Week 12: Conclusion

These past few months have been an amazing journey into the Romance World and its vast array of novels. It’s hard to believe this is our last week of class already! Each week has been a new exploration into different worlds that brought new concepts, new people, and new experiences to learn from. If I hadn’t taken this course, I probably would never have picked up a book similar in nature to those we read, let alone delve so deeply into their meanings, history, and interpretations.

Responding to the concluding lecture, I found the large amount of first-person narrated novels to be more immersive. Reading novels narrated by the characters themselves help make their lives feel more personal and closer to the reader. The first-person narration removes the gap of a third person between the reader and characters. On the other hand, I think a third-person narration helps readers see the bigger picture. It feels more fluid when discussing events that span one’s life. There seems to be more flexibility when covering a larger time period, and moving between the past, present, and future seems more natural.

One theme that stood out was family. More specifically, the novels “The Shrouded Woman” (Bombal), “Agostino” (Moravia), “Bonjour Tristesse” (Sagan), and “The Time of the Doves” (Rodoreda). Bombal focused on a reflection of Ana Maria’s life after her death, emphasizing her rocky marriage. Moravia looked at Agostino’s struggle with sexuality and coming-of-age, one ‘issue’ of which related to his mother. Sagan wrote about a manipulative, conflicted Cécile, who takes action to escape an unwanted family dynamic. Rodoreda detailed Natalia’s difficulties being a mother in a time of war. All these characters’ lives were strained because of the world inside and outside their family. Most were stuck in situations they were expected to live in, whether marriage, parenthood, or childhood. I found these stories to be quite powerful. It’s not always easy to escape family, especially when society’s expectations are involved.

This course introduced me to a new world – the Romance World. Before this class, I wasn’t sure what to expect as I wasn’t very familiar with its contents. I’m glad to say I learned a lot reading and discussing this collection of novels. I think my favourites would have to be Bombal’s “The Shrouded Woman” and Sagan’s “Bonjour Tristesse” (Rodoreda and Cercas following closely). I enjoyed exploring the characters’ lives. Their endings also stood out to me; they were open-ended and left at some sort of neutral peace. For least favourites, I’ll have to say Proust’s “Combray” and Aragon’s “Paris Peasant” (maybe not the best start to the term, personally). I typically like novels with more structure and ‘story’ to them, and those novels were quite confusing. It may have been because they were the first novels in the course, though. A final question I have is, what were your favourite novels and what do they have in common? What about your least favourites?

And lastly, thanks for an amazing term! 🙂

Week 12: Agualusa’s “The Society of Reluctant Dreamers”

“The Society of Reluctant Dreamers” by José Eduardo Agualusa is a novel that follows the characters’ lives and dreams with a background of war and protesting. I found it to be a little confusing as it jumped from different perspectives, but I enjoyed the concept and style of the storytelling.

To respond to the lecture’s question, I think dreams are mostly used as inspiration, escape, and creativity. Dreams are defined in numerous ways. There are dreams one experiences from sleep, dreams one may wish to become a reality, and dreams that are one’s goals for the future. Overall, I think dreams are scenarios and situations that are created when people want to change their current reality, whether temporarily or permanently.

In the novel, we learn of Daniel, Hossi, and Moira’s reoccurring patterns in dreams. For example, Daniel’s dreams of real people and Hossi’s purple coat. There doesn’t seem to be any direct explanation or reason for them. At the end of the novel, using the neuroscientist’s technology, it is revealed that everyone had the same dream. Armando says, “it’s ours! It’s our dream!” (252). Here, it seems dreams are a way of uniting people. Hossi appears in the dreams of those around him, including this large dream everyone had. As mentioned earlier, Daniel dreams of real people, regardless of whether he knows them or not. It was also Moira’s dreams and her records of them on her camera that had drawn Daniel towards her. Another dream in the novel is the people’s strive for freedom. The protestors, including Daniel’s daughter Karinguiri, hope to make a change. They fight for and dream of freedom. Eventually, they succeed, and make it a reality. It seems, in this novel, dreams connect people. The dreams unite them through hope and imagination.

Another part of the novel I found interesting was the lion cub/hyena. It was a smaller part of the novel, but it showed some insight into Daniel’s childhood and nature. Through Hossi’s journal, the reader is first introduced to Moshe Dayan as a lion cub who Daniel didn’t want to kill (26). He instead takes care of him until its disappearance. Later in the novel, however, Daniel corrects Hossi by saying Moshe Dayan was actually a hyena (133). This stood out to me because it didn’t seem to have too much connection with the rest of the story, and after its short tale, it was brought up again later and corrected.

