Categories
Conclusion

Final Conclusion

Any difficulty I had with reading these books will no longer put me off of classic books! Proust was the hardest for me to read, but it set me up well for the rest of the class.

Throughout the course we hit a series of learning outcomes, so here is a quick how-to for future readers:

1) Engage with the text (take notes, highlight sections that confuse you and excite you
2) Pay attention to how the text makes you feel (emotionally and physically – does your heart race? Do get get mad? I found myself angry at characters many times.)
3) Compare, contrast, and recognize patterns in and across books (many themes and character overlaps, and very interesting differences)
4) Connect with your classmates! Make new friends, this is a great opportunity to meet a diverse group of people and get new perspectives.

Personally, I have seen many patterns across books. Memory was a common theme, especially in fragmentations – Proust, of course, is the main one that comes to mind. Reading it felt like walking through a mirror house where every turn there was a new memory, a way out of the current one, only walk into a reflection of madeleines and mommy’s kiss again. I had a similar frustrating feeling when reading a recent book, Faces in The Crowd (Luiselli), where each fragment of the story could have been a memory of one of two main characters, adding another layer of confusion. Nevertheless, the frustration was not unwelcome, just annoying, and allowed me to reflect on what books I don’t find this frustration.

This course lived up to my expectations: looking at text through a personal and analyzing themes. I was surprised that our books weren’t necessarily “romantic” but had subtle romance stories with little to no sex.

My favourite reading was Money to Burn. I found it the most entertaining and different where romance was between two gay people, and the characters were people I could not relate to. I felt like I was reading into a whole new world. My least favourite reading (I’m sorry to say) is Proust’s because I simply did not enjoy reading it. I dreaded the time I put into it and it was hard to read. But I did it, and as my mom always tells me, I can do hard things! Being able to finish the book with a decent analysis made me feel accomplished.

So, in conclusion, what is Romance Studies? Like Jon says, we, too, are tasked with inventing Romance Studies. We can choose what it is, if we want. Is there a wrong answer? The course description says we explored main themes that shaped the Romance World in the age of the nation state, imperialism, colonization, and decolonization. As such, Romance Studies seems to be almost the study of language and literature. We read and interpret and analyze and connect, maybe in more than one language. This course was so fun! Thanks.

Sarah

Categories
Luiselli

You take the man out of the city, not the city out the man – Joe Keery

With our narrator saying “It all began in another city and another life” makes me think of how many people grow up in a place that shapes them, and may end up moving away to a place that suits them better (p. 1). “…in that apartment, in that other city” (p. 5). Choosing an environment — or, another city — can seem like a fresh start, but most of the time, the place that shaped you stays with you. Joe Keery, who plays Steve in Stranger Things, wrote a song “End of Beginning” that has the lyrics “You take the man out of the city, not the city out the man,” referencing how he moved from Chicago to Los Angeles, but lives with the influence of Chicago everyday. This is relevant to our narrator because she is writing a book in Mexico City but reflecting on her time in New York, perhaps even reminiscing, like her apartment with many holders of keys and the people who carry them. “Reciprocity, not generosity,” since she didn’t like to be alone (p. 7). Moby, Dakota, Pajarote, and even plants with a silent presence (p. 12).

However, our narrator tells her son that the story she is writing is a ghost story (p. 13). Are these people real? “Moby exists. Or perhaps not” (p. 8). Perhaps the title of the book references ghosts more directly; supposedly, Ezra Pound had seen his dead friend Henri
Gaudier-Brzeska in a large crowd (p. 14). The first time we see a “face in the crowd.” I often got the sense that somethings may have happened, or not. Perhaps everything was true, or made up, or exaggerated. The notes we see throughout the book about Owen; are they true, or are they based on Zvorsky our narrator could convince White to publish him? (p. 38). Perhaps she is also trying to convince us, and herself, that he was real.

I’ll answer the question from the lecture video: what other similarities did I notice between the main characters: the woman, Owen, and even the woman’s husband? Some correlations or repetitions I noticed was reflection in general; they loved to think back to their youth in New York and talk about the people they met. “… I thought I saw Owen’s face among the many other faces of the subway. It was only for a second. But I was sure he had seen me too” (p. 37). Another example of seeing a face in a crowd; perhaps we see who we want to see among many. The subway seems to be a meeting place between times, where Owen and our narrator can see each other.

