In this reading, I was confused but so intrigued at the same time, primarily when they were constantly referring to me (us) in the reading. The word “you” comes across repeatedly, that much that I centered myself inside of the story, almost as if I could feel it and see it. “Luckily, in the last visit, you managed to bring in some books.” (page 108), as if we as readers were friends with the narrator. Almost as if we both share the same passion and impotence of wanting to escape. But how is there an escape route when there is not an exit and ability to speak up, to begin with?. Moreover, silence is a highly discussed theme. The narrator shows the true background story of Cuba by documenting what was never told and the consequences of standing for yourself (he ends up in jail).
I also want to talk about how hope is also mentioned, “Time passes, time passes, you say.” (page 108), as if life could move on as if there were faith, something worth living for. Plus, noting metafiction “(Hope?)” on page 106 shows the unthinkable, dream, and final goal. Later, the plan changes and turns to revenge “… my triumph which has gone on growing thicker…” (page 113).
Coming back to what I initially mentioned. In the end, when the people jumped the fence and took shelter, the narrator says once again,” they couldn’t annihilate me-annihilate us– completely.” (page 119), as if we were inside with him. However, he mentions he can’t find us, “really, will we still be able to recognize each other” (page 120), making it a little confusing for the reader to identify themselves and figure out which side they are standing on. Still, it seems we (as readers) allied to those “wealthy people” and stayed outside and got ourselves caught without an escape, making us realize that we (someone close to the writer) betrayed him.
Hi Cristina,
I really enjoyed reading your post. I found it interesting that you made this connection between the reader and the outside “wealthy people”, as I never noticed this myself. Though are without a doubt disconnected from the work by nature, I found that the structure and style of the work encouraged a very direct experience of the story. For me, “you” never had anything to do with us, and the “us” in the work, was not meant as an excluding “us”, but rather one that just described who the narrator identified with. Nevertheless, your interpretation makes me reconsider the intention of the use of “you” and “us”, as regardless of how they are used, they will always lead to the reader considering whether they are being referred to themselves.