Categories
conclusion Uncategorized

Concluding Post: bye bye Freud, you will be missed

WOW!

I can’t believe that we are at the end already. At the beginning of this course, I felt a little overwhelmed: I did not believe that I would read so many books, while also juggling my 4 other classes. I am so glad that I took this course. If anything, it has taught me that I can engage with different types of texts–even when I don’t like them. As well, I think that with these books, I have gotten to engage in with really well written books. I think that at the beginning of the course I mentioned that I was used to reading, and that I have engaged with books recommended by booktok. I will say, trying to go back and read a book recommended through tiktok was disappointing. I didn’t realize that we have been engaging with really high level texts.

Above all, I have learned not to judge a book by its title, and to maintain an open mind. As well, reflecting from the lecture, I have learned to be okay with the “slippery” nature of literature. Its okay to have an understanding of a book, and to engage with a completely different understanding (seen through others’ blogs and during discussion sessions), because “their meanings multiply and change in the new contexts in which we read them” (p. 6, Lecture Transcript).

My favorite texts were probably Proust’s Combray and The Shrouded Woman. I liked that both engaged with unique perspectives by playing with the idea of memory in different ways (one through childhood, and the other through death). I am happy with the books that I chose, and I could see a pattern of themes like childhood, memory, love, and morality (as explored in the idea of whether the characters we were engaging with were ‘good’ people). I think that my understanding of Romance Studies for me now is that it is literature that reflects cultures that come from those romance languages. I think that through this understanding, it is therefore possible to layer contexts to understand what is being written about.

I think the discussion that stuck to my mind was when we debated whether or not The Shrouded Woman was a feminist text. I think we engaged with so many different contextual understandings with this discussion, because everyone’s justifications and definitions of feminism differed so widely.

In all, I think that other courses should be like this one because of its elimination of barriers through the contract grading. We essentially got to pick our struggles, and through the blog to express without limit our thoughts on what we read. To this extent, my question for the class now is, Would you re-read any of the books you read during this course?

Categories
Love me Tender

Fog

“I realized I’d finished grieving for my son. I said to myself, That’s it now, the grieving’s over. I felt good. I hadn’t felt that good in years.” (164)

“There was nothing left to say. Nothing left to do.” (165)

This was a very touching read. It was so simple and easy to digest. As someone who has grieved for people so dear to me in the last 2 years, this was so heart wrenching, because it was like experiencing grief all over again. Except, for her she was grieving someone who was alive.

Throughout the book, we are experiencing her efforts at regaining a relationship with her son. It’s terrible that Laurent uses her sexuality as a weapon to turn the courts and society against her. Its even worse that he can do this–that discrimination against her was normalized because of her sexuality. Why was it not enough that she loved Paul? Why was it not enough that she tried over and over again to regain her son? Why was it so simple for him to villainize her?

Seeing her go through different relationships with other women (though I doubt she would call these experiences relationships) as she existed in this limbo was essentially seeing her actively engage in coping mechanisms. The smoking, the swimming, the sex, all of it did not ever measure up to the happiness she felt after meeting her son: “The other day, my roommate guessed right away that I’d seen you, because of how happy I was,” (101). The fact that even the people around her could acknowledge this difference in her mood illustrates how much her life was affected by being yanked around by Laurent. Like crawling through a fog called grief, where nothing else mattered until she could resolve the issue, until she could be brought to be justice.

The worst part, I think, was when she was then rejected by Paul himself. All of that struggling to get through her day, her week, the months. Of seeking to ensure that those who had villainized her, and the legal system that had sealed her fate understood her love for her son. All of that was for nothing, as she never attained the happy ending she wanted with him. Perhaps, love is the word most mentioned in this book. She uses it in reference to her flings, to herself, and to her son. She is never truly able to experience unimpeded love with her son.

Honestly, I think the silver, rusting lining of all this is that she feels no regret: ” I guess these things should make me feel nostalgia, sadness, regret. But no, nothing.” (28) But perhaps it is not nothing, but rather a numbness.

There’s no happy ending, and no explosive reveal. We end the book and continue with our lives. And she? she remains in the fog.

