, but it is what it is, and that is certainly not nothing. Perhaps, in reading, you got so caught up in Murakami's mix of the insubstantial that you missed his big, post-modern themes that have given him such an exalted reputation amongst people that actually know what they're talking about. Truly, a mistake indicative of the highest level of retardation.