What do you think?
Rate this book
La voluntad y la fortuna
«Vi lo que es el poder: una mirada de tigre que te hace bajar los ojos y sentir miedo y vergüenza.» Lamida por mansas olas nocturnas en una playa del Pacífico, la cabeza cortada de Josué Nadal cuenta, recuerda, divaga. Sabe que es la número mil en lo que va de año y que gobierna la delincuencia (traficante o corporativa) con tal cinismo que incluso se celebra el mal como si fuera el bien de la voluntad y la fortuna. En México no hay tragedia: todo se vuelve telenovela.
Josué aspiró a entender el mundo en tanto Jericó, su amigo entrañable, llegó a admirar a Caín. Ambas voluntades chocan tras recabar agravantes en la premeditación y alevosía de Asunta Jordán, mujer indómita. En cambio, Lucha Zapata representa el peligro de la generosidad y el amor. El vasto reparto de esta obra incluye Filopáter, el cura rebelde; el magnate Max Monroy; el abogado Antonio Sanginés, intermediario entre estado y empresa; Miguel Aparecido, encarcelado por propia voluntad, y por encima (o por debajo) la matriarca, la Antigua Concepción. ¿Por qué si hay cinco tigres en una jaula cuatro se alían para matar a uno? Esta novela iniciática, espesa como el corazón de las tinieblas, propone algunas respuestas.
Josué aspiró a entender el mundo en tanto Jericó, su amigo entrañable, llegó a admirar a Caín. Ambas voluntades chocan tras recabar agravantes en la premeditación y alevosía de Asunta Jordán, mujer indómita. En cambio, Lucha Zapata representa el peligro de la generosidad y el amor. El vasto reparto de esta obra incluye Filopáter, el cura rebelde; el magnate Max Monroy; el abogado Antonio Sanginés, intermediario entre estado y empresa; Miguel Aparecido, encarcelado por propia voluntad, y por encima (o por debajo) la matriarca, la Antigua Concepción. ¿Por qué si hay cinco tigres en una jaula cuatro se alían para matar a uno? Esta novela iniciática, espesa como el corazón de las tinieblas, propone algunas respuestas.
552 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2008
66 people are currently reading
792 people want to read
About the author
Carlos Fuentes
389 books1,745 followersCarlos 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.
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.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 78 reviews
October 25, 2011
I wish I could give this book 5 stars. I wish I had loved this book. It is brilliant, genius perhaps...but incredibly boring. It started off well enough- who can't get into a book written by the narrators severed head? But then it plodded on and on and on and on and drowned me in it's newspaper like delivery of Mexican politics and antiquated philosophy. Maybe I am not smart enough to fully appreciate this book...or perhaps not old enough. I am one of those people that feels compelled to finish a book once started even if I cannot get into it- especially if I can't get into it because I believe (perhaps erroneously) that I might learn something by slogging through and finishing something that seems potentially over my head or in this case just dull. I made the same mistake in reading Infinite Jest and promised myself not to make the same mistake again...well self: "I am sorry".
March 8, 2018
Es una obra compleja que requiere bastante atención en su lectura. Un alarde narrativo y creativo del autor, que en esta novela dedica espacio a la crítica social.
http://librodelosviernes.blogspot.com...
http://librodelosviernes.blogspot.com...
April 15, 2023
Es un poco difícil tratar de describir esta novela en pocas palabras ya que toca muchos temas que van desde la amistad, la familia, el romance, la lucha de poder la supervivencia y la desgracia de los individuos. A mi gusto es una novela bastante pesada y no agarra ritmo si no hasta casi el final cuando trata de dar un giro "inesperado" pero ya esta tan empanado el paisaje por las descripciones y comparaciones medio inútiles y algunas subtramas que aportan poco o nada a la historia.
En términos generales la historia se centra en dos personajes, Josúe y Jericó, huérfanos que se conocen en su infancia y se vuelven amigos hasta que concluyen la preparatoria, momento en el que se separan para buscar su propio camino y se reencuentran años después justo para ser parte de una compleja trama que involucra a un millonario llamado Max Monroy y al presidente de México. La historia es circular ya que la novela termina justo en el momento en el que empieza (un poco como "Crónica de una muerte anunciada" en el que sabemos que le ocurre al personaje al momento de comenzar la novela).
De las cosas que me gustaron de esta obra es que esta plagada de guiños de las obras anteriores del autor, de modo que se podría ver como el cierre (o casi) de lo que Fuentes denominaba "La edad del tiempo", que es el conjunto de su obra. Sin embargo el ritmo de la novela es pasmoso, los personajes los construye a base de analogías (cuando son jóvenes forma de Cástor y Pólux los hijos mellizos de Zeus de la mitología griega; y cuando se reencuentran a forma de Abel y Caín y de hecho así se llaman los capítulos) y los personajes secundarios me parecieron muy planos, como que solo estaban ahí para tratar de rellenar la historia, (fuera de Miguel Aparecido), además de que el final me pareció precipitado.
Definitivamente no es de mis obras favoritas del autor, y de hecho no la recomendaría a menos de que ya hayas leído el resto de su obra y todavía quieras más. La verdad es que este libro me dejo agotado y aturdido y pensé muchas veces en dejarlo, así que si tienes mucha paciencia, conocimiento amplio de la obra del autor y predilección por los discursos filosóficos puede que disfrutes esta novela más de lo que la disfruté yo, ya que definitivamente este libro no es para todos.
En términos generales la historia se centra en dos personajes, Josúe y Jericó, huérfanos que se conocen en su infancia y se vuelven amigos hasta que concluyen la preparatoria, momento en el que se separan para buscar su propio camino y se reencuentran años después justo para ser parte de una compleja trama que involucra a un millonario llamado Max Monroy y al presidente de México. La historia es circular ya que la novela termina justo en el momento en el que empieza (un poco como "Crónica de una muerte anunciada" en el que sabemos que le ocurre al personaje al momento de comenzar la novela).
