Self Reads

I think Haruki Murakami is very fascinated by all that we share in common with animals. A lot of his stories feature relationships between humans and animals that do not occur naturally but highlight fundamental aspects of survival. In this book, a character can talk to cats and usually does so because he is lonely. This highlights on both ends how animals are social creatures, even cats, some of the most isolate animals need interaction every now and then.

My issue wit Murakami however, this I even saw in 1Q84, is the end of his book. By 3/4 of the book, the reader knows what is about to happen at the end, however Murakami drags this on for WAY TOO LONG. It becomes so hard to finish the book because I already know what is going to happen yet it takes 50 pages to get there.

As a reflection of the book 1Q84, I tried creative writing mimicking Haruki Murakami’s style

The Room

Video 🙂

Recently I read this book as a recommendation from a friend. Seeing as my extended essay topic revolved a lot about the role of conflict in someone’s life, I thought this would be a perfect supplementary read. To be honest, I was extremely disappointed with the book. There were so many components of it, which I will elaborate on, causing me to dislike it greatly.

Firstly, I have always been one to HATE books that jump perspectives. I don’t see how authors expect us to grow alongside characters if we are constantly torn apart from the character before we get a chance to develop a sound understanding of them. I understand it is a relatively short read so it is hard to witness huge change, but then I think another mistake of the author was just the sheer number of characters. So many of them did not play a vital role and I cannot imagine the magnitude of change would be very much if they were removed. Each chapter was basically from a different characters perspective, and that too not even on the same issues! It felt much like a stream of consciousness recording than a narrative.

Alright, I though perhaps the first issue is something more to do with my taste rather than an issue with the book itself. But the issue of just how the story was written is something that stayed with me. It was this weird mix of a third person narrator, but looking at issues from a first person point of view. A narrator in essence should be an ominous bystander. I felt so torn between trying to see things from a birds eye view and finding myself caught in the action, it felt like this limbo state between being in and out of the story.

That all being said, I must say that the snapshots of the teacher Garuda, actually resonated with me. Over the course of the book, I actually saw progress and development. At the end, I was given closure and an understanding of the role that his character played in trying to highlight the flaws in the education system.

Video Reflection

This is a book written by Jim Rogers who is an American investor. It is a very short book, less than 100 pages, but very inspirational nonetheless. It is what my dad git me to read as my introduction to the stock market and investing, which also marks the beginning of what is about to become a non fiction plethora over the next few months as I introduce myself to stock investing. This book is close to my heart just because my dad went through and made little annotations of his own, what he wants me to learn from life and even specific to investing.

The biggest lesson I took from this b0ok is that he who knows nothing of other cultures knows nothing of his own. Reading the news, travelling and immersing yourself in new places and people does a world of wonder for you on a personal and financial level. So much of Roger’s success came from having cultural and historical knowledge while the average investor has financial knowledge only. I also learn the value in reading the news. I do that anyway, I read the newspaper every single day, however I know realise I need to be doing way more research into whats happening around the world.

Up until now my streaks of reading classics had failed to disappoint me, but I must say I did not take very well to Catch 22. There were too many creative and explorative elements of the story, that it lost focus and drive. I understand trying to mix things up a little., but some aspects of the story need to stay grounded so they can help guide the readers through. I found myself rereading passages, not because I wasn’t paying attention, but because I simply did not see the link what so ever and it confused me greatly, making me wonder whether I had missed something. A kid in my class said it was his favourite book which blows my mind, I cannot see how anyone likes this and aside from the language used itself, I really don’t see why this book is a classic.

Before I become extremely critical, I must say that there were enjoyable components to the book. The humour at several moments was very engaging. I loved seeing the arguments between characters because they were so random and perpetually made no sense, but that’s what was so funny. There were so many paradoxes, like that of the Major who would only let people into the office if he wasn’t there meaning they would never meet him. This all plays along to the paradox of Catch 22 itself which really makes me wonder what the author was on when he wrote this. I also really liked the style of writing, something about the humour was very old school British, reminding me a lot of P.G Woodehouse, where the intricate play of words is what brings the humour in.

That being said, the pace of the book was TOO fast. There was a new character basically every chapter, and by six chapters later I would forget that character in order to keep up with the 6 new ones introduced. No mission was ever complete and because it kept following different people, I felt like the timelines were being jumped. I also felt that there was not sufficient time given for the reader to develop a connection with the character whether it be good or not. I was not particularly fond of some of the plot lines, Yossarian spent too much time in hospital at the start (to set the stage of him being lazy) and then o time at all later, contradicting the while thing. There was a bad amount of depth to a character’s background like Major Major, I believe that there should have been a greater focus on how he received the name, more of his upbringing because that’s what made his character funny.

Reflection

Video Reflection