Overall, I found Agualusa’s “The Society of Reluctant Dreamers” to be a creatively written novel and concept. Dreams are quite fascinating, and through this story we delve deeper into its different meanings and interpretations. A question I have is, what do you think is the purpose of Daniel and Moshe Dayan’s story?

Week 11: Cercas’s “Soldiers of Salamis”

The novel, “Soldiers of Salamis” by Javier Cercas is an interesting mix of war, memory, and imagination. I enjoyed the novel as a story, especially with its “happy ending” and open end.

One of the main aspects of this novel would be its mix of reality and imagination. While it includes real people’s names and lives, much of the events are fictional. It’s easy to forget that some parts of it were real or that some parts were not. The novel told of significant people’s lives with their names on them, but a lot of their actions and experiences only ever existed in the form of a book. To answer the lecture’s question, it felt like the characters’ thoughts and feelings were real, but the plot and the journey felt made-up. I think after reading the other novels from this course, it feels weird to have a story and ending that came together so well that it ended on a high note. As for the importance of the falsehoods and errors in this text, I think they can impact one’s perception of certain people whose names were used but whose lives don’t quite match. If it’s someone’s first time hearing of a person, then the text and its possible inaccuracies may serve to be one’s first impression. I think it’s important to keep in mind what may or may not be true as you read the text, and to not dismiss it as just fiction but also not rely on it to be completely factual.

Something that reminded me of “Amulet” by Roberto Bolaño was when Cercas stated, “[Miralles] remembers because, although they died sixty years ago, they’re still not dead, precisely because he remembers them” (236). In last week’s novel, Auxilio stated that she was the memory, suggested that she was the mother of Mexican poetry, and metaphorically witnessed history’s birth. One interpretation is that she is the mother because she remembers her history and is keeping it alive, letting it grow. Similarly, Miralles remembers the people from his life and because of that, in a way, he keeps them alive in his mind. Regardless of when it happened and how long ago it was, they are not dead because his memory keeps them alive.

Overall, I enjoyed Cercas’s “Soldiers of Salamis”. It may be because of its different plotline (or presence of it) or its storytelling, but its content ending was quite noticeable and stood out from the other novels we’ve read recently. A question I have is, why do you think Cercas chose to write himself in the novel with a life different than his real one? The lecture mentions changes in his birth date and his family, but the focus of the novel is Cercas’s mission to find the truth about Mazas and Miralles. What difference could this have made?

Week 10: Bolaño’s “Amulet”

The novel “Amulet” by Roberto Bolaño is focused on Auxilio Lacouture and her experience and memories as she hides in a washroom on the fourth floor of a building. The novel is set in 1968 as the army takes over the National Autonomous University of Mexico.

The novel begins with the narrator informing the audience the following story will be a horror story. However, she says “it won’t appear to be, for the simple reason that I am the teller” (1). This is a unique start to a story as often the narrator doesn’t state what they will be talking about. Additionally, narratives with war involved typically have some aspect of horror or tragedy. Despite the setting of war and danger, Auxilio finds a way to share her experience in a calm manner. She tells her story in a somewhat poetic way, which seems to flow quite nicely.

I found this text to be similar to Fuentes’s “The Old Gringo” because of its relation to war and its repetition. Throughout Fuentes’s novel, the line, “Now she sits alone and remembers”, is repeated several times in some shape or form. It reminds the audience the events told are just recollected memories. Here, Auxilio often restates she is in the women’s washroom on fourth floor of the Faculty of Philosophy and Literature. With some variations on the reminder, we are constantly brought back to her situation of hiding. Like Fuentes, Bolaño seems to poetically include this repetition to not let the readers forget the one recollecting the memories.

Another thing I found interesting was Auxilio’s comparison of hiding in the stall to giving birth as well as her description of herself as the “mother of Mexican poetry”. When she hides from the solider in the cubicle and is finally able to let her legs down, she says “the birth was over” (31). Later, during what seems to be a metaphor or scenario, doctors tell her she was not giving birth and they were “just taking [her] to attend the birth of History” (152). These events go from her seemingly birthing history to her only attending its birth. It seems she goes from being the mother to being only a witness. However, she still plays an important role, which is suggested as she says, “I am the memory” (174). She is the one to keep the memory alive. From the lecture, the name “Auxilio” means ‘help’ or ‘assistance’. Being the memory, in a way, helps history survive and live on. Without her, it would be lost.