De las cosas que me gustaron de esta obra es que esta plagada de guiños de las obras anteriores del autor, de modo que se podría ver como el cierre (o casi) de lo que Fuentes denominaba "La edad del tiempo", que es el conjunto de su obra. Sin embargo el ritmo de la novela es pasmoso, los personajes los construye a base de analogías (cuando son jóvenes forma de Cástor y Pólux los hijos mellizos de Zeus de la mitología griega; y cuando se reencuentran a forma de Abel y Caín y de hecho así se llaman los capítulos) y los personajes secundarios me parecieron muy planos, como que solo estaban ahí para tratar de rellenar la historia, (fuera de Miguel Aparecido), además de que el final me pareció precipitado.
Definitivamente no es de mis obras favoritas del autor, y de hecho no la recomendaría a menos de que ya hayas leído el resto de su obra y todavía quieras más. La verdad es que este libro me dejo agotado y aturdido y pensé muchas veces en dejarlo, así que si tienes mucha paciencia, conocimiento amplio de la obra del autor y predilección por los discursos filosóficos puede que disfrutes esta novela más de lo que la disfruté yo, ya que definitivamente este libro no es para todos.
April 3, 2017
The most recent Fuentes book was awesome. Couldn't put the book down.
It begins with a decappitated head washing up on a shore near Acupulco Mexico. Obviously the reader wants to know what happened? It may seem obvious in light of the Mexican drug cartel violence but the story is more about power and politics. Fuentes recountes the tale through this head as the story of two men, Josue and Jerico. Josue is the head and how he got here is surprizing.
Returning to his motif on corrupt familes, he uses Mexico's richest man Carlos Slim as a model for Max Monroy who seems to wield absolute power. His aim is give every Mexican a hand-held device to help them with their pitiful existence and of course, he wants them to buy his own as he owns a monopoly. This is the angle of power. Opposite to this, the President gets elected by announcing his wife is dying of cancer and whose timely death gets him elected. However, all Presidents need a mandate for their six year term, and after her death, he has none. he decides that to help the poor Mexicans with their lives, they need to have more frequent fiestas. This is the politics. Through into the mix some very enticing and yet corrupt women, some diatribes on politics from both ends of the spectrum and you have this platform for the lives of these two men.
of course having read this, you won't want to go to Mexico for a vaction if you thought their power and politics are like this. But then again, it is only a book....but those headless corpses do periodically wash up on the shores. Enjoy.
It begins with a decappitated head washing up on a shore near Acupulco Mexico. Obviously the reader wants to know what happened? It may seem obvious in light of the Mexican drug cartel violence but the story is more about power and politics. Fuentes recountes the tale through this head as the story of two men, Josue and Jerico. Josue is the head and how he got here is surprizing.
Returning to his motif on corrupt familes, he uses Mexico's richest man Carlos Slim as a model for Max Monroy who seems to wield absolute power. His aim is give every Mexican a hand-held device to help them with their pitiful existence and of course, he wants them to buy his own as he owns a monopoly. This is the angle of power. Opposite to this, the President gets elected by announcing his wife is dying of cancer and whose timely death gets him elected. However, all Presidents need a mandate for their six year term, and after her death, he has none. he decides that to help the poor Mexicans with their lives, they need to have more frequent fiestas. This is the politics. Through into the mix some very enticing and yet corrupt women, some diatribes on politics from both ends of the spectrum and you have this platform for the lives of these two men.
of course having read this, you won't want to go to Mexico for a vaction if you thought their power and politics are like this. But then again, it is only a book....but those headless corpses do periodically wash up on the shores. Enjoy.
September 16, 2024
Voința și norocul de Carlos Fuentes (2008)
Am ascultat un interviu dat de Fuentes în 2006 în care spunea că un scriitor are responsabilitatea de a-și crea cititorii, nu doar de a le da ce își doresc. Cititorul trebuie să facă un efort alături de scriitor: viața e grea, gânditul este un proces care cere efort, situațiile sunt extreme și așa cum nu a fost ușor pentru scriitor, nu trebuie să fie ușor nici pentru cititor. Și, poate, la finalul acestui drum dificil, când vom închide cartea, vom găsi și o recompensă.
Cred că acest fragment este o bună descriere a experienței pe care am avut-o cu Voința și norocul, o carte al cărei prim capitol bate orice scenă horror scrisă de Stephen King sau de alți maeștrii ai groazei. Toată cartea se desfășoară pe parcursul ultimelor respirații și momente de conștiință ale unui cap tăiat: „Aici se află capul meu retezat, pierdut ca o nucă de cocos la țărmurile Oceanului Pacific, pe coasta mexicană din Guerrero.”
Apoi, vocea dintre lumi începe să își spună povestea, și ne poartă din copilărie până la momentul morții violente, într-un amestec de istorisire cronologică și de realism magic, care permite apariția unor voci din lumea de dincolo sau a unor îngeri călători prin timp și spațiu.
Fuentes creează personalități excepționale: toate personajele de la președinte, la prostituată, de la magnat la călugăr, de la pușcăriaș la toxicomană, de la femeia de afaceri seducătoare la casnica supusă și abuzată sunt foarte clar conturate. Cadrele sunt de asemenea extreme: suntem când în subsolul unei pușcării teribile din Mexic, când în biroul președintelui, când deasupra unui mormânt din care se aude vocea unei afaceriste sociopate, când în garsoniera unor buni prieteni, idealiști și filosofi. Marile puteri care se înfruntă sunt politica și puterea economică, libertatea și credința, toate într-un vârtej care cere din partea cititorului multă concentrare. Recompensele sunt însă dese, pentru că Fuentes se pricepe la răsturnări de situație și dezvăluiri neașteptate. Iese un fel de Pulp Fiction mexican, foarte dur și seducător:
„ - Ce ne rămâne?
I-am zis să îmi zică el. Eu habar nu aveam.