My question: is this really a ghost story? Or is it a metaphor? I’d love to discuss what is fiction and fact – much like our narrators husband.

Categories
Agualusa

Fragments of Lies: The Book of Chameleons

I quickly realized why José Agualusa’s “The Book of Chameleons” was titled as such: many character’s take on different colours, changing based on their environments. Even the first-person narrator isn’t a chameleon, but a gecko. As stated in the lecture, the Portuguese original title means “The Seller of Pasts,” referencing the albino, Felix Ventura. The titles of the chapters are good examples of change too, correlating with the changing environments and characters of interest; “The House,” for example (pg. 7), then “The Foreigner” (pg. 13).

The perspective of the narration changes too, from first perspective, to second, to third: “I was born in this house…” (pg. 3), “A wide doorway takes you from the library into the corridor” (pg. 9),”Felix Ventura studies…” (pg. 15), and continues shifting perspectives throughout the book. Playing with perspectives is another example of “changing colours” (like chameleons), where our brains as readers can shift alongside the grammar and linguistics included in the different anecdotes.

The fragmented chapters puzzled me at times, however, making me confused, alongside the multitude introductions of characters. I think this correlated will with Eulálio’s day to day life where he slept all day (except when interrupted, like the scorpion appearing), and dreaming of conversations.

“Lies,” he explained, “are everywhere. Even nature herself lies. What is camouflage, for instance, but a lie? The chameleon disguises itself as a leaf in order to deceive a poor butterfly. He lies to it, saying. Don’t worry, my dear, can’t you see I’m just a very green leaf waving in the breeze, and then he jets out his tongue at six hundred and twenty-five centimeters a second, and eats it.”

 

He took my pawn. I was silent, dazed by the revelation and by the distant brilliance of the sea. I could only remember someone else’s phrase:”I hate lying, because it’s inexact” (Dream No. 5, pg. 122).

My question relates to this quote, as it’s the only time actual chameleons are mentioned: is Agualusa suggesting people can really change? Or are they putting on a mask, a face, lying to themselves and others, and regress to their old selves after they’re tired of blending into different versions in different environments? (Or can’t help it, since their past always seems to catch up to them.) It seems like this is the overall message, but I’d love to hear more people’s thoughts on this.

As for the psychology in this book, it seems to touch on false memories. It’s commonly known that people’s memories are unreliable, influenced by biases and heuristics. After-all, the world seen through our eyes shapes our truth. When Ventura gives the foreigner a new name and past, and it’s revealed “true” after Buchmann does some digging, suggesting his stories were not false at all. (Of course, the plot-twist was it was, which I enjoyed.)

The Book of Chameleons eBook : Agualusa, José Eduardo, Hahn, Daniel: Amazon.ca: Kindle StoreThe Book of Chameleons | Book by Jose Eduardo Agualusa, Daniel Hahn | Official Publisher Page | Simon & Schuster Canada

Two different title pages of “The Book of Chameleons.” I like the cover page with the silhouettes of people because it foreshadows how people “change” too.

Sarah

Categories
Uncategorized

Money to Burn – Who knew giving gunmen a love plot would make me like a book?

Piglia must have done extensive research to complete this book, especially publishing it 12 years after the robbery happened. However, this impacted my engagement while reading. At times, I felt like the monologue was saying: “This happened at this time, this happened here, this happened there…” and recaptured my attention with the details of the characters.

I enjoyed this biography-esque based book that blended fiction and truth. I learned this was based on a true story where Argentine author Ricardo Piglia wrote something closer to home for him: a robbery done in San Fernando, Buenos Aries that left many dead, and money never recovered. Writing a novel with events such as The Battle of Liberaij is smart; it’s engaging, and feels more real and tangible.

