Nietzsche on His Balcony

by Carlos Fuentes, E. Shaskan Bumas (Translator), Alejandro Branger (Translator)

On a hot, insomniac night at the Hotel Metropol, the novelist Carlos Fuentes steps onto his balcony only to find another man on the balcony next door. The other man asks for news of the social strife turning into revolution in the unnamed city below them. He reveals himself as the 19th-century philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, permitted to revisit earth once a year for 24 hours based on his theory of eternal return. With tenderness and gallows humor, the novelist and the philosopher unflinchingly tell the story of the beginning of the revolution, its triumph, fanaticism, terror, and retrenchment: a story of love, friendship, family, commitment, passion, corruption, betrayal, violence, and hope.

Genres: Fiction, Latin American, Latin American Literature, Literature, Philosophy, Classics, 21st Century

332 pages, Paperback

First published September 24, 2012

About the author

Carlos Fuentes Macías was a Mexican writer and one of the best-known novelists and essayists of the 20th century in the Spanish-speaking world. Fuentes influenced contemporary Latin American literature, and his works have been widely translated into English and other languages.

Fuentes was born in Panama City, Panama; his parents were Mexican. Due to his father being a diplomat, during his childhood he lived in Montevideo, Rio de Janeiro, Washington, Santiago, and Buenos Aires. In his adolescence, he returned to Mexico, where he lived until 1965. He was married to film star Rita Macedo from 1959 till 1973, although he was an habitual philanderer and allegedly, his affairs - which he claimed include film actresses such as Jeanne Moreau and Jean Seberg - brought her to despair. The couple ended their relationship amid scandal when Fuentes eloped with a very pregnant and then-unknown journalist named Silvia Lemus. They were eventually married.

Following in the footsteps of his parents, he also became a diplomat in 1965 and served in London, Paris (as ambassador), and other capitals. In 1978 he resigned as ambassador to France in protest over the appointment of Gustavo Diaz Ordaz, former president of Mexico, as ambassador to Spain. He also taught courses at Brown, Princeton, Harvard, Penn, George Mason, Columbia and Cambridge.

---
کارلوس فوئنتس در ۱۱ نوامبر ۱۹۲۸ در پاناماسیتی به دنیا آمد. مادرش برتا ماسیاس ریواس و پدرش رافائل فوئنتس بوئه‌تیگر است. پدر وی از دیپلمات‌های مشهور مکزیک است. وی سفیر مکزیک در هلند، پاناما، پرتغال و ایتالیا بود.

دوران کودکی‌اش در واشنتگتن دی.سی. و سانتیاگوی شیلی گذشت. فوئنتس در دانشگاه مکزیک و ژنو در رشتهٔ حقوق تحصیل کرد. او به زبان‌های انگلیسی و فرانسه تسلط کامل دارد.

آثار
* مرگ آرتمیوکروز، ۱۹۶۲
* آئورا، ۱۹۶۲
* زمین ما،‌ ۱۹۷۵
* گرینگوی پیر، ۱۹۸۵
* ملکهٔ عروسک‌ها
* آسوده خاصر، ترجمهٔ محمدامین لاهیجی.
* مرگ آرتمیو کروز، ترجمهٔ مهدی سحابی.
* آئورا، ترجمهٔ عبدالله کوثری.
* سرهیدا.
* خودم با دیگران (به تازگی با نام از چشم فوئنتس) ترجمهٔ عبدالله کوثری.


---
Carlos Fuentes Macías fue un escritor mexicano y uno de los novelistas y ensayistas más conocidos en el mundo de habla española. Fuentes influyó en la literatura contemporánea de América Latina, y sus obras han sido ampliamente traducidas al inglés y otros idiomas.

Fuentes nació en la ciudad de Panamá, Panamá, sus padres eran mexicanos. Debido a su padre era un diplomático, durante su infancia vivió en Montevideo, Río de Janeiro, Washington, Santiago y Buenos Aires. En su adolescencia regresó a México, donde vivió hasta 1965. Estuvo casado con la estrella de cine Rita Macedo de 1959 hasta 1973, aunque era un mujeriego habitual y, al parecer, sus asuntos - que se ha cobrado incluyen actrices como Jeanne Moreau y Jean Seberg, su llevados a la desesperación. La pareja terminó su relación en medio del escándalo, cuando Fuentes se fugó con un periodista muy embarazada y entonces desconocido de nombre Silvia Lemus. Se casaron finalmente.