- Politica, Iosua. E foarte clar, frate. Când nu ești bun de măturător sau de compozitor, când nu poți să scrii o carte sau să regizezi un film, să deschizi o ușă sau să vinzi niște ciorapi, atunci te consacrii politicii. Merge ca uns.
- Asta o să facem? am întrebat cu o falsă uimire
- Politica e ultima resursă a inteligenței.”
Este interesant felul în care anumite cărți se așează la ceva timp după ce am terminat de parcus povestea, după ce mi-am repovestit în minte toate relațiile dintre personaje și mi-am creat un film cât mai senzorial al celor întâmplate. Din păcate, nu există încă un film artistic după acest roman, deși are toate ingredientele potrivite: vorbește despre manipularea maselor, despre globalizare, despre crearea unor noi nevoi de consum în rândul celor săraci, despre democratizarea informației, despre intenție și destin, despre libertate și adicție.
Pe scurt, am avut o nouă întâlnire captivantă cu literatura mexicană.
Am ascultat un interviu dat de Fuentes în 2006 în care spunea că un scriitor are responsabilitatea de a-și crea cititorii, nu doar de a le da ce își doresc. Cititorul trebuie să facă un efort alături de scriitor: viața e grea, gânditul este un proces care cere efort, situațiile sunt extreme și așa cum nu a fost ușor pentru scriitor, nu trebuie să fie ușor nici pentru cititor. Și, poate, la finalul acestui drum dificil, când vom închide cartea, vom găsi și o recompensă.
Cred că acest fragment este o bună descriere a experienței pe care am avut-o cu Voința și norocul, o carte al cărei prim capitol bate orice scenă horror scrisă de Stephen King sau de alți maeștrii ai groazei. Toată cartea se desfășoară pe parcursul ultimelor respirații și momente de conștiință ale unui cap tăiat: „Aici se află capul meu retezat, pierdut ca o nucă de cocos la țărmurile Oceanului Pacific, pe coasta mexicană din Guerrero.”
Apoi, vocea dintre lumi începe să își spună povestea, și ne poartă din copilărie până la momentul morții violente, într-un amestec de istorisire cronologică și de realism magic, care permite apariția unor voci din lumea de dincolo sau a unor îngeri călători prin timp și spațiu.
Fuentes creează personalități excepționale: toate personajele de la președinte, la prostituată, de la magnat la călugăr, de la pușcăriaș la toxicomană, de la femeia de afaceri seducătoare la casnica supusă și abuzată sunt foarte clar conturate. Cadrele sunt de asemenea extreme: suntem când în subsolul unei pușcării teribile din Mexic, când în biroul președintelui, când deasupra unui mormânt din care se aude vocea unei afaceriste sociopate, când în garsoniera unor buni prieteni, idealiști și filosofi. Marile puteri care se înfruntă sunt politica și puterea economică, libertatea și credința, toate într-un vârtej care cere din partea cititorului multă concentrare. Recompensele sunt însă dese, pentru că Fuentes se pricepe la răsturnări de situație și dezvăluiri neașteptate. Iese un fel de Pulp Fiction mexican, foarte dur și seducător:
„ - Ce ne rămâne?
I-am zis să îmi zică el. Eu habar nu aveam.
- Politica, Iosua. E foarte clar, frate. Când nu ești bun de măturător sau de compozitor, când nu poți să scrii o carte sau să regizezi un film, să deschizi o ușă sau să vinzi niște ciorapi, atunci te consacrii politicii. Merge ca uns.
- Asta o să facem? am întrebat cu o falsă uimire
- Politica e ultima resursă a inteligenței.”
Este interesant felul în care anumite cărți se așează la ceva timp după ce am terminat de parcus povestea, după ce mi-am repovestit în minte toate relațiile dintre personaje și mi-am creat un film cât mai senzorial al celor întâmplate. Din păcate, nu există încă un film artistic după acest roman, deși are toate ingredientele potrivite: vorbește despre manipularea maselor, despre globalizare, despre crearea unor noi nevoi de consum în rândul celor săraci, despre democratizarea informației, despre intenție și destin, despre libertate și adicție.
Pe scurt, am avut o nouă întâlnire captivantă cu literatura mexicană.
May 22, 2011
A difficult but ultimately very rewarding novel. The pairs are dizzying, and spirals into 3s 4s and mores. Politics, philosophy and the nature of storytelling battle to draw for center stage. Colorful, engaging characters galore. Fuentes demands knowledge of (or at least serious thinking about) the Bible, Greek legend, St Augustine, Nietzsche, Spinoza, Mexican politics and more. A novel about everything that somehow manages at the same to time to stick to its knitting. And how can you argue with observations like:
"We were, as children, singular magicians. As adults, we will be herd animals."
"Just look at the Gringos. Look at what prosperity has done for them! They work constantly, eat badly, you can bet they fuck in a hurry, a straight suburban quickie, they don't have vacations, they don't have social welfare, they retire at fifty and die beside a lawn mower. A lot of work, a lot of money, and not much satisfaction.... Some happiness!"
"Now I told myself the probable summary of history is that we could analyze in detail and clarify the cultural modalities of the time but did not know how to avoid its evil."
"I don;t want the killings to go on."
"What serious politician hasn't eaten shit, Josue."
"We were, as children, singular magicians. As adults, we will be herd animals."
"Just look at the Gringos. Look at what prosperity has done for them! They work constantly, eat badly, you can bet they fuck in a hurry, a straight suburban quickie, they don't have vacations, they don't have social welfare, they retire at fifty and die beside a lawn mower. A lot of work, a lot of money, and not much satisfaction.... Some happiness!"
"Now I told myself the probable summary of history is that we could analyze in detail and clarify the cultural modalities of the time but did not know how to avoid its evil."
"I don;t want the killings to go on."
"What serious politician hasn't eaten shit, Josue."
