Talk:Kazuo Ishiguro

Almost Unique

If his literary characteristics are "almost unique", then there must a very small number of other writers, perhaps as few as 1, who share these characteristics. Who are these writers? JackofOz 02:32, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Also, Kazuo Ishiguro is a native born Japanese name and should be written in hiragana. You have it written in Katakana which is only for foreign names or items. There are three ways to write japanese and his name should be written in hiragana. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.71.129.210 (talk • contribs) 16:53, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

For people of Japanese origin who are not 'nationalistically' Japanese, they tend to have their names written in Western order and in katakana. -Rikoshi 23:41, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Hiragana? Very few names are written in hiragana these days (some older women have names in hiragana or katakana), most names are (like Kazuo) in kanji. Ishiguro is of course in kanji, that goes without saying.

No, Rikoshi (above) is correct. People brought up in Japan would not write Kazuo Ishiguro (or for that matter, Yoko Ono or David Suzuki) in kanji because these people do not - or no longer - identify as Japanese. The names are written in katakana, as you will see if you look at the photographs of Ishiguro's book covers on Amazon.jp. So "Ishiguro is of course in kanji, that goes without saying" - it goes without saying because it is without basis. 80.4.202.8 (talk) 18:30, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

reasons for cleanup and todo

some bits of the section are problematic.

1. the tone is inappropriate, eg; "quality of the research is superlative", "...is represented with skill rarely approached in historical fiction", at the very least these need to be quoted from sources and identified as positive criticism.
2. use of incorrect or confusing terms and constructs. "mixed chronology of the plot", "within a large country home of an aristocratic lord" [italics mine, showing problem constructs], "In the process of writing, Ishiguro makes full use of historical context, usually semi-fictionally."

perhaps replace with a broader section on works, covering style (first-person,), subject matter (individual choices, the ties b/w individuals and historical events), critical reading (explicitly sourced) and maybe plot outlines.

Doldrums 20:23, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

"named runner-up"?

I didn't think the Bookers named runners-up, just a winner and finalists. What happened, I believe, is that a leaked account of the judging committee's meeting reveals that the committee at one point had reduced the competitors for the win to NLMG and John Banville's "The Sea," before chosing the latter. But this really isn't the same as being named runner-up, a designation the Bookers do not give out.

Yeah, you are right. Originally I believe I wrote "cited as the runner-up." He never actually was named the runner-up. This should never have been changed.... Bsd987 03:58, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I've edited the page to fully reflect this considerably more nuanced series of events, which seems most appropriate; I was misled by the language that the page carried. If you can provide a citation, I'd appreciate it! Mote (talk) 05:19, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

"The Toolshed" ?!?

What the hell is "The Toolshed"? There is no citation, and I can find no reference to this work anywhere else on the internet (except of course for pages which cite Wikipedia). I've removed it from the page until someone comes up with a source. Nigel Napalm 22:11, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Nationality

The article gives his nationality as British, but he was obviously a Japanese citizen at birth. Can anyone confirm if he has taken UK citizenship? Indisciplined 13:13, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

In a Japanese magazine interview, Ishiguro said he choose and took UK citizenship for a practical reason. Because Japan does not allow double nationality. The magazine is 文学界/Bungakukai Aug.2006 issue. According to jp.wiki , it was 1983 Ishiguro took his UK citizenship.--Oda Mari 16:58, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

The article says "British subject", but as far as I know, this term is not correct today anymore. One says "British citizen". Please read British subject and decide whether we should correct and write Ishiguro is a British citizen. Thank you. ~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.78.180.148 (talk) 20:30, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Japanese titles

I reverted an edit that included the titles of some Japanese editions of Ishiguro's work -- it seems curious and inconsistent with general Wikipedia practice to give the titles of foreign-language editions of works that were written and first published in English. Ishiguro is an English-language, not a Japanese-language, author. I think this is particularly important because of the (perhaps understandable, given the setting of his earlier novels) public confusion alluded to in the article about Ishiguro's nationality and identity, and the way in which he has chosen to resolve those (becoming an English subject, admitting that Japanese literature has not generally been a strong influence on his work). It also implies that the Japanese editions are "authoritative" and that the English editions are merely translations, when the opposite is in fact the case. I'm a fan of Ishiguro and don't mean to cause trouble; I'll let the community settle this as it will. Thanks & cheers, Mote (talk) 05:12, 22 July 2009 (UTC)