Seriously?

He's like Kafka in as much as some of his books have people who feel unfree.

I guess you could argue Never Let Me Go is Kafkaesque, but even that is a real stretch. Although the characters do feel trapped, there's not the same heavy atmosphere of hopelessness, one in which an identity is stripped away. The bulk of Never Let Me Go is a positive search for identity, even if it is ultimately lacking in meaning, not a negative removal of an existing identity due to an oppressive and suffocating system.

The initial mystery and slow reveal of the purpose of the donors isn't very Kafkaesque either - in Kafka's writing, the complete lack of explanation or justification is pivotal.

I have nothing for the Proust comparison though, that one perplexes me.

He's at least slightly reminiscent of Austen for me but 1/3 isn't great for a comparison

proust interested in nostalgia memory
ishiguro interested in nostalgia memory

that's litterally it

the unconsoled is extremely kafkaesque

Not close to their level, no. But fairly decent. I guess she meant just the sort of writing he does.

Who is this guy and why is he being talked about all of a sudden? Death?

>Has anyone read this guy?

Another literal who only picked because he was Asian

Haven't read that unfortunately, is it worth a go?

it's by far his best book

He won the Nobel Prize in Literature today.

Have you even read any of his work?

Kek, but they can't be blamed for those ones given their publishing history.

>Proust
>Kafka
>Austen

None of these writers have anything remotely in common.

No one said they did

>>"If you mix Jane Austen and Franz Kafka, then you have Kazuo Ishiguro in a nutshell — but you have to add a little bit of Marcel Proust into the mix." - Sarah Danius of Swedish Academy
Why do we take women seriously in the current year?

Therefore I can't imagine how a writer could possibly be a mix of those three. If someone said Austen, James, Eliot, and Conrad to describe a writer, that would be plausible, but not those three.

>Has anyone read this guy?
Would be very interested in Veeky Forums demographics. There are some people in the varied cords and goodreads groups that have been improving themselves for years, but the vast majority of people here seem to have read a "classic" in college and migrated here for a weekend.

hey i have a great idea for you...
how about....
...ok you might want to sit down for this one...
reading one of his books?
wild, right?

what's your point user?

I don't need to read his books to see how that's an implausible combination of writers because I've already read Austen, Kafka and Proust. You need to go back to troll school.

a mix means he has distinct qualities of all three, that doesn't imply any relation between them, you stupid cunt

Mix, qualities, whatever you want to call it, there's no way he could embody those three writers in any way. They're too removed in theme and style.

The Unconsoled is gud guise. That’s why he gets compared to Kafka. I don’t love his other stuff (read remains of the day I school and Never Let me Go on my own as a teen) but The Unconsoled will stand as his best book I think.

you sound retarded

A great writer is not comparable to previous great names, they are their own thing. You wouldn't say Proust is a mix of Flaubert and De Quincey with a hint of Maupassant (random names for the example).

reading must be hard for you

Are you fucking stupid? Shut the FUCK up!

kafka bois BTFO

There's nothing retarded about my argument, although samefagging is pretty retarded.

Have you read The Unconsoled?

You should know, faggot. Hang yourself or go back to plebbit.

you dont read much do you

That only shows how pathetic your responses are that you both look exactly the same.

>plebbit
Never been on reddit, but gee, if you think daily threads about Shitstoyevsky and meme post-modern novelists is quality, you need to go to university and quit the vidya for awhile.

I'm already going to uni, physics student desu. I've never made a thread about Dosto, only read Notes from the Underground so far. Anything else you want help with? That's a lot of retardation and projecting in a few posts, why don't you hang yourself my man?

Why don't you pretend that your pocket knife is your daddy's dick and choke on it? Inbred fag

Ok tryhard edgelords, I'm not the only one in this thread who has said or implied the same thing. See the following: Not sure where these b-tier posts are coming from but there's certainly been a wave of shit on this board of late. Anyhow, I have no idea why you're so hellbent on proving I'm wrong for saying no author could possibly mix those three writers. If you had read them, you would know how absurd it would sound. Maybe I should tell you it's a bit like mixing Assassin's Creed, Starcraft, GTA, and WoW all in one?

Let me know how teaching high school physics or bagging groceries works out for you.

