I just finished and am really excited about this novel Out from Japanese writer Natsuo Kirino. I’ll let the english translation speak for itself, but as a teaser, here are excerpts from a few interviews she’s given.

From Japanreview:

-Tokyo is a bleak and joyless place in your books. Is Japan doomed? Or is it a condemnation of suburban life in general? Is there such thing as redemption in this day and age?

I don’t this the situation is cause for despair. Rather, the suburbs are interesting in that human desires are transparent and in the forefront. In case of the suburb where Out was set, the small houses all in row are a product of what people desire. It can be seen as quite typically Japanese. I don’t think there is such thing as “society”. There is that much more freedom in that looseness.

In terms of redemption, the question is, redemption from what? I’m not quite sure what you are referring to, but if you return to the former question, the Japanese rarely recognize the sense of redemption because they lack the concept of the “society.” That’s to say, one doesn’t know how to be redeemed, and what you have to do to accept it, and how and who should accept it.

-What influences your work Japanese literature, western literature—or do you read other mystery writers? Are there any books of this genre you feel strongly about? Or are your influenced by other mediums—TV, movies, music, and news events? What current Japanese writers do you like?

When I was a child, I read magazines indiscriminately and I read a lot of foreign juvenile and children’s fiction—mostly books like Adrift in the Pacific, The Three Musketeers, and Little Women. I think that that they may have influenced the way I tell stories.

I don’t really like mysteries so I don’t read many of them of late. I quite like Patricia Highsmith, among others. As for Japanese authors, I would say Ryu Murakami and Fumiko Hayashi. I also read non-fiction. I love movies, especially Scorsese and Lynch. As for music, I am a fan of seventies soul.

From Metro.co.uk bookclub

The sexual violence in the book is very disturbing - did you ever have any qualms about writing those scenes?

It’s very disturbing to write about violence. However, as long as there is such violence in reality (that’s often beyond our imagination) I feel it is my responsibility as a writer to write about them. It’s unfortunate if anyone is disturbed or feels uncomfortable with these scenes (especially the ending), but I actually wrote the book in an effort to eliminate violence from society.

and Booksense.com

-What reaction surprised you the most?

Men were very shocked that a wife could kill her husband. That was really a provocative idea. Japanese men felt so threatened by it. They also never imagined that a woman could write such an aggressive novel. The most shocking part of Out for a lot of people is that it’s written by a married woman who has a family and a child. If the book was written by a man, people wouldn’t be as surprised, and they’d look at it as fiction. But because a woman wrote it and it’s realistic to a certain degree, people were surprised.

-Your novel and many Japanese films from the last few years depict contemporary Japan as an unsettled society whose outward calm masks an underlying current of severe physical and psychological violence. Is this the case?

The old family system is collapsing more and more. Although the division between men and women remains — men still go out and women still stay in — a man now cannot sustain the entire family. We have reached the point where women have to put the children into childcare so that they can work to help support the family, too. Then, the children themselves are under extreme educational pressure. So everybody is making the best effort to sustain him or herself. It is a very confusing time for our society. I have the feeling that people don’t know what to do to get out of their situations.

-Do you think this is creating a culture of violence?

Some of the violence depicted in the media is a metaphor for frustration, but there are more and more cruel crimes happening — and the people who commit these hideous crimes are getting younger and younger. A few years ago, there were a lot of crimes committed by young women. Now it’s kids murdering people. Japanese adults are completely astounded, and don’t know what to do. That’s the reality that we are getting into, and it is getting worse.

Also, thanks to mll3 for turning me on to this novel in the first place.

