Although during the first 2 pages I thought a more appropriate title would be “Who would have bought it?” I’m actually quite intrigued with it now, and am quite fond of the Dr. Norval, though I question his choice in marrying such a shrewd woman. I do find it so far that the male characters seem to be far less vicious and prejudiced than the females, yet at the same time find myself sympathizing with all the female characters in their unwanted social roles. Who knew that marriage could be worse than is today? I didn’t realize that book was so antiquated, until they mentioned the year directly I believed it to be more recent, because the dialogue isn’t as far removed from modern speech as I would usually associate 19th century literature to be.

So far the bigotry of some characters in the novel is so profane it’s difficult for me to imagine, however, I love the fact that there exists characters that do in face set themselves apart through genuine concern and proverbial mindset. Reading below I see that some don’t appreciate the descriptive manner of writing in which she uses and mentioning the historical background, but I see it as a strength rather than a weakness, as the book may lose it’s context should that not be included. Her storytelling stays consistent in regards to both its literary quality and its obvious historical accuracy, as it was written so quickly after such events would have transpired. I enjoy also how there are references to better explain the context of the writing. Despite the morbidity of social injustice the book conveys, I still enjoy the humour we see is evident as the neighbours gossip about each other and use mockery I think is ahead of its time.

I find it very interesting that so many class members have found Who Would Have Thought It? to be such a tedious and frustrating read. I have loved every minute of it! This woman has got spunk! I have found myself laughing out loud at frequent intervals throughout the novel, mostly out of appreciation for Ruiz de Burton’s unrelenting boldness. Her tone is so blatantly bitter and cynical, and yet some of her criticisms are so subtle that she manages to achieve a certain harmony within the text. I have read certain chapters multiple times and from each additional reading, I take something different away. The fact that she dared to write something so politically inflammatory and outwardly critical of her society in 1872 warrants a great deal of respect. For a woman to write a novel as opinionated and socially critical as Who Would Have Thought It? would be a bold move today. For her to have proclaimed such a strong message at a time of such widespread narrow-mindedness, therefore, was no less than courageous.

I find it ironic that Rosaura Sànchez and Beatrice Pita’s introduction mentions Ruiz de Burton’s concern that readers would “find fault with her text” (vii). Not only does she raise a multitude of insightful points, but she expresses them in a very eloquent manner. I particularly enjoy the use of Greek mythological characters for the names of her own characters. I love the melodramatic characters, I love the sarcasm and I love the extent to which the novel condemns the horrendously racist viewpoints of the late ninteenth century. So far I say well done, Ruiz de Burton, and I look forward to the rest of the novel!

I find that the story of “who would have thought?” is not really a a great story but it allows through a story line to show difference between certain groups by using contrast. for example It uses contrast between races, how different people of one race it treated compared to that of another especially when it comes to the case of Lola when arriving at the home she is even compared to an animal just because she is of dark colour (which later turns to be a dye). This contrast is also seen a lot when you compare her to Emma which Mrs. Norval approves for her son. You can also see two opposite sides when it comes to religion Mrs.Norval being a Presbyterians and Lola being Roman catholic you can see in page 66 how she perceive the catholic Mrs. Norval says “but my religion is a rational one , not an obsurd beliefin images and saints , and relics and holy water.” You see a very big difference in general between Dr.Norval and misses Norval they oppose in religion, in politics and in their view of others. I believe this difference is due to the fact that he has travelled and been more in contact with other cultures. In the story we also see how men and woman of that time were contrasted especially when Lavvy tries to help her brother who is in jail, for example Mr.Brown tells her “I see you don;t grasp the idea. Of course, ladies can’t well grasp great ideas”(114) So by using contast the writer allows us to see the ideas of that time.

While it was hard to get into the spirit of this book in the beginning, it’s definitely starting to get more interesting the more I read. The thing that struck me the most of all in the early pages was the ambivalent feelings I had towards the arrival of the little black girl. While the words coming out of the mouths of the Norval girls were appalling, they are no different from things we hear today in society. The only difference was how acceptable it was to bash others just because of the colour of their skin. Nowadays I believe such comments would receive a much harsher reaction from others.
Another thing that struck me was how unresponsive the family was to the arrival of Mr. Norval. Having been gone for 4 years, I would have thought his family would be a little more excited to see him. On the other hand, Mr. Norval was not much different. What kind of family values did this family have, and is this a reflection of the times represented in this tale?
As the story goes on, I’m curious to see what other sort of commotion is caused by the presence of the little girl, and how she is to be integrated not only with her new family but with all those that come across her in the book.
Living in Canada, which is such a multicultural country, I believe we have somewhat of a different approach to having people of so many cultures and origins living together. We are more accepting of immigrants, as many us us are just that. Once in a high school socials studies class we were told to raise our hands progressively to inform the class if we were first, second, third generation Canadians and so forth. Not one person had had their great grandparents born in Canada. Due to this, I’m inclined to think that if a little black girl came into our lives, we would act differently than the Norval family.

