Author: Eliza Jackson

Posted on

Conclusion!

Hello guys! It’s crazy that we have almost reached the end of the course already, it has certainly been a blast! It was really nice to meet you all and discuss the various texts that we explored in class! Though I’m looking forward to the semester coming to a close and for the upcoming nice weather, I have enjoyed this class and will miss it. 

In all honesty this course was very challenging for me and required that I open my mind to different forms of literature. Many of the texts were difficult to comprehend and forced me to spend a lot of time reflecting on what I had just read. As said by the professor, “books move us in different ways”– I really loved this and thought it encompassed our course really well.  I usually only read fiction or fantasy, so taking this class introduced me to a new form of literature which I much appreciated. 

I noticed that other people were discussing their favourite book of the semester so I figured I would also discuss my own! The book that I enjoyed the most was Nada by Carmen Laforet. I thoroughly enjoyed the thrilling, chaotic, and apocalyptic energy that radiated from this book. I am definitely going to buy the physical copy and read it again in my own time to further reflect!

Something I really enjoyed about this course was the contract and that we got to choose our own grade based on how many books we wanted to read this semester. I think this offered people the necessary freedom to do what they are capable of, but also allowed for everyone to choose the books they were interested in reading and therefore enjoy them more. 

To answer the professor’s question(s), some of the patterns I noticed within all of the texts that we read were memory, childhood, death/suicide, war and post-war, and/or reflection, though memory stuck out to me as the most prominent. These different themes certainly allowed me to group the texts according to different approaches and structures. Though every book was distinct in its own way, it was enjoyable to find the overarching themes and connections within all of the books. 

It was interesting that this course and the study of this type of literature is named “Romance Studies”, as not all of the books included an orthodox or normal love story. What do you think the true meaning of “Romance Studies” is? 

Thank you to professor Beasley-Murray, Jennifer, Patricio, and all of the classmates for making this course so enjoyable!!

Posted on

My Brilliant Friend

I really enjoyed this book and thought it was fairly engaging. The book discusses an odd friendship between two women, Lila and Elena, who both grew up together in the same neighbourhood and environment. Their friendship was certainly brilliant, and left readers with much reflection on this odd duo. 

The book began when Elena received a call from Lila’s son – who seemed to have a strained relationship with both his mother and Elena – saying that his mother was missing again. Elena seemed fairly unfazed by the disappearance of Lila, and instead decided to write a story of their friendship, thus commencing the story of their “brilliant” friendship and the lasting memories with which Elena has with her friend.  

As we get deeper into the story, we learn more about both of the girls and the dynamics of their friendship. Lila is an intelligent, independent, strong and sometimes bossy young woman. Elena is also a smart young woman (however not as smart as Lila), though clueless, a people-pleaser and often dependent on Lila. Young Elena paints Lila as this superior or exceptional being and seemingly sought the approval of her friend on many matters. She tried to emulate Lila in all aspects of life. 

The constant gender imbalance and violence was often hard to read and made me pretty uncomfortable. The boys in the class’ abuse towards the girls at the beginning of the novel, the abuse from their fathers (especially when Lila’s father throws her out of the window and breaks her arm) and their recurring harassment of the girls was difficult to witness as a reader. 

I enjoyed reading about the dynamics that took place in the neighbourhood, as it reminded me of my own community back home. Our neighbourhood is very tight knit, like Elena and Lila’s, and everybody knew each other and had different connections. Reading about Elena’s memories with her friends, rivals, and enemies in her neighbourhood reminded me of my own memories of growing up in a close community. 

Through my research on the context I found that My Brilliant Friend was made into a television series. Though this is not the point of reading the book, I am excited to commence the show and find the similarities and differences between the series and the book. 

My question is: Why do you think Elena Ferrante chose to include so many characters? Did you find it difficult to keep track of all of the people and subsequent relationships?

Posted on

Amulet and “Sleepwalking”

Amulet opens with: “This is going to be a horror story. A story of murder, detection and horror” (1). This explanation by the narrator, Auxilio Lacouture, created, right off the bat, a sense of suspense and mystery that allowed readers to expect an exciting or thrilling story. However, in my opinion, the novel was the complete opposite. To me, the book ended up being narrated quite calmly and conversationally, with the odd sporadic or strange tone. 

