For my ¨not yet bilingual¨friends! Also, it´s easier for me to rage in English. :)
A Lupita le gustaba hacerme perder el tiempo. Prometiendo misterios, acción, soluciones, personajes interesantes, se dejaba perder en las reflexiones sobre la situación actual de México, sobre su niñez, sobre su pasado y sus errores. (Lupita liked to waste my time. Promsing mystery, action, solutions, interesting characters, she would lose herself in reflections on the current state of affairs in Mexico, her childhood, her past, her mistakes.)
En fin, todo eso es válido, Sin embargo, no ha logrado un buen misterio aquí.
Confieso que a pesar de que tengo las otras dos novelas de la autora aquí en la casa, todavía no llego a leerlas. Sí he visto la peli que se hizo de la primera, pero según cuentan, no es nada como la novela. (In short, that's all valid. However, this is not a good mystery. I have to confess that, while I own her previous two novels, I still haven't read them. I have seen the film made from the first novel, but from what I've heard, it's not faithful to the novel.
Volviendo al tema...primero, hay que comentar la intensidad, o la falta de intensidad, y la intención de la novela. Comienza la novela con un ¨misterio¨-¿quién asesinó al delegado que le tocaba a Lupita proteger? Y ese misterio sí se resuelve al final, pero no de la manera tradicional. (Back to the topic at hand....First, the intensity, or lack thereof, and the intent or point of the novel. It begins with a "mystery"-who killed the delegate that Lupita was assigned to protect? That mystery's solved at the end, but not in the usual way.
Me di cuenta después de tres capítulos de que no se iba a llevar a cabo de la manera tradicional, pero decidí darle chance, a ver si resultaba algo innovador. Me he quedado decepcionada. El personaje principal, Lupita, una policía mexicana, es una mujer con antecedentes (sí, poli con antecedentes, vaya país), traumada, acomplejada, y adicta (alcohol principalmente, aunque sí utiliza las drogas para bajarse el humo). Es decir, una heroina defectuosa, léase ¨gente normal¨, porque todos tenemos nuestros defectos. Y parte de la novela es su proceso de auto-conocimiento, evolución, aceptación de los errores que ha cometido en el pasado y de sí misma, de aprender a valorarse por sí misma y quererse a sí misma. Sin embargo, le quita bastante al misterio. (I realized after three chapters that it wasn't going to progress as a typical mystery would, but I decided to give it a chance, to see if there was something innovative at work here. I was disappointed. The main character, Lupita, a Mexican police officer, is a woman with a record (yep, a cop with a record, what a country!), traumatized, with issues and addictions (mainly alcohol, although she uses drugs to come down). Which means that she's a flawed character, in other words, "normal people", because we all have our problems and defects. And part of the novel is her process of self-discovery, her reaching acceptance with the mistakes she's made in the past, acceptance of herself, learning to stand on her own two feet and love herself. However, all of this self-exploration takes away from the mystery.)
Cada capítulo empieza con ¨A Lupita le gustaba...¨ , unos párrafos introspectivos sobre el papel que esa actividad había hecho en su niñez o en su formación como mujer policía. En algunas instancias, veo la relación entre los quehaceres domésticos y su trabajo de policía bien forzada. Por ejemplo, le dedica un capítulo a sus ¨poderes de observación¨ en una discoteca-los cuerpos de tanto las mujeres como los hombres, cómo bailian juntos, quién se va a llevar a quién a la casa, cómo les irá en la cama. Sin embargo, no adelanta nada la solución al misterio, y resultan estas introspecciones un poco contradictorias-porque si Lupita prestara sus poderes de observación a su trabajo, se solucionarían los casos mucho más rápido que éste. Si le fascinara tanto correr, lo más probable que no estuviera tan gorda como se describe. Los talentos que dizque tiene los malgasta en cosas de poca importancia en su trabajo y hasta su vida personal-resulta chismoso, una oportunidad para que la autora de la novela nos comunique sus observaciones sobre la naturaleza humana, a su ver. Para colmo, con más frecuencia mientras se va acercando el final del caso, la autora también incluye comentarios sobre las culturas antiguas de México, como si dudara de la inteligencia de sus lectores-las creencias antiguas no se han desaparecido, y las antiguas leyes de la justicia siguen vigentes. No hay que pensar mucho para ir juntando los cabos, porque la autora nos lo pone todo bien claro y en las narices. Total, estos párrafos introspectivos al comienzo de cada capítulo más los comentarios sobre los aztecas alentan el paso y la intensidad.
