THE SEMESTER IS ALMOST OVER? (CONCLUSION POST)

2 Replies

We did it. We did it, everyone. We made it to the end of the semester and this will be the last blog post for the course. Applaud yourselves on the back for all the readings you have done, blog posts you wrote, as well as all of the discussions you went through. Most importantly, a huge applause to the TAs and our professor for the course, Dr. Jon Beasley-Murray. I’m surprised how quick the semester flew by and that I somehow managed to get myself writing a weekly blog post and commenting on classmates’ posts. I signed up for this course as part of my literature requirement, but I had initially thought this course was all about reading romantic books originating from different languages, but it turns out, it is much more.

Now, reflecting back to all the readings we have done throughout the semester, I noticed common remerging themes. Aside from the discussions of books being gendered, characters having asshole husbands or boyfriends, sexism, politics (including war), and coming of age, were the most prominent recurring themes with all the books we have read. I liked how we explore books from a range of centuries and read the translations from various languages. In addition, we read books with varying levels of difficulty, which I believe encourages us to think about and engage with the material, even if we did not particularly indulge with the book itself. For example, The Hour of the Star by Lispector, was a more challenging book to read because of the confusion between narrators and characters, but also it being a challenge makes you want to understand why it was difficult or confusing? However, this is not to say that the books where it was more tedious to follow, for example, Combray, were enjoyable. In fact, I did not really enjoy reading it because quite frankly, the style was just not my cup of tea.

The range of books we have read in the class also had authors not just from varying cultural backgrounds and eras, but also distinctive styles of writing. I found how the style of writing can also be metaphorical in the way it can be connected to the storytelling. For example, Death without Interruptions, had many long sentences without a period in sight. When you think deeply about what a period does, you can also think about how the function of a period indicates the end of the sentence, and think through how that could be representative of the citizens being immortal in the book.

Overall, this course has really allowed me to see the varying styles of writing, interpretations, as well as how we can collectively think about the translations in writing. I am proud that I have made it through completing the contract (after some revisions and breaking it one time, but this was way before the deadline to revise the contract). I think that with this course and semester coming to an end, I can only think more about selecting more books that are outside of my preferred genres of non-fictions or simple romantic fiction. This course has been well organized and it has been overall fun to write blog posts. I truly enjoyed hearing some of the engaging discussions along with reading some of the posts because quite frankly, some of you had the most creative, honest, and humorous titles.

My Brilliant Friend, Ferrante

5 Replies

This week’s last and final reading of choice is My Brilliant Friend by Ferrante. This is also the first physical copy of a book I have in this class, and what I have to say is that it’s easier to indulge into a book when you have the actual copy in your hands. With that said, here is my last and final book review for the course.

Impressions:

Now, my first impression of this book was wow, this is long. Although the book was long, it takes on a very different perspective than previous books we have read because we get to have a deep dive into the character’s life journey and development. This made me feel more attached to the characters, especially with Lila, who from the beginning since childhood had me thinking that she was a literal girlboss (a more generation z terminology to describe a girl or woman who is independent and successful). Not only was she academically gifted and on top when it came to every subject, but also what really made me like her as a character was when she pushed Marisa for calling another girl a whore (p. 40).

The jealousy that the main character, Lenu, had in the beginning during childhood seemed to make me like Lila more than the main character herself. Firstly, she thinks of her as being prettier than Lila, like is she not your friend? Also, she was jealous of Lila being better in academics than her and beating people like Alfonso, the son of Dan Achilles. Understandably, this was occurring mostly during childhood and the beginning of the adolescence chapters, so how she felt is probably a part of how the nature of growing up was. I also find that what brought Lila and Lenu together was not their interest in academics, but also because they both grew up in a household with violence.

In the book, I disliked how many side characters there were, as there were so many names of children who don’t seem to have played a significant role in either Lenu or Lila’s life. It made it a tad bit hard to follow with the plethora of characters I thought I had to keep up with. In addition, what I really disliked was how the author didn’t give Lila more time in the book, and only really gave her the moment to shine in the beginning of the book. Yes, she’s not necessarily the protagonist, but also the author made her more likable or attachable to me than Lenu. I felt like I had so much anger for how Lila’s character was just boiled down once she left school, which was unusual of her character, to join her father as a shoemaker. I feel like we don’t learn much about Lila after she gets married to Stefano, and I think that Lila was portrayed as more of the main character than Lenu in the beginning, so it felt like a bummer.

