Categories
Uncategorized

Ferrante: Pitting two queens against each other

For starters… there were once again a lot of characters in this novel! So I’m extremely grateful to Ferrante for including an index of characters at the very beginning. It was very much appreciated for someone like me, who struggles with remembering characters – especially side characters that are only mentioned a handful of times throughout the novel. Moving onto the actual content, I expected this to be about an actually pure and beautiful (brilliant!) friendship, but it was far messier than anticipated. I think this kind of relationship is complicated… we can clearly see their jealousy and inferiority complex, but there are also moments when we can see their bond and support for one another. I guess it’s like how you can truly appreciate someone when you see their ugly parts? Or like that one quote about how you can always love someone, but that doesn’t necessarily mean you like them. I think it’s interesting how to begin with, Lenu’s aim in friendship was rooted in her envy and insecurity, constantly stating how Lila is better than her, and how she herself will always be in second place (roll the dialogue!). This page in particular made me think about how it would be extremely difficult to have a healthy friendship when this is how it began.

“What that demotion caused inside me I don’t know, I find it difficult to say, today, faithfully and clearly what I felt. Perhaps nothing at first, some jealousy, like everyone else. But surely it was then that a worry began to take shape. I thought that, although my legs functioned perfectly well, I ran the constant risk of becoming crippled. I woke with that idea in my head and I got out of bed right away to see if my legs still worked. Maybe that’s why I became focused on Lila, who had slender, agile legs, and was always moving them, kicking even when she was sitting next to the teacher, so that the teacher became irritated and soon sent her back to her desk. Something convinced me, then, that if I kept up with her, at her pace, my mother’s limp, which had entered into my brain and wouldn’t come out, would stop threatening me. I decided that I had to model myself on that girl, never let her out of my sight, even if she got annoyed and chased me away. […] Certainly I trained myself to accept readily Lila’s superiority in everything, and even her oppressions.” (pg. 46)

I wanted to talk about the latter part of their friendship, but I think I’d run out of words because the lecture video made me think about even more topics. But the way their timeline ends also brings it back to the beginning of their friendship, I think – Lila disappears and tries to erase all presence of her existence, while Lenu is left attempting to catch up, just like she did when their friendship first started. I believe it also relates to when Lenu wrote that she would “never let her out of [her] sight, even if she got annoyed and chased [her] away” (pg. 46), because in this case, Lila didn’t chase her away, but instead ran away herself! And yet Lenu is still proving her statement correct, because she’s writing down their entire history so that Lila won’t be let out of her sight. What a homoerotic #toxicyuri (let’s unpack how I was surprised but also not when the #toxicyuri was real and not just my own personal headcanon) dependent (not quite co-dependent) twisted yet realistic bond…

Anyways, the lecture video made me realize the repeated mentions and importance of the difference between the casual dialect and proper Italian. It made me wish I knew the language so I could feel the palpable difference between the two, as well as the culture, but alas I can only liken it to something like code switching (perhaps AAVE and other types of modern slang?). Of course I can read when the translation says they’re using proper Italian, but that’s different from actually knowing the vocabulary and the context in which they’re used. I wish I could know every language in the world because it truly vexes me to read something in its non-source language and think about how I must be unable to pick up cultural and linguistic nuances 🙁

Categories
Uncategorized

Agualusa: Fake it till you make it (extreme mode)

I think the style of this novel was quite refreshing because it was different from what we’ve previously read. The short sections (can I even call them chapters?) honestly made it easier to read, I felt like I was going through the novel faster than before because it was like little short anecdotes rather than an extended plotline. I was a little confused for the first 10 pages or so (a regular occurrence for me, though), then it started clicking when the Foreigner appeared. One of the standout, morbid parts of the novel to me was when the gecko started talking about his first death as a human (pg. 63) – how he purchased the pistol hoping that his death would be eternal… but instead, he lived as a gecko for 15 years. Perhaps that’s why I felt that it was right to end the novel with Felix’s narration of the gecko’s (second) death. But then that got me thinking, if the gecko was a reincarnation of Borges, and the gecko had wanted to die permanently as a human the first time, why did Agualusa wish to give the narrator a second chance? But maybe I just don’t know enough about Borges to understand the decision about the reincarnation. Maybe the second death was like justice, finally letting the gecko rest in peace after forcibly giving him one more chance despite his wishes? I’m not sure, maybe I’m looking too deeply into this.

