Few public figures can hold the polemic generator medal.

Arturo Pérez-Reverte

is one of them. Say what you say, say what you think, even whatever you do attracts, as if it were a black hole, hordes and hordes that attack you mercilessly or defend you tooth and nail. That last night he agreed to go to

El Hormiguero

- it is contrary to television sets and much more to live sets - and gave an interview was an exceptional fact that could have gone well or could have gone wrong. With

Arturo Pérez-Reverte

there is no gray scale, or black or white. However,

Arturo Pérez-Reverte

gave

Pablo Motos

and gave

El Hormiguero

one of the best interviews that have been lived in the program. It does not matter if you agree with what it says, it does not matter if it generates animosity or rejection, listening to someone's free thought, whether you like it more or you like it less, is a privilege that in today's times you could almost say that It's a miracle.

The interview with

Arturo Pérez-Reverte

could have become a heads-up between

Pablo Motos

and the writer, in which he would have lost in the end. But

Pablo Motos

adapted to the character. He allowed him to speak, to expand, to let go, allowing the protagonist to be only

Arturo Pérez-Reverte

. Nothing more was needed than that, the question and the answer, but the answer, as

Arturo Pérez-Reverte

felt like answering it. Not even the ants dared to interrupt even half a second of the interview. It is that the antennas did not appear. Not even

Pablo Motos

dared to reply or interrupt the academic and writer. Yes, maybe it was because it is

Arturo Pérez-Reverte

, although the real reason is because it was worth listening to, I insist, whether you agree with him or not.

The "pa 'what" of Arturo Pérez Reverte in El Hormiguero

There was a phrase from

Arturo Pérez-Reverte

-actually, there were many- that comes close to understanding why last night's interview was one of the best interviews that have been experienced in

El Hormiguero

: "The enemy is not granted any virtue and not a fault to the friend. This is very dangerous. "

We play?

Are we able to recognize the virtues of what we consider our enemy?

Let's try.

The same

Arturo Pérez-Reverte is right

and we are incapable.

Arturo Pérez-Reverte

is the clear example of this. If you hate him, you will never be able to accept that he is worth listening to, that he is one of the few intellectuals, of the real ones, that remain in Spain. That yes, that he will drive you out of your boxes, that you will see him as a macho, as a retrograde, as a fascist ... The adjectives that he faces every time he opens his mouth. Well, last night he opened it a lot - at most -, so imagine. And it is that

Arturo Pérez-Reverte

has an advantage that he himself recognizes gives him the position he holds. "The pa 'which is the privilege that life has given me." And it is that pa 'what that allows him not to have to pay homage to anyone, other than his gaze and what he believes: "I may be wrong,But what I can't do is to make me feel good about violating my gaze. "

In fact, during last night's interview at

El Hormiguero

He left phrases for history, but there was one that repeated more than any other: "This is my opinion, this is my look, this is what I think." You don't want to indoctrinate, you just want to be able to show your gaze without feeling self-conscious. Freedom? Yes. And he says what for many are stupid, make no mistake about it, but it is his stupidity, the ones he considers, the ones he believes. Play in another league, in the league of those who do not even have to explain - although sometimes he gets horny and calls the one who touches the balls an asshole. "I keep quiet about many things. When you are 70 years old, you have written novels, you have been a reporter, you are not as vulnerable as if you are young. And aware of this I allow myself things. My Korean, Croatian reader ... He reads me and makes me free ". The for what.

Because

Arturo Pérez-Reverte

went to

El Hormiguero

to talk about his new novel, El italiano, and he spoke at length, of course, but each question in his new book was accompanied by a lecture. Already the beginning of the interview promised when Pablo Motos asked him to explain "the issue of the hangers" of the Royal Academy of the Language. Before last night's interview,

Arturo Pérez-Reverte

invited

Pablo Motos

to the RAE.

