Macabéa, ridiculed, bullied, deemed irrelevant. She “wasn’t an idiot but she had the pure happiness of idiots” (60). She “got up early in order to have more time to do nothing” (26). She “didn’t know what she was just as a dog doesn’t know it’s dog” (19). She was “a hair in the soup [that] nobody feels like eating” (51). I mean, damn. Was this a novel or an insanely philosophical diss track? My girl just wanted to be a movie star, expand her vocabulary and get a boyfriend like the rest of us.
I see why Clarice Lispector let her fictional narrator, Rodrigo S.M., take the blame. They really drag her through the mud. Rodrigo S.M. claims it’s his duty to write this story, that he absolutely has to, and he spells out what a burden it is to tell her story plainly. The writing however is rather grandiose, and he constantly interrupts Macabéa’s story with fancy words (that I don’t even want to quote because then this blog would be all quotes, and how dare Clarice Lispector be so quotable?) He contradicts himself, circles around the story, and withholds the full picture or any kind of comforting resolution. But he never promises to do so either.
I suppose he is kind of a personification of writers in general. He says he belongs to no social class, that he’s detached, and yet he treats the poor much like all of society does. He claims he wants to look away, but in reality, he cannot. He calls Macabéa “a truth I didn’t want to know about,” yet also insists that he loves her and he alone suffers for her (31). Somehow, he manages to pity her and put her down at the same time. And then there is her RAT of a boyfriend Olímpico. This course has really just made realize that I #hatemen. I mean, why is it that all the books in this course that were written by women feature really shitty boyfriends? Can’t be a coincidence is all I’m saying…
Back to Macabéa. While she has a “flimsy soul” she does have these (explosions) that I thought were cool. Then the ending killed me. Well, it actually killed Macabéa. CLARICE HOW COULD YOU DO THIS TO ME. She gets hit by a car. The end.
But despite being a “nobody”, she is what she always wanted to be; “for at the hour of death a person becomes a shinning movie star” (20). HOW DARE YOU INSINUATE THAT LIFE ONLY HAS MEANING WHEN YOU DIE. HOW AM I SUPPOSED TO LIVE NOW.
My question is wtf because genuinely wtf
Sofia Rocha Zandbergen
(Real question: What/who else could the narrator represent?)
4 replies on “The Hour of the Star (CLARICE HOW COULD YOU DO THIS TO ME)”
i KNOW! this story was just so incredibly SAD and I also see why Clarice would wanna share the blame of dragging Macabea’s name through the mud because WOW. if someone ever wrote something like this of me, I don’t think I could ever recover.
I completely agree! It’s such a tragedy that the happiest moment of her life is in her death, and even though that’s poetic and whatnot… it didn’t make the ending of the book any for fulfilling. And amen cause Olimpico is TRASH!!
Reading your post made me realize how annoyed I actually was with the narrator. Like I didn’t fully process it but now it’s pissing me off. AND OLÍMPICO!!! I truly hate them both. The ending hurt so bad also… her death just felt so cruel.
“I suppose he is kind of a personification of writers in general. He says he belongs to no social class, that he’s detached, and yet he treats the poor much like all of society does.”
Interesting point! Artists are commonly seen as detached of the material world, or at least their relation with the world is tensiones. So your reading makes much sense!
We can discuss it on Wednesday.
Julián.