February 28, 2011
No, I'm not done with this book. I'm 50 pages in. And on a three month "break" from law school (read: internship) I'm not about to waste my time with this. I get it. It's pretty words. They are nice, but really, really, every paragraph doesn't have to be so intense and deep that I can't actually grasp what is going on with the characters. I can tell from the reviews as well, it's not going to get any better.
So, perhaps I will revisit the entire book one day, but from the 50 pages I've read, it doesn't really seem to be worth the mental power. Sorry, Fuentes, you seem cool but I can't stand your writing style.
So, perhaps I will revisit the entire book one day, but from the 50 pages I've read, it doesn't really seem to be worth the mental power. Sorry, Fuentes, you seem cool but I can't stand your writing style.
July 20, 2014
2011, Εκδόσεις Καστανιώτη
Η επιμέλεια ελλιπής
Άλλοτε εξαιρετικά δυνατό, σε σημεία κουραστικό και με σταδιακές "αποκαλύψεις" που δε μου κέντρισαν το ενδιαφέρον. Ωστόσο περιέχει σημεία εσωτερικής αναζήτησης και αγωνίας-χαστούκι για τον αναγνώστη. Η πραγματική βαθμολογία μου θα ήταν μάλλον 3,5. Το 3 το αδικεί, το 4 δε θα το τολμούσα.
Η επιμέλεια ελλιπής
Άλλοτε εξαιρετικά δυνατό, σε σημεία κουραστικό και με σταδιακές "αποκαλύψεις" που δε μου κέντρισαν το ενδιαφέρον. Ωστόσο περιέχει σημεία εσωτερικής αναζήτησης και αγωνίας-χαστούκι για τον αναγνώστη. Η πραγματική βαθμολογία μου θα ήταν μάλλον 3,5. Το 3 το αδικεί, το 4 δε θα το τολμούσα.
September 25, 2023
Sólo dire: Gracias Lucha Zapata por la lección!
May 26, 2025
The most compelling depiction of brotherhood between men since Narcis & Goldmund - inspiring, tense, intimate.
I've very much enjoyed Fuentes's use of magical realism - he manages to weave fantastic elements with the narrative in a seamless way, adding to the immersive quality and allure of the story.
+: maintains a sense of suspense up to the final pages, even though the 'conclusion' is given away in the first one
-: could have been 100 pages shorter without losing much of its impact
I've very much enjoyed Fuentes's use of magical realism - he manages to weave fantastic elements with the narrative in a seamless way, adding to the immersive quality and allure of the story.
+: maintains a sense of suspense up to the final pages, even though the 'conclusion' is given away in the first one
-: could have been 100 pages shorter without losing much of its impact
November 8, 2024
First 150 - 170 pages - great! After that it turns into an unbearable read. This book could have been at least 200 pages shorter. I didn't finish it but actually i don't even care how it ends, so bad is it. But the first chapter about Josué's childhoon - fantastic work. And that is enough for me.
July 14, 2020
Βαθμολογία 7/10. Πολυεπίπεδο μυθιστόρημα με ένα κεντρικό εύρημα που αρχικά σοκάρει τον αναγνώστη (αφηγητής είναι το κομμένο κεφάλι ενός νεαρού δικηγόρου). Μέσα από την εξιστόρηση των γεγονότων που οδήγησαν στην δολοφονία του πρωταγωνιστή ο σπουδαίος Μεξικανός συγγραφέας ανατέμνει την σύγχρονη ιστορία της πατρίδας του. Όμως παρά την ύπαρξη αρκετών σελίδων στις οποίες ξεδιπλώνονται όλες οι λογοτεχνικές αρετές του δημιουργού του, το βιβλίο με κούρασε αρκετά μειώνοντας σημαντικά τον βαθμό απόλαυσης του.
February 26, 2022
Have you ever visited Mexico as not a packaged tourist but a genuine indie visitor? Did you spend some time in Mexico City, aka DF? If the answer is yes to both questions, read this book and this edition specifically. I've heard from a Mexican friend that Fuentes is not easily, if at all, translatable into English. Edith Grossman is the right person for the job. The book is multiyered, complex, and fascinating.
April 9, 2011
Definitely not a beach book! I plodded along for the first 200 pages, but then more things began to fall into place as I realized that Fuentos was writing an allegory about Mexico, about both the past as well as the current system of elites in running (ruining) the country. I'm headed to Wikipedia to look up some of the mythic figures, Castor and Polllux, etc., that are central to the novel. I probably respected the book and the writer more than I actually enjoyed reading it, however.
August 20, 2017
I read the book in its Greek translation. Once I started, I couldn't stop.
Many times I felt like reading poetry.
It's the kind of book that calls you to read it again.
Powerful, till the last word.
Many times I felt like reading poetry.
It's the kind of book that calls you to read it again.
Powerful, till the last word.
July 21, 2019
At times the book was very enjoyable. But much like work to get through the story.
December 14, 2018
This is a story about Mexico.
Unfortunately, I'm not familiar enough with Mexican culture, politics, or history to fully appreciate this novel. What I can say is this:
It's extremely dense. We follow Josue as he grows into adulthood. He makes a good friend, Jerico (with no last name). Part of the chemistry between the two is due to their similar outlook.
I enjoyed the translation - but the prose is extremely dense, with numerous adjectives overlapping each other.
A lot of the book revolves around its commentary on Mexico:
And:
A theme continued later in the book, by saying:
And on politicians:
2/5 stars
Unfortunately, I'm not familiar enough with Mexican culture, politics, or history to fully appreciate this novel. What I can say is this:
It's extremely dense. We follow Josue as he grows into adulthood. He makes a good friend, Jerico (with no last name). Part of the chemistry between the two is due to their similar outlook.
I enjoyed the translation - but the prose is extremely dense, with numerous adjectives overlapping each other.
