5. How do you intepret the end of the novel? Do you see it as redemptive or destructive? (By 'end of the novel' I mean the last sentence - the sinking into the mud and the star in the sky.)
"When he turned to look up for the last time at Ephraim, all he saw was a six-pointed star turning slowly against the black sky" (370). I thought this was a terrible way to end the story. I hate when books don't have a nice, finished ending, because I would really like to know the last little bit that happened. I'm assuming that they sank into the mud and died, but I would have liked knowing for certain.
Aside from my own disappointment with the ending, I didn't really think the ending was in one way redemptive or destructive. However, I am leaning more toward redemptive. In the story of St. Christopher, the saint was 'redeemed' for carrying the Christ-child. "'You have had not only the whole world on your back but also him who created the world. For I am Christ your king, whom you have rendered this service'" (41). He is rewarded with a fruitful tree for carrying the child to safety. Tiffauges is also redeemed for his sins in the end of the story, by carrying the child to safety. However, I think Tiffauges was more redeemed when he rescued the boy and sheltered him. I thought that relationship was very different than the others Tiffauges has had with children. Tiffauges assumed the role of a paternal figure, and made sure the boy was safe instead of exploiting him in some way. I had a completely different view of Tiffauges once Ephraim entered the story. I pitied Tiffauges in the beginning, because he seemed so pathetic. Then, as the story progressed, he disgusted me. And then, at the end, I regarded him a little more highly for rescuing the child and protecting him to the very end.
I read the ending of the story as though Tiffauges was the peat bog man and Ephraim was the child-head they found. We have discussed how children are the Alpha, and it would make sense that since they only found the head of the second person that it would be a child and an Alpha. I liked how the peat bog man came back again, and I thought it was a greater symbol here. I mean, I understand how it could symbolize the missing Jews, but I think it fits better as a pre-symbol for Tiffauges' fate.
the ending
I thought the last 20 pages of the novel were absolutely excellent. The novel itself was really good, but the ending was both expected and totally unexpected. When Tournier (through Ephraim) explained all the symbols finally, and seeing Tiffauges react to them, it was like I was seeing for the first time all the different connections. I mean obviously I as the removed observer was aware of all the symbols, but when he explained everything I got all excited like "Yes! I knew that's what that meant!" and so on.
I thought Tiffauges' reaction to the hair was really striking. "Tiffauges could not hear this without seeing himself holding a sack of hair in one hand and offering Frau Dorn a haunch of venison with the other. He remembered how the tall clumsy creature backed away, making negative gestures with her head, her hands, her whole body. She must have heard about the hair at Auschwitz and thought she was being asked to take part in that vast and macabre manufacture" (355).
He finally sees himself as the Nazi had really become. Yes, he was still French and still a prisoner, but he adopted the German language, and integrated himself so well with his captors that he essentially became one of them. "Thus, through Ephraim's long confessions, Tiffauges, steeped in horror, saw an infernal city remorselessly building up which corresponded stone by stone to the phoric city he himself had dreamed of at Kaltenborn...all his inventions, all his discoveries were reflected in the horrible mirror, inverted and raised to hellish incandescence" (357).
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Monday, April 19, 2010
The Ogre [Day 3]
2. Discuss the emphasis upon animals in Rominten. What do you think the aurochs symbolize? Or why the emphasis on the hunt? Try to extract as many meanings as possible from this.
I sort of lost sight of the larger picture of the story when Tiffauges went to Rominten. He no longer seemed like a prisoner, because his German captors had integrated him so much into their society. He was asked to come to Rominten with the forest ranger, and was in very close contact with Goering.
I thought the aurochs were kind of scary. I really don't like any sort of animal outside of cats, and I especially don't like horses and cows and that sort of big animal. If I were in Tiffauges' situation, I wouldn't have even spent the time to count the animals but just gotten straight out of there. However, after looking at the questions and looking back at the reading, I think the aurochs symbolize the Nazis. "Professor Dr. Lutz Heck, father of Bos primigenus redivivus, explained that paradoxically his beasts would remain dangerous so long as they retained any traces of domestication. Born in captivity, they would take years to learn to fear man and to flee as soon as they suspected his presence " (203). The aurochs were a dangerous force in such a number, and they were also frightening to look at. The Nazis had huge numbers of followers, many of them young children, and some of their chants that Tournier includes in the book are frightening. I also think the aurochs symbolize the Hitler Youth. The children are taken from their parents at a young age, and basically 'born in captivity'. They are brainwashed into accepting the Nazi doctrine, and when they emerge from their education (their 'captivity'), they are dangerous. They so believe in what they have been taught that they perform crazy tasks, like jumping 30 ft into water or juggling the heavy wooden beams.
I thought the emphasis on hunting was a very apparent symbol. I thought that it symbolized the hunt to round up all of the Jews, and I thought the rabbit hunt especially illustrated this. "The last picture Tiffauges carried away with him that day was of an immense carpet of fawn and fur formed by the bodies of twelve hundred hares lying side by side - the bag. Alone in the middle of this cemetery of softness, Goering, crowned king of the hunt by virtue of his bag of two hundred, posed for his official photographer, belly outthrust, field marshal's baton held aloft in his right hand" (228-229). The innocent hares that were hunted and slaughtered were like the Jews that were mercilessly hunted and slaughtered.
3. Bluebeard is a very important character in the text - how does the horse serve as a mirror image for Abel? What dos the horse symbolize for him? Why is this important?
