Author Archives: Ryan Tsang

Conclusion

Hi all, if you don’t know who I am my name is Ryan. It’s not too late to ask for my autograph before I become famous.

Let’s go back to the first lecture. I actually had no idea what Romance Studies was. I enrolled in this course because it has a cool name and fulfills my literature requirement. Who would register in a course without reading the descriptions? Certainly not me, right? To answer one of the prompts for this blog: I learnt what Romance Studies is about.

I read 6 books in this course: Nadja, The Shrouded Woman, The Time of the Doves, Money to Burn, and Faces in the Crowd. I can’t really pick a favourite book. The most memorable ones are Time of the Doves and Faces in the Crowd.  The former was bittersweet: descriptions of the ups and downs of life made me reflect a bunch, while the latter had me thinking hard about what’s going on. A theme that stood out to me across all texts is love. All forms of love, not necessarily romance. Some were twisted and some were regretful.

Something I enjoyed in this course… are all the blogposts! We have what, like 70 people in this course? That’s 70 different ways to interpret the same thing in different ways. I go through many blogposts and got to experience the book from another perspective. In my first post, I said that my goal is to read more “nutritious” books. I think I did that. Having to write a review for every book made me read more seriously, and not just flipping through pages to pass time.

The only complaint I have is for the UBC bookstore. I like having a book in my hand. I like the touch of paper. The bookstore told me they ran out of budget to order books for the remaining year. The same university that gets from the government 5000000 times of what I will ever make in my life, ran out of money to provide the necessary material for a course 🙁 Digital pdf’s just don’t feel the same, you feel me?

Simple question this week! What do you look forward for in the second half of 2024?

Farewell 😀

Faces in the crowd, liars, legs, sense of belonging

Last book of the course 😀 (I wrote this before watching the video lecture)

First of all, I want to say that I enjoyed this book. It was a fun read but it took me about 30 pages to get used to the “jumping between stories” thing. My first impression was, “wow, this woman is making love with everyone, every day”. I read a bit more and realize that, she might be making love but there was no love. She gets lonely, so she gave her keys to many people. Yet she can’t handle it when they are actually visiting her. I thought, just maybe, she doesn’t know how to love. She often tells lies and loves to steal. I wouldn’t go as far to say she believes she doesn’t deserve love because she is a liar, but I think there is something about her own actions that bother her. It’s not guilt, though. It’s like she wants to belong to someone but couldn’t, then she found her husband but her husband doesn’t belong to her completely.

The beginning of the book mentioned young and slim legs a couple times, then there’s the bald guy who likes feet that appeared around page 70, page 98 when children clinged onto the woman’s legs, nothing much after that, page 143 cockroaches’ tiny feet going up and down the stairs, her legs becoming rigid from the scare. I anticipated more “legs” because it was (at least to me) emphasized at the beginning. I tried connecting the dots but nothing came up.

A hundred pages in I already mixed all the stories up. I don’t know what’s real and what’s from the book she was writing anymore. Did the author meant to do that or am I just stupid? We know the woman is a liar. Like Moby, who was supposed to be a made up character was inspired by someone by the name of Bobby. I think half of the notes printed in smaller fonts are made up.

There are two ghosts in this book: Owen the dead guy and Without. Just as I was at the peak of my confusion, blending imagination with reality, Owen became someone that can talk and he had acquaintance. An assistant perhaps. I have more time until class tomorrow, I might re-read the second half of the book… I really did enjoy this book, but it’s not good for leisure reading because once you lost focus you can’t get right back into it.

Last note, I guess my friend wasn’t lying when he said 75% of the artists who draw lewd stuff are women. They also have lewd stuff on their minds.

Question: How did you navigate between the stories within this story? I genuinely need help

Money is just paper

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?

I dove think I can come up with an interesting title

I am still not used to reading. It might be the selection of books in the course, but it’s probably just me. I rarely read books that do not involve supernatural powers or mystery solving. Anyway, I am definitely sensing a pattern here. Why does every book need a problematic figure? To be frank, I felt slightly uneasy with this book. And I know I am probably alone on this one but it’s just all too realistic. I can see everything happening in life. Basically, I only read to escape reality. I want to have fun while reading. Now put all those aside, let’s talk about the actual story (I am running on low battery mode with a messed up sleep schedule).

