Norwegian Wood discussion

I recently read this wonderful book for a second time. Both times, I found the scene of Reiko describing her seduction/rape extremely disturbing. It had the feel of a dream where you wake up and are unable to move.

Anyway I found myself thinking a lot about Reiko. Later in the story, Toru tells her that he wants to break up with Naoko and asks her advice. Next thing we know, Naoko is dead, with no suicide note, except that her clothes be given to Reiko. Reiko goes to Toru and they sleep together. There are references to her physical resemblance to Naoko (which to me ties in with the mysterious night-time scene where Naoko reveals herself to Toru... could it have actually been Reiko, somehow?) It's almost as though she's taken on Naoko's role in Toru's life. Other posters here have seen that as a positive. But perhaps it's not. Reiko seems to have a great influence on Naoko's life.

Basically this time round I felt that it was possible that Reiko might be the manipulative one. The way in which she describes her student was the way I felt about Reiko the first time round - she seemed like a wonderfully warm and wise character. Maybe she manipulated Naoko into suicide.

Anyway this is probably a very prosaic way of seeing the story (and from a feminist/political standpoint, rather unsavoury as it turns Reiko from a victim into a perpetrator...)

As always I am in awe of the way Murakami's writings have the possibility of being interpreted in so many different ways.

Does anyone have any thoughts?

I think this theory has a lot of merit. When she was telling the story about her pupil, I was really concerned that everyone seemed to just believe her.

I've finished the book recently and I think there is a lot of merit to this now that you have brought up and reminded me again that there was this consistent analogy going on between Naoko and Reiko and how they were supposed to parallel each other: this broken, young, beauty on the course of death vs this older, "washed up" older woman who is able to recoil back towards a better life.

She seemed very detached regarding Naoko's death if you consider how strong their bond must have been, and there definitely is room to infer whether or not how reliable her own account about the scandal with her piano student was.

This theory definitely does raise the questions on how reliable Reiko is as a person (and again, she herself does constantly emphasize how she isn't well) and the creepy implications that Reiko could have wanted to take Naoko's place or BE Naoko -which makes the supposedly platonic scene between her and Toru before she takes off towards the end all the more sinister. I think if you take this as all true, you can see it as that Reiko could have been easily jealous of Naoko's fragility and ability to feel so much emotionally versus her own problems with detachment -yet Reiko finds no difficulty in being sexual while Naoko can't even get aroused.

(Trying to avoid spoiling anything, this is the same sort of sentiments I feel about the Miu character in Murakami's other work, Sputnik Sweetheart, in which she also has a very open-endedness thing about her character as to whether or not you can see her as someone to sympathize with or in actuality, manipulative.)

This is what I definitely enjoy, but also sometimes get frustrated over, with Murakami's open-endedness. And because he does take note of how his writing gets translated, things that probably mean nothing could also mean something and vice versa.

Oh my God I've been searching through the internet only to find any justification of my suspection for Reiko, thought it was only me! and glad to see this discussion so I could pour my thoughts.

Yeah I know right? Readers believe that Reiko is a good one, and its make sense, because Haruki Murakami potrayed her like that. She helps Naoko like A LOT! She even tried to make something work on Toru & Naoko relationship.
But somehow, that is not make sense for me..

@J , I feel you too!
I feel like somehow Reiko is the one who manipulate everything, she doesnt really care about Naoko. Well, maybe she is, but that is not much as much she love herself.

I feel like she is full of herself. From the beginning of the part where Toru visited Naoko, she just never want to get off of they two!
I mean like, hey, Toru and Naoko had not seeing each other for a really long time, and yet she came up with an excuse to be always around them, she took most of the time where Toru and Naoko should spend their time together, only just the two of them.

And also yes, at the end of the story I'm feeling kind of weird when they're finally had sex. And it seems like Reiko had wanted it for a long time since she met Toru.

Well okay, forgive all my negative thoughts about Reiko, this just the way I describe my feeling towards the character! :D
Maybe I'm just overly 'attached' with the character of Toru and Naoko, and somehow felt a bit of jealousy, if you know what I mean.

And P.S. : I actually found this book awesome. So no hatred! :D

I was thinking the same thing when Reiko was first introduced. She was creepy and she had a twisted view of things, and she seemed to be manipulative.

The worst thing she may have done however is to convince TW that Naoko never loved him. I think it's clear from their interactions that she did, but somehow Reiko twists this.

