Monthly Archives: December 2016

Memory as Choice of Perspective – A Generation of Narrative Voices in Cristina García’s Dreaming in Cuban

Leave a reply

Everyone in Cristina García’s postcolonial novel Dreaming in Cuban has been displaced: some by exile, some by madness, some by family crises. The novel reveals the similarities and differences of the scattered characters’ varying experiences through the historical, cultural and personal memories which connect them to each other. García employs the narrative structure as a rhetorical tool by making it dependant on changing narrative perspective. By moving between early and mid-twentieth century Cuba and the United States, the characters of the novel are defined through their collective memories. The three generations of the del Pino family – Celia, Lourdes and Pilar – inhabit the space between past actualities and deceptive memories as playing a pivotal role in their respective lives. The different narrative voices of these women show memory as dependent on perspective, creating in turn, individualized historical truth.

Pilar, as a limited first person narrator, notices the fine line between the actual recollection of the past and its distortion into fiction, and is frustrated that she has to rely on what other people value as important in order to create her cultural and political history. In Postcolonial Literature, in the chapter on Memory, Justin D. Edwards cites the Caribbean poet and play writer Derek Walcott who highlights this fine line by defining history as “a complex negotiation between memory, forgetting and fiction.“ (Walcott: in Edwards 2008: 132). The term “negotiation” accurately describes the complex compromise that has to be made in order to represent history. The choice of integrating some facts, will leave others out and it is impossible to authentically represent the past. Pilar argues that “we only know about Charlemagne and Napoleon because they fought their way into prosperity” (García 1992: 28). The synecdoche of famous characters such as “Charlemagne” and “Napoleon” represents the winners of history who have whole history books dedicated to them. For Pilar and her precursors the physical fight that brought them to the present, is merely a narrated memory of unmentioned battles. The use of the nature-based metaphor “prosperity” is a further tool, to create a circular notion of thriving, prospering and decaying. Characters such as Napoleon or Charlemagne are being eternalized in history books and prevented from historical decay. Pilar defies this sole historic truth and states that “If it were up to me, I’d record other things.” (García 1992: 28). The linguistic use of the conditional tense “were” and “I’d” highlights the unlikeliness of an ordinary female middle class character to make decisions on what to document and what not. Pilar further develops what “other things” she would record, such as “the time there was a freak hailstorm in the Congo and the women took it as a sign that they should rule. Or the life stories of prostitutes in Bombay.” (García, 28). Nothing is known about these events and about these women, due to historians’ decisions. The two rhetorical questions asked by Pilar “Why don’t I know anything about them? Who chooses what we should know or what’s important?” show to what extent she is questioning our common knowledge (García 1992: 28). History is not a proof of what really happened, but rather a choice of perspective by people in power.

Lourdes, as well as Historians, creates her own truth by choosing a perspective on events and people. Although she does not speak in first person narration[1], Lourdes’ character is revealed through an external narrator and  through other characters’ supplements. Pilar observes that “Mom [Lourdes] filters other people’s lives through her distorting lens.” (García 1992:176). Through the lexical field of photography (“filters”, “lens”), the reader is confronted with a paradox. On the metaphorical level the concept of a photograph is as an excerpt of an immutable truth. Lourdes is portrayed as choosing a certain perspective and therefore distorting reality. Opposing “what is really there” with “what she wants to see”, Pilar stresses the difference between the two and that Lourdes makes a choice of the way she portrays her own memory (García 1992: 176). Lourdes judges events she was not present at and although these events are static, the interpretation and focus change with time. What happened in the past is not as pivotal as how we choose to reassemble it. What we remember and what we choose to forget is who we are, it constructs our identity. Edwards paraphrases Jamaica Kincaid’s statement about selective memory, who states that: „This process of erasure is a way of controlling and manipulating stories about the past“ (Kincaid: in Edwards 2008: 132). The importance of this “process of erasure”, is that it has the power to create a new truth by choosing what we see and also what we do not see.

