1q84

A central characteristic of Murakami's 1q84 lies in its place and time. The book begins with Aomame exiting 1984 Tokyo and entering 1q84 Tokyo, though she does not realize the transition immediately since the new universe is only infinitesimally different than the Japan of 1984. Aomame and Tengo alternately narrate each chapter and the connection between the two of them is gradually revealed.  Morality does not restrain Murakami characters. This is a mythic novel (as is Kafka on the Shore) in which nothing can be taken as first presented. Sex is not merely sex, but can serve other purposes, personally and in society. Family may or may not even be family.

Aomame does notice that police are wearing semi-automatic pistols instead of revolvers and thinks that she has simply missed the news. For the reader, this change signifies a more militaristic Japan than that in the world Aomame came from. Later, when Aomame acquires a gun, she is advised that "'According to Chekhov...once a gun appears in a story, it has to be fired.'" Interestingly Murakami does not obey this precept, which he puts into a character's mouth. Neither Aomame's gun, nor the police guns are used, which demonstrates that Chekhov is incorrect. Perhaps Murakami just wanted to demonstrate that Chekhov could be wrong, or perhaps show that reality is more complicated than a Chekhov play. Chekhov is mentioned prior to this, when an excerpt about the Gilyaks from Sakhalin Island is read aloud. It is an ethnographic description of a way of life, and Gilyak interaction with Russian explorers/colonizers. 

One note about the English translation - the title is 1Q84. When it would look better as a lower case q - 1q84. That looks more like 1984, which would be more fitting.

Any sufficiently boring history of magic is indistinguishable from boring history

Sometimes a book is published that seems to be exactly the type you will enjoy, but turns out to be a disappointment. An excellent example of such a book is Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell by Susanna Clarke. This book details how magic is revived by two magicians in England in 1806. It is an alternate history. What the book does well is provide a rich literature for British magic in footnotes, create believable historical characters, and engage the reader to the end. The book falls short though in ending badly, in creating unsympathetic (arguably stupid) characters, and giving the female characters no personality or agency.

If the book had had an ending to suit its length it would make up for much, but instead the ending seems patched on. After 782 pages I expect to feel that my reading time was well spent. It is apparent from the fact that "darkness" covers the world at the novel's end that Clarke intends to write a sequel, but why would I read a sequel to a book if the plot can not not be brought to some kind of conclusion in so many pages? One problem many books seem to have is being too long. I think this is a problem of the author not knowing how to end the novel and not doing enough revision. If something could be told in fewer pages then it probably should be.

A second problem with the book is the unsympathetic and boring characters. Neither magician is sympathetic. Jonathan Strange is particularly unpleasant, pompous and self-important. Granted this could be said to be true to the literary form of the British novel, but the plot would be more interesting if the main characters are likeable.

Second, I must object to the comparisons of this book with those by Jane Austen (review). The characters in Austen's novels have personality - both the female and the male characters. In this book the female characters are dull and uninteresting. That the women are boring characters is quite surprising since Jonathan Strange's wife, Arabella Strange, plays a significant role in the book. The issue is the total lack of agency that she has. She has no particular skills or intelligence. When she "dies" her husband finds another young woman to marry, though their marriage is forestalled when Arabella revives. The message of the book seems to be that women are replaceable, but necessary. That is why it is unfair to compare this to Austen. Though Austen's characters had limited agency they did manage to accomplish things, in the private realm. Clarke's female characters are singularly unaccomplished.

The fundamental problem with the book is the concept - making an alternate history of a magical Britain and creating it to be as dull as an actual history. The magic has been taken out of magic.

Fall already!

The Fall of Atlantis is an interesting, although flawed book. The flaw is found in the failure to create a coherent world. There are many hints at the structure of the story-world in which this book takes place, but there is a lack of actual description on the part of the author, Marion Zimmer Bradley. Rituals, phrases, and hierarchies are described, without explanation for the naive reader.

The main characters are two sisters, Domaris and Deoris, who are priestesses of an unnamed religion. The religion which predates all future religions, perhaps. The (mainland) temple in which they live encapsulates the action of the story, with Atlantis lurking in the background. Atlantis, always out of focus, is a somewhat unorthodox colony where a new temple has recently emerged. The narrative thread begins when Domaris and Deoris are teenagers, and follows their diverging paths. Domaris accepts the world as it is and follows the path of the light. Deoris, on the other hand, is rebellious and rejects the light to follow the path of certain darkness. Bradley manages to portray the "good" and "bad" sides well; however, showing how cruel and inhuman the "good" can be and how accepting and kind the "bad" can be. To state the focus shortly the overarching theme is the complexity of loving relationships.