I didn't have many new things for me.

Perhaps because it was written in 1950 and was for our time and culture.

The parts that were interesting to me were:

Living means separating from what we were to reach what we will be hidden in the future.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

His [human] nature has within it the desire and thirst for realizing himself in others. Man himself is connected to the pain of exile and the change of time. Therefore, when he is aware of himself, he is also aware of the non-existence of others, that is, of his loneliness.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++====++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

We are condemned to live alone, but we are condemned to pass through our own loneliness and re-establish the bonds that related us to life in a past paradise. We use all our forces to get rid of the bond of loneliness. For this reason, our feeling of loneliness has a twofold importance: on the one hand, it is awareness of oneself, and on the other hand, it is the desire to escape from oneself.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

We all live in our own lives and within our own limits, in loneliness and isolation, until we purify ourselves and then return to the world.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Loneliness and sin go away together and heavily.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The modern man likes to pretend that his thinking is awake. But this awake thinking has led us to the tortuous paths of a nightmare where the fragmented rooms are endlessly repeated in the mirror of wisdom.

When we wake up, perhaps we will realize that we are seeing dreams with our eyes open and the dreams and illusions of the individual are unbearable. And then perhaps, once again, we will want to see dreams with our eyes closed.

***I would like to write a more in-depth opinion of the printed words in this book, breaking down the topics it touches on, the way it does so, and how it affects me. But that would be to write a small essay of his, and evaluating and interpreting the opinion of a person who wrote this in the past decade with the assertion that it could be an obsolete analysis in 50 years doesn't really interest me much.

However, there are some things I would like to leave here:

To start, a statement. Octavio Paz earned many titles, but among them, the one that I believe defines him the most, the one that stands out and shows in his prose, clearly, from my personal perspective, is that of a poet. Which also means that the exposition of his ideas is surrounded by a rich vocabulary, but it is used in a certain way that sounds beautiful in his sentences. Octavio uses extensive lexical resources to express abstract concepts and to highlight nuances and qualities of the topics he presents. This includes a cumulative of connotative and technical resources.

And don't take what I'm saying the wrong way. This statement goes hand in hand with two others. Of course, I couldn't expect less from a humanistic (and even political) discourse that is written in a literary genre like the essay. But I have to admit that I have trouble correlating the way all this information is presented, and his opinions regarding it with the "validity" of his vision of Mexico.

I have trouble understanding how someone who uses language as a worthy poet and essayist would do, makes an analysis (argued, of course, either because of the nature of the genre or as a justification for a harsh criticism of the regionalisms of his country) about its use in Mexico. I have trouble reading about my culture with a passion that denotes sadness, disappointment, and sometimes even indignation. The nature of the genre allows Octavio to expose his personal opinions and mix them with justifications that drag historical events, not only in the sense of an increase in the complexity of our society as a set of behaviors over time but also as the mechanisms that control these behaviors. It is brilliant, in some ways, how he uses concepts and their implications of how this evolution is closely related to ideological, economic, and political ties, but something bothers me about him talking about the evolution of our country, of the United States and Spain, but orienting his judgments in Mexico and its population.

Therefore, my previous paragraph is not a criticism, it is more of an observation, it is rather the encounter of irony in his discourse. And there are plenty of those, aren't we blind to them only because the external criticism of this work is good, right? Because it seems ironic to me that someone who talks about a country, its culture, and its people with so much passion, compares it all the time with the other countries where he had the opportunity to exist, sometimes forgetting that the discourse he maintains, in its own history and cultural evolution, absolutely all countries also have. And I'm not going to lie and say that he forgot about that small detail in absolutely all his preaching, but every time he remembered that detail, he softened his statements, and you can contradict me on this by saying that that was my perspective. And then I would quote him showing how he decided to present certain ideas and thoughts for you to deny it to me with arguments that convince me.

