1
What is “Murakamiesque” to Americans?
—Considering Americans’ Preference of Haruki
Murakami’s Wind-Up Bird and Kafka—

Introduction“A Wild Haruki Chase: How the World Is Reading and Translating Murakami,” aninternational symposium held at the University of Tokyo in March 2006, did not just mark aturning point in Haruki Murakami’s career as a writer; it demonstrated that the United States
was definitely something in the Worldwide Murakami phenomenon.1

In that cosmopolitan

assembly, with translators of Murakami and literary critics gathered from around the world,
one could easily acknowledge that special emphasis was placed on the participants from theUnited States.

Richard Powers, a contemporary American writer, gave the keynote speech asa representative of all the participants, and Jay Rubin, Professor of East Asian Languages andCivilizations at Harvard University and a translator of Murakami’s works such as The
Wind-Up Bird Chronicle and Norwegian Wood, was also one of five participants representing
the translators in the panel discussion.

The United States is the most responsible for the

English translations of Haruki Murakami’s works. This is not just because those who havetranslated his stories into English so far—Alfred Birnbaum, Jay Rubin, and Philip

1

The symposium was held at the University of Tokyo on March 25, 2006, with twoworkshops following on the next day. Smaller symposiums were also held in Kobe andSapporo on March 29.

2Gabriel—are all American; it is because the U.S. was where the first English translation of
Murakami circulated and remains the English-speaking country where his works are the mostwidely read.
There are some critiques that venture to discuss how Haruki Murakami’s works are readin the United States, but they all pursue the reasons why the American public generally likehis books and do not attempt to consider how each work has been read differently.2

It is

impossible to grasp Murakami’s popularity in America in general terms, however, since
Americans obviously prefer certain works by him: The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle and Kafka on
the Shore.

Therefore, this paper will consider Murakami’s popularity in the U.S. from a newperspective by focusing on how these two works have been read there.
Wind-Up Bird, published in 1997, had been the most widely accepted in the U.S. until
Kafka’s publication there and has often been referred to as Murakami’s masterpiece, which isa phenomenon peculiar to America in contrast to how his Norwegian Wood achieved
enormous popularity in Japan and China.3

When Kafka came to the U.S. in January 2005,

however, it almost seemed to topple Wind-Up Bird’s status as a Murakami masterpiece; Kafka

2

The following are representatives of critiques on Murakami’s reception in the U.S.:
Hirata, Hosea. “Amerika de yomareru murakami haruki: ‘fun’ na taiken.” Kokubungaku
40.4 (1995): 100-104.
Keezing, Michael Fujimoto. “What Makes Him So Good?: An American Writer’s
Perspective on Haruki Murakami.” Trans. Hisayo Ogushi. Eureka 32.4 (1998):
72-75.
Kelts, Roland. “Murakami Haruki ni tsuite kataru toki ni wareware no kataru koto.” Wochi
Kochi 12 (2006): 12-15.
3 Maryles, Daisy. “Behind the Bestsellers: Tokyo’s Treasure.” Publishers Weekly 252(2005): 24.

3
was the first of Murakami’s books to become a national bestseller there.

This seems toindicate that Americans preferred Kafka to Wind-Up Bird, but closer analysis of the reviews of
the former will reveal that even with its success, Kafka lacked something.

The defects ofKafka, whose length and story resemble those of Wind-Up Bird, will prove that in a sense,
Wind-Up Bird is superior to Kafka and thus deserves to be called Murakami’s masterpiece.
Assuming that the advantages of both The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle and Kafka on the Shore
must be what not only American scholars but also the American public expect from Haruki
Murakami, this paper will conclude by suggesting which elements Murakami should include
in his future works to continue being credited in the United States.

Similarities of Wind-Up Bird and Kafka
Before analyzing the advantages and disadvantages of both, it is necessary to consider
what The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle and Kafka on the Shore have in common to fully
understand their differences later.

Although Kafka became a national bestseller in the UnitedStates, an achievement which Wind-Up Bird could never have made and which we will see infurther detail later, one cannot doubt how well the two works resemble each other.
obvious resemblance is their length.

One

Even though it experienced extensive cutting of theoriginal Japanese version, the English version of Wind-Up Bird still consists of at least 600
pages (the paperback has 607 pages), the longest of all Murakami works.

