1) The author analyzes Haruki Murakami's use of diction and syntax in the short story "The Elephant Vanishes." 2) Murakami uses short, concise syntax and diction to characterize the protagonist's structured, analytical life, contrasting that with flowing descriptions of the elephant and its keeper. 3) This craft choice conveys that the protagonist feels freer and less restricted while observing the elephant, but reverts to his confined self after it disappears, showing his lack of meaningful relationships.

1. Hill 1
Jennifer Hill
12/12/14
Diction and Syntax in “The Elephant Vanishes”
In “The Elephant Vanishes,” Haruki Murakami uses short and concise diction and syntax
when describing the life of the protagonist, but contrasts that with flowing, descriptive syntax
and diction when describing the elephant and his keeper in order to show the structured and
unromantic life the main character leads. Using this craft device enables Murakami to convey to
the reader the ultimate restriction the protagonist faces in life juxtaposed with the fantastic
disappearance of the elephant. I will first explore how the diction shortens and simplifies when
Murakami describes the protagonist, but elongates and flows when describing the elephant and
his keeper. Lastly, I will underscore why this is important to the story and how using this device
lends meaning to “The Elephant Vanishes.”
The characterization of the protagonist is immediately evident through the use of concise
and chronological diction, meaning that Murakami colored his character as an analytical and
structured individual. The beginning paragraph of the story takes the reader through the course of
the protagonist’s morning, reading, “My alarm clock woke me that day, as always at 6:13…I
went to the kitchen, made coffee and toast, turned on the radio, spread the paper out on the
kitchen table, and proceeded to munch and read” (453). Notice how these sentences read like a
newspaper article that depicts some crime; an article that would have a need for exact and
chronological detail. They are without description of taste, color, or emotion. Furthermore, the
sentences do not wander but resolutely track the exact events of that morning without seemingly
any tangential purpose but to tell the reader what happened; not how it happened. Through the
use of clipped and concise diction and syntax, Murakami successfully characterizes the

2. Hill 2
protagonist as analytical, structured, and routine-loving. But something curious happens when
Murakami begins to describe interactions the protagonist notes between the elephant and his
keeper.
Because this subject involves the fantastical disappearance of the elephant and its keeper,
and the protagonist’s strange attachment to the elephant along with the belief that they magically
vanished, it strongly juxtaposes the tone of logic that accompanies scenes involving the
protagonist’s everyday life. Murakami does this by employing flowing syntax; as oppose to short
and clipped sentences that sequence an order of events, he writes descriptively and soaks his
writing with a tone of fascination and creativity- completely the opposite from the protagonist’s
characterization. Although Murakami continues to stick to analytical details, such as the
protagonist noticing that the elephant seemed ambivalent to its shackle, that it kept “it’s blank
gaze fixed on some indeterminate point in the space, its ears and a few white hairs on its body
waving gently in the breeze” (456), note how the writing style has subtly changed. The focus has
shifted to description, such as in the phrase “few white hairs on its body waving gently in the
breeze.” Contrasting that to the fact that the protagonist’s toast or coffee were not described, and
neither was his kitchen, age, appearance or emotion noted at the beginning of the story cues the
reader to pay attention to the elephant; something about it plays an integral role in the story. As
soon as the story focuses back onto the disappearance of the elephant, the diction and syntax
reverts back to unemotional, clear and nondescript. Page 457 documents this change when
Murakami writes, “The second problem was the route of escape…The third problem was
elephant tracks.” These sentences structure this mystifying and extraordinary occurrence as a
problem in need of solving which follows the analytical tendencies of the protagonist.

3. Hill 3
In the end, however, the protagonist, after reviewing the facts and analyzing the data,
comes to the conclusion that, quite inexplicably, the elephant has indeed simply vanished
without a trace. Because he has no concrete evidence to support the elephant being stolen or
having rid itself of its chain, he decides that the elephant disappeared in a mystical way. This is
where the real significance of Murakami’s story comes into play. Because the diction and syntax
in “The Elephant Vanishes” begins swift, concise and chronological, then shifts to descriptive
and flowing when speaking about the elephant, the reader gets the sense that the protagonist falls
into a “free” state while observing the elephant. During these moments in the story, the
protagonist seems to be less restrained by the shackles of his analytical life, an observation
triggered by noting the change in syntax and diction. Because of this, the reader wants the main
character to remain or expand his time in this freer state, where possibilities seem potential and a
depth of life seems evident; after all, the protagonist is observing, “the special warmth, the sense
of trust between [elephant and keeper]. While the keeper swept the floor, the elephant would
wave its trunk and pat the keeper’s back” (463). Because the protagonist is so isolated and
confined to his structured life, the reader hopes that the inspiration and fascination the
protagonist has with the elephant and its keeper will change him for the better. For that reason,
when the end comes about and Murakami characterizes the protagonist in exactly the opposite
way through diction and syntax, the reader is disappointed.
The ending reads, “The elephant and keeper have vanished completely. They will never
be coming back” (465). The tone of this sentence implies that the “investigation” is complete.
Because of the clipped and undescriptive diction coupled with the definitive of “completely” and
“never,” the reader understands that the protagonist has lost the sense of wonder and intrigue
inherent in the disappearance of the elephant and its keeper. The protagonist, whatever

4. Hill 4
awakening he may have felt while watching the elephant and his keeper or following their story
in the news, is lost. What is also intriguing in this story, and supports this claim, is that
Murakami compares the loss of the protagonist’s woman friend with the loss of the elephant and
his keeper. The diction changes when the protagonist is speaking to the lady friend. Murakami
even employs italics to show this change when the protagonist says, “A kitchen probably does
need a few things more than it needs unity,” conveying that unity in structure (which we know
the protagonist values) does not make someone completely happy. The use of italics shows that
the protagonist becomes more engaging, spontaneous and fun with the prospect of a relationship
with this woman. It also shows that what he is missing is the depth of life that is inherently
supplied with a relationship; something that the protagonist almost has with the woman and
something he watched between the man and the elephant. When both these things disappear the
syntax reverts, as we have seen, to bland, to the point, and flat; no italics, no descriptions, and no
emotions.
Essentially Murakami uses syntax and diction is “The Elephant Vanishes” to show the
reader that the protagonist is suffering from a lack of significant relationships in his life. This
tone is conveyed through clipped diction and chronological listings to emphasize his structured
life. Conversely, when the fantastical element of the vanishing elephant is explored, or the
possibility of a relationship with the woman is touched on, flowing syntax and descriptive
diction is used, signaling a shift. However, in the end, the reader notes that the protagonist has
reverted back to a life lacking in romance, mystery, or connection through the use of declarative
sentences and undescriptive language.