I have some mixed feelings about this one… some parts of the book I flew through because the action was so intense, and other parts I felt like I was dragging myself along trying to keep track of what was even happening.. I still thought the story was very interesting but there are so many perspectives, newspaper reports, testimonies, police commentary, and background stories that I would just get a bit lost sometimes..
One thing that stood out to me immediately is how detailed the scenes are. I really felt like I could picture a lot of the action scenes, especially around the robbery and the siege in Montevideo. Those sections felt fast-paced and cinematic, but then suddenly the narration shifts into these long explanations or historical details and I felt the pacing slow way down… I understand that Piglia is trying to show how the story is constructed from different sources and perspectives, which is interesting because the novel is based on a real crime, but sometimes I just wanted the narrative to stay focused on the main characters instead of jumping into another police report or witness statement.
Speaking of the police… I have to be honest.. I did not care about the cops’ perspective. Sorry! Every time the narrative shifted to them I felt less interested. Maybe that’s intentional, because the criminals themselves are actually way more compelling.. Even though they are obviously terrible people who have committed horrible crimes, I still found myself weirdly rooting for them to escape with the money. Which is a bit concerning, because they are not good people at all… but somehow the story makes you emotionally invested in them anyway..
The characters that stuck with me the most were the Kid and the Blond Gaucho. Their relationship was probably the most emotionally intense part of the whole novel for me. The final moments between them were actually really moving. When the Kid is dying and Gaucho holds him and tries to comfort him, the scene feels almost religious. The description where Gaucho holds him “like an image of the deposition of Christ” (p.181) was such a powerful image. The scene just felt so intimate and calm compared to the chaos around the apartment.
Another thing I noticed is how the novel comments on the meaning of the crime itself, especially the burning of the money. The newspapers describe it as something worse than murder, calling it “an act of nihilism and an example of pure terrorism” (p.159) and compare it to cannibalism (p.158), which is crazy to me. Like they are upset because they can’t say “at least they are doing it (all of the murdering..) for the money!”
Overall, I liked the novel’s characters, plot and atmosphere, but sometimes got lost in the delivery. The mix of crime story, historical reconstruction, and multiple perspectives is definitely interesting, but also a little overwhelming. Despite that, the emotional moments between the characters, especially the Kid and Gaucho, really stayed with me after finishing the book.
Question: Do you think Piglia’s use of multiple perspectives (police reports, witnesses, newspapers, etc.) makes the story feel more realistic, or does it make the story harder to connect with emotionally?