So, which Bolaño first? 2666 or Savage Detectives

>>8513433
The portoguese translations are better than the originals.

Read a shorter one like By Night in Chile first to see if you're into him.

>>8513457
It's OK, I'm sure I'll like it. I can tackle on of the big ones. I was just wondering if there was any reasonable order

I read 2666 first but it's undeniable that The Savage Detectives is pretty much necessary to fully understand it. I read it a couple of months later.

That said, 2666 became one of my all-time favorites upon completion so, though TSD is necessary for a full understanding, it's not necessary for significant enjoyment. It just makes it that much better.

In short, you should definitely read TSD first but if you don't it shouldn't affect your enjoyment of 2666 too much. Have fun man, it's one of those books I wish I could read for the first time again

>>8513561
thanks a lot. This is the kind of answer I was hoping for. I'll follow your advice

I just read The Savage Detective, in Spanish since I am Latin American.
I really recommend it. Havent read 2666 yet.
The only stuff I had read from Bolaño before were La Literatura Nazi and El Gaucho Insufrible.

Los Detectives Salvajes is divided in 3.
First part is a diary, second part (which is 2 thirds of the book, perhaps slightly more), consists in interviews to dozens of different people, that track the whereabouts and occupations of 2 characters from the first part through years and decades, cities and continents.

The third part is the continuation of the diary we saw in the first part, but now you know the future of those characters because of the interviews.

It is impossible to find no flaw at all in an enormous book, but this is close to a masterpiece.

Detectives salvajes, obvio. Está completa.

>>8513433
Actualmente estoy leyendo los detectives salvajes y está entretenido, aunque no entiendo las comparaciones entre Bolaño y Borges (Borges es muy autista como para escribir tantas escenas sexuales).

>>8513439
l o l
get off of your cloud

>>8513634
No tiene sentido.
La influencia de Cortazar y Rayuela es obvia, pero el comentario de contratapa sobre Borges es un disparate.

Which English translations suck the least?

Don't read 2666 first. Read it last, after everything else you intend to read from him. His work builds on itself, and 2666 is the culmination. Very special book. Don't spoil it for yourself by hurrying, revisit it in a few years.

So what's it even about? The future?

>>8514183
Not really easy to pin down. It's about a group of people searching for information about a mysterious author, and a serial killer in a Mexican city. Those are the two major plot lines I guess.

>>8514180
Oh. Ok. Thanks for the thorough answer

>>8514180
OP again. So, suppose I want to read one of his shorter novels before Detectives and 2666. Which one would you recommend?

>>8513433
I think Detectives Salvajes is more enjoyable overall. In fact Bolaño intended with it to make a big novel so entertaining that you could read it in one go.

>>8514591

I think you can go straight to Los Detectives Salvajes, if you want to read some of his shorter novels first, try Estrella Distante and Nocturno de Chile.
Amuleto is also good, and its character appears in Los Detectives Salvajes, but Nocturno de Chile is probably the best one.

>>8514180
>tfw read 2666 first
Fuck you dad, why'd did you give me that book?

>>8514904
You're a spoiled little shit