Question:

Why do you think she left her academics behind to pursue shoemaking? Do you think this was to satisfy her father?

Saramago – Death with Interruptions

1 Reply

Impressions

This week’s choice of book is Death with Interruptions by Saramago. The book is unique and distinctive from other books we have read because it grapples with a more philosophical approach to it, specifically on the topic of death. I am not too much of a taboo individual, but seeing the word death constantly does not feel comforting at all. The word itself reminds me of a skull in one of those hoodies or cape holding a scythe, which I guess makes more sense in the later part of the book when the word itself becomes a being. The beginning of the book unveils what appears to be sudden immortality as no one in the country seems to be dying, despite deaths occurring the day before. Immortality seems to have permeated the society, but no one quite knows why.

Interestingly, I do think that Saramago intentionally turned death into a character because well, for one, talking about death constantly is depressing, but also I think there is a deeper philosophical essence to it. For example, Death is described as being a woman (p. 141), which when you think about it, anything nature or environmental related is typically associated with having feminine energy or being a woman. We see this to be the case when you hear people talk about the Earth being a mother or ‘mother nature.’ Seeing how death in the book was once just a concept or what would be seen as marking the end of life, but in this book, it paradoxically turns into a character or what mimics life itself.

One thing I noticed about the book is the lowercase, as well as the switching between lowercasing and capitalization of the first letter for names. It is mentioned that in the letter of the newspaper the character, Death did ask to have her name to be restored to death, however, the letter also talks about one day finding about Death with a capital D (p. 123). There were also instances where names don’t have capitalization such as the list of names on page 125 or the name of the famous musician, Johann Sebastian Bach (p. 190). One thing that I believe could explain this is that the capitalization emphasizes whether or not the character is alive or technically no longer alive. The newspaper does talk about how one will understand between full and empty, but why would she want to have her name be restored and then capitalized. I don’t really know, but I presume there is a philosophical meaning behind it because death itself is still an unknown thing. We don’t know what really happens after the end of life, maybe there is just nothing afterwards and the author writes this so we can have some extent of hope about it. There are just many theories about death, and I think that the author really makes you think about it throughout the book, hence why it turned into a character.

Thus, my question for all for you is:

Questions

Why do you think the names were not capitalized?

The Original Grand Theft Auto in a Book (Money to Burn) – Piglia

1 Reply

This week’s reading is Money to Burn by Piglia. The themes uncover crime, corruption, and gang wars in Argentina. My first impression of this book was that it reminded me of the video game, Grand Theft Auto, hence the reason behind the name of the title for my blog. From the acquisition of illegal drugs to the large sums of money, it was like this was the original game but ‘played’ with you reading it. If you don’t know what Grand Theft Auto is or in short, GTA, it is a game where you can participate in various heists and commit crimes. That is just a simple explanation as there are more than just petty theft and crimes you can do in the game, which can be detailed similarity to some of the events that occur in this book.

Interestingly, this book is based on a true story which takes place. It also uncovers the danger of being in a gang and participating in criminal activities. From what I noticed in the book, many of the characters are young people, and some with ambitious backgrounds. For example, Twisty is only 20 years old, yet made the unwise choice of participating in gang activities, resulting in death. On the other hand, Malito, the leader of the gang, went to school and was formerly an engineer. Despite having achieved an engineering degree which in itself is prestigious, he chooses to live a life where the shortcut to money derives from bloody wars and robberies. It is what makes me want to know more about Malito and why he chose this path.

It is notable that this is a book based on real events (as mentioned in the Epilogue). I assume that the author illustrates his own version of the story based on true crime, and as a result, there is a large emphasis on detailing the gang’s plans. However, I felt like this made it feel like I could not know more about the characters other than brief details such as age, and the fact that they’re a criminal. Thus, I did not really indulge into this book as much as I would like to this week, but that could also be explained by my skimming for the reading. It was also difficult to read into the characters because there were simply so many, although many were just gang associates. Nonetheless, I liked how this book was based on real events, and it makes me wonder what the readings for the next few weeks will be about.

Question:

How do you feel about the characters in this book?