>you couldn't possibly mix gta and asscreeds

you're retarded

>I should tell you it's a bit like mixing Assassin's Creed, Starcraft, GTA, and WoW all in one?
I should tell you to quit the vidya for a while. You're not making any worthwhile arguments and you're getting called out for it. If it triggers you, leave the thread.

Explain why an authors influences can't be wide and or diverse other than it doesn't sound right. Long flowing sentences, alienation, memory. Wow impossible.

Open world Sci Fi w/ parkour

Ez.

You don't need a potpourri of favorite writers from disparate groups to have those qualities in your work. Most authors belong to a single tradition that can be identified in a constellation of similar writers.

A Proust and Austen marriage seems rather off. One, the druggie writing about decadence in fin-de-siecle France while the other in the prim-and-proper Regency period writing about upper class marriages. And then somehow you have to yoke them with the neurotic factory manager from the Austro-Hungarian Empire writing Biblical parables about bureaucracy, cockroaches and plainclothes policemen dragging you into dark alleys.

Yeah, I can TOTALLY imagine a writer who brings that all together.

It's actually not inaccurate.
Perhaps making him sound like he's some sort of literary Frenkenstein's monster wasn't the best way to go about it, but he's definitely got a bit of Austen's sensibility towards class and feeling (although I'd argue Henry James or Edith Wharton could've been mentioned instead of Austen just as easily), Proust's interest in the construction of memory and Kafka's trapped-with-no-way-out aesthetics.

They could easily describe those qualities you've mentioned without namedropping those authors. I always feel as if that detracts from an authors work when you hear someone say something akin to "he's the greatest satirist since Jonathan Swift" or "her latest novel is a comedy-of-manners in the vein of Austen's best with the gritty, pulp cynicism of Chandler's noir detectives." Such shit grates me.

This... all these "they're like X and Y and Z!" statements about artists are so dumb that only the idiots who actually respond to marketing slogans would believe it.

Sperg-tastic analysis.

It was a typo. She meant Kefka.

That's true, it's grating, but I understand why they do it. Plebs have a hard time choosing new authors to read, so recommending them something based on names they know gets them to buy the books.

>all together
>all
>still. making. the. same. error.

>mouthbreathing intensifies
>S-s-s-s-s-PERG TASTIC.....
>uhmmm errhrhrhrh
>........ANALYSIS!

Not an argument. Heh-heh. Nothing personnel, kid.

>Look, plebbitors, today we've prepared you another episode of how to read a dictionary, the special retard edition (tm)!

I don't understand who comes to this board anymore. Have you honestly never read him before? Some people here are claiming to have never even heard of him and I just find this so hard to believe. How do you claim to be passionate about literature but have never read or perhaps even heard of Remains of the Day? I just don't buy it

Wew lad, spicy

i'm a filthy crossboarder who comes to Veeky Forums when something major happens related to books. otherwise i only read comics.

Ishiguro is a fantastic writer. A Village After Dark is one of my favourite short stories ever:

newyorker.com/magazine/2001/05/21/a-village-after-dark

I'm a canonfag who rarely reads anything written after 1950. Also I'm in grad school, which winds up generating the same result.

>all at the same place
you sure showed me woweee trips comfirm subscribe to my newsletter but dont make subrddt

So intelligent, nihilstic and with a wicked sense of humor?

No, that's Kafka.

I found The Buried Giant a little heavy-handed at times but definitely enjoyed it. It has an very unnerving atmosphere that builds subtly to some quite memorable scenes near the end. The reviews tended to focus on some of the most surface level metaphors, which were made worse by over-reading. Good as a sort of aimless, dark fantasy. Haven't read any of his others yet.

Also, I think Nobel is by nature targeted more at
NY Times tier lit -- it's silly to expect them to exactly match board taste and have something clever to say about it. It's a sort of randomized reflection of what people found meaningful that year, and his novels are consistently popular and seem to be at least consistently above normie tier. Based on the authors listed above who didn't win, that seems to be about as high praise as you can get before you start being one of those canon authors who never quite won...

I enjoyed Never Let Me Go, any other works of his you'd recommend? What are your actual thoughts on him as a writer without comparing him to everyone who was snubbed?

>i read for the plot: the post