/lit/ - Literature

>>17497623
There is no book that pretends to be a masterpiece.

it's pretty great but requires a lot of patience to get through, it also could be about 200-300 pages shorter for sure

>>17497623
Part 5 is the best and the entire book works up to it.

>>17497703
I've heard this. I'm excited. That's when you follow von Archemboldi, right?

>>17497694
Very wrong.

>>17497623
>>17497703
this. stick with it anon, the pay off from part 5 is worth it. fyi, the novel is unfinished but its the part about the crimes which is uninished not part 5 which was actually written first. bolano also planned a 6th part.

>>17497623
Its about Chaos

>>17497933
elaborate

>>17497933
wait I thought a couchsurfing douchebag constantly in a ball of smoke was his literary alter ego

>>17497998
We are all desperately searching for meaning in a seemingly meaningless world, so we find those niche areas of interest that will drive us to find some sort of salvation. Whether its through poetry, literature, philosophy, love or war etc...But this world has other plans, plans that are unknowable and untraceable, plans that disrupt us or cause us to look at stark moments of violence that shows how chaotic the world really is. Chaos is not something we can control, though we desperately attempt to make order out what we think we can control, the world will carry on regardless of our thoughts or feelings. But cheer up, its fun in the end

>>17497933

>>17497623
Is this a copypasta now? I love it.

>>17497933
It's actually about evil

>>17497623
This is a stupid question
But I should probably read the original Spanish version right?

>>17498481
sure if you want, but the translation by Wimmer is very good

4. The Part About Amalfitano
3. The Part About Fate = The Part About the Critics
2. The Part About Archimboldi
1. The Part About the Crimes

Naturally, Archimboldi is more pleasurable, but the Crimes is definitely the crown of the work, and Bolano's career. It's a spell, with the express purpose of inflicting harm on the reader. Were it not followed by Archimboldi, everyone who read this book would die.

>>17497933
>>17498334
I think you're close, but not quite there.
The difference between pure chaos and the force that Bolano depicts is indifference: Chaos implies a neutrality, a lack of a telos. The specter that haunts 2666 is clearly malevolent. It's the only thing with anything approaching autonomy here: while I agree that human action in his novel is reduced to mere chaos (from creative act to murder, it is all external and ungoverned by any individual will), the forces that bring men together, that guide and shape the world have an end, which is the maximization of suffering. Humans are merely shuffling about in the shadow of this absolute will, either avatars of its malevolence, or subject to it.

>>17498655
Well that begs the question that is the force truly malevolent, or does it just inhabit those prone to violence and evil

>>17497867
yeah it's good, you'll jack off

>>17498882
oh fuck yeah, i love jacking off

>>17498334
>>17498655
thanks for the clever insights, anons. I'd never really thought about agency but you have a point. None of the characters seem to be doing anything for any reason, and seem to be pushed along by some kind of weird evil force. Actually, that was something I didn't like initially: I was frustrated with how the characters seem to have no purpose or meaning but I guess that's the point. It's like that whole thing with Edwin Johns, who creates this art out of self-mutiliation but the art itself has no meaning to him or purpose to the world.

>>17498734
I'd argue the former.
Look at the way the murders are depicted, vs, for instance, the crimes of the church defiler (can't remember his name at the moment). There is never an individual effectively connected with the murders. The tragedy surrounding the defiler is in the circumstance around him, not necessarily his actions (being confronted by the priests vs the mere, comparatively minor acts of desecration).
I think the point is that it needn't actually possess individuals, as their naturally chaotic essences, when put into the right circumstances (circumstances that it frequently and effectively arranges) lead to tragedy.
I'm not sure "inhabit" is quite the right word. Think about the really genuine depictions of evil in the book: what comes to mind most immediately for me is the German bureaucrat Archimboldi meets in the POW camp. What defines his evil? His response to circumstance, I'd argue. That doesn't seem a possession or habitation: at most, he was birthed from an evil womb into an evil world, to perform more evil upon it. He is evil, unquestionably, but it is the force beyond him that inspires, manipulates, collaborates with the evils of man--whereas any good act is met almost invariably with corruption, tragedy, and failure.