So far into Ruiz de Burton’s novel, I am extremely pleased with this reading. I love that there are times where her characters are drenched in sarcasm or the obviousness of her prejudices shines through like a blinding light. Much of the historical American references I am unfamiliar with, but from the book’s footnotes I can understand that Ruiz de Burton’s satirical nature runs deep within the veins of America’s colonial history, government, and society. Such as, when describing the reaction to headlines of treason, she writes: “Men and women were electrified What! to dare plot against ‘the best government on earth’!” (p. 68). Such a statement shows the rebellious, sarcastic nature of the author as it seems she could only express through her literature. Her writing displays her knowledge that she knows she isn’t the same as these proud and patriotic ‘pure-blooded’ Americans , but also that she doesn’t want to be like them. On the other hand, there were times while reading where I compared Ruiz de Burton to a revenge writer; feeling the sting of rejection and then writing compliments dripping with sarcasm directed towards her bullies.
As English is not Ruiz de Burton’s first language, I am astounded with her astonishing skill as an author. She captures much literary symbolism and wit using her second language. I especially enjoy the many references to Greek mythology made throughout the novel. This shows a vast education and the intelligence to apply it, especially for a woman in Ruiz de Burton’s era. She even cleverly titles chapter 8 as “The Trophies of Militiades Do Not Let Me Sleep.”, referring to Greek history and Themistocles’ resentment towards Militiades for what should have been his. I wonder if in these references she attempts to make these characters, these situations, or even the book itself ‘epic’.
On page 106, I felt that Ruiz de Burton was describing Lavinia much as she would describe herself; a latino-born woman living in colonial America:

“…[Lavinia] was reflecting that no matter how much a woman, in her unostentatious sphere may do, and help to do, and no matter how her heart may feel for her beloved, worshipped country, after all she is but an insignificant creature, whom a very young man may snub…”

Perhaps the author felt as though despite her best efforts, she was always seen as second-rate, due to both her spanish background AND being a woman.
I am especially intrigued with Lola’s part in the story as I feel that she may represent the triumph of the ‘foreigner’s spirit’ over Mrs. Norval’s portrayal of the underhanded, native-resident’s psyche. What happens between her and Julian in the pages to come may dictate the winner of this epic battle.

I thought that the first half of this book was rich with hypocrisy and racism.  The racism aspect of the book is to be expected because the setting is during the American Civil War.  Mrs. Norval seems to be adamant about refusing to accept Lola’s heritage as a full blooded Spanish woman.  Because Lola’s skin is painted black she is treated with disrespect.  Since the black skin is a veil, this misconception leads to numerous examples of hypocrisy.  A standard northern abolitionist family believes in a degree of equality and fairness.  However Mrs. Norval seems to pick and choose when and where to be an abolitionist.  In the company of others she tones down her inherent racism. However, in the seclusion of her house and in the presence of her family she reveals her true feelings.  I feel as if she becomes a different person in social settings to seem progressive and to gain respect from her peers.

Religion is another example of hypocrisy in this book.   Lola’s mother specifically gave instructions to raise Lola as a roman catholic.  This came into conflict with the Protestant beliefs of the Norval family.   An example of this is on page sixty-six.  Mrs. Norval and Dr. Norval were having an argument about Lola’s religion.  Dr. Norval had asked if Mrs. Norval was on her deathbed and asked if she would want her children to be brought up Protestant.  She replies “…but my religion is a rational one, not an absurd belief in images, and saints, and relics, and holy water” (Burton, 66).  This role reversal that Dr. Norval imposed on his wife shows the double standards of that society.   She is essentially saying that the death wish of a Catholic woman should not be respected as opposed to the death wish of a Protestant woman simply because being Protestant is a superior faith to Catholicism.  This self-righteousness foreshadows what is to come in later chapters.

Although this novel examines the very interesting topics of gender, class, race, and the social structure they form in everday life in the United States during the mid 1800’s, the way in which this particular work is written I find quite pedestrian. The author uses an extensively descriptive style, and at times trails off onto subjects which seem unrelated to the ideas and arguments she is trying to present to the reader. Evidently the themes presented include the effects of the American Civil War on middle-class 18th century Americans and race as a key factor in society.

