Mario Vargas Llosa: the immortal transformed into a distant memory

The reading of “A Barbarian in Paris”, in addition to the enormous amounts of pleasure it induces, it comes with a heavy dose of dread and wonder. The man who wrote these texts at the end of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st does not seem to be the same man who recently entered the French Academy. It is a fact that the passage of years transforms us, but the idea that these can transform us into what we once criticized and even hated is terrifying.

The controversies aroused by the nobel They are not new, especially if you comment on the political situation, but what the reader sees in your latest publication are nothing more than positions and convictions which, without a sheet of paper, would have fallen into oblivion. The same man who thanked jean paul Sartre to have saved him from schematism and a one-sided vision is the one who, election after election, sided with a single candidate to sell him as salvation in the face of the threat of those who contradicted his strongest convictions.

To those of us who for years have read – and continue to do so – each of his novels with admiration and dedication, we cannot help but see ourselves reflected in the paragraph where “the brave little sartrecillo” remembers of the author of “The Nausea” and the dismay he suffered upon realizing that even “the smartest man in the world could also – even in a moment of discouragement – talk nonsense”.

It seems that the author of “L’appel de la tribu”, a magnificent book on the life and work of great thinkers, is moving further and further away from liberalism open to the similar and the strange in order to forget the Albert Camus’ warning on any theory that it be presented as absolute, since sooner or later it justifies crime and lies. Just a few days ago, the writer completely forgot the deaths of 60 people – most of them resulting from the brutality of the police – to praise President Dina Boluarte, assuring that “she has acted fairly” in the face of the riots. which have been unleashed since December 7.

What is happening in our country is what Vargas Llosa once understood from his readings of Camus and reflected in one of his texts from 1975: that political freedom is worth little to someone who remains in misery, does work animal and lives in ignorance. This is why the 1992 self-coup had such popular support and the one perpetrated by Pedro Castillo deeply hurt thousands of Peruvians who believed in the opportunity to settle a historic debt, but did confidence in a man contaminated by the worst faults. that characterize our political class.

The Nobel Prize, as well as a good part of those who have the possibility of having a microphone in front of them, have erased from their heads the possibility of admitting that the adversary may be right, of letting him speak and agree to reflect on his arguments. It was easy to upset Pedro Castillo’s postulates in the campaign, but instead of seizing the promise represented by the Free Peru candidate, they demeaned and smothered them with stereotypes until they were ridiculed. They have completely forgotten the writings of the author of “El extranjero” and have contributed to a polarization that we have already seen in the United States, in Chile, in France, in Brazil and which will continue to divide nations if we do not fill not the task of recognizing the existence and voice of the other. .

“A Barbarian in Paris” remains a distant memory of Mario Vargas Llosa who feared populism and who understood that he had to listen to those who are at the antipodes of his thinking. This book confirms that in addition to being a good writer, she is a great reader; for this reason, the desire not to close the covers for fear of finding a completely different image on looking up, continues throughout its 278 pages.