El Blog de Twanda

When I began reading the Cubs, I had to take a second look at the text to figure out who was speaking and when.  The sentences run into each other and speakers change in mid-sentence.  In his preface to the book, Vargas Llosa mentions that he wanted the reader to feel like he was listening to the story being told rather than feeling like he was reading it.  I think that this style of changing voices is the author’s method of creating such a feel for the reader.  Rather than setting quotes up as,  ” Cuéllar said, ‘I  . . .’” and  “His father said, ’Why don’t you . . . ‘”, Vargos Llosa runs things together as things tend to occur in everyday speech.  Rather than one all-knowing narrator, the voices of the people in the community are heard by emplotying this technique.

Vargos Llosa also includes an interesting use of pronouns in the story.  Throughout most of the text, the pronouns “we” and “they”  are used interchangeably. For example,  “They gave in to him, and we went along with him,” and “What we liked most in the world were sports and movies, and they would give anything for a soccer match.”  There is even one instance where the two pronouns are used side by side. “They we’re getting even”  The use of these two pronouns seems to reflect the voice of the group as a whole, for it is difficult to identify two separate groups with which to associate each pronoun.  The group voice consists of Cuéllar’s peers in the barrio, and possibly at times the community as a whole.   

One of the passages that stuck out to me in the Notebook is the one where Césaire cites some of the African heritage of his people (princes of Ghana, Madhis, etc.) contrasting this heritage with their present-day reality (mediocre dishwashers, etc.).  Dr. Sol’s lecture helped me see the big picture in this text.  She suggested that this was a point in which Césaire was working through which group he identified with.  In this passage, Césaire  seems to identify with the black people in his country.  In speaking of the history of the black people in this passage, he uses the pronoun “we,”  which implies that he is part of the group being described. I wonder, though, what he means by the phrase “I laugh at my former childish fantasies,” which precedes the history he cites.  Is he suggesting that as a child he fantasized about these “glory days” for the black people, in a time when they were not slaves, but proud warriors?  Were these the stories that black children acted out as they played with each other, similar to the cowboys and Indians that children used to act out in the U.S.? Or, is Césaire referring back to his fantasies of how he would return to his native land and speak for all those who could not speak for themselves? It is hard to say for sure what Césaire intended by this statement, but it could fit all three interpretations.

When I read End-Game, it was hard to visualize exactly what was happening on stage.  Watching the video in class helped a lot.  I also did not catch the reference to a chess game in the title, but it makes a bit more sense after having that reference. 

Although I don’t think Beckett intended for us to understand all of the situation in his play, the feeling of hopelessness comes through clearly.  The characters exude a lack of purpose, meaning, and dissatisfaction with their lives.  Hamm remarks that “this is not much fun . . .but that’s always the way at the end of the day.”  There is no purpose to their lives.  Hamm even asks why he was born, as if implying that he should not have been. 

The characters try to pray, but end up saying that God doesn’t exist.  He couldn’t in such a messed up world.  Ironically, Nagg’s story of the tailor also suggests that it is God’s fault that the world is in such a state, since he threw everything together in only six days. 

The only meaning that seems to be found in the story is the daily routine in which the characters interact with each other.  Every day is the same.  Hamm says to Clov, ” We’re not beginning to . . .to . . .mean something?”  Clov, of course, rejects this idea, but in a sense it is true.  Hamm needs Clov because he can’t walk or see.  Clov must find some purpose in being with Hamm, or why else would he stay for so long? 

At the first of the book when Juan told Abundio that he was looking for his father, Abundio said, “Pedro Parramo’s my father, too.”  This was puzzling to me at first.  Was Abundio really Juan’s brother, or was there more to it than that?  After finishing the book, I think that Abundio was not being literal in saying that Pedro was his biological father.  Although Pedro may well have had any number of illegitimate children based upon his habits of sneaking into the servants quarters,  I think that Abundio’s statement was a figurative reference. 

Pedro Parramo was in a sense a father figure to the whole village of Comala.  Everyone’s livlihood depended upon him.  Economically, legally, and spiritually, he controlled the town.  He owned the majority of the land.  Both the priest and the sherrif answered to him.  Dr. Ruiz Perez mentioned that one aspect of the novel included the migration of people from the rural areas into the cities.  Perhaps one reason for this movement away from the countryside in Mexico is that the situation in many rural villages was not unlike that of Comala.  One or a few wealthy landowners controlled life in these towns, and there were few opportunities for the poor to prosper, depending upon the whims of the landowners.  In this sense, all of the villagers look to Pedro as a “father.” The fate of Comala is tied to that of Pedro Parramo.  When Susana San Juan dies, Pedro say, “I will cross my arms and Comala will die of hunger.”  The narrator then states, ” And that was what happened.”  The vitality of Comala turned upon what Pedro did.  When he lost interest in Comala, it did indeed die.