Bluebeard is a mirror image for Tiffauges because all the horse is concerned with is eating and defecating. There is also a lot of emphasis and description of the horse's bottom. "'But all a horse's strength is in his crupper...In fact, a horse is crupper with organs attached to the front'" (224). This is one of the first things Pressmar tells Tiffauges, and of course this is Tiffauges' favorite subject. "...Tiffauges saw brand-new balls of dung emerge, wonderfully smooth and shiny, to fall one by one unbroken on to the straw. Such perfection in the defecatory act struck Tiffauges as the supreme justification of Pressmar's theories. The whole of a horse is certainly in its crupper, so the crupper makes the horse the Spirit of Defecation, the Anal Angel, and makes Omega the key of its essence" (226).
Bluebeard, and probably a hose in general, is the best animal for Tiffauges. It mirrors him in size and strength. Tiffauges was able to work tirelessly while in the prison camp, and is only ever able to fit into the leftover uniforms that are much too large for anyone else. Bluebeard is also an extremely large horse, and capable of carrying Tiffauges on his journeys to collect boys. Both Tiffauges and Bluebeard are obsessed with the act of defecation. For the horse, it is not so much a religious act as it is for Tiffauges. However, it is one of the only things each of them is good for.
I sort of lost sight of the larger picture of the story when Tiffauges went to Rominten. He no longer seemed like a prisoner, because his German captors had integrated him so much into their society. He was asked to come to Rominten with the forest ranger, and was in very close contact with Goering.
I thought the aurochs were kind of scary. I really don't like any sort of animal outside of cats, and I especially don't like horses and cows and that sort of big animal. If I were in Tiffauges' situation, I wouldn't have even spent the time to count the animals but just gotten straight out of there. However, after looking at the questions and looking back at the reading, I think the aurochs symbolize the Nazis. "Professor Dr. Lutz Heck, father of Bos primigenus redivivus, explained that paradoxically his beasts would remain dangerous so long as they retained any traces of domestication. Born in captivity, they would take years to learn to fear man and to flee as soon as they suspected his presence " (203). The aurochs were a dangerous force in such a number, and they were also frightening to look at. The Nazis had huge numbers of followers, many of them young children, and some of their chants that Tournier includes in the book are frightening. I also think the aurochs symbolize the Hitler Youth. The children are taken from their parents at a young age, and basically 'born in captivity'. They are brainwashed into accepting the Nazi doctrine, and when they emerge from their education (their 'captivity'), they are dangerous. They so believe in what they have been taught that they perform crazy tasks, like jumping 30 ft into water or juggling the heavy wooden beams.
I thought the emphasis on hunting was a very apparent symbol. I thought that it symbolized the hunt to round up all of the Jews, and I thought the rabbit hunt especially illustrated this. "The last picture Tiffauges carried away with him that day was of an immense carpet of fawn and fur formed by the bodies of twelve hundred hares lying side by side - the bag. Alone in the middle of this cemetery of softness, Goering, crowned king of the hunt by virtue of his bag of two hundred, posed for his official photographer, belly outthrust, field marshal's baton held aloft in his right hand" (228-229). The innocent hares that were hunted and slaughtered were like the Jews that were mercilessly hunted and slaughtered.
3. Bluebeard is a very important character in the text - how does the horse serve as a mirror image for Abel? What dos the horse symbolize for him? Why is this important?
Bluebeard is a mirror image for Tiffauges because all the horse is concerned with is eating and defecating. There is also a lot of emphasis and description of the horse's bottom. "'But all a horse's strength is in his crupper...In fact, a horse is crupper with organs attached to the front'" (224). This is one of the first things Pressmar tells Tiffauges, and of course this is Tiffauges' favorite subject. "...Tiffauges saw brand-new balls of dung emerge, wonderfully smooth and shiny, to fall one by one unbroken on to the straw. Such perfection in the defecatory act struck Tiffauges as the supreme justification of Pressmar's theories. The whole of a horse is certainly in its crupper, so the crupper makes the horse the Spirit of Defecation, the Anal Angel, and makes Omega the key of its essence" (226).
Bluebeard, and probably a hose in general, is the best animal for Tiffauges. It mirrors him in size and strength. Tiffauges was able to work tirelessly while in the prison camp, and is only ever able to fit into the leftover uniforms that are much too large for anyone else. Bluebeard is also an extremely large horse, and capable of carrying Tiffauges on his journeys to collect boys. Both Tiffauges and Bluebeard are obsessed with the act of defecation. For the horse, it is not so much a religious act as it is for Tiffauges. However, it is one of the only things each of them is good for.
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
The Ogre [Day 2]
There were a few things in the reading for today that both intrigued/repulsed me.
I. the execution of Weidmann
"'But Monsieur Tiffauges, he's just like you! Anyone would think he was your brother! He's like you, Monsieur Tiffauges, exactly like you!...It was grotesque, unbearable. You could hear the click of the knife rising jerkily between the posts. Then a hiss. The blood spurted out in floods. It was 4:32 AM" (118-119).
I thought this scene was particularly repulsive. I don't think it was the idea of the execution that I found repulsive, but rather the fact they still used the guillotine in France after almost two centuries. I do not like the idea of the guillotine, and especially the thousands of heads that rolled from it during the French Revolution. It just seemed like such a primitive, bloodthirsty way of executing someone in an age that was on the brink of technology. I didn't have much of anything insightful to say about this scene, only the fact that it repulsed me.
II. the camera
"When I range about the streets in my old Hotchkiss, I'm never quite happy unless the camera case slung around my neck is properly wedged between my legs. I enjoy being equipped with a huge leather-clad sex whose Cyclopean eye opens like lightning when I command it to look, and closes again inexorably on what it has seen. It is a marvelous organ..." (103).