On the other hand,

the hardcover version of Kafka has 436 pages, being the second longest, while the average

4length of a Murakami novel is 300 pages or 400 at the longest.

Thus, both Wind-Up Bird

and Kafka are longer works; the author must have put tremendous efforts in writing them andtried to produce them as works of importance.
The two major works also resemble each other in their surrealism, which is one element
among others that American reviewers found attractive, in contrast to the realism seen in
Norwegian Wood.4

Consider John Updike’s following review: “Haruki Murakami’s new

novel, ‘Kafka on the Shore,’ […] is a real page-turner, as well as an insistently metaphysicalmind-bender” (91). To be reviewed by an important writer like Updike in The New Yorker
itself seems to be an accomplishment, since many other reviews mention this fact.

Thus, notonly does being reviewed by Updike but also the fact that he praises Kafka in this sentenceadds credit to the novel.

Here he uses the term “metaphysical” to explain the surrealism in

Kafka, and tells us how the surrealism has a hallucinatory effect on us.

Surrealism in Kafka

refers to things such as Nakata, one of two protagonists, talking to cats, or fish and leechesfalling from the sky.

Just as Toru Okada goes to a different room through the wall of a wellin The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle, mysterious things happen in Kafka, too, and American
scholars are interested in them.

4

Compared to the realistic Norwegian Wood, Wind-Up Bird

The following reviews point out the realistic nature of Norwegian Wood:
Buruma, Ian. “Becoming Japanese.” New Yorker 72 (1996): 64.
Horvath, Brooke. Rev. of Norwegian Wood, by Haruki Murakami. Review ofContemporary Fiction 13 (1993): 229.
Strecher, Matthew. Dances with Sheep: The Quest for Identity in the Fiction of Murakami
Haruki. Ann Arbor: U of Michigan, 2002. 46.

5
and Kafka clearly resemble each other in their surrealism.

What Kafka Has That Wind-Up Bird Does Not Have
Although similar, The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle and Kafka on the Shore differ greatly inthe fact that the latter achieved what the former did not.

One achievement of Kafka is that it

was the first Murakami work to appear on bestseller lists all over America.

In The San

Francisco Chronicle, for example, not only did the hardcover version of Kafka rank first in
the bestselling fiction list two months after its publication, but it remained there for three
weeks (“San Francisco Chronicle Best-Sellers”).

Moreover, Kafka ranked number six in the

hardcover fiction category of the whole United States in a month, according to Publishers
Weekly (“The Book Sense Lists”).

Considering that the worldwide bestseller, The Da Vinci

Code, ranked second in the same list as Kafka, no one can deny how well Murakami literature
is becoming familiar to Americans.
In addition, the authoritative The New York Times chose Kafka on the Shore as one of“The Ten Best Books of 2005,” another and most remarkable accomplishment of the book.
As a matter of fact, The New York Times had also included The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle in the“Notable Books of the Year” when it was first published in 1997, but had never considered it
as one of the best that year.

To be chosen as one of the best books of the year by theprestigious The New York Times is what only Kafka could accomplish among all Murakami
books published in the United States.

Yet, although Wind-Up Bird was not chosen as one of

6the best of the year, it at least was chosen as one of the notable, and then Kafka was chosen as
one of the best.

Since Norwegian Wood or any other works by Murakami had never done

any of these deeds, this fact itself proves that American critics prefer works such as Kafka on
the Shore or The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle to those like Norwegian Wood.
Then, why did Kafka succeed that much in the United States when it resembles
Wind-Up Bird? One reason for this is that Murakami had by then established himself in
America.

Reviews of Murakami’s works before Kafka almost always included an

introduction of the author, listing his other works to help readers of the reviews remember his
name.

Reviews of Kafka on the Shore, on the other hand, lack an introduction of the author;

instead they incorporate phrases such as, “America’s favorite Japanese novelist” (Moore T06)
or simply say, “Haruki Murakami’s latest novel” (Jones 67) without any explanation of theauthor.