Pablo Motos

appeared without the appropriate dress code, to which

Arturo Pérez-Reverte

He had to lend him one of his, and with a sports backpack that the presenter decided to hang on one of the hangers in the RAE.

It was then that the writer strictly forbade it.

"In the Academy the coat racks are in order of seniority, when someone dies the next one moves until you reach the end, like the end of life. It is something symbolic, like a sanctuary for those who have left and are arriving" he explained.

"Isn't death overwhelming you?"

Pablo Motos

asked him then

.

"No, because I take it as part, but nothing happens, human beings have died for millions of years"

Arturo Pérez-Reverte and the patient sniper

"The Academy is an independent institution, the State cooperates with it and subsidizes it like others, but if it were not like that, it would exist the same. When Franco wins the war he orders that all the academies remove their Republican members and put Francoists. Except for the RAE. that she said no because she was independent, and then Franco took everything from her.

Rajoy

, for example, left her asphyxiated and never set foot in the Academy, she was not interested in anything. Since there is talk of the Academy, well that nobody forget it. Because, as he himself explained, the best tactic is that of the "patient sniper." If you have an enemy that you want to kill and you know that at some point you are going to kill him,

Arturo Pérez-Reverte

He is in favor of waiting, of staying asleep waiting for the best moment to shoot. "In the end everyone passes in front of the shotgun, the best thing is to wait, place the shotgun in the window and in the end everyone, everyone, ends up passing", and then it is time to shoot. But what happens when it's your enemy who shoots you first?

"When one is a certain age, enemies have many advantages. When you are young an enemy can crush you, but when you have a trajectory the enemy is something else. It is educational because it makes you pay close attention (...) Enemies are like the sea. Good enemies, not shits, make you take better care of yourself, like a sailor who is always alert. They make you pay attention. "

Arturo Pérez- Reverte

did not talk about his enemies, he did not even say if there are many or few, although it is more than obvious that he must have a long queue waiting to shoot. But he's

the patient sniper

or wants to be. He does not always follow his tactic, last night he did not follow it, last night he dealt left and right, but not a deal with anger or spasms, a deal in the style of the wise man. Plato said that the wise speak because they have something to say and that fools speak because they have to say something.

"The old, I am old, they are not contemporary. If an old man is contemporary, he plays the clown. The old man cannot adapt to a world that is no longer his own, but he has an advantage, experience, a look. Before the old man they put in the center and asked him, 'how did you do?', and the young learned from the old, but now turn

away the old and are depriving young people of the experience of the old look.

you can not ask me to I started tap dancing, but you can ask me what I can give

. But we tend to push aside. Old people are useful not because they are modernized or clown but because of their gaze. "

It may seem that during the interview

Arturo Pérez-Reverte

lost the thread and went through the Cerros de Úbeda, but it was rather that

Arturo Pérez-Reverte

spun very fine, too fine, just so that I could follow him.

It was the gaze, it was the enemy and it was also the new religions, it was also social networks, "humanitarianism", "repression".

"In social networks I have the feeling that they tell us that using the mind is bad,"

Pablo Motos

asked him

, always obsessed with social networks and with the slavery that they suppose for him.

Arturo Pérez-Reverte's

response

was probably one of the best descriptions that have been made of what social networks are and what they are creating: "The problem is much more serious than that. Now, with the gods, religion and Christianity dead, we have a new religion, we have changed humanism for humanitarianism, we are philanthropists, we want the world to be a world full of birds, flowers and blue clouds, it is our new religion. As every religion has apostles and inquisitors, the networks are where the inquisitors lurk and they dictate norms, if you do not comply, you are a heretic and you must be exterminated and annihilated, especially in Spain. The only resource for that is culture and education, but the repression that we are already experiencing in education is changing the panorama of everything " .