The Alcoholic Coat (TrenchCoat) – Manea

4 Replies

This week’s reading was The Trench Coat. The book takes place in Romania under the communist regime and to be frank, I did not enjoy reading it. I was on the treadmill while reading the beginning section and what I captured was the copious amounts of drinking such as whisky and vodka, which coincidentally, is also the drink of choice for this week’s lecture. Aside from the drinking the phrase, “yes, yes” seems to permeate through the beginning and midsections of the book, which makes me wonder what the intent behind the double yesses mean. A possible interpretation I have is that it is either a way to convey a message (whatever it is) in the translation or an emphasis that the author is making, but again, I am not sure. I do not really understand this book.

Interestingly, the front page title of this book says Compulsory Happiness. I would not say that this title would resonate nor correlate with the book, but it also makes me wonder, did I read this book “correctly?” This book obviously does not make you “happy” and it was overtly not my cup of tea. Arguably, being on the treadmill at a high incline while reading this could be one of the reasons why I did not particularly indulge it, but also I found myself bored early on. It felt like there was not enough entertainment or heated moments in the book, so it was like I was reading a story of almost pure dialogue with a hint of mini-events. In addition, the characters were hard to like or feel connected to, but I did feel like Dina should have been treated better.

It is notable that thematic elements such as politics would not usually be made for entertainment, but rather to highlight particular matters for example, political upheaval or its effects. The book itself is short, but I like a lot of what I was reading projected as either borderline confusing or up to interpretation. The ending of the book was somewhat of a cliffhanger, further exacerbating the confusion. For example, I could not interpret what the raincoat or trench coat symbolizes in the book, and I’d thought the author intended for the readers to think about what the trenchcoat really means. I had only imagined the trenchcoat to be an enigma or a roaming spirit in which the readers are subjected to think about what it symbolizes.

For this week’s question:

How did you all approach this book?

The Hour of the Sad (Star) – Lispector

2 Replies

Impressions

This week’s choice of book, as you could probably tell by the title, The Hour of the Star. The beginning of the book felt like I was reading more so of a diary than a book because of the style it was written in. I would describe it as being similar to when you are overthinking and your traces of thoughts feel neverending or perhaps ignited by anxiety. In the middle parts of the book, it was less like a diary and more so a “readable” fiction. Towards the end, specifically after the interaction with Madame Carlota, I was a bit lost on what was happening.

My first impressions upon reading the first half of the book was that I was going to rip my hair off (not literally, just figuratively). Why do you ask? Probably because of another character I really hate again this week. I’m certain it’s no surprise that it is Olimpico, the egotistical and sexist man who dumps Macabea for Gloria, her co-worker that is described as being “ugly.” I also did not like Gloria very much as a character, but at the same time, I think it would have been better for Macabea to not be with Olimpico. Not only was he a douchebag, but Macabea is a complicated individual whose sense of understanding in the world differs greatly from other characters in this world, thus Olimpico would likely further take advantage of that.

Macabea as a character felt very depressing and sad, even when she presumably had the four roommates, she did not have people to turn to, even with Gloria. Her character felt like it was defined greatly by sadness and pain, but she does not see it until Madame Carlota gives her that realization. She also does not seem to have a conventional way of conceptualizing the world or her surroundings, which could be as a result of not having her parents and only her aunt, as well as living in poverty. For example, when the doctor told her she had pulmonary tuberculosis, she just politely thanked the doctor not knowing whether or not it was good or bad. The doctor was also neglective of her as a patient, but the narrator describes that this doctor was the one for the ‘poor’ and wanted to do “nothing,” thus likely explaining why he did not provide any treatment plans. This is just my two cents on Macabea as a character and how I interpret the book as being defined by sadness and pain such as the thoughts of death or reading the line where the narrator describes herself as being a suicide, but never having the thought of it (p. 50).

One word in particular that was brought to my attention in the book was, ‘(explosion).’ It seems to me that was significant, although I cannot pinpoint why this was used. Thus, my question to you all is:

What do you think the usage of (explosion) meant? Do you think it was an emotional expression or was it used to symbolize something I missed?