Is this essay still valid? Yes, in parts. You can always make extensive analyses of human behavior, its growth, its chronology, its evolution. And does Octavio deserve merit for this quite a bit of work? Of course, it is a very well done job. It is a very good essay, sometimes raw, sometimes heart-wrenching. But isn't it curious that we are talking about a culture that is losing itself and at the same time the author completely loses the other cultures that are going through the same thing? Is this an essay that only talks about the Mexican and portrays his reality? Or is it an essay that talks about the human from the perspective of someone who was born in Mexico and therefore focuses his discourse on his country?

Is he an excellent writer and poet who knows perfectly how to make good use of the verb? Yes. Without a doubt, without question. Is this a work that deserves to be acclaimed as the perfect description of our Mexican civilization? Uh. I'm sorry that this question is answered with a yes in education, but how could it be contradicted? In what way does Octavio, if he makes quotes and references, concrete data of experiences exposed in literature, historical, political allusions, and other types of foundations, but it is an expository essay impregnated with the interpretation of its author, of his personal opinions, and how can a personal opinion be acclaimed as a perfect description or "perception" of something? We are only human.

Ah, and a question that kept arising in me throughout the entire book was, how does he distinguish between speaking of "Mexicans" as if he were alien to them to including himself in his discourse?

In chapter IV, Octavio uses the statement "the use of violence as a dialectical resource" and I had to write down at that moment, «And what about your use of the dialectical resource as a form of violence?» And well, if it's more comfortable for him to use "contempt" or "rejection" instead of violence, let's do it.

Because here is the biggest irony and the one that I believe represents everything I read. From the first chapter, we are exposed to the well-known rejection of the Mexican towards his own culture, clearly added to the rejection towards his own identity and a natural contradiction to a sense of cultural belonging. But, I'm very sorry, but the perfect example is in this very book, in the very opinions of the author filling these pages, more than of the perspective of the "Mexicans" that he announces in them.

I usually loathe rating nonfictional papers with stars.

If you have perused a snippet of "Labyrinth" (and let's be honest - you have: otherwise, you know very little about the Mexican race), you will understand the point. The Mexican is an outcast who dons masks to conceal inner emotions (occasionally, the repressed emotions burst out... such as during its celebrations), and the country adopts dogmas that often do not suit the Mexicans... thus resulting in disorder, even to this day.

Paz has crafted a sociological paper accurately. He imparts authenticity to his thesis - and elements like La Malinche and the Pachucos resonate. I read this with almost romantic enthusiasm, although it is more like a guidebook. I can truthfully state that I take lexicons/encyclopedias far too seriously.

The book starts off very engaging for the Iranian reader, initially creating the impression that we are dealing with a heroic work.

However, in reality, this is not the case and we are instead faced with a rather mediocre American Latin work.

Although at the beginning the author starts to hide his Evangelical beliefs, with a little attention, we can better understand the baselessness and lack of foundation of this article from those very first sentences. For example, this sentence: "The deepest reality in the human condition is solitude."

If you, like me, ask why no scientific or philosophical answer will be obtained, it is because the author will not give a reason and will quietly show his own Christian conservative upbringing in the rest of the book.

The next wrong statement is presented on the very next page, which is the basis and foundation of this article: "Man is the only being who knows he is alone and is in search of another."

Of course, the author also makes an allusion to human love and its indestructibility in order to avoid an empty space. The reason for this is that the author, from the first statement, is after saying that we are a separate part of God and have been separated from God by the first sin, so our solitude is not related to being repaired by love and such. The only way is that we connect to God through Christ after the end of time. After reaching the very margin, we come to the real elements of the article: "Almost all religions... related to the founding of cities... are in search of that sacred center from which we have been led astray." "Every time a priest celebrates the mysterious rite of the Eucharist, Christ descends at that moment and offers himself to them and saves the world."

In short, I will never read another book by Octavio Paz again.

I didn't understand a thing but I loved it.

This simple yet profound statement encapsulates a unique experience. Sometimes, in life, we encounter things that are completely beyond our comprehension. It could be a complex piece of art, a foreign language, or a new concept. Despite not being able to fully understand it, there is still something about it that captures our hearts and makes us fall in love.