Anyways, I think this novel clearly demonstrated the power of lies and perception. It’s like, if I don’t know the truth, and you can’t recall the exact truth, then who’s driving the bus? Eventually the lies will turn into the truth if you keep feeding yourself with them. It’s like with what happened to Jose – he lost his pronunciation, became more expansive, and lost his moustache, all to fit with the new past that Felix granted him. Even though Gouveia admits to making things up so Felix will believe him, he himself believes in his own fabricated facade:

“I needed Felix himself to believe in my life story. If he believed it, who wouldn’t? And today, I honestly believe it myself. I look back now, back into my past, and I see two lives. In one, I was Pedro Gouveia, in another Jose Buchmann. Pedro Gouveia died. Jose Buchmann returned to Chibia.” (pg. 172)

I think this quote demonstrates the power of a narrative. Felix also admits to having jumbled memories, which I can attribute to his frequent habit of lying and storytelling. Like I said earlier, if you tell so many lies, you’ll eventually lose track of them until they inevitably become the truth.

“Apart from the bit about the portrait, everything I’ve told you about my background is quite true. Or at least, as much of it as I remember. I know I have false memories sometimes – we all do, don’t we? …there have been studies done by psychologists of this – but I think this much is true.” (pg. 116)

The following dialogue made me laugh, because I think Angela really gagged Felix. Hit the nail on the head! And yet, Felix still had the audacity and shamelessness to lie (once again) and say he didn’t…

“I can believe it. But your friend Jose Buchmann, that story is completely made-up, isn’t it? You invented him yourself…” (pg. 116)

Speaking of Angela, I quite liked her. Not really for any specific reason, but like Felix says, everything about her is Light! I can’t exactly say the same about Felix and Gouveia…

Categories
Uncategorized

Piglia: Characters to Burn

Like many of the other students, I was also lost in the amount of characters in this novel. So many characters, so many crimes, and the fact that they were often introduced with their real name then were referred to by their alias from thereon out… there was just a lot going on. The queer love story between the Kid and Dorda was also intriguing and refreshing (compared to the previous romances we’ve been reading) – they’re not absolved of guilt, but they find solace within each other, and Kid’s death plus the way Dorda spoke of him was particularly touching. In addition, I thought it was interesting how not all of the criminals had tragic backgrounds or impoverished backgrounds that led to a life of crime – I think this reflects real life, where not everything is the result of trauma. Sometimes, people are just drawn to do horrible things.

One thing I’d like to touch on is the fact that this was a real story, as the lecture thoroughly discussed. Piglia finds it important to emphasize the accuracy of his storytelling, through firsthand accounts, police reports, and the like. But why does he explain all of this if the readers can tell that some of these details are, in fact, not real? Things like the character’s backstories, or when the lecture mentioned how there is a character that Piglia tends to include in his other novels, so there’s no way he would be a real human in the Money to Burn universe. The fact that Blanca, the Girl, told Piglia this entire story herself was also intriguing.

Since there were so many characters and details, I was a little bored up until the actual heist and burning scene. That bit was actually thrilling; the heist only taking 7 minutes yet the stakeout being the most thrilling part, leading up to the burning? (Insert picture) Absolute cinema. I feel like the burning symbolizes many things. They planned this heist so meticulously, but when placed in a corner, they decided to burn all that money (no small amount either). It felt like a mix of saying fuck you to the police (as they were saying throughout the entire novel), but also bitterness like if I can’t have it no one can? The message that the general public didn’t care about the corruption and bloodshed that these criminals had previously committed, and had commit to obtain that money, instead caring about the money itself, was very profound. Money makes the world go round, right?

I think almost everyone has discussed this specific quote, but I still wanted to highlight it:

“Money is just the same as drugs: what’s fundamental is its possession, knowing it’s there, touching it, checking it’s still in the cupboard, there in its bag slung among the clothes, checking there’s still a half-kilo of the stuff, a hundred grand’s worth, being content with that.” (pg. 30)

 

Categories
Uncategorized

Is RMST 202 making us read cautionary tales against romance???

