Originally written here.SYMMETRYAfter Isaac Newton laid his 3rd law of motion, almost every branch of science agreed with him. I suppose, even religion does. “For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.” It is the fundamental symmetry of the universe. Our every action draws an imaginary path, an effect. Sometimes even a small change may result to a large difference.Andrés Faulques, a war photographer by profession, decided to leave his famous life and secluded himself in a tower by the sea, painting an extensive mural on its interior. A vision of nightmare: 26 centuries of the iconography of war. Because he couldn’t find, through the lens, “the definitive image; the both fleeting and eternal moment that would explain all things,” “the hidden rule that made order out of the implacable geometry of chaos.”One day an unexpected visitor came; introducing himself as Ivo Markovic, the subject in one of Faulques war photos, “The Face of Defeat”. And, announcing without swell that he intends to kill Faulques. But first, he wants the photographer to understand some important details. “I can’t just kill you,” he explains. “I need for us to talk first; I need to know tyou better, to be sure that you realize certain things. I want you to learn and understand. ... After that, I’ll be able to kill you.”The game was set, the terms were laid. But Markovic was puzzled by Faulques. The painter of battles is different from the war photographer he thought he knew. His visits were welcomed, followed by long philosophical conversations on war and the natures of man. The issues of responsibility and guilt were always present. And death was never far behind. ”It's here, under our skin,....In our genes. Only the artificial rules, culture, the varnish of successive civilizations keep man within bounds. Social conventions, laws. Fear of punishment.”The novel was both beautiful and tragic. The callousness of how Arturo Pérez-Reverte depicts war as art was something you cannot look away from. His prose will encourage you to look over Faulques’ shoulder and take a peek at the picture of suffering. Each was rendered in technical details. His philosophies on symmetry and violence through Faulques’ eyes can evoke a clash of feelings.I have only Club Dumas -having read only that before this- to compare The Painter of Battles with. This book is different in many ways, but the strange element is also present. My only complaint is the incessant reference to the protagonist as “the painter battles”. Or maybe, Reverte have a certain point he wished to drill that I totally missed. Arturo Pérez-Reverte is a great mind-bender and his games of mental-chess are something I have to get used too.
i am still mulling things over in my head...and also wishing we could give ½ stars here on GR because i am feeling in-between on this one and would feel better with it at a 2 ½-star rating. :/this is a very philosophical novel, and it had a lot of potential. in the end, though, it felt heavy-handed and not very elegant in its delivery. i found this review from the guardian (2007), which seems to reflect many of the same things i was thinking about and feeling while reading the novel. (except the reviewer erroneously notes markovic's child as a daughter, when it was a son.) http://www.theguardian.com/books/2007... "The Painter of Battles is a strange book, much of its material shoehorned...into its flashbacks, its central dialogue straining under the moral weight placed upon it; it's a messy clash between showing and telling. " this novel could make for an interesting film or stage adaptation, with the right people - and my brain kept jumping to this idea as i was reading. there's a detached nature to this book which is interesting. on the one hand, with such deep and awful experiences being communicated, it would make sense to have a very emotionally driven story, or a story that results in strong emotional responses. yet that didn't happen with me and i was strongly aware of detachment while reading. but this also makes sense given the idea is touched on during the book, and the fact a war photographer (or this particular war photographer) kept himself emotionally apart from the subjects - people and places - he was capturing on film.two things i had particular trouble with that i want to mention in this review: 1) the character of olvido - a former model, then photographer who shot high-end and architectural shoots for magazine. she just never became a fully fledged character for me. the best i can guess is that her choice to join faulques as he covers war zones, and then to choose to photograph only objects and not people ties in to her merely being an object herself in this book. the fact of her beauty is repeated again, and again...which brings me to the next issue for me:2) the translation - i am not sure i trust it? most of the time it seemed okay to fine, but there was a lot of repetition i noticed. and i was constantly wondering how this would read in its original spanish? i feel like, perhaps, the original is mush more beautiful, mate even less heavy-handed, more evocative. but i can't read spanish, so i won't ever know.so i do feel glad i read the book - i have had it for a while and have heard many raves for other books by pérez-reverte. but i have also read the painter of battles was a departure, and perhaps not his best move/best work. so maybe i will check out The Club Dumas next.
Do You like book El Pintor De Batallas (2006)?
Perez-Reverte is one of my favorite contemporary authors. This book has moments of brilliant and beautifully insightful writing. Mirroring the main character's obsession with a painting depicting the horrors of warfare, Perez-Reverte uses his words and images to give brushstrokes of meaning. The overall effect leaves the reader somewhat haunted by the seeming meaninglessness of human existence. This was a difficult and interesting book of ideas that struck the same note many times in slightly different ways.
—Christan
A thought provoking ,deeply disturbing story on the trauma and evil of war and the underlying predominantly evil nature of humanity. It is less a story but a psychological probe into the inherent animal nature of man when reduced to the level of survival. The author seemingly reveals his darker side which is sometimes hinted at in the swashbuckling anti hero Alatriste series. Not a feel good story told through the eyes,lens and paint brushes of a long traumatised war photographer. There are few if any redeeming features in the tale of a brutal stark reality of savagery and dehumanisation
—Jim Bartlett
This book is like a one act play in which the main character, previously a war photographer in the Balkans, gives up his career to live in seclusion and paint the inside of the lighthouse in which he lives. However, a man whose life he affected by doing nothing but shooting photographs of the suffering, has decided he will camp out at the painter's home and eventually kill him, to the painter's knowledge. While he is there, he tries to make the painter gain emotional attachments. The book provides a good portrait of the effects of war on families and the professionals who cover it.
—Caitlin
