Unfortunately, I have not been able to read more than a couple of chapters up to this point but I'll make a couple of observations briefly and hopefully add more soon.
I was almost in shock when I started reading this book...A woman's point of view! I thought women didn't have a voice in these novels! Of course, this was written in 2000, so I guess things have changed a bit. I like the fact that this novel is written from more than one point of view and I find myself enjoying the slippages through time, both within chapters and from one chapter to the next.
I haven't read enough about the dictator yet to be able to talk about him in a meaningful way but he seems to have a fondness for sharks...
At least this time we see there is a plot to get rid of the tyrant...
One other note: I am enjoying the humour in this novel as well...
Monday, March 24, 2008
Monday, March 17, 2008
The General in His Labyrinth Part II
I am on a sugar/caffeine/insomnia high so this might not make much sense...
We have touched on this in class, and I had mentioned it in the previous blog...Bolivar, as depicted here, is a far cry from the other dictators we have had the good fortune? misfortune? pleasure?(insert appropriate word here...) of reading about up to this point (with, perhaps...[a very strong perhaps] the exception of El Supremo)...Indeed, it is as if the only descriptions of Bolivar as a dictator are the ones in which he literally dictates the letters to his trusty scribe (and nephew) Fernando. Of course, there are reports of various people calling him a dictator which brings me to another point of interest: the role of the narrator. He describes what is being said (and written) about Bolivar in various places but clearly rejects it, as we can infer from his tone throughout the novel. It is an interesting parallel to the first-person "narration" by El Supremo, which has an effect similar to that in Garcia Marquez's ...ugh I give up!!! Though I am not managing to articulate it very well, I am referring to the idea that the President figure has done a lot for his country and that those calling him a dictator are not really aware of the magnitude of what was done and are attempting to undermine it in some way...
I also wanted to briefly get back to something else I noted in Blog No.1 regarding this novel and that is the use of humour, subtle as it is. An example (admittedly, in the first half of the novel) is the part about Josefa Sagrario and the images conjured up by th efollowing: "...for over the front and back of her dress had hunga a cuirass of magnificent local goldwork. And when he tried to carry her to the hammock he could scarcely lift her because of the weight of the gold" (114)...Of course, there are plenty of examples later on as well...I have to admit I chuckled when the words "biblical rages" are immediately followed by reported shouts of ""Fuck it!" (186).
I also like some of the 'quotable bits'...For example, ""And there's nothing more dangerous than a written memoir."" (154) Also regarding memoirs: ""They're nothing but dead men making trouble" (201)
A very brief blurb on intertextuality...We have noticed bits of I, the Supreme and Facundo creeping in (the ornage trees; the illness; the faithful servant/scribe in the case of the former and descriptions of battle, references to Rosas etc. that echo Sarmineto's book). There are some echoes of The President, as well...I'm thinking of those wretched turkey-buzzards!!! I guess what I'm trying to say is that, in a sense, this book is pulling together all the other ones we have read up to this point...
I think I'll end it here.
We have touched on this in class, and I had mentioned it in the previous blog...Bolivar, as depicted here, is a far cry from the other dictators we have had the good fortune? misfortune? pleasure?(insert appropriate word here...) of reading about up to this point (with, perhaps...[a very strong perhaps] the exception of El Supremo)...Indeed, it is as if the only descriptions of Bolivar as a dictator are the ones in which he literally dictates the letters to his trusty scribe (and nephew) Fernando. Of course, there are reports of various people calling him a dictator which brings me to another point of interest: the role of the narrator. He describes what is being said (and written) about Bolivar in various places but clearly rejects it, as we can infer from his tone throughout the novel. It is an interesting parallel to the first-person "narration" by El Supremo, which has an effect similar to that in Garcia Marquez's ...ugh I give up!!! Though I am not managing to articulate it very well, I am referring to the idea that the President figure has done a lot for his country and that those calling him a dictator are not really aware of the magnitude of what was done and are attempting to undermine it in some way...