Critics do not have to explain anymore what kind of writer Murakami is or what hewrote in the past; they assume that the readers would recognize him just by saying “Haruki
Murakami.”
As to another reason for Kafka on the Shore’s success, one can easily imagine that
American readers saw something in Kafka that could not be found in The Wind-Up Bird
Chronicle.

The reviews of Kafka point out two main characteristics of the novel, other than

the surrealism found also in Wind-Up Bird.

One is about the exterior structure of the story.

Again, consider the following quote by John Updike:[…] “Kafka on the Shore” has a schematic rigor in its execution.

Alternate

7chapters relate the stories of two disparate but slowly converging heroes.

The

odd-numbered chapters serve up the first-person narrative of a fifteen-year-old
runaway […].

The even-numbered chapters trace […] the life of a mentally

defective sexagenarian, Satoru Nakata. (91)
Saying that Kafka “has a schematic rigor,” Updike explains how the book is made up of astrict framework. Indeed, the story of Kafka Tamura as protagonist and Satoru Nakata as
protagonist turn about in Kafka on the Shore.

Murakami himself said in an interview about

Kafka that he deliberately built the novel in that structure, simply adopting a technique towrite a story (Murakami 12-13).

By contrast, The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle lacks precisenessin structure, since memories, letters, and newspaper articles appear abruptly through thedevelopment of the story.

The American public must have felt it easier to read Kafka thanWind-Up Bird because of the strict framework peculiar to the former.
Another characteristic that American reviewers found in Kafka concerns the story itself.
In the following review, “Murakami takes a gentle bildungsroman, a novel of education, about
the quest for love and autonomy […]” (“Our Editors Recommend” B2), Kafka is explained
literally as a bildungsroman, a story in which the protagonist grows up; in this case it seems torefer to the fifteen-year-old Kafka Tamura growing up through many experiences.

Kafka asbildungsroman and the calculated structure of the novel suggests that so far, Kafka on the
Shore seems to fit perfectly into familiar framework.
However, reviews point out that even the organized Kafka has its faults.

Scott

8
Blackwood, for example, argues that the novel merely displays a large stock of knowledge:
The digressions about philosophy, art, literature and music might inspire thereader to play a Radiohead song or read Sophocles rather than finish “Kafka.”[…] But most readers will feel that too many of these characters are mere props
for metaphysical speculation, rather than genuinely complex personalities. (K5)In Kafka on the Shore, too many literary quotations appear to the point of excess.

The

characters talk over ancient Greek dramas and Greek philosophy or turn their thoughts toward
Beethoven’s life.

On the other hand, it seems that all those talks take place just to introduce

wisdom, instead of representing the characters’ personalities.

The characters are merely

used; instead, the weight is on how much knowledge could be packed into the novel.
Furthermore, Steven G. Kellman implies another defect of Kafka: “A bildungsroman […], it[Kafka on the Shore] proffers wisdom but at least delivers what a character calls ‘a lifetime of
weird stuff packed into ten days’” (143).

Like Blackwood, Kellman admits that Kafka gives

us some kind of knowledge: however, nothing more.

He merely sees Kafka as a novel madeup of strange occurrences, which do not place it as a work of importance.

Since a few otherreviewers say that Kafka cannot be considered as a story with deep connotations (Maslin), one
can conclude that American scholars think Kafka has no further meaning than being a
bildungsroman and cannot be called a profound novel.

What Wind-Up Bird Has That Kafka Does Not Have

9
In addition to the problem of Kafka on the Shore’s defects, interestingly American
reviewers do not seem to think Kafka as Murakami’s best book, in spite of its reputation in the
United States.

Since they had not hesitated to praise The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle as a

Murakami masterpiece, it suggests that Wind-Up Bird must have been superior to Kafka insome sense.

What is it that American reviewers saw in Wind-Up Bird that they did not in

Kafka? The reviews of Wind-Up Bird around the time of its publication demonstrate thatcritics paid attention to the vivid wartime descriptions in the novel:
The new book [The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle] almost self-consciously deals witha wide spectrum of heavy subjects: the transitory nature of romantic love, the evilvacuity of contemporary politics and, most provocative of all, the legacy ofJapan’s violent aggression in World War II. (James BR8, emphasis added)
In contrast to Kafka, having been referred to as a novel without much meaning, Jamie Jamesexplains the problems in Wind-Up Bird as “heavy,” in other words, meaningful.