Celia’s narrative switches between a limited first person narration in her expressive letters, as well as a third person narration that is generally limited to her own observations and thoughts. For her, the beauty of recollection lies in the ability to interpret and rearrange the original experience at will and “Capturing images suddenly seems to her [Celia’s] an act of cruelty” (García 1992: 48). Images suspend the possibility of rearranging the past, but rather present a given frame of an excerpt of truth. The hyperbolical portray of images as an “act of cruelty”, stresses Celia’s resentment to fixing memories that can never be changed nor forgotten.  Reflecting that “memories cannot be confined” Celia reasons with the metaphor “to imprison emotions of glossy paper” to show that memories should not be rigid and eternized (García, 47-49). Contrasting Celia’s attitude towards “imprisoned emotions” on images, is Celia’s action of writing letters for 25 years on the eleventh of each month to her Spanish lover Gustavo, without ever sending them off (García 1992: 36). By writing her personal truth on paper from 1935 to 1959, Celia restricts her memories to momentary choices that will remain unchangeable on paper. After having intermitted the structure of the novel various times through Celia’s letters, the novel ends with Celia’s last line “She [Pilar] will remember everything.” (García 1992: 245). The use of the hyperbole “everything”, shows Celia’s hope of finally letting her memories keep living in another form than through unsent letters. Celia sees them safe in her granddaughter’s hands, giving Pilar the choice of perspective to create a new historical truth.

Through the narratives, constructed of the three generations del Pino women, it becomes evident, that history is not a proof of reality but rather a choice of perspective. Memories do not portray the complete truth of history and just because something is history does not mean that it represents individual memories. Pilar, as a central first person narrator, stays close to narrating her own perspective of people and situations. Lourdes, through Pilar’s narration, embodies the choice between remembering certain aspects and forgetting others, to create new historical truths that give the characters the power to control and manipulate their past. Celia’s narratives switch between a limited first person narration in her expressive letters, as well as a third person narrator generally limited to her own observations and thoughts. Thus, narrative perspective is used as a powerful tool to intertwine different characters’ realities in Dreaming in Cuban. What we hear is an opinion not a fact and history, created of memories, is one perspective not the sole truth.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wordcount: 1214 words

Bibliography:

  • Edwards, Justin D. “Chapter Twelve: Memory.” Postcolonial Literature. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008.
  • García, Cristina. Dreaming in Cuban. New York: Ballantine Books, 1992

 

 

[1] Except when she has visions of her dead father.

Dreaming of Cuba in Cristina García’s Dreaming in Cuban – The Interlacing of Pilar’s Hybridity through meaning and stylistic figures

Leave a reply

 

Dreaming of Cuba in Cristina García’s Dreaming in Cuban

The Interlacing of Pilar’s Hybridity through meaning and stylistic figures

 

The political post-Cuban revolution context left many people exiled and evoked the issue of hybridity. Pilar’s inner turmoil concerning her immigrant experience is explored by contrasting the character’s longing for her home country with the slow detachment from her origins. In the chosen passage from page 137 to 138[1] in Dreaming in Cuban, the Cuban-born American novelist Cristina García plays with figures of speech to engage the reader in a reflection about the sense of belonging. By intertwining the meaning of the passage with the employment of stylistic figures such as metaphors, hyperboles and comparisons, a better understanding of Pilar’s hyphenated existence is enabled.

The different ways in which Pilar’s parents react to the separation of their homeland as well as Pilar’s own disruption between instances of longing for Cuba and letting go are explored through the use of stylistic figures. Pilar’s mother Lourdes tries to detach herself from Cuba by refusing to talk about her personal past “It doesn’t help that Mom refuses to talk about Abuela Celia. She get’s annoyed every time I ask her and she shuts me up quickly.” (138). The use of familiar language such as “she shuts me up” as well as the draconic way of showing the resistance of Lourdes dealing with her past “Mom refuses to talk” and “[Mom] gets annoyed every time” highlight the different demands from mother and daughter concerning their past. Pilar is longing for more information about her past while Lourdes is trying not to be involved in conversations concerning her personal history. Opposing Lourdes who tries to break bonds with Cuba, Pilar’s dad, Rufino Puente, is presented as being strongly attached to Cuba “Dad feels kind of lost here in Brooklyn. I think he stays in his workshop most of the day because he’d get too depressed or crazy otherwise.” (138). By using hyperbole “he’d get too depressed or crazy” attention is drawn to the inability of Rufino to find his place in Brooklyn. The trope “feeling kind of lost” is a paradox because it is impossible to be only half lost. The symbolic term “orbit” „he’s [Rufino] just in his own orbit.” (138) indicates his solitary lifestyle in the United States. As Cuba is “mostly dead” for Pilar (138) a parallel can be drawn by showing that Rufino only “looks alive” when remembering Cuba and his past (138). To demonstrate the importance of the instances where Pilar longs for Cuba, a dead metaphor is used: “But every once in a while a wave of longing will hit me and it’s all I can do not to hijack a plane to Havana or something.” (137). By using waves as a metaphor, the fragile and unpredictable state of Pilar’s feelings become evident. Feelings of longing can break out at any moment and when they do, they have a fluctuating impact. Letting Pilar be “hit” by waves exposes the force, the suddenness and also the coming and going of the above mentioned stylistic figure. This discrepancy shown by the dead metaphor “a wave of longing will hit me”, is a strong indication about Pilar’s uncertainness of where she belongs and about her inner conflict of slowly letting go of Cuba but simultaneously longing for it.

