Author Archives: mberrach

last post af

Yay! last blog post! Happy end of the semester/ year! Hope everyone is having a good end of the semester and is excited for summer!!!

I actually had so much fun in this course! I originally took this course because it sounded super cute and fun, and I’m happy to say it did not disappoint. I’m super happy that I achieved my goal of 11 books and that I actually ended up enjoying almost all of the books that I read.

I’ve always been a reader, but I feel like this course allowed me to enjoy ‘school readings’ and take some of the pressure off for understanding everything and just allowing myself to consume literature in an academic context in a fun-ish and accessible way. This was also my first time reading translated fiction so it was a very fun and exciting experience for me.

I feel like I really branched out of my comfort zone in terms of the types of books I read and definitely found some new favourites. My favourite books of the course are My Brilliant Friend, The Hour of the Star and Money to Burn. I loved the storyline of all these novels and the drama that took place. I think my least favourite may have been The Book of Chameleons (sorry if this is a hot take), but I think It’s just because I didn’t fully understand everything that was going on – and there was a lot going on. But I think that’s also something that I’ve learned in this class, is that it’s okay to not fully understand what’s going on. In fact I think I learned the most from the books I did not fully understand like Agostino and the Book of Chameleons. Writing these blog posts, watching lectures and engaging in content helped me to better understand. The informalness of the blog posts is also very freeing, it has helped me understand complex literature and themes in ways that are accessible to me.

I also really loved the recurring theme of coming of age and identity throughout the class. Cause even at university age we all still have a lot growing up to do, and these coming-of-age stories can relate in many different ways. I felt this a lot in My Brilliant Friend which was my favourite out of all the books ths semester.

My final discussion question (which isn’t really a discussion) would be to please recommend me some books for the summer (maybe with a similar vibe to My Brilliant Freind) pls and thank u!

arrivederci girlhood (i woke up with a new grey hair)

1 Reply

Elena Ferrante checks your mailbox, I’m sending you a check for emotional damages.

Holy fuck I loved this book. This genuinely might be one of my favourite books I’ve read this semester, and maybe on of my favourites books in a while. It’s in this novel’s simplicity is where I found the most connection to it. I loved how simple the storyline and plot were but every chapter held its own and made an impact on me.

I found myself comparing it a lot to Sally Rooney’s ‘Normal People’ which is one of my favourite books. Both these novels have a very simple plot: just two people growing up. ‘Normal People’ focuses more on a romantic relationship between two people who just CANT communicate, whereas ‘My Brilliant Friend’ is the coming-of-age story of two girls. I also compared it to ‘The Hour of The Star”. As both novels are ways of looking at the experiences girlhood through the lens of class and political dynamics

I loveddd the way this novel depicted young girls growing up (cause hella relatable). The struggle of getting people to like you while also trying to like yourself during the awkward years of growing up. And actually don’t get me started on the beautiful depictions of female friendships in this novel. While Lila and Elena have their fair share of ups and downs (very Connell and Marianne of them), they always find their way back to each other. There were multiple times when I wondered “Do these girls even like each other” but then a few chapters later seeing their bond being so strong. Lila and Elena’s friendship goes through a full range of human emotions: it’s both beautiful and pure but also full of competition and animosity. It felt real and true to real experiences of friendship, especially between girls of this age.

This back and forth genuinely had me struggling to figure out if I supported their friendship or not. I went through every emotion reading this book with these girls, I was angry, sad, and happy, wanted to punch multiple characters in the face (I’m looking at you Donato). There were so many moments in this book where I wish I was a character so I could talk to Elena and Lila and offer some kind of advice (cause these girls need some kind of role model I beg).

My question for discussion is: “Do you think Elena and Lila’s friendship is positive or negative or a mix of both?”

And yes I will be watching the show and yes I will be continuing the rest of the Neapolitan Novels. And yes maybe I’ll even learn some Italian.

kafka gonna sue ur ass

2 Replies

I feel conflicted about this novel. One one had I thought it was interesting, creative and unlike anything I’ve read before. The idea of an almost ‘double’ or bi-directional reincarnation is super cool and confusing. But on the other hand, this book left me confused and a bit unsatisfied. I wanted more information and answers to my questions. And at times I felt like the pacing was a bit weird and choppy with all the cuts to and from the dreams (I get that’s the point, but it confused me a lot). But I did find it fun and almost game-like to figure out if the gecko form was the ‘second’ life or the first.

