|
Introductory
Note to the Reader Time is one of those abstract concepts
that has bewildered me ever since I became conscious of what it means, or
what I have been taught to believe it means, within my own cultural
understanding of existence. We measure it, organize our lives around it, and
constantly complain about not having enough of it. Yet, despite its
familiarity, I have often felt trapped both by time and within it. Like
Bernardo Soares in fragment 350 of Fernando Pessoa's Livro do Desassossego,
I find myself wondering whether we truly understand something that governs
practically every aspect of our existence. Whenever I think about Einstein's
theories of relativity and the curvature of spacetime, my bewilderment only
deepens. If time is not as absolute as we ordinarily imagine, what does that
mean for our brief existence? And what, if anything, awaits us when our
allotted lifespan comes to an end? Would someone like Carl Sagan have simply
reminded me that our consciousness ends with our biological existence, that
death is the final chapter, and that there is nothing beyond it? Perhaps. Yet
I cannot help wondering whether our scientific understanding of time can ever
fully satisfy our existential questions about it. This is why Soares's reflections
resonated so profoundly with me. His uncertainty felt strangely familiar,
almost as though he were articulating questions I had carried silently for
years. Reading this fragment did not provide answers. Instead, it reminded me
that literature sometimes accomplishes something equally valuable: it gives
language to the uncertainties we have never quite managed to express. This
essay emerges from that recognition, from my encounter with Soares's temporal
disquiet, and from my own persistent inability to reconcile the time we
measure with the time we experience. Jonathan
Acuña Solano |
Living in the Interval: Time, Consciousness, and the Restless Self in Bernardo Soares
|
|
Abstract This
essay examines the philosophical and existential dimensions of time in
fragment 350 of Fernando Pessoa's Livro do Desassossego, narrated through his
semi-heteronym Bernardo Soares. Moving beyond the conventional understanding
of time as chronological progression, the analysis explores how Soares
questions the reliability of clocks, emotions, dreams, and memory as
instruments for comprehending temporal experience. Drawing on Henri Bergson's
concept of duration, Martin Heidegger's existential temporality, Paul
Ricoeur's relationship between time and narrative, and Walter Benjamin's
understanding of historical consciousness, the essay argues that Soares
experiences time as an unstable construction of consciousness rather than a
measurable continuum. Particular attention is given to the impossibility of
fully inhabiting the present, the reconstruction of the past through memory,
and the paradoxical function of writing as an attempt to preserve experiences
already lost to time. Ultimately, the essay proposes that desassossego is not
merely an emotional condition but a fundamentally temporal predicament: the
awareness of existence continually slipping away even as it is being lived.
Through Soares's reflections, Pessoa invites readers to reconsider the
relationship between time, identity, mortality, and the unsettling experience
of being conscious of one's own existence. |
Keywords: Fernando Pessoa, Bernardo Soares,
Time, Consciousness, Memory, Temporality, Existentialism, Desassossego |
|
|
|
Resumen Este ensayo examina las dimensiones filosóficas y
existenciales del tiempo en el fragmento 350 del Livro do Desassossego, de
Fernando Pessoa, narrado por su semiheterónimo Bernardo Soares. Más allá de la concepción convencional del tiempo como una progresión
cronológica, el análisis explora cómo Soares cuestiona la fiabilidad de los
relojes, las emociones, los sueños y la memoria como instrumentos para
comprender la experiencia temporal. A partir del concepto de duración de
Henri Bergson, la temporalidad existencial de Martin Heidegger, la relación
entre tiempo y narración de Paul Ricoeur y la concepción de la conciencia
histórica de Walter Benjamin, se sostiene que Soares experimenta el tiempo
como una construcción inestable de la conciencia, más que como una sucesión
mensurable. Se presta especial atención a la imposibilidad de habitar
plenamente el presente, la reconstrucción del pasado mediante la memoria y la
función paradójica de la escritura como intento de preservar experiencias que
el tiempo ya ha transformado en recuerdos. Finalmente, el ensayo propone que
el desassossego no constituye únicamente una condición emocional, sino
también un conflicto esencialmente temporal: la conciencia de que la
existencia se desvanece incluso mientras la vivimos. A través de las
reflexiones de Soares, Pessoa invita al lector a reconsiderar las relaciones
entre el tiempo, la identidad, la mortalidad y la inquietante experiencia de
ser consciente de la propia existencia. |
|
|
|
|
Resumo Este ensaio examina as dimensões filosóficas e
existenciais do tempo no fragmento 350 do Livro do Desassossego, de Fernando
Pessoa, narrado pelo seu semi-heterónimo Bernardo Soares. Ultrapassando a
compreensão convencional do tempo como uma progressão cronológica, a análise
explora a forma como Soares questiona a fiabilidade dos relógios, das
emoções, dos sonhos e da memória enquanto instrumentos para compreender a
experiência temporal. A partir do conceito de duração de Henri Bergson, da
temporalidade existencial de Martin Heidegger, da relação entre tempo e
narrativa de Paul Ricoeur e da conceção da consciência histórica de Walter
Benjamin, o ensaio argumenta que Soares experiencia o tempo como uma
construção instável da consciência, e não como uma sucessão mensurável. Dá-se
especial atenção à impossibilidade de habitar plenamente o presente, à
reconstrução do passado através da memória e à função paradoxal da escrita
enquanto tentativa de preservar experiências que o tempo já transformou em
recordações. Por fim, propõe-se que o desassossego não constitui apenas uma
condição emocional, mas também um conflito fundamentalmente temporal: a
consciência de que a existência se desvanece enquanto está a ser vivida.
