Who are we really talking about whenever we talk about Murakami Haruki, or in fact, what are we talking about? Using the concept of ‘signifier’ in linguistics and semiotics to look at the name ‘Murakami Haruki’, this reflective piece argues that the more he writes and the more we talk about him, the more this name becomes an empty signifier. The name no longer really refers to the actual writer himself—whenever the word ‘Murakami’ is evoked in writing or conversation, what we (critics and readers alike) are really referring to is a string of vague associations and assumptions that are only discursively linked to the author, but may in fact have little to do with the actual person himself. (This goes for this very reflective piece as well.) Such associations and assumptions can be the fictional works he has written (not all of which may reflect values he believes in), the non-fictional works he has produced (again, not all of which may reflect his beliefs), the popularity and reputation he enjoys among the public and scholars (i.e. the so-called Murakami phenomenon, fuelled also by readers of this volume, with little regard for whether this is what he really wants) and even the way his name is represented or stylised (in the West he is known as ‘Haruki Murakami’ following Eurocentric naming conventions—what cultural politics does this highlight, but also, does he care?). The name can now also evoke associations based on the treatment of certain themes in his works, such as gender, food, war or capitalism. The reflective piece will capture the multifaceted meanings the name ‘Murakami Haruki’ can now evoke and, more importantly, discuss the implication of this empty signification process to the study of literature in the twenty-first century.