Cuban author Leonardo Padura (The Man Who Loved Dogs, etc.) isn't impressed by Roberto Bolaño as literary critic, calling him: "the worst literary critic of recent years", as Prensa Latina reports in Bolaño: Good Writer, Bad Literary Critic, says Padura.
In particular, Padura seems to doubt that Bolaño read anywhere near as much or widely as he claimed, suggesting: "if he had read all the books he said he read, he would not have been able to write not even one of his own".
I don't really think it's that hard to believe Bolaño was such a great reader. And while I don't think much of what he wrote is truly 'literary criticism', I also think he was a very good reader, and he wrote well about what he read -- see, for example, Between Parentheses. Yes, some of his judgments were off, but a lot were spot-on.
In particular, Padura seems to doubt that Bolaño read anywhere near as much or widely as he claimed, suggesting: "if he had read all the books he said he read, he would not have been able to write not even one of his own".
I don't really think it's that hard to believe Bolaño was such a great reader. And while I don't think much of what he wrote is truly 'literary criticism', I also think he was a very good reader, and he wrote well about what he read -- see, for example, Between Parentheses. Yes, some of his judgments were off, but a lot were spot-on.