Being a late laggard has its advantages. I discover Haruki Murakami thanks to
Scheherazade in the New Yorker and am instantly hooked. The advantage is that there is a great, and
big body of work to now savour given how prolific this author has been (writing
since the 1980s).
And boy its hard!! One of the strong points about his stories are how shorn of judgment, negativity, sarcasm and evil they have in it. Even when there are shortcomings, someone is being dishonest or wants to lie – it rarely comes out in a bad way, and the author almost apologises for it.
However, Haruki is not everyone’s cup of tea and can be
challenging – and perhaps that challenge is the very thing that makes his short
stories and novels interesting.
Haruki’s stories can have various effects – right from
melancholy, to surprise, regret, an epiphany, nostalgia, interest – the whole
panoply of emotions can come through at any point. As you go through them. But
the one which is inevitable is a strong desire to discuss this immediately.
Its one of those insights you don’t realize and perhaps
because I watch Indian movies, I never realized it. In one of our meetings in
the Middle East, one of the seniors a Lebanese was surprised at the data on why
a significant number of people went to a movie alone, when the point of going
to a movie for her was to discuss it with someone after the movie. And this was something you didn’t realize as
most popular Indian films were simply to be experienced and not
intellectualized (‘leave your brain at home’) and discussed heatedly.
But that’s what makes those stories stand out. The majority of the hard work has to be done
by the reader. There’s just a touch of tantalizing (actually not) tid bits
sprinkled around the story, a few dots as you can see – and one needs to
connect them and make a picture, sometimes a conjecture as to what really is
going on in the story.
Did I add that this is not everyone’s cup of tea?
Years ago Meryl Streep was being interviewed by Oprah after
her performance in the movie DOUBT – where Meryl plays the role of the senior
nun and takes on Philip Seymour Hoffman on allegations of misconduct. This was based on a popular play, and both
the play and movie are inconclusive nor do they tell us what happened after.
Oprah had a bet with her friend Gayle as to what really
happened, and they had differing views. So naturally Oprah, then asks Meryl –
what really happened in the story. And
perhaps only Meryl can do this to Oprah (on her show) – that what really
happened in the story would have to be what the viewer wants to have or
believes has happened in the story. Its all up to the viewer and all up to the
reader. Shabana Azmi had a similar conflict when she did broken images, and the
playwright Girish Karnad refuses to help her in deciding which character should
Shabana empathise more with and let her decide for herself.
Haruki does not bother even that much. Most stories there’s sometimes not enough
dots – perhaps just a couple scattered, and its hard to draw an image from
that. Sometimes there might be no point.
And boy its hard!! One of the strong points about his stories are how shorn of judgment, negativity, sarcasm and evil they have in it. Even when there are shortcomings, someone is being dishonest or wants to lie – it rarely comes out in a bad way, and the author almost apologises for it.
There is humour – mainly in the irony – and if you know the
Japanese, its not what you’d have expected. My brother had years ago fallen in
love with Haiku (he has this thing – but he’s an early trialist of everything).
He was hooked and penned quite a few – and they were mirthful and ridiculously
funny. Even the nonsense poems from Lewis carrol couldn’t hold a candle to
them. The thing that he was fascinated was that the Haikus that he’d read would
be a couple of simple lines, with a lot of profound deep meanings and layers in
it. Though I couldn’t figure it out.
Besides I only read his work, and not the book he’d fallen in love with. My brother’s attempts were many but one which
I can remember was something like”:
The ant walked up the rose petal
..and the ant wept
Yes that’s it. Upto
anyone to dismiss it or consider what it meant and what could it relate to,
metaphorically, allegorically etc etc.
But then poetry is a challenge anyway. But at least to some extent it is clearly
established the context and what the poet meant or was interested in. I was lucky to have some great teachers
explaining poetry to me, but not enough for me to become a fan nor start
writing them. They only succeeded in helping me appreciate the ones I had to
study in school. Alfred Tennyson’s poem
on the brigade and the Elegy are good ones, but the ones I really fell in love
were poems by Gurudev Tagore. The
teacher had gone so crazy about the English collection in Gitanjali, he’d taken
the trouble to learn Bengali and had even visited Vishwa Bharati univ to
discuss this with them. So when he
taught a poem from the collection (which won Tagore the Nobel prize at the beginning
of the 20th century) – the teacher would literally transport us into
a different world altogether, the mind of Tagore. I came to believe that somewhere Tagore was
lucky enough to experience and see the divine truth. (remarkably none of his
poems or works ever talk about the names of the God – and I think that was very
very very powerful, and how it is meant to be).
Haruki’s work comes closer to the Haiku but can be even more
frustratingly loose and scattered.
What is a guarantee is the fact that there is nothing lost
in translation. And that is the beauty
of his work. He writes in the simplest,
most basic descriptive, and clear, direct way that is non-judgemental and shorn
of pretence or trying to impress the reader. (I gave up reading Arundhati Roy’s
works, I felt it was trying hard – too hard to impress).