Categories
Faces in the Crowd

Everything Everywhere All at Once

“Then I go back to the novel. A vertical novel told horizontally. A
story that has to be seen from below, like Manhattan from the
subway.” (122)

“Or a horizontal novel, told vertically. A horizontal vertigo.” (125)

Getting into the book was a bit difficult for me. It reminded me of Andre Breton’s Nadja due to what felt to me like a disjointed book. After taking a LONG break, I realized about halfway through the book that this was actually being told from two different perspectives: the woman’s and Owen’s perspective. To this effect, I tried (and failed) to mentally construct some sort of plot line and timeline to the book. It went a little like this:

  • Are they going to meet? (no, he’s dead–no wait he’s alive?)
  • Is her husband the other perspective (yes, no, maybe???)
  • Are the characters like Moby real, or are they ghosts? (I don’t know, I give up!)

I don’t particularly enjoy not knowing exactly what’s happening, and to me, it felt like I was in a frequent state of confusion. Indeed, reading it was like experiencing vertigo, it was like I was at a consistent loss of balance–of understanding the stories I was being presented with. However, something that I did really like was the mirrored moments. To me, it showed in a sense, how time was changing the characters. For example, in the beginning the woman’s (or Owen’s?) legs are strong and slim (8) and then later they are like “two elephants’ trunks” (121). Also, the manner with which the notes written by the woman somehow transition into a real, experience as narrated through Owen’s perspective was very interesting to me. For example, the part where the notes taken by the woman about Owen are then later translated are so interesting. On page 40, she talks about how Owen would weigh himself in the subway because of his belief that he is integrating. Then, this is confirmed on page 69 when he talks about how he weighs himself, believing that he was disappearing slowly. Beyond this however, was just the utter feeling of confusion because of the sense that time was not an actual constraint here. She was just fluidly moving through time, with a focus on the characters.

My favorite part of the book (the part that I actually understood most), was the end of the book following the earthquake. The two were experiencing such different things and somehow their experiences were overlapping. For example, the mother, the son, and the baby hid under the table; and simultaneously, Owen laid on the table and knew that there were three cats below him. It kind of reminds me of the movie everything everywhere all at once

To me, this leads me to asking the question: are we in the present, the past, the future, or are we just experiencing these things all at once?

Categories
The book of chameleons

Dreams

” ‘I have no name,” I replied quite frankly. “I am the gecko.”
“That’s silly. No one is a gecko!”
“You’re right. No one’s a gecko. And you – are you really called Felix Ventura?” My question seemed to offend him. He lay back on the bench and his eyes disappeared into the incredible depths of the sky.” (80)

First, I’ll say that I quite enjoyed this book!  I liked that there was actually positive black representation, because to me this meant that this book would be something to really enjoy and analyze.

That being said, the premise of the book, being based on Felix’s ability to create lies for people was so much different than what I expected the book to be about from its title. It made human nature clear, in showing how sometimes all we wish is to be able to re-author parts of our stories to make some sort of difference in our current reality. For example, the white man, hoping to settle in the country sought Felix out to re-author his story by inventing a new reality in which he had a large family, a new identity, and most importantly, “more than just a decent past,” (17). This reminded me of a game I sometimes play with my friends, whereby we go out and pretend to have an entirely different identity (not a student, not studying at UBC, a filmmaker) and nothing close to our real selves. Because I relate to this, I don’t necessarily judge Felix for having this line of work, nor others for seeking him out.

I do feel wary of calling Felix a downright liar (even though, technically he is), because the way he put it here: “No!” he managed to blurt out. “I don’t do things like that. I invent dreams for people, I’m not a forger . .”, is actually quite an interesting way to view his profession. Because maybe dreams are achieved to the extent that stories can be re-imagined, and heritages reset.

I also really like the exploration of reality throughout the book. It seemed as though reality was being reconstructed over time, which added an entirely new layer in absorbing the story. For example,  the emphasis on how “Felix would sew fiction in with reality dextrously, minutely, in such a way that historical facts and dates were respected” and the implied doubling of Felix as reality:  “no one but Reality could possibly have come up with someone as unrealistic as Jose Buchmann”, shows that reality can constructed and shift.