Através das reflexões de Soares, Pessoa convida o leitor a reconsiderar as
relações entre o tempo, a identidade, a mortalidade e a inquietante
experiência de estar consciente da própria existência. |
|
|
|
|
The
mystery of time |
|
The
fragility of existence |
|
|
|
“What
then is time? If no one asks me, I know what it is. If I wish to explain it
to him who asks, I do not know.” — Saint
Augustine, Confessions, Book XI, Chapter 14 (trans. J. G. Pilkington, 1886) |
|
“Our
little life — William
Shakespeare, The Tempest, Act IV, Scene 1 |
|
“Não sei o que é o tempo.”
There
are sentences that seem to open a philosophical argument, and there are others
that quietly dismantle the possibility of having one. Bernardo Soares's opening declaration in fragment 350
of O Livro do Desassossego by
Fernando Pessoa (n.d.) belongs to the second category: “Não sei o que é o
tempo.” It sounds deceptively simple. After all, time
is one of the most familiar structures of human existence. We measure it with
clocks, calendars, anniversaries, schedules, birthdays, historical periods, and
memories. We know when something happened, how long it lasted, and whether it
belongs to yesterday, today, or tomorrow. Yet Soares's statement immediately
destabilizes this apparently secure knowledge. He does not ask how time works.
He does not ask whether time is objective or subjective. He begins from a much
more unsettling position: he does not know what time is at all.
This
uncertainty is characteristic of Soares's consciousness. Throughout O Livro
do Desassossego, experience rarely arrives as something stable that can
simply be lived and recorded. Experience becomes thought, thought becomes
self-observation, self-observation becomes doubt, and doubt becomes writing. In
fragment 350, this process is applied to time itself. The result is not a
conventional philosophical theory of temporality but something perhaps more
revealing: a phenomenology of temporal disquiet. Soares discovers that every
ordinary way of measuring time fails to correspond adequately to the way time
is actually experienced. The clock is false; emotion is false; dreams are
false; memory rearranges the past into “níveis e planos absurdos.”
What
emerges from the fragment is therefore a radical proposition: time does not
exist for Soares as a neutral sequence through which consciousness travels.
Time exists as something consciousness continually reconstructs. The past,
present, and future do not occupy three separate compartments. They penetrate
one another. Memory can make childhood more immediate than yesterday; dreams
can accelerate or prolong experience; anticipation can give reality to
something that has not yet occurred. The present itself becomes difficult to
locate. Bernardo Soares, consequently, does not simply have a problem with
time. He has a problem with the present.
The clock and the fiction of
measurable time
The
first target of Soares's meditation is perhaps the most obvious representation
of time: the clock. He writes the
following: “A do relógio sei que é falsa: divide o tempo espacialmente, por
fora.” The sentence is remarkable because of the verb divide.
The clock does not merely measure time; it divides it. And, more
importantly, it divides it spatially. Minutes and hours become units
that can be visualized almost as objects arranged beside one another.
This
is precisely the problem that Henri Bergson (1910) identified in his
distinction between measurable time and durée. Bergson (1910) argued
that consciousness does not experience time as a collection of discrete units.
Lived duration is qualitative rather than quantitative: conscious states
interpenetrate rather than simply succeeding one another.