By choosing the teenage girl as a limited first person narrator as well as through the use of comparative figures of speech, Pilar’s detachment from Cuba and her ancestors can be examined.  By using antithesis “Most days Cuba is kind of dead to me.” (138), the reader’s attention is attracted to the paradox of this central statement. Firstly, although a country cannot be dead in the literary sense, the dead metaphor “being dead to someone” highlights the finality of the relationship between Cuba and Pilar. Secondly, it is impossible to be “dead on most days” which would have for consequence to be alive on the other days. During Pilar’s reflection she manifests her resentment against politicians and people in power positions, who write history by choosing a certain point of view. “I resent the hell out of the politicians and the generals who force events on us, that structure our lives, that dictate the memories we’ll have when we’re old.” (138). By using hyperbole “the hell” as well as military terminology such as “forcing”, “structuring” and “dictating” the restrictions which the politicians impose on Cubans and which will always remain in their memory no matter the context, are stressed. Through the use of the first person plural pronoun “on us”, “our lives”, “memories we’ll have”, it becomes clear, that Pilar still identifies with Cubans and feels as one of them. Pilar’s detachment from both Cuba and her grandmother occur day by day and is reinforced through the use of repetition demonstrating the slow and reoccurring progress. “Max knows about Abuela Celia in Cuba, about how she used to talk to me late at night and how we’ve lost touch over the years.” (137). The use of the past tense “how we used to” indicates the termination of this mental and emotional connection. Although the trope “losing touch” is a conventional expression, it underlines not only the loss of a mental connection, but also a physical loss. The slow detachment from Cuba, described as “fading”, gives Pilar’s self-reflection a temporality “Every day Cuba fades a little more inside me, my grandmother fades a little more inside me.” (138). Through the use of repetition “a little more inside me” we are brought back to the essential part of the phrase – the slow detachment from Pilar of her origins.

It can be concluded, that Pilar’s hybridity is demonstrated through intertwining meaning with stylistic figures. Through the effective use of drawing parallels and highlighting important elements through metaphors and hyperboles, Pilar’s inner conflict of both longing for Cuba and simultaneously letting go of it is shown. The opposing ways of dealing with the past of Pilar’s parents, reflect on Pilar who is torn between the two extremes: Lourdes who is trying to refuse her past and only lives in the moment and Rufino who is only happy when talking about Cuba. Thus Pilar has to find her own balance of these two extremes. She is torn between the two, struggling with her hyphenated existence and longing to find a way to reconcile the two sides of her life to know where she belongs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wordcount: 1055 words

Bibliography:

García, Cristina. Dreaming in Cuban. New York: Ballantine Books, 1992

[1] From page 137 “Max knows [ … ]” until page 138 “[ … ] about Cuba.”.

“Wrestling ghosts in her dreams” Positive and Negative Hauntings Experienced by Lourdes Puente in Cristina Garcia’s Dreaming in Cuban

Leave a reply

In Justin D. Edwards’s book on postcolonial literature, he explains that postcolonial writers “invoke spectres and ghosts to represent the devastating effects of colonization and slavery” (Edwards 119). Thus, haunting as a post-colonial literary device is often used to speak about a collective trauma experienced by a nation. In Cristina Garcia’s Dreaming in Cuban, the members of the del Pino family have been affected by the political climate of Cuba; this country thus serves as a setting for a “collective haunting” (Edwards 121), not only for this family, but for all the population of the country as well. Some members of the del Pino family still live in Cuba while others have left the country. Among the latter, Lourdes Puente, who now lives in New York City, appears as the one who is the most haunted by what she has lived in Cuba and only the presence of her father as a ghost seems to have a calming and uplifting effect on her. Indeed, through the setting of Cuba, her memories and her body, Lourdes is haunted by the ghosts from her past, while her father’s ghost serves as a positive presence in her life; thus showing that Lourdes’s haunting is experienced in a personal level.

