By Night in Chile by Roberto Bolano

I had wanted to read something by Roberto Bolano for as long as I could remember, so long in fact that I can no longer remember how he came to my attention. At the Sydney Writers Festival this year, I purchased tickets to attend a discussion about Bolano, that was hosted by Hugo Browne-Anderson and Chris Andrews. The latter is one of two people who have been translating Bolano's works from Spanish to English and so was able to add some really interesting perspectives to the discussion. This was the final motivation I needed to visit the library and borrow By Night in Chile, and I wasn't disappointed.

This is one of the most wonderful works of literary fiction that I have ever read. The plot is described thus on the back of the book: "During the course of a single night, Father Sebastian Urratia Lacroix, a Chilean priest who is a ember of Opus Dei, a literary critic and a mediocre poet, relives some of the crucial events of his life. He believes he is dying, and in his feverish delirium various characters, both real and imaginary, appear to him as icy monsters, as if in sequences from a horror film. Among them are the great poet Pablo Neruda, the German novelist Ernt Junger, and General Augusto Pinochet - whom Father Lacroix instructs in Marxist doctrine - as well as various members of the Chilean intelligentsia whose lives, during a period of political turbulence, have touched his own." Not uninteresting, that's for sure.

There is no comparing Bolano's use of language in story telling to anyone else. The language is utterly unique; satirical, lyrical and full of wit. The imagery Bolano uses almost makes the reader part of the story, it feels as if you are seeing and feeling what Lacroix is. Reading the book felt a little bit like being part of a waterfall. The words flowed so rapidly that it was hard to lose control as you were swept along in it's flow. At first, I actually found very challenging to focus on the story. I found that my mind wandered onto other things, in much the same way as the story wandered between the past and the present. As I got used to the language, though, I was able to sink deeper into the story and really appreciate the language.

This is a book about many things; but I would argue that it is largely about literature and the literary establishment. Lacroix is a priest, but he sees himself more as a literary critic and poet. He places little focus on his religious calling in his rememberings, instead recounting his experiences with famous literary critic Farewell, poet Pablo Neruda, author Ernst Junger and his experiences at the home of aspiring author Maria Canales.

Bolano is incredibly critical of the literary establishment in Chile, and Chilean literary tradition, although he is clearly in awe of Pablo Neruda. Bolano's critique is more aimed at the literary establishments complicity in Pinochet's regime. These people see themselves as artists and progressives, but offer no resistance to the violence and conservatism of Pinochet's regime.

Throughout his delirious ramblings, Lacroix talks to a "wizened youth" who if often present in his mind. It never clear exactly who this wizened youth is, but I believe that is a younger version of himself, and his ramblings are really Lacroix attempting to justify his own complicity with the Pinochet regime. The story begins:

"I am dying now, but I still have many things to say. I used to be at peace with myself. Quiet and at peace. But it all blew up unexpectedly. The wizened youth is to blame. I was at peace. I am no longer at peach. There are a couple of points that have to be cleared up."

In my mind, that wizened youth is that little voice at the back of all of our heads, telling us those things that we don't want to hear. Lacroix needs to convince himself, against the whisperings of that voice, that he has nothing to repent for.  

Despite his direct participating in Pinochet's regime, by teaching Pinochet and his Generals about the Marxist doctrine, he tries to justify his behaviour by trying to convince the reader (and himself) that he always attempted to hold himself apart from politics. The following quote is a long one, but describes how he experienced Allende's time in government:

"... and then a pro-Allende general was killed, and Chile restored diplomatic relations with Cuba and the national census recorded a total of 8,884,746 Chileans and the first episodes of the Chilean soap opera The Right to be Born were broadcast on television, and I read Tyrtaios of Sparta and Archilochos of Paros and Solon of Athens... and the government nationalised the copper mines and then the nitrate and steel industries and Pablo Neruda won the Nobel Prize and Diaz Casaneueva won the National Literature Prize and Fidel Castro came on a visit and many people thought he would stay and live in Chile forever... and the first anti-Allende march was organised, with people banging pots and pans, and I read Aeschylus and Sophocles and Euripides, all the tragedies..., and in Chile there were shortages and inflation and black marketeering and long queues for food... and the Bureau of Women's Affairs was set up and Allende went to Mexico and visited the seat of the United Nations in New York... and I read Thucydides... and there were strikes and the colonel of a tank regiment tried to mount a coup, and a cameraman recorded his own death on film, and then Allende's naval aide-de-camp was assassinated and there were riots, swearing, Chileans blaspheming, painting on walls, and then nearly half a million people marched in support of Allende, and then came the coup d'etat, the putsch, the military uprising, the bombing of La Moneda and when the bombing was finished, the president committed suicide and that put an end to it all. I sat there in silence, a finger between the pages to mark my place, and I thought: Peace at last".

