Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.79 AVERAGE
3.79 AVERAGE
challenging
informative
mysterious
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
N/A
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
Ficção histórica é um dos meus gêneros literários favoritos. Entender o passado é saber como chegamos até aqui e como podemos evitar os mesmos erros no futuro. É também conhecer as origens de nossos vícios e nossas virtudes como sociedade.
É incrível, porém, o quanto a nossa tendência a consumir história européia e norte-americana nos faz negligenciar a história daqueles que são muito mais próximos de nossas origens, daqueles que sofreram as mesmas mazelas e cuja formação social muito se assemelha à nossa.
Neste livro intenso, forte e surpreendente Juan Gabriel Vásquez nos conduz numa imersão a alguns dos principais acontecimentos da história colombiana no século XX, seus impactos na formação social do país e na vida de personagens fortes e marcantes. Numa história muito bem tramada, intercalando personagens e acontecimentos reais com ficção, Vásquez nos mostra como a história, muito por nossa culpa, se repete e se renova. Como cometemos os mesmos erros por razões diferentes e como nossa memória e nossa amnésia social são exploradas por aqueles que manipulam a narrativa social para o seu próprio favor, vitimando sempre aqueles que se põem na linha de frente da história, próximos demais dos fatos para entender as teias que manipulam a grande imagem da história.
Um livraço!
É incrível, porém, o quanto a nossa tendência a consumir história européia e norte-americana nos faz negligenciar a história daqueles que são muito mais próximos de nossas origens, daqueles que sofreram as mesmas mazelas e cuja formação social muito se assemelha à nossa.
Neste livro intenso, forte e surpreendente Juan Gabriel Vásquez nos conduz numa imersão a alguns dos principais acontecimentos da história colombiana no século XX, seus impactos na formação social do país e na vida de personagens fortes e marcantes. Numa história muito bem tramada, intercalando personagens e acontecimentos reais com ficção, Vásquez nos mostra como a história, muito por nossa culpa, se repete e se renova. Como cometemos os mesmos erros por razões diferentes e como nossa memória e nossa amnésia social são exploradas por aqueles que manipulam a narrativa social para o seu próprio favor, vitimando sempre aqueles que se põem na linha de frente da história, próximos demais dos fatos para entender as teias que manipulam a grande imagem da história.
Um livraço!
… that shape being an amorphous mass...
A man, who shares the name and life of the author, tells the story of umpteen real assassinations in Colombia and America. I abandoned it at page 270 – just after the halfway mark – so maybe a fascinating plot emerges after that. One thing’s for sure, it didn’t emerge before it!
It starts off quite well, telling the story of how the narrator got sucked into a little group of conspiracy theorists who believed that there was more to the 1948 assassination of Jorge Eliécer Gaitan, a leading left-wing Colombian political figure, than the authorities had allowed to be revealed. At this point I thought I was going to love it, and I raced through the first 150 or so pages, during which the book compares Gaitan’s assassination and associated conspiracy theories to those surrounding the assassination of JFK, and discusses how both events adversely affected the nations in which they happened; in the case of Colombia, leading to years of violence. Then suddenly the book moves back in time to tell, in detail, of the assassination (and associated conspiracy theories) of Rafael Uribe Uribe, another leading left-wing political figure, in 1914, with a bit of comparison to the assassination carried out by Gavrilo Princip that provided the trigger for WW1. Okay, I could go along with that, though it was beginning to feel very much like a history of Colombia told backwards.
Then suddenly the book moves back in time again to tell, in detail, of the attempted assassination of some other guy whose name escapes me but was doubtless another leading left-wing political figure, at some date which I couldn’t care less about. By now I had reached about page 250 – a week that took me. The following three days saw me advance by twenty pages, so I had to conclude that the book had well and truly lost my interest, and I abandoned it.
