Witold Gombrowicz and Jorge Luis Borges

“Witold Gombrowicz and Jorge Luis Borges”

JCG WG

"Witold Gombrowicz and Jorge Luis Borges", Juan Carlos Gomez, friend and disciple of Gombrowicz and creator of the gombrowiczidas club, In contrast the figures of the two authors and, step, It refutes the resemblance that Saer and Piglia attributed them. You can read the article here, or following the link: http://www.elortiba.org/pdf/Gomez_Gombrowicz_Borges.pdf

All Nations have their champions in matters relating to the activity of writing, but there are very few who ever having a champion of Champions. In the Argentina will becoming increasingly clear that that title the metaphysical Asiriobabilonico has earned it clearly despite all the efforts that made Gombrowicz so this does not happen.
It is easier to infer the relationship that existed between these two man of letters as distinguished from the appearance of their own families than of their mutual knowledge. As autumn ignored during his lifetime his relate settled more or less striking anecdotes. The of “Kill Borges”, an exclamation that Gombrowicz there would be pronounced aboard Federico Costa when he was in the Argentina, It was completely false and anonymous author.
The of “Here Gombrowicz!!”, on the other hand, It is a true story and its author is the grotesque.
“One night we went out Rex confectionery and we met Borges, coming in the opposite direction. I pointed out, and then Gombrowicz, which reached to see it back, When was a few meters away, He shouted pressing the index against the chest: ' Here Gombrowicz!!’. Borges appeared to waver, confused, tumbled, and without becoming it walked with its somewhat hesitant step. By that then Gombrowicz had not read the writings of Borges (…)”
“Later, back in Europe he was fascinated by some texts, in special “Death and the compass”. Recently, the writer Juan José Saer has drawn a remarkable parallel between Borges and Gombrowicz, especially with regard to the distant and committed position which both kept facing the national culture, Polish and argentina respectively.
The Declaration of the Marxist Vate that Gombrowicz was the best Argentine writer of the 20th century had become famous. In effect, the philosopher Payador, author of the remarkable parallel to which refers the grotesque, He says that this statement was not as far-fetched as it might seem at first sight, and this for several reasons: by immaturity and the unfinished subjects, because much of the Argentine literature was written by foreigners in foreign languages, and because the look of Gombrowicz was not only an artist but also a politician look. For the same reasons that the Marxist Vate considered to “Transatlantic” one of his masterpieces.
“The evolution of their literature is inseparable from its Argentine experience, and that experience penetrates and models the greater part of his work, that without it he would become incomprehensible”
This exaggeration of the Payador philosopher is the conclusion that takes the perspective that Gombrowicz examines the world, It seems you equal to the mode having argentina related to Western culture. And adds that while the outside perspective of Gombrowicz may be a result of his quest for originality, It is also the result of Argentine exile.
These two men were not only different but, In addition, they wanted to be different, but for what that only can be different things that are similar, the philosopher Payador goes out to seek similarities that these two writers have. Gombrowicz says that the Asiriobabilonico metaphysical is smug and focuses on literature, and that it, on the other hand, It is not smug and deals with life.
El Payador philosopher tries to remove a good portion of this reflection saying Gombrowicz had a habit of asking whether there was intelligent people when he arrived at the Argentinian inland cities, It concludes that it was more partisan than intelligence of Vitalism.
Finds them similar in: the aristocratic snobbery, one, with the military ancestors and English origins, another, with aristocratic pretensions and genealogical hobbies; the attraction by the low, one, with the cult of courage and thugs of Committee, another, with the attraction to retreat and immaturity. What follow, the more similar of this nature are more different these two demons will result. If the boiler of the devil exist certainly that Borges and Gombrowicz would be there mocking us.
Borges says that to Gombrowicz saw it only once, It seemed to him a histrion, He lived modestly in a dirty piece he shared with others, that was declared count because the counts of a very dirty nature could not ask him to clean up the piece, It had to ban you mention his name because he spent all day talking about it to Mastronardi, that he had not read it, that started when reading “Ferdydurke” ten minutes came you want to read other books, that pretty well knew him, they were friends, He spoke of the metaphor, the novel, poetry, the rhyme, Gombrowicz was a mediocre Spanish.
Gombrowicz says that Borges wrote boring books, that had become too borgiano, that he was a metaphysical asiriobabilonico, rhetorical and far-fetched.
It was a sterile writer, that both practice the literature on the literature had become unreal, powerless against fate and a twisted imagination, that he had not read it because it had very bad opinion about his work, as gouache to men of letters sopita.
They are evil statements and, in some cases, contradictory. Any normal person would have dedicated to investigate to see what happens with these two men, they have these differences, but the writers are not normal people because they write not for the people but for writers.
Borges and Gombrowicz entered the heads of men of letters with one diabolical purpose: Let's see what do you do now? Those poor heads began to spin around these two demons and their thoughts overheated his musings into the boiler of the devil.
And persons employed in the activity of writing about Gombrowicz and Borges began to suffer a set of symptoms that the handbooks of modern medicine is known as the Procrustean syndrome.
Procrustes was a Greek robber who assaulted travellers on the roads. After plucking them completely it slept in a bed of iron, the Procrustean bed; He garbled to them that were longer than the bed, and to them which were shorter stretched them to dislocate them, the thing is that all the victims were fleeing bedding with the measure.
