war – RMST 202 Blogs

The old gringo is set in historic Mexico during the Mexican revolution. This story took a couple of turns that I was not expecting, but it definitely kept me wanting more. The love tale told within the story had both passion, and deceit, which kept it interesting every step of the way. My expectation of this book was completely wrong, but in the best way possible. I think this book has been one of the only books throughout the course that really highlights love and relationships, which was unexpected.

I also want to touch on some of the questions asked in the lecture, as I also found myself pondering the same questions. As professor Murray stated in the lecture, a common theme throughout this story is repetition. More specifically, repetition of the line “Now she sits still, and remembers.” I interpret repetition in a book as something that the author wants their readers to pay attention to and think about it in a deeper way. I think that the placement of the line, “Now she sits alone and remembers” means that the author wants his readers to do the same. He wants them to sit and reflect on the events that had just occurred, and understand their significance. Another line I noticed that was repeated several times was, “And your daughter?” Although, I don’t think this line was repeated in order to convey some deeper meaning like the others did.

I think the love triangle between the three characters was fascinating as I wouldn’t expect Harriet to have fallen for the old gringo. I wouldn’t have expected such a turn of events when Arroyo became so angry with the gringo and Harriet, as I never caught on to the strength of Arroyo’s feelings for Harriet. I think for Arroyo to be so forceful and aggressive towards Harriet, shows his true intentions and personality.

I also noticed that they made this book into a film as well. Having watched some of the scenes, I was surprised to see the characters whom I had imagined in my head, as they were not like what I was imagining. However, I am intrigued as to how much the story line of the film matches with the novel.

My question for my peers is:

Do you think the meaning of repetition, in this story more specifically, conveys a deeper meaning or do you believe the author felt like the line fit in more than one place?

I have to start by saying this book is nothing like any book I have read before in the fact that there aren’t just two stories going on, but one being an autobiography and the other being fiction. In saying this, I did not enjoy the stories as much as I was hoping to, as I was often confused as the author jumped between the two stories. I also had difficulty in piecing the two stories together, and understanding why the author chose to combine them.

Of the two stories, I was definitely more drawn to Perec’s autobiography of his childhood. It was really interesting to me that the idea of memory was a recurring theme throughout the story, as Perec chose to write a story about his childhood, while not having remembered a large portion of it. His loss of memory is demonstrated multiple times throughout the entire story, as we read on page 28 “The memories I have of my father are not many.” and again on page 122 “(that doesn’t mean she didn’t come: it means I don’t remember).” I almost felt like it was necessary for the author to recount his memories from his childhood, in an attempt to understand and cope with what he went through. As both of his parents were taken from him due to the war, where his father died fighting and his mother died in the Auschwitz concentration camp, it is quite obvious the pain and trauma that Perec endured as a child that could have caused some gaps in his memory. I felt sympathy for Perec as not having many childhood memories, especially ones with your deceased parents, would be tough to deal with throughout your life. “For years, I took comfort in such an absence of history: its objective crispness, its apparent obviousness, its innocence protected me; but what did they protect me from…” I feel that this line is a good illustration to what I had previously stated. His recollection of memories shows how he is trying to come to terms with what he went through as a child, which seems like something he had not previously done. In order to protect himself. He also talks a bit about how he imagines his parents would be if they had lived, which I think is another way of showing how he had attempted to cope with the situations he was put through.

My questions for this week:

Why do you think Perec chose to include the story of W along with his autobiography?

What relationship did those two stories share?

Tag: war

Carlos Fuentes “The Old Gringo”

Georges Perec “W, or the Memory of Childhood”