Some reviewers have compared the writing to Javier Marias. Some see this as a good thing, others not so much. I fall into the latter camp. I’ve only read one book by Marias and I agree the rambling circuitous over-wordy style is similar. However, Marias’ writing, while it rather drove me up the wall, at least contains some beautiful prose and some truly thought-provoking ideas and images. The writing in this one is plain to the point of being monotone, with fifty words for every ten that are required; and for the most part is a straight recounting of (I assume true) facts, including photos and extracts from documents. I tried to assume that perhaps it was my ignorance of Colombian history that was causing me to lose all interest, but frankly if a British writer started by telling a story about Thatcher, then backtracked to Churchill, then Disraeli, I’d have found it equally tedious, interesting though I find each of those people individually. Given that there were another 240 pages to go, I was concerned we might end up back at Cain and Abel and the associated conspiracy theories that no doubt grew up around that...
The book probably deserves more, but since it failed to maintain my interest enough to keep me turning pages, one star it is.
NB This book was provided for review by Amazon Vine UK.
www.fictionfanblog.wordpress.com
A man, who shares the name and life of the author, tells the story of umpteen real assassinations in Colombia and America. I abandoned it at page 270 – just after the halfway mark – so maybe a fascinating plot emerges after that. One thing’s for sure, it didn’t emerge before it!
It starts off quite well, telling the story of how the narrator got sucked into a little group of conspiracy theorists who believed that there was more to the 1948 assassination of Jorge Eliécer Gaitan, a leading left-wing Colombian political figure, than the authorities had allowed to be revealed. At this point I thought I was going to love it, and I raced through the first 150 or so pages, during which the book compares Gaitan’s assassination and associated conspiracy theories to those surrounding the assassination of JFK, and discusses how both events adversely affected the nations in which they happened; in the case of Colombia, leading to years of violence. Then suddenly the book moves back in time to tell, in detail, of the assassination (and associated conspiracy theories) of Rafael Uribe Uribe, another leading left-wing political figure, in 1914, with a bit of comparison to the assassination carried out by Gavrilo Princip that provided the trigger for WW1. Okay, I could go along with that, though it was beginning to feel very much like a history of Colombia told backwards.
Then suddenly the book moves back in time again to tell, in detail, of the attempted assassination of some other guy whose name escapes me but was doubtless another leading left-wing political figure, at some date which I couldn’t care less about. By now I had reached about page 250 – a week that took me. The following three days saw me advance by twenty pages, so I had to conclude that the book had well and truly lost my interest, and I abandoned it.
Some reviewers have compared the writing to Javier Marias. Some see this as a good thing, others not so much. I fall into the latter camp. I’ve only read one book by Marias and I agree the rambling circuitous over-wordy style is similar. However, Marias’ writing, while it rather drove me up the wall, at least contains some beautiful prose and some truly thought-provoking ideas and images. The writing in this one is plain to the point of being monotone, with fifty words for every ten that are required; and for the most part is a straight recounting of (I assume true) facts, including photos and extracts from documents. I tried to assume that perhaps it was my ignorance of Colombian history that was causing me to lose all interest, but frankly if a British writer started by telling a story about Thatcher, then backtracked to Churchill, then Disraeli, I’d have found it equally tedious, interesting though I find each of those people individually. Given that there were another 240 pages to go, I was concerned we might end up back at Cain and Abel and the associated conspiracy theories that no doubt grew up around that...
The book probably deserves more, but since it failed to maintain my interest enough to keep me turning pages, one star it is.
NB This book was provided for review by Amazon Vine UK.
www.fictionfanblog.wordpress.com
Un libro excelente que traza con escepticismo la cruda realidad colombiana.
Far more clever and literary than most of what I read, but well worth the time. Being disconnected from one's own history couldn't be a more timely theme.
challenging
emotional
informative
mysterious
sad
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Good writing, interesting idea about conspiracy theories and re-litigating the past. Nice ending, but takes a long time to get there, a lot of narratives framed within frames.
Bogotá, Colombia, epicenter for Juan Gabriel Vásquez's sprawling masterpiece - The Shape of the Ruins.