Siguiendo los pasos de sus padres, también se convirtió en un diplomático en 1965 y sirvió en Londres, París (como embajador), y otras capitales. En 1978 renunció al cargo de embajador en Francia en protesta por el nombramiento de Gustavo Díaz Ordaz, ex presidente de México, como embajador en España.

Reviews

[Eylül Görmüş · Rating 4 out of 5]

"Bir devrimin kötü tarafı, her bireyin ahlakını ortaya çıkarması ve onu kendi etiğinin kolektif etik olduğuna inandırmasıdır. Oysaki yegane politik etik sana başta söylediğimdir: beklenmeyeni yapmak. Hiçbir şey yapmadan yönetmek. Şaşırtan ama belli aralıklarla yinelenen eylemlerle kandır ve mutlu et. Gündeliğe dönüşen bir şey olağanüstülüğünü yitirir. Her gün tekrarlayan bir şeyi artık kimse fark etmez. Sana gücü veren şey işte budur. Gücün sende olduğunun fark edilmemesini sağlayan işte budur."

Carlos Fuentes'in ölümünden hemen evvel tamamladığı son romanı Friedrich Balkonunda, tam bir "devrim önce kendi çocuklarını yer" hikâyesi. "Tanrı öldü" dediği için her sene Tanrı tarafından belirli bir süreliğine yeryüzüne gönderilen Friedrich Nietzsche, balkonundan oturup olan biteni izliyor, bu esnada da Carlos Fuentes kendisiyle sohbet ediyor, Meksika'nın başarılı da olsa başarısız da olsa hüsranla nihayetlenen türlü devrimlerine benzeyen kurgusal bir devrimin öyküsünü anlatıyor.

Zor bir kitap demeyeceğim, zaten Fuentes'in yazdığı ve kolay olan bir şey var mı hayatta? Terra Nostra ve Doğmamış Kristof'tan alışık olduğumuz diyalogumsu destansı anlatıma burada da başvurmuş yazar. Nietzsche'nin "bengi dönüş" (buna ebedi tekerrür desek daha doğru olacak sanki ya) kavramı üzerinden konuşuyorlar devrimi ve Meksika'da olup bitenleri, eh, devrime dair umutsuzluğunu tahmin edebilirsiniz. (Aklıma Fuentes'in yakın arkadaşı Kundera'nın yine aynı kavramı didiklediği bir başka roman olan "Varolmanın Dayanılmaz Hafifliği" geldi tabii, acaba Fuentes kitabı Kundera'ya okutmuş muydu? İnsan merak ediyor.)

Çoksesli, anlatıcısı her bölümde değişen, teknik olarak müthiş bir kitap bence Friedrich Balkonunda. Okuduğum en iyi Fuentes kitabı değil ama benim gibi kendisinin epik dilini seviyorsanız, son derece haz alacaksınızdır.

"Tutkular ne Tanrı'nın ne de olayların eseridir, tutkular bizim gizli güdülerimizdir, aşk maskeli egoizmlerdir, aşk öfkeyi gizliyor; alçakgönüllülük gururu".

[MJ Nicholls · Rating 5 out of 5]

Master Mexican novelist Carlos “The Don” Fuentes’s last novel ends one of the most significant careers in world letters with a spectacular flourish of a whimper. Encountering the pessimist’s pessimist Friedrich Nietzsche on his balcony one evening, the two muse on the theory of the “eternal return” (infinite recurrence of the universe), and invent a story of a revolution featuring a cast of strange and beguiling characters. Among them various hopefuls for the vacant position of leader: the idealistic and doomed Saul Mendes, the hopeless Aaron Azar, and two brothers Dante and Leo, one nice one evil (no surprises in who emerges victorious). Split between droll dialogues with Fuentes and Nietzsche and the tales spun, the novel is vibrant with Fuentes’s incredible prose, observations (on philosophy, the nature of revolution, politics, fraternal and other relationships), and impeccable structure and economy. A finer career finale one couldn’t hope for.

[Jim · Rating 2 out of 5]

Nietzsche on His Balcony is the last book by Mexican novelist Carlos Fuentes. It was published posthumously. Although I have liked everything else I have read by the author, this book did not hold together for me.

Consider the framing device: The narrator (Carlos Fuentes?) is standing on a balcony at his hotel. On the adjacent balcony is a man who looks like and who claims to be Friedrich Nietzsche. Apparently, he is allowed an "Eternal Return" for a limited time once each year.

The book is ostensibly a study of political revolutions, closely approximating the events of the French Revolution. Why is Nietzsche selected, however, as an expert on the subject of revolution? He was certainly not an expert on the subject during his lifetime, and his Germany is perhaps better known for altogether suppressing revolutions.

