Book of the Day - Novelist as a Vocation by Haruki Murakami

[@TheCodeXCantina]

Great chat. Really appreciate the point about representing affable/average and relooking at other scripts.

[@shethewriter]

Interesting review. His books are a bit hit or miss for me--I've concluded that they (at least for me) have depreciating value. The more of his books I read, the less I like them. But I think any one of his books in isolation is a lot better, because they are all quite singular. As a novelist myself I can't imagine writing a book about what it means to be one. Great points made here, and now I think I might pass on this book. There is a series of essays in a book called "Light the Dark" about writing and that might be the best one that I've read.

[@franciscolealgonzalez1333]

I've never read Murakami, I've never been attracted to his books. I was hoping that this one was at the very least intriguing... Thank you for a great review!

[@jamesabbiati5775]

Successful novelist = 1 part competent technical expertise (gleaned consciously or subconsciously), 1 part talent (how that experience is applied), 5 parts time and hard work, and 2 parts luck (sometimes the best works go unnoticed/unappreciated by the reading public, and the worst are inexplicably lauded). Most of the books on writing I've read gloss over most of this and focus on the author's opinion on how to go about gaining subconscious expertise (just read a lot and write a lot!!...or worse....find and follow your muse!!). As a result, some aspects of the craft which could be taught, aren't, because we, the writing community, don't treat our craft as an actual craft. We're too in love with the romantic notion of tortured writers and smokey cafes ....

[@davebrzeski]

On a related subject, I once came to realise that there was one virtually foolproof way to have a self-published best seller... simply write, and publish a book about how to have a self-published best seller.

[@fabrislemos]

I like his fiction, but the whole book is him trying to justify himself. For example, he spends page after page saying he doesn’t care about critics and prizes all the while defending himself from criticism and trying to come up with reasons (other than the quality of his work) why he doesn’t get awards. It’s insufferable.

[@konstantinos-6-6-6-8]

If you talk about novelist as a vocation you are really talking about writing as a job in a capitalist society, and really the only way to attribute one’s success to luck is by abstracting all the factors that contribute to one’s success into it. Probably the best person to explain why an author is successful is someone behind the scenes, that will explain the marketing, money invested, (backroom deals perhaps?) and so forth. Talking about why the writing is successful is a different thing, and why it works here and not there might be too complicated for anyone to discuss. There are some interesting theories on writing (what is good writing, how it should be taught etc) but they are academic (something like generative rhetoric). I kinda disagree with the idea that a book of this kind would be better if the writer didn’t hedge, feign humility, and offer platitudes and self-help cliches. Every time Steven Erikson explains why his writing is successful/how it works/why it’s brilliant/how the poor stupid plebs that dare criticise his writing should be reading him, he comes off as even more obnoxious and pretentious than he usually does, no doubt some kind of achievement, but a dubious one, that most likely costs him more readers than it gains him. Anyway what I’m trying to say is that these kinds of books are mostly pointless self-aggrandisement that do not merit discussion. I have been meaning to try reading Murakami though, any suggestions?

[@cplradio]

I enjoyed Killing Commendatore quite a bit, though that one doesn't seem to resonate with many of his fans.

[@zsuzsablom6256]

I thoroughly enjoyed it, as so many of his books, so I was thrilled by its length.