Assassinations, conspiracy theories, obsessions, friends, family, births, deaths, memorials, literary references, they're all here, most especially books and writers since the narrator of this multifaceted saga is none other than Juan Gabriel Vásquez - that's right, the Colombian author has written himself into his own novel.
Readers are in for a special treat for three reasons: 1) translator Anne McLean renders the Spanish into clear, fluid English; 2) many photos and documents mentioned in the story are included; 3) appeal of the book itself - large trim size, readable print, quality paper. Thank you, Riverhead Books.
Right in the opening chapter, we're served a sumptuous feast of major players, important themes and key ideas that will be expanded and embellished upon as we move through the tale's 500 pages - among their number:
Carlos Carballo - It's 2014 and Juan Gabriel watches the TV screen flash a news headline: Carlos Carballo arrested at the former home, now museum, of Jorge Eliécer Gaitán for attempting to steal the serge suit the liberal politician wore the day of his assassination, a suit on display in a glass case. Unlike thousands of TV viewers, Juan Gabriel isn't at all surprised since the 41-year old author first met Carballo face-to-face ten years ago and is well aware of Carballo's obsession. Like a match set to a keg of dynamite, the arrest of Carballo ignites Juan Gabriel's memory, enough explosive recollections to propel the author to chronicle the story we're about to read.
Jorge Eliécer Gaitán - Charismatic firebrand, political leader loved by the people and the man likely to become Colombia's next president, Gaitán was assassinated while walking down a busy sidewalk in Bogotá on April 9, 1948. This event proved monumental, resulting in not only riots, mass killings and the burning of much of the city but for ten years thereafter the political scene in the country spiraled down into a bloodbath known as La Violencia, which, in turn, was one of the factors that led to guerrilla insurrections, death squads and those horrific Pablo Escobar years.
Fiery Jorge Eliécer Gaitán, 1903-1948. Assassin Juan Roa Sierra pictured in the upper right.
Juan Roa Sierra - The assassin who shot and killed Gaitán was a young Colombian by the name of Juan Roa Sierra. Ah, those demented loners who strike out on their own! But wait - could things possibly be more complex? We'll never know because Sierra was attacked and killed by a mob within minutes. Why? Well, as reported by none other than Gabriel Garcia Márquez who happened to be in vicinity on that fateful April afternoon, a tall man "wearing an irreproachable gray suit as if he were going to a wedding" incited the crowd to bloody violence and then was picked up by a new car as soon as the assassin's corpse was dragged away. And from then on, that tall, well dressed man appears to have been erased from history forever. Garcia Márquez recollects many years later that it occurred to him "the man had managed to have a false assassin killed in order to protect the identity of the real one."
Does the fate of Gaitán's assassin ring any bells? How about Lee Harvey Oswald? Many Colombians, particularly a conspiracy fanatic like Carlos Carballo, have not failed to make the connection, and that's understatement.
Francisco Benevides - A friend of Juan Gabriel, a physician whose father was the man who conducted the forensics on Jorge Eliécer Gaitán's corpse, Francisco Benevides and Carlos Carballo go back. Benevides isn't exactly as obsessed as Carballo when it comes to conspiracy theories, but it's close. Benevides is also a lover of literature and thus has many reasons to cultivate Juan Gabriel's friendship.
Hospital Drama - In the opening pages of the novel, Juan Gabriel recounts his time at a hospital with his dear wife who must be cared for since she will be giving birth prematurely to twin baby girls. True, Juan Gabriel loves his family, however, the swirl of conversations and revelations in his home city of Bogotá acts like a powerful magnet and Juan Gabriel quickly succumbs to its force. At one point, some weeks after leaving the hospital, Juan Gabriel's wife confronts him directly, "What's happening to us is important. You have to pay attention. We still haven't come out the other side, there are still lots of things that could go wrong, and the girls depend on us. I need you to be with me, concentrated on this, and you seem more interested in what a paranoid madman says."
