Thoughts?

This book has everything I wish I could do in a novel. It’s also very sensual at parts, does that get lost in the translation? I’d assume some of it does. Also this book introduced me to Musil and TMWQ is the best book I’ve ever read so there’s that too.

If they are art hoes then I don't know that the fuck you faggots in this site are.

wannabe art hoes but too ugly and stupid to be one

how do you even translate the giglico shit?

Yes. In Spanish it's way more sensual.

How does this book compare to Bolanos 'The savage detectives'? I'm currently trying to read that but it's so boring and pretentious. I have a copy of Hopscotch that I might give a shot instead.

Attached: 41sxeKTbNBL.jpg (323x500, 26K)

probably stay away from that if you think TSD is pretentious

Got it, thanks.

Not even close. Bolaño is on a different league.

In a worse league? I enjoyed some of Cortazars short stories in 'All fires the fire' and 'Blow-up and other stories', so I'm still a bit interested in reading Hopscotch.

But holy shit if it's anything like the first part in TSD (Mexicans lost in Mexico, or something like that) then I won't even bother. It was just a bunch of young adults smoking weed, having homosex and talking like pretentious art hoes over poetry and shit. Shame since so many others seem to like it.

True, Cortazar is a better short story writer but not a novelist. Bolaño was a poet from the streets, taking a shit with his son like you said or taking with a drunk fisherman about some hooker he fucked are the things he found interesting.

As a novelist, yes. But Cortázar is miles ahead as a short story writer, and is also a better poet than Bolaño, though. Bolaño writes poems about taking a shit alongside his son, for fuck's sake.

The best Cortázar is actually just a bad Borges.

t. Argie.

Attached: Correction+cartoons+with+little+girls+_e9f8c51154d8d3c247fe5a1b74fb8fc8.jpg (798x809, 48K)

Bolaño has some good poems here and there but the guy was anything but a poet. His essays are even better than his poems. And yea, his themes were kind of vulgar but it's the technique that's dull. Literally all his poems are free verse.

They had different styles, themes, preoccupations, and ideas. Normie critics like to spew this nonsense only because both wrote fantasy short stories. No one would say, for instance, "the best Lovecraft is just a bad Poe". An absolute platitude.

Well, if i really had to be fair, i would say Cortázar shines best in his short stories.
Hopscotch, on the other hand, it's a really original idea, but it's an absolute waste of time. The only people i knew that readed this crap and ejoyed it, were pretentious faggots in college, and boomers that non ironically believed they were going to do a socialist revolution in Argentina.

This is, to me, the problem with a big part of Cortázar's work: people pretends to enjoy it because it enables them to pat themselves in the back and brag about reading his crap. Not only is boring, but if you read it in spanish you will notice how bland the prose actually is. Don't waste your time on this faggot.

Attached: fag.jpg (467x433, 40K)

Grow up and learn how to read other's lives and their experiences (whether fiction or not) without dropping them because you don't relate.

That being said Cortazar is amazing, and probably beyond your reading level.

t. pretentious weed-smoking socialist homo
No thanks, I'd rather read good literature.

really great but the hopscotch gimmick is pointless and gay

long-winded

Have you ever read borges?

This in most cases, pretentious marxist bullshit is worshiped like the paradigm of excellence in this board a lot, fuck that shit man.
I guess we wont get again at dostoievsky tier.

Second'd.