Overall, I loved this book, and wish that I gave myself more time to really absorb the details! I will definitely be returning back to it.

Categories
Piglia

Money to Burn

“Then the Kid raised himself up ever so slightly, leaning on one elbow, and murmured something into his ear which no one could hear, a few words of love, no doubt, uttered under his breath or perhaps left unuttered, but sensed by the Gaucho who kissed the Kid as he departed.

They remained motionless for some moments, the blood
coursing between the two of them.” (181)

I think this might be the first book that we have read in this class that has very clear queer representation! That being said, these individuals were crazy, absolutely off the rails. I’ll be honest, whenever I consume a piece of media where the protagonists are clear criminals, I always expect that the back story somehow redeems them. As such, I was on the edge of my seat with curiosity wondering about the gang’s stories: what the Kid’s story was, and what Malito’s roots were. I was also very intrigued by the voices in Dorda’s head, and whether or not it would reveal traumas and further self motivations for his own actions.

This time however, I fear that their backstories did 0 redeeming. It’s rare for me to NOT find some sort of redeeming quality to individuals that are otherwise positioned as criminals, but seriously, there was none. This time, I felt like I was reading about genuine, terrible criminals. They stole, they killed, they raped, and they lived with no real consideration for each other. It was like I was reading about a dog-eat-dog world, where they were doing these terrible things because they could , not necessarily because there was any real motivation. As for motivation for their actions, I think this line was so good: “Money is just the same as drugs: what’s fundamental is its possession, knowing it’s there, touching it, […]” (30).

Anyway, as much as I really (really!) disliked all of them, I felt that the love between the Twins was cute. I loved the concept that one of them was in charge or thinking, and the other was the muscle. This feature made me think of them as soulmates, like their souls were intertwined with each other. Which made the death at the end all the more heart wrenching. They had become so intertwined in their life of crime, and were together to the very end when the Kid died. I also liked that they never shied away from their affection for each other: “‘Who d’you think you are?’ asked Malito. ‘Man and wife?’ ‘Of course, cretin,’ answered the Kid.” (59) In the end, even terrible people love.

I think that the most shocking part of all this is that it is nonfictional. I thought that it was absolutely legendary that they were able to hold out for that long as the police pursued them and eventually staked them out!

Categories
Duras The Lover

The Lover!

“Everything chimed with his desire and made him possess me. I had become his child. It was with his own child he made love every
evening. And sometimes he takes fright, suddenly he’s worried about her health, as if he suddenly realized she was mortal and it suddenly struck him he might lose her. ” (100)

How interesting?

Beginning the book was a little bit difficult for me, as I was trying to get used to the narrative style. I was also quite confused about the timeline, and debated drawing one so I could understand where exactly in her story we were. All I was sure of was that she was 15 and a half, and that her family lived in poverty. I also remember thinking that this would somehow be a book about the relationship between her and her mother. I thought this especially when she said “The beast, my mother, my love…” on page 22. But boy, was I wrong.

I was misled quite a few times about the direction that the book was taking. But something that stood out to me was how truly ‘teen’ this time was. She was growing and learning more about herself and what she desired, and also had to navigate very complex relationships with those around her. From her love/hatred of her mother, to her fear of her older brother, to the weird relationship she entertained with her lover, I truly couldn’t help thinking that this was such a teenage book. I also felt quite sorry for her, that no one even attempted to help her even though they all recognized that she was in a sexual relationship with an adult 12 years her senior.

Of the relationships she outlined, what stood out to me was her connection to her mother. From her mother’s insistence that she study mathematics, to her abuse of her as outlined on page 58, I thought it was so sad that she lacked this relationship in her life. It was also interesting to navigate her mother’s despair/depression/madness through her eyes.

Finally, can we talk about how we don’t actually know the name of the narrator, her mother, her brothers, and her lover? I found it so interesting that she named H.L (Helene) and described her desire for her extensively, but then never told us about her own name. Which leads to my question: why do you think this choice was made?

