Little Green Monster: Interpretation vs. Intention - Isabella

     I wish I had not read the interview with Murakami before I read his short story “Little Green Monster”. When discussing the female character in “Little Green Monster”, he states, “But the cruelty of women is more ordinary, everyday”. Therefore, I went into this story expecting an ordinary, everyday cruelty. It was not until the end of the story, however, that I began to feel differently and got an impression of the story that I am not sure was intended. To me, the woman in the story did seem cruel at all. Although she does create more and more elaborate ways to harm a little, ostensibly harmless little monster, upon reading the ending and truly sitting with it, I felt this woman was entirely justified in her actions. I felt the entire story became a metaphor for the seemingly inconspicuous ways men harass and bother women. The ways that are seen as benign and in turn, how women are unfairly seen for their reactions. 

    Take the woman in the story, going about a peaceful day until a little monster shows up and walks into her house uninvited, unasked, and unwanted. The monster, who is begging for and expecting love, seems to be true to life as a generalized idea of the expectation men place upon women. I felt angry for her! I felt angry when she said, “I wasn't afraid of the monster anymore.” This monster, for at least a brief amount of time, had scared her. She, like so many other women, have been afraid by the “love” of men and the aggressive way it is portrayed. So then, when she begins mentally attacking this monster, it feels satisfying; she does not feel like a villain at all.  

    With the added context of Murakami's interview, I began to feel confused. It seems that he intended for her to be the cruel one. It seemed to him that she was the perpetrator, causing unnecessary harm to the little monster. Maybe because this monster is, for him, something else? A helplessly in love little creature cruelly killed in different ways? 

This opens up larger questions about intention and interpretation in art and how reader and writer function together to create meaning. Is my interpretation valid if that was not the intended message, or can writers be “wrong” about their own intention if reception is overwhelmingly different? I feel that with Murakami, it is hard to understand his intention most of the time, but with this added context for this particular story, it makes me wonder how his intention might differ from my understanding of his other works as well.