I loved how each character had a nickname, including”Crow” Mereles’s girlfriend: Blanquita. I know “blanca” can be white in english, and “-quita” as a way to say “small.” AKA little white. Ironic considering the last book I read for this class, “The Lover,” had a nickname for the nameless French girl: petite blanche. Her nickname addressed her social and race class alongside power dynamics, and I think this applies and Blanquita where she’s 15 when she first meets the supposed gunman (pg. 14). However, I’m not aware of Mereles age, and Blanquita is middle-class (pg. 70). Even so, I think including people’s names and even nicknames points out how labels are powerful and hold meaning. “They call him the Gaucho, because he lived in the countryside for a long time, out in Dolores…” (pg. 91).

“Another Queen of the Night taken prisoner for disobeying the rules of trade” (pg. 80). I think this quote captures the rebellious feel of the book entirely. While this particular quote was addressing “the lad” who dressed like a queen who wore a lot of makeup was arrested, I think it also can be applied to the group of gunmen too. While they aren’t Queens, they are different, each with a trouble like a nervous disorder, OCD like symptoms, schizophrenia, and/or addiction, etc… and society tends to punish those who go against the norms, or “the rules of the trade.”

“The Kid might be powerful but he was kneeling there on the ground” (pg. 84). I liked this depicted contrast because it has hints if internal homophobia. At times, the Kid would leave the flat to meet other people, particularly men. When he met Giselle (but her name is Margarita), he also said, “1 like men, from time to time, ’cause when I’ve spent a long while without going out, I get bored.” Blaming his sexuality on boredom may be a coping mechanism through denial, especially when he’s been known to be sensitive when talking about his masculinity (pg. 91). I was sad when the Kid died in the Gaucho’s arms 🙁

My question: where did the Kid and the Gaucho’s hate for the police come from? (There doesn’t seem to be one answer, which I like.)

I would love to explore the idea of justice in this book more in class.

Sarah

 

Categories
Duras

“How could I know everything at 18, but nothing at 22?” TSwift and The Lover

“Never again shall I..” “From now on I’ll…” “I shall…” “I’ll always have…” (pg. 34). I miss the childlike naivety of knowing everything. While this paragraph seems to be the narrator reflecting on her life, it can also be a manifestation of the young girl determined to be with a man who is majorly, inappropriately, much older than her, but has money. The narration feels disconnected between reflection and description, so sometimes I found it puzzling to understand who’s voice was in focus.

“He’s weak, probably a helpless prey to insult, vulnerable” (pg. 38). I mean, yeah, a pedo is likely to have these characteristics because weak men prey on who they think is weak: children. “He’s twelve years older than I, and this scares him” (pg. 49). This man knows it’s wrong, even crying while having sex with her. “[He could] penetrate the other woman with his desire for her, the white child” (pg. 115). GROSS.

Yet no one intervened directly. Her mother of course did shame and hit her with the coaxing of the older brother (pg. 58 – 59). Although the elder brother is an asshole, the girl’s “desire obeys [her] elder brother, rejects [her] lover” (pg. 53). However, if the girl was seeing a white man, would her brother behave the same way?

Early on, the lover’s father said he “won’t let his son marry the little white whore from Sadec” (pg. 35). So it was definitely frowned upon, but it seems like the young child was punished more than the adult male, regardless of their race. This difference in punishment emphasizes an interesting dynamic: the girl has the privilege of being white, but the oppression of being a woman, while the man has the privilege of being a man, but the oppression of being Chinese. “From the first we knew we couldn’t possibly have any future in common” (pg. 49). Is this because they are both aware of their class difference, or race difference? Both? Something else? I think this text demonstrates the complexity of intersectionality and oppression well.

The dinner scene is sour. “We all treat my lover as [my elder brother] does. I myself never speak to him in their presence” (pg. 51). “…[my lover] could take any sort of treatment from me and still go on loving me” (pg. 51). These quotes show another layer of racism in this book where a white family, though impoverished, has the entitlement to ignore and dismiss a man paying for their meal because he is Chinese. Quote two takes it a step further, suggesting a rich Chinese man will romanticize white people despite how he is treated. Crazy entitlement from white people shown here (I say as a white woman).

