I found “Eyes of Zapata” to stand out as the best and most resonant story in the book. It was also the longest. It shows how Cisneros can write outside of her modern Chicana persona, and take on the voice of a completely different woman in a completely different time and place. The protagonist of this story is purely Mexican, a woman of the Revolution. Even Emiliano Zapata, hero of the Revolution, hero of Mexico, does not escape Cisneros’ criticism. This story sees a much less political side of the Revolution…I don’t want to say the female side because Cisneros would be enraged if I implied that females don’t understand politics; this isn’t what I mean….I mean that it is a more domestic and human view of the Revolution, which takes love and family and everyday life into account. Even in this story, the man continues to be the intangible, the unreachable, the elusive beauty and strength in the woman’s life. Her descriptions of his body, his hands and feet, border upon idolatry. She worships him and his beauty, and she needs him. In her love, she is blinded and trusts him, which is always a mistake according to Cisneros. When he betrays her, she is hurt, but when he comes back to her again and again, she realizes that in the end, she also holds power over him. Perhaps the woman’s love for Emiliano is intensified because of his intangibility, whereas he is able to detach himself from her because he has possessed her from the beginning, since he kissed her under the tree. Again Cisneros emphasizes the difference of a woman’s love and a man’s love…women are possessed by men, and men are solely possessors and never possessed.
However, the recurrent theme of mystical or primal female power is also prominent in Ines, the protagonist. Her ability to see things in dreams, her ability to leave her body and fly over the countryside, all-seeing, a spirit, these attest to her depth of wisdom and power. To Cisneros, women are magical, and their power is often one misunderstood by men.
This misunderstanding results in suffering for women; Ines’ mother was a bold and mystical woman and was killed for it.
In the end, despite the fact that he leaves her time and again, Emiliano returns to Ines time and again, and she accepts her fate. Despite her magical strength and wisdom, she is still resigned to suffer at the hands of the man she worships and loves.
And Emiliano is oblivious to it all. Throughout the whole story he is asleep, at peace, while she has turmoil inside of her. While she watches him from the skies in another woman’s bed, he is oblivious. This seems familiar to Cisneros; her other stories reflect similar male attitudes.
This story and all the stories we have read in class are really interesting to me because my mother is Mexican…she came to Canada when she was 20. And many of the female attitudes in the books we’ve read are something I have grown up with my whole life: the adaptation of Catholicism into a slightly mystical, folkloric religion mixed with elements of Aztec and Maya beliefs; the belief in supernatural or spiritual power in women; the feeling of oppression by men and the culture of machismo (how many times has my mother told me, just like in the novel, “never marry a mexican!”; the idolatry of men on the other hand; and a very colourful, generous way of loving. To me, Cisneros’ book rings very true.

Now that I’ve finished the book, I can definitely say that my opinions about it have drastically changed since reading the first half. I found complete changes and of course similarities in the style and form in which Cisneros brings these stories in the second half to life. Her creativeness, attention to detail and absurd way of writing actually astounded me, rather than annoying me like it did in the beginning. Anyway, I’ll begin, as there it so much which can be said about this book!

I found the “Eyes of Zapata” to be the most curious of all the stories. It stuck out from the whole book because, although it was the same in the sense that it spoke of a woman and her experience with a man (like most of the stories did) it had a completely different impact on me, as I’m sure it did for many of you (?). Obviously Cisneros was not alive during the revolution, so we can assume that this story was not about her. From this a few interesting things pop out. On the one hand, how on earth can she describe with such passion the situation of this woman during the Mexican revolution (Emiliano Zapata’s mistress…I think) without having any sort of personal connection to her. On the other hand, she mentions her last name (Cisneros) as a man involved in the revolution, bringing us to guess that she has some sort of family tie to the revolution which she is perhaps quite aware of. I would guess that she (Cisneros) is most probably a Zapatista, and she, relating her experiences and hardships with men, decided to express what it was like for Chicana women during the revolution, and that no matter how famous or “sucessful” your husband was, they all face the same or somewhat similar issues. She describes a universal issue by highlighting the experience of a woman involved with one of the most famous Mexican revolutionaries. I’m going to go a little deeper and say that I believe she is trying to say something about Contemporary Mexico. Obviously people wonder “Why Mexico?” “Why so many problems?” Poverty, corruption, etc, the list goes on…I think she is focusing on Mexican society in addition to a man-woman interaction. If Emiliano Zapata, one the most praised revolutionary men in the Mexico is treating a woman like that, what does it say about the country?