He is almost trying too hard to convince us and himself that he is, as he puts it, "on the side of history", that we really see that this a man who knows that he has things to repent.

Ultimately, there are two things about this book that make it a work of art. It is a a literary masterpiece (in my opinion), with an entirely unique style and lyrical use of language. It is also a political critique of the complicity of the literary establishment in the brutal Pinochet regime. 


Summary

What kind of read is this?
Challenging, but compulsive. It is poignant and the language is so beautiful and unique that you will never read another books like it (unless it is another work by Bolano).

Do I recommend this book?
Without any hesitation, this is a book for true book lovers and people who really appreciate the use that language can be put to.

Do I recommend that you buy this book?
Yes. I borrowed it from the library, and know that I will have to buy myself a copy so that I can re-read it again and again.

Star Rating

8 / 8

One of the best books I have ever read. Everyone should read it - it is totally amazing. I am in love.

A Case of Exploding Mangoes by Mohammed Hanif

A Case of Exploding Mangoes is Mohammed Hanif's debut novel, set in Pakistan. It is a political comedy; exploring the mystery surrounding the assassination of General Muhammad Zia ul-Haq, the military dictator of Pakistan. THis book came to my attention at the Sydney Writers Festival 2009, when I watched Mohammed Hanid do a reading from the book. It appealed to me very much. Hanif had a wonderful reading voice, and I didn't want him to stop. I finally managed to read the book 1 week before the Sydney Writers Festival 2010.

Assassination fiction is not a genre that I am overly familiarly with, but I can say without reservation this is the funniest and cleverest book that I have opened in a very long time.

We know that General Zia is killed wen his C130-Hercules plane, Pak One, explodes and crashes in August 1988, after General Zia has been watching a military display. A Case of Exploding Mangoes takes a unique look at what, or who, may have been responsible. But it is that not a typical exploration of this question. The publisher's description of the book reads:

"There is an ancient saying that when lovers fall out, a plane goes down. This is the story of one such plane. Why did a Hercules C130, the world's sturdiest plane, carrying Pakistan's military dictator General Zia ul-Haq, go down on 17 August 1988? Was it because of:

1. Mechanical failure
2. Human error
3. The CIA's impatience
4. A blind woman's curse
5. Generals not happy with their pension plans 
6. The mango season

Or could it be the narrator Ali Shigri?"

The plot is ingenious and complex, and the main character Ali Shigri has a very clear, unique and sardonic voice. The story is told through a series of vignette's; mostly comprised of the events from Shigri's perspective, but also third-person accounts of events from the perspective of various other characters, like General Zia himself.


I can't really go into the plot too much for fear of spoiling the fun if you decide to read this book, which I recommend that you do. I will say that the characterisation is extremely rich, every person comes alive before the readers eyes. There is a whole range of fun characters including Lieutenant Bannon, an American who is part of the Pakistan Army, Obaid or Baby O, Shirgri's best and closest friend and Uncle Starchy, the Army Academy's laundryman (who comes to play a significant role).

The story largely plays out in a Pakistani Airforce Academy, and begins when Shigri is being blamed for Obaid's disappearance in an Airforce plane. It is evtually revealed that Shigri has developed an assassination plot, because he believes that General Zia is responsible for the death of his father. At the very beginning we are suspicious of Shigri's true involvement in General Zia's downfall, particularly after he proudly states: "The only witness to that televised walk, the only one to have walked that walk, would be completely ignored. Because if you missed that clip, you probably missed me. Like history itself, I was the one who got away." This quote gives you a good insight into the tone of the book, and Shigri's feelings toward the role he played in the death of Zia.