As for my title, it seems as though our white french girl knows everything. She knows she uses her lover for his money, and he will always love her anyway. She knows what is expected of her as a white girl, and follows rules in public, especially around her older brother. However exploited, the narrator seems to know that, therefore knowing “nothing” at an older age.

My question: what would our French girl’s life look like if she had a father in her life?

Categories
Lispector

The Hour of the Star – YOLO

In the dedication by the author (actually Clarice Lispector), she wrote: “And—and don’t forget that the structure of the atom cannot be seen but is nonetheless known.” This poetic sentence seems to demonstrate a theme of the book where the narrator attempts to capture the unseen: Macabéa. “And my duty, however artlessly, to reveal her life” (pg. 5).

I didn’t like how the narrator wrote about how a male writer could only capture this story in a clear and meaningful way “because a woman would make it all weepy and maudlin” (pg. 6). Ironic as the author is female. I would think Lispector included this in the narrator’s perspective because a man would think this particularly in the time it was written. Perhaps even some men would think this now… which is why I appreciate reading books like this because it reminds us that problems and perspectives back then are still relevant today.

This book made me think of Vancouver and the experiences of the impoverished. With the cost of living increasing, and living paycheque to paycheque as a working student, I’m very aware of my privilege of having a family to fallback on worse case scenario. It makes me sad to think of Macabéa having shitty people in her life that she can’t rely on anymore after her aunt passed, and therefore anyone else.

I liked how we weren’t introduced to Macabéa’s name until about halfway through the novel; it felt as though we were learning who Macabéa was alongside the narrator, which I’m sure is purposeful (pg. 35). Landing on a name for a character — who’s “creator” claims to love this character alone — alongside him is quite fun (pg. 21).

I found it puzzling and uncomfortable how the narrator cared so much about Macabea’s “sex:” “mute but unexpectedly covered with thick and abundant black hairs— her sex was the only vehement sign of her existence” (pg. 61). This passage was sudden and surprised me. It seems to emphasize how the narrator is critical of her, however obsessed with creating her. As if to make his story successful, he talks about her as if she is living and breathing person, not someone who he has created in his head – in this way, I think it makes writing easier for him; however, he suffers from writing block and even gets tired of his characters (pg. 61). I love that detail.

And of course, with the full circle of “yes” makes this story seem very satisfying to end (pg. 3 and pg. 77). The ending feels like closure, even when it’s also open ended as the narrator points out we’re all going to die someday, and our stories continue until then. Since he played God the whole book, it felt like a poke at readers to remind us we don’t have a lot of control over our time of death. YOLO!

My question: “The girl did not know that she existed, just as a dog doesn’t know it’s a dog” (pg. 19). Why wasn’t Macabéa aware she existed/was unhappy?

Sarah

 

Categories
Rodoreda

Hey Siri: Play “Free Bird” by MOONLGHT

Why is it that older generations have stories of meeting their partners in the creepiest ways? When my grandmother met my grandfather, she said she hated him at first because he would follow her around her university campus and try to get on the same work schedule as her just to talk to her. Romance or stalker vibes? Quimet running after Natalia reminded me of my grandparents. “… years later he’d still talk about [the day we first met]…” and the first day they met was Quimet pursuing Natalia to the point of her RUNNING FROM HIM and not looking both ways before crossing the street so she almost got hit by a car (pg. 19). She was running away from him, and told him she was engaged. Yet he still ran after her. Scary instead of romantic. Right at the start, I did NOT like Quimet.

Another thing I didn’t like was how Quimet said if Natalia wanted to be his wife she had to start by liking everything he liked (pg. 22). He didn’t like blackbirds, so she couldn’t like blackbirds. Perhaps this is why he calls her Colometa; his little dove, as doves tend to be white. His obsession with birds may be foreshadowing his abuse and narcissism since he likes to control things, including Natalia, basically treating her like an object and something to capture and control. Additionally, Natalia felt bad about leaving Pere: “when I thought about leaving Pere it hurt me inside and the hurt made me realize I’d done something wrong” (pg. 21.). It seems as though Pere was good for her, yet she wanted more.