I hate Quimet – Time of the Doves

5 Replies

First Impression

This week’s reading was Times of the Doves by Rodereda. The first impression I had in this book was that Quimet was a walking red flag. A few pages in, Natalia or Colometa, as Quimet would call her, had just broken up with her fiance, Pere. Quimet just did not hesitate to ask her to marry him and just practically asked if she had broken up with him. This might not necessarily be the red flag itself, as this could also be part of a cultural component or perhaps the norm of the society in that period of time. However, what really made me dislike Quimet was how he treats Natalia and how controlling he seems as a partner. Because I have already disliked his character from the start, I did not even feel like I had any remorse or felt bad when he was having what seems to be long-term or enduring leg pain.

One segment of the book where I had wished Natalia had seen it as an indication of a red flag was when Quimet was mad because apparently, he saw Pere and Natalia at the street together. This was obviously not the case, as according to the narrator, she has not spoken to Pere since they had broken up. It felt like he was gaslighting her and putting blame that she did something inexcusable. Even if hypothetically they were down the street together, they had already broken up, so what Quimet would have been complaining about demonstrates a projection of jealousy. Although this was towards the beginning of the book and the behavior could also be explained by an episode or issues he has deep down. Possibly this was a dream that felt real to him, however, this is not to excuse how he was mad and had this audacious claim he made but rather it is just another perspective to think about.

Quimet is obviously a character I feel strongly negative about. His character feels like the embodiment of patriarchy or the yearning to be an dominant, authoritarian figure. This seems to be a common and emerging theme that has also pertained to other novels we have read such as Shrouded Woman. One example of how Quimet would demonstrate his authoritarian figure is that he was straight forward with being the one to choose the name of their first baby boy, despite the suggestions of name from her father.

My speculation and feelings towards Natalia as a character is that she feels obligated to be with Quimet. Notably, the book does not explicitly nor necessarily hint at this, but Natalia seems like a character who has not had the person to talk to when it comes to problems such as talking about Quimet. Natalia’s mother has died and she has primarily her father and step mother as parental figures, but it does not seem like she has ever had the guidance in terms of looking out for signs of people to not be around or befriend. The narrator even mentions that the mother has never spoken to her about men (p. 28), which could explain why she does not see Quimet as problematic and just accepted his vow to marriage, despite his obvious red flags.

Question:

Do you think Natalia genuinely likes or even loves Quimet?

Black Shack Alley

10 Replies

Impression

This week’s reading on Black Shack Alley covers underlying themes including slavery, poverty, violence, trauma, and colonialism. Readings of some of the descriptive writings illustrating the violence and infliction of pain such as the bruising instilled disheartening images to me as I read. The themes in this book are much more serious than previous books we have read thus far, but nonetheless subjects to talk about because they are ingrained in history, in the present or through intergenerational trauma. For example, from what I sense, the treatment inflicted by M’man Tine, the grandmother, seems to be as a result of intergenerational trauma, as well as a possible vengeance from lived experiences. This is not to justify the treatment of the grandson, but rather a potential explanation for her violent actions which she projects from her lived experiences.

The relationship between M’man Tine and Jose is one that I think is notably unique in a sense that there are moments where Jose is mistreated, but also moments where she provides him with love and fills the caregiving role. M’man Tine is the primary caregiver, as his father is not part of his life, and his mother, Delia, sees him only once in a while. When M’man Tine passes away, Jose reflects back to her caregiving roles and sacrifices made for him.

Another unique relationship I wanted to highlight is Madame Leonce and Jose. On one hand, we know that they’re not of the same class, as Jose works under her as a slave. On the other hand, she would feed him lunch. Jose initially thinks of her as someone who was unfriendly, but when she feeds him, he thinks almost as if she is kind.

Overall Thoughts

The book itself was long, but the literature itself was easy to understand. I found the book a bit depressing because Jose never really lives a normal childhood as he was enslaved to the plantation as a child, and faces oppression solely because of skin color. He never really gets to understand why he is treated like this. At one point he wonders what black people have done to be disliked and oppressed both by the devil and the beke (p. 37). Although he lives a traumatic and difficult life, he still finds himself to find joy in something such as being in school. He does not really have a role model to look up to, as he grows up with the absence of his father and his mother being away in another plantation, but has his grandmother only to look after him.The book itself is depressing, but does highlight topics of oppression, colonialism, and classism, which still has its lingering effects on society today.

