Reflecting on my experience with this week’s reading, Juan Rulfo’s “Pedro Páramo,” I can only describe it as challenging. Despite my initial excitement to delve into what I expected to be a concise narrative at an overview, seeing that it lacked traditional chapter breaks and was fairly short, I soon discovered it would be yet another new reading experience. Overall, I found it pretty difficult and confusing for a number of reasons. Rulfo’s series of fragmented memories and non-linear narrative is hard to follow. At times, I found it difficult to understand what was taking place in the realm of reality and what was taking place in this other fantasy realm filled with ghosts. Another reason is the disorienting narration style. The jumping around between past and present, 3rd person and 1st person, frequent shifting between various living and dead characters’ points of view made it difficult to keep track of who was speaking and, at times, follow along with their stories and place in the timeline of the novel.
During the lecture, Professor Beasley-Murray mentioned that “Comala is the site of a permanent afterlife, of tales that continue to be told long after their tellers are dead (but not gone).” I think this speaks to the question brought up during the discussion about what the text is telling us about life, death, and the relationship between them. Like Comala, the people that comprise it have maintained a kind of permanence in its site. In the text, Rulfo explores the idea that death is not the end of existence, but that life and death are interconnected. He does this by telling stories through the perspective of ghosts that appear in an in-between state of life and death, suggesting that death is not the end, but rather a continuation of life. The way the story is told also blurs the line between past and present and between what is alive and dead, showing that life and death are not always separate; they can be connected in different ways.
Despite reading the novel in its entirety and doing additional research, I’m still not really sure what I’m supposed to take away from it. So, my question for discussion is: What is your interpretation of the themes and messages in “Pedro Páramo”? What do you think the author is trying to convey about the human experience when it comes to life and death?
Going through Dr. Beasley-Murray’s lectures is always a recommended strategy, and remember that there are other tools on the course site to support you in your reading. Of course, if you have questions you can also ask me by mail or during office hours. You have done a careful reading, identifying the way in which the changes of narrators (and tenses) work in the novel.
Hi Diana!
I really like your blog post, and I agree, the constant shifting and uncertainty of who was narrating what was confusing for me too!
I like your insight into the idea that life and death are not always separate, and that the line between them can be blurred. I feel like we (in general) view life and death to be very “black and white”, so having this new perspective was interesting to think about.
In terms of your discussion question, I agree with you in the sense that life and death are much more connected and fluid than we perceive them.
Hi Diana,
Thanks for your thoughts on Rulfo! I agree, I also experienced some difficulty in keeping up with the non-linearity of the book, and the constant evolving nature of Juan interacting with various characters became a bit confusing too, particularly because they weren’t always clearly introduced. To answer your question, I also found the connected-ness between life and death as a central theme–it continued throughout all of Juan’s interactions and more, even after he passed. I also found a theme of hope-hope that he could keep going to find his father, hope that life would get better, or come to a fortunate answer. I noticed that alot throughout reading.