Bernardo
Soares seems to intuitively arrive at a similar distinction, although his
conclusion is more pessimistic. The clock gives us an external order, but it
cannot tell us what an hour feels like. Ten minutes spent waiting can
become enormous; an entire afternoon can disappear almost without leaving a
trace. The clock says that two hours are equivalent. Consciousness knows that
they are not.
The
problem, therefore, is not that clocks are inaccurate. The clock is accurate
precisely about the wrong thing. It accurately measures standardized
intervals, but those intervals do not necessarily correspond to lived
experience. This distinction allows us to reconsider one of the
fundamental tensions in Desassossego. Soares lives in a world governed
by external time: work has schedules, commerce has hours, streets have
routines, days begin and end. As a bookkeeper, he inhabits a world of
measurable units, accounts, transactions, and regularity. Yet his inner existence
continually escapes those measurements.
The
irony is exquisite. The man who works with numbers discovers that the most
fundamental number cannot measure his existence.
When emotion fails too
But
Soares does not simply replace clock time with psychological time. He immediately distrusts that alternative as well: “A
das emoções sei também que é falsa: divide, não o tempo, mas a sensação dele.”
And this is an important
qualification. One might initially imagine that if chronological time is
inadequate, subjective time will solve the problem. Perhaps time is simply
whatever the individual feels it to be. But Bernardo Soares refuses even this
consolation.
Emotion
does not reveal time. Emotion reveals only our sensation of time. The
distinction is subtle but crucial. There is perhaps a temporal reality, but
every attempt to grasp it is mediated by consciousness. We never encounter
"pure time." We encounter waiting, boredom, nostalgia, anxiety,
pleasure, anticipation, fatigue, memory, and desire.
In
other words: We do not experience time directly. We experience ourselves
being affected by time, or by what we take to be time. This makes Soares's
meditation surprisingly close to phenomenology. The question is no longer “What
is time objectively?” but “How does temporality appear within
consciousness?” And the answer is unsettling: it never appears in a stable
form.
Dreams: the collapse of
temporal measurement
The third temporal system Bernardo Soares examines is
even more fascinating: “A dos sonhos é errada; neles roçamos o tempo, uma
vez prolongadamente, outra vez depressa...” Based on this idea, it
can be stated that dreams expose the instability of chronological time because
they can compress, expand, distort, and rearrange experience. That is, a dream
lasting seconds may seem to contain hours. A brief dream sequence may feel like
an entire biography. Conversely, hours of sleep can disappear into what seems
like an instant.
The
dream therefore provides Soares with evidence that temporal experience cannot
be reduced to chronological succession. But the readers must notice his
language: in dreams, “roçamos o tempo”. This can be translated into
English as “We merely brush against time.” And that expression deserves
attention. Soares does not say that in dreams we finally understand time. Quite
the opposite. The dream brings us close to something whose nature remains
inaccessible. We touch the mystery without possessing it.
This
may be the fundamental structure of the entire fragment: approach without
possession. The clock gives us measurement but not time itself. Then
emotion gives us sensation but not time itself. On the other hand, dreams bring
us close to time but do not reveal its nature. Therefore, memory reorganizes it
but cannot explain it. And the more Soares thinks about time, the less certain
he becomes that he has actually encountered it. And this is where philosophy
becomes indistinguishable from desassossego (being disquiet).
Time as a frame
The most audacious proposition in the fragment arrives
next: “Julgo, às vezes, que tudo é falso, e que o tempo não é mais do que
uma moldura para enquadrar o que lhe é estranho.” Here
Bernardo Soares reverses the usual relationship between time and experience. We
normally imagine experience as occurring inside time. Soares proposes
that perhaps time is simply a frame imposed upon something that is
fundamentally foreign to it.
The
metaphor of the frame is extraordinary because it transforms time from a
container into an interpretive device. A painting exists independently of its
frame, yet the frame determines how we encounter it. Similarly, perhaps
experience exists independently of the chronological structure we impose upon
it. Time would therefore be less like a river carrying us forward and more like
the border of a picture.
But
what is outside the frame? Soares does not answer. And perhaps the inability to
answer is precisely the point. There is something about existence that resists
temporal categorization. We experience events as happening before or after
other events, but consciousness continually disrupts these distinctions. The
past can become present. The future can become emotionally real before it
occurs. A childhood memory can suddenly become more vivid than the room in
which we currently sit. The frame remains, but what it frames refuses to stay
still.
