"So much for the myth of tolerance and goodwill among divorced couples. By the time the conversation ended, I was half in the mood to hop on the next train to Bronxville and strangle Edith with my bare hands. The other half of me wanted to spit. But give the old girl her due. Her wrath had been so violent, so blistering in its denunciations and contempt, it actually helped me come to a decision. I would never call her again. Never again for the rest of my life. Under no circumstances, not ever again. The divorce had disentangled us in the eyes of the law, dissolving the marriage that had held us together for so many years, but even so, there was one thing we still had in common, and because we would go on being Rachel's parents for as long as we lived, I had assumed the connection would prevent us from sinking into a state of permanent animosity. But no longer. That telephone call was the end, and from now on Edith would be no more than a name to me - five tiny letters that signified a person who had ceased to exist."
in The Brooklyn Follies, Paul Auster
in The Brooklyn Follies, Paul Auster
aqui está um bom exemplo de divórcio, este não ficava mal na fotografia nem sequer desiludia quem tem as suas firmes ideias sobre o divórcio. estas resumem-se a uma lista de vinte pontos indentada e numerada, de modo a que não falhe nenhuma característica das imprescindíveis a caracterizar um divórcio. é que sendo um assunto sério, convém sempre conferir que o divórcio alheio está de acordo com as regras próprias. alargando isto à sociedade em geral, ficaremos todos mais limpos de dúvidas e confusões. a bíblia chegou a desempenhar este papel importantíssimo, mas o comprimento das barbas e a falta de banho não convencem os leitores de hoje. além do mais é um livro enorme, muito para além das quinhentas páginas e sinceramente há pouca pachorra.
No comments:
Post a Comment