In The Time of the Doves, we follow the life of Natalia and most importantly her two marriages. Her first husband was an arse, at least to me (feel free to hop onto the bandwagon and use the #arse tag). He is a furniture designer who is pretty self centered. Before they got married, he basically didn’t allow Natalia to have a coversation with any man. She had to apologize by kneeling, in the public, for talking with Pere. Their relationship was also driven by lust. Yet, the most awkward thing about Quimet is how he kept mentioning a woman by the name of Maria which drove Natalia crazy. She would compare herself to this woman (whom she probably have never met) in everything she did. “Maria would look better in this dress”, “Maria can cook this better”, etc. Of course, as readers we are approaching all these from Natalia’s perspective. Naturally, I wonder if there is another side to the story. I think the trustworthiness everything regarding the first marriage depends on how traumatized Natalia was. Oh yeah, I didn’t even mention Quimet died in a war.

Natalia became a single mother of two, until she married Antoni, her second husband. I would describe her second marriage as the complete opposite of the first. Antoni was not a man driven by lust (in fact, he lacks the tool). He was also way more caring than Quimet. I don’t know if young and naive Natalia would marry Antoni, but at this moment in time, this was what they both needed. Antoni wanted to have family but he couldn’t start one, and Natalia’s kids needed a father figure.

Near the end of the book, we witnessed the marriage of Rita, the daughter of Natalia. I actually really enjoyed this part. I initially thought it’s just a fun little section that doesn’t contribute much to the story, but it’s somewhat of a microcosm of Natalia’s experience.

Question: when reading this kind of books, do you put yourself in the eyes of the protagonist? Or do you try to remain a witness?

The Shrouded Woman Over There

Bombal’s The Shrouded Woman is my third book of this course. It is almost February, time really does fly.

Anyway. Prof said last week that The Shrouded Woman might be a response to Breton’s Nadja. I can see why he said that. Surrealism wants to unleash the unconcious mind; modernism challenges readers to approach from a different perspective (a very brief summary of based on my little understanding). This story begins from the “unconcious mind point-of-view”, the corpse, or should I say spirit of a deceased woman. She names her family one by one but ultimately, this story is about her thoughts and experience with love. I wonder if narrating events from a third person view is a modernism thing, I think it’s fairly useful for providing more insights without the risk of ruining the character’s image. The narrator would ask questions to guide the reader’s thinking.

Why then did she bring out that shyness in her? Because of her gestures, perhaps. Those gestures always so harmonious and sure. None of them ever seemed out of place like her own. They never remained in suspense…No, she didn’t really envy her!

I believe, I shouldn’t call her a narrator. Maybe a commentator? Play by play announcer? Bombal’s writing style is also heavy on imagery, the details between the lines are nice. Though not on purpose, but I rarely read books by female authors. I’d say it’s pretty refreshing especially after Proust and Bombal. Not locked into the mind of one character also makes reading so much easier.

In my judgement, this book is not a respone to Breton. This is just a last goodbye tour of a dead woman, something she has to do before peacefully letting go of her mortal life. I’m not sure if she settled for what she had in the end, or something just clicked. To me, she didn’t get the love she wanted, for one reason and another.

Question: If you get the chance to review your life after you have passed, how important is love?

“Nadja? I can fix her.” -Breton

Nadja by Breton is a fever dream. I was a few pages into the lecture transcription and stopped. The lecture provided too many answers to my questions; I want to try and elaborate a bit on my own first.

This is my first time reading a surrealism book. As usual, I avoid learning about the context and background of the author to get a fresh first hand experience. Nadja reads like a diary, soon I realize that the story might be based on real life events and become concerned for the narrator. One thing for sure is that, Breton fell head over toes for the woman, Nadja, and he was on the brink of going mad. He was already quite vulnerable since the beginning, questioning who he is and going on a “self-preservation trip”. The photos are probably there to provide context, but I just find them eerie how there isn’t anyone on the streets.

Breton describes Nadja initially as a “young, poorly dressed woman”. What attracted him was 1. her demeanor (“she carried her head high, unlike everyone else on the sidewalk”) and 2. her eyes (Breton goes into details about her eye make up). Nadja would occasionally get these visions that prompt her to do something. Breton and her went on a trip to Saint Germain because of a vision, and grew concious of what he had been doing. Did he feel guilt for having an affair despite being married? Probably not. He brought up the analogy of “a lapdog laying on Nadja’s feet”. A lapdog, teacher’s pet, whatever you want to call it. He knew at that point he was neck deep in mud, but it’s also not too late to get out–perharps he wanted to submerge completely. Nadja’s vision reminded me of Hildegard von Bingen, a German abbess who sees visions but historians think it’s just a side effect of severe migraine.

My questions is: What made Breton and Nadja attract each other? Was Nadja using Breton to cure her loneliness?