A lot of the book revolves around its commentary on Mexico:
Poverty could be a consolation. The worst commonplace of sentimentality, he added, removing his hands from mine, was to think the poor are good. It wasn't true: Poverty is a horror, the poor are damned, damned beyond their submission to fatality and redeemable only if they rebel against their misery and become criminals. Crime is the virtue of poverty, Jerico said on that occasion I have not forgotten, looking down and taking my hands again before shaking his head, looking at me now with a restrained happiness:
"I believe that youth consists of daring, don't you agree? Maturity, on the other hand, consists of dissimulating."
And:
As I had thought of Edmond Dantes earlier, now I tended toward Doctor Mabuse, the prisoner who directs his crimes from a Berlin cell. Is there anything new in these prison stories? Looking at Miguel Aparecido, I told myself there was. The plots resemble one another because they are part of the same destiny: lost freedom. In prison, more than anywhere else, we realise there is no freedom because we live day by day, because our goals are futile, fragile, and in the end unattainable, because death takes responsibility for canceling our contract and when we're dead we're not aware of what has survived us, what has perished with us, and, at times, before us. It's enough to walk down a busy street and attempt, in vain, to give transcendence to the lives passing by on their way to death, anticipating it, trying to deny it, all subject to disappearing into a vast, collective anonymity.
A theme continued later in the book, by saying:
Jerico was right: Perhaps we're always at a great crossroads, a circular plaza with avenues radiating from it, each leading in turn to other plaza from which other avenues radiate. Six, thirty-six, two hundred and sixteen, infinite plazas, infinite avenues for a finite life guaranteed a direction only by what we make with our hands, our ideas, our words, forms, colors, sounds, not what we do with sex, social relationships, family life: these evaporate and no one remembers anyone after the third or fourth generation. Who was your great-grandfather, what was the name of your great-great-grandfather, what face did your most remote ancestor have, the one who lived before photography, the one who wasn't lucky enough to be painted by Rubens or Velazquez? We are part of the distribution of the great collective forgetting, a telephone book with no numbers, a dictionary of blank pages where not even the fingerprints of those who turned them remain...
And on politicians:
Sangines explained the obvious. The lust for power leads us to hide defects, feign virtues, exalt an ideal life, put on the little masks of happiness, seriousness, concern for the people, and always find, if not the phrases then the appropriate attitudes. The fact is that Velntin Pedro Carrera exploited his wife, and she allowed herself to be exploited because she knew she would not have another opportunity to feel famous, useful, and even loved.
Neither one was sincere, and this confirms that in order to achieve power, a lack of sincerity is indispensable.
2/5 stars
September 9, 2023
Yo siento que la trama está inspirada en la misma vida del autor, desde su nacimiento hasta su adultez. Que al igual que la narración, Fuentes se pregunta a si mismo si lograría ser tan chingón como los demás piensan de él y como piensa él de si mismo si no hubiera nacido en el seno de una familia burguesa. Josué y Fuentes vivieron en zonas acomodadas del DF (cuando lo era), tuvieron amistades del ámbito intelectual, estudiaron en la facultad de derecho y se creaban un camino "prefabricado" por la fortuna, por la estrella con la que se nace y que hasta entonces no se cuestionaban, sino que se limitaban a disfrutar a sabiendas que lo ignoraban. ¿CF habrá pensado, a sus setenta y tantos años de edad: "que hubiera sido de mí en otras condiciones, este hombre habría de surgir de sí mismo en otra clase social, en otra ciudad del enorme México traumatizado, en otra década, bajo otra familia"? ¿Era CF inevitable si tuviera otro nombre, otro país, otro género, otra sexualidad, otros despertares, otras influencias, otras deformidades?
Fuentes mezcla su experiencia con su testimonio y escribe a un joven protagonista en el México (su México, que al igual que el de la revolución, ya no existe pero deja secuelas permanentes) de siempre: olvidado, olvidadizo y abandonado que siempre tiene, a unas cuantas calles, las casas de unos ricos que tienen su propia versión de México. El México rico, blanco y privilegiado es igual de real que el México pobre, injusto, marginal y saqueado. Josué y Jericó se trasladaban de un bando al otro cada que se les daba la gana pero no por que su destino (la voluntad disfrazada) lo exigiera, sino por la necesidad del autodescubrimiento, la necesidad de crecer, madurar y avanzar y disfrutar sin detenerse lo mas que se pueda. A Jericó le dio una trama confusa y poco convincente sobre engendrar el poder en el poder mismo, derrocándolo y asumiéndolo para después apropiárselo. Pero no pudo. Creo que Josué, Jericó, Miguel Aparecido y Max Monroy son cuatro perfiles de la experiencia de CF.
Lo que entendí, ya como resumen, es que la fortuna se trata de la suerte y los accidentes, la voluntad es el destino enmascarado que siempre lucha con la necesidad y la necesidad es lo que se tiene que hacer para sobrevivir. Vivir es utilizar las dos primeras cartas que nunca cambian, que son permanentes desde naces hasta que mueres y confortarte con el camino que vayas trazando en vida, este y no otro, que no se puede tener todo, que se puede transitar hasta morir en la pasividad de imaginar que hubiera sido de mí si yo hubiera elegido este otro sendero, o este otro, o aquel.
Y finalmente, que estos factores no son aislados. Los caminos siempre se cruzan con otros, la fortuna es fácilmente tragedia cuando te atraviesas con los demás. Esa es la paradoja de la vida. Uno se concentra en seguir el rumbo en el que tiene fe y la gente puede apenas rozarte, ignorarte, compartir el camino, abandonarlo o sencillamente bloquearlo. De aquí ya no pasas, me vale que estés siguiendo tu voluntad, la mía puede más.
