Publishers Carb the fuck up drama

PDF/EPUB 2666 eBook è ☆ blockdiagramwiring.co ☆

A cuatro profesores de literatura Pelletier Morini Espinoza y Norton los une su fascinación por la obra de Beno von Archimboldi un enigmático escritor alemán cuyo prestigio crece en todo el mundo La complicidad se vuelve vodevil intelectual y desemboca en un peregrinaje a Santa Teresa trasunto de Ciudad Juárez donde hay uien dice ue Archimboldi ha sido visto Ya allí Pelletier y Espinoza se enteran de ue la ciudad es desde años atrás escenario de una larga cadena de crímenes en los vertederos aparecen cadáveres de mujeres con señales de haber sido violadas y torturadas Es el primer asomo de la novela a sus procelosos caudales repletos de personajes memorables cuyas historias a caballo entre la risa y el horror abarcan dos continentes e incluyen un vertiginoso travelling por la historia europea del siglo XX 2666 confirma el veredicto de Susan Sontag el más influyente y admirado novelista en lengua española de su generación Su muerte a los cincuenta años es una gran pérdida para la literatura


10 thoughts on “2666

  1. ɸ~y&x _tj*x7`fCbG`Vru&-]Ȍ,sD4DKj27&ɼۘz9cy= =bY)%XT[ˬN2IsRO҂羃QKGte#,1F)AisޕqK3'Odt[.aíIg(|3%dLut;KtY[S$ʐ¡"AYg^2fA|:"Je,Rxz)V,h]3`{SnwMBIȡ>O SvQz#ַe>^S29~Y 34P\W,[ y̡gʴQg?.!o%c+h SYrNaZt]¼Qt¦3H789<}tr(#lG]dpcM-*բi+װl=!,A#hr#Ql2> OMkl.17?0fߣ 6_G|W5; A&6${0T[i:BG<$lr9#K8J\օ7XqvCzҼa\EF\ӜjFˍ픲Bznws<8:mݴ M:i/ZF1BȆ6Nf<+XV?]ez-#)/"6m׷K*ʓd (0gP40M=+#+dQ*3tG>C*RL¸˜jv1E*.T|!y }i5@5ۦ:FEy@+w\yyY2 XiU\!ѰmK)q@]& DdF| ΄N;Qj,+v*sr<O9x7QV!._(#mdݎTc>f0)|@NFt:#cN =! D@@A@@ĄLAȐH }  6p+G |DlDNg-4`=Fq|A#_a \묯04jv3UBu2Po(g޾#*e*e QF⛘缀3˿'RV荇K|rݙXIMS*""F{:=%F!6tpe1BŞ`l8ND (HU+ǩa ȣٗQpx݌478UPS%K6X[(]Ѭf1B{2& fx B$"O4O 4VMI붷bT\Tʛ@q 0@Ph 8w%~W@q Prm;e!J9 %HrȰ, Zُ `*cS$NxOM3DoGg8ƭޤ _,ԝ^K%ZCRX[FCc.#sb5{d&#(R(7Rxp.㲩[n2Qr7`T1drׁ w{!ȗBpƄy4 !$}F^s4V lR_BDĿD;tr?)܉}$$.aRwwpA+d2'M+`z3&4"ƤKYewaO3EQ 1gɎZF8o o6P1#,OcW.bhtQ/uVDG&kr%KUȌDZx|DRGK #KP81G`NX8 8`ڈ&pA:%%U%'͂,d$ƌ5<Xjbym2k M%iϑ4VGL]K "$v F}%6HCrv7|#JvF\$j)xbN_ leeL]nM5!ъM LG@$7X:<oqZMϥ&tWi6%ţtOr8k >KR.CƧiПXYwfkr@D=%34'FK).D4݉SQG_!TsH#Ш(,bOja(B} *k{=Xfdc"Y)啹M$/I%2 }:o؆ٺ2Q<;!7uOMn.=+Yb&'ȞMJ fn<܃*#"Udu4vƄJɪ6VgqJPDǔԟhh/ 84q)XRlBU2BcPZʴ2YmL]mk-yGWɔcb$dKxJK+Cc˻e#2D[-h.%ũ6[$) QFÖƒΉ EQi!4;9*kU$I) m l"聦/= !%} m=44B-`i?aRF΍`ף {m**M w2yB,v֞GNQpQF" M\$=&X4BzWE_Ar6aw'ܝ8yKI=4L(WIkt~Zt镙Y5d7<2LtOCT3]<. Q(,P?8EޤW$#g3 q\'؉@$mg =%S\ &ЬXnZk.vBGpZ&'rū_afbu]I5%dBYL&@}u7Gҩx躬 mPԭFЬۛ8}2nW}H}&,tfkA.(PxԿ#|#ʩig&!1AQaq@@OZ3A2Lcς \C1M#/zApLK:vsafaGz[s-PhZ`W[ϩl93T>&Bʘ<$I|xaz C\J*[T|d7 Xi{4T5ل]T!<)bLdlèY}/<u R.Cg$ģX.0Q>#h&lGEhcE)ܳ%Ug5"hdDPѩۂr֊ N9VRYxC2[U> f| <0(E)`<0ՖUtLJ`U2\ g#F3 q w vM3Yf.{Fþshl^킑*/g,y83^]7o4f9~JApbPi!}Zb&ỗQCWTO%`}Ph& Hdn߸d`yo+ D9 GNrCaYc0ܦsox}(mZ9D+sSuq,pnbD+Єv5ʻnQ妝a=mre8K#2ֵ㏀͔|-ʵ نXVvJuA, <Ha^Uɂl| V`^rbz,f-`g@t\?kDJЀ7x5X* ]@?T<%'FhP܇,:M+19.X0"寂srzT^aHN9!1"{2F[/[bvʺfX0*\s;ٍrFeJKWC*kܱ,t,Ev;"p%蔥q9r^tDR=1I'"0uӆh c}1Q ?&P]E%帔@NRW{̧Tf Ǯ47IsWln6*]  3*يXB*EL;Gte@IJS }ěʃM)KVETzk`d d8,UyY9<_S>]bߠT,81Sij CVeNȰ 7^"Ks,S1,帙!)w0iJy%i(9%-2ҧ,R"9wuC PW4gH.MpdVV/Oj!