Roberto Bolaño Ávalos (28 April 1953 – 15 July 2003) was a Chilean novelist, short-story writer, poet and essayist. In 1999, Bolaño won the Rómulo Gallegos Prize for his novel Los detectives salvajes (The Savage Detectives), and in 2008 he was posthumously awarded the National Book Critics Circle Award for Fiction for his novel 2666, which was described by board member Marcela Valdes as a “work so rich and dazzling that it will surely draw readers and scholars for ages.” The New York Times described him as “the most significant Latin American literary voice of his generation”. (Wikipedia)
Bolaño and the History of the Future
Bolaño’s fiction, whether set in Chile or Mexico, is as much about a memory of Latin America as it is about the region’s actuality, even if that memory is sometimes also a memory of the future.
See also the conversation video: On Roberto Bolaño.
- Bolaño, Roberto. Amulet. Trans. Chris Andrews. New York: New Directions, 2006.
On Roberto Bolaño
Bolaño Videos
2666 | Who is Roberto Bolaño?:
Mexico: The Tlatelolco massacre, 50 years on | Al Jazeera English:
A Crash Course in Mexican History #7: Mexico 68 and The Tlatelolco Massacre:
The Tlatelolco Massacre and The Mexican Student Movement of 1968:
Both Chile and Peru claim pisco—a form of brandy or distilled fermented grape juice—as their national drink. Pisco’s origins date back to colonial times, when the grapes used were imported from Europe but the colony was forbidden from exporting wine. The word “pisco,” also the name of city in southern Peru, is from the Quechua for “bird.” So the drink occupies the faultline of colonial relations between Spain and its colonies, and of the conflictual history between independent postcolonial states. For the dispute between Chile and Peru over pisco, which has been fought out in the media and international courts, is, as Jerry Mitchell and William Terry note, “a proxy war contesting the outcome of the War of the Pacific” (525), in which, between 1879 and 1884, Chile expanded its northern territorial borders, encroaching upon Peru’s pisco-producing region. There is a lot of history that goes into the drink. A pisco sour, meanwhile, is a cocktail of pisco, lime juice, simple syrup, and egg whites. It is distinctively different in the two countries: smoother in Chile, but equally potent.
- Goldman, Francisco. “The Great Bolaño.” New York Review of Books (July 19, 2007).
- Harvey, Giles. “In the Labyrinth: A User’s Guide to Bolaño.” New Yorker (January 18, 2012).
- Long, Ryan. “Traumatic Time in Roberto Bolaño’s Amuleto and the Archive of 1968.”
Bulletin of Latin American Research 29.1 (March 2010): 128-143. - Wood, Michael. “More like a Cemetery.” London Review of Books 31.4 (February 26, 2009).
Bolaño Questions
- “This is going to be a horror story [. . .]. In fact it’s the story of a terrible crime” (1). Is this so? What is the horror, what is the crime?
- A generational logic seems to be important in this book. What is the role of the youth? And of their mothers?
- What does it mean that several of the major characters, not least Auxilio Lacouture and Arturo Belano, are not Mexicans?
- How does this book’s treatment of memory compare to what we have seen in other texts?
- How does space figure in this book?
- What is the role of art, particularly poetry, in this book?
- What is the relationship here between truth and fiction?
- What does this book have to say about history?
- What does it have to say about politics?
- What is the significance of the title and last word of the novel: amulet?
The following questions are taken from your blog posts…
On Titles and Beginnings:
What were your thoughts on the book? Did you like it or not?
Do you like the rambling, messy way this book is narrated? Does it make it all too confusing and difficult to follow? Did you even find it messy?
Why do you think this novel is titled “Amulet” and how might an amulet be relevant in this novel?
Why do you think Bolaño chose amulet as the title of this book? Do you think there’s another title that would be better suited?
At the beginning of the novel, Auxilio Lacouture says that “this is going to be a horror story.” So my question for this book is: What is the horror part shown in this novel?