I also wanted to briefly get back to something else I noted in Blog No.1 regarding this novel and that is the use of humour, subtle as it is. An example (admittedly, in the first half of the novel) is the part about Josefa Sagrario and the images conjured up by th efollowing: "...for over the front and back of her dress had hunga a cuirass of magnificent local goldwork. And when he tried to carry her to the hammock he could scarcely lift her because of the weight of the gold" (114)...Of course, there are plenty of examples later on as well...I have to admit I chuckled when the words "biblical rages" are immediately followed by reported shouts of ""Fuck it!" (186).
I also like some of the 'quotable bits'...For example, ""And there's nothing more dangerous than a written memoir."" (154) Also regarding memoirs: ""They're nothing but dead men making trouble" (201)
A very brief blurb on intertextuality...We have noticed bits of I, the Supreme and Facundo creeping in (the ornage trees; the illness; the faithful servant/scribe in the case of the former and descriptions of battle, references to Rosas etc. that echo Sarmineto's book). There are some echoes of The President, as well...I'm thinking of those wretched turkey-buzzards!!! I guess what I'm trying to say is that, in a sense, this book is pulling together all the other ones we have read up to this point...
I think I'll end it here.
Monday, March 10, 2008
The General in His Labyrinth Part I
Well...here goes my attempt to get back into 'good-personhood'....
This is the first time I'm reading a book by Gabriel Garcia Marquez (to my eternal shame). I like his style and...what a different account of the dictator figure! Of course, Simon Bolivar really was a hero for many, unlike dictators who project themselves as such but have nothing to back it up with.
I find it interesting that so much emphasis is placed on reading as opposed to writing in this book. We have Manuela and Fernando reading to the General; we have accounts of the trail of books he has left behind him over the years and various military campaigns; when letters come there is an emphasis on reading again, rather than the writing. There is also a sense of deterioration, both in the kinds of books the General has his aides read to him from and, more obviously, in the fact that the General himself can not really read anymore because of his deteriorating health and more generally, his deteriorating power. This is perhaps also a metaphor for his fading dream of continental unity.
I also found the account of Bolivar to be an interesting mix of Facundo and El Supremo, with the former's bravery and militray capability and the latter's intellect....but lacking the brutality of both of htose men. In addition, he is clearly loved by the people while Facundo and El Supremo are both hated and feared. Ok, so there have been more than a few attempts on the General's life bu thte impression I got that most of the regular people genuinely like him...Obviously, his enemeis would want him dead.
I have to say that I am much more sympathetic to this character than to the others we have encountered thus far...There is such a sadness about him and yet it is intricately intertwined with humour...I am really liking this book.
This is the first time I'm reading a book by Gabriel Garcia Marquez (to my eternal shame). I like his style and...what a different account of the dictator figure! Of course, Simon Bolivar really was a hero for many, unlike dictators who project themselves as such but have nothing to back it up with.
I find it interesting that so much emphasis is placed on reading as opposed to writing in this book. We have Manuela and Fernando reading to the General; we have accounts of the trail of books he has left behind him over the years and various military campaigns; when letters come there is an emphasis on reading again, rather than the writing. There is also a sense of deterioration, both in the kinds of books the General has his aides read to him from and, more obviously, in the fact that the General himself can not really read anymore because of his deteriorating health and more generally, his deteriorating power. This is perhaps also a metaphor for his fading dream of continental unity.
I also found the account of Bolivar to be an interesting mix of Facundo and El Supremo, with the former's bravery and militray capability and the latter's intellect....but lacking the brutality of both of htose men. In addition, he is clearly loved by the people while Facundo and El Supremo are both hated and feared. Ok, so there have been more than a few attempts on the General's life bu thte impression I got that most of the regular people genuinely like him...Obviously, his enemeis would want him dead.
I have to say that I am much more sympathetic to this character than to the others we have encountered thus far...There is such a sadness about him and yet it is intricately intertwined with humour...I am really liking this book.
Friday, March 7, 2008
I the Supreme Part II
I don't seem to be able to articulate my thoughts on this tonight so I have no idea if any of this is going to make any sense. Nevertheless, here it goes.
