Mention was made in class of Roberto Arlt's affiliation with existentialism and Los sietes locos does indeed echo many existentialist themes and ideas: Remo Erdosain appears as a River Plate Raskolnikov who derives his sense of being from a criminal act ("sólo el crimen puede afirmar mi exitencia, como sólo el mal afirma la presencia del hombre sobre la tierra"); an Nietzschean ubermensch who seeks to "pergonar la audacia, la nueva vida" by "violar el sentido comun"; and a Sartrean angoissé preoccupied by the nothingness of things and the meaningless of a life "movida por el automatismo de la costumbre".
I would like to suggest another affiliation. Juan Carlos Onetti's description of Arlt as a (non) writer dismissed by Buenos Aires' stylish martini set reminds me of Truman Capote, himself a stylish martini-drinking New Yorker, who said of Jack Kerouac: "That's not writing, its typing". Kerouac and Arlt are not without similiarities: both were outsiders born into poverty; both were anti-establishment figures who distained the language of "los mandarinos"; both took as their subjects the marginalized and mad ("The only people for me", wrote Karouac, "are the mad ones, the ones who...burn, burn, burn, like fabulous yellow Roman candles exploding like spiders across the stars"); and, most interestingly, both have entered their countries respective national canons despite (and/or because of) their scorn for bourgeois taste and respectability. Breaking open literary language and liberating it from the hold of the cultured elite is what makes these "bad writers" good, a badness to which Allende, Coehlo and Esquivel could only dream of aspiring.
2 comments:
Heh. I think you're on an interesting track with this notion of "a badness to which Allende [and co.] could only dream of aspiring."
Some other possible comparisons: the more contemporaneous Henry Miller, for whom the "word and concept" of the literary "disgusted him"; the more recent Charles Bukowski.
Interesting, I also thought of Henry Miller and Charles Bukowski when I was reading this book, though I didn't think of Kerouac, nice reference. However, I am not sure why, but I haven't been enjoying this book as much as the I enjoyed books by the latter authors mentioned here. I do enjoy that it's a subaltern point of view and that the language and characters reflect that. And I still dont get why it's bad literature.
Post a Comment