Edit:

I have returned after completing the lecture. It confirmed some of my suspicions. Breton wanted to be like Nadja. As a leader of the surrealism movement, and as a person. I found a transcription of Breton’s lecture on surrealism. This is most likely translated from French. I thought surrealism was only a type of art/literature, but Breton actually believed that they could change the world, in sort of a cult-like way. He said, “[surrealism] provoked new states of conciousness…modified the sensibility, and taken a decisive step towards the unification of the personality, which it found threatened by an ever more profound dissociation” From my understanding after conducting a brief research, members (well, artists) who wish to participate in surrealism activities had to get into Breton’s inner circle. Back to the book. I wonder if this affair with Nadja changed Breton’s view on surrealism. Nadja was basically the final product of what he was trying to achieve. She mixed “dreams” and “reality” into her own reality. However, it was later revealed that Nadja belonged to a psych ward. She was actually crazy. What confuses me the most is how Breton wanted to ride the fine line between sane and insane but retreated because he got scared (probably after the driving incident), yet he continued his surrealism movement and published this book. I would not support his movement after reading this book. I don’t understand the intensions behind writing this book. It was not useful as propaganda material.

Proust’s Combray confuses me

Hello viewers (in James May’s voice). I did a quick scroll on the blog page and so far almost every post about Proust has been negative. I share similar feelings, so I will try to explain it. The story starts by reminiscing the childhood of the protagonist on a sleepless night. The child is a member of an upper class French family, evident by the fact that they have servants, and multiple residences. An emphasis is placed on the child’s bedtime “ritual”, a goodnight kiss from his mother. His father finds it absurd, and usually becomes irritated. The child longs for his mother’s attention and affection.

Now, why do I not enjoy reading Combray? First, I know this story is told from a child’s perspective, but with all the mental analysis and descriptions added by the author, this obsession with “mother’s kiss” weirds me out. After 50 something pages, I still think to myself, “what was the point of all that?” Second, a child that cannot sleep without his mother probably doesn’t think that much (am I missing something?). Wait — hold on. In order to write this blog post, I have re-read part one of Combray a few times, and I am starting to get the gist of it. When you think about the past, everything tends to be slightly exaggerated. For example, a Filet-o-Fish used to be $2.50 ten years ago, which simply isn’t true. The emotions of every character is heavily exaggerated by the author because he is trying to tell the story through the child(again). This kid, who wants the affection of his mother, naturally portrays his father as the bad person.

“My father was constantly refusing me permission for things that had been authorized in the more generous covenants granted by my mother and grandmother because he did not bother about ‘principles’ and for him there was no ‘rule of law’.

While in reality, his father is most likely just a normal, sane person. That’s why the child is so surprised his father allows him to sleep with his mother. However, know that does not make reading this book more enjoyable, at least for me. But, it certainly piqued my interest as I find the way Proust describe these mental battles pretty unique.

Question: Have you ever caught yourself altering memories of the past?

Week 1: Doing donuts in a snowy parking lot

I walked into Mathematics Annex, a building I never visit. The interior was gloomy with a mysterious vibe to it. I had little thoughts about this course. I thought it was a history course, but the first questions asked were about books; I don’t read books a lot. I read words a lot. I read words to pass time. It’s not a good habit. Over the last 5 years, I have read hundreds of “light novels”. They are shorter Japanese novels that’s written with (mainly) one goal in mind: to be picked up by some anime production company. Therefore, the target audience of LN are teens and young adults. After about 20 LNs, you can easily notice a pattern, a formula. They are very, and I mean VERY predictable. Why am I still reading them? When you find that one good book in a pile of bad ones, it’s just extremely rewarding. Anyway, I don’t recommend others to do the same, and I plan to read more “nutritious” books.

Let’s address the title. Snow fall! First snow! Of course, our government was unprepared, as usual. Not a single piece of snow salt was spotted on the main roads. All of last week everyone was anticipating snow fall soon. Today, I left UBC at 5pm, and got home around 730. My average speed was probably 2 km/h. Bicycles were zooming past my car in the snow. I listened to some Chet Baker but then decided I was not in the mood for that (sorry Chet). I had to reward myself for sitting through 2 hours of dreadful traffic, so I went to the nearby parking lot a did some donuts before going home.

I have always wanted to create a blog; I have a lot on my mind but nowhere to spit out. Hopefully, I can get used to the format of this course and take advantage of the opportunity to read more books!

Question: Do you like raw onions? I personally don’t unless it’s in a salad. Yes, it does provide some extra texture on a burger but it takes the spotlight away from the patty. Caramelized onion on the other hand, is a patty’s best friend.

Peace