What's Veeky Forums's thoughts on Ernesto Sabato?

What's Veeky Forums's thoughts on Ernesto Sabato?

You don't often see a Mexican in a sweater.

Lameass one trick pony who lived his life hanging off of the tits of more talented men like Borges and Bioy Casares; wrote one good book and then proceeded to write it again and again for fifty years. Only teenage girls who think they're too intellectual to read Coelho care for him.

One of my favourite authors actually. I try to bring it up here often.
How can you even think this? How is El túnel any similar to Abbadón el exterminador? you are just spouting shit. He is one of the greatest genius of literature in spanish. Maybe you're butthurt because he attacked Borges in one of his books?

can you tell me more on why you admire him?

what are your thoughts on Julio Cortázar? do you agree with me that he is incredibly overrated, overthought and even nonoriginal?

>He is one of the greatest genius of literature in spanish.

Not the other guy, but
>incredibly overrated
yes
>overthought
that's terribly vague
>nonoriginal?
no

He's one of the best argentinian novelists, Sobre Heroes Y Tumbas is the superior argentinian book.

>overthought
I mean people have given more depth and analysis (thought) to his works while they are rather bland or easy to understand but even still they try to find an obscure meaning where there isnt. eg: when people thought

and by nonoriginal, p much all of his nonsense of "reality" is based on the ideas of many others

eg: when people thought one of his stories was about Peron's crackdown on writers who were against his ideas/regime but the story was really just a nightmare he had

(Casa Tomada)

and even when I studied him, many were trying to find deeper analysis of his works like if he was some kind of literary genius but the stories were mostly straightforward, nothing deep about them in reality

Spoken like a true teenage girl

Anteaters in sweaters are the most rare species of animals though.

t. plebeian

Well then he is just as overthought as any other big name in literature. As for nonoriginality, I still insist that he's not. I've about a student thesis' worth of problems with him and his work (and especially his readers), but originality is one thing I cannot take away from him. Sure, he answered to a by-then already well established tradition of mixing the otherwordly with the ordinary, but he did it in a way that was unprecedented. Not only in the sense of what happens in his stories, but also in the techniques he uses to write them. His prose is rather unique.
I don't much care for his "political" novels, though, and think his short stories are worth 10.000 Rayuelas.
t. tourist

>all this butthurt in just a few posts
I think he's ok desu

what? you mean his unique prose of creating "new" words (mixing mostly) and literally not giving a damn about punctuation and other rules because of literally "muh stablishment"

I believe he's pretentious for that, if a literally who writer did that everyone would call him out for not having passed 6th grade for his writing style akin to that of a child's. but apparently it is different if you say it is a kind of protest against the stablishment that oppresses you by creating an arbitrary set of rules based on their arbitrary view of what is real and what is not.

imo, that makes him a hack rather than a "one of the greatest latinamerican writers of all time"

Do you even like reading? What do you have against experimenting with language? Are you going to give Joyce shit, too, for writing Finnegans Wake?
And who ever said anything about """muh stablishmen"""? His better writings precede his political phase, as I said, anyway.

if I make a novel and use an arbitrary use of commas, periods and semicolons, will my novel be even readable or am I actually experimenting with language aka 2deep4u?

paraphrasing him, he's said he's against the western mindset and the stablishment for creating "an arbitrary set of rules based on their conception of what is real and what is not" that's why he made his whole "reality mixes the real and the unreal" ordeal

Again, the whole anti-establishment comments came after his properly good period. But back to the language-focused part of the argument:
>if I make a novel and use an arbitrary use of commas, periods and semicolons, will my novel be even readable or am I actually experimenting with language aka 2deep4u?
Firstly I didn't mention FW merely exempli gratia. It's far more complex, far more experimental and "unreadable" than anything Cortázar has ever written, yet it's one of the greatest pieces of writing of the XXth century, and with reason (we can discuss it later, though I fear it'll be an endless, pointless back-and-forth). If you were to write something like that today then yes, of course you'd be considered a hack. But that'd be precisely because we've experienced it at length and by the hand of truly talented people, people who knew technique and anti-technique too. Cortázar is not 100% original in the sense that, as I already said, he's the continuation of a modernist/post-modernist tradition, but his works definitely contain the best, and somewhat earlies examples of such approaches and techniques in the spanish language.
What's more, the stories he tells through these techniques are accessible, memorable and often times much more human and relatable than people care to recognise. Yes, the supernatural, although somewhat subdued (especially compared to Borges, the most obvious yet not necessarily accurate comparison in this case) elements permeate 9 out of 10 of his stories, yet they're also more often than not an element that is used both as a contrast and therefore a highlight to the more down-to-earth aspects of the stories and as an interesting, imaginative take on surreal and supernatural narratives and concepts. It's really, really not that hard at all to read and "get" his works, strange writing techniques or not.

It seems to me you seem to have a beef against him because of his retarded le revolurtionery xD stance that he took after the late 60s, and have let that (rather justified) dislike take over your critique of his overall work. As I said (really, most of this is just me repeating myself in more detail), I don't like him as a person, I don't like his political phase and I sure as fuck dislike most of his hardcore readers, but his work 1945-1964 is indisputably good, and inhabits an echelon with very few other writers of fiction in the spanish language. Sabato is definitely not in that echelon, by the by.

And I'm going to have to leave this thread now. I have to be somewhere

well, that last post was spot on, I have to admit it user, you're good.

>wrote extensively on the injustices of the Argentinian government during his time
>he was so ggod at it he was put in charge of an investigation that put everything in perspective.
>wrote three god-tier fiction novels

The FUCK did u just say?

He introduce me in the literature when I was an argie teenager years ago. The past year I re-read 'El Tunel' and it was just like the fucking first time. The other two novels are excellent too. The guy is a fucking legend for the argentine fucks like us.

>calls Sabato literature for teenage girls
>actually defends Cortazar with all his might

oh my kek

Hahahahahahahahaha