The absurd architecture of memory
This becomes particularly visible when Bernardo Soares
turns toward memory: “Na recordação, que tenho da minha vida passada, os
tempos estão dispostos em níveis e planos absurdos...” This
may be the most important sentence in the fragment since memory does not
preserve the past as a chronological archive. It reorganizes it spatially, and
there are “níveis e planos”. Some memories are near. Others are distant.
Some are vivid. Others have almost disappeared. Some moments from childhood can
feel strangely remote, while another event from decades later may seem
extraordinarily close.
Soares
gives us a fascinating paradox: Chronological distance and psychological
distance are not the same thing. The past is not a line; it is a landscape.
And the self does not move through this landscape according to the calendar.
And this is where Bergson becomes particularly useful. For Bergson (1910),
duration involves the persistence of the past within the present: each moment
of consciousness contains, in some form, what came before. Memory is not merely
a warehouse in which old experiences are stored; the past continues to shape
the present.
Soares's
formulation is more radical because his memories appear almost architecturally
disordered. The past does not simply accumulate behind him. It is continually
rearranged according to the intensity with which consciousness encounters it. The
child is therefore not necessarily "farther away" than the adult. Sometimes
the child is closer. Sometimes fifteen years ago is more immediate than
yesterday. And suddenly the chronology of the calendar becomes almost
irrelevant.
The impossible present
This
leads us to what I consider the central philosophical insight of fragment 350. If
the past can become present, and the future can be anticipated before it
arrives, where exactly is the present? Bernardo Soares never formulates
the question quite this way, but the entire fragment seems to circle around it.
Heidegger's
(1962) analysis of temporality helps illuminate what is happening here. Rather
than treating past, present, and future as three independent points arranged
along a line, Heidegger understands human temporality as an interconnected
structure in which what-has-been, what-is-present, and what-is-possible
continually belong together.
This
is remarkably close to the strange architecture of Soares's consciousness. The
present is never pure present; it contains memory, expectation, possibility,
and interpretation. And, perhaps most importantly for Soares, it contains self-consciousness.
Bernardo is telling us that we do not simply experience the present; we know
that we are experiencing the present. And the moment we turn toward our
experience and say, we are experiencing this now, the "now"
has already begun to recede.
This
creates an existential paradox: The more intensely Soares tries to become
conscious of the present, the more the present escapes him. This may
explain why contemplation in O Livro do Desassossego so frequently
produces dissatisfaction rather than peace. Reflection does not stabilize
existence; it destabilizes it.
The self that cannot remain in
one time
The
temporal problem is therefore also an identity problem. Who is Bernardo Soares?
Is he the person who experienced the past? The person who remembers it? The
person who is remembering it now? The person who imagines his future? Or the
person who writes all of this down? The answer may be: all of them,
simultaneously.
This
is why Soares's consciousness often feels fragmented without necessarily being
schizophrenic or incoherent. His fragmentation is temporal before it is
psychological. He is inhabited by different temporal versions of himself. That
is, the child exists inside the adult. The remembered person exists inside the
remembering person. The imagined future self exists inside the present self. The
writer exists inside the experience being written. Consequently, identity
becomes a temporal multiplicity.
This
is particularly compatible with Ricoeur's account of the relationship between
time and narrative. In Time and Narrative, Ricoeur (1990) argues that
narrative and temporal experience are intimately connected: narrative gives
temporal experience a form, while temporal experience gives narrative its
fundamental problem. Soares reverses this relationship in a particularly
Pessoa-like way. He does not narrate his life in order to create a coherent
identity; he writes because his identity cannot become coherent. The
fragments are not failures to construct a biography. They are the form
appropriate to a self that experiences itself as temporally fragmented.
Writing against disappearance
And
here the meditation on time leads inevitably to the act of writing. And it is
here where the readers find Bernardo Soares writing because everything passes. Yet
writing itself cannot stop time. And this produces one of the deepest paradoxes
in Desassossego: Writing preserves an experience by transforming it
into language, but the transformation itself proves that the original
experience has already disappeared.
From a
metaphorically paleontological standpoint, the written sentence becomes a kind
of temporal fossil. The experience is gone. The consciousness that experienced
it is already different. But the sentence remains. This is the reason why the
diary form is so important. A diary appears to record the present, but the act
of writing always occurs a fraction of a second after experience. By the time
an experience becomes language, it has already entered memory.