But as the end of his answer because it is a latent reality to which not to look: "(...) the only resource for this is the culture to know that a tweet is not the gospel. That is achieved at home with education and at school. But how they are depriving us of those things ... The child who raises his hand, who protests, who complains is questioned. He

is leaving people innocently illiterate

. "

Illiteracy, the scourge that marks and remarks a philosopher named

Arturo Pérez-Reverte

: "If now we have to be philanthropists, it does not matter if we are illiterate but we will import our philanthropy. If a man beats his wife in Afghanistan, he does it for historical reasons and We believe that we can convince the Afghan not to hit his wife by telling her that he is a macho. Why the rejection of the West? ... because exporting that philanthropy is impossible, I realized in the Gulf War. We have created one religion made of virtues that we believe is exportable. We are not going to make the Arabs become democrats, if they do not want to change it from within, we are not going to change it from the outside. "

Arturo Pérez-Reverte and Sánchez: "He's bad, he's cool, he's arrogant"

But what happens when the philosopher stops being a philosopher and becomes the patient sniper? Very simple, with

Arturo Pérez-Reverte

no one is saved, neither forgiveness nor mercy. First, inclusive language and therefore Minister Irene Montero.

Arturo Pérez-Reverte

has faced inclusive language with all the weapons he has available. Not feminists, not ministers, not anything. As a good generator of controversy, his opinion on inclusive language has never left anyone indifferent. However, last night in

El Hormiguero

, his explanation was not an attack on those who defend him - except for ministers - but the reason why right now he cannot agree with the implementation of that language.

"Language is based on many macho guidelines and it must change, in fact it changes, but it cannot be violent, that it be changed in four days via decree. I work with language and I need the language to be clean, practical (...) The word 'putad'a is a word that the group says is denigrating and that they want to remove from the dictionary. We cannot because it has been used by

Cela

and other great authors, and if someone does not know what it means they have to have a place to find its definition. That is what the

Academy does

. That is why no serious feminist falls for those things. The illiterate fall. " A shot.

"What do you think of the casting of politicians that we have now?", Once entered the mud that the rhythm does not stop. The response of Arturo Pérez-Reverte is surprising. It is surprising because the one you could least imagine is the one who leaves the best. From

Sánchez

? A "killer". Who? ¿

Sánchez

and

Pérez-Reverte

? Both. "What do you want me to tell you. To

Sánchez

I defined it three years ago.

I said he's brave and unscrupulous.

He is a gunman who will kill those he has not killed.

Even the King.

He has killed everyone, and the King not because he needs it.

For a novel he is a very interesting character.

He is arrogant, he is bad, he is cool ... If he were to marry my daughter I would not be so amused, but for a novel it is magnificent. "Little can be added. That of the virtues of the enemy, that of the patient sniper.

And Married?

"If you have to vote for

Casado,

no one will vote for

Casado

. But when

Sánchez

screws up, everyone will vote against

Sánchez

and there he will be married. The patient sniper."

Gentle?

Maybe not so much.

¿

Pablo Iglesias

?

And here comes the surprise.

"

Pablo Iglesias

, I don't like him, but he's a cultured guy, who has read, who has an intellectual height, he was a guy who was worth it. On the left of those there are none and on the right I won't tell you."

Now how do you stay?

Was

Arturo Pérez-Reverte

surprised

at

El Hormiguero

?

Like

Arturo Pérez-Reverte

, no.

Neither as a sniper.

Today hosts like bread and flattery like suns will fall on him, more of the first than of the second, but no one can deny that he says what he says and whatever you think his arguments are worth listening to, he is worth listening to.

Maybe that's your rifle.

According to the criteria of The Trust Project

Know more

  • The Hormiguero

  • Arturo Pérez-Reverte

  • Pablo Motos

Digital Tribune A Volcanic Monday

TelecincoThe last temptation |

Andrea, Fani and the cheating business

Tamara's revenge: charge against MasterChef and leave him at the feet of the horses

See links of interest

  • La Palma volcano

  • Last News

  • Home THE WORLD TODAY

  • Work calendar

  • Fact checking

  • How to do

  • FC Bayern Munich - Barça

  • Semifinal, live: Belgium - France