I thought this was a slightly disturbing image, especially given the events that follow. As we discussed in class on Tuesday, Tiffauges is basically asexual, with neither heterosexual or homosexual relationships (excepting Rachel). I thought the camera replaced his sexual organs because he was microgenitomorphous, and also because the camera was the only thing that allowed him to have 'relations' with people.
At first, I felt slightly bad for pathetic Tiffauges when little Martine accused him of being the rapist, when he really only had intended to help her. However, when I thought back on the whole situation, it made sense that she would accuse him as the rapist. He was having 'relations' with the children, without their consent, by hanging around the school and taking their pictures without them knowing. When I read the line about Tiffauges hearing a scream, it was like I knew the events that were going to follow.
III. the pigeons
"he had come to the conclusion that many pigeon owners were not doing their patriotic duty, were turning a deaf ear and, not so much out of negligence as out of jealous attachment to their birds, were failing to write to the Erstein headquarters. It was just these birds he longed to see and touch and possess: as they were the most loved, they must also be the most desirable" (141).
I felt like with this statement, pigeons have replaced the children in Tiffauges life. Since he does not have the love of children to occupy his time, he has devoted countless hours and days to the rearing of a wounded pigeon and to the upkeep of the pigeon loft. He treats them with almost this sickening devotion, caring for them as if they were humans and not birds. I thought the grossest part was when he willingly prechewed their food and let them eat it from his mouth. I have a cat at home, and I love him tremendously, but I would never chew his cat food for him so that he would have an easier time eating it.
I also think Tiffauges takes his pigeon obsession too far, as he does with the children. Mme. Unruh, the dear widow with the small pigeon loft 'bequeathed' to her by her late husband, is torn about parting with the silver dove, and begs Tiffauges not to take him. However, her pleas do nothing to change his mind, and he takes the pigeon anyway. I feel like this is the same with the children. When the child falls down the stairs, and his knee is cut and injured, Tiffauges slaps and manipulates the poor child into whatever poses he likes, just so he take a photograph.
IV. the Monster
"Tiffauges threw it open and staggered back before the monster that stood framed there. It was at once like a horse, a buffalo, a deer. It took a step forward and was immediately halted by its enormous antlers, with jagged tips, which got caught on the doorposts...Now Tiffauges understood the begging demeanor, the awkward gait, the somnabulistic slowness; and because of his own awful myopia he felt close to the dark giant" (176-177).
I thought it was funny how a man so large as Tiffauges, who ate nothing but raw meat and raw milk, was afraid of another creature as monstrous as he was. I also found it funny how murderers and corpses have been compared to Tiffauges, but now it is an animal that he is being compared to. I thought the comparison of Tiffauges to the elk was rather fitting, because Tiffauges can also be lumbering and gentle. Although he had a strange obsession with children, and was given to strange tendencies, he never really meant any harm to anyone. This is just like the elk, who only wanted food because he could not see well enough to fully feed himself.
"'I feed blind elks,' he said" (181). My most favorite quote from this novel so far.
I. the execution of Weidmann
"'But Monsieur Tiffauges, he's just like you! Anyone would think he was your brother! He's like you, Monsieur Tiffauges, exactly like you!...It was grotesque, unbearable. You could hear the click of the knife rising jerkily between the posts. Then a hiss. The blood spurted out in floods. It was 4:32 AM" (118-119).
I thought this scene was particularly repulsive. I don't think it was the idea of the execution that I found repulsive, but rather the fact they still used the guillotine in France after almost two centuries. I do not like the idea of the guillotine, and especially the thousands of heads that rolled from it during the French Revolution. It just seemed like such a primitive, bloodthirsty way of executing someone in an age that was on the brink of technology. I didn't have much of anything insightful to say about this scene, only the fact that it repulsed me.
II. the camera
"When I range about the streets in my old Hotchkiss, I'm never quite happy unless the camera case slung around my neck is properly wedged between my legs. I enjoy being equipped with a huge leather-clad sex whose Cyclopean eye opens like lightning when I command it to look, and closes again inexorably on what it has seen. It is a marvelous organ..." (103).
I thought this was a slightly disturbing image, especially given the events that follow. As we discussed in class on Tuesday, Tiffauges is basically asexual, with neither heterosexual or homosexual relationships (excepting Rachel). I thought the camera replaced his sexual organs because he was microgenitomorphous, and also because the camera was the only thing that allowed him to have 'relations' with people.
At first, I felt slightly bad for pathetic Tiffauges when little Martine accused him of being the rapist, when he really only had intended to help her. However, when I thought back on the whole situation, it made sense that she would accuse him as the rapist. He was having 'relations' with the children, without their consent, by hanging around the school and taking their pictures without them knowing. When I read the line about Tiffauges hearing a scream, it was like I knew the events that were going to follow.
III. the pigeons
"he had come to the conclusion that many pigeon owners were not doing their patriotic duty, were turning a deaf ear and, not so much out of negligence as out of jealous attachment to their birds, were failing to write to the Erstein headquarters. It was just these birds he longed to see and touch and possess: as they were the most loved, they must also be the most desirable" (141).
I felt like with this statement, pigeons have replaced the children in Tiffauges life. Since he does not have the love of children to occupy his time, he has devoted countless hours and days to the rearing of a wounded pigeon and to the upkeep of the pigeon loft. He treats them with almost this sickening devotion, caring for them as if they were humans and not birds. I thought the grossest part was when he willingly prechewed their food and let them eat it from his mouth. I have a cat at home, and I love him tremendously, but I would never chew his cat food for him so that he would have an easier time eating it.
