Of readings and possibilities

On April 13, Mario Vargas Losa, one of the most important book of the second half of the twentieth century in Spanish. Written by books like A conversation in the cathedral (1969), City and dogs (1963), The end of the world war (1981) y Goat party (2000), it has become an author of the door to monitor the various faces that are carefully found in the reality of Latin America. Speaking of this author, he is also fatal to mention the literary value of his work, which prompted him to obtain many confessions outside CERVANTES Awards and the Nobel Literature Prize – which was awarded in 1994 and 2010, respectively – as a member of the Spanish Royal Academy and the French Academy. Vargas Llosa maintained the marine infantry of storms and the hero of the novel, in the center of many discussions in which they raised passion, the eternal contradictions and discussion were restored about the value of literary work to the value of literary work in contrast to the political activity of the author or the author. In fact, a complex topic that can lead us to a land of dangerous value, at the doors of subjectivity and rationality, at these times, yesca becomes the fires of the fatuos.

During these days, as usually before the death of the personality of this cultural dimension and transgression, there was no shortage of magic and brief rulings about his life, political decisions and everything that can be seen through ideological glasses that are usually the short -sighted palace. This happened with Vargas Llosa: The discussions and situations that intend to nullify their literary work under the optics were for those who stand as judges that could not be heated in their CV. If this mechanism should prevail – as another face for some contestants – to evaluate literature, we can only keep a handful of writers or writers who will be saved from emotional conclusions, from the tempting called intolerance and political loss.

Perhaps a little look between our book and our book, for example, is close to their proximity to the PRI network in the last century, to their sympathy for dictators such as Fidel Castro or the Russian Communist System for drawing some ideas under the weight of history. Perhaps this type of method can push to deepen that old debate about the artist’s life – their political decisions, his relationship to society, and the faces of his shortcomings and virtues – and the distance that involves assessing his work in the context of a literary perspective. What caught the attention in that trial, which is promoted today in a world of divisions and divisions, plays those limits with how absurdity in many places that can fill that freedom in literature, in art.

Consequently, it is not by chance that among the pages that call the echoes of this controversy, the words of Amos Oz are present in his book Against fanaticismHe realizes his piracry about the lack of our knowledge, even when we have a hundred percent reason … “(pp. 30-31). Undoubtedly, this is a reading calling at these times when fanaticism acquires an increasing land.

Whoever will approach Mario Vargas Losa, Rosario Castelanus, Jaime Sapine, Borges or Garcia Marquise as he wants. Perhaps the only thing that must be emphasized is that this freedom of choice, enjoyment or lack of reading, analyzing and value, does not always have good correspondence with the reading of the manne, which is implemented through a moral rule where the strict division is increasingly risk because it becomes a face of worship.