Thus:
experience
→ consciousness → reflection → language
And at
every stage, time has passed. The diary therefore becomes an impossible attempt
to write the present. It is always writing the present that has just become
the past. And this may explain why the Livro feels so strangely
suspended. It is neither autobiography nor conventional diary, neither novel
nor philosophical treatise. It inhabits an interval. And interval may be
the key word to describe Bernardo’s diary.
Soares and the Benjaminian
instant
Walter
Benjamin (2006) offers another productive way of thinking about this problem. Benjamin
(2006) challenges the idea of history as a homogeneous continuum and develops
the notion of Jetztzeit, or "now-time": a charged present in
which past and present can suddenly encounter one another. His historical
thought resists the idea of empty, homogeneous chronological progression.
Bernardo
Soares's experience is not historical in Benjamin's political sense, but there
is an illuminating structural affinity. For Soares, the past is not dead simply
because it happened earlier. Based on his written account, one concludes that a
memory can suddenly erupt into the present. A childhood scene can become
contemporary. A forgotten emotion can return with unexpected intensity.
Time
is therefore capable of folding. The past does not always remain behind
us. Sometimes it arrives. And when it arrives, chronological distance
collapses. This gives us another way of understanding Soares's
"absurd" temporal planes. Memory creates moments in which the past
becomes contemporaneous with the present. The event is no longer merely
something that was. It becomes something that is again, although
never in exactly the same way. This is why memory in Soares is not simple
recovery. It is reappearance.
“Que coisa é esta que nos mede sem medida?”
Near the end of the fragment, Soares asks perhaps his
most haunting question: “Que coisa, porém, é esta que nos mede sem medida e
nos mata sem ser?” As it can be seen, the contradiction is
devastating. Time measures us but cannot itself be measured. It kills us but
apparently does not possess existence in the ordinary sense. It governs our
lives without presenting itself as an object. This gives time an almost metaphysical personality. And
Soares explicitly moves toward that possibility: “...é nestes momentos, em
que nem sei se o tempo existe, que o sinto como uma pessoa...”
This
is perhaps where the fragment ceases to be merely philosophical and becomes
profoundly poetic. Based on Bernardo Soares’s cavillations time becomes a
person. For him the abstraction becomes a presence; the invisible becomes
intimate. And what does Soares want to do when time becomes almost personified?
He wants to sleep: “...tenho vontade de dormir.” Therefore, the ending is perfect because it
refuses philosophical closure. Soares does not solve time. He becomes exhausted
by thinking about it. And his response to metaphysical uncertainty is not
enlightenment but withdrawal. Sleep becomes an escape from the demand to locate
oneself temporally. Perhaps sleep is the only state in which Soares does not
have to answer the question: Where am I in time?
Desassossego as temporal
condition
At
this point, desassossego (disquiet) itself can be reinterpreted. We
usually understand disquiet as an emotional or psychological condition. But
fragment 350 suggests something more fundamental. Desassossego may be what
happens when consciousness cannot remain inside chronological time. Soares
cannot simply inhabit the present because the present is constantly invaded by
what has been and what might be. Consequently, he cannot trust the past because
memory rearranges it. He cannot trust the present because consciousness
immediately transforms it into reflection. He cannot trust the future because
anticipation can create experiences before they happen. He cannot even trust
dreams because dreams expose the elasticity of temporal experience. And so he
occupies an interval between temporal categories.
Bernardo
Soares is always slightly elsewhere. This may be the deepest reason for the
peculiar sadness of O Livro do Desassossego. Soares does not merely
suffer because life passes. He suffers because he is conscious of life
passing while it is still happening. And for him, that is a much more
painful condition; a person can lose the past without thinking continuously
about having lost it. But Soares cannot.
A
person can anticipate the future without simultaneously observing the act of
anticipation. Soares cannot. A person can live a moment without asking what it
means to be living it. But once again, Soares cannot. His consciousness is
always one step removed from experience. And that distance is his desassossego.
The present that cannot stay
Perhaps,
then, we should return to the opening sentence: “Não sei o que é o tempo.”
It is tempting to interpret this as ignorance. As a reader, I would read it
differently. From my personal stance, it is an admission that the ordinary
concept of time is inadequate to describe lived existence. Soares knows that
clocks exist. He also knows that emotions alter our perception, that dreams
distort duration, that memory rearranges the past, and that consciousness
complicates every temporal boundary.
What Bernardo
Soares does not know, and perhaps what cannot be known, is the thing itself
that lies behind all these experiences. And perhaps that unknowability is
precisely what makes time so powerful. Time is not simply the medium through
which we live. It is the condition that prevents us from ever possessing the
life we are living. By the time we recognize an experience as experience, it
has already become memory. By the time we imagine the future, we have already
brought it into the present as possibility. And by the time we describe the
present, we have already lost it.
