Finally, Justice has not blocked the distribution of the book ‘El Hatement’, by Luisgé Martín, about José Bretón, the Parricida de Córdoba, but now it is certain booksellers who decide not to sell the work on their shelves. As certain pharmaceuticals with the pill of the day after, they appeal to their conscience to refuse to sell the title. For what such controversy serves (literature is full of bad) is to turn the noise into the best promotion for a book that, due to its quality (pulling insubstantial) and interest (none, because it says nothing that we have not read on the case in hundreds of articles and reports and, the moral disquisitions of the author, bare I could or dream. It seems understandable that Ruth Ortiz, the mother of the two little killed, wishes to prevent her publication, and I understand that she tries by all means. But I’m glad he hasn’t succeeded. And that does not mean, apologize for the ‘goes byelantismo’ (how I detest them), which does not feel commiseration of their pain. It is only that I do not believe that his status as a victim gives him legitimacy to limit the freedom of expression and creation of anyone, not even a criminal or an unconstitution. It seems understandable that Ruth Ortiz wishes to prevent its publication. But I am glad that I have not achieved it in the striking that most of those who hit the chest, hurt and affront, have not read the book and, to read it, they would not find anything that they have not already scrutinized until the satiety in articles, reports and news, in gatherings and various podcasts, I find it very interesting the fervor with which the furious mass is delivered to the furious Name of what fair cause is. And the dialectical pirouettes used to justify that in this case, although in others it does not. That there are duels and duels. And, total, freedom of expression is not so much and, the creation, even less. I believe that it is precisely where it lies the interesting of the subject, in creation: that this is not an essay or a report, nor a rigorous scientific exercise of study of the monster’s mind or approach to pure evil. It is literature and its author is free to focus as you want, without the slightest obligation to be empathetic, nor equanimous, nor pious. That is not his role. I had no obligation to talk to who would not estimate timely. Another issue is the explanation (pilgrim) that decides to give us (or give), and another also the minimal courtesy (which also unavoidable) of the publisher for the mother. But the absence of education, decorum and honesty is not punishable. In any case, reproachable. And the pain of a mother cannot be, in a rule of law, that which resides where everyone’s freedoms and rights end. Because it is about that, after all: the right of someone to write a book and the right of the rest to decide whether or not to read it or justify the relevance of prior censorship placing the limit in the pain of a mother is, perhaps, the most perverse way to instrumentalize the pain of others to admit that the limit to the freedom would put it, mandatory, where each of us is my mind. I, really, would have preferred that the mediocre text of someone who has approached a murderer closer, one without any attractiveness or magnetism, would have seen them with the public with a gentle body, and not surrounded by the Aura embellish Aura of curse that has given him the controversy. Be able to criticize it and not have to defend it.
#Rebeca #Argudo #Criticize #defend
