Points and Lines (Japan's Mystery Writers)

Rating:
Summary: Tighter and more believable than Inspector Imanishi
Review: Great mystery. Loved it. Fairly short, especially compared to Inpector Imanishi, but more realistic. Highly recommended.

Rating:
Summary: An amazingly ingenious literary feat!
Review: I just finished this book not 5 minutes ago, and it was absolutely spectacular! With a fine eye for detail, Matsumoto creates a stunning novel full of intrigue right up to the very last page. The novel is wrapped up very nicely with a superb, conclusive ending.

I definitely agree with the other reviews which sum up the power of the book. I myself was particularly impressed by the manner in which such an intricate and excellent tale was constructed. A delightful and thoroughly satisfying read! A great one for anyone who has read Inspector Imanishi or those interested in Japanese culture & mysteries.

Rating:
Summary: It is no bare all at the end
Review: I think the author is good at writing stories in both short story and the novel format. He was brilliant in Ichinenhan mattete (Wait for one and half years) and same can be seen in points and lines.

This book unlike other mystery books does not cheat you by keeping all the secrets to itself till the end. It is more like a gradual revealation. The feeling was of discovery with the author than by the author.

The book deals and magnifies minor nuances of Japanese life like hostess bars, tightly controlled train schedules, intricate politeness in formal situations. All these are brought together in this magnificient tale. It also makes this very locational as it can happen only in Japan. I sincerly thank the translator for bringing this masterpiece to life in English.

I was reading this book and missed my train stop, and things like this normally do not happen to me.

Rating:
Summary: definitely a japanese murder story
Review: i was expecting a lot from this book when i bought it last month. people in the other reviews had said it was this great mystery and he was a great writer. don't get me wrong, his style is distinct and i enjoyed it, however this story was a bit on the shallow side. the story had an interesting twist and was extremely intricate, but perhaps a little too twisted. it was one of those reads where the author just suddenly comes up with the solution at the end. it didn't leave any room for the reader to actually figure out who did it and why and how. it just basically told you at the end how it all happened and you're supposed to say "Oh, I get it!" and laugh it off carelessly. when i read japanese detective novels, i look for more of a reader-oriented style, like "the tattoo murder case". it gave a sense of letting the reader actually see everything and try to figure it out themselves. i don't recommend this book to people who want to know all the facts. it's an easy read, and short, so, if you have some time, i wouldn't say don't read it.

Rating:
Summary: A slice of Japanese sociology
Review: I'm sure that Seicho Matsumoto, in writing Points and Lines may have never meant to do this but he did present a slice of Japanese culture that is both a treat and insightful.

In chapter 11 "The Stubborn Wall", Matsumoto explores the relationship between Ishida and Sayama - the former is the high level official in Ministry X while the latter is an assistant section chief. Mind you, we are getting this in a discussion between Mihara, the novels protagonist and his chief Kasai. Juxtaposed as this is, it makes you wonder if the same relationship exists between Mihara/Kasai as it does for Ishida/Sayama. Matsumoto writes:

"A man holding the position of assistant section chief is a veteran; he's full charge of everyday business of the office. Division chiefs and sections chiefs seem to leave all the routine matters to these experienced assistants. They don't do this deliberately; what happens is that they themselves simply aren't familiar with the day-to-day affairs of the section. They're too busy climbing the ladder of success. They have no time to learn the office routine. Their assistants, on the other hand, have been handling it for a long time; they know the work thoroughly. They are like experienced craftsmen. But they can't go very far. They have to stand by and watch the younger men, the university graduates with the proper qualifications, get promoted and go past them. Most of them are resigned to this situation. They resent it, of course, but they know that to show their feelings will get them nowhere."

Now, contrast that to the rich and vibrant relationship the Mihara and Kasai have. Seicho Matsumoto writes in the same chapter but a few pages earlier:

"Mihara stared at him (Kasai - inclusion mine). He realized that while he was in Hokkaido invisible currents had been eddying around the chief. Yet Inspector Kasai, after all, was only one of the figures in the investigation. 'We didn't have much luck there either,' Kasai stated bluntly. 'Tatsuo Yasuda apparently visits his wife once a week. So it's more likely that he has affairs with other women. But there's no evidence of this. If he does have a mistress, he's very clever about keeping it a secret. This is merely an assumption, of course; Yasuda may be a faithful husband. They seem to be a devoted couple.' Mihara nodded. This had been his impression also when he called on Mrs. Yasuda. 'It would appear that Otoki, Sayama and Yasuda, if he does have a mistress, are all very skilled at keeping their love affairs secret.' His words struck Mihara forcibly. What had been only a slight hint suddenly becomes clear. 'Chief, has there been some new development?' He tried to suppress his excitement. 'Yes,' Chief Kasai replied. 'The section chief has become interested in this double suicide!'"

