Tournament of Books discussion

space to discuss TOB 2022 contender Intimacies by Katie Kitamura

Just finished this on audio--found myself a little meh on it. What I enjoyed I really enjoyed, mainly the work as a translator and the trial of the ex president. The rest I could take or leave and found them mainly distractions.

Bob wrote: "Just finished this on audio--found myself a little meh on it. What I enjoyed I really enjoyed, mainly the work as a translator and the trial of the ex president. The rest I could take or leave ..."

I wonder how much of that is due to the format. I haven't listened to a lot of audio books, so I'm not speaking with any expertise, but this seemed like the kind of book you had to inhabit a little more. I'd think an audio book would emphasize narrative (the trial work), but the book really comes alive when you have the space to think about the different intimacies revealed in the text. When I think about the book and what I liked about it, the trial (except for how the accused managed his relationships with various people) fades into the wallpaper. (More when we get to the tourney.)

This was definitely one of my favorites, but for readers who need a propulsive plot line, this won't be for you.

I read Intimacies and liked it a lot. I just listened to the audio sample on Audible and it immediately struck me how important it is for this narrator to speak through your own mind - to hear your own version of her voice. Having another human speak for her didn't work for me - there's a loss of intimacy that spoils it. And makes me realize how important the title is ......

Tim wrote: "for readers who need a propulsive plot line, this won't be for you"

I don't always need one but I feel like it hurt my appreciation in this instance. Same holds for Matrix.

I think this book really works as a meditation on intimacy in all its different forms, something I hadn't considered in any depth before. I read it, and it definitely drew me in and wrapped me in the narrator's world. I'm still thinking about it.

I read this a few months ago and still remember intensely how it felt. Like others are saying, print is really the way to go for this, taking the time to let it seep in. I felt so unsettled all the way through, partly the narrator's forced intimacy with the President and the horrors there, partly her feeling of not belonging anywhere and never really being sure what's going on, there was this underlying feeling throughout of things somehow not being right. It was masterful to me, how Kitamura kept that so subtle. I didn't enjoy reading this book at all, but I'm a little in awe of it. (I feel the same way about All's Well, similarly because of the way it's making me feel while I read.)

I'm about 3/4 through and am thinking that I might have liked it better if I'd listened to it, since what's bothering me the most is a stylistic issue -- what is with the commas? Was anyone else who read it in print bothered by the incorrect usage of commas, making sentences seem or read as run-on?

Yes! I loved Intimacies, but was unpleasantly distracted by all the comma splices (when a writer uses a comma to join two independent clauses without using a conjunction to link them). This was my daughter’s most common grammatical mistake all through school, so I am particularly sensitive to them. I came across this on the MLA website:

“Comma splices are also acceptable in fiction. In dialogue and first-person narration, for example, a character might be excited or upset and thus speak in a rush. The minimal pause conveyed by a comma can clarify sentence structure while conveying the character’s state of mind. Or the author’s style might use splices frequently for some other effect.”

So maybe she was going for a certain effect?

Did this narrator seem like a person who speaks and/or thinks in a rush? I don't think so. I think it's just bad writing that was allowed, for some reason.

Gosh, this really didn't bother me. I just went back into my copy, to try to find examples, and all of the sentences just flowed nicely for me. But then I realized (reading this comment, as well as my comment above) that this is kind of the way I write too, ha.

Hmmmm. If I still had a copy, I could find an example on every page, in every paragraph. It was consistent.

Ellen wrote: "Hmmmm. If I still had a copy, I could find an example on every page, in every paragraph. It was consistent."

I didn't notice this at all. I also often don't notice the lack of quotation marks in books if I am invested in the narrative. But if it is a book that I am not really enjoying, I totally notice their absence and it usually bothers me.

Ellen wrote: "Did this narrator seem like a person who speaks and/or thinks in a rush? I don't think so. I think it's just bad writing that was allowed, for some reason."

I think you are probably wrong about that. The use of comma splices created the sense that we were getting interior monologue - the narrators unfiltered thoughts - rather than the formulation of an omniscient narrator. I don't think there can be any question that it was done intentionally and for effect. We've seen that kind of thing over and over again in the tournament (often with how dialogue is handled) - think about the stylistic quirks of =Black Wave= for example, and the deliberateness with which they were employed.

It's okay not to like it, and it doesn't disqualify you as a reader that you found it annoying. But I don't think there is any reason to believe that it was a mistake and not an artistic decision.

Somewhat related, Lark has talked about feeling music in reading and writing, I forget the words they used, but it was implying they feel the beat in the text. I also have a musical background, and have to end paragraphs (and especially sections) with a certain rhythm, or it just feels unsettling. I feel pauses from commas and periods differently, and often a sentence break--though it might make the text easier to read--just feels too abrupt within the flow. It's how I'm feeling this paragraph, like I have to add these words in order for the rhythm to feel right. And I couldn't have used the word "correct" in the last sentence, because that would have thrown off my beat.

The rhythm authors use is part of their voice, and often very unique to them. Maybe not "purposeful" in that they think, "Oh I want this to feel unfiltered and rushed, so now I'll add a lot of commas!" But not a mistake or editing issue either.

Elizabeth wrote: "Somewhat related, Lark has talked about feeling music in reading and writing, I forget the words they used, but it was implying they feel the beat in the text. I also have a musical background, and..."

What a fascinating post, Elizabeth! After almost 60 years of reading, you've given me a whole new way to feel about it - I can feel it in your post!