Fuentes mezcla su experiencia con su testimonio y escribe a un joven protagonista en el México (su México, que al igual que el de la revolución, ya no existe pero deja secuelas permanentes) de siempre: olvidado, olvidadizo y abandonado que siempre tiene, a unas cuantas calles, las casas de unos ricos que tienen su propia versión de México. El México rico, blanco y privilegiado es igual de real que el México pobre, injusto, marginal y saqueado. Josué y Jericó se trasladaban de un bando al otro cada que se les daba la gana pero no por que su destino (la voluntad disfrazada) lo exigiera, sino por la necesidad del autodescubrimiento, la necesidad de crecer, madurar y avanzar y disfrutar sin detenerse lo mas que se pueda. A Jericó le dio una trama confusa y poco convincente sobre engendrar el poder en el poder mismo, derrocándolo y asumiéndolo para después apropiárselo. Pero no pudo. Creo que Josué, Jericó, Miguel Aparecido y Max Monroy son cuatro perfiles de la experiencia de CF.
Lo que entendí, ya como resumen, es que la fortuna se trata de la suerte y los accidentes, la voluntad es el destino enmascarado que siempre lucha con la necesidad y la necesidad es lo que se tiene que hacer para sobrevivir. Vivir es utilizar las dos primeras cartas que nunca cambian, que son permanentes desde naces hasta que mueres y confortarte con el camino que vayas trazando en vida, este y no otro, que no se puede tener todo, que se puede transitar hasta morir en la pasividad de imaginar que hubiera sido de mí si yo hubiera elegido este otro sendero, o este otro, o aquel.
Y finalmente, que estos factores no son aislados. Los caminos siempre se cruzan con otros, la fortuna es fácilmente tragedia cuando te atraviesas con los demás. Esa es la paradoja de la vida. Uno se concentra en seguir el rumbo en el que tiene fe y la gente puede apenas rozarte, ignorarte, compartir el camino, abandonarlo o sencillamente bloquearlo. De aquí ya no pasas, me vale que estés siguiendo tu voluntad, la mía puede más.
January 6, 2024
Two young men find each other as teenagers. Both are without families. Josue lives in a mansion with no one but a dour housekeeper, Jerico lives in an apartment by himself. Neither knows anything about their families or their circumstances but they form a friendship that will endure throughout their lives. As they grow, their paths diverge. Josue goes to work for the country's most powerful entrepreneur, Max Monroy. Jerico becomes the country's President's right hand man.
Along the way, they meet many strange characters. There is the prisoner who rules the prison and stays there to avoid killing his father who deserted him. There is the aviator whose life is a mystery and who lives with Josue for several years. There is their friend whose mother is killed by the woman who becomes his stepmother; a woman who was a former prostitute enjoyed by both the young men. There is the dead woman who talks to Josue about her son Max and how she sacrificed everything for him. Will the two find out their backgrounds?
Carlos Fuentes was one of the most influential Mexican novelists. He was the son of a diplomat and a diplomat himself. He was credited along with several other Latin American authors with bringing the literature of the region to the attention of the world. He won many awards and prizes including the highest one of his country. In this book, he uses magic realism to pit the two friend's lives against each other along with the influence of business versus politics. The novel is narrated by one of the young men who has been murdered and decapitated. This book is recommended for readers of literary fiction.
Along the way, they meet many strange characters. There is the prisoner who rules the prison and stays there to avoid killing his father who deserted him. There is the aviator whose life is a mystery and who lives with Josue for several years. There is their friend whose mother is killed by the woman who becomes his stepmother; a woman who was a former prostitute enjoyed by both the young men. There is the dead woman who talks to Josue about her son Max and how she sacrificed everything for him. Will the two find out their backgrounds?
Carlos Fuentes was one of the most influential Mexican novelists. He was the son of a diplomat and a diplomat himself. He was credited along with several other Latin American authors with bringing the literature of the region to the attention of the world. He won many awards and prizes including the highest one of his country. In this book, he uses magic realism to pit the two friend's lives against each other along with the influence of business versus politics. The novel is narrated by one of the young men who has been murdered and decapitated. This book is recommended for readers of literary fiction.
August 13, 2025
"La voluntad y la fortuna" es una novela compleja. En ella, se entrelaza el contexto político de México en la primera década del siglo XXI, con la narrativa de Josué Nadal, que cuenta su tragedia siendo una cabeza decapitada que flota en el mar del Pacífico, como si flotara en sus recuerdos.
El pragmatismo del político mexicano enfrentado al poder empresarial que resulta del boom tecnológico y comunicacional del siglo; mientras ambos son cuestionados por el creciente control estadista del crimen organizado. La voluntad aparece como la capacidad de construir nuestro destino, y la fortuna como el necesario golpe del azar (o no) para lograr el objetivo.
La magia de Fuentes radica en las variadas referencias propias del pensamiento humano, desde filosofía hasta mitología griega.
Lo cierto es que, en algún punto, las conexiones entre las historias y los variados personajes se presentaron ligeramente forzadas. De ahí las cuatro estrellas.
El pragmatismo del político mexicano enfrentado al poder empresarial que resulta del boom tecnológico y comunicacional del siglo; mientras ambos son cuestionados por el creciente control estadista del crimen organizado. La voluntad aparece como la capacidad de construir nuestro destino, y la fortuna como el necesario golpe del azar (o no) para lograr el objetivo.
La magia de Fuentes radica en las variadas referencias propias del pensamiento humano, desde filosofía hasta mitología griega.
Lo cierto es que, en algún punto, las conexiones entre las historias y los variados personajes se presentaron ligeramente forzadas. De ahí las cuatro estrellas.
May 19, 2020
Pudo haber sido un libro memorable, que muestra el deterioro de las democracias latinoamericanas, partiendo del caso mexicano. Tiene elementos muy interesantes que solamente entiende un latinoamericano o quien haya vivido en Latinoamérica. Pero el exceso de repeticiones de las mismas metáforas, como Castor y Polux, Caín y Abel, el tema de la madre de Monroy, de su mujer y de su amante, una y otra vez, dejando sin embargo sin pulir otros caracteres, hace que el libro sea innecesariamente larguísimo, costando mucho terminarlo. La parte rescatable es la crónica de una realidad, pero la parte novelística es bien pesada.
