Insults between well-known writers

You are right! Oddly enough, those cultured writers who seem very peaceful all also confront each other and also insult each other. And it is that, how bad is envy! Or are other reasons that lead them to such provocations? Judge for yourself. Here is a compilation of the insults between well-known writers that we have been knowing.

Bukowski said about Shakespeare ...

Shakespeare is unreadable and overrated. But people don't want to hear this. One cannot attack temples. It has been fixed throughout the centuries. You can say that he's a lousy actor, but you can't say that Shakespeare is shit. When something lasts a long time, snobs start clinging to it, like suckers. '

Borges on the work of "Ulysses" by James Joyce

«I think" Ulises "is a failure. When enough has been read, thousands and thousands of circumstances about the characters are known, but they are not known. And thinking about Joyce's characters is not the same as thinking about Stevenson's or Dickens's, because in the case of a character, in a Stevenson book, for example, a man may only be present on one page, but he is he feels that one knows him or that there is more of him to know. In "Ulysses" thousands of circumstances are told about the characters: that they have gone to the bathroom twice, the books they read, their exact postures when they are sitting or standing, but, really, they are not known. It is as if Joyce had passed through them with a microscope or a magnifying glass.

Bolaño on Pablo Neruda

«I like Neruda quite a bit, as I say in that little story. A great American poet. Very wrong, on the other hand, of course, like almost all poets. He was not the successor of Whitman, in many of his poems, in the structure of those poems, we can only see now a plagiarist of Whitman. But literature is like that, it is a somewhat nightmarish jungle where the vast majority, the vast majority of writers are plagiarists.

David Huerta on Bukowski and his fans

“To get down to business, I will ask a simple question: what is the dream of every teenager, apart from getting a car? Getting up late, not making the bed, drinking with friends, cheekily staying up, gambling and gambling, going to pool or to the racetrack to risk money, preferably ill-gotten. Everything that has nothing to do with this is "petty bourgeois", "strawberry", "exquisite" and the string of supposedly infamous adjectives that the curious reader wants to propose. Therein lies the key to Bukowski's enormous success: his books are the expression of a teenage dream fulfilled in all its glory.

Nicolás Cabral vs. Vargas Llosa

«The deception of the media that privilege opinion over thought has elevated figures like Vargas Llosa. Flyweight writer who now laments the decline of Western culture is the embodiment of the most blatant cynicism. As a feather of the worst causes, his school prose secretly collaborates in the phenomenon that he denounces from the pulpit ».

Borges against Góngora

«I have been reading the Solitudes and the Polyphemus: they are actively ugly. I read all of Polyphemus: it's horrible. Góngora, in Polyphemus, specializes in showy ugliness. He likes words like cork, scales, suck, puke, mother of pearl, and pearls. He likes a system of scales with saucers that stabilize, lower or rise: if he says that something is noble, another is humble, this white, this black, all articulated by words as though, not so much, however, no less. This is a mistake: since literature is a machine, it must be clandestine, a bit mysterious. Góngora's is a world of verbal mechanisms. You cannot imagine what it says and it is essentially rude: to write that the water of the Nile vomits wealth is rude and stupid. How can you not see that this verb does not suit you? He wanted to use Latin words, and that was enough for him. His idea of ​​ingenuity was quite strange. Any opposition, black-white, death-life, attracted him and seemed ingenious to him. Dámaso Alonso has prosified Las soledades, that is, he has broken the hyperbatons and has restored the syntax, without noticing that he was exposing Góngora's mental poverty ».

César Aira on Julio Cortázar

“Cortázar was an initiation for all Argentines, but if one reads his texts when he is mature, his hairs stand on end, because he realizes that he was not a very good writer. I used to admire it, but now it seems bad to me ".

And reading this, I only have one thing left to point out: My goodness, how is the patio and how it was already at that time!