Definitely don't think she had any role in Naoko's suicide. I think she had had her mind set on it during first visit in the mountain.

This is an extremely interesting interpretation, Reiko is certainly more important to the story than i believe she is made out to be. She is the one that plays the titular Norwegian Wood after all, it is most associated with her character

Now this is an interesting theory. Maybe I/Toru was also manipulated by Reiko as I haven't looked to her story in different angles. I just followed what she said.

I also had suspicions that Reiko twisted the rape story and made Toru believe her so she can feel good about herself. Thus, giving her an assurance that she did nothing wrong and/or Toru won't have an opportunity to find out what really happened because Toru won't really bother! They're in a sanatorium after all. She can go all out defensive to justify her actions. Remember when Reiko divided the story into 2 parts? Because she needs time to invent more!

That's my theory though. :p This is my 2nd Murakami book and rated it 2 stars. I think it's time to review the story again.

Interesting observation, I'd never suspected Reiko could be evil or manipulative. Although their sex scene is objectively a very strange occurrence, it somehow seems to make sense.

I think it's going too far to say she manipulated Naoko into suicide, but your theory made me realise that with characters in Murakami's works I've never really questioned their integrity since they (especially the main characters) tend to be quite apathetic and passive, and thus seem as if they would not have the motives nor the drive to lie or manipulate.

By the way, I'm curious you rated the novel 1 star while making the effort to re-read it and call it 'wonderful' :)

The note was weirdly specific, but it's not like she needed the clothes, or Naoko's place in life outside. If Murakami truly gave us a hint through her story that she was herself a pathological liar, we also were given the hint about things not adding up as a way to find out about it, I think it would be more apparent. Besides, the kid from her story was someone people admired and wanted to believe to, while Reiko was presented as a woman who had a sexual interaction with a thirteen year old girl, hardly a sympathetic position to be in, even if she didn't consent to it.

Putri wrote: "I feel like she is full of herself. From the beginning of the part where Toru visited Naoko, she just never want to get off of they two!"

She states that the doctors managing the clinic put her constant surveillance as a condition to Toru's ability to visit Naoko. And it's not like Toru doesn't appreciate that there is someone there ready to help Naoko in a different way than the one he could come up with (sex, which would have been ineffective at that point).

Cagne wrote: "The note was weirdly specific, but it's not like she needed the clothes, or Naoko's place in life outside. If Murakami truly gave us a hint through her story that she was herself a pathological lia..."

The thing that troubles me is it is Reiko who says the sanatorium's policy, not a doctor. So we have to trust Reiko is telling the truth. There's no verifiable lie that she tells Toru that would suggest she is manipulative, but her ubiquity and even desire to monopolize Toru's time interfered with Toru's and Naoko's relationship.

Ah ah, one could say this desire to push all the (partial) responsibility of Naoko's death from mostly Kizuki to mostly Reiko might be deeply rooted misogyny.

In Naoki's last letters to Toru, she talks about Reiko badgering her about writing to Toru and her bad job on the sweater. At the time I didn't think much of it, but it did give me pause. Like, "that's a little harsh, Reiko!" I also felt that there was something not quite about how Naoko became more and more dependent on Reiko, and how Reiko came to replace Toru as Naoko's connection to the outside world.

I could definitely see this theory being accurate. Toru is someone who hasn't dealt with a lot of manipulation, and so would have trouble spotting it.

Interesting interpretation!

Oh my. You have now opened a whole new way of thinking about Reiko for me. I guess now I'll have to reread the book.

To be honest, I would probably never thought of that. I was just too impressed with everything that's been happening around Naoko and Tóru that I wasn't paying attention to Reiko to that extent. But as I read your comment on this I suddently actually can see it. Was Reiko really the evil? Murakami is awesome and his books are really to be interpreted in many ways. Maybe it was really all Reiko's fault?
As we know, it was mostly Reiko who made Naoko stay in Ami for that long (at least that's the way I see it). And it may even be possible that it was her who kind of led her to suicide.
I guess we will never know. But we can find little clues here and there in the book.
I can't wait to read the book for the second time, maybe I'll find something I haven't noticed at first.