I also think Tiffauges takes his pigeon obsession too far, as he does with the children. Mme. Unruh, the dear widow with the small pigeon loft 'bequeathed' to her by her late husband, is torn about parting with the silver dove, and begs Tiffauges not to take him. However, her pleas do nothing to change his mind, and he takes the pigeon anyway. I feel like this is the same with the children. When the child falls down the stairs, and his knee is cut and injured, Tiffauges slaps and manipulates the poor child into whatever poses he likes, just so he take a photograph.
IV. the Monster
"Tiffauges threw it open and staggered back before the monster that stood framed there. It was at once like a horse, a buffalo, a deer. It took a step forward and was immediately halted by its enormous antlers, with jagged tips, which got caught on the doorposts...Now Tiffauges understood the begging demeanor, the awkward gait, the somnabulistic slowness; and because of his own awful myopia he felt close to the dark giant" (176-177).
I thought it was funny how a man so large as Tiffauges, who ate nothing but raw meat and raw milk, was afraid of another creature as monstrous as he was. I also found it funny how murderers and corpses have been compared to Tiffauges, but now it is an animal that he is being compared to. I thought the comparison of Tiffauges to the elk was rather fitting, because Tiffauges can also be lumbering and gentle. Although he had a strange obsession with children, and was given to strange tendencies, he never really meant any harm to anyone. This is just like the elk, who only wanted food because he could not see well enough to fully feed himself.
"'I feed blind elks,' he said" (181). My most favorite quote from this novel so far.
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
The Ogre [Day 1]
2. Why is part one written as a diary? Why does he call these his "sinister writings"? What might this imply?
"I thus have two sets of writing...one that is 'sinister', distorted by all the 'gauchenesses' of genius, full of flashes and cries - in short, inhabited by the spirit of Nestor" (pg 30). At first, I didn't understand why they were called sinister writings. They didn't seem evil, but only the past events of his life. Then it clicked when he said 'gauche', and it made sense. They are sinister writings because they are written with his left hand. I also thought the writings represented Nestor. Nestor was a lefty, and somehow transferred this ability to Tiffauges. Part one was written as a diary to explain why Tiffauges is so fascinated by children. Nestor was very fascinated by children, even though he was only a child himself. I thought it was weird how old Nestor seemed; he was taking the same classes as Tiffauges and the other children, but he seemed years ahead of them in knowledge and in maturity.
5. How do you interpret Abel's "rewriting" of the Adam and Eve myth? How does he transform the myth? Why? What does this say about Abel's personality?
"Later he sees that the solitude implied by hermaphroditism is undesirable, so he puts Adam to sleep and takes from him not merely a rib but all his feminine sexual parts, and makes these into an independent being" (pg 16). I thought his rewriting of the Adam and Eve myth was both strange and very fascinating. We are quick to put down creation myths like that, and support evolutionist ideas (I myself included), but as much as we disbelieve them, we don't ever dare to change them. Tiffauges, on the other hand, has no problem in believing in and changing the myth. I would never have thought to give Adam both gender roles. But being the only human until Eve was created, he had to reproduce somehow. And honestly, how could Adam and Eve, one man and one woman, have populated the entire Earth? That would mean that everyone was related and we would all be extremely inbred. I don't it would be possible for a race to survive that long with so much inbreeding; there would have been some serious genetic defect along the way that would have mutated a person's cells so much that they wouldn't be able to function.
"...a sexual part of man, too cumbersome for him to carry permanently..." (pg 16). I thought this quote made Adam look very weak and inadequate. He couldn't handle the responsibilities of being a woman, so God had to help him by taking those parts away. I thought that this also made woman look like the true other half of man. She become the other piece of the puzzle. Although man could 'use' her whenever he wanted, she couldn't really be his inferior. It would almost make her his superior, because she carries the burden that man couldn't handle.
"I thus have two sets of writing...one that is 'sinister', distorted by all the 'gauchenesses' of genius, full of flashes and cries - in short, inhabited by the spirit of Nestor" (pg 30). At first, I didn't understand why they were called sinister writings. They didn't seem evil, but only the past events of his life. Then it clicked when he said 'gauche', and it made sense. They are sinister writings because they are written with his left hand. I also thought the writings represented Nestor. Nestor was a lefty, and somehow transferred this ability to Tiffauges. Part one was written as a diary to explain why Tiffauges is so fascinated by children. Nestor was very fascinated by children, even though he was only a child himself. I thought it was weird how old Nestor seemed; he was taking the same classes as Tiffauges and the other children, but he seemed years ahead of them in knowledge and in maturity.
5. How do you interpret Abel's "rewriting" of the Adam and Eve myth? How does he transform the myth? Why? What does this say about Abel's personality?
"Later he sees that the solitude implied by hermaphroditism is undesirable, so he puts Adam to sleep and takes from him not merely a rib but all his feminine sexual parts, and makes these into an independent being" (pg 16). I thought his rewriting of the Adam and Eve myth was both strange and very fascinating. We are quick to put down creation myths like that, and support evolutionist ideas (I myself included), but as much as we disbelieve them, we don't ever dare to change them. Tiffauges, on the other hand, has no problem in believing in and changing the myth. I would never have thought to give Adam both gender roles. But being the only human until Eve was created, he had to reproduce somehow. And honestly, how could Adam and Eve, one man and one woman, have populated the entire Earth? That would mean that everyone was related and we would all be extremely inbred. I don't it would be possible for a race to survive that long with so much inbreeding; there would have been some serious genetic defect along the way that would have mutated a person's cells so much that they wouldn't be able to function.
"...a sexual part of man, too cumbersome for him to carry permanently..." (pg 16). I thought this quote made Adam look very weak and inadequate. He couldn't handle the responsibilities of being a woman, so God had to help him by taking those parts away. I thought that this also made woman look like the true other half of man. She become the other piece of the puzzle. Although man could 'use' her whenever he wanted, she couldn't really be his inferior. It would almost make her his superior, because she carries the burden that man couldn't handle.