Especiallythe underlined part shows how he acknowledges significance in the scenes depicting theSecond World War from a Japanese point of view.

Wind-Up Bird depicts with incredible

vividness an event in World War II where a Mongolian peels the entire skin of a Japanesecaptive that slowly leads him toward his death.
shocking description of war.

Kafka, on the other hand, does not include a

Nakata, one of two protagonists in Kafka, becomes disabled inan accident during the Second World War, and two fugitive soldiers who seem to have died in
the same war appear in modern life wearing their uniforms at the time, but Murakami does

10
not give vivid descriptions of the battle.

Unlike Kafka, the impressive wartime descriptions

in Wind-Up Bird that stick to the minds of readers must have been one reason that raised thenovel to its position as a Murakami masterpiece.
Another of Wind-Up Bird’s advantages that we can discover through the faults of Kafka
is that it does not belong to a particular literary genre:
Murakami’s branching, hybrid tale is a love story one minute, a detective story
the next, a psychological thriller, a New Age-ish Bildungsroman, a sober
chronicle of wartime atrocities, a meditation on historical guilt and more, indizzying succession. (Ward X08)
While American scholars considered Kafka as a mere bildungsroman, they had seen Wind-Up
Bird as a novel that seems to fit into every category but at the same time cannot match asingle genre.

Considering that they also saw Kafka as a story based on a strict framework,

we can say that they had found Wind-Up Bird to be a story far more original than Kafka.
Kafka must have been easier to understand because of its simple structure and because of thefact that it can fit into a single category of bildungsroman.

In terms of originality, however,Wind-Up Bird has the upper hand, and this “originality” of the novel turns out to serve as theother element that makes the book a masterpiece.

What is “Murakamiesque” to Americans

11
Kafka on the Shore’s invasion of the American literary society does not exactly topple
The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle’s status as a Haruki Murakami masterpiece there.

Both havetheir own charms; Kafka’s charms seem to have attracted a great many of the American
general public, while those of Wind-Up Bird seem to have rendered it a steadfast position as
Murakami’s most important work.

The advantages of both can be considered as what

exactly Americans expect from Murakami literature, that is, what is “Murakamiesque” toAmericans.
If the author wants his future works not just to sell well but to be regarded highly, and if
Americans still expect the same “Murakamiesque-ness” from his works to come, then
Murakami will simply have to incorporate the charms of both Kafka on the Shore and The
Wind-Up Bird Chronicle into his new books.

First of all, he must write a surreal novel, justlike both Kafka and Wind-Up Bird were surreal; he should not write a realistic novel like
Norwegian Wood anymore.

Second, in adopting the advantage of Kafka, he must

consciously write in some kind of framework; then the readers will find the bookapproachable and consider purchasing it.

He should not, however, bother too much with thestructure, since the consequence might be that the novel lacks importance.

Instead, heshould concentrate in providing the novel with significance, including vivid descriptions ofbattle, for example, like those that appear in Wind-Up Bird.

And finally, as it would be sad if

the new novel were to belong merely to a single category like Kafka, Murakami must pursue
originality unfettered by all literary genres.

If he considers all four advantages of Wind-Up

12
Bird and Kafka—surrealism, structure, meaning, and originality—when writing his novels tocome, his literature may continue to be regarded highly in the American literary world.

Conclusion
This paper considered the reasons why Americans prefer The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle
and Kafka on the Shore among other Haruki Murakami works and revealed what is“Murakamiesque” to them.

Wind-Up Bird and Kafka resemble each other in both theirlength and story; compared to the realistic Norwegian Wood, both are surreal novels.
Although similar, Kafka became a national bestseller in the United States, an accomplishmentthat Wind-Up Bird could never have made.
successful Kafka lacked something.

Some Americans, however, felt that even the

Examining what Americans saw in Wind-Up Bird thatthey did not in Kafka demonstrated that although Kafka seems an approachable novel,
Wind-Up Bird deserves to be called Murakami’s masterpiece.
Analyzing the reviews of Wind-Up Bird and Kafka revealed four elements that
Americans seem to expect from Murakami: surrealism, structure, meaning, and originality.
If the author keeps in mind these elements when writing his future works and if Americans
still expect the same “Murakamiesque-ness” from his works to come, Haruki Murakami may
keep on invading the American literary society; thus this paper is important in suggesting themethods of how he might continue to succeed in the United States.

