'No to everything', a credible recreation of the 'tamayazo'

will be celebrated

Since we are not aware that the Community is going to commission a musical from Nacho Cano to commemorate him, and thus invent another myth to legitimize the current Aguirrismo 2.0, Guillermo Zapata's book could fulfill an inverse function: reveal how that act of turncoats on the one in which the Popular Party of Madrid petrified its hegemony, explain that funny maneuver that allowed those who had lost it at the polls to regain power and continue to exercise it.

he gets it halfway.

If in June 2003 the confusion did not provoke mobilization, the economic crisis revealed an institutional degradation that in 2012 turned into reformist indignation.

In 2013, 10 years after that national grotesque, Zapata wrote a script for a film that was never filmed.

At that time he was

of an information and opinion website.

In the wake of 15-M, two spheres of understanding of the country's reality seemed to be consolidated: the traditional media had been disconnected from the new generations and there was the digital.

Zapata moved in that second sphere.

From that place it made sense for him to rethink the

.

That script was a fiction based on real events and the protagonists had their names changed, but they were very easy to identify.

In this novel he recycles ideas from that text and it is clear what is the potential of fiction to imagine scenes that reveal spheres that the chronicle cannot access.

The key is not the factual, but the plausibility.

The dialogue between the socialists Eduardo Tamayo and María Teresa Sáez during a meal is invented, but it is credible because it is consistent with the character of the characters and with one of the possible explanations for what happened: the tensions within a party that reaches the Government , is going to hand out charges and a faction that feels displaced tightens the rope, out of ambition masquerading as coherence, to the point of sacrificing alternation.

This is the political line of the

, convert the miseries of the parties into external miseries”.

This potential of fiction also works with another meal, that of the economic explanation line: a plot linked to both construction and Caja Madrid and whose dramatization is visualized in another meal sown with misunderstandings between politicians, businessmen and journalists.

But the recreation of these and other scenes, or those of the investigative commission or the speech about the defeat of Simancas, alternates with reflection on what has happened from then to the present and at different levels, and this essayistic fondness of the author ends. to confuse the reader.

The underlying thesis is undoubtedly powerful.

The least relevant is whether there was a plot or a conspiracy.

That is the finger and the moon is something else, which is what matters.

Zapata maintains that with the

a leadership style emerged that remains.

"A relationship between the rulers and the ruled, some lines of tension between the media and power, a way of understanding the Government."

It is a way of exercising politics that is activated when power is discussed and that destroys to survive, as experienced by the ousted Pablo Casado, who is not named but appears in the last chapters.

But the literary problem of No to everything is that this thesis does not have a successful novel translation and, in the end, with this accelerated review of stellar moments of popular Madrid, from the Middle Ages to the demonstration against La Manada, the ideological interpretation does not achieve incarnate in literary action.

Look it up in your bookstore

You can follow BABELIA on

Subscribe to continue reading

Read without limits

Keep reading

I'm already a subscriber