Did I mention Juan Gabriel's tale contains a layering of many dimensions back there? Oh, yes, the following eight chapter detonate with a fiesta of themes and threads - historical, political, social, cultural, literary, personal. Here's a pair I found especially captivating:
Novelist Narrator - In the course of his narrative, Juan Gabriel refers directly to his past novels: about a woman from Germany (The Informers), his novel about Panama (The Secret History of Costaguana), about the Pablo Escobar years (The Sound of Things Falling), the novel he was working on (Reputations).
Juan Gabriel also alludes to a string of other novelists and their books: Georges Perec, Vladimir Nabokov, Julio Cortázar, Juan Rulfo, Juan Carlos Onetti, F. Scott Fitzgerald, Malcolm Lowry and frequent inclusion of Gabriel Garcia Márquez and Jorge Luis Borges - for example: "Then I remembered "The Modesty of History," an essay by Borges that I'd always liked and that there, in that man's apartment, seemed to acquire a mysterious pertinence, for in it Borges sustains that the most important dates in history might not be the ones that appear in books, but other, hidden or private dates." This literary element adds real sparkle and depth to the tale - not only to have a literary man as narrator but to have Juan Gabriel himself - a zesty enhancement!
Rafael Humberto Moreno-Durán - Juan Gabriel attends the memorial service for one of the most notable novelists of his generation, a writer known to his friends, Juan Gabriel among their number, as R.H.. Following the service, still in the church, guess who pops up? Carlos Carballo collars Juan Gabriel and insists on telling him how R.H. spoke in an interview about Orson Wells' visit to Bogotá and how he, Carballo, proposed a book to R.H., a book that could be written when he, Carballo, fed R.H. tantalizing information revolving around the assassination of Gaitán. Carballo goes on to say that R.H. agreed to write the book but couldn't because of his illness. Carballo continues speaking, relating that R.H. told him he knows the writer who could and should write the book - Juan Garcia Vasquez. Now the plot really thickens, twists and begins dancing the cumbia.
Colombian novelist Rafael Humberto Moreno-Durán, 1945-2005
So the question poses itself: Did Juan Gabriel Vásquez finally agree to write the book proposed by Carlos Carbillo, a fictional character of his own creation? The answer is 'yes' - our narrator/author did write that book, a book in the form of a novel, the very novel under review, a novel entitled The Shape of the Ruins. Read all about it, the tale is spectacular, or in Spanish, espectacular.
Colombian author Juan Gabriel Vásquez, born 1973
dark
hopeful
informative
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
N/A
Loveable characters:
N/A
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I can’t help but think this book could have been great. It’s almost as if Vasquez has written about the Uribe Uribe conspiracy, the Gaitan conspiracy, and then Carballo’s story separately, and then not having enough for 3 complete books just combined them all together.
I stuck with it to the end and was delighted with the last 30 pages but otherwise this is a slog.
I stuck with it to the end and was delighted with the last 30 pages but otherwise this is a slog.
Dear The Shape of Ruins,
I tried. I really did. But I just couldn't find it in me to care about early 1900' Columbian politics. There was nothing for me to hold on to through your expansive exposition and all of the chapters were soooooo long. I don't DNF books, but I just could not continue reading you.
I tried. I really did. But I just couldn't find it in me to care about early 1900' Columbian politics. There was nothing for me to hold on to through your expansive exposition and all of the chapters were soooooo long. I don't DNF books, but I just could not continue reading you.
I do love how the books are growing shorter. This is the biggest (the only big) book in 2019's long list of International Booker (now in short list) and it didn't feel that long. I think what makes it a quick read is that much of it is narrating facts and events Which kind of offer much less food for thought per minute.
The main theme is conspiracy theories. And it had a putting off effect on me. I find some of them interesting (Dan Brown novels are interesting) but not the ones that concern the death of political figures (Kennedy, Bose, etc), definitely not enough to read 600 page long novels on them.
The Marquez Connections
This one interested me because of the mention of the name of Gabriel Marquez in some of the reviews. Apparently, Marquez happened to be in place of murder of a famous Colombian politician, Gaitain, just after the murder took place and would remember, in his autobiography (Living to Tell The Tale), a mysterious elegant man that played a major role but was not remembered by anyone else at the scene.