Thursday, April 8, 2010
100 Years of Solitude [Day 4]
3. Aureliano's deciphering of the parchment - Why does Melquiadez want this parchment to be deciphered and read?
I thought the last few pages of the book were extremely intense, and I was literally on the edge of my seat reading them. I knew how the novel was supposed to end, that we were supposed to find out Melquiades wrote the book and that we were reading his observations of the Buendia family and Macondo. However, I felt like in the last few pages I forgot that we were supposed to know the ending, and I was very curious to see how the story ended.
Throughout the whole book I couldn't convince myself that Melquiades was dead. There was just something about the way he would reappear to the people in the room that made him very un-dead. "Melquiades revealed to him that his opportunities to return to the room were limited. But he would go in peace to the meadows of the ultimate death..." (356). I think it has to do with the issue of memory. Melquiades mentions 'ultimate death', which I took to mean him actually dying. The sort of death he was under now was just a state of memory. Those who were interested in his alchemy and his manuscripts never forgot that he existed, while those who could care less forgot about him. "As had happened to Ursula with Aureliano Segundo when the latter was studying in the room, Santa Sofia de la Piedad thought that Aureliano was talking to himself. Actually, he was talking to Melquiades" (356). Sofia thinks he is dead, so she cannot see him in the room. But Aureliano, who is translating the manuscripts, can see him because he has not forgotten about him. The last time Aureliano sees Melquiades, after he has learned almost as much as he can, Melquiades tells him "'I died of fever on the sands of Singapore'" (356). This is how everyone else believed he died, so when they heard this news, he became dead to them. Only when Aureliano is almost finished translating does Melquiades tell him this, so that he can forget him too. If Ursula and Rebeca and Pilar can live over one hundred years, I saw no reason Melquiades should have to die.
I wasn't entirely sure of the reason Melquiades wanted this manuscript to be read. I thought that maybe he wanted it to serve as a lesson to the future generations who read it, but it can't be a warning for Aureliano because he is the last of the line in a dead town. However, I also think Melquiades meant to use this as a false sort of memory. Everyone seems to forget things so quickly that maybe he wanted everything to be preserved. When Aureliano reads it, he learns about the memories of his family and of his own lineage. If this parchment memory wasn't there, he would have never found out Amaranta Ursula was not his mother or his sister but instead his aunt.
The last line of the novel really brought the idea of circular time and memory to a nice end. "...everything written on them was unrepeatable since time immemorial and forever more, because races condemned to one hundred years of solitude did not have a second opportunity on earth" (417). Ursula always seemed to think that everything was going in a circle, that everything was repeating. But just because everyone shared the same name did not mean they went through the same experiences. Also, after reading this line, I finally understood the meaning of the 'one hundred years of solitude'. It wasn't that someone spent 100 years by themselves, like I originally thought. It was that the family inbred into itself for 100 years, and did not reach out into the external world (and gene pool).
8. The symbolism behind the sexual union of Amaranta Ursula and Aureliano and the resulting pig-tail child
By this point in the story, I was very confused as to who was who, and how they were all related to each other. I couldn't remember the ages of certain characters because of the repetition of the names and because everyone either seemed older or younger than they really were, based on what they did. The final Aureliano (not the last child who was born) seemed ages older than Amaranta Ursula, but she was actually slightly older than he was.
Their union was like the union of Ursula and Jose Arcadio Buendia. They were the first of the cousins to be married in the novel, and they were worried about having a child with a pig tail. The other incestuous unions do not result in children with an animal tail, until only two members of the family are left. Unlike Ursula, who wore the chastity panties to avoid having sex, Amaranta Ursula only put up a small fight, and very willingly gave in to her cousin's desires.
I thought it was only fitting that the last surviving members of the Buendia family would produce a child with a pig tale. I also thought it was weird that there was almost a role reversal here. When Ursula's cousin was born with the pig tale, a butcher cut it off and he ended up bleeding to death. However, when Amaranta Ursula has the child, she is the one who ends up bleeding to death.
I thought the last few pages of the book were extremely intense, and I was literally on the edge of my seat reading them. I knew how the novel was supposed to end, that we were supposed to find out Melquiades wrote the book and that we were reading his observations of the Buendia family and Macondo. However, I felt like in the last few pages I forgot that we were supposed to know the ending, and I was very curious to see how the story ended.
Throughout the whole book I couldn't convince myself that Melquiades was dead. There was just something about the way he would reappear to the people in the room that made him very un-dead. "Melquiades revealed to him that his opportunities to return to the room were limited. But he would go in peace to the meadows of the ultimate death..." (356). I think it has to do with the issue of memory. Melquiades mentions 'ultimate death', which I took to mean him actually dying. The sort of death he was under now was just a state of memory. Those who were interested in his alchemy and his manuscripts never forgot that he existed, while those who could care less forgot about him. "As had happened to Ursula with Aureliano Segundo when the latter was studying in the room, Santa Sofia de la Piedad thought that Aureliano was talking to himself. Actually, he was talking to Melquiades" (356). Sofia thinks he is dead, so she cannot see him in the room. But Aureliano, who is translating the manuscripts, can see him because he has not forgotten about him. The last time Aureliano sees Melquiades, after he has learned almost as much as he can, Melquiades tells him "'I died of fever on the sands of Singapore'" (356). This is how everyone else believed he died, so when they heard this news, he became dead to them. Only when Aureliano is almost finished translating does Melquiades tell him this, so that he can forget him too. If Ursula and Rebeca and Pilar can live over one hundred years, I saw no reason Melquiades should have to die.
