Borges and I

“Borges and I” defies easy genre categorization, blending elements of a short story, essay, and poetry. At its core, it is a piece of prose as it adheres to the conventions of written language that closely resemble everyday speech rather than the structured patterns of poetry. However, Borges incorporates poetic elements commonly found in prose poetry. Prose poetry combines the literary techniques of poetry with the formatting of prose, devoid of traditional line breaks or meter. In this way, “Borges and I” weaves together vivid imagery, symbolism, metaphor, and more, akin to a poetic composition. For instance, when Borges describes “the laborious strumming of a guitar” (Paragraph 2), he employs imagery to convey how he perceives his inner identity, a stark departure from his written works and instead found in the realm of experiences like music.

Borges also classifies the story as a parable, a brief narrative featuring human characters that conveys a broader message about human behavior or the human condition. Traditionally, parables have been a prominent form of storytelling in the Western world, most notably in the Christian Bible, where they serve as vehicles for spiritual teachings. They often possess enigmatic qualities, presenting mysteries for contemplation. “Borges and I“ ponders the enigma of internal and external selves in conflict. Instead of providing definitive answers, Borges leaves readers with the question of which identity authored the piece, inviting contemplation.

“Borges and I“ also embodies the essence of a lyric essay, though it predates the widespread use of the term. Lyric essays merge elements of lyric poetry, which convey personal sentiments, with those of essays. Unlike traditional essays with a central thesis, lyric essays prioritize evocation over argumentation, using association, connotation, and imagery to delve into a subject. They often blend narrative, memoir, and allusion to evoke a universal subtext explored through fragments. Within this essay, Borges reflects on a deeply personal struggle—the reconciliation of two facets of his identity. The passages where Borges professes his affinity for “hourglasses” and the “taste of coffee” employ poetic language, enhancing the exploration of the text’s central theme. When he writes, “I tried to free myself from him” and embarked on a journey “from the mythologies of the suburbs to the games with time and infinity” (Paragraph 2), he uses imagery and metaphor to convey his quest to liberate himself from his public persona. Despite the sense of control slipping away, the language emphasizes the duality of identity, the story’s central theme.

The essay explores the distinction between the author’s two: “Borges” and “I.” “Borges” represents the external, public persona associated with the author’s work and the way others perceive him, while “I” symbolizes the private, personal individual. He designates “Borges” as “the other one” to whom things happen (Paragraph 1), while “I“ represents the doer of actions, the one who walks the streets of Buenos Aires. The essence of “I“ defies containment within a name or a written description.

The narrator aligns with the pronoun “I” to represent the innermost self, the personal core of his identity. This “I” is intimately connected to the narrator’s preferences, such as his fondness for coffee, maps, and literature. It embodies the warmth and depth of personal experiences and emotions. In contrast, “Borges’ is depicted as a detached and impersonal entity, often reduced to a mere entry in a biographical dictionary or a name associated with books and writings. This stark contrast sheds light on how the author, Borges, perceives himself. The “I” symbolizes the author’s inner self, a nuanced and authentic representation of his identity. This inner self has evolved over a lifetime of experiences, shaped by preferences and encounters with literature, introducing the theme of The Impact of Creativity on Identity. “Borges,” on the other hand, shares these preferences but exists more superficially, lacking the vitality and depth of the “I.” While outsiders may discern his likes and dislikes, something intrinsic is lost in translation. Consequently, “Borges” is reduced to an actor, highlighting the alienating nature of celebrity.

While readers may believe they know Borges through his writing, this portrayal is only a fraction of his complete self. Borges, as the narrator, acknowledges that his true self is elusive and transient, destined to fade from the world. In contrast, the “Borges” persona will endure, sustained by the author’s writings and the works of others about him. However, this persona is a magnified and falsified representation. In this, Borges creates the theme of The Relationship Between Authors and Readers, suggesting that an author’s public image is largely shaped by how readers interpret their work. As such, readers define and construct an author’s identity. Borges also references the philosophy of 17th-century thinker Spinoza, who suggested that all entities seek persistence in their existence. The author thus raises the question of whether he truly exists as an individual or if he merely embodies the concept of being someone. He ponders if his identity is more present in the writings of those who influenced and shaped him than in his own works, pointing to literature’s power to not only create characters but shape living identities.

The dilemma lies in distinguishing the cause from the effect in the relationship between these two personas. Borges grapples with the paradox that his creations inevitably transition from his inner self (the “I”) to the external persona (“Borges”). This paradox culminates in the story’s concluding line, where Borges questions which of the two personas authored “Borges and I” itself. As such, the essay engages in existential contemplation as Borges grapples with the nature of his existence and the consequences of his literary career.