“Bien Pretty” the second and conluding story in the book definitely merits some attention as well. Cisneros documents the experience of a Californian artist who courageously moves to Texas, almost to leave her past behind. In this case, I think it’s interesting how she describes her possessions which she takes with her in her truck having all came from different parts of the world. She automatically shows us that this Chicana is an established American who clearly is very knowlegeable and conforms to the upper class. A true San Franciscan. I believe Cisneros highlights this womans life and experience as a way to embrace diversity as an essential component in the way she describes these different Chicana women. I love the way she compares language to love, and how it comes into play during the relationship between Lupe and Flavio. She says “I’ve never made love in Spanish before” (Pg 153) I think this whole page says a lot about communication and the culture barrier between these two people who share common hertiage, but lead such different lives. Is their common bond their Mexican roots? I would think not, seeing as Cisneros almost seems to consider herself a “Mexicana light”.

Overall, I ended up really enjoying the book. I found the stories in the second half really brought her artistic ability to life, and I was really able to connect with the author through the stories. A great read.

Sandra Cisneros knows about love. About the innocence and totality of the love found in a childhood friendship. About the loss of this innocence and the sting of your first betrayal. About the incapability to deny love once it has set itself in a young heart. About unrequited love. About forcing yourself to endure a love that is superficial and injurious. About letting go of counterfeit love. About never letting go of genuine love. About the unending depths of family love. About public love. About private love. About jealous love. About vindictive love. About misplaced and projected love. About wanting love. About needing love. About giving love.

And goddamn, the woman knows how to write. Reading this, I felt as though I was being guided through the inner workings of the tender heart of each of the characters, as they were either awestruck or utterly disappointed by love.

I must also say that although this book can clearly be identified as feminist literature, and Mexican or Chicano literature, I really feel that Cisneros’ writing surpasses all of that. These are universal tales of the human condition, and it is a pleasure to read such a truthful account of what we all go through.

“I want to come undone, like a gold thread, like a tent full of birds”.

The technique that became most apparent in the second half of Woman Hollering Creek is the intertwining of Spanish and English into one ‘Spanglish’. The symbolism of Mexican immigrants living in the US but struggling to find their identity on both sides of the border is not lost in this conglomeration of languages. Cisneros is an expert at laying out Mexican slang within an English monologue…and I’m guessing that this is because that was how language worked for her while growing up. As I read the stories (such as Little Miracles, Kept Promises), I began to wonder what it would be like to not have any background in the spanish language and attept to read those short spanish prayers. Perhaps we get the feeling for who Cisneros’s audience really is: Chicanos….the bilingual masses. I feel like she has let me into these secrets just because I have taken the effort to learn spanish and understand her culture. It’s almost like she could care less for those people that don’t take the time to understand even THAT necesity about her: her language.

I love all the different writing styles that surface in this book. It becomes almost overwhelming to catch onto a different style with every chapter, but it’s still all written in that same sassiness that I have come to admire about Cisneros. I found that my least favorite story was Eyes of Zapata. It was full of magical realism, which I love, but something about it having to do with a historical figure made me pop out of that fantasy world of characters that Cisneros had created. And once again, the naive, frail female protagonist who stayed with her famous, cheating husband frustrated me. That opinion aside, considering that Cisneros couldn’t have experienced this time period but still achieves such an amazing level of description is an incredible feat.

And finally we see two stories that have some relevance to eachother: Bien Pretty, and Tin Tan Tan. Yet even through this small victory of correlation, I couldn’t feel a connection with the protagonist. I felt more connected to the childhood stories than any other section in the book. I have a suspiscion that my adult life experiences are a little more low-key as compared to those of Cisneros and her characters. Final response: this book made me feel very young.

This book is not so much a probe into identity as it is a reminiscence of Chicano/Chicana life before it can be necessarily be acknowledged as such. We experience the various memories, first-person narrative coming-of-age tales, and third person observations without knowing much back story or mythology about these seemingly endless protagonists. However, I’m going to try to be more specific in my musings than I tend to be…

This book, unlike the others, is modern in its revelations, new in its creation, and abundant in its pop culture references…I love the mention of Alarma! the gory Mexican tabloid magazine which is actually quite an entertaining read if you are able to desensitize yourself enough from violent pictures that you can read the rather comical articles…probably no worse than the video games we play here. It is a pretty disgusting rag, nonetheless I enjoyed the allusion.