May 9, 2022
I truly believe that something was lost in translation with this novel. I think a good comparison might be if a person were to read Thomas Pynchon in Spanish. I couldn't help but feel that I was standing outside the essence of this work because I couldn't read it in its native language. I appreciated the insight I gained about Mexican culture through the subject content but felt that I wasn't able to appreciate the passion the author was obviously trying to convey through the language used to consider and process that content.
August 20, 2025
De niño me parecía solo una historia rara; con los años entendí que ahí estaba mi primera cachetada social. Fuentes te mete las manos en el lodo y te obliga a olerlo. Volverla a leer ya grande es como ver de frente el origen de mi propio cinismo: descubrir que mi despertar social empezó demasiado temprano, y que tal vez esa inocencia nunca existió.
May 3, 2019
Long and boring
I like to read Carlos Fuentes, but year style of this book is the same as the others, the end of the novel is long and painful
I like to read Carlos Fuentes, but year style of this book is the same as the others, the end of the novel is long and painful
May 24, 2020
"Vi lo que es el poder: una mirada de tigre que te hace bajar los ojos y sentir miedo y vergüenza".
September 1, 2020
Seguramente el mejor inicio que he leído jamás. Muy buen libro.
April 28, 2020
Carlos Fuentes ha sido un escritor con el que me he identificado en sus relatos ... Cómo olvidar "La muerte de Artemio Cruz", "Aura" o cómo olvidar su experimento narrativo y delicioso en "Cambio de piel". demás, sus trabajos históricos son muy bueno como " El espejo enterrado" , que me fascinó.
Esta novela comienza de una forma llamativa , que te cautiva de inmediato... Sin embargo, pasadas unas cuantas páginas ya se convierte en un relato repetitivo... ¿Dónde habrá quedado la magia del inicio?
Esta novela comienza de una forma llamativa , que te cautiva de inmediato... Sin embargo, pasadas unas cuantas páginas ya se convierte en un relato repetitivo... ¿Dónde habrá quedado la magia del inicio?
February 6, 2011
"Elvira Rios, the whore with the bee, my current ball-and-chain, Lucha Zapata, paled in comparison with this woman-object, this beautiful thing, attractive, sophisticated, elegant, and supremely desirable...." (183).
"...basically there is no whore who does not aspire to matrimony. It infuriates them that men don't call them 'women' but 'broads.' Being a 'broad' is being a whore, trash, tamale wrapper, mole pot. Being a 'woman' is being a girlfriend who can become a wife and mother" (205).
"...Asunta stopped being Dulcinea-Iseult-Heloise and became a base fetish, to the extent that her photograph at the head of my bed occupied, a quasivirginal spot, and I say 'quasi' because on a few nights I did not resist the temptation to masturbate looking at her face (upside down, it's true, given that my jerking off occurred while I was lying in bed and Asunta's image hung vertically, held up by a tack) and surrendering, in the end, to solitary pleasure, forgetting Asunta, reproaching myself for my weakness though repeating that line about 'Things are known to Onan unknown to Don Juan'" (271).
I could go on...Fuentes' narrator certainly does. Obviously, this novel would never be considered "chick lit," though it could certainly be classified as "dick lit." Of course, with a word like "desire" in the title, a reader should probably expect preoccupation with lust objects. And that's all the female characters ever manage to become. The women are either "a cross between the devouring Aztec goddess Coatlicue and the national patron saint, the Virgin of Guadalupe" (356)--or "a doll without will," "a wounded bird" (108)--or "a jealous Medea" and "enveloping Gorgon of power, queen of an empire that would slip from her hands if she did not endow herself with bloody eyes, a terrifying face, and hair made of serpents..." (404-405).
The males aren't much better. The friends who serve as the central characters, Josue' and Jericho, are Castor and Pollux, Cain and Abel. Fuentes tells us so repeatedly. I'm not convinced that one can create archetypal characters by having their narrator harp on about their mythic correspondences.
Still, I did manage to finish the book, hoping that Fuentes' plot would eventually rise to the level of the best efforts of Umberto Eco and Arturo Perez-Revertez. These two authors usually manage to construct mysteries worth solving, despite the ubiquitous presence of female characters who could have been lifted from the pages of Bram Dijkstra's _Idols of Perversity: Fantasies of Feminine Evil in Fin-de-Siecle Culture_. However, by the time Fuentes gets around to revealing "who-done-it," I could care less. Although I am usually a very patient reader, I found myself exasperated by the onanistic digressions of Fuentes' narrating character.
These characters do not engage in conversations. They make speeches at one another--and, frequently, the reader learns that significant actions have occurred outside narrative. The plot seems to be building up to a crisis that the reader expects to witness, to share only to discover that, after much build-up, something vague has happened between paragraphs or during the turn of page.
But, maybe I'm being unfair. This novel is narrated from the perspective of a bodiless head. I think it's supposed to be the one that usually attaches to the neck; but, by the end of Fuentes' text, I'm thinking poor Josue' is suffering one radical castration.
"...basically there is no whore who does not aspire to matrimony. It infuriates them that men don't call them 'women' but 'broads.' Being a 'broad' is being a whore, trash, tamale wrapper, mole pot. Being a 'woman' is being a girlfriend who can become a wife and mother" (205).
"...Asunta stopped being Dulcinea-Iseult-Heloise and became a base fetish, to the extent that her photograph at the head of my bed occupied, a quasivirginal spot, and I say 'quasi' because on a few nights I did not resist the temptation to masturbate looking at her face (upside down, it's true, given that my jerking off occurred while I was lying in bed and Asunta's image hung vertically, held up by a tack) and surrendering, in the end, to solitary pleasure, forgetting Asunta, reproaching myself for my weakness though repeating that line about 'Things are known to Onan unknown to Don Juan'" (271).