Another Marquez link is part of the story being based on the assassination of a politician, Rafael Uribe Uribe, which was a major inspiration for the character of Colonel Aureliano Buendía in One Hundred Years of Solitude. (Btw Vasquez loved that book but is critical of its Magical Realism as he is quoted saying when talking about his other book 'The Secret History of Costaguana'
Yet another Marquez trivia, mentioned in the book, is that he claimed to be born in a different year to make the year of his birth same as that of Banana Massacre, an event he was greatly obsessed in and that, as Vásquez tells us found its way into 'One Hundred Years of Solitude'. I don't know why Marquez thought that the coincidence of his birth with a major political event made it any special, it is kind of like old superstitions where people would consult horoscopes or stars (Mark Twain was born shortly after an appearance of Halley's Comet, and he predicted that he would die as well; he would die the day after the comet returned.) but Salman Rushdie, another admirer of both Marquez and One Hundred Years of Solitude (without any qualms about magical realism) also shared Marquez's love for big events. Born about two months before India's independence, he changed the date of birth of his fictional counterpart, Saleem Sinai, to coincide not only the month and date of independence but also the time to exact same second in the Midnight's children.
Assassinations
While the book does mention these Marquez facts, that is all we hear about him. Nothing more. Same with 9/11 conspiracy theory and a couple of others - nothing more than a mere mention in passing 'The Shape of the Ruins' is mostly focused on assassinations of politicians (mostly Columbian, but also Kennedy) and how all of them seem to have more parties involved than the killer or killers that were caught, the involvement of a secret powerful organization. It gets into minds of conspirators, how to them everything seems to be a result of plans from a strong force:
But that is going too far and:
Way too easy. If you look long enough and with full concentration of thought at anything, say a chair in your room, or your own navel, you will suspecting everything including the existence of those very things and yourself. That, in fact, is how yogis and philosophers are born. When it comes to major political events though, there are people whose lives are unfortunately so far affected by them, that they can't help thinking too much at them.
The truth has no obligation to show itself, it can remain hidden, unknown, forgotten, unproven. And majority needs proofs (unless it is a question of faith), and so the versions of events that can't be proved become conspiracy theories. A conspiracy theorist thus must suffer the anguish of a hallucinating person whose private version of reality makes him/her lonely. Many of them waste their lives away trying to prove their version of events. Something that does happen to a character in the book.
Violence
Another theme is violence. The assassinations are important because of violence they provoked - in one case discussed in the book, killing thousands within the first few days. The author was especially sensitive to the violence, that we have got used to in our modern day lives, at the eve of the birth of his daughters. And thus the book is born - and the book is dancing alternatively between reality and fiction.
Love For Leaders
Personally, I think the problem is with our unhealthy obsession with individual political leader rather than the idea or ideas the leader represents (assuming existence of such ideas, most modern day politicians don't have any) - and that is something I think should have been brought up in the book. Much of action of the book (unless it is almost Wikipedia like the narration of assassinations) is about blood, bones, clothes, etc of these dead politicians, how some people love them as treasures. In fact, it was the author's (and narrator's) holding the rib of one such politician in his hand which was what inspired this book. Take museums containing historical objects like mummies, Gandi's Charka and alike. I mean really? Isn't it all a kind of necrophilia?
But I think that unhealthy obsession with politicians is the problem. This kind of blind devotion to a single leader, considering him a kind of god, was warned against by Dr. Ambedkar in his speech while introducing the Indian Constitution.
Also, when people are doing something not because they think it is right but because a leader told them to do it, it just makes sense to kill the leader to make people back off. In one of the sequels of Godfather, the writer points out that what is strange is that there are any more assassination attempts on the lives of the political figures given how many enemies they have.
And if there is a lack of investigation in such crimes, it is because the assassin who actually does the killing is of far little importance that the person he kills, to prosecute the assassins diminishes the godlike value of those politicians further (and that is why the descents of the assassinated members of Gandhi and Nehru-Gandhi family find it easy to forgive the assassin).