The interesting part of the underlying theme of the novel, is the fact that in the big picture, we are presented with a selection of diverse New Englad families whom are being affected by a war fought over the abolishment of slavery and racism. Meanwhile the author focuses on one of these families, and almost compares it to their personal situation on a smaller scale using Lola’s character. In her writing Maria Ruiz de Burton flaunts these democratic Americans fighting to abolish slavery – and racism – while they in a sense fight their own personal battle with the race of this Mexican girl; more specifically Mrs. Norval.

While reading the first half of the novel, we lightly witness the integration of Lola into this family, and her effects. Mrs. Norval, evidently racist and true upholder of Puritan morality, forms a relationship with Mr. Hackwell clearly represents her low self esteem and a perfect example of a woman of that time who truly did need the direction of a man. It is easy to witness her stupidity as she lets him take advantage of her obliviousness and utter trust for men. Overall, Ruiz’s use of irony and satire creates an interesting novel, although the subjects it discusses do not reach their galvanizing potential.

Fiction acts as a mirror or reflection of society, and reading it helps us understand commonly held notions, and ideals of the times. While this book is indeed a bit tedious and frustrating at times, Who Would Have Though It does help us get a clear illustration of history and societal values of the time.
Through reading this book, we come to understand stigmas of race, nationality, and religion that existed in the times that it was written. Interestingly, while these stigmas have evolved and changed over time, they still exist it different forms today. While the issues are today presented in different terms, having grown up in California, it is very obvious that great prejudice of Latin Americans are still quite prevalent.
In class we discussed the idea of Mexicans not crossing the border but the border crossing them. I think the idea of fluidity of geography between the New World, the Old World, and national boundaries within these regions is a theme that is well illustrated within this novel.
All in all, because this book is a tedious read, I think it is important to try and keep in a historical context.

Some things never change. It has been over one-hundred years since this book was written, yet some of the social constructs and problems I observed in Ruiz de Burton’s Who Would Have Thought It still linger.

Throughout the novel thus far, it seems as if Lola’s prospects of marriage have been scare because she is not Caucasian and not from New England. On page 100, Lola speaks on the racial prejudices acted upon her by the Norval family and her community, stating “I saw that your mother detested me, and Ruth had a sort of repugnance for me…I was an object of aversion because my skin was black.” Furthermore, Mrs. Norval mentions the then 10 year old Lola and her prospect of marriage on the first night they met. When informed that Lola was of a Spanish (not an Indian or African) heritage, Mrs. Norval starkly replied, “I am glad she is not,because…if she be of decent people, then…a decent man would marry her” (27).

Interracial relationships can still be seen as looked down in some societies or by some people today. Take my parents, for example. My father is Caucasian, and was raised in a rural, Catholic area of Washington State. My mother is a Chinese-Indonesian, meaning her family has been in Indonesia for Generations, but is of a predominately Chinese heritage. She grew up in a rural and Muslim village in Indonesia.

When my mother’s family discovered the relationship between my parents was becoming more serious, they were, well, according to my mother, ecstatic. The Chinese in Indonesia are discriminated against because they are a large and mostly rich community. However, my mom, being Chinese, was discriminated against by her Indonesian classmates as a child. So, she told me, when she was “silly and sixteen” she decided she, “wanted to marry a non-Chinese Indonesian or a foreigner”. In my dad, she found both, and also of course, love. In a way, this accidental meeting between my parents was a “step-up” according to many of the villagers.

However, on the other side of the Pacific, the reactions from my father’s side of the family were different. They grilled him, asking him things such as, “Why do you want to date a foreigner? And an Asian at that! From that Turbulent country we have never heard of? What was wrong with the girls back home? Why couldn’t he just date that nice blonde girl from your calculus class etc., etc”. I guess in that generation and in that time, interracial dating was very foreign (no pun intended) experience for the staunch Catholics of my father’s family.

Everything worked out in the end with both families accepting each other, but there were definitely some rough times. For me, it is just hard to grasp that over a hundred years later, people still thought that interracial relationships were still taboo.

And part of me believes that they still are a bit…my boyfriend is from Germany. When I told my parents about him, they said, “Deanna, why did you decide to date a foreigner? And one that is five years older than you at that!”. This statement was ironic to me, seeing as my parents are from two different countries, and 11 years apart. Oh well. I guess some things never change.