Pedro Paramo has been my favourite read out of the entire course so far, unsurprisingly, as it did come with the recommendation that it may be “the best Mexican novel ever written?” by Jon himself. This book has been filled with narration spanning from multiple different perspectives, each with a unique link to the village or Pedro Paramo himself. The way the story jumps perspectives and is told in a non-chronological order comes with a unique charm that honestly enhances the story itself in my eyes, as thankfully each instance the setting of time or character changed in each paragraph, it was easy enough to follow along. I think it was really effective in garnering my curiosity to figure out more about the Media Luna and Pedro Paramo himself.
Reflecting back on the lecture video, I can easily see how Gabriel Garcia Marquez found inspiration from this novel, as I personally liked this book more than his own creation Chronicles of a Death Foretold, which is the one I had read before. I think because it was told more simply and less flowery, that the stylistic choices that the author did use show through more clearly.
Within the book, the gap between life and death seemed completely unique, in people dead or alive, being able to hear or see the dead in some way or another, without the book making it completely certain if they themselves are dead or alive. Much of the book also reflects on the ideas of salvation, and the concept of sin and forgiveness, that push this constant tension between life and death forward. I think in some sense, Pedro Paramo and everything around him is tied to life, while Susana and the things that surround her ties to death. With her first husband dying, the shadow of death haunts her, and she is constantly tortured by visions and voices much like ghosts, then her father dies, then herself, then the entire village grows dead and deserted as Pedro takes his revenge. On Pedro’s side, much of everyone’s life is tied to him, with the Father constantly hearing about everyone’s confessions that tie back to his son, or others sorrowful dependency on him, or his capacity to take the lives of others away from them when he desires. In some sense, He took the life of Juan Preciado, the character that visits the village in the first place because of his mothers desire to “make him pay for the way he forgot us”, as the way he learns of Pedro’s life is the way his life is taken away by the voices. But these two things, life and death, are not polar opposites, but rather things that feed back into each other, and might be the same thing depending on how you look at it.
A question to all is, What are your thoughts on the Father? Did you like him or not and why? What kind of a character was he to you?
Hi Kelly 🙂
I just finished writing my post where I’ve definitely painted the father to be a “wild” and “manipulative” man. As you suggest, we know that he owes much to the people around him (like Rulfo and his mother) – and that he was able to obtain a monopoly of the land around the village, and many other hints throughout the story. So taken together – I think it would be fair to say that he had these traits – and died a sour death for which he expresses some guilt and regret (fearing the haunting of Abundio which would soon come).
In some way, all the characters contribute to this kind of condemnation in which the people of Comala live, don’t you think? Perhaps not to the same degree as Padre Renteria or Pedro Páramo, but their destinies are connected by a kind of (almost Greek) fatality. There is a Christian conception of the “Other World” throughout the narrative, but it is not very orthodox either. Thanks for sharing your post.
Hi Kelly!
Good question, and I’m really interested in talking more about Father Renteria. My main point of interest was how he and the church still gave an honourable service to Miguel Paramo, Pedro’s son, who was said to have ‘bad blood’. This decision was motivated by wanting to appease Pedro Paramo himself, as he had much influence and resources in the area, and the church wanted to be on his good side. This however, is irreconcilable with religious doctrine, for if someone is deemed ‘evil’ let’s say, they should not be given service – this goes against divine decree itself.
I’m not staunchly religious, yet this is an important point. Father Renteria, acting on behalf of the church, should not give into these ‘earthly forces’ such as appeasing Pedro, for God in Catholicism should be praised and respected over all worldly affairs.
What do you think? Is this a minor point or is this significant?
^ this was posted by Curtis HR! I don’t think it shows my name (FYI Daniel/Jon!)
Hey Kelly! Good job on the blog! I think Father Renteria is a bit of an antihero. He plays an instrumental role in the plot, since he’s the reason why everyone is stuck as ghosts, an I reckon his perspective would have been a good one to read the rest of the story from. As to whether or not I like him as a character, I’m pretty neutral about him. I neither hate him, nor am I his biggest fan. I think he’s a very human character, if that makes sense, and I think that’s as good a description as I can give.
– Deeba