-$[]GYɁ^-AWQb#-+#*f"4CU8žNAv,ĭUv΢nt5Z=EB"PK +P&TJ2g.R᪇br>go1 O-+=!R4{I|i`uD0bQ'B4|J4]puE;lzen6(R8rrK!KFgC'Rdl >Ha@z EJC nNBE\;HVגYfOd{+ k<+c'(AyXT쯼L Bz-y<` 8 ?W5[E,,'9GVv=݀mti<&eZ/CRӘ`7k$Pl&.Y!:-ȅB-V%虹kQTB~#A?!KD^ `ed"G8$L9RPCFUp"%PtjoJ-J qw UCMˀ y"|Jy.hs5# W_4ť| >,*ıK37MW T byQe|2יW/-Hi92iYJ#iniLmrw0֘HĴgx$aUy=0ch17YIyU|,E9}q3u4R* )RW\L}A"A,\2aeZ{X}gڃy%C7yvE{R Uɂ 匌:3`>`Oo0>T= pw0T2ic KWWh&;b [yu N=)E7(Sٺ цÓ7!9}#0 (R(f"z_"*Ӧ4CJ$QxZ=GmԳ5_@3*o0'5˪(2%r$aA9p"7dd#jm\1A֦-ag=JZY.xEMf-R\ P,@J \VUP͡jC#@ 0p00P"#*6',h $E]E+ u;ZnfeYV#Mz~̝?j<(0[â D+$girfl 1S2-:B"mAkp8`BΌ$T|C<"Ƚ, T{ @@@@@@@L PTDhl}0 CPQ~Xr S-LX=Tݤ!cA" srcset=">d`l$$( ( ,,$,(,,,8@0(,4L\T@Pɸ~y&x _tj*x7`fCbG`Vru&-]Ȍ,sD4DKj27&ɼۘz9cy= =bY)%XT[ˬN2IsRO҂羃QKGte#,1F)AisޕqK3'Odt[.aíIg(|3%dLut;KtY[S$ʐ¡"AYg^2fA|:"Je,Rxz)V,h]3`{SnwMBIȡ>O SvQz#ַe>^S29~Y 34P\W,[ y̡gʴQg?.!o%c+h SYrNaZt]¼Qt¦3H789<}tr(#lG]dpcM-*բi+װl=!,A#hr#Ql2> OMkl.17?0fߣ 6_G|W5; A&6${0T[i:BG<$lr9#K8J\օ7XqvCzҼa\EF\ӜjFˍ픲Bznws<8:mݴ M:i/ZF1BȆ6Nf<+XV?]ez-#)/"6m׷K*ʓd (0gP40M=+#+dQ*3tG>C*RL¸˜jv1E*.T|!y }i5@5ۦ:FEy@+w\yyY2 XiU\!ѰmK)q@]& DdF| ΄N;Qj,+v*sr<O9x7QV!._(#mdݎTc>f0)|@NFt:#cN =! D@@A@@ĄLAȐH }  6p+G |DlDNg-4`=Fq|A#_a \묯04jv3UBu2Po(g޾#*e*e QF⛘缀3˿'RV荇K|rݙXIMS*""F{:=%F!6tpe1BŞ`l8ND (HU+ǩa ȣٗQpx݌478UPS%K6X[(]Ѭf1B{2& fx B$"O4O 4VMI붷bT\Tʛ@q 0@Ph 8w%~W@q Prm;e!J9 %HrȰ, Zُ `*cS$NxOM3DoGg8ƭޤ _,ԝ^K%ZCRX[FCc.#sb5{d&#(R(7Rxp.㲩[n2Qr7`T1drׁ w{!ȗBpƄy4 !$}F^s4V lR_BDĿD;tr?)܉}$$.aRwwpA+d2'M+`z3&4"ƤKYewaO3EQ 1gɎZF8o o6P1#,OcW.bhtQ/uVDG&kr%KUȌDZx|DRGK #KP81G`NX8 8`ڈ&pA:%%U%'͂,d$ƌ5<Xjbym2k M%iϑ4VGL]K "$v F}%6HCrv7|#JvF\$j)xbN_ leeL]nM5!ъM LG@$7X:<oqZMϥ&tWi6%ţtOr8k >KR.CƧiПXYwfkr@D=%34'FK).D4݉SQG_!TsH#Ш(,bOja(B} *k{=Xfdc"Y)啹M$/I%2 }:o؆ٺ2Q<;!7uOMn.=+Yb&'ȞMJ fn<܃*#"Udu4vƄJɪ6VgqJPDǔԟhh/ 84q)XRlBU2BcPZʴ2YmL]mk-yGWɔcb$dKxJK+Cc˻e#2D[-h.%ũ6[$) QFÖƒΉ EQi!4;9*kU$I) m l"聦/= !%} m=44B-`i?aRF΍`ף {m**M w2yB,v֞GNQpQF" M\$=&X4BzWE_Ar6aw'ܝ8yKI=4L(WIkt~Zt镙Y5d7<2LtOCT3]<. Q(,P?8EޤW$#g3 q\'؉@$mg =%S\ &ЬXnZk.vBGpZ&'rū_afbu]I5%dBYL&@}u7Gҩx躬 mPԭFЬۛ8}2nW}H}&,tfkA.(PxԿ#|#ʩig&!1AQaq@@OZ3A2Lcς \C1M#/zApLK:vsafaGz[s-PhZ`W[ϩl93T>&Bʘ<$I|xaz C\J*[T|d7 Xi{4T5ل]T!<)bLdlèY}/<u R.Cg$ģX.0Q>#h&lGEhcE)ܳ%Ug5"hdDPѩۂr֊ N9VRYxC2[U> f| <0(E)`<0ՖUtLJ`U2\ g#F3 q w vM3Yf.{Fþshl^킑*/g,y83^]7o4f9~JApbPi!}Zb&ỗQCWTO%`}Ph& Hdn߸d`yo+ D9 GNrCaYc0ܦsox}(mZ9D+sSuq,pnbD+Єv5ʻnQ妝a=mre8K#2ֵ㏀͔|-ʵ نXVvJuA, <Ha^Uɂl| V`^rbz,f-`g@t\?kDJЀ7x5X* ]@?T<%'FhP܇,:M+19.X0"寂srzT^aHN9!1"{2F[/[bvʺfX0*\s;ٍrFeJKWC*kܱ,t,Ev;"p%蔥q9r^tDR=1I'"0uӆh c}1Q ?&P]E%帔@NRW{̧Tf Ǯ47IsWln6*]  3*يXB*EL;Gte@IJS }ěʃM)KVETzk`d d8,UyY9<_S>]bߠT,81Sij CVeNȰ 7^"Ks,S1,帙!)w0iJy%i(9%-2ҧ,R"9wuC PW4gH.MpdVV/Oj!-$[]GYɁ^-AWQb#-+#*f"4CU8žNAv,ĭUv΢nt5Z=EB"PK +P&TJ2g.R᪇br>go1 O-+=!R4{I|i`uD0bQ'B4|J4]puE;lzen6(R8rrK!KFgC'Rdl >Ha@z EJC nNBE\;HVגYfOd{+ k<+c'(AyXT쯼L Bz-y<` 8 ?W5[E,,'9GVv=݀mti<&eZ/CRӘ`7k$Pl&.Y!:-ȅB-V%虹kQTB~#A?!KD^ `ed"G8$L9RPCFUp"%PtjoJ-J qw UCMˀ y"|Jy.hs5# W_4ť| >,*ıK37MW T byQe|2יW/-Hi92iYJ#iniLmrw0֘HĴgx$aUy=0ch17YIyU|,E9}q3u4R* )RW\L}A"A,\2aeZ{X}gڃy%C7yvE{R Uɂ 匌:3`>`Oo0>T= pw0T2ic KWWh&;b [yu N=)E7(Sٺ цÓ7!9}#0 (R(f"z_"*Ӧ4CJ$QxZ=GmԳ5_@3*o0'5˪(2%r$aA9p"7dd#jm\1A֦-ag=JZY.xEMf-R\ P,@J \VUP͡jC#@ 0p00P"#*6',h $E]E+ u;ZnfeYV#Mz~̝?j<(0[â D+$girfl 1S2-:B"mAkp8`BΌ$T|C<"Ƚ, T{ @@@@@@@L PTDhl}0 CPQ~Xr S-LX=Tݤ!cA" class="avatar avatar-100 photo amp-wp-enforced-sizes" height="100" width="100" layout="intrinsic"> says:

    Roberto Bolaño's 2666 has been described as the most electrifying literary event of the year Lev Grossman Time as a landmark in what's possible for the novel as a form Jonathan Lethem The New York Times Book Review as a work of devastating power and complexity Adam Mansbach The Boston Globe as the work of a literary genius Francine Prose Harper's Magazine and repeatedly as a masterpiece Adam Kirsch of Slatecom writes that 2666 is an epic of whispers and details full of buried structures and intuitions that seem too evanescent or too terrible to put into words It demands