J wrote: "I recently read this wonderful book for a second time. Both times, I found the scene of Reiko describing her seduction/rape extremely disturbing. It had the feel of a dream where you wake up and ar..."
J, I went back and read the first chapter after finishing the book (I had to read this author's "After Dark" twice in a row to get it) and there were answers there to questions I had. But about Reiko, as far as we know, Reiko never met Vizuki (spelling?) the early character who killed himself. And I think he killed himself because of Naoko's inability to love anyone. And at the end of the first chapter, Turo, on his way to meet Watanabe in Germany, admits that Naoko never loved him. Reiko may indeed nurse this disability within Naoko, Reiko in fact may understand and have the same disability (remember the scene in which they tried, and failed, to make love with each other). I'm highly suspicious of the facility in which Reiko and Naoko live. We never really learn who, exactly, are the "patients" or the "doctors".

Tery wrote: "To be honest, I would probably never thought of that. I was just too impressed with everything that's been happening around Naoko and Tóru that I wasn't paying attention to Reiko to that extent. Bu..."
Tery, you may find that you only need to read the first chapter again to find answers. The BIG answer is there, Toru admits, finally, to himself that Naoko never loved him. And that's why he is off to Germany to join Watanabe, who we know is unable to love. I believe Toru is joining Watanabe in a life of simply searching for sex, of living a life of lust. (And there are people who we know in real life who do live for anonymous sex, there is a great movie entitled "Shame" that illustrates this type of person, and oddly it's more common that we think, and to those people this type of life is not shameful at all). The character who kills himself early on (I'll refer to him as V, as I can't recall the spelling) did so because V knew what Toru later discovered, that Naoko was incapable of loving anyone.

Isn't that a bit of a stretch, to use post-suicide-of-her-soulmate Naoko as a reason for the suicide of her soulmate? -_-' From memory. he (Kazuki) sounded like an isolated guy with unaddressed issues, specially regarding the future, whom she couldn't be everything for, even if she wanted.

Cagne, just my interpretation. But we know Naoko never loved Toru, and we know K had problems. But we also know Naoko is definitely mentally ill, even the first chapter warns us of her impending death. Sometimes problems snowball, and Watanabe and Toru were right to leave for Germany to start new lives, trying to escape what K. Started.

I agree with J, to some extent, although I do not think she can rightly be called good or evil, because she was both a sociopath, and in some respects, a god. (The latter makes more sense if you read a lot of Murakami - surrealism, super powers, etc.). Neither gods nor sociopaths are good or evil, in their own minds, they just do what they want.

I think that Reiko was the mythomaniac she so accurately defined at the beginning of the second day of her story, not her beautiful 13 year old piano student, and that in describing the student's lying she was simply transferring what she knew about herself to the young girl. Recall the detail she went into in describing how the inner mind of a mythomaniac works, at the beginning of the second day of her life story.

I think that she tried to manipulate Naoko into a lesbian relationship when N returned to the Ami sanitorium from the real medical hospital, was rebuffed (because Naoko said she was about to reunite with Watanabe) and so Reiko showed Naoko the letter from Watanabe asking for advice on how to deal with his love for Midori and his unrequited puppy love (ju-ai in Japanese) for Naoko. This caused two things that Reiko wanted - to be able to comfort and then seduce Naoko on the rebound, and then to put herself in the place (clothes) of the younger, unwrinkled Naoko, and seduce Watanabe. In other words, to become young and beautiful once again.

Naoko was not suicidal - wanting to get better, looking forward to life with Watanabe - until the revelation.

Recall that Reiko's feelings for Naoko were not all that charitable - she wrote to Watanabe saying that although Naoko was all the world to him, she was only a "clumsy girl" to Reiko.

I imagine it was she and not Naoko who burned all of Watanabe's letters, or at least encouraged Naoko to do so after revealing his letter about Midori. I imagine she forged the "give my clothes to Reiko" note, so she could use them to help seduce Watanabe.

From a textual standpoint, Reiko was the deus ex machina in the book, and therefore god-like. Recall Watanabe's discussion with Midori's dying father:

"Are you familiar with Euripides?

He was an ancient Greek - one of the "Big Three' of Greek tragedy along with Aeschylus and Sophocles. He supposedly died when a dog bit him in Macedonia, but not everybody believes this. Anyway, that's Euripides. I like Sophocles better, but I suppose it's a matter of taste. I really can't say which is better.

