De mierenmoordenaar

Perhaps because of the title and a misleading summary, I was hoping for something along the lines of "Gargantua and Pantagruel." I was hoping, at least, for a character or two, since my version of "Cronopios and Famas" does not indicate anywhere that it is a collection of briefly explored ideas

Show More

that could have become the seeds of short stories or could perhaps have been condensed into poems (prose or otherwise) with proper attention.This is more of a humorist's assembly than anything else. If you feel the need to read it, out of loyalty to Cortazar or for some other reason unconnected to its merits, keep it by the toilet. Reading it all at once can only be a disappointment.

But, my actual suggestion would be that you don't read this book, certainly that you don't read the section of the book that justifies the title. Check out Francis Ponge if you want thought-provoking, outsider prose poems, or Isadore Ducasse if you want absurd, poetic short stories. On the shear strength of "Autonauts of the Cosmoroute" I will continue to search for another Cortazar book that I like; but this stinker really lowered my hopes.

Show Less

A collection of short items, in 4 groups (Manual de instrucciones, Ocupaciones raras, Material plástico, and Historias de cronopios y de famas) - generally somewhat surreal and hilarious, and often profound as well. Fairly easy reading for an intermediate level learner of castellano.

I finally read this one. Perhaps because I've already read much of his work, but this one seemed underwhelming. There were brilliant bits but also bits that seemed formulaically Cortázarian. This would be a nice primer, because it presents his more playful side, which is the more photogenic side

Show More

of Cortázar afterall. The thing is that you need this sillier side to enter the serious side, it is the portal through which one finds Cortázar's presumptions to be more stomachable, even appetizing (one must remember that Cortázar is the kind of guy who will go to unimaginable lengths just to laugh at himself).

I really liked the first piece (which I think was untitled), the one about the bear in the pipes, and many of the sillier Cronopios/Famas/Esperanza stuff in the last section.

I sometimes wonder why he is so obsessed with these playful categories--maybe he secretly fears that he is a Famas, or even, god-forbid, an Esperanza. The thing is that he is all these things, and more. Did Cortázar set out to have these correspond roughly with the id, the ego, and the superego? Cronopios is definitely the id, the other two I'm not sure. I see the ego as the esperanza and the superego as the famas, but these are not as clear-cut.

Cortázar's writing is, in itself, the prime example of the battle of these forces. He wants above all to be the instinctual writer, the one who circumambulates logic, who goes directly to the reader's baby-understanding. Naturally he achieves this as he is a born writer. One reads his sentences as if walking through the fecundity of continuous parks.

Yet at the same time he cannot overcome his tendency for logic and order, especially when it breaks down in structure, or when it seems paradoxical. This is a form of paring back that acts against his nature, i.e. to prose playfully and without restraint. Structure and play create slightly opposing armies and sometimes this is a self destructive battle, as in most of his short stories, in which I feel the balance goes towards the structure despite the great prose. But sometimes, as in most of his novels, the balance is just right, and the battle rages on.

Show Less

A very lovable book--whimsical, clever, and at times truly bizarre.