“Amulet” by Roberto Bolaño is a story of memory and dreams with a background setting of war. It includes aspects of poetry, both content-wise and in its writing style. I’m not sure I can say it’s one of my most favourites, but I did find it quite intriguing with its unique storytelling. A question I have is, why do you think this novel is titled “Amulet” and how might an amulet be relevant in this novel?

Week 9: Fuentes’s “The Old Gringo”

I found “The Old Gringo” by Carlos Fuentes to be about what I was expecting; a somewhat turbulent novel that is set around war. It was a bit confusing to read as the perspective seemed to change frequently, but how the chapters were broken into smaller parts helped organize the text a little more.

Throughout the novel, there is a lot of repetition as the lecture mentions. One of the most repeated phrases is, “Now she sits alone and remembers.” To respond to the lecture’s questions, I think this repetition shows the reader Harriet often reflects upon her surroundings and life. I think it also serves as a constant reminder to us, the audience, that she is remembering the story’s events. Using the same line at the beginning and end of the novel seems to enclose it in a memory, a time from one’s past. As mentioned in the lecture, this repetition is a poetic device used to set the scene for the story and where the story really lies. It keeps bringing us back to the reality of the situation. This reminds me of Maria Luisa Bombal’s “The Shrouded Woman” and how much of the events of the novel happened in the past and are now, presently, being narrated and reflected upon by the one who experienced them.

Another phrase I noticed was repeated is, “The most important thing in Arroyo’s life would be, not how he lived, but how he died” (119). This is the second mention in the novel regarding how the way one dies is more important than how one lives. I found this quote to be rather interesting, especially given how Bierce and Arroyo both wanted to die a certain way. Bierce went to Mexico to die, and Arroyo wanted to die young (199). They didn’t seem to care much about their lives and what they did. They just wanted to pass a certain way, and they did.

Overall, I didn’t particularly enjoy Fuentes’s “The Old Gringo”, but I don’t dislike it, either. The style in which the novel was written resembles poetry, partially due to its repetition of phrases and their underlying meaning. A question I have is, would you have viewed the novel differently if it did not use repetition the way it did? For example, if it had not repeated the phrase, “Now she sits alone and remembers”, and instead conveyed the setting more similarly to Bombal’s “The Shrouded Woman”, would you see it any differently? I think the repetition is an important part of this novel and would have a very different impact without its poetic devices.

Week 8: Perec’s “W, or the Memory of Childhood”

Georges Perec’s novel, “W, or the Memory of Childhood” is an interesting mix of reality and imagination. I found the writing style to be quite similar to Proust’s and Aragon’s as Perec often jumped between different memories and thoughts.

Something I found intriguing was how Perec describes the relationship between writing and the people from his life. He talks about how he had lived with these people who are now gone, but they’ve left an impact on him, and that impact is writing. He also says, “Their memory is dead in writing; writing is the memory of their death and the assertion of my life” (42), which suggests he writes to keep his memory of them alive. It also seems to be his focus in life, something that gives him purpose. Another thing I noticed was how the same people kept getting introduced. For example, Aunt Esther was introduced as Perec’s aunt several times throughout the novel, even though we already know who Esther is. This detail lines up well with how he is missing a large portion of his memory, and hints he is trying to hold on to what little he remembers. As a result, he seems to repeat himself to retain his memories.

The universe of W reminded me of “The Giver” by Lois Lowry. Both worlds had a strict society, where everyone’s lives and jobs were set for them. There was population control to limit the number of births and “weak” individuals were eliminated. In “The Giver”, the citizens are shielded from life’s pain and suffering, like war and starvation. In a similar way, the people from W are unaware of what a life could look like outside of their society.

What really made this novel stand out from the others is the writing style, and how the chapters alternated between different worlds. It was a bit of a challenge to follow along at first, but as the novel went on, it was a bit clearer. It felt like the narrator was trying to escape reality as the text went from his own history to a world made from one’s imagination and back again. It was like trying to live in a made-up world but always being brought back to the real world.

“W, or the Memory of Childhood” by Georges Perec is a novel that contains scattered memories whose gaps are filled by imagination. I found it difficult to fully grasp what some parts of the text was saying, but I found the alternating chapters to be a nice change in pace. A question I have is, does Gaspard Winckler have any connection to W? Why or why not? Both stories and worlds were written in italics and were imaginative narratives, but they don’t seem to be connected at all.