What marks his plays is the way things get so mixed up the characters are trapped. Do you see what I mean? Lots of different people appear, and they all have their own situations and reasons and excuses, and each one is pursuing his or her own idea of justice or happiness. As a result, nobody can do anything. Obviously. I mean, it's basically impossible for everybody's justice to prevail or everybody's happiness to triumph, so chaos takes over. And then what do you think happens? Simple - a god appears at the end and starts directing the traffic. "You go over there, and you come here, and you get together with her, and you just sit still for while.' Like that. He's a kind of fixer, and in the end everything works out perfectly. They call this 'deus ex machina'. There's almost always a deus ex machina in Euripides, and that's where critical opinion divides over him.

But think about it - what if there were a deus ex machina in real life?"

The old man was unable to say much of anything but did say:

he said.

"Ticket? What ticket?"

he said. .

I had no idea what he was talking about, and just kept quiet. He stayed silent for a time, too. Then he seemed to say . He opened his eyes wide and looked at me hard. I guessed that he was trying to tell me something, but I couldn't begin to imagine what it was.

he said. .

"Ueno Station?"

He gave a little nod.

I tried to summarize what he was getting at: "Ticket, Midori, please, Ueno Station," but I had no idea what it meant. I assumed his mind was muddled, but compared with before his eyes now had a terrible clarity. He raised the arm that was free of the intravenous contraption and stretched it towards me. This must have been a major effort for him, the way the hand trembled in mid-air. I stood and grasped his frail, wrinkled hand. He returned my grasp with what little strength he could muster and said again .

"Don't worry," I said. "I'll take care of the ticket and Midori, too." He let his hand drop back to the bed and closed his eyes. Then, with a loud rush of breath, he fell asleep. I checked to make sure he was still alive, then went out to boil more water for tea.

In other words, Watanabe promised a dying man he would take care of his daughter Midori, and some kind of ticket at Ueno station.

He then gets caught up, stuck between Midori and Naoko, and can't make up his mind. As long as Naoko is alive, "nobody can do anything".

In comes Reiko. She manipulates Naoko's suicide, and forces Watanabe to keep his promise to take care of Midori, after getting what she wants - a last chance at being young, beautiful, and sexy again. She then gets her train ticket, (recall that she refused to fly, even though far easier) and leaves forever in the last scene, from Ueno station, where Watanabe calls Midori, not ever knowing what hit him.

Ticket. Ueno. Midori.

John wrote: "I agree with J, to some extent, although I do not think she can rightly be called good or evil, because she was both a sociopath, and in some respects, a god. (The latter makes more sense if you re..." Wow! Your interpretation is amazing. :O

Thanks!

It is interesting to think that Murakami wrote this as his "100 per cent realistic novel", and I guess it is compared to some of his other work - well, all of it, actually. He denies that it is autobiographical but he was born in 1949 and wrote it when he was 37 (Watanabe's age at the time of the telling of the story -- and Reiko's (!) age), about a time period 1969-1970 when he was 19 and 20, like Watanabe and Naoko.

A good interview is in the Paris Review:

http://www.theparisreview.org/intervi...

Another interesting thing about his work is the repeated reference to "wind-up" characters, especially wind-up deity-like characters. Watanabe talks about how he goes thought the motions of the day by winding himself up in the morning, except on Sundays when he doesn't have to be wound up. The Wind-up Bird Chronicles is of course full of such references.

Give a listen some time to a 1969 song by the band Jethro Tull, entitled Wind-up.

I think Murakami has a good bit in common with Thomas Hardy, by the way.

John wrote: "I agree with J, to some extent, although I do not think she can rightly be called good or evil, because she was both a sociopath, and in some respects, a god. (The latter makes more sense if you re..."
Thank you John. People like you are the reason i use goodreads.

Well thanks, Huy!

John wrote: "I agree with J, to some extent, although I do not think she can rightly be called good or evil, because she was both a sociopath, and in some respects, a god. (The latter makes more sense if you re..."

This is exactly what I was looking for.

Thank you John, I could't agree more with everything.

I read the book in Spanish and I believe some information was lost in the translation. However, you're interpretation of Reiko really makes sense.

Again, thanks!