I thought a bit about the discussion we had in class yesterday about the "death of the author" and how readers inevitably connect the texts to, or interpert them within the framework of, some aspects of their own time, place, expereince etc. As we noted in class , this book, along with The President, can really be about any dictator...Fidel Castro is one who comes to mind...or Robert Mugabe....But I had to giggle when I read the following: "I am the final judge. I can decide how things will go" (196). Why? Because this reminded me of (the democratically elected?) Bush, Jr.'s fairly recent statement that he is "the decider" or, the more dated gem, that "it would be a heck of a lot easier if [the US] was a dictatorship...so long as [he is] the dictator!" The quote from I the Supreme just seems so perfect and if we keep reading, the Supreme writes that he can "contrive the facts. Invent the events" (196). Hmmm...sounds familiar...WMDs...mushroom clouds... although, in fairness, it wasn't only the decider contriving the events in this case as he prepared to 'prevent war' by starting one--he had some help from his Patinos. I guess this is my strange way of getting to the theme of writing and power and its relevance today.
Indeed, what I am getting at is the fact that this book is just as relevant today as it was when it was published and that the dangers are not unique to dictatorship. Indeed, the kind of paranoia and fearmongering that Francia exhibits is strangely familiar in today's democracies where the need for security is used as an excuse to erode civil liberties. Writing, whether in the form of legislation (Patriot Act) or in the speeches of senior memebers of the Bush administration in the lead-up to the Iraq war. These could be examples of the sentence, not the sword, being the weapon (109)...but we all know what happened then. Of course, the US is still a far cry from the type of regime described in this book but I feel that some of the parallels are useful.
This book is also a powerful indictment of the misuse of religion. Patino's request for a cross to mark his grave is a perfect illustration of the kind of hypocrisy found in those who commit heinous crimes and then turn to religion when it is too late. In this sense, the dictator is less of a hypocrite. He does not pretend to be religious and rightly criticizes Patino, asking, what the cross can mean to him after all he has done after calling him the "craftiest scoundrel in the last hundred years" (408). It certainly did not seem to mean much when he was participating in the torture of human beings duirng the "interrogations" he conducted.
As I've noted before, despite its humour, this book is also very dark even though that darkness is often very subtle. We infer from both the compiler's notes and also El Supremo's descriptions of the punishments almost used on those who did not do what he ordered that such punishments were commonplace at the time. In a sense, it is the account of reality we get from reading between the lines. One of the examples is when El Supreom complains about all the widows wanting to talk to him. The assumption is that thier husbands were killed because of suspected disloyalty. Another example that stuck with me was the story about the kitten that was eaten by rats as part of a sick experiment.
Still, I like this book and I'm glad I got to read it.
I thought a bit about the discussion we had in class yesterday about the "death of the author" and how readers inevitably connect the texts to, or interpert them within the framework of, some aspects of their own time, place, expereince etc. As we noted in class , this book, along with The President, can really be about any dictator...Fidel Castro is one who comes to mind...or Robert Mugabe....But I had to giggle when I read the following: "I am the final judge. I can decide how things will go" (196). Why? Because this reminded me of (the democratically elected?) Bush, Jr.'s fairly recent statement that he is "the decider" or, the more dated gem, that "it would be a heck of a lot easier if [the US] was a dictatorship...so long as [he is] the dictator!" The quote from I the Supreme just seems so perfect and if we keep reading, the Supreme writes that he can "contrive the facts. Invent the events" (196). Hmmm...sounds familiar...WMDs...mushroom clouds... although, in fairness, it wasn't only the decider contriving the events in this case as he prepared to 'prevent war' by starting one--he had some help from his Patinos. I guess this is my strange way of getting to the theme of writing and power and its relevance today.
Indeed, what I am getting at is the fact that this book is just as relevant today as it was when it was published and that the dangers are not unique to dictatorship. Indeed, the kind of paranoia and fearmongering that Francia exhibits is strangely familiar in today's democracies where the need for security is used as an excuse to erode civil liberties. Writing, whether in the form of legislation (Patriot Act) or in the speeches of senior memebers of the Bush administration in the lead-up to the Iraq war. These could be examples of the sentence, not the sword, being the weapon (109)...but we all know what happened then. Of course, the US is still a far cry from the type of regime described in this book but I feel that some of the parallels are useful.