Anyway, the problem with the 'The Shape of Ruins' is that it rarely goes beyond the superficial scratching of its themes.
And now my favorite quote, especially because Indian elections are coming, and this one perfectly captures the attitudes of most Modi bhakts and twitterites:
Goodreads comments are still awesome though!
More Quotes:
The main theme is conspiracy theories. And it had a putting off effect on me. I find some of them interesting (Dan Brown novels are interesting) but not the ones that concern the death of political figures (Kennedy, Bose, etc), definitely not enough to read 600 page long novels on them.
The Marquez Connections
This one interested me because of the mention of the name of Gabriel Marquez in some of the reviews. Apparently, Marquez happened to be in place of murder of a famous Colombian politician, Gaitain, just after the murder took place and would remember, in his autobiography (Living to Tell The Tale), a mysterious elegant man that played a major role but was not remembered by anyone else at the scene.
Another Marquez link is part of the story being based on the assassination of a politician, Rafael Uribe Uribe, which was a major inspiration for the character of Colonel Aureliano Buendía in One Hundred Years of Solitude. (Btw Vasquez loved that book but is critical of its Magical Realism as he is quoted saying when talking about his other book 'The Secret History of Costaguana'
"I want to forget this absurd rhetoric of Latin America as a magical or marvelous continent. In my novel, there is a disproportionate reality, but that which is disproportionate in it is the violence and cruelty of our history and of our politics. Let me be clear about this quote, which I suppose refers, in a caringly sarcastic tone, to One Hundred Years of Solitude. I believed that with this novel, and I can say that reading One Hundred Years ... in my adolescence contributed much to my vocation, but I believe that all of the sides of magical realism is the least interesting part of this novel. I propose to read One Hundred Years like a distorted version of Colombian history. That is the interesting part; in what makes One Hundred Years ... with the massacre of the banana workers or the civil wars of the 19th century, not in the yellow butterflies or in the pigs' tails. Like all grand novels, One Hundred Years of Solitude requires us to reinvent the truth. I believe that this reinvention is to make us lose ourselves in magical realism. And what I have tried to make in my novel is to recount the 19th Century Colombian story in a radically distinct key and I fear to oppose what Colombians have read until now.)
Yet another Marquez trivia, mentioned in the book, is that he claimed to be born in a different year to make the year of his birth same as that of Banana Massacre, an event he was greatly obsessed in and that, as Vásquez tells us found its way into 'One Hundred Years of Solitude'. I don't know why Marquez thought that the coincidence of his birth with a major political event made it any special, it is kind of like old superstitions where people would consult horoscopes or stars (Mark Twain was born shortly after an appearance of Halley's Comet, and he predicted that he would die as well; he would die the day after the comet returned.) but Salman Rushdie, another admirer of both Marquez and One Hundred Years of Solitude (without any qualms about magical realism) also shared Marquez's love for big events. Born about two months before India's independence, he changed the date of birth of his fictional counterpart, Saleem Sinai, to coincide not only the month and date of independence but also the time to exact same second in the Midnight's children.
Assassinations
While the book does mention these Marquez facts, that is all we hear about him. Nothing more. Same with 9/11 conspiracy theory and a couple of others - nothing more than a mere mention in passing 'The Shape of the Ruins' is mostly focused on assassinations of politicians (mostly Columbian, but also Kennedy) and how all of them seem to have more parties involved than the killer or killers that were caught, the involvement of a secret powerful organization. It gets into minds of conspirators, how to them everything seems to be a result of plans from a strong force:
“In politics, nothing happens by accident,” Franklin Delano Roosevelt once said. “If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.”
But that is going too far and:
"it’s very easy to ignite suspicion but what is necessary is to prove it."
Way too easy. If you look long enough and with full concentration of thought at anything, say a chair in your room, or your own navel, you will suspecting everything including the existence of those very things and yourself. That, in fact, is how yogis and philosophers are born. When it comes to major political events though, there are people whose lives are unfortunately so far affected by them, that they can't help thinking too much at them.