I have never thought about it before I saw this page... I just finished the book, I am still emotional and I am going to read it again, just to pay attention to everything carefully... I was so excited about the Toru's relationship with Naiko and Midoro, that I completely missed Reiko as one of the most important figures. Well I now realize what a huge role she had.
I think she is a woman, who missed her life and now she is trying to revive her lost stories with Naiko's help. She tells Toru at the station that she is just a shadow of her memories. Behind strong and fighting person there is a woman trying to occupy Naiko's life. She is misusing her condition and sucks whole life out of her.
Instead of taking care of the relationship between Vatanabe and Naiko, she refuses to inform Toru, like she is deliberately trying to tear them apart... When she writes to him not to write back, not to see her and so on; the idea that she burnt the letters and she maintained the clothes herself is a complete cruelty on her part; however, it is possible... I pity Naoko; in the end she was really trying to get back on her feet and she was fascinated with the idea of living with Toru... I do not think the Reiko's stories about Naoko were true... and the fact that she could anticipate what she would do, for example, when she told her that they were seeing each other for the last time and did nothing... it is really painful to think that the hero you were so fascinated with while reading leaves you so astonished in the end.... maybe nothing is really her fault... who knows.

I am so happy I found this topic as I felt like no one was noticing the OBVIOUS.
I did not like Reiko at all from the first moment, she is very manipulative and thinks she's much more important than she is (and maybe she even becomes important because of this). She had no business to interfere in their relationship and it just bugged me so much the way she kept emphasising she and Naoko tell each other everything...
On the other hand I had no trouble believing her story of the little girl/rape thing, I do think this is possible.
But everything else about her is wrong: her influence, her arrogance, her being fake and sleeping (!) with Toru... And she is most definitely lying more and more towards the end, in writing to Toru and presumably in what she tells Naoko.
She's the only character that really caught a nerve with me.

John wrote: "I agree with J, to some extent, although I do not think she can rightly be called good or evil, because she was both a sociopath, and in some respects, a god. (The latter makes more sense if you re..."

Top interpretation, one which i liked the most.

I thought I was the only one who thought that Reiko is a liar, there are just too many clues and things that don't fit if Reiko is not a manipulative psycho. But as the book is written from main characters' perspective, he doesn't find out and we don't find out either. It gives the book a great dark perspective, so many people just taking it for a sad love story. Really happy to see there are other comrades that think the same

Right from the start I felt susicious and something sinister about Reiko. What’s a 40 odd year old woman doing bathing naked with a young girl? I hate to sound so unsentimental, but this behaviour and many of her others seemed questionable and manipulative. I also found her sleeping with wantanabe at the end massive betrayal to Neiko. Dead or alive. And to sleep with someone so much younger than her? I don’t trust her and find her a disturbing character

Greg wrote: "Cagne, just my interpretation. But we know Naoko never loved Toru, and we know K had problems. But we also know Naoko is definitely mentally ill, even the first chapter warns us of her impending de..."

Definitely a top interpretation/comment, I don't think a good writer would throw in those "fancy details" in while not trying to reference something, and this is their very probable explanation (if we ignore philosophing in sake of philosophing).

I just also realized that a strong proof that the piano-student Reiko was talking about was actually (created up on) her (image) is that the piano-student was a lesbian while Reiko too tries to "seduce" (experiment as she says) Naoko and sleeps and showers with her WHILE stating she's not actually a lesbian (in a way, she says it in an undefined tone). Plus someone who got technically raped by a young kid probably wouldn't want get that friendly with Naoko.

I actually somewhat believe the piano student was Reiko herself, rather than merely based on her. The way Reiko pities and excuses her, she never really hates the girl and emphasises the piano student is a victim herself. - Or at the very least the piano student was an allegory of her own illness. "And she knew she had this power... I only realized later. At the time, I had no idea what she was doing to me." What doesn't seem to be discussed is that she really tried to rape the student and it could've also been the time she realized her illness and broke down.

---

Additionally I'm thinking that (I'd need someone to re-read the passages to confirm) that Reiko was smoking every time she was saying a (major) lie (or at the very least it signalized stress). If I recall right, Naoko somewhere towards the end of the story said that Reiko's smoking habit's getting worse (= she could've gotten more manipulative). - The thing is Reiko supposedly according to her own words was happy where she was and who she was, yet her eating and smoking habits are likely to imply there was some stress going on with her life.

I read Norwegian Wood some days back . When Murakami introduces the character Reiko, I found her to be quite friendly with Toru. Her friendship with Toru baffled me because I always felt that Reiko wanted something more from Toru. She came across to me as a character who I wont say is evil but was lonely and selfish.
She wanted to be close to someone and Toru was the gateway to her close companionship. Although she knew that Naoko and Toru shared a special bond , she almost never lost any opportunity to show Toru her interest in him even though she said all that playfully. She comes across as an extremely free spirited individual, drinking and smoking away to her glory who has overcome her painful past.
I really like the way Murakami has portrayed the story of her tumultuous past which justifies her behavior towards Toru . At the end of the book , she insists Toru to be close to her and both sharing the same grief of losing Naoko , try to be happy at that very moment. She thanks him for making her feel happy like never before since her marriage and embarks on the way to her new life. Reiko is just like many of us, selfish and looking for momentary happiness.

