Tag Archives: love

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.