Jorge Francisco Isidoro Luis Borges Acevedo was an Argentine short-story writer, essayist, poet and translator regarded as a key figure in Spanish-language and international literature. His best-known works, Ficciones (transl. Fictions) and El Aleph (transl. The Aleph), published in the 1940s, are collections of short stories exploring motifs such as dreams, labyrinths, chance, infinity, archives, mirrors, fictional writers and mythology. Borges's works have contributed to philosophical literature and the fantasy genre, and have had a major influence on the magic realist movement in 20th century Latin American literature. Born in Buenos Aires, Borges later moved with his family to Switzerland in 1914, where he studied at the Collège de Genève. The family travelled widely in Europe, including Spain. On his return to Argentina in 1921, Borges began publishing his poems and essays in surrealist literary journals. He also worked as a librarian and public lecturer. In 1955, he was appointed director of the National Public Library and professor of English Literature at the University of Buenos Aires. He became completely blind by the age of 55. Scholars have suggested that his progressive blindness helped him to create innovative literary symbols through imagination. By the 1960s, his work was translated and published widely in the United States and Europe. Borges himself was fluent in several languages. In 1961, he came to international attention when he received the first Formentor Prize, which he shared with Samuel Beckett. In 1971, he won the Jerusalem Prize. His international reputation was consolidated in the 1960s, aided by the growing number of English translations, the Latin American Boom, and by the success of Gabriel García Márquez's One Hundred Years of Solitude. He dedicated his final work, The Conspirators, to the city of Geneva, Switzerland. Writer and essayist J.M. Coetzee said of him: "He, more than anyone, renovated the language of fiction and thus opened the way to a remarkable generation of Spanish-American novelists."
"الدنو من المعتصم" بظاهرها قصة عن قصة: مغامرة طالب قانون يتورط في جريمة قتل، يهرب، يختبأ، يلتقي بأحد المشردين اللصوص، ويتحول الى متشرد بدوره ويجول في الهند. اما باطنياً فهي تتناول القصة من حيث تحليل الأفكار ويأخذ بورخيس الأقنوم الغنوصي للأرواح الممسوحة بمسحة الهية.
The unequaled review and wildly intriguing analysis by Jorge Luis Borges of one almost unheard-of novel called "The Approach to Al-Mu'tasima."
This is one fine example of why I could never really grasp Borges. His labyrinthine writing style here is as good as any other unreadable Borges story.
I'm sure this shortie is plagued with overflowing symbolism, obscure references and other figures of speech which totally escape my rudimentary level of understanding. And of course, I could just simply investigate a wiki, or ask ChatGPT wtf he meant here, but I don't care to. To hell with this, and to hell with Borges.
----------------------------------------------- PERSONAL NOTE: [1968] [6p] [Fiction] [1.5] [Not Recommendable] [As a reviewer I appreciate the idea though] -----------------------------------------------
La inigualable reseña y tremendamente intrigante análisis de Jorge Luis Borges de una novela practicamente desconocida llamada "El acercamiento a Almotásim."
Éste es un excelente ejemplo de por qué nunca pude realmente comprender a Borges. Su laberíntico estilo de escritura aquí es tan bueno como cualquier otra historia ilegible de Borges.
Estoy convencido que este corto está plagado de desbordante simbolismo, oscuras referencias y otras figuras retóricas que escapan totalmente mi rudimentario nivel de entendimiento. Y por supuesto, podría simplemente investigar una wiki, o preguntarle a ChatGPT qué demonios quiso decir aquí, pero no me importa. Al diablo con esto, y al diablo con Borges.
----------------------------------------------- NOTA PERSONAL: [1968] [6p] [Ficción] [1.5] [No Recomendable] [Aunque como reseñador aprecio la idea!] -----------------------------------------------["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>
I had to read this for class and never have I been so glad to have been given a text to read without knowing what it was or any of the context.
This is a great surprise when you read it that way. So if you don't want any spoilers: google it (yes this story is available on the internet), read it, do some research after that (just reading the Wiki page will tell you enough), & tell me if you figured it out before doing some research.
A review of a book that never existed, complete with debate over which version was better. Borges claims this story was at least partially a "hoax" revealing his playful sense of humor. The story lends itself to analysis of Borges' style more than it does to reading entertainment.
I am beginning to understand what Nabokov meant when he said that it is pleasant to get lost in Borges' "lovely labyrinths". Here we have a mock review of a book that does not exist, but the review summarizes it in its entirety.
In particular the moment where in his desperate fleeing the protagonist of the fictional book "flees to a tower where he meets a robber of Parsee corpses collecting gold teeth" (Wikipedia) brings to mind Akutagawa's Rashomon. The similarity of this moment is very strong: a palace guard committed to upholding the law but is left to starve finds a woman in a tower stealing hair from corpses to sell wigs. The guard, like the protagonist here, goes on to descend into that same moral morass and begins stealing -- he steals out of hatred for the thief! But the protagonist of Borges, in a journey reminiscent of Razkolnikov, emerges from his murder a believer in God, a pilgrim. The idea of God being a pilgrim searching for someone who is in turn searching for someone is also going to marinate a long time in my mind.
It is a masterclass in irony for Borges to invent a story and have the frame narrative call it uninventive and dull or something, thus preempting his own critics.
ay mi borges cuan labertintica odisea me haces tener el placer de procesar por medio de mis globos oculares dearreh q me hago osea buen librazo me gusto mucho la creatividad inicial y formato de este cuento corto, puesto a que basicamente borges hace una review a un libro que no existe criticando su estructura y forma,, muy adelantado para su epoca, de igual manera, la diferencia entre un buen cuento y un super buen cuento radica en como se opera con lo que se tiene en una hoja en blanco y este cuento especifico de borges parece ser uno de esos cuentos que en premisa te comen pero en ejecucion soslayecen una explicacion clarivenciada de lo que se acaba de apreciar.........
Borges feeds us mysticism straight out of the palm of his hand with this short story, where he masterfully blurs the lines between fiction and philosophy, allowing us to peel back the layers of reality and get to the core of Truth. But why Sufism? What attracted Borges to it, and Islam alike? Maybe it is a pathway to which he understands the mysteries of existence. Above all, I think he calls for accepting Mysticism for our sake; don’t seek the logical, simply lift the veil that clouds or blurs your vision. A must-read and a must re-read.
Mir Bahadur Oli is, as we have seen, incapable of evading the most vulgar of art's temptations: that of being a genius. Though I didn't like it as much as Orbis Tertius, I did enjoy this one. It is effectively a review for a book which doesn't exist. For a review, it is rather rational though not without being critical or even mean (as the above quote proves).
More like an essay, it is an interesting review of a book that doesn't actually exist - however, you still get (briefly) captured by it. Very strange, very Borges.