Week 7: Rodoreda’s “The Time of the Doves”

The novel “The Time of the Doves” by Mercè Rodoreda is a powerful novel that tells a story of Natalia’s life as she grows a family and lives through war and loss. I liked this novel despite its sad undertones. Everything goes downhill for a bit, but it seems to have a content ending.

While Natalia is married to Quimet, she seems to be a bit depressed. As she narrates her life, she states things like “I was killing myself cleaning up after the doves” (100) and “I was killing myself working” (107). She seems to be doing most of the work both in and outside the house while Quimet finds excuses to not work. After a while, she begins shaking dove eggs to prevent them from hatching. This shows she doesn’t have much control over her life here. Quimet often brushes her off and laughs at her when she brings up concerns, and her children enjoy the doves. She cleans up after everyone but cannot escape the responsibility without forcibly removing them from her life, like killing them off.

After Quimet’s death, Natalia struggles to support her and her children. She even begins plotting to end her children’s lives. This was quite surprising, but in some (twisted) way understandable as she could not provide a good life for her children anyway. The lecture asks about our reaction to this, and I find it a difficult situation to judge. I think encountering this in a novel versus in real life are quite different. In the novel, we’re able to see the narrator’s thoughts and feelings and can somehow see their process and reasoning behind their actions, but in real life, I think judgement would be a lot harsher. Additionally, we know it is a fictional story, so that may cause some bias.

When Natalia buys the acid for poison, Antoni decides to give her food and a job, which turns her life around. I found it interesting that, if not for Antoni at that time, she may have already done something irreversible. The exchange eventually leads to their marriage and a better life for all of them. Antoni deeply cares for Natalia’s children, and the children look up to him. They seem to have a good relationship with each other. This newly formed family is also notable as remarriages with children from past relationships may not always work out as well as expected.

Overall, I enjoyed “The Time of the Doves” by Mercè Rodoreda. It’s a great novel that focuses on life and its complications, and while mostly gloomy, eventually ends on a higher note. A question I have is, do you think there is an intended relation between Natalia killing the dove eggs and planning to end her children’s lives? I feel like the author meant for a connection here, where Natalia is seemingly unable to do anything about her situation except for extreme actions. I also think the dove eggs could have been foreshadowing the latter case.

Week 6: Sagan’s “Bonjour Tristesse”

The novel, “Bonjour Tristesse” by Françoise Sagan was quite a rollercoaster of a story. Just from a brief description of the novel, I expected drama similar to “The Shrouded Woman”, focusing on family and relationships. However, after reading the text (and thanks to a warning from last week), I found it was also quite similar to “Agostino” because of the main character’s relationship with her father.

Throughout the novel, Cécile constantly changes her view regarding Anne. At times, she is thankful for Anne’s constant push for improvement, but other times she blames her for taking away comfort in life. This change seems to occur even when little things happen. Cécile seems to realize this when stating Anne truly loved her father and could not be angry at her. However, she notices that whenever reminded she’d have to share a life with her, she is angered. Some examples of events that change her view of Anne are when left at the casino (40), when forbidding Cyril to see Cécile again (48), and immediately regretting her revenge plan upon seeing Anne’s happiness (68). Cécile seems to truly act like a teenager, easily influenced by little things and struggling with inner turmoil due to the change. Despite this, she is observant enough to manipulate people in order to drive Anne away.

Something that I found interesting was their way of handling Anne’s death. They didn’t really speak of the incident, and only called it an accident. They seemed to move on with their lives. At the end of the book, Cécile ruminates on the summer’s events, and calls out, “Bonjour, tristesse!” From the lecture, “tristesse” is defined as sadness, sorrow, or unhappiness. To answer the lecture’s question, I think this was left untranslated to preserve its original meaning in its original language. In this case, Cécile seems to feel a deep sadness due to everything that had happened, despite her having been the puppeteer behind it. When she says “hello” to this sadness, she seems to be accepting she’ll always live with this knowledge and burden of what she did.

Overall, I liked “Bonjour Tristesse” by Françoise Sagan. It tells a story of family, manipulation, and a young girl figuring out her life and feeling threatened by change. It may have ended in some tragedy but is a well-written novel that details one’s thoughts and inner conflict. A question I have is, do you think Anne was right to try and “fix” or “improve” Cécile’s life in the way she did, and were Cécile’s actions were justified? I think it made sense that Anne tried to integrate herself into Cécile’s life and try to improve her future, but I feel she could have done it in a more careful manner (like not locking her up). I can also see why Cécile reacted the way she did, but her emotions seem to have made her go too far.