The first story told is of when she was a cleaner and broke a vase, with which she “couldn’t stop thinking about” (9). She seems unsure of her words, other than the concrete fact that there was a vase present, a constant in the story she tells to readers. I am unsure of the relevance of this story in the grand scheme of things, but I progressed…

We then learn about the Mexican poets and the story of her entrapment in the bathroom of the university in 1968, which is repeated many times throughout the novel. This part was one of the only parts in the book that I actually found slightly stressful or thrilling, as was promised by the narrator at the beginning of the novel. She begins to describe herself as the “mother of all the poets” (22) as well as explains the loss of her teeth in this section of the book. 

Initially, I did not create the best relationship with the Auxilio, as I sensed a lot of uncertainty in her words, creating this lack of trust in what she was telling. For example: “I can’t remember exactly” (18), and her admittance of being untrustworthy on page 80. As a character, Auxilio seemed nosy, uncertain, observant, curious and self-conscious. I personally found Auxilio slightly irritating, which made reading the book difficult as I struggled to empathize or resonate with the narrator/main character. She had many stories, and her stories and trauma seemingly make up her identity. The main story with which she keeps coming back to however, is of the women’s bathroom and the descriptions of the tiles and the moon in relation to the university washroom. Time seems to stand still while she is in the bathroom, and as she navigates her trauma from her entrapment and bears witness to history, we are taken on a journey of her memories of the future and past. 

On page 112 of Amulet, Bolaño writes that Auxilio was “speaking like a sleepwalker”. I believe this really captures the structure of the novel and Bolaño’s writing as it had a quite random flow and was similar to a stream of consciousness. Bolaño’s writing creates this essence of sleepwalking and as readers we are witnessing the randomness of Auxilio Lacouture’s dreams/visions – or in this case the stories of her witnessed history. 

My question is: “Why do you think the book began how it began (“This is going to be a horror story”)? Were you disappointed when the book did not offer much “horror” or thrill? How do you think the book as a whole is related to the opening line(s)?

Posted on

The Old Gringo and Reflections of Oneself

The Old Gringo was an interesting read indeed. This book touches on memory, life, death, religion, revolution, and history. It recounts the journey of a man who travels to Mexico during a civil war, to die a fulfilling death. The Old Gringo, later revealed as the author Ambrose Bierce, leaves behind little, other than a suitcase filled with miscellaneous objects and books, including the story of Don Quixote and a few of his own books. He encounters a self-proclaimed general, Tomas Arroyo, who has burned down the estate or “hacienda” of the Miranda family in an act of revenge. The Old Gringo also meets an American woman named Harriett Winslow, who was meant to be the schoolteacher for the Miranda family but is found jobless after the family fled before facing Arroyo’s oppression. Harriett is a stubborn yet strong woman, as she refuses to leave the hacienda in spite of protection and responsibility to the Miranda family. The Old Gringo seems to see himself in Harriett and confides in her, however I am not sure if this is driven by romantic or familial/familiar feelings. 

The hacienda is described as a “miniature Versailles”, as it contains a room with floor to ceiling mirrors. Mirrors and seeing oneself becomes a recurring theme within the book, with the Old Gringo repeatedly asking Harriett: “Did you look at yourself in the mirror?” (40, 49, 54, 60, 61, etc.). Mirrors are objects used to see a reflection of oneself, as we are all aware, but how does this play into the reality of the story? What do you think the significance of this question/trope was and do you think it sheds light onto the stories of these characters and how they are intertwined? 

Similar to W, or the Memory of Childhood by Perec, there is a separation of reality and fiction, and the book discusses dreaming and imagination repeatedly. This is discussed on page 52 (amongst many others), where the Old Gringo navigates “options [in] his head”, where he goes back and forth between the realities of his situation, including that he does not fear his own death but rather came to Mexico to die. 

Something that really stuck out to me while reading this book was the treatment of women, especially Harriett Winslow. I found it appalling the way women were spoken to or regarded as. “Well what can women be but sluts or virgins” (49), discussions about rape and scenes of abuse were often shocking to read and made it difficult for me to fully appreciate the text. It made me think about the challenges that women historically had (shown through this text), but that there are also issues and barriers that women continue to face in the 21st century, much later than when this book was set. 

Posted on

The “Double Life” in Perec’s “W, or the Memory of Childhood”

It was interesting to read the beginning of the book about the French translation, and as a French speaker myself I was able to fully comprehend (or at least I think I could) what was being explained on page 6 of the introductory pages. In French, the letter W is “double-vé” meaning double letter v, however something I noticed was that it also sounds like “double vie”, which in English means “double life”. I found this really interesting as I believe it directly pertains to this book. 

