I Just Read About That…

I’ve waited to post this, my wrap up of ideas abut 2666, until I saw what others had to say about it.  Which is kind of a cop out but also kind of understandable.  This book is a giant mess of information, and I’m not entirely sure how to process it all.  So I’ve been looking for help.  And I’ve gotten some, but it’s all kinds of contradictory.  Most people seemed to hate the book.  A few people enjoyed it somewhat, and one or two people really felt moved by it.

I think I fall squarely in that middle camp.  As anyone who has been reading here knows, I became obsessed with Bolaño’s books, and read all of his short fiction (saving Savage Detectives for a read in a few weeks).  And yet I’m not exactly sure WHY I felt compelled to read these stories.  (I’m very glad I did…there will be more on Bolaño himself in a day or two).

I’ve decided to look back over what I wrote to get a sense of what I thought of the book (I knew these posts would come in handy).

I really enjoyed Part 1.  The style reminds me of most of the other Bolaño books: lots of details, lots of sex and not a lot of plot.  And yet I enjoyed the prosaic style of the story.  It also turns out that this part does give up a lot of details about Archimboldi that are useful for filling in the gaps of what happened near the end of the book.  I had jokingly said that one would have to re-read the beginning like with Infinite Jest to get a full picture.  I wouldn’t want to reread the whole book, but I would consider reading Part 1 again.

Part Two, about Amalfitano read just like one of his novellas: a very detailed look at one individual, with some diversions about people who have impacted the main character. As a conjunction to Part One it didn’t really work, except to give us some background into the man that the Critics met in Part One.   I’m not sure how much sense it makes to give so much information about him since he plays such a comparatively little role in the book, but, it seems to be Bolaño’s way to give you more information than you require.  The one downside to Part 2 is at least according to my write up, no real timeline is given of these events.  (Although when I scanned th ebook again for dates, I was able to piece together a lot of information that was quite informative–again, see the timeline below).

Part Three, the part About Fate is the section that really kind of stands out as a weird one, in the grand scheme of things.  Fate is even more of an outsider than the critics (although they are all initially drawn to Santa Teresa for reasons that have nothing to do with the murders).  Yet by the end Fate is intrigued by the murders and wishes to investigate them.

As I was re-reading my notes for this section I saw that Chucho tells fate about the 200 or so murders that have happened there.  And now I can’t help wonder if the Part about the Crimes is actually designed as Fate’s investigation into the crimes. On page 298, the reporter asks him how he expected to write about the crimes if he didn’t know anything about them.  He replies, “I thought I’d do some research.”   I also like the idea that Fate is reading these stories of the deaths (hence the very “official” tone) while the rest of the Part, the details about the cops and more (which are written quite differently) are going on in “real time.”

I can’t decide how much I’m reaching to use that as a tie in, but I know that Bolaño tends to surround his characters with a ton of background and more, so tying this to Fate makes some kind of sense.  It also makes me feel a lot better about the Part About the Crimes in general.

Fate also rescues Rosa Amalfitano, which is comforting for those of us who grew to like her in Part 2. This section is set in 2001 (there’s that whole thing about posters of Osama bin Laden at a 9/11 rally).

When the Part About the Crimes ends, Klaus Haas is singing about the giant in the woods (now that we know that Lotte has visited Klaus a number of times (for at least 5 years) and has told him about Archimboldi, this makes more sense).

The Part About the Crimes is still brutal in my head.  But I think the real brutal part was the disconnectedness of the whole thing.  The deaths are so pointless, and no matter how much you look into the details, there’s just no meaning to any of it.  And yes, that is the point. It parallels, of course, to the murder of the Jews in Part 5.

But the other story in the Part About the Crimes–about the police is actually compelling.  And if you were to re read that section without the details of all the women murdered, I wonder what the section would read like.  Clearly the police are terrible human beings, (which almost seems like Bolaño had an ax to grind) and yet  in the overall plot line of things there some interesting  happenings:

There are some decent people here.  Even among the terrible cops, there are a few who stand out as actually trying to help.  There can even be humanity amongst the horrors of Santa Teresa.  It’s not terribly uplifting and yet, in a way, it does send a very positive message.

And then back to Haas.  We learn from Part 5, that while Haas is in prison, all of the things that happened while he was in there (the shiv, the gang members killed, the cell phone deals), happened after his mom had visited him.  And that just makes it so much worse.  It’s pretty clear that despite Lotte’s protestations, Haas is a pretty bad man.