Lourdes is haunted by the memories of her past linked to the physical setting of Cuba. This country represents all the bad memories she has left behind when leaving for the United States of America. When she learns that her father, Jorge del Pino, has just passed away, “Lourdes imagines [him] … heading south, returning home to their beach, which is mined with sad memories” (24). In this dead metaphor, the use of the adjective “mined” creates the idea that the negative souvenirs from Lourdes’s past are buried in the ground, that they belong to the setting of the house near the beach in Santa Teresa del Mar. This adjective is also related to mines which explode if we walk upon them. Here, the fact that memories are associated to mines reinforces the idea that it is difficult for Lourdes to remember them; that they will explode if she gets too close to them. Thus, we can see that the woman has to hide away to protect herself from the painful memories of her past. In an article focusing on Lourdes’s trauma, Inger Petersson explains that “Lourdes is a woman with repressed experiences and memories” (Petersson 49). Indeed, she has lived things in Cuba that are too painful for her to remember or face directly: the lack of maternal love from her mother, the premature death of her second child and her rape by a soldier. Two of these traumatic experiences happened in the villa where Rufino Puente and Lourdes used to live when they were still in Cuba. When she finally returns to Cuba with her daughter Pilar, she goes back, alone, to this villa which is haunted with memories from her past: “she lost her second child in this place. A baby boy. A boy she would have named Jorge, after her father. A boy, Lourdes recalls, a boy in a soft clot of blood at her feet” (227). The fact that she has lost her child is associated to the “clot of blood” at her feet, which is the embryo. Furthermore, the villa in itself seems haunted by Lourdes’s traumatic experience of a loss of a child. Now that she has been able to face the ghosts of her past, she is afraid that her baby’s death is going to be “absorded quietly by the earth” (227), as if the setting of this Cuban villa had the power to retain or erase these painful events in Lourdes’s life. Therefore, Cuba serves as a setting which contains all the ghosts and painful experiences of Lourdes’s past.

Lourdes, however, does not need to be physically present in Cuba in order to be haunted by the ghosts from her past. Indeed, her body bears the physical marks and trauma that she has experienced. The loss of her child has left an emotional and psychological hole inside her body. Pilar explains that, when sleeping, “[her mother] tossed and turned all night, as if she were wrestling ghosts in her dreams. Sometimes she’d wake up crying, clutching her stomach and moaning from deep inside a place [she] couldn’t understand” (221). We can see that, while she sleeps, Lourdes is tormented by the ghosts from her past. These ghosts are present inside her body, in a place so deep and so hidden that Pilar cannot grasp its significance. This place is what Lourdes’s lost child has left: “Lourdes felt the clot disloge and liquefy beneath her breasts, float through her belly, and slide down her thighs. There was a pool of dark blood at her feet” (70). With this description of the loss of Lourdes’s child, we can see that something physical is going out of her body. She has not just lost her child, but also a part of her; a part of her that would always be present in the villa where she used to live with Rufino. Furthermore, Lourdes is also haunted by the ghost of her child when she is in New York. While sitting near a pool inside a museum with her daughter, “Lourdes is mesmerized by the greenish water, by the sad, sputtering fountain, and a wound inside her reopens” (174). The woman bears in her body the scar of the loss of her child. Because this wound is reopened, her child comes back to haunt her: “Lourdes sees the face of her unborn child, pale and blank as an egg, buoyed by the fountain waters” (174). The presence of water reminds Lourdes of the loss of her child. It is also associated with the color white, with words such as “pale”, “blank” and “egg”. Thus, here, death is paradoxically associated to the color white and to water, which are also linked to giving birth to a child. While the color white often symbolizes purity, here it is associated to death. Just after this traumatic event, Lourdes was raped by a soldier from the revolutionary government: “when he finished, the soldier lifted the knife and began to scratch at Lourdes’s belly with great concentration. A primeval scraping. Crimson hieroglyphics” (72). Lourdes’s body bears a physical trace of her rape: a scar on her belly. However, what the soldier carved is “illegible” (72), as if the reality of this act was too painful to be put into words. Both the loss of Lourdes’s child and her rape are associated with the color red. This color represents here something raw, primitive and violent. It is both associated with Lourdes’s blood and the crimson hieroglyphics on her body. Thus, the traumatic memories of her past in Cuba are present physically on her body, leaving eternal scars and haunting the woman.