Why do you think the book began how it began (“This is going to be a horror story”)? Were you disappointed when the book did not offer much “horror” or thrill? How do you think the book as a whole is related to the opening line(s)?
Do you think you would have enjoyed the novel more or less if it was depicted from a horror-story stance? And why?
What are your thoughts on why Bolaño decided to name the novel “Amulet”?
Why do you think Bolano named this book “Amulet” , what significance does it have? and did you find yourself imagining UBC while reading, or picturing yourself if it were you in this scary circumstance?
On Auxilio Lacouture
Given the glimpse we’ve had into her life, do you find Auxilio relatable? Or would you have acted differently under the same circumstances?
Is she a part of the chaos – by virtue of being at the geographic epicentre – or is she better understood as being an observer?
As Auxilio was confined to the stall trying to survive, what were some coping mechanisms she adopted throughout the invasion?
How did her identity as “a mother of all poets” change over time at first and at the end of the book?
Throughout the novel, she referred to herself as “the mother of poets”. I never really understood what she meant by this, and the more serious significance?
Did you like how this story was told, or would you have rather read more about Auxilio’s experience of survival?
Why did the author name the virtual protagonist he constructed as the “mother of poets”, and what does this show?
If you were in Auxilio’s situation, what would you do? Would you go back to the washroom and stay there or go somewhere else?
Do you think that this is a usual way for a woman to talk about love or do you think the fact that Bolaño wrote this piece impacted her as a character? What makes you think this?
I also considered that the author was male, but wrote from a female perspective. My question for the class is why did he do that? What was the impact of writing this from a woman’s perspective? Did it make it more understandable if you were a woman? Does gender matter in this novel?
Do you think that you would personally enjoy her way of life? Do you believe that you would be fulfilled and happy spending your days reading, doing random work and socializing the way she does?
If you were in Auxilio’s shoes, do you think you would have looked for friendships in the same places as she did?
What do you think would be Auxilio’s most valuable lesson from her experience? Would you be equally calm if you’re trapped in a washroom whilst a massacre is going on?
What do you think of the way our narrator Auxilio recounts the story in terms of her memories? what are your thoughts on her misremembering some events and how do you think that impacts the narrative?
How do you think her memory and the event of the occupation impact her visions about the future?
Do you believe Arturio could be a part of Auxilio’s memory or identity rather than a secondary character?
How do you think Auxilio’s peculiar characterization contributes to the narration of her story?
How do you find that way that Auxilio finds happiness in the connections that she makes? Do you think that her relationships, especially Felipe and Garfia, are beneficial for her?
How do you think the narrative point of view limits what the readers get from the whole story? To simplify the question a bit more, do you think that Auxilio’s way of narration limits what we know?
What is the significance of the fact that neither the author nor the protagonist are from the city in which the story is set?
Why do you think Auxilio told her story and history in the tone that she did?
Do you think the author did a good job of secretly revealing Auxilio’s sexuality to the readers?
Did you think that the narrations of Auxilio’s past served as a powerful distraction from the events in the book? How do you think this experience would have impacted her (physically and emotionally)?
Do you think that Auxilio spends time ruminating to comfort, soothe, reassure herself? Why might other people repeat themselves or seem forgetful? Does this only happen during extraneous circumstances or new environments?
Do you think that breaking the fourth wall by addressing the reader directly, allows us to become closer to the narrator? Does it have any other goal?
On time, temporality and peripheral views:
Based on other Latin American literature you’ve read, does this sense of being peripheral comes up or reveals itself?
How did the unique portrayal of temporality affect your reading? Did this make you feel as if the story was being narrated in a different realm? Did it confuse or distract you at all?
What role did time play throughout the events in the novel? How did this story of memory differ from others we have read in the class?
What was the significance of the future? Was she talking about the future or recollecting her past from the point of view of her past self before it occurred?
