The book this week was quite a change a pace compared to the other reads in this course. The narration from the child’s perspective is quite a unique one compared to other books with a youthful and innocent narrator; there are a lot of nice stylistic touches that reminded me of my own childhood as well. In particular, the narrator created a list (I’m not quite sure what the point of it was) that detailed how the world is broken up into 3 places, or types of “spells” such as yawning and “attacks”. I don’t know where the childhood fixation on creating weird lists of things comes from, but I think the effect of the text was very strong. It certainly reminded me of all the goofy things I was up to as a child, and really brought me back to how you view life when you are younger. Perhaps that is a child’s own way to figure out and establish some control for the world around them, as if to say “I was here, and I experienced all of this, and I want you to know that I figured all this out”.
One thing I didn’t expect from this book was for the focus to not be solely on how parental roles influence the way our lives play out, or to outline the different ways different parents and their actions influence the way children grow up (basically, some form of trauma dump). Obviously the focus of the book is the relationship between these characters within this family, but the personal relationship (or emotional development, better put) between the narrator and Papi are quite distant at times, speaking from seeing a choppy focus of her emotional journey with these parental figures through all these tumultuous events. I think a better example/ piece of evidence would be how Mami is portrayed throughout this story, and how her significance to the narrator is not really conveyed, as if they way they live together isn’t moulding who she is as a person. They merely appear as “figures”. To some effect, the distance does highlight that gap between her and Papi, in that he is often not there when he says he will be or shows up when it wasn’t expected of him to. This probably reveals a message about distant fathers and the fascination and admiration that comes with such an enigmatic figure. But I think another reason for this portrayal is to convey a broader message that isn’t limited to the theme of “family” or “parental figures”, as Jon said in the lecture video, maybe it is to convey other effects such as the portrayal of the macho cacique archetype, or some broader societal meaning.
To end with a question, how did you feel about the narrator’s childlike storytelling; did it remind you of anything, or was there anything especially notable to you about it? Why so?
“To some effect, the distance does highlight that gap between her and Papi, in that he is often not there when he says he will be or shows up when it wasn’t expected of him to.” This idea is very interesting, especially because of the play on words that can be made in Spanish with this: the narrator fills the wait with certain expectations about her father. But are they hers or do they belong to the social imaginary of what a father in these circumstances should be? I say this because of the historical context that Dr. Arturo Victoriano tells us in the conversation with Dr. Beasley-Murray. Other people in their blog posts this week have written about the possibility that this “Papi” represents more of a national narrative.
Hi Kelly! awesome post, as per usual! I felt quite neutral toward the childlike narration. I thought it was very apt and appropriate given the age of the character, and at times I found her annoying like many children. In my own blog I made a comparison to Lullabies for Little Criminals, which I think we both read in high school (unless your class did something different) and I think there were some similar vibes with the father-daughter relationship.
Hi Kelly! I really enjoyed reading your blog post this week! I thought your take on the child narration and the family dynamic in this story was really interesting and gave me a lot to think about! To answer your question, I quite enjoyed the childlike narration in this story, as I think it illuminated a theme we have explored in multiple different weeks about viewing a concept, historical viewpoint or story from a perspective that doesn’t generally get told. The way in which the story was written definitely reminded me of the countless conversations I have had with young children in which they will spring some of the most shocking information onto you like it is nothing haha. I think one element of her storytelling that brought out this childlike voice was the use of repetition of phrases multiple times within a paragraph. Thanks again for your great post!
Hi Kelly, really interesting post! To answer your question I think that the childlike storytelling is what makes this book so interesting. I think that one of the things that was the most notable to me was the way the daughter described her dad, always with admiration. I think it is really interesting to read about characters as complex and “negative” as Papi from the eyes of a kid.
Hi Kelly, I enjoyed reading your blog post! To answer your question I also agree like others have said, the way the story was told through the lens of the 8-year old daughter allowed us to see how a child acts in the relationship with her father. It reminded me of how young children all have this sense of innocence, but as they all grow older they lose some of it through the realization of the actual world around them.
Hi Kelly! Great post! 🙂 To answer your question, I think the childlike narration presented in this book gave it so much more character and meaning. It definitely reflects the purity and innocence that a child has towards what’s happening in their world and how they interpret it. Although there was a little bit less of that towards the end of the book and it became more real and grounded, I definitely think the way it was written can be considered as one of the strengths of this book.
“maybe it is to convey other effects such as the portrayal of the macho cacique archetype, or some broader societal meaning.” I wonder how viewing the book in this lens might change what we take away from it. To answer your question, the childlike storytelling felt very authentic to me; it felt like there wasn’t a ‘filter’ between the narrator’s thoughts and words. This made the book more authentic and credible for me.
– Daniel C