I found the cyclical nature of the way Piglia’s The Crazy Woman and the Tale of the Crime was told to be particularly interesting. It makes you question the intention of the narrative. Could Piglia be writing about his own experience? Or, is he simply trying to embody a fictional character, while provoking a sense of realism to the purpose of the narrative? The self-reference to the beginning line “fat, broad, melancholy, the nile green polyester suit floating on his body…” gave me chills when I first read it. It forces reflection on why. I think it draws more attention to the societal issue of censorship many Latin countries have dealt with throughout time. Out of fear for one’s personal security, they cannot overtly criticize the government or any governmental bodies. This theme seems so prevalent in Spanish fiction literature that it makes you wonder, how much of it is actually heavily based on reality? Why is freedom of the press something that is such a privilege in the modern world?
Another interesting thing about this text’s self-reference is in respect to how it reads. Most fiction is just told to you. It’s taken for granted that this character/narrator’s inner dialogue is just available to us to consume. Rarely do we question it, until we are given an example of a narrative with purpose. It cycles and makes you re-read it. When you re-read this story already knowing the ending, you can feel how the author may have written this out in a hurry. You can feel the sense of urgency and desperation in his attempt to unveil the truth.
Hi Griffin, I agree with many of the points you make, particularly the part where you paid attention to the sense of Piglia’s self struggles. Thus, I would like to expand on this specific topic. I personally think there is a personal aspect to Piglia’s writings; however, I do not think he is writing entirely on his own experience due to, like you said,” one’s personal security”. The chances are high that if Piglia writes something too close to his own experience, then someone higher-up will take notice. Therefore, I think that due to the innate nature of this story, Piglia fabricated a fair portion of the book. What do you think?
The story is absolutely a work of fiction, but tragically, Piglia didn’t have to go too far from reality in composing his stories. There was significant censorship and violent retribution in Argentina at the time. One example would be Rodolfo Walsh’s investigative journalism and open criticism of the dictatorship, for which he was murdered in 1977 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodolfo_Walsh). A similar situation occurred with the Pinochet critique Orlando Letelier, who was murder *in the United States* in 1976 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Orlando_Letelier). As you and Griffin observed, it was violent epoch of censorship for sure.
Loving these reflections, Griffin. Your comments on censorship and freedom of the press are spot on, and I really appreciate your observations about pacing and rhythm (the way in which form can mimic content by creating a sense of haste or panic). The reflection that a second reading of the story–after one has recognized the circular nature of the text–is rich and meaningful is excellent. This is definitely a story that becomes more profound on a second or third reading.