This novel contains two seemingly completely different stories, alternating throughout the chapters. Though the constant back and forth was at hard times to follow, it allowed for some excitement and is unparalleled to most other novel’s structures. One story is about a journey to a sports island off Tierra del Fuego by the name of W, containing quotes and seemingly fictional events. This story was completely written in italics, creating a clear and obvious contrast between the two stories. The other story is a detailed recollection of childhood and memories as a young Jewish boy during Nazi Germany. I enjoyed the second story more, as the writing was, in my opinion, more engaging and easier to follow. 

The second story significantly touches on the complexities of childhood and memory. One of my favourite quotes about childhood is on page 12, where it says that “childhood is […] a horizon, a point of departure, a set of coordinates from which the axes of my life draw their meaning”. This quote really stuck with me, especially the part about the coordinates. Interestingly, I actually have a tattoo of the coordinates of the street I grew up on, so I was able to really resonate with this line. 

I think I found the second story more engaging as it felt as if the narrator was speaking directly to me, or that I was reading his journal – almost like an autobiographical read. This conversational tone is easily identifiable in the negations present in his writing, where he questions what he had just written. Though this was at times confusing as a reader, it also allowed for a development of trust between the narrator and reader. 

I found it difficult in my reflection of the book to come up with similarities between the two stories, and the true reason for or purpose of Perec’s intertwining of two completely different stories. The only thing I could think of was the recollection of memories and the connections between the island and the concentration camps. The book concludes with a description of the camps as “no work but ‘ ‘sport’” and the violent games and sports with which prisoners were forced to play. It seems to connect the sport town and its sadistic rules to the Holocaust concentration camps. I am not sure what true purpose Perec had, or if one even exists, but I am open to listening to ideas!

Questions:

  1. Why do you think the title is “W, or the Memory of Childhood” and not “W, and the Memory of Childhood”? 
  2. Why is the first story set by the island Tierra del Fuego (“Land of Fire”)? Do you think there is a deeper meaning to this setting?
Posted on

Blog Post 6- Lispector

This was a difficult read for me and I struggled to grasp the true meaning of the book. However, the novel was beautifully written, and almost sounded or flowed like poetry. Lispector’s use of poetic style created a mystical and eccentric atmosphere when reading.   

It appears as if the narrator, “G.H”, is going through an existential crisis and questioning the very essence of her being. The character, who is only named by what we assume to be her initials, G.H, discusses in each section an accounting of her thoughts on her failures, successes, loves, fears, and passions, within the course of her life. While the book is written in the inner voice of G.H., we as readers are fully immersed into her journey of actualization, almost holding her hand as she tells us her story (page 10). 

The structure of this book was compelling because it allowed me to gain an understanding of each section. Although this was a very difficult book to read because of the content with which G.H was trying to share (her crisis), the structure grounded me somewhat because she began each new section using a segment of the last line from the previous section.  Lispector’s use of continuity was obviously deliberate as she gave a frame with which the reader could view the inner conversation of the narrator, G.H. . I believe this structure is what allowed me to carry on with the novel, as I felt the first line of each section was a hint of what she was developing in each particular section. It also allowed for the largely dense material to have a certain flow that helped with my comprehension of what I believe she was trying to achieve. 

On page 39, the narrator faces a cockroach in her maid’s room, which she refers to as a “burning chamber” (page 41), which triggers a seemingly hysterical episode. Initially, G.H. sees the cockroach and is terrified by it, setting up the reader with a fearful attention. Contrary to what Lispector sets up to us as the reader, she then realizes that she has a similar connection with the cockroach in that they both exhibit an “attentiveness” – mindful observation – to living. She was then alert like the cockroach, something she repeats about her own life repeatedly throughout the novel. The concrete essence of the cockroach became a mirror for her recognition of self, her almost basic nature of being, as described on page 45 and 57 where she says that “[she] [is] the cockroach”. G.H. is working through figuring out who she is, and the cockroach is a symbolic facilitator in this realization of self. 