The non-linear storytelling was honestly confusing. I know it’s supposed to mimic the narrator’s train of thought but… since I’m not her, I didn’t really know where all this information was coming from! I felt like that “guy who needs context” meme for the beginning portion. There were details all over the place and one second she’s 15, and the next she’s 20, and the next she has a son, and then she’s back to being 15 again. There’s a certain stylistic charm in that but when reading the novel for the very first time, it’s confusing. And then when she talks about her first encounter with him, she uses third person speech, like it’s not her own story, and she has instead dissasociated from it. Perhaps that says something about the grooming? (I’m pulling at straws here)

It feels like the male protagonists in all these readings are on a speed run for who can be sent to super mega ultra hell first. How irredeemable can they get? The language used in the novel was also frightening – what specifically stood out to me was “the little white whore from Sadec” (pg. 35). I wonder how these phrases were originally read as in the source language. Were they even more vulgar, or were they adapted to have a similar level of severity?

More than the grooming going on throughout the whole story, I think this story demonstrates what war and poverty can do to somebody, and their family. For example, the narrator is poor and white, in contrast to the lover who is rich and Chinese. Meanwhile, her elder brother treats the lover like he doesn’t exist, even though the lover is in a higher financial position than him. It gives an interesting perspective on racial ad wealth gaps, but still, it all ends up with women in the lower rung, despite her white status and therefore “higher racial hierarchy”.

I think at first, the narrator was attracted to the lover because that is the only way she could reclaim some kind of control over her life. The way she frames her actions and dialogues is as if she’s choosing this life, that she’s a willing participant, and that the lover is foolish but she still stays to exploit him. Previously, her impoverished life had no room for control – what did she have? But now, with one thing that is her ‘own’, she’s ‘free’ to criticize him however she likes. Obviously, from our point of view, she’s being groomed and manipulated – but in such a desperate state, the narrator appears to be willing to grasp any rope for help out of poverty, which is why her narration reads like she’s choosing these things for herself.

Question: What did you think of the nonlinear narration? Did it serve to tell her story better, or was it as confusing as I thought?

Categories
Uncategorized

To be loved is to be known…?

Rodrigo puzzled me as a narrator because he felt a bit wishy-washy with his feelings about Macabea. [Edited to cut something out here because I got the details wrong oops] He goes on and on about how he’s the only one who is capable of loving her and that it’s his duty to tell her story (since obviously no one else will). He describes how Macabea is utterly plain and ridiculously simple, not quite stupid, but a little daft and won’t question what is given to her or aspire for greater things. The way he described her kind of irked me… like, are you sure you love her? Because it certainly doesn’t sound like it. For example:

“She didn’t have that delicate thing called charm. I’m the only one who finds her charming. Only I, her author, love her. I suffer for her. And I’m the only one who can say this: “what do you ask of me weeping that I wouldn’t give you singing”? That girl didn’t know she was what she was, just as a dog doesn’t know it’s a dog. So she didn’t feel unhappy. The only thing she wanted was to live. She didn’t know for what, she didn’t ask questions. Maybe she thought there was a little bitty glory in living. She thought people had to be happy. So she was. Before her birth was she an idea? Before her birth was she dead? And after her birth she would die? What a thin slice of watermelon.” (page 19)

“She forced her being upon me. […] I alone love her.” (page 21)

I know that he’s a fake narrator and doesn’t really exist, but he acted like he knew absolutely everything about her, but also admitted to not knowing everything about her. You know the textpost that goes, “people b saying things so definitively. like man i think it depends”? That’s exactly how I feel about Rodrigo’s description of Macabea. In fact, the entire novel, I felt like Macabea’s agency was being taken away from her (well, she didn’t really have any greed for it to begin with). Rodrigo, who apparently ‘loves her’ came across as having a god complex or saviour complex with how he’s apparently the only one who can tell Macabea’s story, since (according to him) she’s so plain and boring and there are tens of thousands of girls like her (could be a comforting notion but comes off horribly arrogant from his mouth). And then there’s Olimpico, who’s just a straight up asshole. And finally, when Macabea gets a sliver of hope handed by the fortune teller and decides to live for herself, there’s an (explosion) and her life is over just like that. Clearly ironic and a call to the title of the book, as Macabea saw herself as a star for basically an hour before her dreaded fate.

In a way, the ending reminded me of Rodrigo’s description in the beginning. Thousands of girls live just like Macabea, and they can easily be substituted for each other. What made Macabea’s life special? Perhaps the mundanity is what makes this story interesting – the moment Macabea can escape from her previously greedless life, it’s cut off. Contrary to what Rodrigo seeks (“a story with a beginning, middle and “grand finale” followed by silence and falling rain” (page 5)), this finale isn’t grand at all. It’s rather abrupt and unresolved.

Can I say Rodrigo truly loved Macabea like he claimed? I don’t think so. But to be loved is to be known, right?

Spam prevention powered by Akismet