from the reader a kind of abject submission—to its willful strangeness its insistent grimness even its occasional tedium—that only the greatest books dare to ask for or deserveBoyd Tonkin claims that 2666 offers everything that fiction can – and then gives even And combining Bolaño's biography and art one critic writes His death in the last moments of its creation applies the final indeterminate Bolañesco touch mystery openness imperfection—a simultaneous promise of everything and of nothingBut none of that is what I found in this book Instead of being the epitome of the art of the novel or its salvation 2666 is for me an ambitious attempt at greatness that fails It represents also the failure of literary critics to recognize the difference between great literature mediocre literature in the shape of great literature and pretentions to greatness that are bolstered by a romantic life and an early death Typically a good novel will have an interesting plot significant character development or thematic or political significance 2666 though lacks all of these things It has a merely perfunctory plot a total lack of character development as characters remain flat and distant and come and go with no fanfare and any central theme or political significance is deeply buried within the overwhelming level of detail Even a good novel is one that does something creates an emotional response in the reader teaches something illuminates an issue or makes a political statement This novel does none of those things My primary problem though is that this a novel with no joy in it The characters are all deadened and distant lacking connection with others and satisfaction with their lives the plot such as it is focuses on rape and murder lost people and war and the style consistently holds the reader at arm's length from all of this This joylessness seems to be intentional but that doesn't make it any pleasurable interesting or rewarding to read Giles Harvey writes of 2666 Samuel Beckett the original laureate of failure needed only a few pages of dialogue or prose to suggest an infinity of excruciating boredom Bolaño chooses to actually subject us to that boredom for 900 pagesThere are books that function precisely because of this lack of joy to make a point or to highlight by contrast something fundamental about humanity Richard Wright's Native Son is such a novel It takes us into the psyche of Bigger Thomas a rage filled and frustrated young black man in 1930s Chicago as he rapes and murders two young women This is a novel without much hope and without much light mired as it is in Bigger's world but this darkness is purposeful designed to bring a problem to light and effect political change Similarly Cormac McCarthy's The Road is a beating of a book in the way it emphasizes desolation and loss But again even if there is no hope for the characters in the plot there is a sort of redemption in the relationship developed between father and sonThe darkness in Bolaño's 2666 is different though Part 1 The Part About the Critics tells the story of four European literary critics in search of an author Benno von Archimboldi and their mostly unfulfilling love affairs with one another Part 2 The Part About Amalfitano is about one man in Santa Teresa a town in Mexico that has been plagued by a series of rapes and murders of young woman and which was modeled on Juárez in which a real