tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1911087927983597831.post321879531631277432..comments2024-01-02T15:37:04.858-05:00Comments on Caravana de recuerdos: Three Readers in "The Part About the Crimes"Richardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01746599416342846897noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1911087927983597831.post-9709191593604477592014-03-22T10:11:42.796-04:002014-03-22T10:11:42.796-04:00Sorry for the delay in getting back to you, Scott,...Sorry for the delay in getting back to you, Scott, and thanks for the kind words about the post. Muniz's article is so "nutrient-dense" that I've kind of been putting off writing about it for fear of what kind of time it's going to take to do it any justice, but I still plan on getting to it by the end of the month. Both <em>2666</em> and the real life atrocities that are its "inspiration" certainly give one pause, no? Cheers!Richardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01746599416342846897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1911087927983597831.post-49153301135799889312014-03-19T15:29:26.999-04:002014-03-19T15:29:26.999-04:00Richard - A great post, and one that's giving ...Richard - A great post, and one that's giving me one of those "D'oh!" moments for not having paid attention to this reading element (after <i>The Savage Detectives</i>, I should have expected it). I'll be curious to read more about Gabriela Muniz and the hypothesis that <i>2666</i> is in part a reflection on the "desaparacidos" of the South American dictatorships. Surely the Juarez murders echo much of the savage abuse of power seen before in South and Central America. Somewhere in RB's essays, though, he notes that the Juarez murders are like nothing seen before. Surely it's an atrocity that has very wide and especially disturbing dimensions. <br /><br />You put it so well - your comment about possibly being lead to "the uncomfortable conclusion that the text inspires me aesthetically at the same time as it arouses indignation in me thematically." It's what bothered me most the first time I read <i>2666</i>; on a second reading, I'm convinced the discomfort is intentional. But as regards teasing apart all that that may imply, I'll conveniently quote you again: "You tell me!"seraillonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17654593356535433945noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1911087927983597831.post-55102796458234951692014-03-05T15:39:34.075-05:002014-03-05T15:39:34.075-05:00I'd remembered or misremembered 2666 as a lot ...I'd remembered or misremembered <em>2666</em> as a lot less reading-centric than say <em>The Savage Detectives</em>, Sarah, so I was happy to be reminded that that's not entirely the case with the novel even in the middle parts between "The Part About the Critics" and "The Part About Archimboldi." I like both what Rise added about readers and what you say here about <em>2666</em> as "a treasure chest" readers; the latter is certainly true but easy to overlook given the depressing nature of many of Bolaño's themes.Richardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01746599416342846897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1911087927983597831.post-56357748692826407532014-03-04T19:15:19.394-05:002014-03-04T19:15:19.394-05:00I love the theme of reading that runs throughout t...I love the theme of reading that runs throughout the entire book, and am glad that you touch on it here - especially as RB's novel is a treasure chest for a reader and open to so many interpretations. I like what Rise says about the readers-response above. I can only hope my reading will be brave enough!Sarah (tuulenhaiven)https://www.blogger.com/profile/11007601900702081303noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1911087927983597831.post-47989844443726358342014-03-02T15:36:17.710-05:002014-03-02T15:36:17.710-05:00Thanks, "elitist critic" Miguel, but you...Thanks, "elitist critic" Miguel, but your humble scribe can't take any credit for that because reading Bolaño conditions you to noticing readers in his works. Outside of maybe Borges and Sergio Pitol, I'm hard pressed to think of anybody else who makes such obsessive use of readers and reading as part of the narrative scaffolding in their respective oeuvres on such a consistent basis.Richardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01746599416342846897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1911087927983597831.post-10242483387631004262014-03-02T15:29:52.211-05:002014-03-02T15:29:52.211-05:00Thanks for expanding on your initial comment. I g...Thanks for expanding on your initial comment. I guess I don't know enough about reader-response criticism to argue you with you very well, ha ha, but that won't be necessary anyway because I agree with everything you've just said in this second comment of yours. Sorry to be such a pushover!Richardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01746599416342846897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1911087927983597831.post-73757362554172352092014-03-01T17:06:47.153-05:002014-03-01T17:06:47.153-05:00That's a fine observation, noticing all the re...That's a fine observation, noticing all the readers in the novel. Elitist critic that I am, I only noticed all the highfalutin' references to writers and modern artists, but I totally missed all this subtext about reading throughout the novel. Thanks for noticing it!LMRhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08538873868140070018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1911087927983597831.post-19066396601981971742014-03-01T04:14:58.389-05:002014-03-01T04:14:58.389-05:00I suppose the "unknown" factors make RB&...I suppose the "unknown" factors make RB's pronouncement about great, torrential works a double-edged one. I think he may not privilege reader-response in the sense that there's no single correct response, only interesting and valid ones. Or, to use RB's favorite adjectives about reading and writing, only brave and courageous ones.Risehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17446964640160585194noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1911087927983597831.post-62034108959695953762014-02-28T23:56:14.288-05:002014-02-28T23:56:14.288-05:00Tom, yes, it's been more than I could have ask...Tom, yes, it's been more than I could have asked for: great discussions, nearly 20 posts so far (many of them wonderful), and engaged comments from people who aren't even reading the book with us. The novel, by the way, isn't bad either.<br /><br />The posts are being collected on my January 29th intro to the book, but I think I'll round them up again sometime in March for people who missed that earlier post. Thanks for the suggestion.Richardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01746599416342846897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1911087927983597831.post-71783256099154097152014-02-28T23:46:36.709-05:002014-02-28T23:46:36.709-05:00Rise, I'm really intrigued by your last point ...Rise, I'm really intrigued by your last point because it seems that Bolaño's conception of the "active" reader, as borrowed from Cortázar's <em>Rayuela</em>, might actually privilege a form of reader-response criticism. Are you interested in following up on this? Great point, by the way, about the plethora of different types of readers in <em>2666</em>. I was interested in exploring what a select sample of readers from "The Part About the Crimes" might tell us about Bolaño's "message" in this part of the novel, but I guess he was probably just way too crafty to be pinned down by such a simple maneuver as the one I tried. Oh, well: "If you don't believe in God, how do you believe in a fucking book?" was still worth sharing, you know?Richardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01746599416342846897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1911087927983597831.post-25996077800832867402014-02-28T15:46:57.998-05:002014-02-28T15:46:57.998-05:00This readalong event has been going well, hasn'...This readalong event has been going well, hasn't it? You guys should publish the posts together as an ebook.<br /><br />Or a post with links to everyone else. Whichever.Amateur Reader (Tom)https://www.blogger.com/profile/13675275555757408496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1911087927983597831.post-66686261574745071722014-02-28T10:48:27.799-05:002014-02-28T10:48:27.799-05:00Richard, the individual readers you mentioned are ...Richard, the individual readers you mentioned are a throwback to the 4 Archimboldi critics,not to mention Amalfitano. Close readers, suicide readers, atheist readers. There are all kinds of readers, it appears, and books are books. They have or have not an intangible value. I'd like to think of the repeated emphasis on the "unknown" in books as a critique of reader-response criticism. Risehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17446964640160585194noreply@blogger.com