The Book of Chameleons: Kafka if He Were a Gecko (Mar 25)

I. Loved. This. Book.

Although a quick Google search might call this novel a “murder mystery,” I think that’s quite a stretch. By the halfway point, I felt the book was leaning more towards fantasy because of its whimsical, mysterious, and somewhat unsettling tone (I’ll explain this more later!). However, towards the end, it shifted towards resembling a thriller, which is exactly what I like.

A. Who is Felix?

The narrative revolves around an affluent, older albino man who earns his living by assisting bourgeois individuals who have bright and promising futures but have an undesirable past. Essentially, Felix assists these individuals in crafting identities that “resonate with nobility and [the dominant] culture” of Angola (Agualusa 16). But despite his involvement in fabricating histories, Felix doesn’t see himself as a criminal for doing this. When working on Jose Buchmann’s story, he insists he is “not a forger” (Agualusa 18) and refuses to fake Buchmann’s identity documents. Instead, Felix describes his role as that of a storyteller who crafts people’s histories through genealogy and family trees (Agualusa 16), but despite his claims, it’s clear to me that Felix operates as a forger in essence lol.

B. A Kafka-Like Narration: “The Metamorphosis”

Interestingly, the story is also narrated from the perspective of a Tiger Gecko named Eulalio, Felix Ventura’s best friend. Initially, I mistook the narrator for Felix’s house, given the descriptions imbued with human-like qualities, such as breathing and moving (Agualusa 9). Felix describes Eulalio’s gecko species as possessing a laugh remarkably similar to that of humans, hinting at the novel’s conclusion where Edmundo identifies Jose through his laughter.

The narrative style, especially from Eulalio’s point of view, reminded me of Kafka’s “The Metamorphosis.” Like the protagonist in Kafka’s work who becomes a beetle, Eulalio was once a human man whose “soul [is] [now] trapped in this [new] body” (Agualusa 40). Eulalio frequently reflects on his past human life, such as his inability to form human connections -– especially with women — due to his upbringing and his sexual experience with Dagmar. This really prompted me to question the purpose of his transformation within the context of the story. It indeed made Eulalio more human, but I can’t seem to connect it with the themes within this story (such as deceit or revenge). 

C. The Truth Always Comes Out

Returning to the unsettling aspect mentioned earlier, the novel starts dropping hints that things are not as they appear in the second half. First, the gecko notices changes in Jose Buchmann, describing it as a “metamorphosis” (Agualusa 55). Specifically, Jose’s accent begins to shift, losing its Slavic-Brazilian blend in favor of a Luandan rhythm (Agualusa 55). It felt as though Jose had always been “Jose Buchmann” (Agualusa 59), even though this was not his identity. This uneasy feeling extends to Felix, especially when Eulalio notes how the man recounts “his childhood as though he’d really lived through it” (Agualusa 88), casting doubt on Felix’s own reliability (even though he is close to Eulalio).

Ultimately, the novel reveals that Jose’s real name is Pedro Gouveia, seeking Felix’s services to commit revenge against Edmundo, a communist revolutionary responsible for his personal tragedies. This included killing his wife as well as torturing his newborn daughter, who we find out was Angela!

D. Duplicity and Translation

What captured my attention was the novel’s exploration of duplicity, especially illustrated when the Minister seeks Felix’s help to fabricate a genealogy that connects him to a notable historical figure, aiming to boost his appeal. Dr. Beasley-Murray’s discussion on how “dissimulation is designed to deceive us, making us vulnerable to exploitation” and the advice to “remain vigilant of the true essence concealed behind the facade” (1-2), prompted me to reflect on the nature of truth and falsehood in our society and history. It’s fascinating, and somewhat meta, to realize that some of the truths we accept in this world might actually be constructions and we blindly accept them as fact.

Moreover, I also wanted to discuss the author’s point that “every translation is a re-creation” (Agualusa qtd. in Beasley-Murray 2). Here, Agualusa underscores the transformative power of translation, emphasizing that every translated version of a story provides a unique lens through which we view it. With each translation, we encounter a different facet of the narrative, colored by the translator’s choices and interpretations, which is obviously heavily relevant to Romance Studies — it’s interesting to think about the ways in which we interpret novels may not be the way the author originally intended. 

Consequently, the true essence of a novel remains ever elusive and hidden (like a chameleon lol), as we are always interacting with a version that has been shaped and reshaped by layers of interpretation — there are infinite possibilities contained within a single piece of literature and the idea that our understanding of a story is continually evolving.

E. My Ending Thoughts!

Although the book does not feature the kind of heart-wrenching fatalities that leave readers in tears (like in Time of the Doves or Hour of the Star), it made me very emotional towards the climax when Felix uncovers the truth about Angela and Pedro. Their duplicity regarding their identities, though devoid of harmful intentions, underscores the irony of Felix’s situation—he, a fabricator of identities, finds authenticity and realness in the least expected place: Eulalio, an actual chameleon. The ending, however, was quite satisfying as it hinted at Felix’s quest to find Angela. Contrary to Felix’s philosophy on life, I hope that the two “live happily ever after” (Agualusa 89).

F. Questions for Discussion

Q: What’s the point of Eulalio being a former human?

Q: Do you think parts of our history were constructed?