13
Works Consulted<Primary Sources>
Murakami, Haruki. Kafka on the Shore. Trans. Philip Gabriel. New York: Knopf, 2005.
---. Norwegian Wood. Trans. Jay Rubin. New York: Vintage, 2000.
---. The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle. Trans. Jay Rubin. 1997. New York: Vintage, 1998.
<Secondary Sources>
Adams, Phoebe-Lou. “Brief Reviews.” Rev. of The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle, by Haruki
Murakami. Atlantic Monthly 280 (1997): 165-66.
Barr, Cameron W. “An Author’s Midlife Search for Self and Nation.” Christian Science
Monitor 89 (1997): 12.
Blackwood, Scott. “Therapeutic Surrealism.” Austin American-Statesman 23 Jan. 2005: K5.
Block, Allison. Rev. of Kafka on the Shore, by Haruki Murakami. Booklist 101 (2004): 532.
“The Book Sense Lists: Hardcovers and Trade Paperbacks.” Publishers Weekly.com. 2005.
Publishers Weekly. 1 Sept. 2006 <http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/
CA501186.html>.
Buruma, Ian. “Becoming Japanese.” New Yorker 72 (1996): 60-71.
Cheuse, Alan. “Off the Air.” Rev. of Kafka on the Shore, by Haruki Murakami. World
Literature Today 80.1 (2006): 27.
Chung, Sarah. “Where Fish Fall from the Sky.” LA Weekly 4 Feb. 2005: 35.
Dyer, Richard. “Narrative Drive Sustains Elusive ‘Wind-Up Bird.’” Rev. of The Wind-Up

14
Bird Chronicle, by Haruki Murakami. Boston Globe 14 Jan. 1998, city ed.: D6.
Gregory, Sinda, Toshifumi Miyawaki, and Larry McCaffery. “It Don’t Mean A Thing, If It
Ain’t Got That Swing: An Interview with Haruki Murakami.” Review ofContemporary Fiction 22 (2002): 111-19.
Heller, Amanda. Rev. of Norwegian Wood, by Haruki Murakami. Boston Globe 15 Oct. 2000:
K3.
Hirata, Hosea. “Amerika de yomareru murakami haruki: ‘fun’ na taiken.” Kokubungaku 40.4
(1995): 100-104.
Horvath, Brooke. Rev. of Norwegian Wood, by Haruki Murakami. Review of Contemporary
Fiction 13 (1993): 228-29.
Hower, Edward. “The Salaryman’s Quest.” Rev. of The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle, by Haruki
Murakami. The World & I 13 (1998): 261-66.
Iwamoto, Yoshio. Rev. of Norwegian Wood, by Haruki Murakami. World Literature Today
75 (2001): 321-22.
Iyer, Pico. “Tales of the Living Dead.” Rev. of The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle, by Haruki
Murakami. Time 150 (1997): 114.
James, Jamie. “East Meets West.” Rev. of The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle, by Haruki
Murakami. New York Times 2 Nov. 1997: BR8.
Jones, Malcolm. “The Call of the Wild.” Rev. of Kafka on the Shore, by Haruki Murakami.
Newsweek 145 (2005): 67.

