As aforementioned in my
post, seemingly independent story lines converge; this suggests that personal
histories are entwined with the national histories both to determine an
individual’s present and future life. So for Mr. Okada to bring back Kumiko, he
would have to do the impossible; to change the events that are far beyond his
control and power (family histories and national histories). This leads me to
the focus of this second post, the theme and motif of freedom from the past and
recreation of one’s self.
The question is can one recreate oneself? The notion that one can is a deeply modern idea. But such an idea presupposes an absolute freedom from the past, or in other words, absolute causal power, which makes sense only in a secular modern mind. To be self-made, one must have the power of a first cause. One must be a god to be able to create things. Marukami’s point is precisely that such is impossible because finite, fallible and fragile humans aren’t gods. If one cannot be the first cause, one’s past, to a great extent, determines future outcomes. One has only an illusion of recreation by changing clothes, perfumes or jobs. Such changes, however, are shallow and meaningless. A person might make changes like these in a uniform manner, without really thinking, though their substantive self still retains its deeply ingrained dispositions. What holds of individuals holds of nations, in this case Japan. For a nation is no more than the collection of such individuals and shares many properties with these individuals. The misfortune of the Okadas is that they both believed the impossible—that is, that they could live like gods. However, Kumiko’s disappearance and the actions that she feels to be most natural, but wishes not to be hers, show the wind-up bird effect (a deeply ingrained nature to act a certain way). Perhaps the best one can hope for is a transformation; a transformation presupposes that something remains the same. A transformation does not require the causal powers of the first cause aforesaid. This realization is what makes May (Toru’s nearby neighbor the most hopeful character in the novel. She suggests small transformations and as she had stated in chapter 2 of book 2: "Nothing good happens in this chapter," "The little things are important, Mr. Wind-Up Bird."(188)
I can't pretend to follow all of this, Mehdi, and I think you go a little too far in suggesting the Okadas thought they were gods, but I wholly agree with your point about what we inherit from culture and history being inhibiting factors. Nevertheless, are not Toru, Nutmeg, Lt Mamaiya and May (even the awful NW) examples of self-transforming individuals?
ReplyDeleteTo a certain extent, these characters that you've listed somewhat change during the book but the extent to which Toru is attempting to recreate his soul and mind is far beyond his capacity. As we've seen in the beginning of the novel he really is a clueless character, just roaming around the house, cooking, sleeping and looking for the cat (Wataya) every now and then. Near the end of the book he rejects Norboru Wataya's offer for helping him get back with his wife and even when he's talking to Noboru himself he's enraged by his ways and at this point he seems to be entailed in getting up and dusting himself off (i.e. taking control of his life). He becomes conscious of the fact that his life could be rolling down a hill if he didn't 'settle the dust' with his wife as she is asking for him to divorce her. He must communicate with her, find his feelings before these titular women find it for themselves and keep it. Sure perhaps I might have thought a bit took hard on the gods idea however I thought I might give it a try as it really is just an opinion of mine. Additionally, they didn't explicitly say that they were gods however they implied it through their actions through their passions. The window's space that allows us to enter their mind shows intention to change and I attempted to build on that brick of recreation with what it means to me and its logical probabilities of it happening. One side note, notice how you used the word transformation rather than recreation. Many wouldn't discern this word but it does hold a dissimilar tone and realistic to the character themselves.
ReplyDelete