life series of rapes and murders took place during the 1990s who gradually loses his grip on reality Part 3 The Part About Fate follows an African American reporter called Oscar Fate who comes to Santa Teresa to cover a boxing match and winds up being drawn into the mystery surrounding the disappearances there Part 4 The Part About the Crimes does little than clinically detail hundreds of crimes against women many of them involving similar young women who have been anally and vaginally raped and then murdered and follow the half hearted attempts of the local police to solve said crimes and Part 5 The Part About Archimboldi finally tells readers who the author from Part 1 really is where he came from what shaped him mostly World War II it seems and what has become of him The parts are only loosely related to one another and none of them contain any closure Giles Harvey again writes The book is a monstrosity an immense negation of everything we expect literature to provide form insight redemption happiness It seems to want to inflict itself upon us I have suggested that the book is a failure Yet to call 2666 a failure feels somehow tautological Bolaño's imagination was underwritten by the idea that every human impulse is ultimately thwarted cancelled destroyedThis drive toward failure is therefore distinct from the darkness found in Native Son and The Road Its only purpose after all it seems is to destroy all hope and to impart Bolaño's bleak worldview a worldview which itself does nothing The most striking instance of this is in Part 4 about the crimes Some reviewers have argued that the book makes a political statement about the treatment of and attitude toward women that allows this kind of rape and murder to continue unabated some have called his writing about the epidemic of rape and murder compassionate some have even claimed his coverage of the killings can be called feminist Michael Berger writes The sheer audacity of the novel is that it reads at times as the ultimate indictment of Bolaño’s gender his own dreams and desires and especially the culture of machismo gangsterism and tyranny that passes for masculinity in many parts of the world A review from the New York Magazine Book Review claims that Bolaño humanizes not only the women and their families but the corrupt police and even the murder suspects It’s a perfect fusion of subject and method The real world horror anchors Bolaño’s dreamy aesthetic producing an impossibly powerful hybrid of political anger and sophisticated artBerger also describes the style of Part 4 by saying that the murders are described in a neutral matter of fact style that serves to humanize the victimsThe overwhelming and clinical detail surrounding the murders do little for me in the way of humanizing the victims however They all start to sound the same The names may be different but the details are all too similar This seems the opposite of humanizing actually And this is an important point to dwell upon because all of the things these positive reviews claim that it is political literature Bolaño's compassion that it is feminist depend for their effectiveness not on deadening the reader or highlighting the horrors of humanity but on drawing the reader in creating an emotional connection and even pushing the reader to change the way she or he thinks and even acts Bolaño's work thorough as it is does not do this When