Time of the Doves: I Actually Liked Quimet (Feb 24)

A. Initial Thoughts

This book has quickly become my favourite among the ones we’ve read in class. While both novels explore the lives of women, I find myself deeply in love with “Time of the Doves” and Natalia’s journey, far surpassing my like for “The Shrouded Woman.” There’s something about the raw, beautiful writing of “Time of the Doves” that made me feel a connection to Natalia I just didn’t feel with Maria Luisa, whose narrative seemed too comedic and novella-like by comparison. Watching Natalia grow from a young woman into a mother was moving for me; and even though I initially hated Quimet, the way he was described through Natalia’s eyes changed how I saw him and I felt quite fond of him by the end.

B. Key Themes: A Mother’s Resilience and Her Unrecognized Labor

The story unfolds with Natalia, our protagonist, going out to the shops alongside her friend Julieta. Natalia shares the loss of her mother a few years back and her father’s subsequent remarriage. Her recounting how her mother’s “only joy in life had been to fuss over [her]” and how she “couldn’t give [her] advice” anymore (Rodoreda 16), paints her mother as a pivotal figure, rendering Natalia somewhat innocent and unprepared for life’s complexities, much like Maria in “The Shrouded Woman.” Natalia’s life takes a turn when she meets Quimet, leaving her then-fiancé Péré to be with him. 

Quimet, who nicknames her “colometa,” or little dove, immediately strikes me as unpredictable and reckless, a contrast to Péré, her stable ex-fiancé. Quimet has outbursts over Natalia expressing her opinions — insisting that “to be his wife [she] had to start by liking everything he liked” (Rodoreda 22) — and his complaints about his mother’s cooking, expose him to be extremely petty and similar to most men of the 19th century. Further, Quimet insisted on splitting their apartment expenses and felt emasculated and insecure when Natalia revealed how her father had helped with her expenses — I honestly hated him at this point. Lastly, when Natalia and Quimet get married he states how “this marriage business-is just a moment, and the less it costs the better and if we can do it in five minutes instead of ten that’s fine” (Rodoreda 38), highlighting his dismissive attitude towards their relationship, and I cannot help but also feel frustrated at Natalia, since she seems to overlook the glaring red flags due to her mother’s absence of guidance on men. 

Natalia then has a chance encounter with Péré on the street who is sullen and wants her back. At that moment, Natalia felt how Péré “saw everything inside [her], all [her] secrets and [her] pain” (Rodoreda 56) during her early stage of marriage. This deepened the narrative’s emotional impact, prompting me to contemplate on what might have been had Natalia chosen her life differently. Natalia then becomes pregnant, which brings challenges. Specifically, her baby’s ill health is blamed on her supposedly having “strangled it” (Rodoreda 62) during birth, allowing us to see the shame and hardship Natalia has to grapple with as a woman during this period. Further, Natalia and Quimet start facing financial troubles due to Quimet’s dwindling carpentry commissions. She has to take on a laborious job of cleaning wealthy households and she loses moments with her children, finding “them asleep, sometimes right next to each other and the boy with his arm around Rita (her daughter)” (Rodoreda 96). 

As the story progresses, Natalia has to grapple with the burden of domestic and professional responsibilities. Meanwhile, Quimet’s complaints about leg pain and his expectation for Natalia to handle the household chores and care for the doves he brings home underscore his lack of supportiveness. But strangely, and I think this is an unpopular opinion, Quimet grows on me a little. Yes, they struggled and he was not a very good husband — but Quimet was nonetheless a good father to their kids and tried his best to provide for his family, which is especially shown when he has to leave his family to fight on the frontlines during the Spanish civil war. Though Quimet was frustrating, Natalia hoped for his return and “wanted things to be like they’d always been” and wanted so badly for him to “come home with that pain in his leg” (Rodoreda 138). After seeing how much Natalia misses Quimet, I too, started to miss him. However, Quimet does pass away due to the war, thrusting Natalia and her children into deeper hardship with Antoni (her son) sent to a refugee camp due to financial constraints. The family’s dire situation is captured when they start sleeping “all together… if [they] had to die [they’d] die together” (Rodoreda 140), painting a stark imagery of the realities of families during the Spanish civil war.

But eventually, Natalia encounters a grocer named Antoni, leading to a job and eventually a marriage, paving the way for stability and happiness. Her children’s acceptance of Antoni as a father figure and their eventual successes (Rita’s happy marriage; Toni’s return from military enlistment) provide a satisfying resolution to their earlier harsh trials. 

C. Concluding Thoughts

As the story wraps up, I find Natalia embracing contentment in her life—her and her children are flourishing after she navigated the challenges of single motherhood. Natalia is also in a happy marriage with Antoni, shown as they sleep peacefully with “[her] arm under his arm and hugged his chest” (Rodoreda 200). Yet, that same night Natalia’s thoughts drift back to Quimet, compelling her to revisit their old apartment building—a reminder of her past—where “[she] had gone in that door many years ago married to Quimet and [had] come out with the children behind [her] to marry Antoni” (Rodoreda 196). In her reflective moments, she conjures up an image of Quimet, “in the middle of a field by the sea when [she] was pregnant with Toni [where] he gave [her] a blue flower and then laughed at [her]” (Rodoreda 196), a memory so vivid and bittersweet. Despite my initial disdain for Quimet, the connection and history he and Natalia shared ultimately left me feeling a surprising sense of loss. Even as I want to celebrate Natalia’s newfound happiness, there is a lingering memory of her past with Quimet.

D. Questions for Discussion

Q: What was your genuine impression of Quimet? Did you like him or dislike him? Did your feelings for him change?

Q: What was your view on Quimet and Natalia’s marital relationship?

Q: Do you think Quimet and Natalia’s relationship changed from when they were first dating to when they got married?

Spam prevention powered by Akismet