(Each chapter begins with "Lupita liked to...." followed by some introspective paragraphs on the role that that activity played in her childhood, in shaping who she was, or in her becoming a police officer. I think that sometimes, the relationship between certain domestic chores and her work as a cop are forced. For example, there's a whole chapter on her "powers of observation" in a night club when she's on a bender (she's supposed to be in recovery, but continually falls off the wagon)--the bodies of the men and women in the club, how they dance together, who's taking whom home, what it will be like for them in bed. However, none of these introspective passages really advance the case's solution, and even turn out to be contradictory--because if Lupita used these powers of observation for constructive purposes, then she'd solve cases a lot faster. And if she truly loved to run that much, she probably wouldn't be so overweight. These supposed talents are wasted on things completely unimportant to her work and even to her personal life-they're just gossip, a chance for the author to tell us her thoughts on human nature as she sees it. To make matters worse, more and more frequently as the case's solution approaches, the author includes fragments of text mid-chapter on ancient cultures, as if she didn't trust her readers to be able to draw the conclusions themselves. No, she doubts our intelligence as readers--the ancient ways haven't disappeared, and the ancient laws of justice remain in effect. You won't have to dedicate any brain power to putting the pieces together, because she lays it out plainly for you. So these introspective beginnings and interruptions in the action just slow down the pace of what should be a very short and enjoyable novel.
El comentario sobre la influencia de los narcos en México actual, y la forma en que la gente se resiste a ella, es un tema con vínculo a la trama, pero que también se presenta de manera tan fácil y explícita que al lector no le hace falta pensar las conexiones.
The commentary on the influence of traffickers in Mexico today, and the ways in which people resist it, is linked to the plot, but again it´s done so blatantly that the reader doesn´t need to expend any effort to figure out the connections.
So why does this flawed character not work, if she's more like "one of us"? Because a good detective or cop is supposed to be principled, dedicated to solving the mystery. Because a character who describes other characters as chauvinistic should be more concerned with her person and personal integrity than with her physical appearance and others' opinion of her appearance. There are so many moments when she almost nails what it means to be an intelligent career woman negotiating a man's world, but then she loses it when her character makes the conscious decision to blow off work/not follow a lead for another dance with her boss (who, it seems, may have taken a liking to her), and/or another drink. (People with (past) addictions are more than welcome to comment here on my take on this-maybe that's truly how addiction works, but as a good detective that we are supposed to care about, she makes it hard.)
I'm not sure what could be construed as new or innovative here. Stories of police corruption abound, in all countries, not just Mexico-and the reach of the trafficker's power has been explored in many more serious works, too. There were just too many contradictions-a judgment of those who have flaws and defects, but a willingness of overlook her own. A criticism of chauvinists, but a kow-towing to superficiality. Just when you're ready to accept the events, because life isn't always perfect and rosy, Lupita does something that makes you lose respect for her. In the end, I truly didn't care about how the case was solved-and when it did come to light, and Lupita discovers that not everything is black or white, and the guilty ones aren't always the bad guys, it makes you say to yourself, "Yes, but we had all of this information 80 pages ago, why now?" I'm sure someone will think it's cool, and based on the success of the film from the author's first novel, they'll do a film. However, I feel as though it would be presented as a total parody, like a Melissa McCarthy film. She'll be the object of derision.