This is a risky venture, there is no doubt about it. There is certainly no other book of this ilk currently in the English market however i am uncertain that it would be an instant bestseller or even if it would be liked by a British audience. This book makes a firm statement and there is no knowing how this will be received.
Sputnik sweetheart is clearly a labour of love. The energy and passion of the description truly moves the reader. You are not sampling another world but becoming immersed in it. I can find no fault with the level of sophistication employed within the imagery and the repeated metaphors are expertly entwined with the context of the characters. I particularly enjoyed crunchy descriptions such as 'veritable tornado sweeping across the plains' and deep metaphors that convey layers upon layers of meaning 'The barber won't be digging any more holes'. The intensity of this description, realistic as it is in conveying the feel of many sensations and emotions, nevertheless creates a surreal effect. In turn these strengthens the connections one feels with the characters. They are painted literally in the mind.
However, half way through the book there is a definite split, either side of which could be an entirely different book. The plot goes from a quaint story of love, development and growing up to the surreal, phantom mystery world of fantasy. The main problem of course is the great crevasse between these two genres. Many readers may like one but be put off by the other. The blurb is perhaps deceitful; one can easily come away thinking that Sputnik sweetheart is a perfectly straight tale of a love triangle gone drastically wrong. The ending is also incredibly vague and may leave readers feeling unsatisfied that the book has been successfully concluded.
However, there is most certainly a niche in the market for your style. The strengths of the language are such that the reader feels a great intimacy for the characters and what they go through. It does take a very open mind to get to the end of the book without wondering what on earth happened to the simple love story however this does, in a way, add to the special nature of the novel.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
I like the way you talk about being immersed in the novel. I agree with this commemt. What do you mean about the book making a firm statement? About what?
Yes, the novel does seem to mix genres and could challenge the reader? And is the ending unsatisfactory?
do you think the blurb is a little unfair for the reader, in terms of letting them know what they are letting themselves in for?
I don't think that the novel end is unsatisfactory. I think that if it ended by tying up all the knots then it would be rubbish because that is not in the style of the rest of the book, it would be cheatful, and wrong. Murikami would be a lazy writer.
It makes a firm statement in terms of writing style. I like the way that the novel mixes genres. I didn't find the ending unsatisfactory as i enjoyed the freedom i had to come to my own conclusions!
I agree with you about the split- I did enjoy the book, but as I read the second half I got annoyed at the way he kept on making things stranger and stranger, I think it almost felt like he was taking the mick.
I agree dan! i reckon the blurb is very poor in terms f summing up the novel as it only really deals with half the book!
I think i agree with abuot the split in the genres, i quite liked the fantasy section of the book, but felt the opening part was tiresome and quite boring, to be honest. Not my type of book really. I like the way you describe the book, however, makes it sound so intersting
Like most other people I agree with the way you said it was a split genre book, but I'd say it was more a fade to another genre rather than a complete split, it still contains the elements of the original story even in the 'second half'. Also I agree with you and Dan about the Blurb, perhaps thats just another way of making the book more unexpected. To Camille also I think your point about the ending is a good one, although I have wrote differently about it in my last blog, I see where your coming from and am obliged agree...oh and by the way amy, in reply to what you commented on my blog...
I think yes, your stance as a reader does affect how you interpret Sputnik Sweetheart. I also read a lot of fantasy novels and it is not that I find it difficult to accept the distance from reality myself. I do find it hard to grasp the concept of using the term 'magical realism' at all though. I think it depends on your personal view of what actually is surreal, to whether you label things as magical realism. I find the whole term rather grey, its more of a term for the hazy zone between what's real and what's possible, but depending on your beliefs its hard to tell exactly if something if magical realise or not, so I think it would be hard to argue that anything was that or surreal?
You get me? lol
Do you agree?
i think that on one hand the end to the story is a little lazy...but then we don't need to be spoon fed the book and this way we get to use our imagination and are able to come to our own decisions. i think it allows us to be more active within our reading of the novel. with regards to the 'split' of genres...i quite enjoyed it...it gave the book something new and fresh and i found it a welcome twist.
Post a Comment