There are parts that are interesting, and Fuentes had not lost his touch of inventing interesting characters. But the overall impact? Somewhat lame.

[Caroline ☕ · Rating 5 out of 5]

"Hay muchas maneras de estar en la historia. A veces la haces, a veces la sufres, a veces nada más la miras..." Página 143.

Este libro me dejó sin palabras en la boca y un millar de pensamientos que no me paran de rondar por la cabeza. Si bien al inicio me costó adaptarme a la forma en la que está escrita la historia, una vez que estuve en sintonía y agarre el hilo simplemente no paré de disfrutarla. No puedo decir de qué va porque honestamente no sabría cómo explicarlo, pero considero que se le debería dar una oportunidad sin prejuicios.

[Maria · Rating 4 out of 5]

"...Federico ha muerto! Lo dice Dios."

Creo que Carlos Fuentes nos presenta en Federico en su balcón una propuesta bastante interesante. Un diálogo entre el autor mismo y Friedrich Nietzsche en el presente donde, a través de sus personajes y una creciente revolución llena de simbolismos, hace un análisis de lo que el filósofo alemán podría decir de nuestra sociedad hoy en dia.

Como admiradora de Fuentes debo resaltar que precisamente es esto lo que más admiro de este gran intelectual contemporáneo, su capacidad de ofrecernos diferentes y nuevas técnicas narrativas que ofrecen una introspección, principalmente, de la historia, el poder y la sociedad del México presente, y que lo llevaron a numerosos reconocimientos literarios a través del mundo. Es un placer abrir un libro de Fuentes y ser sorprendida por una narrativa muy diferente a todo lo demás que previamente hayas leído de él. Sin embargo, no recomiendo este libro como la primera lectura de este autor a quienes están buscando introducirse en este gran representante del "boom latinoamericano". A nuevos lectores recomendaria mas buscar La región más transparente, La muerte de Artemio Cruz o Aura por nombrar algunas de sus grandes obras representativas.

"...hay muchas maneras de estar en la historia. A veces la haces, a veces la sufres, a veces nada mas la miras..."
7.1.2018

[Yonina · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was fun- it’s interesting to see how Fuentes has really read his Nietzsche and somehow metabolized it in this novel. I wanted a bit more bile and rage from the character Nietzsche, though- he seemed a bit anesthetized. That’s in the service of him being bonded with the Fuentes character, I guess, and in the service of the alignment in their shared narrative about the revolutionaries… more than anything this reminded me of Musil’s Man without Qualities, with multiple similarities: sex crimes; meditations on madness desire and justice; visiting an insane asylum; considerations of purity and love; both vis a vis sex and beyond, a reaching for atrocity at the same time as for something innocent; looming questions of incest; revolution and revolutionary politics; the role of the mass; the question of the nation; choice and will and also swirling fate…. The list goes on. I didn’t read (listen) closely enough to go further with the comparison, and at times this was draggingly dialogue heavy (another thing it shares with MwoQ), but of course that’s fine.

Most of all I’m struck by the novel’s emphasis on telling as history, fictionality as necessary, and yet unreliable…and on the SHARED telling it affirms between the two characters. I had expected the novel to be more fragmented in voice and focalization but in fact it was very structurally simple and consistent in its pattern. In a way I wished that there was MORE dialogue between Nietzsche and Fuentes, evaluating and debating most of all— there’s not really enough interpretive dissent in the book, either in the frame narrative or in the nested stories that each teller tells.

[Thomas · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm not sure anyone other than Sartre has succeeded in casting a novel from a philosophical model, but this is Fuentes' attempt. The result is beautiful in flashes, but the stories don't cohere. It is probably the case that Fuentes did not care about thematic coherence in this novel, as he did not in many of his more inventive fictions, but that is detrimental to the novel if it intends to present instantiations of Nietzsche's ideas. But maybe that wasn't Fuentes' intention. Maybe he only used Nietzsche as a prop, or a slave, to carry his stories of revenge for compassion and the futility of revolution. Artists. Can't shoot em, I guess.

In any case, a high tolerance for ambiguity is recommended. It is passionately written, as all Fuentes is. It is also the last Fuentes, and we should be grateful we have it rather than nothing.

[Steven Scribner · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is one of the most disturbing books I’ve ever read.