J wrote: "I recently read this wonderful book for a second time. Both times, I found the scene of Reiko describing her seduction/rape extremely disturbing. It had the feel of a dream where you wake up and ar..."

J wrote: "I recently read this wonderful book for a second time. Both times, I found the scene of Reiko describing her seduction/rape extremely disturbing. It had the feel of a dream where you wake up and ar..."

Sorry for my english, it's real bad.
I finish the book yesterday and a few hours later, I suddenly realized that Reiko was involved in the death of Naoko.
The story of the teenager is strange. Naoko had not communicated with Watanabe for a long time, the letter of the clothes ... I'm sure Reiko told naoko about Midori ... in the Spanish forums nobody suspects Reiko. I have had to search forums in English to find people who think like me.

John wrote: "I agree with J, to some extent, although I do not think she can rightly be called good or evil, because she was both a sociopath, and in some respects, a god. (The latter makes more sense if you re..."

Great interpretation!

Have just read it for the second time in 2 years, I realized that Reiko really disturbed me this time and just wasn´t quite sure how. This helped a lot.

As for the sex scene in the end, I somehow saw it, from Toru´s view, as his personal revenge after all the suffering Naoko inflicted on him. That should explain the intensity of it, different from any other he had.

It also clearly helped pave the way for his phone call to Midori.

John wrote: "I agree with J, to some extent, although I do not think she can rightly be called good or evil, because she was both a sociopath, and in some respects, a god. (The latter makes more sense if you re..."

I love this interpretation

I am so happy I found this site! I was so angry of Reiko at the end and i didnt like her from the moment she told her story... i felt like she was not very genuine overall and i am pretty sure she is somehow responsible for Naokos death...
I am stunned by Johns interpretation and I couldn't agree more with the second part. But with the first part of the comment my interpretation is: Reiko did rape that student of hers and she was a pathological liar. She manipulated Naoko and made her feel bad about herself and contantly made dirty jokes about Toru - because i believe she liked him/wanted to be loved (for example when he asked to sleep on their couch and nobody would say anything, reiko said that only if he wouldnt rape them, and then he said that Naoko was in the left room (i dont remember if it was left or right, but anyway), then Naoko said that it was reverse... i dont know it seemed very suspicious...
and i keep reading all the other comments about this book (besides this webpage), where they all agree that Naoko didnt really love Toru... i cant believe they would think that! I think she was manipulated by Reiko, possibly made her suicidal... somehow i thought maybe she was the one that provoked the voices in Naokos head, but maybe this is too extreme... anyway, she wanted Toru and she got him... and im not sure if i just read it wrong because i didnt read it in english, but when Toru and Reiko had sex, he came inside her and she was very pleased... i was so shocked when this happened, because the first thing i thought about was that she would have his baby and claim that he raped her or whatever... but then i read the other comments on the internet and thought that i was just watching too much Gossip Girl haha
anyway, i am just so sad that we might never know what really happened, because i just hate the unjustice... and i hate the fact that Toru will now forever think that Naoko never loved him...

Btw, do you think Murakami will ever talk about the books or the way he interpreted it or what was going on inside his head? i keep looking online and i cant find anything -.- i just really need closure! :D i feel like this book has gotten so much under my skin, i dont think its healthy anymore, i cried so hard while i was reading it... anyone felt the same?

Florence wrote: "That was actually my conclusion, Rieko was a manipulative liar and pervert.

My suspicion finalized when she invited Toru to sleep with her. I think she was planning everything all along. She was the antagonist in this novel.

After reading the book, I was looking for someone who share the same view with me. Glad I was not alone.

Reiko is a stone-cold psychopath.

How do we know that Naoko even received the letters from Toru? Maybe she sequestered the letters and Naoko killed herself because she felt deserted by Toru. We have no clue as to why Naoko suddenly killed herself when she was reported to have been doing better, unless her seemingly improved mood was indicative of having decided to attempt suicide. I am unsure of what Reiko was trying to achieve, but I am left with suspicions.

Very interesting indeed!