The truth has no obligation to show itself, it can remain hidden, unknown, forgotten, unproven. And majority needs proofs (unless it is a question of faith), and so the versions of events that can't be proved become conspiracy theories. A conspiracy theorist thus must suffer the anguish of a hallucinating person whose private version of reality makes him/her lonely. Many of them waste their lives away trying to prove their version of events. Something that does happen to a character in the book.
Violence
Another theme is violence. The assassinations are important because of violence they provoked - in one case discussed in the book, killing thousands within the first few days. The author was especially sensitive to the violence, that we have got used to in our modern day lives, at the eve of the birth of his daughters. And thus the book is born - and the book is dancing alternatively between reality and fiction.
Love For Leaders
Personally, I think the problem is with our unhealthy obsession with individual political leader rather than the idea or ideas the leader represents (assuming existence of such ideas, most modern day politicians don't have any) - and that is something I think should have been brought up in the book. Much of action of the book (unless it is almost Wikipedia like the narration of assassinations) is about blood, bones, clothes, etc of these dead politicians, how some people love them as treasures. In fact, it was the author's (and narrator's) holding the rib of one such politician in his hand which was what inspired this book. Take museums containing historical objects like mummies, Gandi's Charka and alike. I mean really? Isn't it all a kind of necrophilia?
But I think that unhealthy obsession with politicians is the problem. This kind of blind devotion to a single leader, considering him a kind of god, was warned against by Dr. Ambedkar in his speech while introducing the Indian Constitution.
Also, when people are doing something not because they think it is right but because a leader told them to do it, it just makes sense to kill the leader to make people back off. In one of the sequels of Godfather, the writer points out that what is strange is that there are any more assassination attempts on the lives of the political figures given how many enemies they have.
And if there is a lack of investigation in such crimes, it is because the assassin who actually does the killing is of far little importance that the person he kills, to prosecute the assassins diminishes the godlike value of those politicians further (and that is why the descents of the assassinated members of Gandhi and Nehru-Gandhi family find it easy to forgive the assassin).
Anyway, the problem with the 'The Shape of Ruins' is that it rarely goes beyond the superficial scratching of its themes.
And now my favorite quote, especially because Indian elections are coming, and this one perfectly captures the attitudes of most Modi bhakts and twitterites:
"Many years ago I’d dropped the habit of reading the online comments my column inspired, not only from lack of interest and time, but out of the profound conviction that they displayed the worst vices of our new digital societies: intellectual irresponsibility, proud mediocrity, implausible denigration with impunity, but most of all verbal terrorism, the schoolyard bullying that the participants got involved in with incomprehensible enthusiasm, the cowardice of all those aggressors who used pseudonyms to vilify but would never repeat their insults out loud. The forum of opinion columns has turned into our modern and digital version of the Two Minutes Hate: that ritual in Orwell’s 1984 in which an image of the enemy is projected and the citizens ecstatically give themselves over to physical aggression (they throw things at the screen) and verbal aggression (they insult, shriek, accuse, defame), and then go back to the real world feeling free, unburdened, and self-satisfied."
Goodreads comments are still awesome though!
More Quotes:
"maybe because marble plaques are reserved by some implicit or silent tradition for those who drag others to their deaths, those whose unexpected fall can take down a whole society and often does, and that’s why we protect them—and that’s why we fear their deaths. In ancient times no one would have hesitated to give their life for their prince or their king or their queen, for all knew that their downfalls, whether due to madness or conspiracy or suicide, could well push the whole kingdom into the abyss."
“It’s one of two things: either my wife is drowning or we’ve run out of ice.”
"I dislike willful irrationality and I can’t stand people hiding behind language, especially if it involves the thousand and one formulas language has invented to protect our human tendency to believe without proof."
“Out of the quarrel with others we make rhetoric,” wrote Yeats. “Out of the quarrel with ourselves, we make poetry.”