You know - I didn’t pick up on it myself, but now that you say that I can totally see it. I wonder if (at least at the time) that was a common stereotype or if it’s specific to this author.Bit of a side note, did anyone else notice a bit of prejudice whenever the author would talk about Osaka or people from there? I kept getting the feeling the author really disliked those people and thought a lot less of them. Reminded me a bit of how some people in the US think less of those with a southern accent for example.
was there even a point to that part? that was one of the last things i read and it seemed really out of left field.This one instead was a more believable ramp up. The only bit that was a bit harder to swallow was when he correctly solved the case of the other detective.
I haven't noticed it but will keep an eye out. He's (the character) been pretty neutral on Saitama which sometimes gets a bit of ribbing.Bit of a side note, did anyone else notice a bit of prejudice whenever the author would talk about Osaka or people from there? I kept getting the feeling the author really disliked those people and thought a lot less of them. Reminded me a bit of how some people in the US think less of those with a southern accent for example.
Not really that I can recall. It more seemed like an aside to show another angle to how society is changing at the time.was there even a point to that part? that was one of the last things i read and it seemed really out of left field.
I haven't noticed it but will keep an eye out. He's (the character) been pretty neutral on Saitama which sometimes gets a bit of ribbing.
What do you think of this angle? The author is a woman writing a male character widening his view of women. Afaik, this ties in just insofar that Honma realizes he would not have been able to change his thinking in the way to understand the case without the case he's on. Reminded me of an article I read a few weeks ago about Europol putting out a campaign targeting female crime. This book is from '92 iirc and we're still seeing this line of thinking in action. Not only that, but also the judgement and dismissal of the poor and indebted. Japan is not renowned for its progressiveness but do you think Miyabe takles these in a meaningful way overall?Not really that I can recall. It more seemed like an aside to show another angle to how society is changing at the time.
I definitely think the author is sympathetic to both women and the poor. I think it becomes increasingly clear as the story progresses and we start to get more details about what led to the main crimes being committed by Kyoko. I don't think the author goes so far as to forgive the crimes (especially given the brutal details), but there is certainly a lot of effort put into explaining why she felt trapped in her life. It explains how the trouble she finds herself in didn't even originate with her. She moved on and tried to make a life for herself and even that was ruined by the debts of her father. I don't think it's an accident that the author paints Kyoko as trying to 'do right' by Shoko.What do you think of this angle? The author is a woman writing a male character widening his view of women. Afaik, this ties in just insofar that Honma realizes he would not have been able to change his thinking in the way to understand the case without the case he's on. Reminded me of an article I read a few weeks ago about Europol putting out a campaign targeting female crime. This book is from '92 iirc and we're still seeing this line of thinking in action. Not only that, but also the judgement and dismissal of the poor and indebted. Japan is not renowned for its progressiveness but do you think Miyabe takles these in a meaningful way overall?
I can see where you're coming from, but I can't say I'm surprised we never got that. The novel does a good job both making Kyoko out to be sympathetic in what happened to her previously, while also detailing just how gruesome her act was (the dismemberment). I think the ambiguity in the end is purposeful.Honestly I liked this way more than I expected it to, given that I've never been huge into the detective-novel subgenre. It felt kinda like a train the whole way through, starting slowly and then slowly gathering speed as the end approached in a way that was very interesting. I do agree that the tendency for every fact to neatly lead into the next lead, and the fact that all his journeys were fruitful eventually was kinda too perfect, but it was at least interesting to see how each one unfolded to the next clue.
One thing I wonder is how accurate the picture of Kyoko was. While I agree the author was somewhat sympathetic in aspects of the portrayal of her, all we know and hear of her is second-hand information from people who either have only partial information, or are likely very biased in their interpretations of her actions (in the case of her ex-spouse). A huge portion of the investigation was him slowly revealing pieces of information about her Kyoko and hearing different people recount their memories of her, and then the detective piecing them together to get an understanding of how she was as a person. I really wish we'd had at least 1 chapter of hearing her talk, or getting some actual idea of her first hand to get a comparison of how accurate the picture he came up with was.
Right? You should let me know if The Memory Police has a similar style to its ending, maybe there's a strong japanese literary tradition of making books 50 pages shorter than they should be.Also I laughed in hindsight at @Fireblend 's comment about whether or not this author was related to Murakami. That ending is some straight Murakami stuff.
Can you go more into this? Reading the part in Osaka now and not getting that feeling at all so farBit of a side note, did anyone else notice a bit of prejudice whenever the author would talk about Osaka or people from there? I kept getting the feeling the author really disliked those people and thought a lot less of them. Reminded me a bit of how some people in the US think less of those with a southern accent for example.