The main thing I want to talk about in my blog post is the concept of translation. Something that was brought up a lot in the lecture video was the difference in titles: the Portuguese title ‘The Seller of Pasts’ vs the English title ‘ The Book of Chameleons”. I brought up the complications with translated literature in my first blog post: that English is often thought of as a colonial language, and the idea of reading translated novels (often from countries that have suffered at the hands of colonialism) in English can take away certain important understandings and aspects of the text. The author’s intention and message of the novel might be lost with a translation, as many words or expressions simply do not translate into English.

In this case, as well as the case of many other novels we’ve read in the class, the title is completely different in the original compared to the translation. One thing that really stuck out to me with the lecture video is the idea that a translated novel is a ‘rebirth’ or ‘reincarnation’ of the previous work. Which is something I’ve never really thought about. That the translation of a novel is not simply JUST a translation but a completely different novel. Looking at a translated novel as a different novel allows you to read it through your own lens, rather than attempting to look at it through the lens of the author – which is both good and bad in my opinion. The author’s lens can give important socioeconomic and cultural context to the story, but it’s also important to be able to fully immerse yourself as a reader.

My question for discussion would be: does the title of a novel influence your understanding of a book? Would you have read this novel differently if it was called ‘The Seller of Pasts” compared to “The Book of Chameleons”?

It’s just like Call Me By Your Name! … but with bank robbery and a LOT more drugs

3 Replies

Luca Guadagnino, I have your next movie idea king!

I actually really liked this novel. It was fast-paced, interesting and genuinely made me go WTF several times. I fully forgot that what I was reading was based on a true story, because everything about it felt like a movie. But even with the genre of ‘crime fiction’ this novel did not necessarily feel entirely fictional. The relationships and characters felt real (honestly super understand the lawsuits). The only fictional thing in this novel and real life is how much emphasis we put on the value of money. And how easy it is for governments to become filled with greed and corruption.

One thing I want to talk about is the idea of art imitating life (and vice versa). In the video lecture, there was a particular quote that stood out to me “What does robbing a bank compare to founding one”. Cause if we want to talk about corrupt governments and shitty banks, let’s call up my homeland -Lebanon!!

Lebanon has a long history of government corruption that would take way too long to explain. But one of the main concerns is the pure lack of access to banks that the citizens have. You literally cannot access your own savings because the government has frozen all access to banks and sunk the worth of money. It’s gone so far that people are fully ‘robbing’ banks and staging sit-ins to gain access to their own savings. Money in Lebanon has basically lost its (fictional) value. Right now one Lebanese dollar is worth 0.000015 of a Canadian Dollar. Again, as stated in the video lecture: money is the most powerful structure, we place so much emphasis on pieces of paper and coins (that could lose value any minute). The only really good thing that’s come out of this crisis is the sense of community that has happened in Lebanon, something that is slightly touched on in this novel.

Piglia is writing about sizing control from a corrupted state is what is happening currently all over the world. Piglia just turns that real-life experience into art via crime fiction.

Another thing I’m super curious about is the idea of crime fiction and the true-crime podcast. For me, a lot of the time when I hear true crime podcasts they feel exploitative of victims and that they’re just interested in the ‘glamour’ of criminality. This brings me to my discussion question: do you think it’s ethical/moral that Piglia invents backstories/characteristics of the characters? Is Piglia also feeding into the glamour of criminality?

Me personally, I love a super cute coat! Wanna do a Clothing swap??

3 Replies

I’ll be super honest I picked this book because it was short and I have a midterm this week. And I feel super neutral about it. I liked the plot of a dinner party, a spy mystery – it felt like ‘Who’s Afraid Of Virginia Woolf’ if that play was about totalitarian Romania!

