I have read Haruki Murakami’s new novel, Colorless Tsukuru Tazaki and His Years of Pilgrimage, and I am afraid to say, I didn’t like it as much as his other books. Colourless Tsukuru Tazaki is a young man, part of a group of five friends in high school, who suddenly finds himself excommunicated from the group. Sixteen years later, Tsukuru visits his three remaining ex-friends, to find out why they had stopped talking to him back then. The book is mostly a narrative of Tsukuru’s visits to his three friends. On the back of it, a love-story is unfolding between Tsukuru and Sara, a young friend of his who is encouraging Tsukuru to find out more about his excommunication. The book has all the traits that distinguish Murakami’s writing style: the metaphors, the existential crises, the...
I just finished reading Donna Tartt’s third and latest novel, The Goldfinch. The story is about a young boy who lost his mother during a terrorist attack in a New York museum. ‘The Goldfinch’ is a painting stolen from the museum by the thirteen year old boy who survived the attack. The painting becomes the secret that gives meaning to his life and the axis around which the story unfolds.
This post inevitably includes spoilers. These spoilers will not be enough to destroy the movie for you, since I will not discuss the ending of the movie. The main purpose of this post, is to discuss the flawed ideological assumptions underpinning the movie.
Last night we watched Prometheus. I didn’t like the end because it was open to two conflicting interpretations. The first one was that there is an evolution of creation that leads back to God: humans are created by the alien people, which in turn are created by someone else, hinting towards the existence of an ultimate creator, God. The other one was that there is no creator, and the existence of God is just the thing that keeps the woman-survivor sane; in this interpretation, God is understood as a weakness of humans.