Mario Vargas Llosa is one of the most important authors in Latin America, I like this book because it was written in 2000, then, the reality that it describes, is somehow related to the reality that the Latin American countries are facing nowadays. Even if the book is talking about the past, there are elements that guide us to the present.
First of all I am going to try to talk about the style; there is a Mexican movie “Amores Perros” (I do not know the translation, but it was nominated to the Oscar as the best foreign movie) this movie has three different stories that are interrelated with each other. When I was reading the nine stories that the book has, I was remembering when I saw that movie for the first time. The interaction between the different stories, creates the perception or the feeling, that, even if there are many different backgrounds in the characters, the final goal is the same.
The Urania’s roll in the story, is the most interesting for me. I can not say that she is the main character, but I think that she represents the present and the past of the Dominican Republic. The present when she is cold, uninterested about the situation; the pain that she has about the past, maybe represents the pain that the society feels in this moment.
In the final part of the book, for me is very interesting how Trujillo has a lot of influence even when he is death. The power that she had in his life overcome his own death.
Monday, March 31, 2008
Friday, March 28, 2008
Feast of the Goat 1
I know! I know! I am a bad person, is Friday and I just going to post the first part of Feast of the Goat.
I am going to start with the comparisons with the rest of the books; with The General in his labyrinth, I will say that the genre is very important in both books. Even if The President has a lot of influence in the women roll, here its different because is only one woman it seems that she has more influence that anyone else in this book. With I this supreme I will say that both books are very different; in the style, the density of each book, in I the Supreme, the story is around two characters, but here there are three different stories with more characters. Instead of that, the figure of the dictator in both books is very similar. Why? There is like a paranoia in both dictators, rudeness and fear about against everything.
In the comparison with Facundo I wan to write a little bit more; My wikipedia project is about Facundo, so I am reading a lot of this book. In the chapter XIV, there is a phrase that can exemplify the behavior of both dictators: “If you are not with me, you are against me”. This is the synthesis of all the Trujillo’s reactions.
Monday, March 17, 2008
The General in his labyrinth 2
In my last post, I left two important ideas without a good explanation, that because I was not sure about my thesis and I preferred to finish the book before develop those statements. Fortunately, the professor and Ericka understood these ideas, and commented in my bloq, then, I feel that I must develop this post explaining my perception of those concerns that I mention in my last comment.
The last week, I mentioned that I was feeling that Gabriel Garcia Marquez converted Simon Bolivar into a real hero and at the beginning it could be polemic, but let me try to explain why: The connotation that most of the Latin American people have about Simon Bolivar is almost the same; he is a good guy that fight in all Latin America achieving the freedom of a lot of countries. The problem is that we have never learned a little bit about his personal life, his mistakes or his weakness. Therefore, Simon Bolivar was as a myth that survive among the years. Gabriel Garcia Marquez converted Simon Bolivar as hero, when he demonstrated that Bolivar was just a man, with feeling, with mistakes and with weakness. The author took care the history of the general and the thing that Bolivar did in his life, Garcia Marquez did not forget that Bolivar was a reference of the Latin American freedom, but at the same time, Garcia Marquez established that Bolivar was as normal as one of us, he had not superpowers or anything uncommon. Therefore, in my perception of hero and, what I think Garcia Marquez wanted to do, Simon Bolivar took a human image more real and therefore more near to us.
The second statement that I did the last week, was about the perception of the death in the book. Among the story, I perceived that the death of Simon Bolivar was more near page by page… his weakness, his ill, the form in which he was remembering all his life create an atmosphere of death. The interesting point here, is the perception of death that Simon Bolivar had. On one point, he had not fear to the death in all his battles, I think that he was prepared for the final even before his illness. But on the other hand, I perceived that Simon Bolivar was not content with the way in which he pass the last year of his life. The situation in Colombia or in “La gran Colombia” was not what he wished all his life…
The last week, I mentioned that I was feeling that Gabriel Garcia Marquez converted Simon Bolivar into a real hero and at the beginning it could be polemic, but let me try to explain why: The connotation that most of the Latin American people have about Simon Bolivar is almost the same; he is a good guy that fight in all Latin America achieving the freedom of a lot of countries. The problem is that we have never learned a little bit about his personal life, his mistakes or his weakness. Therefore, Simon Bolivar was as a myth that survive among the years. Gabriel Garcia Marquez converted Simon Bolivar as hero, when he demonstrated that Bolivar was just a man, with feeling, with mistakes and with weakness. The author took care the history of the general and the thing that Bolivar did in his life, Garcia Marquez did not forget that Bolivar was a reference of the Latin American freedom, but at the same time, Garcia Marquez established that Bolivar was as normal as one of us, he had not superpowers or anything uncommon. Therefore, in my perception of hero and, what I think Garcia Marquez wanted to do, Simon Bolivar took a human image more real and therefore more near to us.