I like how Rodoreda is purposeful with her character creation. Since I disliked a character so quick, and had such a powerful emotion of anger, she’s doing something right. If I liked all the characters, it would likely be a boring read. I feel anger toward Natalia too for choosing Quimet, but Rodoreda’s demonstration of a woman in domestic violence is important. With power imbalance centring their relationship, Quimet and Natalia have different levels of control. Quimet has control over himself and Natalia while Natalia doesn’t have any control. The threat of harm and poverty lies over her head. In a situation like that, she has little to no choice but to stay in order to avoid harm. This is why support for domestic violence victims is so important: chances to escape someone they love who hurts them is dangerous and difficult.

I found it puzzling why Quimet kept saying “poor Maria” (pg. 22 – 121). Was she an ex? Was she a metaphor for the harmed Natalia? Cintet, Quimet’s closest friend, told Natalia that he was sure Quimet never knew a woman named Maria (pg 121). This makes it seem as though Maria was a codename – for what, I’m still not sure. Maria is mentioned one last time on page 121. As such, my question is: who is Maria?

Sarah

 

Categories
Moravia

Agostino: A woman doesn’t pay attention to me anymore? I guess I’m just a loser.

The opening scene of “Agostino” sets the tone of the text: toxic male jealousy. As a 13-year-0ld boy, Agostino loves the attention of his mother. Whether or not this was incestious, it demonstrates how important his mother is to him, and when she gives attention to other men, Agostino gets marvelously jealous. This “jealousy” fades he learns what acts lovers do (pg. 40). I noticed within the opening scene, “his” mother is transitioned into “the” mother, and I wonder if this symbolizes how Agostino separates their familial relation into another (p. 4). Another example on page 6: after a young man had asked his mother for a ride, Agostino suddenly describes her as “the woman” walking behind the man, “meekly, with her usual languid and majestic serenity.” I’d like to talk about this use of pronouns more in class.

This toxic masculinity seems to stem from his obsession with being better than other men. In other words, he cares more about what men think of him than women do, yet he uses women to get validation from other men. He describes his interactions with his mom on the beach as if others would be watching with jealousy (p. 1), or dancing with “a female cousin” at an event until she received another offer from another man (p. 7). His insecurities come from rejection because the women in his life tend to look for “better” men; yet, he comes off narcissistic to hide those insecurities (p.78).

At the same time, Agostino’s mother is comfortable flirting with Renzo in front of him, of which a 13-year-0ld boy (or any aged son) may be uncomfortable with. He notices how his mother’s demeanor changes from strong and graceful to a “feminine clumsiness” so she could gain attention from Renzo accompanying them (p. 11). At times, he often feels like his mother is choosing another man over spending time with him, like when she goes into the water with Renzo instead of rowing with Agostino (p. 13). When he sarcastically brought up how they weren’t going into the ocean because the Renzo didn’t show, she softly slapped his cheek at the comment (p. 14). All of this reinforces Agostino’s idea that he isn’t enough for women, and that all men are better than him. Insecure, yes, and his mom has the right to spend time with a romantic interest, but maybe not in the way she is doing it directly in front of him.

I was reminded of a study done with monkeys, trying to answer the question: “Does testosterone make men inherently violent?” Testosterone predicts dominance, social status, and aggression only when necessary to maintain that status; hence the boy fights between Agostino and the other boys (p. 25). Using women as a way to maintain status seems to cause toxic masculinity that harms both genders, which is why it’s important for everyone to have healthy social circles and good friends. Agostino doesn’t seem to have many friends, very reliant on his mother for attention, and thus is thirsty for validation from the boys on the beach.

My question: is Agostino really attracted to his mother, or is she the closest person to him and isn’t aware of her sexually until he learns what sex is?

Sarah

Categories
Bombal

Bombal: Ana Maria as a Mirror Reflecting Life as a Woman in the 20th Century

I loved reading a piece of literature from the 20th century that emphasizes the life and experiences of a woman, written by a woman. Many romance novels centering woman written by men tend to focus on women’s bodies more, seeming to objectify them, and the conflict in the stories tend to centre men. In “The Shrouded Woman,” we got to experience the woman’s life more, particularly her family, class, and gender dynamics.

