In Japan they prefer the realistic style. They like answers and conclusions, but my stories have none. I want to leave them wide open to every possibility. I think my readers understand that openness.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
I have no models in Japanese literature. I created my own style, my own way.
My style is colloquial storytelling. It's the way we tell stories to one another - it's not writerly, it's not overdone.
The bright future is that readers are accepting more varied forms of stories.
I would rather read a poorly structured story that has fresh ideas than a tightly structured one with cliches.
I suspect that we get used to particular sorts of stories being presented in particular sorts of ways, and we're so used to interpreting them and understanding what it is they're doing that we think of those forms and styles as faithful, complete depictions of reality.
Some stories don't have a clear beginning, middle and end.
I like it when stories are left open.
Let's say I find a lot of current American fiction too overwritten for my tastes, too self-conscious; I like something that's simpler and more direct. The story is what matters to me. I hope to make it seem real to readers, as if it happened just like this - so I don't want fancy descriptions getting in the way.
The marketplace tells us that good, visceral storytelling has a place. But there are lots of questions about the format that stories take.
It's always hard, when introducing readers to a new world/set of rules, not to lay it all out manual-style in the opening chapters but make sure to put the action and the characters at the front. If people don't become invested in them and in the story, the world in which it's set will become a burden.
No opposing quotes found.