Week 5: Moravia’s “Agostino”

The novel, “Agostino” by Alberto Moravia was not what I expected from its description. I found this story to be extremely different than most texts I’ve read before, but still interesting. I also liked the writing style of the story. I felt it had more flow and structure than the previous texts we’ve covered, but it did only cover a much shorter time period in comparison.

The novel was centered on a young teenager who realizes his attraction to women, including his own mother. Repulsed, he tries to shift this desire away from her in order to once again see her only as a parental figure. From this, I was immediately reminded of Oedipus and his relationship to his mother. There is a theory called the “Oedipus complex”, in which Freud states there is a stage in life where a child is attracted to one parent and jealous of the other (though it’s not a very concrete theory). Agostino’s life is an example of this, as seeing his mother with potential partners puts him at unease. Being attracted to his own mother causes him to see those who she may attracted to as rivals.

Agostino also encounters a group of boys who expose him to new concepts that cause him to struggle even more with his sexuality. It eventually drives him to attempt to rid of his curiosity by finding a sex worker. The novel ends with the implication he continued to live with this struggle throughout his teenage years. While this entire encounter could be a reality for many, my initial thought was that it went really fast. Agostino went from being attracted to his mother to trying to meet with a sex worker. It escalated pretty quickly, and yet still seemed like a plausible reality.

Another thing I noticed was Agostino’s experience with Saro. It was quite disturbing seeing Saro’s behaviour towards him and how the group of boys were fine with teasing Agostino about it and implying something had happened on the boat. Saro seems to be taking advantage of the boys’ innocence and his own age, making him like an authoritative figure to them. It also seems the boys didn’t fully understand how serious the situation was, or didn’t care about it.

I found Moravia’s “Agostino” to be a disturbing but intriguing novel. It captures a stage in life at which most struggle with coming of age, and dives deeper into complications past the typical relationships one may form. A question I have is, what do you think would have happened to Agostino if he had not encountered the group of boys? Would his struggle with exploring his attraction change? Agostino seemed quite sheltered, so I think if he didn’t meet the group, he may possibly learn more about his attraction in a less harsh way than the reality check the group hit him with.

Week 4: Bombal’s “The Shrouded Woman”

I found “The Shrouded Woman” by Maria Luisa Bombal to be my favourite of the three texts we’ve read so far. Unlike the other novels, this one felt more like a story, with more structure and characters to tell it. It was more focused on life and relationships. It felt similar to a TV drama with all the disputes and events. It also wasn’t too difficult to follow along with, as it was told like a story that progressed over time, with characters that grew through life.

To answer one of the questions from the lecture, I thought the world constructed by Bombal was quite realistic. Of course, I wouldn’t know what it was truly like in the 1900s, but the world seemed plausible enough to be a reality that many experienced. Like our world, there was friendship, love, family, or lack thereof. However, I did feel like there were more events in Ana Maria’s life than the average person. She dealt with a parent’s death, unrequited love, an arranged marriage, and cheating. As I mentioned before, it felt like a drama show you’d see on Netflix. This world was a harsh one for the main character, especially as she was often at a disadvantage due to her gender. She had to endure her family’s expectations as well as society’s, which led her through loneliness and suffering.

I found Ana Maria and her husband’s life interesting. Like many arranged marriages, the two partners may not have a solid relationship to begin with. Ana Maria, at first, tried to return to her old life, but found herself missing Antonio. Antonio had tried to comfort her as much as possible, but seemed to have understood when she wanted time away from him. Though their relationship wasn’t initially arranged by them, their bond still developed over time. We also see their relationship strained by love interests from the past and present, but in the end, they still did care for each other, even if it wasn’t as passionate as one may expect. Antonio, despite showing little emotion during his time with Ana Maria, shed tears for her, indicating her death had an impact on him. Ana Maria also seems to not love nor hate Antonio. It seems death can reveal many things, both for the living and the deceased.

Overall, I enjoyed Bombal’s “The Shrouded Woman”. It was a nice change of pace from the other two texts, differing in characters, gender, life, and story. This novel provides an intricate telling of a woman’s life from her eyes after death. Many things became clear for her as she walked through her memories and relationships, revealing aspects she hasn’t noticed before. A question I have is, why do you think death may provide clarity to those still living? I think there are many things we may not notice or think about until a larger event happens that would cause us to do so.