I wasn't entirely sure of the reason Melquiades wanted this manuscript to be read. I thought that maybe he wanted it to serve as a lesson to the future generations who read it, but it can't be a warning for Aureliano because he is the last of the line in a dead town. However, I also think Melquiades meant to use this as a false sort of memory. Everyone seems to forget things so quickly that maybe he wanted everything to be preserved. When Aureliano reads it, he learns about the memories of his family and of his own lineage. If this parchment memory wasn't there, he would have never found out Amaranta Ursula was not his mother or his sister but instead his aunt.
The last line of the novel really brought the idea of circular time and memory to a nice end. "...everything written on them was unrepeatable since time immemorial and forever more, because races condemned to one hundred years of solitude did not have a second opportunity on earth" (417). Ursula always seemed to think that everything was going in a circle, that everything was repeating. But just because everyone shared the same name did not mean they went through the same experiences. Also, after reading this line, I finally understood the meaning of the 'one hundred years of solitude'. It wasn't that someone spent 100 years by themselves, like I originally thought. It was that the family inbred into itself for 100 years, and did not reach out into the external world (and gene pool).
8. The symbolism behind the sexual union of Amaranta Ursula and Aureliano and the resulting pig-tail child
By this point in the story, I was very confused as to who was who, and how they were all related to each other. I couldn't remember the ages of certain characters because of the repetition of the names and because everyone either seemed older or younger than they really were, based on what they did. The final Aureliano (not the last child who was born) seemed ages older than Amaranta Ursula, but she was actually slightly older than he was.
Their union was like the union of Ursula and Jose Arcadio Buendia. They were the first of the cousins to be married in the novel, and they were worried about having a child with a pig tail. The other incestuous unions do not result in children with an animal tail, until only two members of the family are left. Unlike Ursula, who wore the chastity panties to avoid having sex, Amaranta Ursula only put up a small fight, and very willingly gave in to her cousin's desires.
I thought it was only fitting that the last surviving members of the Buendia family would produce a child with a pig tale. I also thought it was weird that there was almost a role reversal here. When Ursula's cousin was born with the pig tale, a butcher cut it off and he ended up bleeding to death. However, when Amaranta Ursula has the child, she is the one who ends up bleeding to death.
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
100 Years of Solitude [Day 3]
2. The Rediscovery of Rebeca
I thought this scene was one of the strangest things encountered in the book so far. I had the feeling Rebeca would still be in the house, as I was reading the build-up to her discovery. "He asked who owned it. Someone told him that it did not belong to anyone, that in former times a solitary widow who fed on earth and whitewash from the walls had lived there, and that in her last years she was seen only twice on the street with a hat of tiny artificial flowers and shoes the color of old silver when she crossed the square..." (217). She was ostracized from the family once she married her brother/cousin, so there shouldn't be any reason that they wouldn't have left Rebeca's corpse in the house. Everyone seemed to forget about her and even I sort of forgot about her until this scene. I didn't, however, think Rebeca would still be alive inside the house. "..and then he saw in the center of the room the squalid woman, still dressed in clothing of the past century, with a few yellow threads on her bald head, and two large eyes, still beautiful, in which the last stars of hope had gone out...the woman was aiming an antiquated pistol at him" (218). Seeing as Ursula has managed to stick around this long, I guess there's no reason why Rebeca couldn't still be alive either.
At first I thought it was weird that Rebeca suddenly reappeared after the story went on without her for so long, and everyone had already forgotten about her. But then I read the scene with the massacre, and how quickly everyone forgot about the incident. After that I decided 'forgetfulness', in a sense, was possibly a theme of this novel. Aureliano Buendia (the original Aureliano) forgets about his family ties when he goes to fight the war, and completely forgets the bond he had with his mother. Rebeca is cast out of the house, and everyone forgets about her until they find her almost corpse-like and still alive. The villagers of Macondo completely forget the massacre only hours after it happens. The characters in the story are so good at forgetting things, the reader begins to forget them too.
6. The Ascension of Remedios the Beauty
I liked this scene, mainly because Remedios the Beauty was impossibly innocent, but also because Fernanda became so upset that she lost her sheets. At first, I felt bad for the way the family treated Fernanda. But then, the more crazy things she did, the less I pitied her, and was glad her sheets ascended with Remedios.
I didn't really think anything significant of this scene until I looked over the topic options last night. I was eating Easter candy, and had an epiphany about Remedios rising into the air. "...she watched Remedios the Beauty waving good-bye in the midst of the flapping sheets that rose up with her, abandoning with her the environment of beetles and dahlias and passing through the air with her as four o'clock in the afternoon came to an end..." (236). I thought that she might almost be a Christ-like figure. She lived a pure and simple life, choosing not to dress in fancy clothing but instead a sack-like dress. She was completely innocent of everything, and did not seem to have the sometimes cruel tendencies of the other members of the family. Yes, she did have the habit of killing men who got too close, but she couldn't help that the scent of her skin drove them mad. I thought her rising up into the air was sort of like Jesus ascending into Heaven on the third day. He also lived a very pure life, and did not die of His own sins, but to save us from ours. There isn't any evidence of Remedios the Beauty committing any sins, except that she's too beautiful. I thought with all of the mention of the Church in the story, this might be another one, especially since it is referred to as a 'miracle'. "Fernanda, burning with envy, finally accepted the miracle, and for a long time she kept on praying to God to send her back her sheets" (236).
