I am a peninsular specialist (Spain) but I was thinking last night that Latin American literature is actually more interesting. I feel no need to be defensive about my field. It would be easier to put together a course in 20th century Latin American literature with Borges and Cortázar, Vallejo and Neruda, Paz, Pizarnik, Bioy Casares, Gelman, García Márquez, Puig, Montejo. Latin American fiction is clearly better than peninsular. The poetry is comparable, but I'd still give a 60/40 split in favor of Latin America, and even that is evidence of my own investment in Valente. For example, the antipoesía (Parra) is more interesting than Gil de Biedma and Ángel González. Valera and Pizarnik are perhaps more interesting than Valente.
You wouldn't even have to go to the more second-rate boom writers. Fuentes is still better than Marsé, etc...
It doesn't hurt that I am having these thoughts south of the equator, in BA Argentina. Two colleagues are leaving, so I will be teaching LAT AM the rest of the my career at least 75%.
No comments:
Post a Comment