I expected this book to be leaning more on the thriller side, but didn’t mind the twist at all. In fact, I liked how each character has an identity and interesting background. I read some detective/mystery novels, and most of the times new characters would get introduced for the sake of pushing the plot, and pushing the plot only. I think it’s a waste to have characters with no depth. All that being said, I have to agree with my peers: this text is quite dense (apparently the author is known for that?).
In regards to the genre, I didn’t expect something outside of the book can be manipulated like that. In my understandings, genre is something given to the text after its completion. However, if the author intend to make use of the idea of “genre” for this book, then he must have planned the text to accomodate it beforehand. Which makes sense considering the book is based on a real event. Do you know how some movies put “based on a real event” on the end scenes instead of the beginning? That always leaves a sour taste in my mouth. You made me watch two hours of film just to tell me that? How much is accurate to history, what was changed and why? I will then go home and do some research on the internet. Similarily, I was not aware of this robbery had I not read this book. I can tell most of the dialogues and the relationship between the characters were probably made up. That didn’t stop me from going to wikipedia though…
The civilians were absolutely shocked when they see money being burnt. I didn’t quite understand that part. The author described the act of burning money as “losing justifications for the murders they committed”, that “they had no morals nor motive”. If I were a civilian witnessing that scene, I probably would also think “what a waste of money”, but won’t go as far to think about what good the money could have done. Saving orphans? Improving infrastructure? The money was stored in the bank this whole time. The function of the bank is storing the money of the public safely. So, what was burnt was basically the civilians’ money and yet they think “oh no! why didn’t these criminals use the money they stole from me to save the orphans?” Money has power because of how the society is constructed. Without the people, they are just worthless papers.
Question: What do you think about this book’s method of story telling?
¨However, if the author intend to make use of the idea of “genre” for this book, then he must have planned the text to accomodate it beforehand.¨ That is one of Piglia’s tricks as a writer, and perhaps that is why it seems like a dense novel. It’s actually a thriller but other things at the same time. And all in a few pages! This book would be a good example of what Calvino seeks to do, but in a complete plot. I would not be surprised to know that Piglia has analyzed well ¨If on a winter night a traveler…¨
Hi Ryan, I enjoyed reading your post. I liked this novel’s method of storytelling, and how it sort of weaved fiction and non-fiction together. I also think it really added depth to characters such as Dorda, who would not have been as nuanced and interesting if the author stuck strictly to historical facts.
Hi Ryan! I enjoyed your blog post and the points you have brought up! I also love your title because I think it speaks to the sociological idea of money. To me money is just paper but we people give it meaning yk? To answer your question I honestly did not like the story telling method of this book. I feel like I was just constantly confused.
Hey Ryan! Great bp. I get why the civilians are shocked. Although money is just paper, its paper that we have turned into the fabric of society and of life. I think they are shocked because how could you go and just burn something that literally controls everything. After our discussion in class today – it’s like a devout Christian burning a bible, a representation of god.
Hi Ryan!
I understand your point on the “based on true story” part, and I agree in some ways. It also makes me search on the internet about the real incident. It gives the extension of the storytelling I think, as we actively search for another story that was based on (or related to) and compare with the fictitious story the author wrote.
Thanks for the blog post Ryan 🙂 I agree with you about being blind-sighted with this story being based off of real events. I too did not know this until the end of the book and felt a sour taste in my mouth finding out how much of this story ended up being fictional. Even the final point of burning the money is apparently more mythos then reality! Keep up the blog posts and I look forward to reading more of your stuff in the future 🙂
Hey Ryan, I quite liked the way the book tells the story. I found the narrator quite helpful in understanding what was going on, and I liked the fact that they would sometimes repeat something previously mentioned, which helped when I would miss something. The fact that the deaths (in the book) are based on real reports makes it even more interesting, but also kind of grim at the same time.
-Nathan Harris
Hi Ryan!
Nice blog post btw 🙂
To answer your question, I would say that I enjoyed being able to see diffrent perspectives of the same story. I enjoyed how the narrator would look at perspectives of civilians, cops and the criminals. It really helped me to get a better understanding of the world and what was at stake for each character.
Hi Ryan,
I think the method of story telling was definitely a bit unconventional. I found it really hard to follow and I found myself trying to piece it together but I couldn’t get a clear answer. It’s very stimulating and artistic, but it was not my favorite. – Julia Wouters
Hello Ryan,
I enjoyed your post a lot, to answer your question I think it was an interesting way of storytelling that allowed me to empathize with different characters and figure out their thoughts and motivations- Ximena Avendano CAstillo
Hi Ryan,
I thought the book was fiction the whole time I was reading it, honestly in this case I didn’t really mind too much that some stuff could have potentially been made up (like the relationship between Dorda and the Kid). In some cases, I believe that making something historically accurate is important, but in the case of this novel, I feel like the novel would lose an integral part of what made it interesting if the characters weren’t fully fleshed out.
Hi Ryan! Loved your blog post! I also discussed the whole aspect of combining this sense of realism with having it “based on true events” and fiction. It was very interesting to interpret the reading and the narration in our own ways while also understanding that this could have been true or untrue. Maybe that adds to the suspense of it all!
Hi Ryan!
I have to say I found your post interesting because I don’t think I’ve seen many that have questioned the intentions of this novel as much as you have. As for your question, I think that syntax-wise, it was definitely easier to understand compared to some of the other novels we’ve read but it also had several dates, locations or people to remember— it sometimes felt like a dragged on news report to me. So overall, it felt easier to read but also not?
Hi Ryan, first off, I really like the title of your blog! I definitely did like this book’s method of story telling. I think many books are either plot driven or character driven, and I think this novel is really both. We get to know all of the characters, their motives, and what they’re going through throughout the book while also having a very fast-paced and action packed storyline. It was also effective how they kind of merged fiction and non-fiction together as this book is indeed based on a true story (crazy enough).