The thoroughly unpleasant 19th-century philosopher Nietzsche more or less invented nihilism, and formulated a theory of power of the will that was seized upon by the Nazis, among others. In this book, he appears on the balcony next to that of the (fictional) author, and the two of them exchange banter about a revolution that is taking place in the unnamed city below them. They tell each other stories. They discuss each story in light of Nietzsche’s philosophy. They speak of the leaders of the revolution, and the leaders’ relationships to each other; telling the tales mostly through conversations that sometimes appear anonymous – it’s difficult to tell exactly who is speaking, and that may be the (real) author’s point: these “leaders” often blend into a single entity, seeking what is best for the people or for the revolution or for the country, but always misidentifying it. Their stories begin with cruelty and deviant behavior and grow stranger as the revolution proceeds.

The revolution itself becomes a character, or rather, a monster; in the end, it consumes them and finally, itself. The author seems to be saying that any politics based on nihilism must inevitably crumble under its own (existential, or other) horror. To be fair, there was more to Nietzsche than nastiness (a love of music as an escape from the dreadfulness of life, for example) but in having one of the characters be particularly enamored of Wagner, the author reminds us that Hitler liked Wagner too. All in all, on the surface, this appears to be a book about philosophy, but it is really a story about horror and unspeakable atrocities.

--Steven E. Scribner, author of the "Tond" series (fantasy) https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2...

[Oliwia · Rating 2 out of 5]

Książka dostała dwie gwiazdki, ponieważ do 200 strony byłam bardzo wciągnięta i zaangażowana w tę rewolucję.

Nie jestem w stanie zdecydować, czy ta książka była po prostu głupia w swojej 'mądrości' czy ja byłam na nią za głupia. Tak czy inaczej mam jej wiele do zarzucenia od formy aż po zakończenie, które niesamowicie mnie rozczarowało. Gdy zobaczyłam, że w zakończeniu mówi Fryderyk to pomyślałam sobie 'kurde, czyli będzie wyjaśnienie tej pokrętnej historii' i oczywiście tego nie otrzymałam - chyba że dla kogoś faktycznie było to dobre wyjaśnienie całej książki i mentalności bohaterów.

Podsumowując chyba po prostu książka była przeintelektualizowana. Został poruszony chyba każdy motyw na kilka sposobów i bynajmniej nie był to dobry zabieg, ponieważ nie wiadomo było, na którym wątku skupić swoją uwagę.

Czy książka była zwyczajnie zbyt dynamiczna? Możliwe. Nie mnie to oceniać, ponieważ nie jestem specjalistą, ale takie są moje odczucia po przeczytaniu 'Nieztschego na balkonie'. Książka zapadnie mi w pamięć na długo, ponieważ była ogromnym rozczarowaniem.

[Heronimo Gieronymus · Rating 4 out of 5]

At a certain point we who are raised-up in that poststructuralist wing of the Liberal Arts Inc. compound become accustomed to the sentiment expressed especially by the students of Derrida that all that which relates to human enterprise, even (maybe especially) that which would not at first seem so, is text. All is text. Try exclaiming this to a positivist. Prepare to see him riled. But here we are in the arms of Fuentes, on his last excursion of a novel, before going more-or-less gently into that neutral night. This is a novel written by Fuentes along with Fuentes. The work of the artist is always in some sense a taking-counsel-with-self. Only one of the Fuentes-machines is also basically Friedrich Nietzsche. A Friedrich Nietzsche, not THE Friedrich Nietzsche. Or a panoply of Friedrich Nietzsche-functions that are also half of the Carlos Fuentes meditating and mediating this text into existence. Fuentes/Fuentes-Nietzsche is both commenting upon and generating an edifice of fiction, and we do have to consider that maybe if everything is text everything is also fiction. Certainly everything in your fiction becomes fiction when you are writing fiction, but let's not get dizzy w/ tautologies. Fuentes/Fuentes-Nietzsche are amassing a series of fictional narrative blocks around an engagement w/ a subject very, very dear to Latin American fiction: revolution. Because of the bifurcated author-function and its role as a (sometimes irritating) Greek chorus, often po-mo self-reflexive (the fact that this is all in service to a book entitled NIETZSCHE ON HIS BALCONY is explicitly addressed), we are invited to think of this book as text about generating text (which you don't necessarily only do in a book). Fuentes' Nietzsche doesn't really coincide w/ the Nietzsche I personally carry around w/ me (and boy do I ever!), but I appreciate the point, and I do actually love what Fuentes-Nietzsche lays down in the bravura closing threnody. This is a novel about novels and artists. More than novels, then. A novel about text. Text as broadly defined as you are willing to countenance.