What did you make of the chronology of the novel and how did it impact your understanding?
How do you think the unravelling of the narrative contributed to the novel as a whole?
Did you like the way the book goes into past and future stories rather than just having a linear timeline?
Why is the choice to set stories amidst, or adjacent, but not directly in, conflict, such a powerful choice? What other places have you seen this done?
Do you think that Auxilio’s predictions are truly meaningful for her? Or are they more simply a message about literature from the author?
Why do you think Bolaño felt the need to tell this story from the perspective of Auxilio as opposed to a character more similar to himself?
On Memory:
What kind of memories would you want to fall back on? Back in time? Forward in the future? what would be your bathroom moment?
On Birthing and Motherhood/Womanhood:
How did you interpret the “birthing” scene on page 31, within the broader context of the story?
How did her identity as “a mother of all poets” change over time at first and at the end of the book?
Throughout the novel, she referred to herself as “the mother of poets”. I never really understood what she meant by this, and the more serious significance?
Why did the author name the virtual protagonist he constructed as the “mother of poets”, and what does this show?
Did any aspect of Womanhood pop out to any of you? or am I crazy?
On Objects and Atmosphere:
What did the vase symbolize that Don Pedro was so disturbed by?
What are the effects of describing vague affairs such as the wind or the atmosphere in detail?
What did you imagine the bathroom to look like?
Do you think that Auxilio’s missing teeth played a major part in her life’s journey and the way that things happened or do you think that her missing teeth were insignificant?
On fiction and reality
How did you feel about Auxilio’s “mental trips”? (such as to Remedios Varo’s house) What is the significance of this imaginary narrative? How did it add to the story?
Do you think the memories are real or hallucinations?
Do we experience the reality of Auxilio’s experiences in the novel more than her envisioning of it or is it unclear where to draw the line between the two?
Why do you think the bathroom event was so central? Did it mean to root trauma centrally to history? How did you feel the characters were significant to Auxilio’s storytelling?
On Endings
The ending of the story was the most impactful in my opinion. Was this also the most impactful part of the story for you? If not, what was?
I’m not sure what to make of the ending honestly, the blending of reality and story reaches a height as she finally leaves the bathroom destitute but right…
The amulet
The last sentence says the song is the amulet. Can the amulet represent something else? If so, what are they?
What is the “amulet” and what does it protect us from?
Intertextuality and connections:
I think the sections where our protagonist wanders through the icy landscape, and then the valley (eg. “I left the immense regions of snow behind and saw a valley before me” [178]) is similar to the funeral procession in Bombal’s The Shrouded Woman. Did anyone else catch this? Or did this novel remind you of a different one you’ve read, in or outside of this class?
What are some similarities between this novel and Perec’s “W, or the Memory of Childhood” as memories are one of the main themes in both stories?
Since we are on week ten of our readings, how do you compare this text to the others? What similarities have you been noticing throughout the term?
Which one interests you the most and why? I was skeptical at first of how all these books could share things in common while being written at different times and places but so far it has really proven to be true and it’s interesting to see what these common themes are.
On Context:
Have you heard anything about the uprisings around the world in that period (which formed a chain of reaction)? If yes, which one?
Does reading the book change your perception of Latin America?
What do you think a writer takes into consideration when they go over the history of a whole area in the world? How can they decide what to include and what to exclude?
Do you think the account would have been narrated differently had the narrator been a native Mexican? Would it have been less eccentric, and more clear and direct with more relevant observations? The narrator does pay tribute to Latin America’s literary ambition and tradition in a great way, but I wonder how Mexicans who directly participated in the siege see this account.
Other
What happened to the sick boy Auxilio and her friends rescued from the King of the rent boys? I wasn’t sure what the contribution of the sick boy from the hotel room adds to the novel.
Does simply surviving a traumatic event start a collective movement? Or does one need to become a sole figurehead, or a martyr if necessary, to rally the masses?
