We feature each week Nicholas Reid's reviews and comments on new and recent books.
“THE STRANGE
LIBRARY” by Haruki Murakami (Harvill Secker / Random House, $NZ34:99); “THE
GIRL ON THE TRAIN” by Paula Hawkins (Doubleday / Random House, $36:99)
Do you know what
I mean by a freak or “sport” in the book world? I mean an odd little volume,
which seems designed to appeal to a very specialised audience. Haruki
Murakami’s The Strange Library is
such a sport. Barely 80 pages long, and most of that taken up with
illustrations, this long short story could be a children’s story, except that
it has a chilly, nightmarish and very Kafkaesque tone to it. As I said once
before on this blog [look up my take on
his Colourless Tsukuru Tazaki and His
Years of Pilgrimage via the index at right], the Japanese fabulist Haruki
Murakami is openly and avowedly very influenced by Kafka.
The Strange Library is
told by a little boy, on his way home from school, who goes into the library
and, when asked what he wants, thinks of the oddest subject he can and says: “How taxes were collected in the Ottoman empire”.
At once he is swept down dark corridors and through an underground labyrinth to
a special closed reading room where he is given three books on this arcane
subject and is told he must read them at once. But he cannot check them out.
They are reference books. So he is locked in a cell, with a ball-and-chain
attached to his leg, until he has read them. And he is further warned, by a
strange submissive sheep-man who brings him donuts, that if he does not
remember everything he has read, then his brains will be eaten out by the old
man who is the library’s sinister keeper. After all, if you extract information
out of libraries, why can’t libraries extract information out of you? A pet
starling, a sinister black dog and a beautiful girl who cannot speak also come
into the story – and if you think this is all sounding distinctly Freudian,
then I think you are right.
But what does it
all mean?
I admit I
haven’t the least idea. Is it saying something about how daunting libraries can
seem to children? Is it talking about the power of a child’s imagination in
conjuring up, Caligari-like, a sinister milieu out of something quite mundane?
Is it about the power of memory and imagination, especially in the moments when
the boy is swept into the books he has to read and imaginatively becomes an Ottoman tax collector?
Blowed if I
know.
But it really is
a “sport”, and quite a charming one, mainly illustrated (in this
English-language edition which is apparently designed quite differently from
the original Japanese-language edition) with “found” images from nineteenth
century prints or mid-twentieth century cookbooks or manuals of astronomy,
especially where the phases of the moon are concerned.
And who
precisely is the audience? NOT children, I would guess. More likely its
“specialised” audience are Murakami’s worldwide legion of fans and complete-ists,
without whose existence it might not have got a translation in the first
place,.
* *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* *
I’ve said this
so often on this blog that you are probably tired of hearing it, but it’s still
worth saying. So forgive me for repeating myself yet again: If a novel is newly-published, I consider it
unmannerly for reviewers to spike all its surprises and give away all its
twists.
This is
especially true of whodunits of course, and as Paula Hawkins’ debut novel The Girl on the Train is a whodunit, I
hereby make a solemn promise to provide no spoilers and to break off my
synopsising when I am at most about a third of the way through the narrative.
Okay?
Here goes.
Rachel, a very
unhappy woman in her early 30s, commutes on the train each day from Ashbury to
Euston Station in London. Her life is a mess. Her husband Tom divorced her when
she couldn’t produce a baby and when she started to hit the bottle. To make
matters worse, Tom has remarried Anna, who has produced a healthy baby, so
Rachel feels permanently humiliated. Rachel’s drinking has progressed to the
point where she is virtually an alcoholic. Sometimes she has blackouts (which
will be crucial to the way the story develops). She has not told her very
forbearing landlady that she was fired from her job months previously (for
drunkenness, of course). So when she travels to and from London, she is only
pretending to go to a place of work.
But one thing
brightens up her days. She loves looking out from her commuter train at the
houses that back onto the line, including the house where her ex-husband Tom
and his new wife Anna now live. As she remarks on the novel’s second page
“My head leaning against the carriage window,
I watch these houses roll past me like the tracking shot in a film. I see them
as others do not; even their owners probably don’t see them from this
perspective. Twice a day, I am offered a view into other lives, just for a
moment. There’s something comforting about the sight of strangers safely at
home.”
Near where Tom
and Anna live, Rachel regularly spots from her train window a couple who seem
to be the perfect, contented middle-class couple. She envies them. She makes up
pet names for them. But we as readers soon discover that their real names are
Megan and Scott, and all is not as well with them as it looks from a passing
train window. Megan feels neglected by Scott and is suffering a severe case of
what used to be called suburban neurosis.
Then one day,
from her passing train window, Rachel sees something very disturbing. And soon
after, Megan disappears and is presumed murdered.
Which is all the
set-up and beyond which point, a third of the way through the novel and as
promised, I cease my plot summary.
The narration of
the novel is first-person, mainly told by Rachel, but with sections where Anna
and Megan take over – so we have a chorus of three women’s voices and the
further we get the more we discover how unhappy all their lives are. Rachel is
the prime witness to some nasty things which she tries to convey to the police
– but as she is clearly a bit of a fantasist, an alcoholic, a liar and a
stalker (of her ex-husband and his wife), the police quite understandably see
her as an unreliable witness and do not believe her. So Rachel proceeds with
her own investigation. There is in this novel the big inbuilt improbability
that a woman who is such an emotional train-wreck would have the doggedness to
proceed with her sleuthing, especially as she so often reminds us of her
weaknesses:
“My better angels lost again, defeated by drink, by the person I am when
I drink. Drunk Rachel sees no consequences, she is either excessively expansive
and optimistic or wrapped up in hate. She has no past, no future. She exists
purely in the moment. Drunk Rachel – wanting to be part of the story….. she
lied. I lied.”(p.109)
Still, we can accept it as a
convention of the whodunit, just as (through slightly gritted teeth) I accept
the conventions of the author withholding vital information from us; and of the
eventual unmasked culprit neatly tying up the loose ends by giving a confession
of how exactly the crime was committed.
To begin with, an
investigation sparked by something glimpsed from a passing train reminded me of
Agatha Christie’s 4:50 from Paddington (filmed
long ago as Murder She Said). A main
character who acts as voyeur into other people’s lives has overtones of Alfred
Hitchcock’s Rear Window. But Paula
Hawkins seems mainly to be writing for people of her own generation, so the
focus of the novel is on younger people.
Improbabilities and all, it
stacks up as a good psychological thriller and it has already been optioned for
filming, in which format it will probably become better known than in this
novel form.
No comments:
Post a Comment