I really must learn Scrivener or do something like that to better organize all these notes I make.
Language and joy – these two things are interrelated. Vallejo has pain as a key word but and writes about sadness but there is joy in what he is doing with language (and language appears to build the self, as in Heidegger, but that is a different question).
– The reputation of the poet, essayist, novelist and dramatist César Vallejo (Peru, 1892-Paris, 1938), who died with much of his major work still unpublished, has grown steadily in the Spanish speaking world from the 1950s forward. Vallejo became more prominent in English with publishing events such as Clayton Eshleman and José Rubia Barcia’s 1978 National Book Award for their translation of Vallejo’s Complete Posthumous Poetry (U of California P). In the present century, with new translations such as the Complete Poetry (Esleman, U of California P, 2006), studies such as Clayton’s (cite), Hart’s new biography (cite), as well as the discovery of new manuscripts (cite Fló, Smith-Soto, Echeverría, more), and translation projects underway (cite Mulligan, more), he is emerging as a world author.
-More ideas on world author concept: (use article in n+1): “In modernism, the universal and the obscure make familiar bedfellows. Who in the 20th century wrote poetry more deserving of being translated into all languages and sent on thumb-drives in spaceships to all galaxies — so that aliens may become acquainted with our better selves before deciding whether to enslave or befriend us — than the impoverished Peruvian Communist and [surrealist] César Vallejo did upon returning to his tiny rented apartment in Paris from a Republican Spain that was attempting to stave off fascism? Virtually no Parisians, Peruvians, Spanish speakers, or fellow Communists read Vallejo at the time; his posthumous Poemas Humanos (1939) intone distraught sermons to a nonexistent congregation on the lost cause of somebody else’s civil war. These poems continue to live, while the works of such contemporary world-spanning giants as Malraux and Gide slowly fade to oblivion.”
-Still more ideas on world author concept: Comparative Literature, in the older philological mode (which supposes you can know other cultures, and can suppose this because of its Eurocentrism), may be “dead,” but for international authors like Vallejo it is essential, from the methodological point of view of the need to follow the material networks of literary circulation (what he read, where he was read, what texts are available where, what translations exist); Vallejo at various points asserted himself as Peruvian but was never a cultural nationalist, and is “difficult” in large part because he draws on so many different cultural strands.
-Despite Vallejo’s stature and despite the existence of a fairly large and valuable critical corpus, scholarship on his complex work is nonetheless in its infancy. This is partly due to his early death and his troubled manuscript tradition. Texts are still being discovered and established; many were hard to get to see for a long time; he is best known as a poet, which means his considerable work in other genres has not received sufficient attention. Now that the personal struggles over ownership and interpretation of his work that followed his untimely death have died down and a certain amount of basic work has been done toward finding and establishing texts has been done, work is being begun in a new key. The 2014 congress Vallejo Siempre (Lima and Trujillo, Peru), for instance, brought together older and newer scholars for the purpose of stimulating renewed scholarly work on this author who has become monumental, and who is held close to the hearts of his readers, but who is far from having been fully read. In this panorama, furthermore, studying Vallejo from a comparatist / international viewpoint is important because, given the translations and the work on him in English, it is desirable that the critical tradition not bifurcate into an English and a Spanish one (for instance).