My questions to my classmates are: 

  1. Did you notice the repetitive structure that Lispector used? If yes, did this help you with reading and grasping the true essence of the book? 
  2. What is the significance of the trope of the “third leg”? What do you think it represents?
Posted on

Blog Post 5- Sagan

“Bonjour Tristesse”, or “Hello Sadness” in English, is a stable novella filled with romance and surface-level drama. The story is narrated by a young girl, Cecile, who is describing her summer vacation with her widowed father, Raymond, and his young girlfriend, Elsa. Her father, described as a charming or “playboy” type, ends up falling in love with an old friend of Cecile’s mother, Anne, a classy and unfriendly woman. Cecile, discontent and angry with this relationship and her father’s break up with Elsa, devises a sneaky plan to try and remove Anne from the picture. However, once the plan was in action, Cecile seemingly felt guilty and was constantly questioning the plan. Throughout the novel, Cecile seems to never comprehend or work through the rightness or wrongness of the situation with which she created. The book finishes with Anne dying from a car accident, and Cecile and Raymond question whether it was suicide. Cecile’s plan ultimately has consequences, and she seemingly feels guilty for the death of Anne. However, her plan apparently works as after Anne’s death, Cecile says that “life began to take its old course” (129).

One part that really stuck out to me was on page 44, when Raymond describes his daughter Cecile as his “pet”. I found this honestly creepy and disturbing; however, I believe this part gave readers insight into the relationships in the book, as Cecile says that she “was nothing more than a kitten to them” (44). Cecile seems to feel a sense of inferiority, which she never expresses to her father. Throughout the book, Cecile is repeatedly questioning whether Anne will ruin her and her father’s way of life, as Anne lives a more serious or organized life of discipline. 

One of my favourite quotes from the book is: “fate sometimes assumes strange forms” (117). I thought this was a perfect summary of the book, which touched on fate, bizarre connections, and irrational decisions. On a personal note, this quote really resonated with me as I feel as if it is a good description of our lives right now. Although many of us lost a lot from the pandemic, I am sure the majority of us could say we also learned or gained a lot from it as well, even though this growth came in “strange forms”.    

My question is: How do you think Francoise Sagan portrayed young French women in her novella, and how do you think outsiders viewed the characters (or Sagan) at the time this book was published? 

 

Posted on

Blog Post 4- Nada

Nada by Carmen Laforet is a thrilling, chaotic, and apocalyptic read. Andrea, an 18 year old young woman, guides us through her adventure to live with her terror-filled family in Barcelona while she attends university. The book begins with her first interactions and impressions of her deranged family members on Calle de Aribau, who all seem to hate each other and fight constantly. The house, described almost as a haunted house, is dark, ghostly, and somber. In the first chapter, we are introduced to the central characters in the book: Andrea’s aunt and uncles — Angustias, Juan, and Roman— her decrepit “Mama” (grandmother) who appears to have dementia, Gloria (Juan’s wife) and their baby, and Antonia, the erratic housemaid. 

Though there are many characters, I wanted to briefly highlight two women with which I felt had a significant impact on Andrea. Angustias, Andrea’s authoritative aunt, seems to take on a certain hatred for the young narrator as well as most of the other family members, and we even see her implying killing Andrea on page 80: “If I’d gotten hold of you when you were younger, I’d have beaten you to death”. Gloria is a central character in the story, and we learn a lot about her pretty early on in the book. Andrea seems to create a bond with Gloria and there is an essence of protection in their relationship as her husband, Juan, is openly abusive and overbearing, which Andrea even observes one night in chapter 8. 

As Andrea navigates the craziness of her family, she seems to cope through laughter and comedy. On page 107, we take a dive into Andrea’s dark thoughts where she speaks about a certain “desire” to bite Gloria and even insinuates cannibalism, but readily catches herself and “[laughs] at [her] own monstrous thoughts” (107). This seems to be Andrea’s coping mechanism, as it comes up many times throughout the novel. The humour with which we experience through the narration of Andrea adds a certain edge to the story while also keeping readers engaged with Andrea’s bizarre interactions and adventures. 

Throughout the book it seems as if Andrea struggles to fit in and has a desire for lasting comfort. This is difficult to find in Calle de Aribau, as her family is sporadic and abusive towards one another. However, she appears to find this within her friendship with Ena and Ena’s family, as well as Pons. As someone who speaks French I know that “pons”, although  spelled slightly differently, means “bridge” in English. I believe this was a strategic choice by Laforet as the character Pons was a bridge for which Andrea was able to seek comfort and freedom from her family. 

My question to my classmates is: what do you think the significance of the title, “Nada” (meaning “nothing”), is to the novel? This is something I have thought about, but would like to hear my classmates’ ideas and opinions!

