It's hard to say as I haven't' read Bolano, and I will indeed. But it's always a subjective matter when it comes to concisiveness, which at the end of the day is a matter of style and preference. I, myself enjoy thoroughly high content delivery in a lesser amount of words rather than XIXth century French naturalism agonising over a tree's foliage (I'm not saying that what Bolano does). But hey, each his own. However, where your point is weakened, is:
a) That you're making a really false statement: It didn't take Auster a lifetime to get recognised at all, and he's been published and internationally acclaimed at a relatively young age.
b) That you're making an irrelevant one: Many a writer have been hailed has great new novelists rapidly. Especially in our celebrity and media frenzy era. That has never been synonym with talent or quality (and very often the opposite, unfortunately). Time has simply got nothing to do with it. And there are countless examples in one way (quick: e.g, Auster, or, possibly, Bolano) or the other way (John Kennedy Toole died before he was famous).