David Bushnell , writing in The Hispanic American Historical Review , point out that the work is less a pure historical account than others suggest . García Márquez 's Bolívar is a man " who wander naked through the house , suffer constipation , use foul language , and much more besides . " He argue that documentation do not support many of these details . Bushnell suggest , however , that the fact that the novel is not entirely historically accurate do not necessarily distinguish it from the work of professional historians . The main difference , Bushnell believe , is that García Márquez 's work " is far more readable " than a pure history .