[Ricardo Munguia · Rating 3 out of 5]

Novela bastante complicada y reflexiva. La historia no empieza a agarrar forma si no hasta casi la mitad del libro, pero en términos generales se puede describir como una conversación filosófica entre el autor, Carlos Fuentes y el filósofo Federico Nietzsche en la que se entrelaza una historia que involucra una revolución que sirve como ejemplificación de varios conceptos tocados en la conversación.

La novela es increíblemente densa, pero una vez que le agarras el ritmo se vuelve difícil de dejar, eso sí hay varios puntos de esta novela que no me gustaron. El primero es que si no has leído y no estás familiarizado con la vida y obra de Nietzsche muchas referencias las vas a perder, por lo que creo que leer la obra de Nietzsche es primordial antes de leer este libro. Y lo mismo se puede decir de la obra de Fuentes, pues aunque no hay una referencia a su obra, definitivamente la hay en su pensamiento por lo que no lo recomendaría como una obra para conocer al autor.

El segundo es que a pesar de no ser un libro extenso, la trama se maneja en muchos niveles con personajes muy variados pero en particular la historia de la niña tiene episodios muy perturbadores. No es un libro que se puede leer de manera casual pues uno puede perderse con facilidad, y la verdad es que llega a ser bastante tedioso. Al final la historia agarra claridad y me gustó bastante, pero llegaste a ese punto puede ser un poco desesperante.

Si buscas una novela que te planteé un desafío, creo que está ofrece un buen reto sin ser abrumadora. Si buscas algo ligero y digeribles, definitivamente no lo vas a disfrutar. Recomendado para lectores experimentados y familiarizados con la obra de Nietzsche y Fuentes quienes gusten de obras complejas y diseccionar los textos en busca de referencias.

[Ayşe Zeliha · Rating 3 out of 5]

Son kitabında Carlos Fuentes, bir yandan Nietzsche’nin düşüncelerini tartışmaya açarken diğer yandan da kurgusal bir ‘devrim’in [devrim yapmak, devrimi sürdürmek, devrim dinamiklerine sadık kalmak, devrimin amacından sapmamak vs] olumlu ve olumsuz yönlerini örneklendirerek ‘devrim’ kavramını irdeler. ‘Devrim’in kendi kendini yok etmesi kaçınılmaz olmak zorunda mıdır? sorusu ile okur karşı karşıya kalır en sonunda.
Çok sesli bir anlatım. Nietzsche’nin görüşlerini iyi bilmeli okur bu bu kitabı okumadan önce.

[Banu Yıldıran Genç · Rating 3 out of 5]

http://tembelveyazar.blogspot.com/201...

[Scott · Rating 1 out of 5]

Carlos Fuentes, "Nietzsche on his Balcony." E. Shaskan Bumas and Alejandro Branjer, translators. Dalkey Archive Press, 2012/2016.
This is Carlos Fuentes’s last novel, published posthumously. I bought it at Book Passage in San Francisco and thought that I would take a chance, given that he was one of the most important Boom authors and that the other books I’ve read by him ("The Death of Artemio Cruz," "Burnt Water") are daring postmodern creations that helped shape my understanding of Mexican and Latin American literatures.
Unfortunately, "Nietzsche on his Balcony" falls far short of his canonical works. The premise is interesting. The main characters are Friedrich Nietzsche and his interlocutor(the narrator, Fuentes?), and the setting is a hotel in an unnamed city. Magically, Nietzsche “eternally returns” occasionally to the balcony of this hotel room to observe the world, which is where the interlocutor/narrator/Fuentes encounters him from a neighboring balcony. What happens between them feels something like a writers’ workshop. After some conversation, they each begin to create character sketches and plot lines which develop into a story about a revolution, perhaps in France, after which there is some discussion of what each has created. The book shifts between a character sketch/plot line chapter to a framing discussion chapter about the previous chapter. It is very orderly: character sketch/plot line→commentary, character sketch/plot line→commentary, building toward the larger story. The subtitle of the book should be, though, something like "Two Dirty Old Men Shoot the Breeze." I expected that the dialogues between the characters as well as the narratives they created would explore elements of Nietzsche’s philosophy, and they do but to a very limited degree. Rather, the underdeveloped philosophical discussions seem more of an excuse to initially lead to stories about women, particularly abject and objectified women, criminal sexuality (pedophilia), and hermaphroditism.There is much prurience running through the book, and many of the character sketch/plot line chapters are simply voyeuristic verging on titillating. The female characters who are not objectified, sexualized or abjectified, inevitably subjugate themselves to serve patriarchy: “O those men are so brilliant, and I just need to support them.” The Latin American Boom was a boys’ club, and "Nietzsche on his Balcony" seems to be a last, anachronistic gasp of that club. Besides the sexist portrayal of women, there is the narrative of revolution, a revolution which is, of course, led by men. For this, Nietzsche and his interlocutor focus primarily on aristocratic characters who want to pursue a “revolution,” which they really don’t know how to pursue, because at best they have a generic sense of what a revolution is. Their discussions are shallow and trite, and their words are empty signifiers, stereotypes, and slogans. The characters are “beautiful people,” and the resulting narratives are leading less to a novel and more toward a soap opera or telenovela. Nietzsche and his interlocutor do create an arc leading to the failure of this revolution, which is predictable, but as the story of revolutions peters out in backstabbing, murder, assassination Nietzsche and his interlocutor return to prurience and voyeurism. Revolutions may fail, but violating, exploitative sexuality is always worth looking at. Yuck! The eternal return of sexual obsession: porn will out.