While the setting of Cuba and Lourdes body are negatively haunted, the presence of Jorge’s ghost in Lourdes’s life in New York City is perceived as positive and uplifting for the woman. Indeed, “Lourdes is herself only with her father. Even after his death, they understand each other perfectly, as they always have” (31). Jorge del Pino’s presence is stronger when he is a ghost than when he was alive. The time before his death is just alluded to. On the other hand, when he is a ghost, his conversations with Lourdes and his words are transcribed in direct speech: “‘Mi hija, have you forgotten me?’ Jorge del Pino chides gently” (73). In addition to having direct transcription of what he says, we also have indications on his attitude towards his daughter and on the way he speaks to her: he scolds her in a tender manner. Inger Pettersson analyzes the relationship between Lourdes and Jorge with the concept of “borderless communication” (Pettersson 50). Indeed, their discussions transcend life and death. Developing on the idea that their relationship is positive for Lourdes, Pettersson argues that “death, or rather, the company of her dead father, will become Lourdes’s safe space” (Pettersson 50). While the death of her second child is associated to Lourdes’s sad memories from her past in Cuba, the ghost of her father embodies a positive presence in her life in New York City. Jorge helps Lourdes face the grudges she still feels for her mother and he tries to explain to her that he has also played a part in making Celia turning away from her daughter (194-197). Edwards, while referring to Toni Morrison’s treatment of haunting in her novel Beloved, explains that,

The literary use of haunting offers the possibility of representing ‘unspeakable things unspoken’. That is, the spectral can, in some cases, capture that which is beyond language, particularly experiences that are traumatic, psychologically wounding, emotionally scarring or physically harsh. (Edwards 119)

Indeed, the presence of a ghost can sometimes represent an unfinished business or something that the person, who is being haunted, has hidden away because she or he was too afraid to confront it. When Jorge explains to his daughter that she must go back to Cuba, Lourdes tells her father that he does not understand. She “cries and searches the breeze above her. She smells the brilliantined hair, feels the scraping blade, the web of scars it left on her stomach” (196). Indeed, Jorge confronts her daughter with memories of her past and, while being a positive presence in her life, he is also a constant reminder that Lourdes has not faced the traumatic experiences that she has lived in Cuba. When her father mentions Cuba, the ghost of the soldier who raped her reappears in her mind as a scent. Furthermore, she can feel again the pain that the scar she bears has left on her belly. Indeed, the presence of Jorge as a ghost in Lourdes’s life is positive but also incarnates a lucid reminder that Lourdes must face the ghosts from her past that still haunt her physically and psychologically.

Going back to this notion of “collective haunting” developed by Edwards, the characters of Dreaming in Cuban, as well as the Cuban country as a whole, are haunted by the political trauma that has marked Cuba history. Edwards explains that “in postcolonial writing […] the body politic is sometimes represented as being haunted by history” (Edwards 121). In the novel, the allusions to political figures like Batista (162), the omnipresence of Fidel Castro under the nickname “El Líder” and the allusions to events of Cuban history such as the Bay of Pigs invasion (3,25) reinforce the fact that all members of the del Pino family are affected by this Cuban history. However, Lourdes appears as the character who is the most haunted by the ghosts of her past. She has been mentally and physically marked by her traumatic experiences in Cuba. This country thus serves as a setting where ghosts and memories are still vivid and present. Lourdes’s body is also marked by the loss of her child and by her rape. However, by leaving Cuba, Lourdes did not choose to face the ghosts of her past. Thus, when Jorge died, he came back as a ghost to remind his daughter that she must face these sad memories. It is interesting to notice that the woman would have named her second child Jorge; just like her own father (227). Thus, the two ghosts are strongly associated in Lourdes’s life; however, they both play different roles in her life. While the existence of her child as a ghost is painful, her father’s presence as a ghost is calming and positive. Jorge also embodies Lourdes’s past in Cuba and the fact that she will inevitably have to go back there in order to deal with her troubled past.

Works cited:

Edwards, Justin D. “Haunting.” Postcolonial literature. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008. 118- 128.

