INTERVIEW WITH SHIMADA MASAHIKO FROM 2000

This interview was conducted in Melbourne, on 18/5/00. Shimada Masahiko is one of a number of contemporary Japanese writers of fiction with whom Yoshimoto is often associated such as Murakami Haruki and Yamada Amy. As well as participating in the 2000 Sydney Writers Festival, Shimada also visited Melbourne to present a lecture entitled ‘The Dream of a Free Person: Talking about Suburbs, Suicide and Capitalism’ at the Readers’ Feast Bookstore. This interview gave me a chance to hear from a writer, as opposed to literary critic, about the reasons for Yoshimoto’s literary success.

1. Kitchen was now published ten years ago. How did you react to it at the time it was published? Has your thinking about Kitchen changed over the last ten years?

Over the last ten years Yoshimoto has published lots of books. One comment I would make is that, Yoshimoto writes about themes such as sadness and happiness, very simple emotions which have been central to Japanese literature since the Heian Period and Sei Shonagon. In the Edo Period, Modori Norinaga, in a discussion about karagokoro (Chinese logic) and mono no aware (Japanese emotions), said that in Japanese literature there is a long tradition of expressing mono no aware. And yet there are many people who say that novels based on logic have taken over from those based on mono no aware. It is strange that in Japan mono no aware novels don’t sell, isn’t it?

2. What promise did Kitchen show at the time of its publication? Has this promise been fulfilled by Yoshimoto? In which novels do you feel this promise has been most fulfilled?

At first Yoshimoto sold lots of books, it would have been good if I had been able to buy shares. She has lots of secretaries and translators and she is researching about Argentina. Since Kitchen there has been some debate as to whether she would be able to continue writing.

3. In this thesis I am comparing Yoshimoto’s fiction with novels by Murakami Haruki, Murakami Ryu and Shimada Masahiko. Do you think that this group (the shinjinrui) represents contemporary Japanese fiction? If so, what do they represent about the thinking and attitudes of contemporary Japanese people?

The term shinjinrui is no longer used. If you use that term you will be laughed at.

Murakami Ryu is like a stock dealer, he latches on to emerging themes and social issues faster than anyone else and also manages to write about them very quickly. That is his strength. He is like a journalist. He reflects the thinking of the people at that time. But it would be better to explore things that people don’t already know. If you reflect the thinking of Japanese people today, as it is now, you will miss the boat. Reflecting the times is the job of the journalist not the novelist. But he is an excellent journalist.

Murakami Haruki is very complicated. He writes about contemporary themes but he doesn’t attempt to provide any answers to any of the questions that he raises. The stories always have ambiguous endings. His conclusion is always that there is no suitable solution to the problem. Within that circumstance he will tell a romantic story and he has many readers.

4. Oe Kenzaburo has been critical of the shinjinrui saying that they are not serious enough. He fears that contemporary fiction will leave only a ‘few objects like cars, TVs and microcomputers’ behind. Do you think that this criticism is warranted?

That comment was made nine years ago and the thinking at that time is now anachronistic. It was just an old person’s cliché in denial. In relation to technology and literature, Oe Kenzaburo learnt how to use a fax machine for the first time about six years ago. He thought he was keeping up with the times.

5. Contemporary classical music (such as that of Steve Reich) is competing against music from the past and is experimenting with sound through sampling and other new technologies. Is contemporary fiction being influenced by similar factors?

The writer has to do all they can to find a readership. They have to create their own readership. The writer has to establish a new communication with this readership. There are various efforts that need to be made. At the moment the biggest selling books, or the easiest books for a publisher to sell, are mysteries. There is a big market for these books.

6. If the novel is being aimed at a wider audience, does this mean that the standards of literature are being lowered or is the awareness of the public being raised?

Compared to twenty years ago, thirty years ago, the number of readers has increased. But what the reader is interested in has changed. The number of people who think that literature should entertain has increased whilst the number of people who think that literature must be high quality and contain new philosophies has decreased.

7. What has been the greater need for Japanese novelists since the Meiji Period, the need to explain Japan to Japanese people or the need to explain Japan to an international audience?

Japanese people don’t really need Japan to be explained to them do they? They understand their own times and the common debates of their own times. But for foreigners the context needs to be explained. But to take that to extremes it is related to what kind of language is the Japanese language? How do you teach the Japanese language well? To explain these things you need to have a strong framework or logic to do it in. Amongst Japanese it is not necessary to have such a framework. But when you are talking to people who do not understand Japanese very well if you want to explain how Japanese people think you have to invent such a framework to do this in. There is a big gap I think.

8. In a newspaper interview (Yomiuri Shimbun) in 1995 you said that 80% of contemporary Japanese writers are writing in an orthodox Japanese style. How would you define the ‘orthodox’ Japanese style? Is such orthodoxy possible in the global market?

Under foreign influences we need to reform the Japanese language. There are not many people who are aware of this I think. We need to communicate in Japanese but also we need to consider how we represent Japan and what metaphor should we use to represent Japan. Should we use technology? Should we use tradition? Maybe we should use the romance genre?

When the average person writes a novel they fall into certain categories. There are only percent of writers who do not fall into these categories. Previously you chose the category that you will use and then wrote about Japan. But there are Japanese people who have been forgotten about in Japan, there is a forgotten Japan that nobody can find and a Japan that has not yet been discovered. Only 20 per cent of Japanese writers are working hard in the language to find the answers to these questions.

9. Are contemporary Japanese novelists free from the need to explain Japan or is this still a function of Japanese literature?

Yes, very much so because politicians misrepresent the country. It should not become misunderstood. If they were journalists, Japan wouldn’t be misunderstood would it?

10. In this environment, how would you define the difference between literature and fiction and literature? What category would you put Yoshimoto Banana into?

Let’s think about history and the novel for a while. History is about facts and the collection of those facts that come to the surface.  Lack of historical material can be a problem. In a novel, invention or the use of the imagination is allowed. In history there is a plot. Historical plot is determined by the method of interpretation. The plot of a novel is determined by how the novel is going to entertain the reader, and what information is going to be provided to the reader. Therefore history and the novel are very different.

Of course literature includes history. The novel is also included in literature. And within the novel, fiction is a genre of literature… Romance…. Satire… Much data is collected like in an encyclopedia…. There are numerous genres. Banana writes fiction.