I thought this scene was one of the strangest things encountered in the book so far. I had the feeling Rebeca would still be in the house, as I was reading the build-up to her discovery. "He asked who owned it. Someone told him that it did not belong to anyone, that in former times a solitary widow who fed on earth and whitewash from the walls had lived there, and that in her last years she was seen only twice on the street with a hat of tiny artificial flowers and shoes the color of old silver when she crossed the square..." (217). She was ostracized from the family once she married her brother/cousin, so there shouldn't be any reason that they wouldn't have left Rebeca's corpse in the house. Everyone seemed to forget about her and even I sort of forgot about her until this scene. I didn't, however, think Rebeca would still be alive inside the house. "..and then he saw in the center of the room the squalid woman, still dressed in clothing of the past century, with a few yellow threads on her bald head, and two large eyes, still beautiful, in which the last stars of hope had gone out...the woman was aiming an antiquated pistol at him" (218). Seeing as Ursula has managed to stick around this long, I guess there's no reason why Rebeca couldn't still be alive either.
At first I thought it was weird that Rebeca suddenly reappeared after the story went on without her for so long, and everyone had already forgotten about her. But then I read the scene with the massacre, and how quickly everyone forgot about the incident. After that I decided 'forgetfulness', in a sense, was possibly a theme of this novel. Aureliano Buendia (the original Aureliano) forgets about his family ties when he goes to fight the war, and completely forgets the bond he had with his mother. Rebeca is cast out of the house, and everyone forgets about her until they find her almost corpse-like and still alive. The villagers of Macondo completely forget the massacre only hours after it happens. The characters in the story are so good at forgetting things, the reader begins to forget them too.
6. The Ascension of Remedios the Beauty
I liked this scene, mainly because Remedios the Beauty was impossibly innocent, but also because Fernanda became so upset that she lost her sheets. At first, I felt bad for the way the family treated Fernanda. But then, the more crazy things she did, the less I pitied her, and was glad her sheets ascended with Remedios.
I didn't really think anything significant of this scene until I looked over the topic options last night. I was eating Easter candy, and had an epiphany about Remedios rising into the air. "...she watched Remedios the Beauty waving good-bye in the midst of the flapping sheets that rose up with her, abandoning with her the environment of beetles and dahlias and passing through the air with her as four o'clock in the afternoon came to an end..." (236). I thought that she might almost be a Christ-like figure. She lived a pure and simple life, choosing not to dress in fancy clothing but instead a sack-like dress. She was completely innocent of everything, and did not seem to have the sometimes cruel tendencies of the other members of the family. Yes, she did have the habit of killing men who got too close, but she couldn't help that the scent of her skin drove them mad. I thought her rising up into the air was sort of like Jesus ascending into Heaven on the third day. He also lived a very pure life, and did not die of His own sins, but to save us from ours. There isn't any evidence of Remedios the Beauty committing any sins, except that she's too beautiful. I thought with all of the mention of the Church in the story, this might be another one, especially since it is referred to as a 'miracle'. "Fernanda, burning with envy, finally accepted the miracle, and for a long time she kept on praying to God to send her back her sheets" (236).
Thursday, April 1, 2010
100 Years of Solitude [Day 2]
1. theme: violence.
I noticed a LOT more violence in chapters 6-10 than I did in chapters 1-5. Of course, these chapters deal a lot with the war, but I feel like most of the violence was very senseless. I also noticed that most of the violence was accompanied by pure human cruelty. We talked about ethics in my health science class this morning, so maybe I noticed more how unethical most of the actions were when I went back to look this over.
Violence is present right in the beginning of chapter 6 - "Colonel Aureliano Buendia organized thirty-two armed uprisings and he lost them all. He had seventeen male children...and they were exterminated one after the other on a single night before the oldest one had reached the age of thirty-five. He survived fourteen attempts on his life, seventy-three ambushes, and a firing squad. He lived through a dose of strychnine in his coffee that was strong enough to kill a horse" (103). While there is no direct violence in here, like we see in later scenes, there is still a lot of violence/malicious actions committed against one man.
I thought the worst scene relating to senseless violence was in chapter 8, when General Jose Raquel Moncada was sentenced to death. I thought it was intolerably cruel that the women of the town, and more importantly Ursula, were the ones who stood up in his defense, and that his 'friend' Aureliano refused to commute the sentence. I thought that Aureliano's excuse for why Gen. Moncada had to die was completely unethical, and a pathetic excuse by a delusional man. "'You know better than I,' he said, 'that all courts-martial are farces and that you're really paying for the crimes of other people, because this time we're going to win the war at any price. Wouldn't you have done the same in my place?'" (158). Substituting and sacrificing the life of an innocent man to cover the crimes of others is not acceptable on any level. But the way the General accepted his death really got me, and I'll admit it, I was having an overly emotional day and I almost cried when he calmly removed his jewelry and asked Aureliano to bring it to his wife. The way he was so calm in the face of his impending death, and the grace with which he handled the situation really struck me.
There were the more obvious incidents of violence, like the countless firing squads and frenzied attacks, but I also noticed that Ursula is capable of much violence herself. Although she is normally a calm and collected woman, it doesn't exempt her from being violent and cruel. In some ways, it was funny when she would attack, but it was also very frightening, because she was more than capable of causing harm. This was very present in chapter 6, when Arcadio becomes obsessed with power, and she runs out into the courtyard. "When Ursula burst into the courtyard of the headquarters, after having gone through town shouting shame and brandishing with rage a pitch-covered whip, Arcadio himself was preparing to give the squad command to fire...Before Arcadio had time to react she let go with the first blow of the lash...Whipping him without mercy, she chased him to the back of the courtyard, where Arcadio curled up like a snail in its shell...She left Arcadio with his uniform torn, roaring with pain and rage..."(105).