Pettersson, Inger. “Telling it to the Dead: Bordeless Communication and Scars of Trauma in Cristina Garcia’s Dreaming in Cuban.” Journal of Literary Studies. University of South Africa, 2013. 18 November 2016. <http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02564718.2013.777143>

“Hey, we’re here too and what we think matters!” The construction of Pilar Puente’s subversive identity in Cristina Garcia’s Dreaming in Cuban

Leave a reply

The character of Pilar Puente, in Cristina Garcia’s novel Dreaming in Cuban, grows up as a teenager in a family torn apart physically, geographically and ideologically. As a member of the del Pino family living in the United States of America, Pilar is more and more influenced by the underground culture of the New York scene of the 1970s. In a passage on page 135 – from “I just love the way…” to “…with my mother” – the written transcription of Pilar’s spontaneous oral expression, the recurrence of the notion of violence, and allusions to notable figures of the punk movement reflect Pilar’s artistic, subversive and multiple identity, thus emphasizing that it is through this rebellious attitude that she is crafting her own identity.

The oral devices used by Pilar mirror the spontaneity of her flow of speech as well as her attitude as a teenager. She begins by explaining that “[she] just [loves] the way Lou Reed’s concerts feel” (135), Lou Reed being an American musician and an important figure of the underground music scene of the 1960s and 1970s in New York. The use of verbs of emotion such as “love” and “feel” reflects Pilar’s sensitive personality and how she perceives punk music. For her, music is apprehended through the medium of emotion. With the first-person narration and the internal focalization on Pilar’s thoughts, channeled by her stream of consciousness, we have direct access to the teenager’s point of view. Words such as “just” (135) and “it’s like” (135) are devices used in oral speech and they emphasize that it is indeed Pilar who talks and shares her thoughts. They also reflect Pilar’s use of language as a teenager. She uses short and direct phrases to express herself, such as “Not me” (135) and “If I don’t like someone, I show it.” (135). The lack of a complete sentence and the use of contractions reinforce this transcription of oral expression. The presence of direct discourse in sentences quoted by Pilar, such as “Hey, we’re here too and what we think matters!” (135), again strengthens this presence of orality. Thus, the way this passage is written is a direct transcription of Pilar’s thoughts and emotions.

The subversive directness of Pilar’s oral expression is emphasized by the recurrent presence of the notion of violence. Words such as “energy”, “violence”, “assault”, “confront”, “fuck you”, “rude” and the alliteration “grinding guitars” (135) reflect both the energy created by figures of the punk movement mentioned by Pilar, such as Lou Reed, Iggy Pop and the Ramones, and Pilar’s attitude as an artist. She uses a metaphor of a physical attack to describe their presence as “an artistic form of assault” (135). Here, the notions of violence and art are closely connected. Pilar’s artistic identity is clearly influenced by the subversive behavior of those singers. She explains that “[she tries] to translate what [she hears] into colors and volumes and lines that confront people” (135). By acknowledging the influence of punk music on her art, Pilar presents herself as belonging to this community of anticonformists. The fact that Pilar does not conform herself to the established values of society is reflected in the people Lou Reed sings about: “drug addicts, transvestites, the down-and-out” (135). Pilar identifies herself with Lou Reed because he sings about a kind of people who challenge the morality and values of the American society. Thus, the presence of violence and subversion in this passage mirrors the anticonformist attitude of punk singers and their influence on Pilar’s identity.

Pilar also characterizes her identity as being multiple by associating herself with Lou Reed and his “twenty-five personalities” (135). While speaking about the artist’s “alter egos” (135), Pilar explains that “[she feels] like a new [Pilar] sprouts and dies every day” (135). By using a metaphor of rebirth, the teenager acknowledges that she posseses more than one self. Furthermore, by making a parallel between her manifold identity and Lou Reed’s, she demonstrates that they belong to the same anticonformist community. In a passage preceding the one I am concerned with, Pilar explains that “Lou Reed says he has enough attitude to kill every person in New Jersey” (134). There is again a recurrence of the notion of violence with the words “hostile” and “kill”. This violent attitude is reflected through Pilar’s behavior as a teenager and through her work as an artist. By having “enough attitude” (134) to be “rude” (135), she differenciates herself from her boyfriend, whom she describes as being a “traditionalist” (135), thus someone who conforms to the established values of society. Indeed, Pilar chooses to present herself as being someone with an artistically violent, rebellious, and multiple identity.

