The author's development of a relationship with Borges was a joy to read. The author ended up having to host Borges for his mentor and friend, but ended up developing a friendship with the legendary writer. I like how the author wrote about the changes that happened to him as his relationship developed.

I am still thinking about and unpacking my reaction to this book. As a lover of Borges and the bildungsroman form, I was often charmed by shaggy dog road trip. It is a window to a certain kind of literary life that no longer seems to exist (see Frederic Tuten's wonderful "My Young Life."

However, as I read I became increasingly mistrustful of the many lengthy impossibly witty exchanges of dialogue presented verbatim. The more I read, the less I found myself believing it.

The problem here is that the author's explanatory note, where he reveals the extent the he relies on the tools of the novelist and addresses those long runs of dialogue, characterizing them as being more in the vein of autofiction than straight memoir, appears at the end of the book. I think the publisher should consider placing this note at the beginning, so that readers understand at the outset the liberties that have been taken, and can read the work on those terms.

Still, the book had me returning to my shelves to revisit the magic of Borges, which is ultimately what one wants.

Borges and I is classified as a memoir or non-fiction. I thought it was a book of non-fiction, a memoir or travel diary of sorts. So throughout the book I felt puzzled by Borges as a character, by Jay Parini’s own depiction of himself but mostly how did so many of Borges’ stories were woven into the text. The way that the plot advanced, seemed too tidy to be true. The author explains in his foreword, this is a work of auto-fiction. Now it all adds up. I must confess, had I known I would have never picked it up. What troubles we about this über-white depiction of a trip with Borges through the Scottish Highlands is:

(1) Borges feels very much like a character, and one drawn upon stereotypes of artistic geniuses. He is quirky, extravagant and self-centered. Childlike but wise in a way that only artists are meant to be.

(2) Borges is exoticized in a typical way that Latinxs tend to be portrayed, but made “acceptable” by being racially white, of Nordic or European origins. As a Latinx, this felt familiar and very troublesome.

(3) The author proudly shrouds himself with white privilege. He has never read Borges, all authors mentioned are white, the ideal feminine beauty is very Nordic, and he goes on to say that slavery would have disappeared by itself even if the Civil War had never happened. Worse, that the reconstruction was even worse than slavery. Poison usually uttered by white people who had no idea what slavery really is or means. It made me cringe, to be honest.

(4) Though he tries to give its women characters a feminist, independent twists, they are still only sexual-props and his attitude towards them is terribly condescending. He marvels that they know history, read poems or have heard about Borges. Terrible and uncomfortable.

But don’t let me disuade you. It’s not all bad. It is a very entertaining book, though pedantic as Jay Parini is himself as a character. Borges is a very fun character. Borges’ genius and influence does shine through the book and it does serve as a good introduction to Borges’ Ficciones. Finally, the idea of the book is a creative rework of Borges’ short story “Borges and I”, published in his collection “The Maker” (“El Hacedor”). The title, The Maker derives from the Scots word “makar”, which I think it’s pretty clever given that Borges is a character and Scotland is the background. I would recommend it if you plan on reading Borges and would like a little background on his stories. But never loose sight of the truth: this is not Borges but a character by a white author, with all that cultural baggage that it brings.