The
present therefore becomes an impossible home. We are always arriving and are
always leaving. We are always remembering what has just happened and
anticipating what has not yet happened. We live in the interval. And Bernardo
Soares inhabits that interval with an almost unbearable lucidity.
Conclusion: Time as the
architecture of desassossego
Fragment
350 ultimately transforms a familiar philosophical question, What is time?, into
a question about consciousness itself. The clock gives us measurable time but
not lived time. Emotion gives us sensations of duration, but not time itself.
Dreams reveal the elasticity of temporality without explaining it. Memory
rearranges chronology into subjective landscapes. Consciousness refuses to
remain confined to the present. And writing attempts, unsuccessfully but
persistently, to preserve what consciousness knows it cannot retain.
Bergson
(1910) helps us understand why lived duration cannot be reduced to spatialized
units. Heidegger (1962) helps us see why human existence is constituted through
an interrelation of past, present, and future rather than a simple succession
of moments. Ricoeur (1990) helps us recognize the intimate relationship between
temporal experience and the linguistic forms through which we attempt to
configure it. Benjamin (2006), finally, offers a vocabulary for understanding
how the past can suddenly become present rather than remaining safely behind
us.
But
Soares ultimately exceeds all of them, not because he develops a more
systematic philosophy, but because he refuses the consolation of system. He
ends where he began: uncertain. Uncertainty in the mind of Bernardo helps him
comprehend that time cannot be adequately measured and that it cannot be
securely located. He also comes to realize that time cannot be fully remembered
nor possessed. It cannot even be established with certainty as something that
exists independently of the consciousness that experiences it. And yet it
governs everything.
Bernardo
jots down a maxim that governs us all; time “nos mede sem medida”. It
measures us without itself being measurable. Perhaps this is the deepest
tragedy of Soares's temporal consciousness: we become ourselves only through
time, but time is precisely what prevents us from ever remaining the same self.
And what we witness through time is that a child disappears into an adult. That
adult disappears into memory. Memory disappears into language. Language remains
after the person has disappeared.
And
somewhere inside this chain, Bernardo Soares writes. Not because writing can
defeat time, but because writing is perhaps the only place where he can
momentarily stand still long enough to contemplate its passage. That is why O
Livro do Desassossego is ultimately not a book about time. It is a book
written from inside time's wound. And perhaps this is why Soares's final
gesture is not an answer, but sleep. When thought has followed time to the edge
of intelligibility, consciousness can do nothing more than close its eyes.
San
José, Costa Rica
Saturday,
November 7, 2026
Blog Post #600
📚 References
Benjamin, W. (2006). On the concept of history.
In Selected writings (Vol. 4). Harvard University Press.
Bergson, H. (1910). Time and free will: An essay
on the immediate data of consciousness (F. L. Pogson, Trans.). Macmillan.
(Original work published 1889).
Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and time (J.
Macquarrie & E. Robinson, Trans.). Harper
& Row. (Original work published 1927).
Pessoa,
F. (n.d.). Não sei o que é o tempo [Fragment 350]. In
Livro do desassossego (R. Zenith, Ed.). Arquivo LdoD, Universidade de Coimbra. https://ldod.uc.pt/fragments/fragment/Fr221/inter/Fr221_WIT_ED_CRIT_Z
Ricoeur, P. (1990). Time and narrative (Vol.
1, K. McLaughlin & D. Pellauer, Trans.). University of Chicago Press.
Análise dos Conceitos Temporais em Bernardo Soares
Click to enlarge the infographic: El tiempo y el desasosiego en Bernardo Soares
Continue the Conversation: Watch the Explainer Video
Thank you for taking the time to read this article. If you would like to revisit its central ideas from a different perspective, I invite you to watch the accompanying explainer video.
Designed to complement—not replace—the essay, the video highlights its main arguments, provides additional context, and offers a concise visual journey through the themes explored in La Buenaventura. I hope it helps you see Alarcón's story from a fresh perspective.
If you enjoy the video, feel free to explore my YouTube channel, where I share more explainers and reflections on literature, English language teaching, linguistics, mythology, culture, education, and related topics.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCflH3o-0ZoYauP8t5fcCM4Q
Thank you for reading, watching, and joining me on this ongoing journey of learning and discovery.