I’m not sure if Cisneros intended to make all men look like insensitive misogynists that lack any sense of responsibility or humanity but she does a revolutionary job of portraying them as such…I guess it’s pretty accurate. I don’t take offense to be honest, it in many ways rings true…I just don’t like how the female characters are ignorant to the fact that men are like this, how they are bloodthirsty dogs who want to copulate with them yet they romanticize the memory of them after they never make contact (p. 30).

I’m not trying to discredit Cisnero’s personal experiences with men in her community, but other than a few mentions of boys experiencing discrimination because of their race I felt the novel was a never-ending well of female emotion being either drained or poisoned by men. There are brief descriptions of romance, passion, and then indelible consequences, eternal pain, of these men impregnating women, breaking hearts, deaf to the cries of their victims. These women describing their experiences are intelligent, are aware, but seem to blame rather than take control of the unfortunate situation bestowed upon them…I find it to be more demoralizing for women than it is empowering, as I read on page 100 of the details of a man charming and beautiful, impervious to guilt, and irresistible to all, yet never does a woman become wise to his irresponsible actions.

Still, the sense of togetherness in family is charming throughout, and unconditional love is a major theme in this opus…the imagination of Cisneros is so beautiful and limitless, dreaming up images, smells, both malodorous and pleasant, it brings to mind a photograph interactive in every way. She effectively combines nostalgia with conflict, and in many of these short stories she creates spirits unchained; dramatically pained in their existence but never stagnant.

I have a heard a lot of talk about Sandra Cisneros and now that I finally experienced her work for myself I find that I have mixed feelings about her. I definitely enjoy her uniqueness and I have genuinely enjoyed reading several of her stories. Cisneros has a particular talent for evoking strong emotions from the reader. “My Lucy Friend Who Smells Like Corn” was such a lovely, sweet, innocent story. I felt sincerely nostalgic for my youth as a simple, appreciative, little girl, even though I share none of these experiences with the little girls. Only the memory of childlike wonderment and awe for the simple pleasures is shared among us. “Eleven,” however, evoked exactly the opposite emotions in me, as I struggled not to cry while reading. I still can’t quite figure out why the words of Cisneros were able to touch me so deeply while none of the other texts have been able to affect me in such a way. There’s something about her exceptionally convincing ability to narrate from a child’s perspective that causes the reader to actually feel as though this heartbreaking story is being told by the bullied young birthday girl. And what adds to her sophistication as a writer is that Cisneros can do such a wonderful job of conveying that she is writing from the perspective of a young child without ever needing to directly inform the reader of the speaker’s age. Thus I was quite fond of the first few short stories.

As I read further into the text, however, I found that I began to notice a high frequency of incidents inserted purely for shock value. These did not so much detract from the literary merit of the text as they did from my personal enjoyment of it. As I read further and further into the book, I also found the stories became more and more difficult for me to comprehend. I’m still not sure as to whether I gained a proper understanding of what was going on in “Remember the Alamo,” with Cisneros’ erratic insertion of names before every new paragraph and constant repetition of “Say you want me…” (Cisneros, 67). Neither do I quite understand the significance of the narrator sleeping with her former lover’s son in “Never Marry a Mexican” other than the obvious shock value provided. I feel as though I could read some of these passages several times and still not fully understand exactly what Cisneros was trying to convey. Nevertheless she is an incredibly gifted writer and her writing has been a fresh breath of air. I definitely respect her. I’m just not so sure whether I truly enjoy reading her work as much as I do the work of Julia Alvarez, for example. We shall see how I feel after reading the second half of the book………..

I realy enjoyed this novel, i htink the author does a great job of putting all the stories together and setting common themes like struggle of woman and protraying different types of woman. like in other books we have read in this oen realigion is also a important theme, like it is on the life of eevry day people. One thing I noticed and also erad from other critics is the fact that she steretypes men alot especialy the image of the Latin men, she portays them all as players and abusers of woman, i belive she should have included more diverse men and not just one type. An intrestign not e that i want to add is that Woman holleirng creek exsist and its a creek filled with legends of spirits o fwoman that hunt the creek specialy of one woman that is said to have killed her baby because her husban left her.