[Richard Thompson · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a very interesting book that left me with a lot to think about. It deals with questions of identity, time, philosophy, and fiction in a structure that is not always entirely consistent or coherent, but the messiness of it just makes it more intriguing. Is that really Nietzsche on his balcony? Is Nietzsche just a projection of his interlocutor? Is the interlocutor Fuentes? Are the two main protagonists just alter egos of all of their characters? The Nietzsche character doesn't seem to really be purely Nietzsche. Was that intentional? I think that the answer to all of these questions is a definite maybe. Or sometimes yes, sometimes no.

In some sense I think that we are supposed to believe that history is cyclical, but sometimes not. On one level Mendes, Dante and Azar are Marat, Danton and Robespierre and the general at the end is Napoleon, but on another level they are their own unique individual characters. Maybe the repetition of history is more like Marx famously suggested in The 18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte -- the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce. I don't know. But the "I don't knowness" that I consistently experienced in reading this book was part of what made it fun.

I was initially unhappy with the female characters, who all seem to be different aspects of the same person, who is at once whore, mother and saint. It seemed very one dimensional, but then when I considered the male characters, I saw that they are also all archetypes who blend into each other, so that they are really no different in this regard than the women. At that point I just let myself accept it as part of the style and began to enjoy the book more.

I liked the portrayal of revolution. It rises up out of the frustration and explosion of the people, but then depends on the political leaders to carry if forward. The leaders go through phases, first the messiah, then then the rationalist, then the moralist, then the general and the corrupt politician who restore something like the ancien regime. The revlotionary leaders are each doomed to fail and die in turn as it is impossible for the revolution to be sustained or kept pure. So why have a revolution at all? It's just part of the inevitable cyclical nature of history. We don't have a choice. And yet, fruitless though it may be, you can't help getting sucked into the energy, the hope, the promise of liberation, even if all inevitably turns out false.

[V.]

Not sure why I found this so compelling. Everything about it seems inauspicious—a late, posthumous novel, set in an unnamed Latin American country, with a cute metafictional conceit and endless, mostly standard European literary and historical references (y'all heard about the French Revolution? y'all heard about Nietzsche's eternal recurrence?)

But, anyway, all of that is to say that it somehow worked for me. I was attached to the characters, and the cycles of political and sexual violence they're trapped in don't feel like impositions by a nihilistic master planner, but like realistic outcomes of individual agents, living with Nietzschean lightness and energy, trying to triumph in a world that just happens, at this moment, to have some terror and degradation going on in it.

There were parts of the painfully nonspecific political satire in this novel that gave me heartburn, but that's not really the point here, I don't think, any more than Nietzsche is, really. I don't know, it's very possible that I'm missing the point, for want of either philosophical or historical context (my Nietzsche is spotty, as is my Mexican history). I just know I found it compelling.

This is considered a minor Fuentes, right? I just picked it up, out of curiosity, for the Dalkey spine. I guess I should maybe check out The Death of Artemio Cruz.

[Alphan Lodi · Rating 5 out of 5]

Ülkemizde yaşadığımız yıkım, kaybettiğimiz canlar, bölgede hayatta kalan yurttaşların maruz kaldığı büyük felaket; açgözlülüğün, rüşvete batmanın, vurdum duymazlığın, siyaseti saran ahlaksız fırsatçılığın, bilime sırt çevirmenin sonuçlarının ne kadar ağır olabileceğini ortaya koydu. Olan biteni doğru analiz edip yaralarımızı sarmak ve aynı acıları tekrar yaşamamak için ne gerekiyorsa yapmak zorundayız. Carlos Fuentes’in ölümünden hemen önce kaleme aldığı “Friedrich Balkonunda” oligarşiye son veren kurgusal bir devrimde yaşananları anlatıyor. Çok sayıda karakter ve çok sayıda olayın kesişim noktasında yerleşik toplumsal gerçekleri ve insan doğasından kaynaklanan savrulmaları sorguluyor.