15
Rev. of Kafka on the Shore, by Haruki Murakami. Publishers Weekly 251 (2004): 42.
Kakutani, Michiko. “On a Nightmarish Trek Through History’s Web.” Rev. of The Wind-Up
Bird Chronicle, by Haruki Murakami. New York Times 31 Oct. 1997: E44.
Keezing, Michael Fujimoto. “What Makes Him So Good?: An American Writer’s Perspective
on Haruki Murakami.” Trans. Hisayo Ogushi. Eureka 32.4 (1998): 72-75.
Kellman, Steven G. Rev. of Kafka on the Shore, by Haruki Murakami. Review ofContemporary Fiction 25 (2005): 143.
Kelts, Roland. “Murakami Haruki ni tsuite kataru toki ni wareware no kataru koto.” Wochi
Kochi 12 (2006): 12-15.
Kicinski, Judith. Rev. of Norwegian Wood, by Haruki Murakami. Library Journal 125(2000): 136.
Lange, Alexandra. “Cult Master.” New York 50 (1997): 133-36.
Maryles, Daisy. “Behind the Bestsellers: Tokyo’s Treasure.” Publishers Weekly 252 (2005):
24.
Maslin, Janet. Rev. of Kafka on the Shore, by Haruki Murakami. New York Times 31 Jan.
2005, late ed.: 10.
Miller, Gregory. “Talking About His Generation.” Rev. of Norwegian Wood, by Haruki
Murakami. San Diego Union-Tribune 17 Sept. 2000: 3.
Miller, Laura. “Crossing Over.” Rev. of Kafka on the Shore, by Haruki Murakami. New YorkTimes 6 Feb. 2005, late ed., sec. 7: 1.

16
Moore, Steven. “As the Crow Flies.” Washington Post Book World 30 Jan. 2005, final ed.:T06.
Murakami, Haruki, et al. “Murakami Haruki Umibe no Kafka o Kataru.” Bungakukai. 57.4
(2003): 10-42.
Nimura, Janice P. “Rubber Souls.” Rev. of Norwegian Wood, by Haruki Murakami. New
York Times 24 Sept. 2000, late ed., sec. 7: 7.
Rev. of Norwegian Wood, by Haruki Murakami. Publishers Weekly 247 (2000): 45.
“Notable Books of the Year 1997.” New York Times 7 Dec. 1997, late ed., sec. 7: 58.
Ott, Bill. “Upfront: Advance Reviews.” Rev. of Norwegian Wood, by Haruki Murakami.
Booklist 96 (2000): 1798.
“Our Editors Recommend.” San Francisco Chronicle 13 Feb. 2005, final ed.: B2.
Quan, Shirley N. Rev. of Kafka on the Shore, by Haruki Murakami. Library Journal 130(2005): 99.
Rubin, Jay. Haruki Murakami and the Music of Words. 2003. London: Vintage, 2005.
Samuel, Yoshiko Yokochi. “World Literature in Review: Japan.” Rev. of The Wind-Up Bird
Chronicle, by Haruki Murakami. World Literature Today 73 (1999): 389.

“San Francisco Chronicle Best-Sellers.” SFGate.com. 2005. San Francisco Chronicle. 1 Sept.
2006 <http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/03/20/

17
RVBESTSELLERS.DTL&type=chart>.
Schlack, Julie Wittes. Rev. of Kafka on the Shore, by Haruki Murakami. Boston Globe 17
Jan. 2005, 3rd ed.: C7.
Steinberg, Sybil S., and Jeff Zaleski. “Forecasts: Fiction.” Rev. of The Wind-Up Bird
Chronicle, by Haruki Murakami. Publishers Weekly 244 (1997): 69.
Strecher, Matthew. Dances with Sheep: The Quest for Identity in the Fiction of Murakami
Haruki. Ann Arbor: U of Michigan, 2002.
---. Haruki Murakami’s The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle: A Reader’s Guide. New York:
Continuum, 2002.
---. “Murakami Haruki: Japan’s Coolest Writer Heats Up.” Japan Quarterly 45 (1998):
61-69.
Thomson, David. “A Writer’s Magical Touch.” Rev. of Kafka on the Shore, by Haruki
Murakami. New York Observer 24 Jan. 2005: 21.
Updike, John. “Subconscious Tunnels.” Rev. of Kafka on the Shore, by Haruki Murakami.
New Yorker 80.44 (2005): 91-93.
Ward, Elizabeth. “A Medley of Good and Evil.” Rev. of The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle, by
Haruki Murakami. Washington Post Book World 9 Nov. 1997, final ed.: X08.

Welch, Patricia. “Haruki Murakami’s Storytelling World.” World Literature Today 79 (2005):
55-59.

18
Wood, Michael. “The Roads Not Taken.” New Republic 218 (1998): 49-52.
Wray, John. “Haruki Murakami: The Art of Fiction CLXXXII.” Paris Review 46 (2004):
115-51.
Zane, Peder. “A Writer Who Takes on the World.” News and Observer 8 Oct. 2000, final ed.:G4.