Borges, cosmopolitan and refined, It was an ornament that could not express neither youth nor inferiority. But what Gombrowicz indeed reproached him was that he had failed to develop a personal attitude towards culture according to their own reality and the reality of argentina.
The docility of Argentine art, your correction, his air of good student, they were for it a testament to impotence before the destination itself. Gombrowicz faced this good education with the source of his own inspiration - often unimportant objects, ridiculous and mediocre but sacred by the vehemence with which consecrated them his soul. What could get Ferdydurke in this environment? A book that could not or please the group that was under the sign of Marx and the proletariat or fed to which European refinements.
What lost to Argentine art, in the opinion of Gombrowicz, It is the desire to show to the height of the world. They inevitably fall into Borges, the greatest prose writer of the Argentina, a writer to, Though little read, is admired in South America.
“I express my critical opinion…, for my taste the fantastic metaphysics is twisted, sterile, boring and, in the background, little original: -It is possible… But it is the only writer of our high level of. He has had a very good press in Paris, have you read some of it? Yes, Of course, It is a shame to not write in a different way…, I also prefer to see it more related to life and reality, that was more than flesh and bone. But anyway it is literature”
With some frequency Gombrowicz compares the Polish literary world with the Argentine. The lack of originality that requires to interact with reality through an authority and a culture of others more mature, also felt in Poland, but with less force.
However, Argentines have an advantage over the poles, with a history of at least years, i.e., with less past and, as a result, with a younger and poorer literature, they have more room in the head to dedicate it to the thought and the Universal art. The poles, on the other hand, they are up to the Crown with his three poets prophets whose study took them almost all the time.
The Argentine known as more of the literature and the history of the world. In terms of philosophy and contemporary thought recent, Gombrowicz assumes that both Argentines and the Polish writers in general do not have the slightest idea.
The Argentina, in the intellectual and artistic sense, is almost a French colony, Argentines themselves recognize this.
Gombrowicz differentiates between the spoken Borges and the written Borges; the spoken was limited, too literary, shallow and unwise, but the Borges writer was insightful both the spirit and the soul. This divergence between the two Borges had to do with his blindness. Blindness had allowed him an intense inner concentration which appears in his works of art, some of them of great value. Borges had become ever deeper in their blindness, and in their dealings with the outside world, more and more shallow.
“Borges and I are polar opposites. It is rooted in the literature, in the life. To tell the truth, I am anti-literary (…) What he said I looked like the best quality; was too limited, too literary, paradoxes, one-liners, subtleties, in a Word, the genre I most hate (…)”
“The spoken Borges, the Borges of conversations, Conference, interviews, and also of the essays and criticisms, It has always seemed poor, and rather superficial. In the Argentina cited me often as excellent the one-liners of Borges. As well, always suffered a disappointment. That was only literature, and not even the best (…)”
“Who the hell is?, compared to the mountains of sartrianas revelations, an Argentine Borges, aguada to men of letters sopita?”
The main question that harasses unceasingly the curiosity of men of Spanish-speaking letters regarding Borges and Gombrowicz remains always the same: determine the amount of times that Gombrowicz was found with Borges.
I must say however, Despite all the stories that have put on the meetings between these characters, at least one of those times is registered. Dinner in Bioy Casares which mentions Gombrowicz in newspapers and Bioy's House in a story, became famous without any reason. Perhaps, the only thing remarkable, more than the presence of Gombrowicz and Borges invited to same dinner, they were the tangos that heard before sitting down to the table and the accident suffered by Silvina Ocampo. In effect, to Silvina supply fell when he took her kitchen to the dining room with a bang. The only one who was aware was Gombrowicz which ran to see what was happening. He saw the poor Silvina with head in hands and told him to not worry, collect everything and serve it as if nothing had happened. Silvina asked that he kept secret, during the meal Gombrowicz missed him looks complicit when others said that the food was very good.
A Gombrowicz's twenty-three years in Poland and a metaphysical Asiriobabilonico of a similar age in the Argentina did not know anything yet of the duel that would keep many years later in a precise location of the universe in which Gonzalez Lanuza puts points on the ies.
“One of his phobias then was Borges, that he had just received the Formentor Prize, shortly thereafter awarded to the own Gombrowicz, and as knew my admiration for his work, It sought to stimulate my controversial indolence with their attacks artfully malevolent fun arbitrariness. Suddenly some reticent attitude which in vain tried to hide the already impossible to hide made me suspicious: -Gombrowicz - told - have you re-read Borges?; -Of course not - said unflappable - or I think, the poor opinion I have about his work… I have never heard denigration more Borgesian against Borges, nothing strange thing, as in matter of arbitrariness is more what resembles them that what differentiates them together”
The reason why Gombrowicz has been badly received by the Asiriobabilonico is not too understandable. While it is true that it was arrogant and actor was in a markedly lower situation, was a foreigner without prestige or fortune, a man whose homeland and family had been shattered., that could have awakened a protective feeling as he had awakened to Manuel Gálvez and Arturo Capdevila, but despised it from the very beginning.
The Asiriobabilonico and the Dandy were jovial and sarcastic but in the case of Gombrowicz, a man in a full State of inferiority, they should have dimmed the vitriol used with other members of the Guild, but they did not.

Close Menu