*There may be spoilers ahead…but I’m gonna try not to focus on that and remain appropriately vague*

So I’m sort of caught up in McCarthy fandom and decided I definitely had to read this novel before I saw the film. I have also been a serious fan of Cohen bros. dramas, as opposed to the comedies. Nothing wrong with their comedic quirkyness, but I would argue if you ask the average viewer to name a one of their films, they’ll give you ‘Raising Arizona’ or ‘OBWT’ before ‘Miller’s Crossing’ or ‘The Man Who Wasn’t There’, which I find disappointing. Anyway, from my first learning of this project, I had a strong inclination I was going to love it, and I essentially did.
Reading some sneak peak reviews, I quickly came across a complaint from blog reviewers who hadn’t read the book and are so weened on common suspense arcs that rely on over-the-top sensationalism to outdo one another: Tarrantino style, if you will. But this isn’t about that. Period. There is a very specific reason I have chosen the title of this post from the films tagline and a very specific reason I have chosen this image. Go watch a Tom Cruise, or Vin Diesel vehicle if you cant handle post modern tweaking of the thriller genre. This film comes from a pulp work from a literary mind. Yes, there is a “kick ass” psycho (and after being so compelled by ‘Before Night Falls’, I sensed Bardem was gonna nail this role - I think the fact that he is also the lead in the current Marquez classic speaks volumes about his power as an actor) and there are even over-the-top nifty devices you’ve never seen in a film before - straight from the mind of C McCarthy. So go see it. In a way it’s like getting to see another Peckinpah film, but much of that had to do with the period and location. Here are my two minor and one major beefs…

Because the locations and authenticity are so dead on, even while reading, I have to admit their authenticity stumped my imagination, despite the fact I can recall images of 1980 (OK, not central and west Texas…) I have to get finiky and picky. 1) I don’t remember the girlfriend mentioning she worked in a WalMart. It sort of struck me as a modern jab, and as a nomad, I don’t have my copy of the book here and now to reference, but a search reveals Walmart did hit Texas in ‘75, so it is plausible. It may very well come straight from the text, as so much of the dialogue does. 2) Having ridden lots of Greyhound buses, I’m doubting that semi-southwestern style with the bold blue through the other colors that still adorns the apolstry of many of the seats now, did so then. Total nitpicking I know, but the authenticity is dead on in every other way - I think it bears mentioning.

And the major thing I didn’t like: the young hitchhiker character is reduced to a poolside beerswiller with only a few lines of dialogue. I think there was a lot of revelation about Lwelyn’s character in those passages with her in the novel, as well as more of McCarthy’s foundation about what overtly changed about (our) culture at that time, which isn’t exactly what I mean to say but - the big picture stuff about society and individual. As the film is a bit long as is, I fully understand why the reduction stood, but I’d argue it also built suspense for the story, even though, as stated, that’s not the point. I further admit, I didn’t picture Lwelyn’s wife to be as attractive as the actress they picked, during my reading. I guess I was strung out then on the sexual suspense as well as violent suspense - i.e. semi-loner guy with a bunch of money has beat the devil once or twice, THEN runs into some hot free ass on the road. What now? And there is no sexual suspense at all in the film.

Other than that, every bit of acting worked or excelled. The Cohen bros. excerted their style without being “cliche Cohen bros”. The bleak beauty of the desert was perfectly captured. The moments of gallows humor blended seemlessly between the styles of novelist and filmakers. Was there even a single bit of music in this film? I can’t even think of a song on a radio right now, much less soundtrack…wait, there is a major instance of music I’m recalling, and it’s comedy. But a sort of “slap in the audience face” comedy: the audience wants to go ‘oh irony, ha, and we could use a laugh’, but as the scene lingers there is sort of a feeling of ‘yeah, this is unusual, but what the fuck is funny about it?’. More defiance of easy expectations-

