Nada is a novel based on the story of a young girl who moves to Barcelona in hopes of experiencing the colours of life, and finds herself in the midst of a broken and cruel family.

I really liked this novel. I liked how the explosive and violent energies of the characters and their actions contrasted against the almost comical narration of Andrea, who from the perspective of a young university student, provided the basis for an honest and emotional storytelling of life with her extended family.

What caught me off guard was the amount of violence in the novel, whether it be Juan hitting Gloria, Roman verbally abusing her, or just the general energy of the household and the internal traumas of the characters themselves. I read that the context of the novel is rooted in the post Spanish civil war, and so all the characters and their crushed dreams, problems, and emotional volatility really convey the importance of this novel during the time.

I thought that the relationship between Ena and Andrea was quite interesting. Andrea comes across as a fairly rebellious girl, and it was interesting to see that same sentiment reflected in Ena, who also towards the end of the novel, expressed the joy she received from winding Roman up. There seems to be a strong theme of both freedom, and rebellion, with the latter often bringing out the former. I think this would probably reflect the post-war sentiments, where not only did a chaotic conception of life become alluring or familiar/ordinary due to the on-going war, but maybe seemed like the only way to gain freedom.

I don’t really know anything about the war other than the few google searches I’ve done just now, but it’s clear that Andrea’s family reflected the lower class people that were on the side of a republic. As such, the lives of the lower class and the brokenness and trauma in them is reflected in the characters, who we see from the beginning are very distressed and broken.

My question is: what did you think of Ena and Roman’s relationship? What larger theme did you think it represented? What did it really signify?

First off, I loved this novel. The shrouded Woman by Bombal details the narration of a dead woman who is able to recount her life as a dead body, and present to us moments in her life relating to love, self-worth, and  frustrations with underlying spiritual messages.

I thought Bombal captured the essence of ‘frustrated existence’ incredibly well, with her use of characters that are both naive and childish, as well as deeply sad and longing for things they just can’t seem to grasp or understand before it’s too late, with their ability to understand being overshadowed by the dominating presence of the males in their lives. I thought this narration was so clever, as we are able to get an overview of Ana’s life not as an objective account post-death, but as her living self despite having lived her entire life. It really opened up and explored well the themes of heartache and the troubles of unrequited love and sexual frustration. I could find so many moments within this novel where I was angry at the protagonist for being so childish, empathizing with her situation and feeling bad for her, while also finding parts of myself and my friends in her and while coming back to anger in how she deals with things and the role she gives to the men in her life.

I think what made this read especially prominent was it’s universality in the experiences of women and how they often are made to feel in relationships where they are subordinate and subject to the desires and insecurities of men. This does not underplay their own insecurities, which often times affects not only the men in their lives but ultimately their own lives and sense of self-worth, as we saw with many of the female characters who could’ve been friends or amicable if it wasn’t for the fact that each perceived other women in relation to men.

Ultimately, I felt that the almost ‘obsessive’ portrayal of women in relationships in how their partners see them, and the sadness of their lives when we know of the context that provokes their actions and reactions, really taps into universal themes of the experience of (privileged) women. I find it so incredible that when I read this book, I took so many photos of passages to send to my girlfriends because they were and are so relevant to our modern lives right now, whether it be comparison, making men the centre of our lives and purpose, being mistreated by them, being projected on or limited in relationships, having insecurities and reflecting insecurities, and the ups and downs of the search for love and where a balance of giving and receiving can be found in the constant fight for fulfilment. 

I also really enjoyed the spiritual undertones of this novel, with Ana and the other women’s’ battles over love reflecting complexities of their own identities. Thought this heavily featured the role and emotions of women in regards to relationships and men, it thoroughly explores one set of complexities amongst the many that make up a woman in both her identity and how she is conceived of in society, one that plays a large role and seems inescapable.

My question is: What parts of the novel and the characters did you find yourself relating to if you identify as a woman, and what parts did you find completely inaccurate to your experience? For the men, how do you feel about the portrayal of men in this novel, do you agree or have you seen other men reflect any of the behaviours of the men in the story? And for anyone else, did you relate to the relationship issues that were brought up in the novel, and if so, do you think these themes are universal? If you don’t have experience with relationships or if you don’t relate to romance, how did you feel about identity being so tied to romantic/non-romantic relationships?