In all, I won’t say I loved the book, but I also didn’t hate it. I’m mostly just feeling like saying WTF

Categories
Lispector The Hour of the Star

(explosion)

“Ah if only I could grab Macabea, give her a good
bath, a plate of hot soup, a kiss on the forehead as I tucked her
into bed. And cause her to wake up and find simply the great
luxury of living.” (50)

That was the most interesting introduction I have read so far in this course. Though it was slow, and a little bit longwinded, I was quite amused at how many times he said that he was getting to the story, and then went ahead and talked some more about himself. It was a very philosophical beginning, I think, as he questioned reality and who he was. Statements like “today is today” (12) and “God is the world” (3) had me thinking that this book was going in an entirely different direction than what he was claiming. Honestly, I thought he would never get to telling the story!

There were also moments in the introduction, like when he states: “The action of this story will end up with my transfiguration into somebody else and my materialization finally as an object”, that had me thinking that he was the person he was about to narrate. Especially when he mentioned that he had knew her because he lived with her, but then turned around and said that Macabea only lived with 4 other women and her aunt. However, this confusion was eventually resolved, as I realized that it is possible for the narrator to simply be ‘all knowing’. Slipping in and out of narration I think to me just added an extra layer consciousness that the reader is free to look into and interpret.

On the matter of Macabea, I feel so so bad for her! She finally felt something only for this to be cut short. She never got the chance to actually live a life that was blessed. I found it so sad that she was so cursed, that she ended up incurring the fortune of the person before her. I will say though that it was so funny, ironically, that the fortune teller tells her that her life is looking up and then she dies. Like, seriously, all of this happens to her in her life just for her to end up getting hit by a car?! Not only was she cursed in the way she died, she was cursed in her relationship with others. Her parents dying, her aunt, her coworker, and Olimpico all essentially contributed nothing except a negative experience.

In all, I felt that with the manner in which the story was narrated, there was something more that we were meant to understand. The overall ‘nothingness’ of Macabea’s life, and the narrator’s insistence that her story is “too simple” (10) has me questioning: what then were we supposed to gain from this story? Is there a lesson somewhere here, about death, reality, or even God? (explosion)

 

Categories
Rodereda time of the doves Uncategorized

Poor Maria

First and most importantly, I think that Colometa/Natalia/Maria is so real. The way that the book is narrated is so relatable, as some of the things she says and thinks reminds me of some debrief sessions I would have with friends. Her narration of meeting Quimet, of how she broke Pere’s heart, and her feelings towards her father are quite realistic. Almost like a catch up session that could be had over dinner. She’s just one of the girls!

Beyond this, as I read this book I felt an overwhelming sense of sympathy for her. I was frustrated when she left Pere for Quimet, and something that stood out to me during this sequence in her story was her emphasis on how she did not have her mum there to advise her: “That rubber waistband digging into my waist and my dead mother
couldn’t advise me,…” (21). It led me to ask myself, if her mother were there, would she have allowed her daughter to be swept off her feet by Quimet?

When the two began to fight each other in the beginning, and he would say “Poor Maria…” and would gaslight her and would pinch her and wanted her to stop working, I felt so terrible that this was happening. I did not realize how much these introducing scenes and her time with Quimet held impact until I reached the end of the book, and someone called her Senora Natalia. I was shocked when I read this, as I realized that as I read, I was not actually sure of what her name was. Was I unsure of this because she had never told me? Because I wasn’t actually paying attention while I read? Or because Quimet had so successfully taken over her life and actions that by extension, he had taken over my understanding of Natalia, to the point where I wasn’t even sure what her name was?

My sympathy reached an all-time-high when the war began, and she was left to fend for herself and her children. The scene where she had to leave Antoni at the refugee camp because she could not afford to feed them, and the moment that she decided to kill her children to put them out of suffering tore at my heart strings. I guess this is why page 159 stood out to me. It was like sunshine in her gloomy life, and the clearest presentation of kindness to her. The way that her life turned around following Antoni’s kindness to her stood out to me, and honestly reinforced just how terrible Quimet was. You know it’s bad when you are celebrating the bare minimum.

In all, I greatly enjoyed this book. I felt like I had a constant 🙁 on my face as I read, because of just how terrible it was that no one cared to take care of her for so long in this narrative.