Something I did enjoy about this book as well as the video lecture is learning more about the historical and cultural context of Romania during this time. Learning about the historical context did give me a lot more context about the novel and better explained a lot of the symbolism I found a bit confusing.

But something I did not love about the novel is that a lot of it felt unfinished. I want to know why there’s an unnamed character. I want to know what the coat symbolizes. But I guess the unfinished-ness of the novel is also the point – nothing in this world/society is finished. Even if totalitarian regimes are over it does not mean that the lasting events have also left. The effects of communism and post-war life are cyclical. They still affect the everyday lives of society and individuals even if ‘nothing dramatic is happening’. And these effects still linger generationally.

One point of the video lecture that I found super interesting was the meaning of the missing coat. Is it a symbol? Or is a coat just a coat? On one hand, I do agree that sometimes a coat is just a coat. On the other hand, novels, especially novels of a political nature, makes me think that this coat is not just a coat. For me, I feel like the coat could be a ‘Big Brother’ type of symbol, representing the totalitarian government. Especially given how the characters act very paranoid about it, and as the video lecture said ‘just because you are paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t out to get you’ (also a Nirvana quote). The coat keeps everyone on their toes and keeps everyone guessing. I also feel like the coat has to be symbolic due to the nature of politics and literature. Yes, not all literature is political, but when writing under oppressive governments, everything becomes political. And it’s hard to separate the political from the art.

My questions for discussion would be: do you think the coat is more than a coat? and another question I have is do you think it’s possible to separate art and politics?

Macabea is the realest bitch I know (rip queen)

7 Replies

Clarice Lispector you would have loved Greta Gerwig

I’m so sorry if you didn’t like this book because I’m about to sing its praise. The Hour of the Star by Clarice Lispector is one of my favourite books so far in this class. For a book so short why did I almost cry at multiple parts? I LOVED Macabea, I’m not gonna even talk about her evil ugly boyfriend cause he’s not worth my word count.

Actually, I will only mention the evil boyfriend here, Macabea I’m so sorry that you’re first and almost only exposure to love was with that piece of shit.

Anyways back to Macabea. This book felt like a sad depressing love letter to girlhood and I loved every page, genuinely some quotes made me almost tear up. The quote “so young and already rusted” (p.17) hit me where it hurt. Specifically this quote because I feel like so much of womanhood/girlhood (sorry if this is a generalization) comes from pain. The pain of puberty, the pain of rejection, not meeting beauty standards or not feeling good enough. Having all that at such a young age, for anyone regardless of gender, causes you to ‘rust’.

Lispector also speaks to this ‘all or nothing’ mentality that is so present in today’s world: you are smart or dumb, beautiful or ugly, exciting or boring – “some people have got it. And some people don’t”(17). I also did not find her boring at all. Yes, she has a somewhat boring life where she feels like she doesn’t have a lot to say, but the narrator (I know not Macabea herself but still) has so much to say about her. Also, her ‘boring’ life is not that boring, it’s simply just everyday life. Not every day has to be extraordinary for it to be special and worthwhile. There is beauty and little luxuries hidden in every ‘boring day’ like having a coffee or sleeping in.

The quote “she missed being little […] and thought she’d been happy almost made me cry at the Nest. Again this feels like a sad love letter to girlhood. Looking back at old photos of ‘baby you’ in cute outfits playing with dolls and wondering where the time went. Lispector stop pulling at my heartstrings.

Macabea I promise you are not boring! You will never be cold coffee to me!!!

My question for discussion is- do you feel like Macabea reflects any challenges/experiences of girlhood?

pigeons and politics – The Time of The Doves

1 Reply

If there’s one thing I’ve learned from this class, it is that the shortest books have the most to say. I found this novel to be such a beautiful telling of the ‘other side’ of war stories—a story about the people who stay behind, and the aftermath of conflict.

