Post by Alan Wong on Nov 17, 2015 23:13:50 GMT
Reading this story left me somewhat confused, but since it was written by Murakami, it was probably to be expected. As a whole, I interpreted the story in two ways. The first was that it dealt with the fragility of the human schema (a structure of preexisting knowledge which frames how you perceive things). The second was that the story was a criticism of the modernist viewpoint, which tends to lean towards the pragmatic and away from the unprovable (for example, religion or cultural practices). I did not interpret the vanishing of the elephant in a literal sense, but more as something representing occcurrences which are completely unexpected and yet, inevitably happen from time to time. The elephant itself could represent something very important or something that everybody takes for granted. In fact, it was reminiscent of the phrase "elephant in the room," which is used to describe when there is something extremely obvious not being mentioned or dealt with, despite everybody knowing about it.
The choice to use the word pragmatic was an interesting one. The narrator said, "I continue...in the pragmatic world, based on after-images of memories I retain from that world" (p.416). A person who is pragmatic goes through life thinking about how to deal with things in a logical and realistic way. For the narrator, it is almost as if his entire world was shattered and the only way he can continue to function is by latching on to the fragments of the world he used to live in. Ironically, the narrator can't face the reality of the vanishing elephant (and thus is not being pragmatic) all because of how pragmatic he originally was.
Discussion Question: How do you interpret the last lines of the story, "The elephant and the keeper have vanished. They will never be coming back" (p.416)?
The choice to use the word pragmatic was an interesting one. The narrator said, "I continue...in the pragmatic world, based on after-images of memories I retain from that world" (p.416). A person who is pragmatic goes through life thinking about how to deal with things in a logical and realistic way. For the narrator, it is almost as if his entire world was shattered and the only way he can continue to function is by latching on to the fragments of the world he used to live in. Ironically, the narrator can't face the reality of the vanishing elephant (and thus is not being pragmatic) all because of how pragmatic he originally was.
Discussion Question: How do you interpret the last lines of the story, "The elephant and the keeper have vanished. They will never be coming back" (p.416)?