>>17498452
Bolano often writes about the sheer banality of evil (to paraphrase Arendt) and often showcases how even those whom we regard as vile people, manage to juxtapose this by creating art that is highly regarded as beautiful and pure.

>>17498990
Precisely it. The way Bolano depicts art is truly at the core of this. The book could consist entirely of his disjointed observations on art and art criticism, and it would still convey his most essential thematic points. The Part About the Critics is arguably more important than the Part About Archimboldi

>>17499062
You can also see how in this miasma of violence, where conspiracy comes in. As the murders ramp up, there are questions regarding narcos, American millionaire sons who run a trucking empire to Klaus Haas. So the climate of paranoia feeds on a climate of death.

Even stranger, as I re-read it during this past year, there was a character named Epstein who was a shady filmmaker, with suggestions that he may be a pedophile, and he died a very suspicious death.

>>17498513
very good?
There exist some extremely rare cases in which the translations are as good or even better that the original
This isn't the case here right?

>>17499359
pedantic nerd alert

>>17499250
Fucking website killed my in-depth reply.

In short, if I understand you right, I completely agree: the air of conspiracy is merely the logical mind attempting to adjust to the meaninglessness and disorder that results in being a good person in the world of an omnipresent and sadistic demiurge. We, and the characters of the novel, are used to the idea of a good God, a good world, a good order of things, when (Bolano's) reality is precisely the opposite.

>>17499798
Yes, hit the nail on the head. We can see Bolano is the antithesis to magical realism of his continental neighbours. Bolano joking mocks this, referring to the poetry collective as visceral realists (as we know 2666 is written by Belano). What Santa Theresa is, is the idea of a failed utopia

>>17499359
While you'd be right for a good many translations, Bolano is an international author at heart: his prose, while more than passable, is a mere vehicle. Translations of the book capture what is needed very effectively.

>>17499860
I'm not sure I'm with you on the "failed utopia" end. To me, Santa Teresa has a quality of eternity to it--as in, its evils and degradations have always been present in the world, to be repeated again and again. It seems to be the evilly-beating heart of the world, its wreched omphalos, but the fact is that this heart is ubiquitous--this is why Bolano is so obsessed with WWII and Nazism.
But I don't remember anything about the origins of Santa Theresa--am I forgetting something? I very easily could be

It's impossible to get 2666 unless one considers the role of South/Central America in the world and the whole of the 20th century. Bolaño is writing as an unabashedly pessimistic South American, driven to seeing not only artistic pursuit, but also journalistic and philosophical inquiries as basically meaningless in face of the insurmounting violence of the world. Things are always exploding into violence in the novel, things start well enough and suddenly something creeps in and shatters its character's illusions. I mean, you've only read 200 pages, so I'm going to assume you've basically finished the part about the critics. There are two things happening there: Pelletier and Espinoza fighting for Norton's affection and Morini learning how to cope with getting cucked by being bound to a wheelchair. Pelletier and Espinoza are driven to beat up some Paki due to their insecurities: they became the famous academics they always wanted to, but their pursuit was meaningless. Morini, on the other hand, was still trying to find artistic integrity, and that's why he was so interested in the handless British painter. But when he finds out the reason why the guy did it (the artist whispers 'money'), he becomes immediatly uncucked and ends up cucking both Pelletier and Espinoza. The only really hopeful character in the whole novel is, quite ironically, Morini and even he is drawn to Santa Teresa and its violent vortex. Always try to conduct this operation while reading the novel: how is the character introduced, and what he wants at that point, and what happens by the end of the chapter. I think this can help you navigate through it and make some sense of its loose structure. It's a really good book, but his real masterpiece is The Savage Detectives.

>>17501263
>insurmounting
?

>>17500320
Santa Theresa is a mirror to Ciudad Juarez, on the border of the US, a place where so many consider the where their lives will turn around, but first you go through hell to get there. Here Santa Theresa is a place where people are trafficked in and killed outright with no hope of resolution.

Reading the savage detectives makes me want to move to Mexico City. As a white American would I just get stabbed and robbed on arrival, or is it possible for me to live there with passable Spanish skills?

>>17501563
If you go looking for trouble you'll find it. There are definitely areas you don't go but it's a massive city and even attempting speaking Spanish is a good thing.