I liked how Bombal explored what happens after death while still able to have senses and thoughts. She introduced Ana Maria as a dead body, but in a way that makes her very much alive and conscious, so she seems more human with access to the living and memories. While she is still a subject to the gaze of others, she reminds me of a mirror, a reflection into her life where she can gaze upon her past experiences.

While I describe Ana Maria as a mirror, I also acknowledge the title of the book: the shrouded woman. This suggests she’s ready to be buried and concealed from view, much like the image of a mirror with a cloth covering it. Why cover her? Perhaps it’s a custom, but I like to think about it in a more poetic way: she reflects the truth, particularly about how women are treated at this time, and some people can’t face it. Covering her up may be easier.

A Metaphor: Ana Maria as a mirror, reflecting her past. However, the cloth making the shrouded mirror may suggest the truth is hidden and covered up, even in death.

I first found it puzzling the way Ana Maria’s love interests were introduced, and then I realized they may reflect her resources. As a teenager, she fell in love with Ricardo (her first love), who eventually abandoned her and their unborn child. This shows how men can drop a woman at anytime to chase after their dreams, while Ana Maria couldn’t – her dream was to be with Ricardo, suggesting women. Then she marries Antonio, who tolerates her, though she had to marry in order to gain status even if love wasn’t always involved. Fernando seems more like a friend if anything, where she experiences respect, but no love.

I didn’t love the second person POV (“you”) because I was confused about if Ana Maria was talking to me or another character.

I would love to talk more about the elements of nature in class, particularly the rain she hears in her coffin. My question: is this a metaphor for weeping? Though Ana Maria finds comfort in the sound it seems.

Sarah D

Categories
Breton Nadja

Breton and Nadja: Two peas in a pod?

I really enjoyed Nadja and how it included photos and drawings. Right at the start of the book, I noticed the question, “Who am I?” can correlate well with the themes of surrealism and the unconscious. Breton follows this question by suggesting parts of him “haunts” others. He clarifies that he doesn’t view himself undead, but alive, playing a ghostly part. I think this emphasizes how disconnected he feels towards others; we see how he seems to observe more than act, particularly when it comes to Nadja. He seems to accept people for who they are, coming off more passive than active in their lives. In this way, I resonate with Breton.

I like how we meet Nadja in the second half of the book alongside Breton. He describes meeting her on the boulevard in Paris randomly and spontaneously, being drawn toward her based on her vibes. Her eyes seemed important to him, too. The two converse on the boulevard where we learn she is self conscious about her status, seemingly poor (though we learn she is poor in the sense of mental health), and she tells Breton her name of which she came up with herself: Nadja. Russian for the beginning of the word “hope.”

It’s interesting how Breton ties this part of the story back to the opening question: “Just then she thinks of asking who I am (in the most limited sense of these words). I tell her.” (pg. 61). I like the lack of detail on his own introduction because it emphasizes how Nadja overwhelms and dominates the conversation, often talking about herself. The less detail about Breton is also nice because we heard so much about him in the first half of the book, and it’s a slight call back to his feelings of “haunting” others. I got the sense that he feels that he doesn’t seem to — or want to —  impact a lot of people, but Nadja seemed to impact him a lot. (Particularly when she was institutionalized and he distanced himself…)

I didn’t enjoy the lack of chapter breaks. I found it hard to choose when to stop reading because I felt no closure or sense of “end.” However, my own choice to pause felt spontaneous at times – which I think Breton would like. It’s puzzling though why he didn’t include any breaks.

I would love to talk about the last line of the book more in class: “Beauty will be CONVULSIVE or will not be at all.” I interpret it as beauty should be shocking, otherwise it’s non-existent. How else could be it interpreted?

It seems as though Nadja haunts Breton. Maybe he felt like he had to write about her to make her as tangible as she once was, especially since he doesn’t see her anymore. Perhaps he’s questioning whether or not she was real in the first place… hence my question: does Nadja feel real to him, or does he use her existence as prominent personification and metaphor of his unconscious?

 

Spam prevention powered by Akismet