/lit/ - Literature

I'm only 1 chapter in. Chapter 1 was fantastic.

>>1338935
I read chapter one. I was not impressed. Care to give details why you liked it as much as you did? Adjectives leave a lot to be desired; I prefer explanations.

On my part, I just didn't find the characters engaging. It was interesting, the first chapter, but nothing really caught me and it didn't bother me a bit to never pick it back up again. My main concern would be that the entire book is very topical -- there is a lot of time in 100 years, and I worry that there would be so much and so many that none of it could really be handled the way it ought to be. I felt like the first chapter could be inflated and stand on its own as a short story, were it to be fleshed out properly with more detail. And I was not impressed with the prose - how do you feel about it? Any particular stylistic quirks that are endearing?

>>1338948
>not impressed with the prose
It was written in Spanish, bro. You're reading a translation.

The point of the book is the cyclical nature of time. Characters in one generation are repeated in the next generation - the details get fleshed out over time, as each new addition to the family adds something to the family tree and the familial archetype that person is meant to represent. Keep reading.

>>1338957
Yes, I know about the translation. But as neither myself nor my friend can read Spanish, the translated prose matters. Saying to oneself "well, it wasn't supposed to be this way" might be comforting, but really doesn't improve the experience.

What are some of the negative aspects of the book?

>>1338948
>I was not impressed with the prose - how do you feel about it? Any particular stylistic quirks that are endearing?

Gabriel García Márquez once wrote Edith Grossman (a translator of his other works, but not the translator of 100 Years) to tell her that he purposefully tries to avoid Spanish adverbs ending in -mente, so he would prefer if she not use English adverbs that end in -ly. He probably did the same thing to Gregory Rabassa, the translator of the book you're reading.

For some reason one line has always stuck out to me: in the beginning, maybe even the first page, Gabo writes something like, "The world was so new there weren't yet names for every object, and it was necessary to point." I love that line so much. It makes the Earth seem so fresh, so innocent, so other-worldly and brand-new. It was at that point I knew I would love the book.

>>1338994
Oh yes, that was a good image. I do like the story, but because of that I feel I might be left wanting if I was to read the whole thing. I felt dissatisfied at the end of the first chapter. So much to say, so little of it said.

Need negatives, people!

sage for inferior writing Gabby GarTHEEah Marcalacacacucaracha "magic realism" garbage

stick with Dead White Men, they won't lure you into veiled, slave dialectic minority group attempts to resituate power relations that have already been established by the Will of the Stronger

>>1339008
You're supposed to feel slightly dissatisfied at the end of every chapter, shouldn't you? It's a hook to make you keep reading. It's the whole tension and release thing.

As for negatives: you'll be confused because there are dozens of characters but only five or so different names. You'll need a family tree and some thinking to be able to figure out who's who. Most modern editions include the tree somewhere after the title page.

>>1339013
You're suffering some mad delusions, bro.

I started it and got about 1/4 of the way through it. Then I got bored and haven't gotten back to it. That was about a year ago.

I think my problem is that I read Gilbert Hernandez' Palomar stories, some Angela Carter, and _Love in the Time of Cholera_ before it. I think I was just magic realismed out by the time I got to _One Hundred Years_. Maybe if I had read it first then it would have impressed me more.
At least the edition that I got was the classic paperback edition I used to see all over the f'n place when I was a kid, with the classic cover illustration. Pic related.

I am currently reading this book. About 50% done.
>>1339088
Yes, it was very borning for me at the biginning.
But after 100 pages got exited and enjoying it now.
It's like Catch-22 or like The Plague - you need time to taste it.
Btw sorry for terrible English. I am from Russia.

I read it during a three day drinking bender and still managed to enjoy it (and remember most of it). Even sorted out all the Arcadios and Aurelianos ok.

>>1338922

For the people here who like Marquez (and maybe stuff by Vargas Llosa as well), have a look into Juan Rulfo if you already haven't. Specifically 'Pedro Paramo' - it's along the same lines as Marquez and Llosa and a good read.

Not bad, but...just read Borges instead.

>>1339328
Borges is like a slightly less autistic but still robotic Spanish-language Asimov.

>>1339008

This. Fucking spic ressentiment dreck. I always say,

If the dude ain't white,
The work ain't awwright.

>>1339439

>HAHAHAHA HE BELIEVES ASIMOV IS GOOD WHAT A FAGGOT

Well OP you see Marquez is pretty much hated because he represents that bullshit generic nescafe "magic realism" shit relying on hyperbole and latin american cliche. The book is corny and shallow, but by no means badly executed. Like most of the better known latin american literatura it is corny and shallow (like Cortázar, Paz, Neruda) but at least not pedantic (Vargas Llosa) or pretentious gibberish (Bolaño). Superior latinamerican writers: José Lezama Lima, Juan Rulfo, Borges, Jose María Arguedas, Miguel Angel Asturias

>>1339696
I was actually saying that Asimov is really bad and Borges is just a little better.

Your opinion is bad.

>>1338948
I'm reading it in Spanish. It's a pretty understated style of prose, but I found the village and the gypsies to be pretty cool and I found José Arcadio and Úrsula to be endearing right off.

>>1339770

Still wrong. Borges is perhaps one of the best spanish language writers, while Asimov is pretty low among his fellows. Also, Borges pretty much solved the problem of infinity in literature.

The book gets a lot of meaning (and really becomes interesting) after about 3/4 of the way through (read it last year).

It's theme is actually modernist, although the magical realism will disguise that for a while. And if anything, it has some good political commentary on Latin America, so its good at least in that respect.

Thank you all for your opinions.