“Paging the ghost of HG Wells, white courtesy telephone please…” I’ve often pondered how completely sad it is that humans are still squabbling over really simplton issues like gay marriage, when we are in fact living in the early years of the genetic revolution. The splitting of the genome is gonna make the splitting of the atom, and all of the trouble that followed, look like child’s play. More evidence from Britian, fusion of human and animal embryo’s for purposes of research. Before I get too “yellow journalist/sensational” on you, realize they are talking about the smallest percentage of animal make-up to go into the embryos, which supposedly will be destroyed within 14 days of creation. Really, not that far off from using pig arteries to save a human heart patient - or eating animals for their protein content (not now vegitarifucks…I’m dealing with bigger issues-).
But my mind quickly goes to inherent human curiosity, “let’s do it just ’cause we can” logic, ‘mad scientist shit’ if you will. For all the above board science that will be legit and force itself to answer to laws and civilized standards, there will be a small percentage of those who will pursue knowledge for it’s own sake - and ethics come second. Korean scientist and Raelians lying about having developed clones come to mind. Indeed, why should great minds allow themselves to be hampered by moral majority morons who want to pretend the earth is less than 10,000 years old? I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: the future is going to be freaking weird!
When are we gonna get around to genetically breeding people with gills to again repopulate the oceans, as mentioned in Alvin Toffler’s ‘Future Shock’? Make that really amazing filter gills to deal with all of the crap that will be in the water by then…

On this day 80 years ago, two Italian immigrants were executed by the state of Massachusettes for their alleged involvement in theft and murder. Many believe the case was actually about anti-immigrant and anti-anarchist sentiments in the community. Ancient history, right?
Additional thanx to the late Kurt Vonnegut JR. for first turning me on to these events through his novel Jailbird.

I first saw it at last month’s 1st Thusday, via Pony Club, though I chose to wait for this month’s to buy, in a feeble attempt to keep a handle on the budget. Anyway, I am now the proud owner of this amazing book. If $15 seems steep I assure you it’s worth every dime.

AND through the sparkplugcomics site, I just learned I’ll be town during the PDX zine symposium! Looks like I’ll skip going to Seattle Meltdown with the MarchingBand…

No, this isn’t a post about the Michael Faber novel, but since I appropriate the title for that of this post, I’ll go ahead and urge you read it.
This is just another macbre post inspired by recent musing on tribe.net concerning things to be done with skin after the mortal coil has been shed. Some solid info comes from an article published through an indie paper of the Harvard Law school about anthropodermic book binding. Also sites Ken Kipperman, subject of a doc I have yet to see - Shadows of Silence, debunking the ‘nazi lampshade’ myth.

So two days ago I finished Cormac McCarthy’s The Road
(my 3 word review=obsidian lyrical mastery), loaned from a friend and left with another. Then good ol Cadalai, who I haven’t heard from in a while, got in touch via email. I asked for info on another mutual friend to discuss the novel with, as I was certain he’d read it by now and I was sort of gushing with the desire to discuss. Then Cadalai called to further add (with sadistic glee): McCarthy would be interviewed later that day on Oprah’s show. *Cue Dave Chappell character voice: “WHAT?”* I was incredulous. The third interview the man has given in 40 years and it’s going to be on Oprah - daytime television mostly geared to a docile female audience. But I was free at 4 and you bet your last bullet I tuned in.

If you’re willing to deal with some password jive, you can see the interview through Oprah’s site. There is also some other interesting analysis of that book award winner available. Another blogger attempted to live journal the interview in real time and did a decent job, to give an impression for the curious. Be sure to scroll to June 5 when searching.



To me, the moments it became most obvious Big O didn’t really have a grasp of her subject were when she tried to throw “3 wives later” in his face, and her clear shock at his non-materialistic, anti-glammor stance - a given for anyone who’s taken the man’s work to heart. Any theories as to what else went on behind the scenes to green light this interview in this forum?
Mr. McCarthy was much as I expected to find him, with the exception of choosing this venue.

I just found this W.T. Vollmann interview in the “Bat Segundo” podcast. I was really excited at first, but after a listen I have to say it’s just OK. The intro to this podcast is completely unlistenable and I advise any interested to skip in a half a minute or so, or turn down the volume during “loading”. Further, if I’m ever caught speaking in such an inane and campy way in my own podcast for such a period of time, I urge anyone who has ever enjoyed, been amused or enlightened by, anything I have ever said, to kill me. This is a completely serious request. I can handle clanking plates in the background, it’s not nearly as annoying…

I don’t know how these people get access to the interviews subjects they do, but there are also T.C. Boyle, Amy Sedaris and David Lynch on the list.