This book is also a powerful indictment of the misuse of religion. Patino's request for a cross to mark his grave is a perfect illustration of the kind of hypocrisy found in those who commit heinous crimes and then turn to religion when it is too late. In this sense, the dictator is less of a hypocrite. He does not pretend to be religious and rightly criticizes Patino, asking, what the cross can mean to him after all he has done after calling him the "craftiest scoundrel in the last hundred years" (408). It certainly did not seem to mean much when he was participating in the torture of human beings duirng the "interrogations" he conducted.
As I've noted before, despite its humour, this book is also very dark even though that darkness is often very subtle. We infer from both the compiler's notes and also El Supremo's descriptions of the punishments almost used on those who did not do what he ordered that such punishments were commonplace at the time. In a sense, it is the account of reality we get from reading between the lines. One of the examples is when El Supreom complains about all the widows wanting to talk to him. The assumption is that thier husbands were killed because of suspected disloyalty. Another example that stuck with me was the story about the kitten that was eaten by rats as part of a sick experiment.
Still, I like this book and I'm glad I got to read it.
Monday, March 3, 2008
I the Supreme-Part I
What a breath of fresh air this book is! I am liking the progression from Facundo to The President and now to this! I the Supreme is a difficult book to read but I am liking it thus far. It is quite different from the first two books we have read on so many levels. For one, I am really liking the fact that we get more access to the character of the dictator, and to his own perspective. Before I go on, I want to quickly go over some of the structural/stylistic aspects that I find so fascinating.
This book displays many of the characteristics of the modernist, experimental novel practiced by writers like James Joyce and Virginia Woolf in the early part of the 20th century. Indeed, this book reminds me a lot of Ulysses, with its puns, and various other play with language, the use of the stream of consciousness and of course, its inclusion of the profane and the colloquial. I have noted before that parts of The President are very Joycean but Roa Bastos's entire book could almost be dubbed the twin of Joyce's masterpiece. Some examples are the words raza and azar, the latter being the former spelled backwards, appearing in the same sentence (98) or the alliteration in "They finally formed the filigreed florets of malaria" (45).
Other aspects remind me of Flann O'Brien's At Swim-Two-Birds, especially the metafictional elements like the passage about writing that we discussed in class ..."Don't you think that I could be made into a fabulous story?" the dictator asks (29). On one level, that is the exact meaning of his question but on the metafictional level, the fiction itself is asking the same thing. The talking skull story, as well as the talking stones etc. also remind me of the characters in O'Brien's book which leave their ontological plain...sort of. The gaps in the printed text is also something that occurs in At Swim. Of course, tracing all the various forms of intertextuality in I the Supreme would be a very difficult task.
While this is also a dark book on many levels, I find myself enjoying the humour in it. I will say it again, what a breath of fresh air compared to (mainly) Facundo but also to the more sobering novel by Asturias. I am not quite where I should be by now in terms of the reading but I am looking forward to reading the rest of this challenging book.
This book displays many of the characteristics of the modernist, experimental novel practiced by writers like James Joyce and Virginia Woolf in the early part of the 20th century. Indeed, this book reminds me a lot of Ulysses, with its puns, and various other play with language, the use of the stream of consciousness and of course, its inclusion of the profane and the colloquial. I have noted before that parts of The President are very Joycean but Roa Bastos's entire book could almost be dubbed the twin of Joyce's masterpiece. Some examples are the words raza and azar, the latter being the former spelled backwards, appearing in the same sentence (98) or the alliteration in "They finally formed the filigreed florets of malaria" (45).
Other aspects remind me of Flann O'Brien's At Swim-Two-Birds, especially the metafictional elements like the passage about writing that we discussed in class ..."Don't you think that I could be made into a fabulous story?" the dictator asks (29). On one level, that is the exact meaning of his question but on the metafictional level, the fiction itself is asking the same thing. The talking skull story, as well as the talking stones etc. also remind me of the characters in O'Brien's book which leave their ontological plain...sort of. The gaps in the printed text is also something that occurs in At Swim. Of course, tracing all the various forms of intertextuality in I the Supreme would be a very difficult task.
While this is also a dark book on many levels, I find myself enjoying the humour in it. I will say it again, what a breath of fresh air compared to (mainly) Facundo but also to the more sobering novel by Asturias. I am not quite where I should be by now in terms of the reading but I am looking forward to reading the rest of this challenging book.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
