Yoko Tawada

The novella "The Bridegroom was a Dog" borders on the surrealist. Just like Haruki Murakami books, this story plays with the unimaginable making it digestible and readable. Case in point: The featured story "The Bridegroom was a Dog" tells the story of Mitsuko Kitamura, a Japanese school teacher (a sorts of cram school), and a mysterious visitor who comes to visit one day and stays for good. What is so surreal about the story is what this visitor (his name is Taro Iinuma) does with the teacher when the mood strikes him. The story is far from pornographic, but it is graphic enough to make you think twice about what it is they are doing and why. The unbelievable/believable aspect of the story is that everyone else involved (minor characters, etc.) seem to act so normal despite the abnormal. Since I am about one third into the story I really can't write much more, but there's a mystery to Taro's character and the author is pulling the right strings to keep the reader hooked on the story. So far this has been a surprisingly interesting read.

I have rehearsals for the concert tonight, tomorrow and Friday. An additional rehearsal is schedule for Saturday during the day.

Classes are going great. I am so happy this semester that it seems I have forgotten what a hard time I had last semester. It all evens out, I guess. Today, my students will be taking their first examination on Chapter 22 of "The American Pageant." Wish them luck :-)

The Politics of Ruining a Book

Manguel ruins his book in the end with a manifesto of political proclamations against the United States and its allies. The book was written in the year the Iraq war began, so I can see how he might include some criticism, but to ruin such a potentially great book to make a political statement or to bash George Bush is simply ridiculous and irresponsible. The last third of the book is injected with a leftist diatribe that Manguel intends to forcefully link to the books he read throughout the year. I am disappointed. I wonder how books like these fall through editorial nets (perhaps they don't). I am not writing this from either side of the political spectrum; I would still hold right-conservatives to the same scrutiny. Manguel simply ruins the book and there's no excuse for it.

I am reading "Writers on Writing," a collection of the essays that appeared in "The New York Times" over a couple of years. There are two volumes of this collection so I'll be writing on individual essays and hoping to apply some of the advice to my own writing. Also, I think I am (for the first time) reading two books at the same time. The other books is a collection of short stories by Yoko Tawada, "The Bridegroom was a Dog." Most of the reading for the Tawada volume I will be doing between the hours of 11:30 and 12:10, since that is the time that I'll be most likely to be able to read without interruptions. I am really sorry for the Manguel book, really, it just doesn't make any sense to me.