When does it get good
>>24983887I created a thread just like this a couple months ago. TL;DR it doesn't. It's infamous because "the Part about Crimes" but that's already like a third through the book and it seems people like it symbolically for what it does for the theme, not actually enjoying the content.
>>24983904I finished the part about the critics in one day. It was readable but not a single line of memorable writing. Had it been a standalone novella (as intended?) it would be fucking horrible but I’m holding out at hope it has a greater impact in relation to the whole.
>>24983905It's pretty much more of the same for the next two parts. I reached my limits and dropped it in the middle of "the Part about Fate" then I looked up some video essays to see why this book is so highly renowned. I'm glad I didn't waste anymore time on it.
>>24983905Also, another reason I think this book is so highly acclaimed is because the author was terminally ill and this was his last work before kicking the bucket. It seems this fact has biased people into praising 2666 more than it deserves.
>>24983887It doesn't. It was never revised, you are reading an unfinished work. Stick to his other stuff, which is much better, and only read this out of curiosity.
>>24983887the last partseriously
>>24984272>he's rightWow, that's crazy how I didn't know this. It all makes so much more sense and now I'm even more pissed off that people consider this shit a modern classic.
>book is supposed to be about a cool mystery of women disappearing/dying>opening 100 pages is about some gay fucking love triangle i dont give a fuck about
>>24983923Precisely my thoughts. Bolaño could have written literally anything and it would have been praised. It was actually published posthumously and IIRC against his wishes by his son.The book has no coherent plot and the characters are boring. The Part about Amalfitano was pretty funny, but it was clear that Bolaño was just writing whatever came to mind without any forethought when Amalfitano starts writing schizo diagrams in his journal and spending like 5 pages describing them. The Part about the Critics was similarly aimless. I dropped it in the part about the crimes. The book definitely suffered from not being edited. A lot of spanish literature is like this DESU. I read Pedro Páramo and it similarly refuses to develop or investigate characters at all, preferring 1 dimensional movers that are disposed of as quickly as they come.
>>24983887I actually really like the first part but the part about the crimes is a drag. I really hope Savage Detectives is better.
>>24984952I hate how he forgets to tell a story so he can play dolls with his characters. >They went to Berlin for X then Austria for Y then had dinner then called each other thenBruh this isn’t what I paid for
i liked everything i read from it, maybe you need to be a heckin spicerino to actually get it.>>24984952theres literally nothing wrong with pedro paramo, you just have fixed expectations about how every literary work should be structured like despite of the culture that produced it, or you just hate latinamerican literature, big faggot.
>>24984952>It was actually published posthumously and IIRC against his wishes by his son.wasnt against his wishes, wasnt handled by his (very young) son. you have very low information retention and we can discard your opinion as low-iq ravings.
If an author cant tell the story in <350 pages, they're a bad writer.
