A tapestry of dialogues and fictitious dialogues woven on a fabric of a relatively simplistic plot and characters. Oh but what a brilliant and beautiful tapestry that is!As others have commented, the plot and characters in this novel seemed to serve the sole purpose of channeling the author's opinions and thoughts about facts of life, notably grief. While I don't resonate with this aphoristic-truistic style, here it never succeeded in becoming a drawback for me. The seductive beauty and exquisite flow of Marias' style easily overcame my displeasure in this type of writing.A top asset for a writer, his rare talent for observation coupled with his fine psychological skill transpires not only from the hallmark Marias way of conveying thoughts and thoughts in thoughts and even thoughts in thoughts in thoughts, but also from fine descriptions of gestures which I particularly liked here (e.g. the scene with the little girl and her mother having breakfast).Intertextuality today seems to be synonymous with Javier Marias. Glimpses and interpretations of Shakespeare and Dumas punctuate this "intertextumultous" and sprawling story-telling which is less of a story and more of a telling. Most dialogues were built as fictitious ones encapsulated in the narrator's monologues or even chains of monologues. The longest one was the narrator (Maria) relating about a made-up discourse of the other lead character (Javier) who relates about the imaginary speech of the victim (Miguel) who weaves in the fictitious sayings of others.The characters don't evolve, there is nothing individualistic or unique in them, they just deliver what we can assume to be the author's opinion about stuff. Even relative strangers find it easy to unbosom themselves, using the same figures of speech in the same style of speech. There are justifications to this discourse-orrhea, as most of them are intellectuals and intellectuals do talk a lot.This apparent series of monologues/dialogues comes in a magnificently symmetrical structure, though: the discoursiveness seems to be subdued in the opening and closing chapters which showcase more action. I loved this particular aspect, it did lend a sense of completeness to the novel.Contemplation today often translates into criticism in our postmodern world of irony and sarcasm, but not so in Marias. There was a lot of refreshing positiveness and appreciation for what the narrator observed especially in the first part of the story. I liked that, too, very much.An excellent read. The story is intriguing, perhaps because for many of us, the main trauma and drama in our lives comes to us as bystanders--at some level, we hope this is true and consider it something of an accomplishment. But when tragedy strikes close to home, as it does for Maria, whose pleasant diversion of daydreaming about this nice couple is interrupted by his senseless murder, she can't shake it. She becomes entangled with the widow, and the deceased's best friend. Okay, that's enough of a premise to make me want to read the book. On the choice of POV alone.Marias is a beautiful writer who uses this story to express his thoughts about life and death, which are brilliantly written, but a bit repetitive. i'm not sure if this is a translation issue, an editing issue, or if he really just loved a couple of those ideas so much he couldn't resist repeating them two or three times, often from the mouths of different characters. Which is how ideas spread, of course, so it worked. I really enjoyed every inch of this novel. It's a step away from what passes for a thriller these days. If you're a seasoned thriller reader, you may find it too slow for your tastes. But if you can regulate to its pace, take in his many, many observations, even about the process of concealing crimes and planting doubt, I think it makes the reading of more mainstream thrillers even better.
Do You like book Infatuations The (2000)?
I read this for my Book Group at BPL. I didn't like the characters.
—daniellaadebayo
The Infatuations, translated from Spanish. 2013. really good read.
—Alex
Interesting to say the least. I want to read more of this author.
—papap