Haruki’s style is deceptively plain and simple, and like one
of the literary critics said in his column “do you want to write like Haruki,
in as simple a style as his? Well, dream
on…”. Yes, simplicity is the hardest to achieve.
Nothing is lost in translation it is true. But there are a
lot of references I cannot place, and one of this is because Haruki has lead a
rich life, both in terms of experience and exposure. I hope to someday get to patiently listen to
Jazz as well as the works he keeps quoting – from literature to classical
works. He’s traveled a lot to from
remote Greek islands to within Japan, and the entire tapestry comes alive.
But then Haruki is not original, and never claims to
be. Different reviewers claim how his
works are modeled on or influenced works by other famous authors – none of
whose works I have read. I could only identify two – one was JD Salinger – who
is a challenging author to read anyway. And the other is Franz Kafka. My
brother (again the pioneer) was very excited as a kid when he first read and
completed Kafka’s metamorphosis and was explaining this story to us. I tried reading it but gave up, and it didn’t
interest me anymore, also because I know how the story went. I remember buying for my brother the entire
works of kafka, because I knew he’d like it but certain that I wouldn’t.
Haruki doffs his hat to both of them and makes no bones
about them. Theré’s a story where he takes Kafka and continues the
metamorphosis – and what a fine piece of writing it is. I haven’t read the original but fallen in
love with the sequel. How rare is that?
Now coming to art films, like poetry its easier when you
KNOW what is trying to happen in the movie. In India it is relatively easier as
the art film movement would be based on some real issues, and except for some
pretenders, most stories would be lucidly explained, and you also knew the
source and would be able to understand what's going on.
Not so with films like those by Luc Goddard, where watching
them you (or rather me) really couldn’t get what was going on. You almost want to scream – what was the
point of this film? Why did you even bother making this film? And what the … is going on in this film?
Not so with Haruki’s works, you almost want to savour it. And
like someone remarked in the discussion forums – you almost don’t want the
story to end, but keep going on forever.
The good thing is his stories are un-predictable. (read Tony Takitani to understand a WTF
moment, but you also might see the irony and actually have a loud laugh – I
found it kinda comical).
But then when it came to art films, I was lucky to have a
tutor. When I was a kid there was but
one tv station which was a local channel which would run for a few hours every
evening, and show a movie every weekend.
Needless to say, practically everyone watched it, and sometimes
discussed it. On one of the weeks, we had this lady Mrs K , who was my mom’s
friend walk in and discuss the previous weekend’s movie. She had worked in
Calcuttat (the intellectual capital as well as the birth centre of art cinema
in India). She also was a North Kanara Konkani – who are usually more
progressive minded and exposed to and open to arts. (every famous Konkani =
from Shobha de, and Guru Dutt, deepika Padukone etc. are from this
community).
Anyway, my mother felt the movie was terrible and she didn’t
get what was going on. This was ‘Griha
Pravesh’a movie with just three actors - Sanjeev Kumar, Sharmila Tagore and Sarika. Sarika is the colleague who Sanjeev kumar is
having an affair with, and decides to get married to her. My mom said she
couldn’t figure out how the movie ends nor what was the point of the entire
film.
This was enough trigger for Mrs. K to then start exclaiming
how wonderful this movie was for her, and what an outstanding piece of
narration Basu Bhattacharya had done.
She started explaining (SPOILER ALERT – don’t read on if you haven’t seen
the movie yet) – how there were signs of how kanjoos the family had been trying
to save to build a home. Sharmila keeps
licking her plate clean. They are not fixing stuff in their own home and using
spoiled stuff – all to save money for their upcoming apartment. But when Sanjeev
Kumar tells her he wants to leave the marriage and get married to Sarika – it’s
a big turning point for Sharmila Tagore. She accepts his decision and asks him
to invite Sarika to his home for a cup of tea.
And then gets herself glammed up at a beauty salon, drapes herself in a
silk saree. She gets her house done all up asking the painters and others to
double-duty and get it done by 5 pm. So when Sanjeev Kumar comes in the
evening, Sarika actually asks him why he’s behaving strangely.
Eventually as the evening comes to an end, Sanjeev has
already made up his mind – and Sharmila insists on him dropping her off. As he’s
dropping her off there is a wedding procession (baaraat) crossing the road and
Sarika has already crossed the road but Sanjeev stays back, and that’s the end
of the movie – when she waves him goodbye.
So…? For us that was
the revelation in terms of how to read clues and then ‘read’ and appreciate a
movie better.
Its something that has helped – though Haruki’s stories are
really challenging, as sometimes the clues simply don’t exist – and sometimes
the story is so simply straightforward, its embarrassing.
All the same its fun. I have only begun my journey, and
there’s a lot more of Haruki that promises to keep coming…. Join the ride!
No comments:
Post a Comment