I now start to think that in the story about her 'piano student', she was just telling a story about herself when she was a child.
The piano student might never have existed.

Also, Reiko might not have enjoyed the fact that Naoko was doing better and better; this would lead to Naoko having to depent less and less on Reiko.

Excellent point! We know so little about who Reiko really was. Maybe she was someone who only existed as the reflection of others.

from the very first moment i felt like something was off with her character but i couldn't really tell why i felt that way until she slept with toru
the whole storyline with her student doesn't feel right and i can't convince myself that she was 100% not guilty just by the way she describes the events
she gives me major manipulator vibes
this theory is really interesting and it's a way to explain lots of things

The first time we meet Reiko in the book she sort of reminded me of the Chesire Cat from "Alice in Wonderland". Maybe she was not a guiding spirit for Tour after all. Interesting observations in here. I love them all. I personally really liked Reiko's character. But she is indeed ambiguous and her story cannot be trusted at all.

Renzo Amiel wrote: "Now this is an interesting theory. Maybe I/Toru was also manipulated by Reiko as I haven't looked to her story in different angles. I just followed what she said.

I also had suspicions that Reiko ..."

I guess something that I found extremely manipulative and toxic was the sex scene that the narrator and Reiko shared. I felt like she was somewhat using the death of somebody who was extremely important to him, and his vulnerability at the time, to coerce him into having sex? I understand he agreed to it as well, but it just does not seem logical...to me at least. Would she want Reiko to have sex with the narrator? Probably not.

John wrote: "I agree with J, to some extent, although I do not think she can rightly be called good or evil, because she was both a sociopath, and in some respects, a god. (The latter makes more sense if you re..."

omg the ending makes so much sense now.
ticket ueno midori

almost as if the old man predicted it

J wrote: "I recently read this wonderful book for a second time. Both times, I found the scene of Reiko describing her seduction/rape extremely disturbing. It had the feel of a dream where you wake up and ar..."

it did seem weird to me too,
a kid harrasing and abusing an older woman like that does not seem real
and even the suicide note. hoe weird is it that she would think of her clothes before killing herself with no note for toru.
and reiko wearing it in front of toru and asking him if he thought it was weird.almost as if she was prepared to have sex

I think it's of note that we never really learn anything about Reiko and her objective past that doesn't come out her own mouth (or second-hand through Naoko), so my unreliable narrator alarm bells were going off all the time. I think it also helps to remember that Reiko is nearly twice the age of the other significant characters, so she's got a lot more life experience. If she wanted to manipulate or was sociopathic, then she certainly would be harder to spot by a younger person, especially one going through serious psychological issues. I think it's a sign of a good writer that we're all here speculating on a character's true intentions. It shows the characters were fleshed out to a great degree. But, yeah, I don't trust Reiko one bit.

As soon as I read abt this discussion, my first reaction was like "ummmm, how could you say that? Reiko is a total sweetheart and she has helped Naoko and Toru this whole time...".
Then, the final sex scene popped out in my mind. I wasn't expecting that. I mean, sex is a major part of this book. It is through sex that Toru gets attached to Naoko and then Midori.
But, if Reiko was abt to leave... why doing that? And most importantly, why Toru said he had the same desire??
It wasn't just casual sex. When he slept with other girls he didn't feel anything at all afterwards. This time, when Reiko is on the train, he even kisses her...
However, I don't feel like accusing her and I don't think she was manipulating them. There are too many hints that give us a confirm that she truly cares abt them both. During his visits, the fact that she writes to him when Naoko couldn't, when she leaves them alone in the woods...
I'd say Toru had spend the night with Reiko because she just reminded him of her lost friend. He had to let go each and every part of her. It was a necessary step.
Afterwards he seems much more free + he is also able to speak to Midori.
Talking about her personal story, it didn't convince me at all. That was just too odd, yet there is no possible way to discover the truth. I couldn't really find any reasons to believe her.
This would also be a great discussion.
So if u ask me, she is not evil at all. She is just another caregiver, just like Toru.

To further corroborate the theory of reiko being the deus ex machina, her name in Japanese can be translated as ghost or spirit which is similar to God and in the final chapter she leaves to asahikawa which is referred to as the entrance to the spiritual world.

Greg wrote: "Cagne, just my interpretation. But we know Naoko never loved Toru, and we know K had problems. But we also know Naoko is definitely mentally ill, even the first chapter warns us of her impending de..."
这个解读太厉害了，受教了。