everyone in the novel is distant and half dead even the good guys such as they are what does it matter if women are being raped and killed? When even the reader is deadened by the effort of reading the novel what does it matter? Further The Part About the Crimes in which Bolaño details several years' worth of rapes and murders in Santa Teresa in which hundreds of women are brutalized violated mutilated and killed and are only distinguished from one another in many cases by quickly passed over names and clinical descriptions of how they were found and what they were wearing when they were found serves only to deaden The women who are killed are no than objects evidence of a crime wave Reading this section one cannot help but wonder at the sheer volume of the crimes described Bolaño is clearly trying to make a point by depicting each and every one of the crimes trying to represent the breadth of this problem but it loses all meaning eventually Why depict hundreds of dead and violated women's bodies when the point could be made with a far smaller number? Why not allow the reader to extrapolate from an already horrifying number? One cannot help but wonder as I've said but not only at the number of women killed which is what Bolaño attempts to highlight here one cannot help but wonder if at some level there is a perverse pleasure on the part of the author or intended for the reader in seeing this violence against women enacted over and over and over again At some point it crosses a line between instructive and twistedAt least one critic takes note of this John Lingan writes When we read this parade of atrocity particularly in light of the other moments in 2666 when women are raped or otherwise forcibly used for sex it’s hard not to imagine that Bolaño took some small level of skewed enjoyment from the projectBolaño's living women are equally problematic As Victor Manley writes All of the women are either nymphomaniac indecisive fickle insane unnatural or a colourful selection of the above For a so called feminist novel then 2666 is sorely lacking in convincing female characters and in an understanding of women's actual lives Bolaño does evince some concern with the situation that leads to women being raped and murdered but I am not sure that that's enough As Jonathan Birch writes Emotionally for all its absurd scope why read ten different novels when you can read one by Roberto Bolaño? 2666 is as cold and dead as its female charactersThis was a hard book to read and has been a hard book to write about In this it succeeds I suppose in being bleak and depressing and in putting forth a particular view of life and humanity But a masterpiece? I think not Critics like to defend the book by saying that great art challenges the reader that great art may not be immediately recognized as beautiful but these same critics profusely praise the book seeming to undermine their own defenses of it and refuse to note that there is a distinction between challenging the reader and telling him or her to fuck off which is like what 2666 does As one reviewer writes in one of the few not so glowing reviews I didn't exactly hate 2666 but I often got the feeling that 2666 wasn't so fond of mePut literarily In Bolaño’s hellish postmodern creation the silent contract between reader and author is broken there’s nothing to care about nothing at stake and no reason to keep readingIndeed