Sunday, early for a Sunday, begin to look at the newspapers online. I say look, because reading, read what is said, is not. When finished with the serious daily, I go to some blogs. After the blogs, journals less serious, to get there embarrassment is Argentine Time. Touring is a complete editorial you think the national and popular culture over the human race. And what is already a brand of Kirchner, hunt in the zoo, so that the conclusion reached is that they think so, especially those who follow him and not opponents. Nobody in their right mind, and I know what I'm saying, read this rag unless you want to listen to the music of the song Kirchner.
But something I read caught my attention even more than usual. In a featured title, but also hidden digital version of the paper promises its readers, "Controversy of two writers on Argentina's military dictatorship" and had a debate between Mario Vargas Llosa and Juan José Saer. The lowering of the note said, quote, "In 1995, the Nobel Prize Literature published in The country an item on the chilling confessions of the soldiers who participated in the bloody repression. The author of a gloss, indignantly answered publicly. "
I was surprised enough to go into the note to see it said. I wanted to see what was the tone of a debate that I missed and will certainly interest me.
Grande my surprise, Saer at any time he is "outraged" with Mario Vargas Llosa, much less than that, use the Peruvian article in El Pais, Madrid, to think deeply about the dictatorship and Argentina. Allocates responsibilities assumed limitations and makes clever social state recognition of Argentina which promoted, accepted and endured the last coup, but nothing bad about the last Nobel prize. Of course, with justice, Saer one paragraph devastating to the political culture of violence, Montoneros, to ERP and their responsibilities obvious what the story then poured over all the Argentines.
Not that, even for a moment, would have thought that a newspaper like Argentina could play with time cleaning, but I think demonstration of contempt for his readers and, further, explains what happens when it comes the issue of opinion and the right to adequate communication with the banality. Another chapter worth the fictional construction of a past, present and future matter in which the Government is clearly the best student.
0 comments:
Post a Comment