I chose this as my year's "daily meditation." I assumed it could play this role because it has an entry for each day. But it really does not work as aI chose this as my year's "daily meditation." I assumed it could play this role because it has an entry for each day. But it really does not work as a meditation. I guess it is thought-provoking. But it was perhaps too cynical for any kind of spiritual source. It could be claimed that it is simply realistic, and I can't disagree with that. But for daily meditation I am looking for something more than realism. Anyway, the author is a treasure--he combines a fine knowledge of history, especially Latin American history, with a poetic touch. Each day's entry is a vignette from history (from that day, or loosely connected with that day) that is probably unknown to the reader. The book is a sort of "People's History" of the calendar--kind of like Howard Zinn's "People History of the US"--telling us about events whose significance is not appreciated. Along with his poetic touch, I think he plays a bit loose with the facts. But that gives his vignettes their point....more
This is a fine, fine novel. I was unimpressed by "Havana Red," one of Padura's crime series--I thought the story line and the writing were clunky. TheThis is a fine, fine novel. I was unimpressed by "Havana Red," one of Padura's crime series--I thought the story line and the writing were clunky. The translator of this novel is different from the translator of the crime series, and that may be part of the difference. But I think Padura (also) just put a whole lot of effort into this novel. It is long and complex, but there did not seem to be any false steps. He did a fine job of bringing 3 story lines together--that of Trotsky in exile, that of the man that would eventually murder Trotsky, and that of the Cuban man who would eventually tell the story. The stories in this novel resonated with other stories. Padura's handling of the politics of Stalin and Trotsky reminded me of Sartre's handling of similar issues in the play "Dirty Hands." The descriptions of the murderer's feelings leading up to the murder reminded me of Dostoevsky's account of Raskolnikov's feelings leading up to the murder in "Crime and Punishment." Not at all that they were copies, just that they resonated. It was only by chance that I had read Orwell's account of the Spanish Civil War (in which the murderer had participated) just prior to this. I like those kinds of cosmic coincidences, where ones interests converge. ...more
Started this on the plane to California, finished it on the flight home. I picked it up b/c of an article about Padura in the New Yorker--a Cuban writStarted this on the plane to California, finished it on the flight home. I picked it up b/c of an article about Padura in the New Yorker--a Cuban writer who managed to avoid censorship by the Castro regime by writing detective novels. I'm not sure what to think about this b/c the book in fact contained considerable criticism of past (if not present) Cuban policies and behavior toward artists. It certainly does not seem discreet. The writer is engaging and philosophically reflective. I'm not really a crime fan, so I'm not really the intended audience. The solution to the crime did not strike me as especially interesting--in fact I feel like I imagined a more interesting ending myself. What I read was marred by a few oddities--presumably in the translation or the editing: We find the metaphor rendered as "down the shoot" (rather than "chute"), Jesus is said to have turned wine into water, and Camus' famous novel is called (in the English) "The Outsider" rather than "The Stranger." And in general there were spots were the sentences were somewhat stilted or awkward. I can't tell at what stage these infelicities appeared, but the author seems not to have been well-served. Overall it was worth reading, but I will probably not read the others in the "Havana seasons" series. While Cuba was not included in Bush's "axis of evil," I'm glad to read good work by a fine author from a country we officially oppose....more
Finally I have systematically read Borges's stories. I was familiar with a few previously, but mostly just knew of his reputation as a writer and thinFinally I have systematically read Borges's stories. I was familiar with a few previously, but mostly just knew of his reputation as a writer and thinker. That (positive) reputation is well-deserved. Of the 100+ stories in this (complete) collection of his fiction, about 20 were ones that I found especially interesting from a philosophical point of view. And many were interesting from a literary/story point of view. Most all are clever in some fashion. The cleverness never seems to be artificial. He does seem to be obsessed with the issue of whether one could be dreamed by another. Could I be a figment of someone else's imagination? This doesn't quite grab me. It is different from whether what you experience might be a dream. His concern, whether I might be dreamed, questions the core of Descartes' line that "I think, therefore I exist." Descartes would say that even if my thoughts are inaccurate, they are still MY thoughts, which entails that I EXIST (as a thinker). But Borges wonders if my