Question:

What kind of character development do you think Jose had?

Agostino – His Mother and Freud

1 Reply

Impression

My first impression of this book was that it reminded me of Sigmund Freud. I thought to myself, what in the Freud (using Freud as if he was an adjective) was going on whether Agostino would unconventionally describe his mother in a sexual manner. This reminded me of the time when I was taking introductory psychology in first year. The professor spoke briefly about Freud and one of the theories being the Odeious complex where sons supposedly have sexual desires for their own mothers, while resentment to their fathers. Although the case in this book was that Agostino’s father passed away, he did feel hatred and jealousy towards the young boatman because of the intimacy and relationship between the young boatman and his mother. It makes me wonder whether these instances are the yearning of affection from women who he has not seen many, thus he thinks about his mother this way. If I had not thought about the relation with the Freudian theory, I would have dreaded reading this because I felt uncomfortable.

Thoughts

Apart from the vivid, sexual imagery that Agostino thinks of his mother, the book does highlight other thematic elements including bullying, racism, and sexism. These elements were most dominant in the scenes involving the “gang” where they would make fun of Agostino’s mother or jokingly talk about her in a sexual way. Homs was one of the characters in the book who was also picked on and at times which is speculated as a result of his race. It felt like there was microaggression solely targeting Homs because of his race, in which he was the minority among the gang. The microaggressions felt further exacerbated with the way that Agostino would not use his name and rather just describe him as the black boy. The gang making fun of both of them being “lovers” aggravated Agostino’s disdain for Homs.

The sexism in the book was also not so subtle. There weren’t many women characters to begin with in this book as it was, to my knowledge, the mother and the woman at the house near the piazza. Women described in the book were pretty much objectified in a sexual manner, and the gang were the stereotypical “boys will be boys” in the essence of how they would think they can get with a woman. It didn’t really sit right with me how the book was, but I do think it’s notable that it does highlight real issues in our society. I wouldn’t say I hated reading this, but I did not indulge with what I read.

Question:

How do you feel about Agostino as a character?

One of my notes in the book

Bombal – Shrouded Woman

4 Replies

Impressions

This week’s reading on Shrouded Woman was written in a poetic style with an imaginary and descriptive expression. The literature was like a fusion between a poem and a novel. The usage of literary devices such as similes and anaphoras, instills a vivid scenery. For example, the word falling is used in the following passage, “falling and sliding like tears […] falling on her heart and drenching it, dissolving it into sadness and languor” (Bombal, p. 159). I found that with sections of the literature where poetic expressions were used, such as the example, makes the reading easier to follow and illustrates the imagery that the author wants readers to have glued to them. This does not mean that being easier to follow meant it was easier to interpret because to be frank, I had to reread some passages and look through for missed details. This makes me wonder, if what I’m reading is within the intent to be understood or is it a subjective experience where we report our interpretation of what is the meaning.

I found this reading quite compelling because of the way I would imagine Ana Maria being behind a dome and watching her life events in a movie, from her first love whom she could not marry to the spiral of conflict she faces. Just like the title, it felt like the narrator’s life was shrouded and went downhill after not being able to be with her first love, Ricardo. This was a result of Ricardo’s mother disapproving the marriage, illustrated with the passage, “she is afraid that you will marry me […] she thinks I’m not well brought up” (Bombal, p. 166). Ana’s marriage with her latest husband, Antonio, was one that was met with conflict. In the scene where Antonio confronts Ana with the past love letters from Ricardo and tosses every item reminiscing the times with Ricardo. Although evidently a troubling marriage, it was not one she could freely emancipate from, assuming that societal expectations and stigma were an additional conflict and barrier for if she sought to divorce.

There were instances of the book that would ring a bell on how societal ideas imposed on women, such as not having them being taken seriously. A passage that captures this in the literature is when Antonio talks about how “he can’t follow how you women talk and their usage of the word betrayal” (p. 247). It felt like almost a strange relief for Ana Maria when the narrator says that she finds herself immersed into the second death. This to me felt like it was a final shut off of the events she had to recollect as she is dead, but as the chapter ends, so does the pain and suffering she so wanted to emancipate from.

Question:

If Ana Maria had married Ricardo, do you think that she would not have felt like life was despairing?