Although many detective fiction works do not critique society, I would argue that “The Puzzle of the Broken Watch,” by María Elvira Bermùdez, does provide a critique. Because the description of the family home is very detailed, unlike any other place description, the author is pushing the reader to think less about the crime, and more about the characters in the story, leading to her critique of the detective fiction genre.
The description of the home, but not the murder scene, pulls the reader from solving the crime and pushes them towards the characters in the story. This is not a crime of brutality, but rather it is one of passion, as Ismael loves Rosa and is trying to win her over. In order to solve the mystery, one must understand the characters motives and backstories. Because the story is a “whodunnit”, the reader pays more attention to the characters, leading to Bermùdez’s critique of the detective fiction genre and Mexican society in the 1940s. The murderer, Ismael, is a police officer; his job is to protect the people and uphold the law, yet in many Latin American countries, the justice system kills. By making the murderer a police officer, Bermùdez calls into question the integrity of the police force, and prompts the question, what happens when the institution that is supposed to protect is the one that is killing? Furthermore, this critique of the state also critiques the genre of detective fiction, as the main ideas of the genre support a capitalist, US/UK governmental ideals. By calling into question these so called protective institutions, she flips the script on the genre, and makes it relevant to her experiences in Mexico.
Borges fourth rule, “the priority of how over who,” leads to a good problem solving story; however, Borges is not known to critique society through his work, he merely writes good detective fiction. However, because Bermùdez is providing a critique of society through her characters, it is important that the story is focused on the characters. Had the story been focused on the actual crime, it would be much harder for the reader to understand the critique on society and the genre.
Nice summary of our discussion in class. You do a good job of revisiting and reevaluating Borges’s in light of the Bermúdez reading. My one suggestion would be to allow for a crime of passion to *also* be a brutal crime, as gendered and domestic violence–often justified by “love” or “passion”–still result in the beloved being harmed or murdered.
Hi Kiri, I enjoyed your blog post, but what I really want to focus on is this: “what happens when the institution that is supposed to protect is the one that is killing?” I think that this is a major point in our society today. All over the world, regulation of the police force is a very hot and maybe controversial topic. We may not see police brutality happening everywhere, but it may be happening under our very noses. Unfortunately, this is a problem that is not very easy to fix, as merely adding another force to regulate the police can just perpetuate the problem. I think the solution to the problem lies in society and police training itself. You don’t need an armed police force if everyone can mostly police themselves. Therefore, I propose training the police to deescalate situations instead of starting an arms race, as well as changing the main focal point of the police force.
Hi Kiri,
I agree that Bermùdez pushes us to think about who the characters are and their roles in society. However, I think that “The Puzzle of the Broken Watch” follows Borges’ fourth rule. Borges uses a certain example – “the story of a jewel placed within the reach of fifteen men… which then disappears into the heavy fist of one of them” (pg. 113). This example demonstrates the kind of story that would be uninteresting to readers. Regardless of who the culprit is, the “how” would be practically the same and we probably wouldn’t learn anything important about any of the characters because it wouldn’t be relevant to the crime. Rather than saying that a story shouldn’t focus on the “who,” I believe Borges is saying that the “how” is crucial and that characters should be differentiated from each other so that the potential “how” would differ from suspect to suspect. In “The Puzzle of the Broken Watch,” there appears to be a lot of focus on how each suspect could have gone through with the murder given the circumstantial evidence.
Hi Kiri,
I agree that this story is a critique of society. That said, I also think the vivid imagery of describing the home serves as a way to indirectly explain the family’s relationship. It shows how emotionally close they were in terms of physical closeness. They shared a room with a divider between each other. This closeness serves as a deterrent for assuming John did commit the crime. Additionally, this location is the most important setting in the whole story. Its both the home of the accused, the victim and is the crime scene. The entire story is focused on this small 3 room apartment.