In some stories, you don't notice all of the violence that goes on, and can sometimes overlook it. However, I found it very hard to overlook any of the violence here.
2. theme: lack of 'filial piety'
After finishing these 5 chapters, I found that none of the children really have a sense of respect for their parents (or Ursula, since she is basically the adopted mother of every child in the story). Arcadio rebels against her, and decides to take over the town. Aureliano, whom I always pictured as a 'mama's boy', for some reason, completely disowns her when he returns from the war. "It was then that he decided that no human being, not even Ursula, could come closer to him than ten feet" (165). The last person he should have ever turned his back on, in my opinion, was his own mother. His mother is not only the most powerful force in the town, but also the woman who raised him and took care of him.
I also was really bothered by the amount of incest in this story. It was like no one had respect for their relatives. Everyone couldn't wait to get into bed with their aunt or sister or cousin, and I found it even weirder that they actually had feelings and got 'turned on' by their old aunt, or their younger sister. I can't fathom ever having feelings for one of my relatives, because it is just strange and horrible and something you're not supposed to do. I also cannot understand how none of the children, with the possible exception of Remedios the Beauty, weren't born mentally retarded or with some type of deformity. Yes, I realise that there is most likely a psychological problem with most of the boys, like their lust for power (and for their female relatives), but they are not cognitively impaired, as they should be. I also found it strange that Amaranta kept turning down male suitors from outside the family. It was like she was saving herself for one of the boys in the family, and I especially thought so even more the way she lit up when Aureliano returned home.
I noticed a LOT more violence in chapters 6-10 than I did in chapters 1-5. Of course, these chapters deal a lot with the war, but I feel like most of the violence was very senseless. I also noticed that most of the violence was accompanied by pure human cruelty. We talked about ethics in my health science class this morning, so maybe I noticed more how unethical most of the actions were when I went back to look this over.
Violence is present right in the beginning of chapter 6 - "Colonel Aureliano Buendia organized thirty-two armed uprisings and he lost them all. He had seventeen male children...and they were exterminated one after the other on a single night before the oldest one had reached the age of thirty-five. He survived fourteen attempts on his life, seventy-three ambushes, and a firing squad. He lived through a dose of strychnine in his coffee that was strong enough to kill a horse" (103). While there is no direct violence in here, like we see in later scenes, there is still a lot of violence/malicious actions committed against one man.
I thought the worst scene relating to senseless violence was in chapter 8, when General Jose Raquel Moncada was sentenced to death. I thought it was intolerably cruel that the women of the town, and more importantly Ursula, were the ones who stood up in his defense, and that his 'friend' Aureliano refused to commute the sentence. I thought that Aureliano's excuse for why Gen. Moncada had to die was completely unethical, and a pathetic excuse by a delusional man. "'You know better than I,' he said, 'that all courts-martial are farces and that you're really paying for the crimes of other people, because this time we're going to win the war at any price. Wouldn't you have done the same in my place?'" (158). Substituting and sacrificing the life of an innocent man to cover the crimes of others is not acceptable on any level. But the way the General accepted his death really got me, and I'll admit it, I was having an overly emotional day and I almost cried when he calmly removed his jewelry and asked Aureliano to bring it to his wife. The way he was so calm in the face of his impending death, and the grace with which he handled the situation really struck me.
There were the more obvious incidents of violence, like the countless firing squads and frenzied attacks, but I also noticed that Ursula is capable of much violence herself. Although she is normally a calm and collected woman, it doesn't exempt her from being violent and cruel. In some ways, it was funny when she would attack, but it was also very frightening, because she was more than capable of causing harm. This was very present in chapter 6, when Arcadio becomes obsessed with power, and she runs out into the courtyard. "When Ursula burst into the courtyard of the headquarters, after having gone through town shouting shame and brandishing with rage a pitch-covered whip, Arcadio himself was preparing to give the squad command to fire...Before Arcadio had time to react she let go with the first blow of the lash...Whipping him without mercy, she chased him to the back of the courtyard, where Arcadio curled up like a snail in its shell...She left Arcadio with his uniform torn, roaring with pain and rage..."(105).
In some stories, you don't notice all of the violence that goes on, and can sometimes overlook it. However, I found it very hard to overlook any of the violence here.
2. theme: lack of 'filial piety'
After finishing these 5 chapters, I found that none of the children really have a sense of respect for their parents (or Ursula, since she is basically the adopted mother of every child in the story). Arcadio rebels against her, and decides to take over the town. Aureliano, whom I always pictured as a 'mama's boy', for some reason, completely disowns her when he returns from the war. "It was then that he decided that no human being, not even Ursula, could come closer to him than ten feet" (165). The last person he should have ever turned his back on, in my opinion, was his own mother. His mother is not only the most powerful force in the town, but also the woman who raised him and took care of him.
I also was really bothered by the amount of incest in this story. It was like no one had respect for their relatives. Everyone couldn't wait to get into bed with their aunt or sister or cousin, and I found it even weirder that they actually had feelings and got 'turned on' by their old aunt, or their younger sister. I can't fathom ever having feelings for one of my relatives, because it is just strange and horrible and something you're not supposed to do. I also cannot understand how none of the children, with the possible exception of Remedios the Beauty, weren't born mentally retarded or with some type of deformity. Yes, I realise that there is most likely a psychological problem with most of the boys, like their lust for power (and for their female relatives), but they are not cognitively impaired, as they should be. I also found it strange that Amaranta kept turning down male suitors from outside the family. It was like she was saving herself for one of the boys in the family, and I especially thought so even more the way she lit up when Aureliano returned home.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)