Maybe it's the beauty, the mystery, or the sense of wonder that it evokes. It doesn't matter if we don't understand the details or the meaning behind it. What matters is that it makes us feel something special. It reminds us that there are things in this world that are bigger than us and that we can still appreciate and enjoy them even if we don't fully understand them. So, the next time you encounter something that you don't understand, don't be afraid. Open your heart and let yourself be amazed.

It is astonishing that the book "The Thousand and One Nights of Solitude" with such a deceiving title is a book where the reader, if not careful, may find it difficult to establish a connection between the story, society, the thousand and one nights, women, and solitude. As a result, some may simply focus on the light-hearted aspects in the book regarding the understanding of women, love, and solitude, while others, due to quotations from Bergson and Durkheim, classify the book in the category of philosophical and literary books in their libraries.

This diversity in perception shows the complexity and richness of the book. It invites different interpretations and readings, depending on the reader's background, interests, and perspectives. Some may be drawn to the romantic and mysterious elements, while others may be more interested in the deeper philosophical and social themes.

Overall, "The Thousand and One Nights of Solitude" is a book that challenges the reader to think beyond the surface and explore the multiple layers of meaning hidden within its pages. It is a book that can be enjoyed on different levels, depending on the reader's willingness to engage with it.

El Laberinto de la Soledad is a remarkable book that every Mexican should read.

In this work, we can find a critical and unbiased study of our society.

Octavio Paz provides us with an account of the reasons behind many things that afflict us as Mexicans. In a superb way, he opens our eyes and explains why we are hijos de la chingada, why we emigrate to the US, why cholos, pachucos, and chundos exist, and why we only look inside our huts and always seek to screw over our neighbor.

It is sad to see how we have transformed into a society that only seeks its own benefit.

However, if you are still wondering why, read El Laberinto de la Soledad and discover many of the motives behind it.

As Mexico, there is no other like it!

Best regards!

Jonah

In general, the discussions about "loneliness" in the book and that part about "love" and its unavailability in the existing social conditions are thought-provoking and in some cases, they are also validated in our own society - although they haven't been properly addressed with sufficient reasoning. However, the other topics seem a bit scattered and hard to understand! Maybe if the book had a larger volume, or if the article wasn't separated from the main text which is itself a separate book, more could be understood about the author's intentions and judgments could be made about them.

From the text of the book: "All human beings feel lonely and are alone at certain moments in their lives. Living means parting from what we were to reach what we will be in the mysterious future. Loneliness is the deepest reality in the human condition. Man is the only being who knows he is alone and the only being who is in search of others. His nature, if one can use this word in relation to man who has created himself by saying 'no' to nature, has within it the desire and thirst for the realization of himself in others. Man himself is the connection of the pain of exile and the passage of time. Therefore, when he is aware of himself, he is also aware of the non-being of the other, that is, of his loneliness."

Intense and richly written essays on history and society emerge from a deeply perceptive mind.

Now, it must be admitted that I possess insufficient knowledge about Mexican history to either verify or disprove his statements regarding various Mexican leaders and ideologies. However, his arguments are indeed impressive and serve as a good foundation for understanding why Mexico remained a semi-colonial state decades after achieving independence.

Delving deep into a wide range of topics, such as 19th Century debates over positivism, the role of the fiesta in village life, Aztec myth, and the omnipresence of death in Mexican society, this work is in many ways both a harsh rebuke and an open-hearted love letter to Paz's homeland.

It contains some of the finest social essays that I have ever had the pleasure of reading. The author's ability to explore and analyze these complex themes with such depth and nuance is truly remarkable.

Overall, this collection of essays offers a unique and valuable perspective on Mexican history and society, and is sure to engage and enlighten readers.

A person who sees himself through the eyes of others has not lived, has not fallen in love, but is only a negative being who has had his desires fulfilled.

This statement makes us think deeply about the nature of self-identity and the importance of genuine experiences. When we rely solely on the opinions and perceptions of others to define ourselves, we lose touch with our true selves. True living involves exploring our own emotions, dreams, and passions, and experiencing love and connection with others on a deeper level.

