Faces in the Crowd: This Was the Hardest Book I’ve Read So Far but at Least I’ve Got an A+ (Mar 30)

I am happy to say that I have read all the 11 books for this course. But the bad news is that after reading this week’s book, I AM SO CONFUSED. 

I’ve managed to get through 100 pages of the novel over the course of 3 hours. Now, I’m starting a blog to delve into and analyze my thoughts on what I’ve just read, because it’s so complicated I feel as if I will forget. I plan to keep reading and update the blog as I go. I apologize if my blog post will seem a bit unclear this time around. It’s challenging to articulate your thoughts when you’re having a hard time grappling with the material haha.

A. The First Half: Many Perspectives

The narrative begins with a young mother in Mexico City recounting her earlier days in New York. I’ll call her younger self “young woman” since the book deliberately distinguishes between her past and present selves. She worked as a “reader and translator at a small publishing house aiming to publish ‘foreign gems'” (Luiselli 1). She notes, “[n]obody bought them, though, because in such an insular culture, translations are met with skepticism” (Luiselli 1). She critiques the New York cultural scene for its narrow-mindedness, viewing translations with skepticism and demonstrating a lack of interest in literature from other cultures.

The narrative alternates between the perspectives of the mother and the young woman, portraying the mother as suffocated and constrained by her current life. She reminisces about her youth, a time when she “used to write all the time, at any hour, because [her] body belonged to [her]” (Luiselli 3). This is starkly contrasted with her present situation, where she describes how “her baby will catch [her] smell and shiver in her crib… her body is teaching her to demand her part of what belongs to us both, the threads that sustain and separate us” and mentions “her husband will also demand his portion of [her]” (Luiselli 19). It appears she is struggling to maintain her individuality. Her life is now limited to the confines of her home, a stark difference from her past life in the city as a translator, which, though routine, offered her a sense of comfort missing from her current existence.

B. The Second half: A Merging of Time and Narratives

This is where the story gets confusing. The mother discovers a postcard from a woman she suspects is her husband’s lover. She recounts how her husband allegedly leaves for Philadelphia to be with his mistress. Yet, the story twists as it’s revealed he hasn’t left. She asks her husband in her own narration why he’s leaving his family for Philadelphia to which he responds “[b]ecause that’s what you just wrote”, to which the mother replies “[b]ut it’s only a novel, none of it exists” (Luiselli 77). Luiselli’s use of unreliable narration here blurs the line between fiction and reality and this makes it difficult for me as a reader to distinguish what is truly happening in the story. The merging of factual and fictional aspects introduces ambiguity, challenging my understanding of the characters’ true experiences.

Further, while the narration of the mother and the woman are happening, there is a third narration happening in the perspective of Gilberto Owen, a Mexican poet and diplomat, for which the young woman (as well as the mother) have an obsession with. Owen’s life parallels the mother’s in several aspects: strained relations with his (ex) partner, his role as a writer, and his parenthood to a son and daughter. The blended narratives become complicated when a segment I believed was from the young woman’s viewpoint is revealed to be Owen’s. Specifically, the young woman has a friend named Salvador, and Owen also has a friend named Salvador—potentially Salvador Novo, another notable Mexican poet (I realize that the books we’ve read have some guest appearances from different authors haha). The overlapping of perspectives creates confusion, indicating that the young woman’s (and mother’s?) identity might be intertwining with Owen’s. This suggests a deep identification with him, to the point where their narratives and perhaps even their selves begin to merge.

Additionally, the plot becomes more surreal when Gilberto Owen, who passed away before the young woman’s story unfolds, encounters a girl named Dolores “Do”—who is known to the young woman as she helped her find the dead tree—during an outing with his children. This encounter defies chronological logic, suggesting a narrative where time is fluid rather than fixed. Additionally, Owen’s observation of “a woman with a brown face and dark shadows under her eyes” (Luiselli 89) on the subway, which matches the description of the mother. This observation muddles the perspective, creating ambiguity around whether we’re encountering Owen’s actual reality or delving into the mother’s imagination of Owen through her writing. If it’s the latter, this suggests the possibility that the mother is projecting her own experiences through Owen’s perspective, again reflecting her connection to him. Both characters are navigating the disintegration of their personal lives and marriages, which could imply that their stories are deeply interconnected.

Finally, the ending leaves me puzzled. Is the father truly out of the picture? And the hide and seek theme—does it symbolize the mother’s transition into a more ghostly presence? Moreover, what does it mean when the little boy finds his mother at the end of the story? Does this indicate she’s regained some form of tangible existence? I’m really not sure…

C. Did I Like ANYTHING??

HOWEVER, if there’s something positive to highlight about the book, it would be the narratives involving the young woman and her friendships in New York. Her relationships with White and Dakota stand out. The dynamic between White and the young woman had a depth reminiscent of a father-daughter relationship, making the end of their relationship particularly emotional. Her decision to not publish the forged translation was commendable, yet it was heartbreaking to witness the dissolution of her relationship with White, leaving her with the impression that he “had never believed in [her]” and that he only hired her because she “smelled a bit like his wife” (Luiselli 68). The adventures with Dakota brought a lighter, more mischievous tone to the story, especially their escapade to Baldy’s house. Further, Dakota’s gesture of bringing her a writing desk was a touching testament to their friendship.

Additionally, the revelation about Salvatore, the biology professor, being 70 years old caught me by surprise. Considering how the young woman slept with him, I had assumed they were closer in age, so that was unexpected!

D. My Concluding Thoughts: I’m a Hater

Unfortunately, I disliked this book so much, and honestly, I’m going to hate on Valeria Luiselli’s writing style as I find myself questioning the critical acclaim her novel has received. The narrative was like random streams-of-consciousness that felt very discombobulated. The novel opens with a quote that seems to allude to the idea that an obsession can consume one’s identity, as seen with the mother’s fixation on Gilberto Owen, which potentially transforms her into a ghostlike presence within his narrative. This concept had the potential to be engaging, but the way it was executed made it less effective. My disappointment stems from the novel’s inability to clearly convey its themes and its choice to prioritize stylistic experimentation over narrative clarity, sorry! 🙁 

E. Questions for Discussion

Q: What do you think the game of hide-and-seek symbolized?

Q: What did you think this story was REALLY about?