One thing that really stuck out to me in this novel, was the ‘separation’ between the political landscape happening around her, and Natalia’s personal life. Natalia chooses and wishes to remain political and simply just live her life. Unfortunately, the political climate she lives in, makes this impossible. At first, I saw this separation as the gendered public and private spheres: where men take on the public life and women keep to the private life. But as I continued to read I saw how Natalia’s want for separation is something that is still apparent in today’s world – many people try to separate their personal lives with politics. But I don’t know if a true separation between the political and the personal is entirely possible. And Natalia proves that. Her day-to-day life is completely changed during the war and its aftermath, she struggles with poverty and lack of food. Her life is so flipped that she even contemplates murder.

The lecture video told us to pause and think if we should judge Natalia for contemplating the murder of herself and her children. While this idea is uncomfortable and feels almost subhuman, I can’t super judge her. The life she brought her children into and the current life they live are completely different. I don’t see this as an evil act, but rather an act of love (in a fucked up way). The lecture video also noted that a mother murdering her children is one of the greatest sins. While I obviously agree, I find it interesting that in these stories (like Medea) we tend to focus on the mother’s wrong actions, rather than the actions of a society that has failed them or the men that have abandoned them. Natalia is not the only one to blame, a war-torn society unconcerned about the livelihoods of its people is also to blame.

Another aspect of the novel I wanted to touch on was the extensive bird metaphor relating to Natalia. The pigeons are taught to be domesticated and that the cage is their home, but they are fighting their innate predisposition to fly. Natalia constantly being compared to pigeons shows her internal fight of wanting to be free of her circumstances but also being trapped in them. I also found a parallel in the way birds are compared to as both humans and machines is also the way soldiers can be talked about as both human and war machines.

My question for discussion would be: do the translation differences of dove vs pigeon or space vs time in the title change the way you perceive the novel?

A cycle of storytelling – Black Shack Alley

4 Replies

Black Shack Alley by Joseph Zobel has to be my favourite novel we have read in class so far. The story of transformation and expectations is one I think many people can relate to, even in today’s society. One thing about the novel that particularly stuck out to me, was the way Zobel wrote about postcolonialism, and how a similar narrative currently continues to take place.

I also didn’t know that Martinique was still technically a part of France and that they gained decolonization by integration rather than independence, as the lecture video states. But even then I wonder if full independence for Martiqniue is possible.

One of the main things I want to talk about in this blog post is the idea of tokenization. José is obviously very tokenized when he moves out of his community into the ‘literate’ society. But even though he has reached the same level of education as his white counterparts he is still outcasted and tokenized. He is forced to fit into the ‘postcolonial edifice’ that will keep him in a tokenized position. I found the idea of a ‘postcolonial edifice’ somewhat relatable even in today’s society. Companies, schools and overall society celebrate diversity, but only if it fits their box – you’re allowed to celebrate your cultural roots but only if others are able to profit off of it. This also gets into the rocky territory of how one separates true diversity from tokenization.

This idea of true diversity vs tokenization is furthered when José is warned that transformation can hide more fundamental continuities and that ‘nothing has changed’. This book was written 45 years ago and I agree, I don’t think anything has truly changed. I believe that many things have changed to welcome a more equal and free society. However, this society is still built of colonial structures that perpetuate systemic inequality – proving that nothing has truly changed.

Another moment in the novel and lecture that really resonated with me is that José’s transformation was the work of the community around him (which I feel many of us can relate to). I related this to the motif of hands used especially on page 220. The imagery of M’man Tine’s hands made me think about the hands that hold us, cook for us, the hands that labour, the hands that write and the hands that read. This imagery honestly made me a bit emotional.

To me, Black Shack Alley felt like a cyclical novel, but also a novel to break a cycle. Yes, José is breaking out of this ‘postcolonial edifice’ to share his story, but he keeps the cycle of storytelling that has been passed down.

As a closing note, I super recommend ‘The Deep’ by Rivers Solomon. It explores slavery, (post) colonialism and generational trauma through an Afro-futurism lens that is really entertaining to read but also very thought-provoking.

My question for discussion would be: Can you relate to José in any way? Whether it be through a generational lens or an educational one?

What in the Freud did I just read – Agostino

2 Replies

I went into this book expecting a picturesque Italian summer novel ya super cute and fun … I was wrong. Reading this book as a psych major was actually an insane experience, cause all I could think about was Freud, and I had to stop myself from psychoanalyzing Agostino every page.