To conclude, my question would be: Could a man have written this narrative?

Categories
Deep Rivers

Deep Rivers

Ernesto’s connection with nature was something that was evident throughout the book. In particular, his view of the river as an entity really stood out to me. To me, it represents the tension that exists in his life between his connection with the Indigenous peoples and his white identity. It was interesting to me how he essentially would pray to the river, identifying it as an entity that knew him and could keep him safe, but in the same breath would place great importance in being cleansed by the priests through the Catholic church. Recognizing nature as an entity that could be prayed to, yet also depending on the judgement of the priests in the Catholic church interested me because it showed how truly complex his identity was. To me, this book presented the famous question of ‘nature vs nurture’, because first he was by nature a white presenting child, but second by nurture an “Indian”, as he was raised by them and was nurtured by them. I also loved the inclusion of the Quecha language throughout the book as well. It showed how well he was able to weave his two identities together through his use of language as well. It showed that there was true depth to his alignment with the non-white culture.

I did find it really weird how the schoolboys treated the woman though, and how she was generally called the ‘idiot’. I felt it was so strange that they were all so pious and would feel guilt for taking advantage of her, but in the same way still assault her at every chance they got. That was what was most disturbing to me I think: the normalization of assault amongst the boarders. They all just excused the behavior of Wig essentially. Like, yes, Ernesto threw dirt at him that one time, but in all there was a weird air of complacency with that sort of behavior. I think in general the way that the women were treated by the men was not okay, and it was even stranger that it was normalized.

Beyond this major flaw, I really liked the storyline. While it was slow in some cases, I felt that all of the details contributed to the culmination of the rebellion against the government. I loved the Dona, and how she led the other women when they were taking back their salt. I loved the solidarity of Ernesto in this moment, essentially advocating for them with the priest even when he was afraid. I also loved how his father embraced his identity and essentially did not try to get him to change the way he spoke or behaved.

Given that last week’s book was very ‘mother’ focused, the question I would like to ponder on is this: Would Ernesto have been different were he raised by his mother, and if she was more present throughout the book?

Categories
Agostino Moravia Uncategorized

Mama’s Boy Deluxe

I won’t lie, this book was a little strange. Starting it, I thought (naively) that this would be a book about a boy who loved his mother dearly and wanted to tell the world all about her. Ending it, I’m seeing that this is a boy who loved his mother, yes, but loved her in a way that bordered on incestual. I don’t think I’ll be able to properly explain the rollercoaster I experienced as I read about his evolving perspective of her.

I think an interaction between them that really well summarizes their relationship is when the young man is late to come get his mother. It first displays his self awareness: “Agostino crawled through the sand to face her and repeat in what even he knew was a nagging and almost sarcastic voice” (14). This self awareness is something that is portrayed throughout the book, as he is introspective about the reasons behind why he enjoys boat rides with his mother, his discomfort with the young man courting his mother, and his persistence in returning to the group of poor boys. The second part of this scene, when his mother slaps him, and it feels “soft, almost accidental and regretful.”, to me presented this: even when he is the subject of punishment, he still is able to recognize his mother’s softness with him. To me, I thought that this conclusion presented the extent of the love that he had for his mother.  Finally, when she calls for him but does not really put in any real effort into finding him, I got from this that the same type of dedication that he felt towards her was not the same as what she felt towards him.

A section that was strange to me was with the Saro. **Random digression, he had six fingers, and so did Nadja’s first lover that was described in the book. Both of their response were of shock and slight disgust I believe.** Anyways –when he was first introduced as the older man who was surrounded by young boys, I was immediately suspicious. These suspicions were confirmed following his experience with him on the boat. What most confused me, however, was the fact that over time he chose to play into the conclusions that had been made about him. Which would be my question, why, despite his apparent disgust with Saro and the ideas being formulated about his boat ride with him, did he still choose to play along with these thoughts of him? 

I guess my final thought about this book (sorry I am about to get a bit political), was about his description of Homs. While it is a book set within history, I was really bothered by the constant referral to him as the “black boy”. I believe that authors can choose how to frame their characters, and I really really disliked his portrayal of Homs.

Spam prevention powered by Akismet