Tim wrote: " I haven't listened to a lot of audio books, so I'm not speaking with any expertise, but this seemed like the kind of book you had to inhabit a little more. I'd think an audio book would emphasize narrative (the trial work), but the book really comes alive when you have the space to think about the different intimacies revealed in the text..."

I agree completely with this perspective. I listen to a lot of audio and remember noting that I would not be enjoying it anywhere near as much if I'd been listening. I didn't really think through why that was... but spending time with the text and pausing, I suppose, it what I needed.

This was a 5 star read for me. It crept up on and surprised me. When I started I thought it would be good but not great, but then it was.

Jen wrote: "This was a 5 star read for me. It crept up on and surprised me. When I started I thought it would be good but not great, but then it was. ."

Even towards the end I was feeling like it was a good read but not great. But by the end, and as I thought about it after finishing, it had a quiet burn that really struck me.

A quick burn of a novel. One which makes the desire to be understood, as well the the desire to understand, a very sexy and thrilling thing.

I loved this novel too and wasn’t bothered by the commas at all. Like Elizabeth notes, there is a certain rhythm to writing. This novel’s language has a consistent beat and cadence throughout. To me, it felt like a steady calm stream of water. Very introspective but also powerful and somewhat dangerous (as if there were obstacles hidden beneath the surface).

I feel a certain rhythm strongly when I write myself (I also have a musical background). For me, the rhythm comes out in certain dependent phrases that I often use as standalone sentences as well as parentheticals (I can’t seem to write without them). I’m not saying it’s good, but it is personal and very difficult to deviate from.

As for this novel, I loved the everyday intimacies that are highlighted throughout. These are the glancing intimacies that many of us with full and busy lives wouldn’t necessarily notice. This book has me paying more attention to my daily interactions, and I love that.

I thought the runon sentences in this book bugged me, then I started reading a book by Jose Saramago, suffice to say that he puts Kitamara to shame when it comes to runons, it's almost like he doesn't want a sentence to end, some of his sentences take up to half a page when they really should be several separate thoughts, and hey, this guy won a Nobel, so I suppose sentence structure doesn't matter, in any case this book is a minor offender in this regard, also I wouldn't really recommend Saramago's "Baltazar and Blimunda", but I'm only halfway through, it might get better, we'll have to see.

Well done with that sentence Kyle. :)

Ha! Kyle, love that! I liked that particular Saramago book, and I don’t remember being bothered by the sentence structure. Funny how different people react differently to the same books. That’s part of what I love about this group.

Gwendolyn wrote: "Funny how different people react differently to the same books. That’s part of what I love about this group."

I read Intimacies several months ago, and I have no memory of run-on sentences at all - I guess I just ran with it :)

Kyle, I remember seeing 'Balthasar and Blimunda' on the new book shelf at the library when I was a grad student in 1987 and I loved the book description. I made a little mental 'note to self' and then promptly forgot the title. For the next 33 years I racked my brain to find remember that 2-name title, and finally had my ah-ha moment in 2020! I bought it and started to read immediately. It felt impenetrable, but I will try again - I refuse to rain on my romantic parade with this book! Gwendolyn, thanks for the encouragement :)

It's winning me over, but seeing the half-page-long sentences (and one, I think, that spans about 4-5 pages) definitely reminded me of this discussion.

And yeah, it's far more of an effort to get through than anything this tourney has offered. I'm stubborn, though.

The audiobook is a perfect narrator fit to the author's voice IMO. I was completely unaware of run-on's or commas separating the narrative... the book is both very internal and observative. Knowing the author from A Separation, it felt very familiar to me though the subjects could not be further apart. She has a distance to her MC's that still illumines a yearning for connection.

I am unhappy about the ending, but it might be due to feeling I've made the same decision as the MC in earlier parts of my life.

Amy wrote: "The audiobook is a perfect narrator fit to the author's voice IMO. I was completely unaware of run-on's or commas separating the narrative... the book is both very internal and observative. Knowing..."

Yes that's one of the drawbacks of audiobooks for me, you don't get the author's punctuation choices, - and who was it that said style is punctuation? Imagine my surprise after listening to Girl, Woman, Other on audio and then later opening a hard copy to see the book's unconventional mechanics.

But one good thing imo with audio format on this one is that you didn't have to deal with the annoying lack of quotation marks for speaking parts!

I just finished this one, and I'm feeling very meh about it. I didn't love it, I didn't hate it.

I was deeply annoyed at the lack of quotation marks (so much so that I apparently didn't even notice the comma splices). I tried the audiobook, but I did not like the narrator's style, she sounded like a computer voice.

Kitamura does a great job of creating complex characters and giving a fantastic sense of place. I definitely felt the bewilderment that the nameless protagonist felt. The problem is, that's all I felt.

I have similar feelings as those already mentioned. The comma splices drove me crazy and distracted me from the otherwise good writing. I almost stopped reading because of that. If I'd had a copy of the audiobook, I definitely would have switched over just to avoid having the read those comma splices.

I liked the parts about the trial and the Hague but I didn't care for the personal relationship drama. I get that it was commenting on intimacies in personal and professional life and how crazy it was that she was learning the gruesome details of the trial and then going home to live her life as usual. But I really hated that married guy and started disliking the main female character for being so dense that she would open herself up to being hurt by such an obviously messy situation and less than honest guy... over and over again.

I did like the tone and style. And the general theme. I would read more by this author (or more like listen to- on audiobook). 2.5 stars probably rounded up to 3. Somewhere between meh and I liked it.