Now the questions go beyond a double murder mystery but also ask us to question our basic sociological assumptions about Japan and Japanese life. Is it a question of either/or or both/and. What is key to note in these fictional characterizations is the intense involvement into the details of Mihara's investigation by Kasai. Is the Supervisor/Subordinate relationship as Matsumoto writes about in the first quote - that meek subservience and more importantly that hands off attitude by Ishida to defer the details to Yasuda or is it more like the relationship formed by the supportive Kasai to his hard working subordinate Mihara?

Yoshi Sugimoto, in his groundbreaking work "An Introduction to Japanese Society" explores the dominance of the Public Bureaucracy and the notion of amakudari (landing from heaven). He writes:

"It is widely acknowledged that the state, particularly the government bureaucracy, holds supreme authority over private-sector companies in Japan. Throughout Japan's industrialization, the central government was the engine of economic transformation. To optimize this process the national bureaucracy has recruited talented university graduates as career officials chosen for management ability and provided with high prestige and official status. Able, dedicated, and often arrogant, these bureaucrats are believed by many to be the real power-holders in the nation. The perception is consistent with some state practices relating to the private sector. Government ministries hold power of licensing, permitting, authorizing, and approving a wide range of production, distribution, and sales activities, thereby regulating the private sector even in trivial details. Furthermore, without statutory grounding, public officials are empowered to provide relevant companies in the private sector with administrative guidance (gyosei shido) on levels of production, pricing, and quantities of imports and exports, in the name of national interests. Career bureaucrats often retire from officialdom in the late stages of their careers to take up positions in large corporations, a practice referred to as amakudarai (landing from heaven). These three conventions exemplify the power and privilege of elite bureaucrats in Japan."

The quote from Sugimoto certainly lends credence to Matsumoto's depiction of the Ishida/Sayama relationship of an arrogant, qualified candidate for amakudarai leaving Sayama to take charge of all the details of running the section. Once again, in the same chapter, it is clearly indicated that Ishida, concerned about the questioning regarding Yasuda sends yet another assistant Kitaro Sasaki to do his running. Where does that leave all that discourse between Mihara and Kasai? Is it false? Is it wishful thinking on the part of Matsumoto? It would be naïve to think that this situation or that situation exists in exclusivity. I posit that the closer observation will lend itself to a both/and rather than an either/or scenario. I don't see why both scenarios can't exist since a mutually supportive Supervisor/Subordinate model can work just as well as a traditional one. Just a small slice of Japanese sociology and very thought provoking.

Miguel Llora

Rating:
Summary: It is no bare all at the end
Review: I'm sure that Seicho Matsumoto, in writing Points and Lines may have never meant to do this but he did present a slice of Japanese culture that is both a treat and insightful.

In chapter 11 "The Stubborn Wall", Matsumoto explores the relationship between Ishida and Sayama - the former is the high level official in Ministry X while the latter is an assistant section chief. Mind you, we are getting this in a discussion between Mihara, the novels protagonist and his chief Kasai. Juxtaposed as this is, it makes you wonder if the same relationship exists between Mihara/Kasai as it does for Ishida/Sayama. Matsumoto writes:

"A man holding the position of assistant section chief is a veteran; he's full charge of everyday business of the office. Division chiefs and sections chiefs seem to leave all the routine matters to these experienced assistants. They don't do this deliberately; what happens is that they themselves simply aren't familiar with the day-to-day affairs of the section. They're too busy climbing the ladder of success. They have no time to learn the office routine. Their assistants, on the other hand, have been handling it for a long time; they know the work thoroughly. They are like experienced craftsmen. But they can't go very far. They have to stand by and watch the younger men, the university graduates with the proper qualifications, get promoted and go past them. Most of them are resigned to this situation. They resent it, of course, but they know that to show their feelings will get them nowhere."