“O has bir adamdı, yaptıkları politik gereksinimlerden kaynaklanıyordu. Bütün yaptıklarını şehrin meydanında toplanmış olanların adına yapıyordu. Kazanmak için sokağın ondan istediği kişi olmalıydı: İktidardaki bir terörist !”

[Victor Pérez Negrón · Rating 3 out of 5]

Carlos Nietzche ha hablado: Revolución, una palabra permea todo el relato, (no lo mejor de Fuentes, sí genial para ser su último publicado), la gran solución para exterminar la opresión y rapacidad de las élites, pero claro, siempre se comerá a sus hijos. Ahí comienza el eterno retorno de Don Nietzche, todo lo demás es una ilustra elucubración transportado a cualquier triste historia de una nación que experimentado las vicisitudes de abuso cíclico de gobernantes insaciables, siempre insaciables. Sí, el hombre es, una vez más, su único enemigo. Nuestra sombra hasta la muerte.

[Jorge Padilla · Rating 2 out of 5]

Esta novela no me gustó. La historia es bastante difusa, los personajes no están bien delineados y los diálogos entre el narrador y Nietzche no son lo suficientemente profundos, todo se queda a nivel muy superficial. No la recomiendo. Hay por lo menos otras diez obras de Fuentes que valen mucho más la pena.

[A2 · Rating 3 out of 5]

The first third is magical. However, the revolutionary tale unfolds too quickly--lots of telling instead of showing--resulting in a lack of heart, and the fabricators add more philosophy than necessary.

[Praveen Mathew · Rating 1 out of 5]

Rather boring and repetitive, with nothing to take away.

[Grant Johnson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Because we are excrescences of life and gifts for death, Charlotte told herself, and meanwhile we have an obligation to those around us.

[Pris López · Rating 3 out of 5]

¡Federico ha muerto! Lo dice Dios.

[Bob · Rating 4 out of 5]

Chaotic, disturbing and thought provoking.

[Luis Castro · Rating 5 out of 5]

De grandes hombres como éste solo grandes obras se esperan.aún por leer de él muchas.👏

[Gabriela · Rating 2 out of 5]

che libro d hueva

[Shadab · Rating 3 out of 5]

کتاب رو به فارسی رضا اسکندری خوندم. دلنشین و تامل برانگیز. احتمال انتشارش کمه و امیدوارم در دسترس عموم قرار بگیره. باید دوباره بهش برگردم.

[Carlos · Rating 3 out of 5]

Carlos Fuentes e o Eterno Retorno

Da sacada de um hotel em um país que poderia ser tanto o México quanto qualquer outro, dois homens discutem ideias enquanto observam a sangrenta marcha de uma revolução – que também poderia ser qualquer uma. Em torno desse tênue fio condutor que se tece Federico em Sua Sacada, romance que o escritor mexicano Carlos Fuentes concluiu pouco antes de sua morte inesperada, em maio do ano passado.

Federico em Sua Sacada (Tradução de Carlos Nougué. Rocco, 316 páginas, R$ 39) é um livro de estrutura complexa. A narrativa se divide em quatro seções, cada uma delas com uma citação irônica do hino nacional mexicano. Essas partes se subdividem em capítulos curtos, que se alternam entre o diálogo de dois homens que conversam de uma sacada para outra em um hotel e os pontos de vista de uma dezena de personagens cujas ações formam a história de uma revolução popular deteriorada em ditadura e terror. O “Federico” do título é o redivivo Friedrich Nietzsche, que discute com o narrador temas centrais de sua filosofia ilustrados pela ação dos homens e das mulheres que amam e se matam lá embaixo: o eterno retorno, a vontade de poder e a legitimação da violência.