thoughts themselves might be dreamed creations. If so, there is no "I" that HAS them. I guess I am too Cartesian to be bothered by that possibility. To conceive them as "thoughts" is already to posit myself. There is the Buddhist possibility of thoughts without a thinker (i.e., no underlying entity that HAS the thoughts)--but that is not Borges's line. Other philosophically interesting themes include the nature of memory, the nature of representation, and the relation between the finite and the infinite. I appreciate him as someone who has genuine philosophical concerns and finds ways to raise them in non-traditional ways. While I am glad to have read this whole collection, and will sometime tackle his "Selected Non-Fictions," I think that for most people, his "Labyrinths" will suffice....more
Great, great book. I first read it over 20 years ago when I first formed that opinion. When I read it this time (in honor of GGM's passing) I worried Great, great book. I first read it over 20 years ago when I first formed that opinion. When I read it this time (in honor of GGM's passing) I worried whether I would still like it. In fact I think I liked it more, and am probably at a better stage in life to like it. I hope I'll read it again in another 20+ years. As a matter of fact I remembered hardly anything of the book as I re-read it. The book reads like a whole history of (a) creation from (its) Genesis to (its) Apocalypse. (Isn't the last book of the Bible sometimes called the Apocalypse of John?) I won't push that comparison any further--but it is a sort of self-contained (solitude) and complete history of a family--their rise and fall. There is the invasion of their paradise by modern progress (the banana company) with funny descriptions of their incomprehension. There is a remarkable account of the destruction of the community by the corruption of this progress. Much of the book is taken up with how the characters of the family aged (and almost couldn't die). This was a theme that struck home with me (nearing 60--and I imagine did not strike home with me last time I read it). The story really sweeps you along--I read the last 150+ pages in one sitting. (Luckily the academic year ended on Saturday.) Occasionally I read a "commentary" along with a book. (I did this for Joyce's Ulysses, which I hated--FYI.) I happened to own a rather pedestrian one, which was helpful in keeping straight about the characters and events. However, I'm not sure that GGM really expected us to keep them straight. Read this book, sometime in your life. I'll probably get (even) more out of it next time....more
A history of (the exploitation of) Latin America since the arrival of Europeans. The book was researched and written in the 1960s. So much has happeneA history of (the exploitation of) Latin America since the arrival of Europeans. The book was researched and written in the 1960s. So much has happened since then (such as Iran-Contra and our suppression of the revolution in Nicaragua; or NAFTA), but none of the events would change the story. It is a very long, sad, tragic story. Free trade comes only once restricted trade has allowed a country (the US, UK) to develop its own industries sufficiently to benefit from free trade. Then smaller countries that try to resist free trade (in their own interests, as developed countries had once done) get pegged as socialist and get ostracized and undermined. Because of its colonial history, Latin America was sufficiently fragmented that it never developed the unity and scale that would allow it to develop on its own. North America, while it had a colonial heritage, did not have the natural resources that Latin America had (e.g., copper, gold and silver) and so it was not so thoroughly exploited, but left to develop on its own. So its lack of natural resources was a blessing in disguise. When I visited Central America in 1992 we met with representatives of US AID (Agency for International Development) in Nicaragua. While they tout the aid they give, they ultimately acknowledged that it is not altruistic. Its purpose is to develop markets for the US economy. I at least appreciated their candor. The book is not at all written as a revolutionary tract--in fact it is a lyrical and compassionate, yet detailed and wide-ranging, history of the region. But it is written by a person with a political revolutionary vision. Hence it is not surprising, but a bit disappointing, that no mention is made of Liberation Theology, which was emerging in the 1960s throughout Latin America. When the author does discuss the church in Latin American history, it is an accessory to the crimes. But the Liberation Theology wing of the church was a potential ally that went unnoticed or unmentioned. I'm glad I read the book. But, well-written as it is, it is hard to read because it is so thorough and because the oppression and exploitation recounted is so unrelenting. ...more
By 2010 Nobel Prize winner in Literature. Quite readable, even though it tries to convey the experience of a very different world view through its stoBy 2010 Nobel Prize winner in Literature. Quite readable, even though it tries to convey the experience of a very different world view through its story. Well worth reading....more
Loading...