The second statement that I did the last week, was about the perception of the death in the book. Among the story, I perceived that the death of Simon Bolivar was more near page by page… his weakness, his ill, the form in which he was remembering all his life create an atmosphere of death. The interesting point here, is the perception of death that Simon Bolivar had. On one point, he had not fear to the death in all his battles, I think that he was prepared for the final even before his illness. But on the other hand, I perceived that Simon Bolivar was not content with the way in which he pass the last year of his life. The situation in Colombia or in “La gran Colombia” was not what he wished all his life…
Monday, March 10, 2008
The heroes are Gods? Or the humans are heroes...
The book The General in His Labyrinth, describes, I think, the last days of the most important general in the Latin American history. The death as the final passage of an amazing live full of battles, dreams, adventures and all the characteristics that has a hero´s live. I am referring as a hero, not as the perfect general and politician that fight for the freedom of the South American countries, I am referring as a hero in terms of the human inside Simon Bolivar... the man who loved his continent and fought all his live for a dream.
Gabriel Garcia Marquez, in his style, created an interesting, descriptive, illustrative and easy lecture book that represent the general as human, with his defects, his weakness and his strength. A general without all the luxuries that involved the Bolivar´s live in his most important years... now the general was facing his final battle, the last year of his live in which he remembered all the passages of his human life... nor the general’s nor the politician, Simon Bolivar as a human.
I don’t know a lot about the Canadian educational system, but in Mexico, we are used to learn the history as a good and the evil... the Spanish were very bad and Simon Bolivar was a hero without defects. That’s why this book is important for me; it converts Bolivar as a real hero and not only as mythic super hero... It shows us one part of the history that was hidden, but at the end, instead of think that Bolivar was not the hero that I as believing, the book support my idea that Bolivar not only was a good general or a good leader... he was a good man, with a lot of weakness but with a lot of strength, with a lot of defects but with a lot of qualities as me or as all the people in the world.
Other part of the book that is attracting me is the image of the death, but I think that I will clarify better this aspect when I finish the book, so I will prefer to write about that in the next post.
Monday, March 3, 2008
I the Supreme 2
Maybe the hardest book I have ever read in all my life, but also the most descriptive narration about how dictators are and how dictatorships work. The language that Roa Bastos used, can be very confused, but at the same time, only this book can describe the live of a supreme in his thoughts his feelings and his perspectives.
As I mentioned in my last post, I think that the supreme can be adapted to the dictatorships that we have in the actuality. The dictator that Roa Bastos describes, have all the characteristics that the authoritarians government have. The book can be a parody of the supreme figure among the history.
Two days ago, the Venezuelan government threatened to Colombia because the Colombian government made an attack to the FARC in Ecuador. In my point of view, the affected country is Ecuador, then why did Venezuela react in that way?
Maybe we can understand this case with I the Supreme. In the book, Roa Bastos argue that The Supreme has fear about everything; the president thinks that all is against him and all is threaten his power, then he destroys everyone who seems to disagree with him. Does Hugo Chavez have this paranoia?
It is very difficult to talk about the style of the novel; I can describe it as heavy and hard. But I can not distinguish any special characteristic. It seems that the book doesn’t have any story, but then, we can realize that the entire story is a description of the dictator´s life inside his thoughts and his perceptions. However, I find very interesting the reactions of the supreme; it seems that Roa Bastos give us the background of his feelings as a cause of his behaviors. Then, even if the book is very difficult to read, we can understand better all the dictator’s acts because we know what he is thinking.
As I mentioned in my last post, I think that the supreme can be adapted to the dictatorships that we have in the actuality. The dictator that Roa Bastos describes, have all the characteristics that the authoritarians government have. The book can be a parody of the supreme figure among the history.
Two days ago, the Venezuelan government threatened to Colombia because the Colombian government made an attack to the FARC in Ecuador. In my point of view, the affected country is Ecuador, then why did Venezuela react in that way?
Maybe we can understand this case with I the Supreme. In the book, Roa Bastos argue that The Supreme has fear about everything; the president thinks that all is against him and all is threaten his power, then he destroys everyone who seems to disagree with him. Does Hugo Chavez have this paranoia?
It is very difficult to talk about the style of the novel; I can describe it as heavy and hard. But I can not distinguish any special characteristic. It seems that the book doesn’t have any story, but then, we can realize that the entire story is a description of the dictator´s life inside his thoughts and his perceptions. However, I find very interesting the reactions of the supreme; it seems that Roa Bastos give us the background of his feelings as a cause of his behaviors. Then, even if the book is very difficult to read, we can understand better all the dictator’s acts because we know what he is thinking.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