Enquanto Federico dialoga com um narrador que muda constantemente de identidade (às vezes é outro Federico, à vezes é um duplo de Fuentes, em outro momento é Dante, uma das figuras centrais do livro), desfilam diante de seus olhos os principais personagens da narrativa, figuras que cumprem uma função alegórica no grande teatro histórico – posição que é marcada mesmo pela escolha dos nomes dos personagens. Dante e Leonardo são irmãos aristocratas em lados opostos. Leonardo é conselheiro do poder constituído, Dante é um dos ideólogos do movimento, ao lado de Aarón Azar, advogado de austeridade sombria, e de Saúl Mendés-Renania, revolucionário que tem abertos na carne estigmas que sangram continuamente. Não demora para que o movimento triunfe, e cada um deles, além de outros personagens que gravitam na história,assumam papéis que resumem o declínio histórico de qualquer revolução real, da francesa à soviética, passando pela mexicana: o traído, o traidor,o mártir,o herói,o tirano

As interrelações entre o trio de líderes reproduzirão, aos poucos, tensões históricas que ora remetem à ruptura de Stalin com Trotsky (quando Aarón vota pela desgraça de seu amigo Dante), ora o conflito entre Danton e Robespierre (Aaron é austero e seco como o “incorruptível” da Revolução Francesa, e o próprio Dante é chamado, às, vezes, de Dantón, um apelido no aumentativo que reproduz no espanhol o nome da “voz da Revolução”). O arco de personagens, contudo, não é muito desenvolvido, talvez pela própria função alegórica de cada um. A maior exceção talvez seja o sapateiro Basilicato, homem do povo entusiasmado pelo fervor da revolução que vai gradativamente galgando postos na hierarquia do movimento.

Em um romance assumidamente dedicado a transformar o “eterno retorno” de Nietzsche em alegoria, não é de surpreender que temas e inquietações característicos de Fuentes reapareçam neste livro derradeiro. Estão lá acontecimentos suprarreais usados como metáfora para a realidade política latino-americana e a história turbulenta do continente descrita com fartas doses de farsa e sangue – temas comuns ao boom do qual Fuentes foi um dos maiores expoentes e aos quais permaneceu fiel até o fim. Não é um livro fácil,devido à radicalidade de sua experimentação. Também não é um romance coeso,pois,em determinadas passagens, a confusão instaurada pela narrativa parece menos tributária da vontade do autor do que de uma artesania deficiente ou apressada – talvez Fuentes ainda pretendesse trabalhar mais no texto após concluí-lo. Mas serve como uma memorável súmula do trabalho de um dos mais combativos autores latino-americanos

[Jared Levine · Rating 4 out of 5]

Reminded me of Calvino's If On A Winter's Night A Traveler, in the sense that it's a metafictional novel about a story where the chapters bounce between the meta and the story—but it also reminds me of Garcia Marquez's 100 Year of Solitude in that it presents the reader with a detailed fictional history, from it's very start to its inevitable end. It's a masterful work—the writing is precise, and meticulously crafted (and well translated).

Well recognizing the excellence of Fuentes' writing, it's hard for me to pinpoint why I didn't like this as much I felt like I wanted to. I think some of the nuances of Nietzsche as a character were lost on me, because I'm not big on him—but also, I found myself more gravitated to the fictional history of the revolution in the unnamed city. While I love metafiction forever and always, I felt like all the character development takes place outside of it. There is no development of Nietzsche or Fuentes* as characters—though the banter is entertaining. I dunno. I guess maybe this isn't the best place to start with Fuentes' work. It was still a really good book though.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

I am a big fan of Carlos Fuentes and was saddened to hear that he died in May 2012. There were two books published posthumously - this one and "Persona". This book was a challenge and yet after finishing it I pondered what it means? I am still not sure.

For most readers, unless you are a die-hard Fuentes fan, you will dislike this book. For the latter, one cannot wonder that he knew this was his last book and so he wrote such a challenging book. The premise is simple. Two neighbors meet and begin talking on their respective balconies at the Hotel Metropol. One is Friedrich Nietzsche and Fuentes himself. As the author tells the story of a political revolution, they debate philosophical issues. Three men, whose political fortunes change almost by each succeeding chapters are at the heart of the story - they are the "leaders" of the revolution. Their political intrigue, the women who are involved, family issues and a very odd story about a Japanese student and a tiger brings out both the highs and lows in this book.

Structurally each chapter is the voice or the story of each of the characters and is frequently reprised by the brief conversation on the balconies. This structure helps direct as to what is happening and at one section, different people tell their version of a crucial event. Fuentes himself tells us that he needs this as stories are linear, but time is not.

The book is very bleak and cynical. The ending has such a good philosophical reflection to ponder (no spoiler here). This revolution made me think of the Arab Spring which surely must have influenced Fuentes and yet, there were deeper signs here. Is this symbolism for Mexico? Is this what we have become? Fuentes plays on the famous "God is dead" statement that in killing god, Nietzsche could live on philosophically. If you want to be challenged, try this book.

I know I will miss this writer's voice. Adios Senor!