Now, contrast that to the rich and vibrant relationship the Mihara and Kasai have. Seicho Matsumoto writes in the same chapter but a few pages earlier:

"Mihara stared at him (Kasai - inclusion mine). He realized that while he was in Hokkaido invisible currents had been eddying around the chief. Yet Inspector Kasai, after all, was only one of the figures in the investigation. 'We didn't have much luck there either,' Kasai stated bluntly. 'Tatsuo Yasuda apparently visits his wife once a week. So it's more likely that he has affairs with other women. But there's no evidence of this. If he does have a mistress, he's very clever about keeping it a secret. This is merely an assumption, of course; Yasuda may be a faithful husband. They seem to be a devoted couple.' Mihara nodded. This had been his impression also when he called on Mrs. Yasuda. 'It would appear that Otoki, Sayama and Yasuda, if he does have a mistress, are all very skilled at keeping their love affairs secret.' His words struck Mihara forcibly. What had been only a slight hint suddenly becomes clear. 'Chief, has there been some new development?' He tried to suppress his excitement. 'Yes,' Chief Kasai replied. 'The section chief has become interested in this double suicide!'"

Now the questions go beyond a double murder mystery but also ask us to question our basic sociological assumptions about Japan and Japanese life. Is it a question of either/or or both/and. What is key to note in these fictional characterizations is the intense involvement into the details of Mihara's investigation by Kasai. Is the Supervisor/Subordinate relationship as Matsumoto writes about in the first quote - that meek subservience and more importantly that hands off attitude by Ishida to defer the details to Yasuda or is it more like the relationship formed by the supportive Kasai to his hard working subordinate Mihara?

Yoshi Sugimoto, in his groundbreaking work "An Introduction to Japanese Society" explores the dominance of the Public Bureaucracy and the notion of amakudari (landing from heaven). He writes:

"It is widely acknowledged that the state, particularly the government bureaucracy, holds supreme authority over private-sector companies in Japan. Throughout Japan's industrialization, the central government was the engine of economic transformation. To optimize this process the national bureaucracy has recruited talented university graduates as career officials chosen for management ability and provided with high prestige and official status. Able, dedicated, and often arrogant, these bureaucrats are believed by many to be the real power-holders in the nation. The perception is consistent with some state practices relating to the private sector. Government ministries hold power of licensing, permitting, authorizing, and approving a wide range of production, distribution, and sales activities, thereby regulating the private sector even in trivial details. Furthermore, without statutory grounding, public officials are empowered to provide relevant companies in the private sector with administrative guidance (gyosei shido) on levels of production, pricing, and quantities of imports and exports, in the name of national interests. Career bureaucrats often retire from officialdom in the late stages of their careers to take up positions in large corporations, a practice referred to as amakudarai (landing from heaven). These three conventions exemplify the power and privilege of elite bureaucrats in Japan."

The quote from Sugimoto certainly lends credence to Matsumoto's depiction of the Ishida/Sayama relationship of an arrogant, qualified candidate for amakudarai leaving Sayama to take charge of all the details of running the section. Once again, in the same chapter, it is clearly indicated that Ishida, concerned about the questioning regarding Yasuda sends yet another assistant Kitaro Sasaki to do his running. Where does that leave all that discourse between Mihara and Kasai? Is it false? Is it wishful thinking on the part of Matsumoto? It would be naïve to think that this situation or that situation exists in exclusivity. I posit that the closer observation will lend itself to a both/and rather than an either/or scenario. I don't see why both scenarios can't exist since a mutually supportive Supervisor/Subordinate model can work just as well as a traditional one. Just a small slice of Japanese sociology and very thought provoking.

Miguel Llora

Rating:
Summary: Decent, but not more than that.
Review: Since this book is often mentioned in the same breath as Takagi's Tattoo Murder Mystery I started it with high expectations. Yet, in despite of its brevity and interesting cultural context, the plotline was thin and predictable.

Having been raised on the likes of Le Carré and Deighton I read mysteries in full submission to the plot-twisting/reversing will of the author. As such, I am not among the readers whose greatest drive is to figure out the villain before a book's final revelation. Even in this see no suspect hear no suspect mode the plot line of this book has such a giant black hole that I was way beyond the event horizon after chapter three.

While I agree with previous reviewers that the cultural context of this story still has some interesting point, the hapless reiteration of timelines throughout the book turned the final revelation in a most embarrassing event.