Ultimately, it is not important who killed General Zia. This book is a political satire, it satirises the military using caricature and very clever one-liners, like "You can blame our men in uniform for anything, but you can never blame them or being imaginative" and "By the time it comes down to the questions about whether I would rescue my best friend's kitten drowning in a river or tell myself that cats can swim, I have begun to enjoy the test, and my pencil ticks the squares with the flourish of someone celebrating their own sanity."

Amoungst all the fun though, Hanif makes some important statements about the role of military in controling the State, the role of religion in government and the way in which governments can manipulate the population for their own benefit.

If you are looking for something fun, unique and thoughtful, the A Case of Exploding Mangoes is for you.

Summary

What kind of read is this?
It is not a challenging book in terms of its length and the writing, but it is an absolutely unique and hilarious book. It is a political satire and it is historical fiction, but with some important modern messages.

Do I recommend this book?
Absolutely. There are not many books that I could recommend more highly.

Do I recommend that you buy this book?
Yes, this is one that I am proud to have on my shelf, and one that I know will stand up to lots of re-reading.

Star Rating

7 / 8

Brilliant, couldn't put it down. Recommend that you buy it. 

Book Details: Paperback, 295 pages, published by Vintage Books, published in 2008, English

Rice Bowl by Suchen Christine Lim

I bought this book during a holiday to Singapore in September 2009. The book is written by a Singaporean author, who won the first Singaporean literature award for a different novel, and it is the 2009 edition of the book.

This book was Lim's first novel, and I have to be honest and admit that I don't think that this was a well written book. A lot of it felt contrived, the conversations particularly, and I didn't feel like I really got to know the characters at all.


The Rice Bowl is about politics and imperialism and race, and how political theories and ideal intersect with actual lives.The book's main character is a novice nun, who becomes a left wing activist when she commences university. The story is set at the time of the war in Vietnam, and her and her friend's activism culminates in a protest against the war. 

For me, this novel demonstrates a lot of what I didn't like about lefty politics and some of the people actively involved (I don't mean to offend anyone and I'm sure no one I know falls into this category :-) !!!)

This mainly revolves around the main character of Marie, or Sister Marie-Therese. Marie has great intentions and ideals, she encourages her students to think about the world around her before commencing university with them, where she continues to do the same. Unfortunately for her and those around her, her good intentions end up the victim of her own ego and other people suffer as a result.

What really drives Marie is her ego. She likes people to look up to her; she likes having a 'group' of followers. She is so certain that she is right, that she doesn't listen to others in any meaningful way. She aspires to these great ideals that she expects the world and others to live up to, but she doesn't live up to them herself. She can't recognise any way but her own.

A good example of this is where she attempts to convince her convent community to join her and her activist friends in the protest against the war in Vietnam. Her nun colleagues refuse, arguing that they do important work to help the impoverished and the sick in their own way, they educate the young in their schools, and this is the work that they need to prioritise. In the end, the nuns choose to prioritise this work over the idea of protesting against the larger social problems facing the world. They do not reject the idea behind what she is doing, but they reject becoming involved. Marie sees them as rejecting the good of the world, she cannot accept that despite their rejection of 'her way' of resolving to world's ill, they might still be doing good of their own. She says, "As a community they're more interested in social welfarism than in working for the more fundamental changes in the social order". She does not ask herself what is wrong with this? Why shouldn't some people focus more on the individual and others on the bigger picture? Can't these two methods of progress work together? With Marie, its her way or the highway.

Maybe I'm being a bit too harsh. Regardless of her inconsistencies and questionable motives, The Rice Bowl is about people trying to make sense of the world around them, and make it a better place for people to live. They are trying to find meaning, and hope and fight injustice. I think that despite some of the reservations about the methods and motives of those actively taking charge of the collective and protest, the ending of the book demonstrates that the author ultimately believes that their brand of politics has some merit in the world.

There are a lot of issues with politics that this book raises, and despite how poorly I think the novel was written, it did provide some food for thought, especially for those politically minded.

 

Star Rating

5.5 / 8

Good and worth reading if you have the opportunity, but there's no need to prioritise it unless you have a particular interest in left-wing politics and activism.