I could go on...Fuentes' narrator certainly does. Obviously, this novel would never be considered "chick lit," though it could certainly be classified as "dick lit." Of course, with a word like "desire" in the title, a reader should probably expect preoccupation with lust objects. And that's all the female characters ever manage to become. The women are either "a cross between the devouring Aztec goddess Coatlicue and the national patron saint, the Virgin of Guadalupe" (356)--or "a doll without will," "a wounded bird" (108)--or "a jealous Medea" and "enveloping Gorgon of power, queen of an empire that would slip from her hands if she did not endow herself with bloody eyes, a terrifying face, and hair made of serpents..." (404-405).
The males aren't much better. The friends who serve as the central characters, Josue' and Jericho, are Castor and Pollux, Cain and Abel. Fuentes tells us so repeatedly. I'm not convinced that one can create archetypal characters by having their narrator harp on about their mythic correspondences.
Still, I did manage to finish the book, hoping that Fuentes' plot would eventually rise to the level of the best efforts of Umberto Eco and Arturo Perez-Revertez. These two authors usually manage to construct mysteries worth solving, despite the ubiquitous presence of female characters who could have been lifted from the pages of Bram Dijkstra's _Idols of Perversity: Fantasies of Feminine Evil in Fin-de-Siecle Culture_. However, by the time Fuentes gets around to revealing "who-done-it," I could care less. Although I am usually a very patient reader, I found myself exasperated by the onanistic digressions of Fuentes' narrating character.
These characters do not engage in conversations. They make speeches at one another--and, frequently, the reader learns that significant actions have occurred outside narrative. The plot seems to be building up to a crisis that the reader expects to witness, to share only to discover that, after much build-up, something vague has happened between paragraphs or during the turn of page.
But, maybe I'm being unfair. This novel is narrated from the perspective of a bodiless head. I think it's supposed to be the one that usually attaches to the neck; but, by the end of Fuentes' text, I'm thinking poor Josue' is suffering one radical castration.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
February 13, 2011
I’m afraid I have another negative review to write, and in this case, it’s a book I couldn’t finish. I made it about 160 pages out of over 400 into Carlos Fuentes’s new novel Destiny and Desire (which I won from Goodreads) and decided to call it quits. I’m not one to abandon books often or easily, and I really wanted to finish this one, to see if the pace would ever pick up or if my interest would sharpen, but during the last ten or twenty pages, I was beginning to positively hate the book, so it was time to stop.
This is another case, like the novel The Illumination I wrote about yesterday, of not liking a book I’ve read only positive reviews of. The New York Times, for one, reviewed it glowingly last week. My problems with it, though, were multiple. Part of it is that the book struck me as very unfriendly toward women. It’s about two young men growing up in Mexico City, attending school, having intense philosophical debates, reading books together (that’s what I read about anyway — the plot was soon to take them in other directions), and all that’s fine, but their friendship as they grow up is more and more built on bonding through degrading women. The women characters were either sex objects or evil, nasty parents and guardians. I didn’t hold out much hope that this would change.
The other problem was that I did not enjoy the writing, which struck me as overblown and ponderous. There were a few too many passages like this one, which comes from the first page; it starts off fine with some nice images, but takes a turn for the worse:
The Pacific really is a tranquil ocean now, as white as a large basin of milk. The waves have warned it that earth is approaching. I try to measure the distance between two waves. Or is it time that separates them, not distance? Answering this question would solve my own mystery. The ocean is undrinkable, but it drinks us. Its softness is a thousand times greater than earth’s. But we hear only the echo, not the voice of the sea. If the sea were to shout, we would all be deaf. And if the sea were to stop, we would all be dead.
Okay, the last two lines are fine, too, but I don’t know how “answering this question would solve my own mystery.” It’s the kind of vague sentence that drives me nuts, and the book was full of similarly vague sentences. The novel is narrated by one of the two main characters, and he’s altogether too satisfied with himself to be enjoyable company.
The novel has an interesting conceit: the first-person narrator is actually dead — he’s a severed head washed up on the beach. We learn he is twenty-seven at his death, so the novel, as far as I can see, is supposed to tell the story of what led to such a gruesome end. I can see that this book is supposed to say something about Mexican society and politics, and I’m sure that if I could have gotten into the story, that would have been interesting. But it’s not for me to find out.
This is another case, like the novel The Illumination I wrote about yesterday, of not liking a book I’ve read only positive reviews of. The New York Times, for one, reviewed it glowingly last week. My problems with it, though, were multiple. Part of it is that the book struck me as very unfriendly toward women. It’s about two young men growing up in Mexico City, attending school, having intense philosophical debates, reading books together (that’s what I read about anyway — the plot was soon to take them in other directions), and all that’s fine, but their friendship as they grow up is more and more built on bonding through degrading women. The women characters were either sex objects or evil, nasty parents and guardians. I didn’t hold out much hope that this would change.
The other problem was that I did not enjoy the writing, which struck me as overblown and ponderous. There were a few too many passages like this one, which comes from the first page; it starts off fine with some nice images, but takes a turn for the worse:
The Pacific really is a tranquil ocean now, as white as a large basin of milk. The waves have warned it that earth is approaching. I try to measure the distance between two waves. Or is it time that separates them, not distance? Answering this question would solve my own mystery. The ocean is undrinkable, but it drinks us. Its softness is a thousand times greater than earth’s. But we hear only the echo, not the voice of the sea. If the sea were to shout, we would all be deaf. And if the sea were to stop, we would all be dead.
Okay, the last two lines are fine, too, but I don’t know how “answering this question would solve my own mystery.” It’s the kind of vague sentence that drives me nuts, and the book was full of similarly vague sentences. The novel is narrated by one of the two main characters, and he’s altogether too satisfied with himself to be enjoyable company.
The novel has an interesting conceit: the first-person narrator is actually dead — he’s a severed head washed up on the beach. We learn he is twenty-seven at his death, so the novel, as far as I can see, is supposed to tell the story of what led to such a gruesome end. I can see that this book is supposed to say something about Mexican society and politics, and I’m sure that if I could have gotten into the story, that would have been interesting. But it’s not for me to find out.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 78 reviews