Being a negative being who only focuses on having desires fulfilled may bring temporary satisfaction, but it lacks the richness and meaning that comes from a life lived authentically. We should strive to break free from the constraints of others' expectations and embrace our individuality, allowing ourselves to grow and evolve in ways that are true to who we are.

Fifty pages are very few for a complete understanding of the text regarding loneliness, love, time, and so on.

I, being one of those people who like loneliness, don't remember ever feeling the pain of loneliness. And because of my journey in dreams and giving too much to my imagination, I prefer love as a celestial phenomenon without a human creation. This is part of its loneliness and love.

But the last few pages, where humans have stepped into this prison-like world of hours and calendars since the time when eternity and infinity and all times were one, I liked more. Overall, it is a book that should be read.

However, to expand it further, we could say that the concept of loneliness and love presented in these pages is complex and multi-faceted. The author seems to be exploring the idea that while loneliness can be a source of pain for some, for others like the narrator, it can be a state of being that is cherished. Love, on the other hand, is described as a celestial phenomenon, perhaps suggesting that it is something that is beyond human comprehension and control.

The mention of time and how humans have become trapped in the prison of hours and calendars adds another layer to the narrative. It makes one wonder if our obsession with time has taken away from our ability to experience true love and connection.

Overall, this book seems to be a thought-provoking exploration of some of the most fundamental aspects of human existence. It challenges us to think about our relationship with loneliness, love, and time, and perhaps to重新evaluate our priorities in life.

Whether or not one agrees with the author's perspective, there is no denying that this is a book that will stay with you long after you have finished reading it.

La Chingada es la madre de todos los Mexicanos. The Chingada [translations varies with sentence] is the mother of all Mexicans.

I remember when my family moved from Madrid to Mexico, I felt like a ghost moving through a compulsory changing Mexico. The streets were filled with legends that were an integral part of both tradition and history, yet around the corner, there could be a night club. Mexico was a magical land, but also a place of constant change, or perhaps a never-ending cycle of change. It seemed to me that at every stage, in every part of Mexico, and in every coffee house, there was another revolution. Maybe Carlos Fuentes was right when he said that there was the beginning of the Mexican revolution, but Mexico has not really seen the end.

Father Peñalosa, a priest, gave me this book. I was feeling detached from Mexican culture, left behind or ignored. It didn't take long for me to lose the air of a foreigner, but adapting to a culture so family-oriented was difficult. Reading Paz was like studying Mexican culture. I understood the complexity of a Mexican teenager and the fake masks we all wear. It helped me understand why it's so hard for them to adapt to the USA or other countries with different family values. Peñalosa confessed that even he had doubts. Mexican Indian values are so deeply rooted that when the Conquest of Mexico happened, the Franciscans had a hard time converting the Mexicas to Catholics. It was only until the apparition of the Virgin Mary (with differences in appearance from the ones in Europe) to an Indian that the conversion to Catholicism exponentially increased. Here lies the dilemma Paz explains with “hijos de la malinche,” “Sons of the Malinche.” The Malinche was the translator for Hernán Cortez. She opened the doors to diplomacy and the conquest of Mexico, which was seen as a betrayal. This event left a deep injury in the hearts of all Mexicans. Paz then decided that all Mexicans are sons of la chingada—the mother, like la Malinche. La chingada is not a mother of flesh and bone but a mythical figure, one of the Mexican representations of Maternity, like la ‘llorona,’ the long-suffering Mexican mother. From here, Paz moves on to explain Ruben Dario’s study of the word Chingada. It was amusing to read how a whole country could be influenced by the meaning of just one word.
If you want a deep study and self-analysis of Mexico (as Paz does), this book is for you. The subjects in the book have never lost their depth and are still relevant in modern México. If you want to understand more about Mexican American Relations or want to know Mexico better, pick up this book and read it. Read it like you're traveling, like you have a Mexican woman that you can't completely understand (and which woman can be completely understood?). A woman who carries a deep wound and a doubt, a guapango and a danzón, a silver bullet and a sword, the love for the god snake and god deer conflicting with the love for a bleeding God. The reading may be a bit heavy, but the end justifies the means. Enjoy.