I’ve been a fan of Haruki Murakami for a while now, and Norwegian Wood frequently shows up near the top of folks’ must read list for him. It was interesting both in how similar it is to some of his other works, and how much of a departure it was.
In terms of things which struck me as classic Murakami, it leaned hard into what I think of as ‘slice-of-life’ narration that he does really well. Throughout the book we get a whole lot of details about the various places the main character lives – a student dorm and an interesting little garden house – the food they eat, the routines they follow. All of the description adds up to give a very particular, very Japanese feeling for me that I don’t get bored with. I’m not sure if the same level of detail in an American story would hold up for me.
The characters also struck me as very deliberate and precise. So many of them knew ‘I want this’ or ‘I am this type of person’ and in fact much of the crux of the book comes from the conflicts and situations that arise where those differences overlap. There is a particular expression of character that Murakami seems to use consistently, and Norwegian Wood was no different.
The big departure, though, was in the lack of the fantastic. In the intro he even calls it out as his only ‘realistic’ novel. It’s hard to disagree on that count. With only one particular scene, everything described does seem to have actually happened. Strangely, though, the lack of, well, strangeness, didn’t detract for me even though that magical realism in his other works has seemed so central. There was a sort of drifting, lyrical quality to things still, and even in his more fantastic books the grounding in concrete description is always key.
It wouldn’t necessarily be the first book of his that I’d recommend for a new reader, but definitely among the more accessible.