What I mainly want to focus on in this blog post is a thought I had while reading, “This is crazy to read after The Shrouded Woman’. When I finished the book I remembered how all the books we have read so far in the class somewhat connect. In this case, they all connect in the portrayals of women and how differently they do it. For example, Combray by Marcel Proust and Agostino follows a similar narrative: a young boy and his childhood, specifically moments with his mother. Proust recalls fond memories of his mother’s bedtime kisses after reading to him, Agostino fantasizes about his mother in ways that make me genuinely uncomfortable to read. Agostino’s descriptions greatly mirrored Andre Breton’s descriptions of Nadja, of women as objects of desire and muses rather than people. Adding The Shrouded Woman to the mix makes me upset cause I really liked that book, but I would love to know María Luisa Bombal’s impression of Agostino since The Shrouded Woman describes such messy and real female characters, and Agostino is almost using that to his advantage.

I especially feel the relation to Nadja with the quote “She’s a woman, nothing more than a woman” on page 52. I feel like this could represent Agostino’s internal separation between his mother and his fantasy. On the other hand, I feel like the fact that his mother is “just a woman” almost gives him permission to have these thoughts about her, I relate this to Nadja specifically on the portrayal of a woman as parts of a person, rather than the whole.

Another thing that stuck out to me was how short the novel was, for such an intense story, similar to Bombal. But Agostino didn’t leave me wanting to know more about the characters’ lives, it left me flipping the pages wondering ‘Is this the end of the book’. Because how are you gonna end a book like this with the quotes “You always treat me like a baby” and “But he wasn’t a man, and many unhappy days would pass before he became one”. I did not like how that sat with me when I read it, cause whyyyyy are we writing this!!!??

My question for discussion would be “Why do you think Agostino’s mother remained nameless throughout the novel?” I feel like it could be that to him his mother is simply his mother, so since the book is from his view (kinda) he doesn’t feel the need to call her by her name. Another theory I had would be to maybe separate the object of his fantasy vs the actual person.

The Real Housewives of Bombal

3 Replies

Reading ‘The Shrouded Woman’ by María Luisa Bombal felt like watching a reality TV show. I felt like I was watching the Real Housewives: the first loves, first wives, unhappy marriages… all felt like a TV plot and I loved it!

But for such a packed story, the novel is so short. Even Ana Maria describes her life as ‘small’ and seemingly uneventful. But as a reader, all I see are events and relationships (both good and bad) that have shaped this woman, and the world she lives in. A world of women and femininity.

This world of femininity is especially clear when watching the video lecture and hearing “Dead or alive, a woman remains subject to the gaze of others ‘. This quote in particular stuck with me, as it was true in the 1930s and the 21st century. Maintaining this ‘perfect’ appearance as women is so entrenched in society, that it’s even a motif in many classical literatures and art. There is a certain ‘poeticness’ of female death: that a woman’s death will ensure a ‘beautiful corpse’ (ex. Ophelia in Hamlet).

This notion of women as a subject to gaze upon was heavily prevalent in Nadja by Andre Breton, so I can see why we were told that this novel could be seen as a response to Nadja. Bombal’s narrative focuses on the interconnectedness of these women and their lives. Rather than seeing a woman purely as a ‘muse’ like Breton. These women are viewed as sideline characters by society, but they are the main characters for Ana Maria.

Ana Maria’s relationship with these women reminded me of the Dolly Alderton quote “Nearly everything I know about love, I’ve learnt from my long-term friendships with women.” While Ana Maria was not necessarily friends with all these women, she did have long-term relationships with them, and these relationships influenced her life and her death. These women are all different, what brings them together is their femininity and female agency. These women live in a society where they are not fully able to unleash their agency and fulfill their desires. Ana Maria is only able to reach her full agency in her death, where she can become the object she was always assumed to be. Death is her escape.

Overall, this has been my favourite text while fiction has aspects that feel almost relatable and real. Bombal can create a world of imperfection and messiness yet still full of love, mirroring femininity itself.

My question for discussion would be “How does Bomball challenge or affirm traditional notions of femininity in the text?”