Tag Archives: Mexico

Weekly Book Blog

Bolaño’s Amulet; thinking about Auxilio

For this week, we were given the task of reading Amulet by Robert Bolaño. I found this to be one of the best books we’ve read in this course so far. This book, like many of the other ones, have the consistent theme of memory, and I think repetition. The story is one long monologue, from Auxilio’s perspective. I seem to enjoy Auxilio as a character, “the mother of all young Mexican poets”. Something about her makes me really like and sympathize with her, especially when she’s recalling traumatic memories like the bathroom (which she recalls A LOT… repetition amirite?), or having to find accommodation while not wanting to overstay her welcome. One of the most quotable moments I read in the book was, “I lost my teeth but not my discretion, my tact, my sense of propriety” (Bolaño, 37). That was a very memorable line for me. It’s like she just wants to fit in, but also float around, which I find kind of cool. Auxilio doesn’t have many material possessions, but I think she possesses a lot of character and individuality which I noticed while reading. Something that I found a bit confusing during my reading was the constant references to ‘ash’ and damage, which I infer is reference to the revolution, the army occupation of UNAM, or of the coup (I can’t narrow which one is the best fit). It’s like her mind is dusted and ashy in a way. On another note, I felt as if Auxilio was always just sort of around. I say this especially due to the fact that the story is set up in a quite fragmented manner. The narrator is constantly recalling different stories to create one (I hesitate to call fluid, but I might play with the idea of it) narrative that is like her life. For example, there was a solid shift between hearing about Auxilio’s friend, and then hearing a ton about Arturito and Ernesto. Both memories are being called from different times in Auxilio’s life, but are almost told as a story; like she has already lived these moments. 

I really think that the narrators point of view is interesting, but slightly frustrating at the same time. I like how readers get a very raw sort of perspective from Auxilio, to the point where you can see that she’s still trying to think of her older memories and having difficulty recalling them as well. However, the crux of the matter is this, which leads to my question of the week: How do you think the narrative point of view limits what the readers get from the whole story? To simplify the question a bit more, do you think that Auxilio’s way of narration limits what we know? Auxilio seems like an unreliable narrator who is not telling us everything, which only gives us a certain amount of understanding of the story. I think that if the way the story was narrated (without an unreliable narrator), there is a good chance we would have a different story, or the same story but with different information. For example, I think there is a good chance that we would learn more about Juan and how he got into the situation with the King; maybe it was intentionally written so that we’d never know. However, its always interesting to think about how stories could be different if tweaks were made to a character or narrative style. 

With all this said, I would recommend this book especially due to its quotable nature. There are many lines I will continue to think about, especially these two (because I couldn’t choose one; “memory plays malicious tricks on me when the light of the waning moon creeps into the women’s bathroom like a spider” (101), or “If you have friends you’re never alone (61). 

Standard
Weekly Book Blog

The Old Gringo Review

For this weeks book, I read The Old Gringo, by Carlos Fuentes. To be honest with you, I found this book to be a little bit confusing, but for a few different reasons. 

At the beginning of my reading, I found the old gringo’s motivation to be a bit strange; he has come to Mexico to die? Once I got more into the reading, I found myself affirming that Bierce (the old gringo) has very little to live for. It’s even exemplified on page 45 of my copy, in which the main character says, “To the earth and sky alike, to the vegetation of the desert, to whatever took form in sense or consciousness, this incarnate suffering addressed that silent plea: ‘I have come to die. Give me the coup de grace’ “ (Fuentes, 45). I did not know what a ‘coup de grace’ was until looking it up, but it actually refers to the final blow given to a wounded person or animal in order to kill them. Even the main character acknowledges that this is the final thing he wants to finish his life off. That really speaks to the characters life, Bierce seems relatively well thought out in his actions and decisions, and it’s interesting that Arroyo finds that within Bierce too. The Old Gringo’s reasoning as to why he’s come to die is gone into depth later in the novel, but I found it really telling, and a bit of a sad reveal into Bierce’s life.
Now, to discuss Harriet Winslow, who is another interesting character in this novel. Originally when I was introduced to her, I found her to be sort of naive; she spent her time thinking that the Miranda’s would come back to their burning hacienda (the Miranda’s being her employers). There was also a line in the novel in which Winslow said that coming to Mexico was her ‘duty’, and that sort of made me think about what her motivation was; why did she choose Mexico, to teach the children who were going to be a ‘challenge’ for her? I know we receive quite a decent amount of her backstory (with her beau Mr. Delaney, the death of her father), but I want to know exactly why this American girl made this decision. It sort of reminds me of Bierce’s motivation; Bierce comes to die, to fight in the Mexican revolution. Harriet comes to Mexico as a new thrill (or ‘cheap thrill’ as a line in the book puts it); could that also be a motivator for Bierce? 

Another aspect I found to be a little confusing was the relationships between Harriet and Bierce, and Harriet and Arroyo. I did not know if Harriet and Bierce’s relationship was one of a father and daughter, or a romantic one. Furthermore, I found that Harriet and Arroyo’s relationship was very confusing, because I did not know if she felt affection, anger, hatred (or a mixture of all) towards him. After some thinking, I wonder if the bit of confusion I was feeling about these relationships was intentional, and Fuentes knew how he was setting these connections up. 

Something that I found when I was doing a bit of research on the book was that Fuentes wrote this book over about 20 years; I don’t know if it is just the effects of a good book and author, but there were some lines that I found were very wise and seemed to be the reflection of someone with life experience. One that particularly stood out to me was spoken by the old gringo, in which he says: “the only way you escape corruption is to die young.” I know that’s spoken by an older character in the novel, but it feels so enriched with Fuentes’ life experience. A question I would like to leave you is this: Do you think that The Old Gringo would be able to exist as a novel if Bierce’s motivations were different? To further elaborate upon this question, do you think that it would be possible for this novel to exist if Bierce did not want to die? 

Standard