The Hour of Questions

I have to say that this has been my favourite book so far. I loved everything about it, from the engaging writing style to the mysterious nature of the author, and each page left me more eager to go on. It really seems like the overarching theme of this novel is the “unknown,” since there is so much unexplained information.

 

This narrator is a paradox: both humble and proud, mysterious yet close. Each paragraph made me more confused about who the narrator truly is what his actual intention is for writing the story. This quote reminded me of a riddle, it was almost like “what am I” would be placed right after it haha:

“The upper class considers me a weird monster, the middle class worries I might unsettle them, the lower class never comes to me” (8).

This sentence really highlights the unknown aspects of the author: even though he provided a description of himself, it is not nearly enough for readers to learn anything meaningful about him or his motives.

 

The first chapter was full of uncertainty. The author stated multiple times that he “would like to tell the story of the northeastern girl,” which almost felt like an effort to remind himself what his primary objective is. This act of also reinforced the unreliability in the narrator’s version of events. In fact, the narrator himself states that

“[t]his book is a question” (8),

implying that us as readers should not take what he says as face value. However, he still says,

“I prefer the truth in the foreboding” and that “the story is true” (4),

which highlights the nuance in his words. The repetition, his declaration as an unreliable figure, and his desire to emphasize the “truth” in the material led me to believe (very early on) that this guy is a ghost. The last paragraph of the novel confirms this:

“I just remembered that we die” (77).

 

Similarly, I had more questions about why he is telling us about her, why does he love her so much and why he knows so much about Macabea especially since

“the girl isn’t aware of [the narrator]” (25).

I think anyone’s first thoughts would consider him a stalker, which I agree with, but it seemed like he was almost an extension of the girl, to the point he died with her: “Macabea killed me” (76). It seemed like the more I read, the less I understood.

 

Overall, the “simplicity” (3) in the text, as said by our narrator, led me to question the line between truth and lies. Specifically, can something be considered “true” if information is intentionally or unintentionally omitted? In this novel, the lack of details, and paradoxical nature of the narrator made me extremely hesitant to trust anything the narrator said, despite his reinforcement of the “truth” in the story. But I’m not sure I can say that his story is a lie. I open the same question to you all: what do you think?