Posted on

Blog Post 3: The Shrouded Woman

The Shrouded Woman was the first book (up until this point) that I enjoyed reading. I appreciated the female author, and I found it was easier for me to identify and empathize with the narrator, Ana Maria. I found it fascinating to read a story from the perspective of a dead person, as this is obviously something unknown to humanity and is not the most common in literature (from what I know of). I found this novel creative and it’s unfamiliarity allowed for a certain sense of mystery and thrill. While reading, we are placed into a world of binaries: life and death, love and hatred, the strange and the familiar. We learn about Ana Maria’s family ties and dynamics, and interact with her family and friends as they visit her dead corpse. Maria Luisa Bombal writes so intimately that she provides readers with clear, strong images with which to reflect upon. 

I enjoyed the presence of multiple female main characters and the femininity that surged from the book, something we have not had in the past couple books we have read. Although the women were strong characters, they all seemed unhinged and/or confused or distracted. On the flip side, the men were all fairly tame and controlled. Though this stereotypical (and often sexist) portrayal of women bothered me slightly, I enjoyed the centring of the women and having the men as more supportive roles in the background of the women’s stories, especially Ana Maria’s. 

Ana Maria tells stories of different men in her life, and we see how her identity continues to shape and change throughout the course of the book. With Ricardo, her first love, she seems enamoured with him, eventually driving him away. There is then Alberto, a man whom she is forced to marry by her father, who seems to be abusive and is a central figure in the loss of her identity. As different characters come in and out of the story, we learn about vivid memories with which Ana Maria revisits. In the first dozen chapters, I found Ana Maria’s honesty malicious and thought she was a hostile and spiteful woman. However, my views of her changed around chapter seventeen, where we really get to know Ana Maria on a more personal and deep level through her relationship with Alberto.

Throughout the book, Ana Maria grappled with what seemed like a certain desire to live again. At the end however, she says, after her body is taken from the bed and put into a coffin, that “she does not feel the desire to rise again” (249). As a reader, this was a compelling ending to the story.

How do the constraints and desires with which Ana Maria deals with throughout the book compare to the non-fictitious world with which women live? How does Maria Luisa Bombal represent women and femininity in her writing?

Posted on

Blog Post 2: Paris Peasant

In all honesty and transparency, this was a really challenging book for me to get through. I found it extremely confusing and almost always felt myself questioning what I was reading. Aragon’s words felt (for lack of better words) jumbled together as if we were listening to the constant thoughts and images running in his brain. This would be formally described as a “stream of consciousness”. To me, the book had an illogical timeline and therefore made it hard to follow what was happening in the book. In order to relieve some of my stress with reading this book, I tried to highlight some of the themes or recurring ideas depicted throughout the novel. Some that I found were the Passage de L’Opera, light, and time. After watching the lecture by Professor Beasley-Murray, I was able to understand more clearly the timeline and storyline (or lack thereof). A lot of my anxiety around understanding this book was relieved when the professor discussed that the “book’s temporality … [did] not depend on plot or narrative”. 

While discussing this course and Paris Peasant with my mother and the challenge I was having with understanding it, she reminded me of an exhibit that I visited in Southern Italy. This exhibit showcased Salvador Dali’s art, focused on themes of time, religion, and transformations. The art was placed in caves, creating an immersive experience with which viewers were placed directly into the creative (and surreal) mind of Dali. The idea of surrealism and its subsequent art was clearly depicted in this exhibit, forcing visitors to not so much question Dali’s art, but to really appreciate the excessiveness and disorientation with which he highlights. The “Melting Time” statue shown in the photo I took (attached below) is a clear example of the surrealist depiction of time and is a visual that helped to sort out my thoughts on the temporality of Paris Peasant. This exhibit related to the ideas in the book, such as “profane illumination” and surrealism. Making this connection helped me to further understand and appreciate the book for all of its confusion and lack of a traditional storyline or organization.

I guess I can finish this blog by highlighting that although this book was difficult, challenging, and confusing, it enabled readers to really go past their preconceived notions of traditional journeys and timelines through which books should travel. Like Dali’s art, Aragon played with surrealism and poetic imagery to depict and describe the everyday reality in Paris.

To conclude, I would pose the question: is an understanding of this period in literature and art critical to the enjoyment of this novel?

Spam prevention powered by Akismet