The Part About Archimboldi works as a stabilizing force that the rest of the book hangs on.  Would it have made a difference to read it in a different order?  Possibly.  But at the same time, it is fun (fun?) to try to piece the parts together.

Thematically, there’s a ton going on in 2666, but the general theme seems to be as, Bleakonomy put it: “an extended meditation on the phrase ‘shit happens.'”  But I think it also comes down to yes, horrible things are going to happen around the world.  You can either participate in them, or you can try to make do while it’s happening.  There doesn’t appear to be any point in trying to stop the horribleness on your own.

And yet at the same time, there are genuinely good people who do not get trodden on by the forces of evil: Rosa Amalfitano, Lalo Cura, Lotte Reiter, even Archimboldi himself.  The critics, while certainly not blameless, get caught up in some nonsense, but seem to pull through relatively unscathed.

And of course, there is a lot of talk about writing.  Bolaño talks about writers more than any author I’ve read.  That seems to be the most indulgent part of the whole book to me.  And yet there are so many different opinions about being a writer, that I’m not entirely sure where Archimboldi (or Bolaño) falls on the continuum.

After writing all this up (and constructing the timeline below) I have deepened my appreciation for this book. I think it is actually quite well constructed, and, if you’re willing to do some extra work, the pieces do fall into place.  (Although admittedly it is not as well constructed as Infinite Jest).  Bolaño has created a fictional world that resides squarely within the real world.  It’s not a nice fictional world, and yet there are some nice people in it.  And if nothing else, it has opened my eyes t o what is happening in Juarez.

It’s tempting to note that the book is technically unfinished (and what happens to us if this mythical Part 6 is ever released?).  I can only imagine what else Bolaño would have done to the book had he lived longer.

2666 timeline

1913 (approx) Baroness von Zumpe born
1920 Archimboldi born
1926 Ingeborg born
1930 Lotte born
1939 Hans drafted
1946 Archimboldi & Ingeborg settle down
1951 Amalfitano born
1953 Lalo Cura’s mother born
1956 Morini born
1961 Pelletier born
1964 Berlin Underground released in Italy
1969 Leather Mask released in Italy
1971 Rivers in Europe released in Italy
1970 Norton born
1971 Fate born
1973 Inheritance released in Italy
1974 Amalfitano translated Endless Rose
1975 Railroad Perfection released in Italy
1976 Lalo Curo born
1976 Morini first reads Archimboldi
1980 Pelliteier first reads Archimboldi
1983 Pelletier translates D’Arsonval
1984 Pellitier had read 15 Archimbolid books.
1984 Rosa Amalfitano born
1988 Morini translated Bifurcata
1989 Pellitier & Morini first meet at a conference
1989 Berlin Wall falls
1990 Pelletier, Morini & Espinoza first meet at a conference
1991 (approx) Archimboldi gets computers
1991 Morini translated St Thomas
1993 The Part About the Crimes begins tabulating here.
1993 Archimboldi & Baroness’ last meeting
1994 first conference where all four critics meet
1995 Klaus Haas in jail
1995 Lotte visits beginning now
1997 Norton wants out of the relationship
1997 Haas’ third press conference (reveals Antonio Uribe)
1997 Big protest march Santa Teresa…is this the one that Rosa Amalftitano was at when Amalfitano spotted her?
1997 Arrival of FBI agent
1997 Haas’ trial
1997 End of the Part About the Crimes
2001 Present time in the Part About Amalfitano
2001 Present time in the Part About Fate (He hears about a post 9/11 protest)
2001 Lotte reads King of the Forest
2001 Archimbolid &  Lotte reunite
2001 Archimboldi heads for Santa Teresa
2001 Critics head for Santa Teresa (three days behind Archimboldi)

Archimboldi Bibliography  (no dates given, Pelletier had read 15 books by 1984!)

Lüdicke
The Endless Rose
Leather Mask
Rivers of Europe
Bifurcaria Bifurcari
Inheritance [ 4 years after Ingeborg died]
Saint Thomas
The Blind Woman
The Black Sea
Lethaea
The Lottery Man
The Father (which ends in 1948)
The Return
*King of the Forest
*The Garden
*D’Arsonval
*Railroad Perfection
*Mitzi’s Treasure
*Berlin Underground
*Bitzius
*The Head

*not mentioned in The Part About Archimboldi