The President--post I

I am not sure that I even need to say this but...here it is nonetheless...I find this book much easier to read than Facundo. So now that I have said that I can get to the other stuff.

Where to start? I find it interesting that this book pays much more attention to women. For a start, unlike its predecessor it actually has female characters, the lady rendered earless by Facundo notwithstanding. This automatically makes it a less macho affair and indeed, it shows the men's vulnerabilities as well as the women's. An example is Rodas, whose conscience won't allow him to forget the brutal murder of the Zany carried out by his friend Vasquez. Indeed Rodas seems quite traumatized by the event and I think the psychological realism, the consequences of the brutality of the regime, the toll it takes even on those working for the government makes it more than merely the bloodbath that Facundo is. In fairness, Sarmineto did not exactly set out to give the innermost thoughts of his characters and, of course, the field of psychology has changed quite a bit from his time to that of Asturias. One thing I have noticed, however, is that we do not get, at least up to this point, access to the title character's thoughts, as indeed was the case with Facundo.

There are, of course, other similarities to Sarmiento's book--the emphasis on violence and brutality; the mention of wild beasts (tigers included); the use of dramatic language and vivid imagery (though this somehow works much better here than in Facundo). Perhaps I shall say more on this on another occasion.

I also wanted to briefly mention some of the modernist elements of the novel. Its emphasis on time is interesting. A lot seems to happen at times when the clock is striking the hour. In addition, the novel is divided into periods of a few days at a time but the actions shifts fairly seemlessly to the more distant past (as in the description of Camila's trip to the coast) and back again. The presence of little bits of verse, as well as some of the play with language strikes me as almost Joycean (ex. "Curveofacurveinacurveofacurvecurveofacurveinacurveof Lot's wife. (Did she invent lotteries?)" p.20 or the whole "logical, illogical, relogical" banter between Dona Venjamon and her husband p. 54).

I am looking forward to reading the rest...even though it still is a difficult read because of all the suffering depicted. I found the description of Camila's old nurse when Nina Fedina goes to the general's house especially touching...as well as Fedina's clinging to the baby...

It is also ironic that while the authorities are searching for the colonel's killer and accusing and interrogating and torturing innocent people, the real killer is dead already (shot by the police) and nobody knows about it...at least that's what we think at this point in the novel.

Forgot the tag

I realized today that I forgot to tag my last post...I went back and added the tag...Hopefully it worked.

Facundo post, the second

I have been trying to make sense of this book for the last little while and I'm not sure that I'm coming up with anything wothwhile. I was disappointed that, in parts at least, it reverts to the style and mood of the first couple of chapters (which I found very difficult to get through). This had the effect of making my mind wander and indeed, made it very difficult to continue reading at times (and possibly contributed to my gray hair count).

Despite the above-mentioned difficulties, I have to admit that Sarmiento raises some very interesting questions about governance, perception, the civilization/barbarism or city/country dichotomies. I shall not dwell too much on these latter issues, only note the much more sympathetic treatment of the gaucho. Is Sarmiento saying that the gaucho is really not that bad, or that Rosas is so terrible that (even) the gauchos in the Pampas are nothing compared to him...or, again, some combination thereof? But then, Rosas is, according to Sarmiento, a "bad gaucho." Also, there is clearly a more mature view of the Europeans--one that acknowledges and admires the good aspects of European civilization but indeed challenges the the imperialist, self-interested aspects of the European policies, which are content to be indifferent in the face of atrocities if it suits those interests.

This, in turn, brings up the issues of writing and power that we have discussed to a degree in class. Sarmiento is clearly aware of the potential power of writing to shape opinions as he shows throughout most of the book. This is most evident at the end, where, through his writing, he attempts to mobilize his fellow Argentinians in exile, as well as any international actors to help the cause of bringing down Rosas by disseminating information (through the written word) abouth his many crimes. Indeed, even today, the mobilization of international public opinion against dictators or governments that do not respect human rights may be more effective (though perhaps not as often as it could/should) than the use of military force. Of course, it still depends how powerful the human rights violators are in the international arena and their ability to withstand or, sadly, (in the case of big powers), more often ignore such negative attention without consequences...Is the pen really mightier than the sword? I am leaning that way...though I'm sure there are many who do not share that opinion...but I ramble...

Another thing I noticed is the final treatment of Quiroga which is almost sympathetic...Perhaps it was only meant as a way to highlight that Rosas was even more brutal...but of course, we are left with only Sarmiento's word on that. Of course, that, taken within the context of the last couple of chapters suggests that those chapters are indeed th eintended focus of the book and the rest merely a way to set that up...but, I ramble again.

Facundo post the first

Not being very familiar with Latin American literature, I am not sure where to start exactly. Reading Facundo, one of the things that jumps out at me is the structure of the novel. Indeed, Sarmiento's vow to "evoke" the "terrible specter of Facundo" (31), which sounds almost like an invocation of an admittedly strange type of muse , the description of the physical landscape of Argentina and the catologue of characters have all the makings of an epic. All this is accentuated by the use of dramatic diction and very vivid imagery. It is also set up as a dialectic between "civilization" (good?) and "barbarism" (evil?) as many an epic before it. We shall see how it all plays out as we read further on but I shall now move on to other aspects of the work.

I found the earlier part of the book very difficult to get through though I am not exactly sure why. Perhaps I feel that too much emphasis is placed on the description of the landscape. But, be that as it may, I was glad to find the pace pick up as I got further along.

Of course, it is difficult to ignore Sarmiento's racist and ethnocentric ideas and rhetoric (with regard to indigenous peoples) and his prejudice against peasents and all thsoe who do not fit his ideas of "civilization." I find it very ironic that Sarmiento, as someone who is supposedly enlightened and possesses the education the lack of which he laments in his countrymen, accepts so uncritically the "sweetness and light," to borrow Matthew Arnold's terms, of the European "civilization," --one that he does not himself belong to. Of course, in a sense Sarmiento is a product of his time, as shown by his numerous references to science, or quasi-science (Phrenology), so popular in Europe at the time and which was used to perpetuate European colonialism and oppression of the "savages" in the colonies. It is also interesting to note the subtle tone of admiration for the goucho in Sarniento's descriptions of him, and indeed in the description of Facundo himself, especially in the final passages of Chapter V.

Test post

Let's see if this works...