The notion of belonging to a community is a recurrent theme in Cristina Garcia’s Dreaming in Cuban. Whether it is by being devoted to the Cuban Revolution (Celia), by organizing a party to celebrate the Fourth of July in the United States of America (Lourdes), or by associating herself with the punk movement (Pilar), the actions of the members of the del Pino family are determined by this search of belonging. While clearly identifying herself with a part of American underground culture, and thus detaching herself from her Cuban origins, Pilar also refuses to accept the American patriotism of her mother. Her identity as a teenager and artist is thus defined as subversive. It is through her direct oral expression as well as the recurrence of words related to violence that Pilar’s identity is created. The allusions to notable figures of the punk movement of the New York scene in the 1970s serve as a reflection on the search of identity of young people during that time. As well as giving a sense of belonging to teenagers, this underground scene also enabled them to stand against the values of the older generations and create their own. Therefore, although focusing mainly on Cuba, Cristina Garcia’s novel also deals with the American perspective of the life in the 1970s and how living in an American society has an impact on Pilar’s construction of her identity.

The Different Manifestations of Orality in Cristina García’s Dreaming in Cuban

Leave a reply

The Dualism in Luz Villaverde’s View of Her Family in Cristina García’s Dreaming in Cuban

Orality is a central term in postcolonial literature. Many critics have studied it and one of them is Justin D. Edwards. He wrote a book called Postcolonial Literature in which, among other subjects, he deals with orality. One of the main definition he gives in his book is that “an oral tradition is […] defined by the transmission of cultural material by word of mouth rather than through written documents” (Edwards, 40). In Cristina García’s Dreaming in Cuban, orality is a recurrent theme. Throughout the whole novel, there are different elements that bear witness to the presence of orality. Among them, Spanish words in an English text, the themes of history and personal history, and the structure of the novel, attest the presence of orality in the novel.

García’s novel is written in English yet, sometimes, Spanish words appear in the text. In his study, Justin D. Edwards explains that this is a characteristic of orality: “the first-person narrator, Hera, uses non-English words such as ′Kamakama′, ′Pakeha′ and ′hoha′” (Edwards, 49). Edwards talks about this characteristic explaining that the main character also uses words that are linked to his background. In García’s novel the characters expressing themselves use Spanish words. They mix them with English, however there are two different ways to use Spanish words in this novel. Some of those words are written in the same font as the English words. When Pilar talks about her grandmother, she hardly ever uses the words “grandmother” or “grandma”. She almost always uses the Spanish word “Abuela”: “I imagine Abuela Celia’s surprise as I sneak up behind her” (García, 26). This word, as the other Spanish words that are not graphically separated from the English text, is part of someone’s name. Here, it completes Celia’s name. Other Spanish words are however written in italic. One of them is the term “santería” which is a religion practiced in Cuba. Felicia believed in “santería”: “At night, Felicia attended our ceremonies” (García, 186). The use of Spanish words, whether they are written in italic or not, emphasis the Cuban culture of the characters.

The culture of the characters is also expressed through history. As Edwards point out in his study, “the history and culture of the place and the people are kept alive” (Edwards, 48) through orality. That is precisely what Pilar’s father is trying to do when he “told [her] stories about Cuba after Columbus came. He said that the Spaniards wiped out more Indians with smallpox than muskets” (García, 28). Pilar asks: “Why don’t we read about this in history books?” (García, 28). Pilar’s question shows that she did not learn about the Spaniards in history books, by reading. But she listened to her father who told her this story. In this extract, orality keeps history alive because oral words transmit knowledge, which was not written down, to someone. Pilar wants people to also remember the history that is not written in books: “If it were up to me, I’d record other things” (García, 28). “Record” has a double meaning that is essential in this context. The first meaning is linked to the idea of preserving information (Oxford English Dictionary). The second meaning is linked to the recording function of electronic devices (Oxford English Dictionary). In this meaning, there is the idea of recording information that was spread by oral transmissions. Oral transmission is more efficient in keeping history alive because it keeps many histories alive, not only the one that can be read in books.

The history that must be recorded is also the personal one. Celia used to talk to Pilar and this reminded her of her Cuban origins. But now that Pilar does not talk as much as before with her Abuela Celia, “Every day Cuba fades a little more inside [her], [and her] grandmother fades a little more inside [her]. And there’s only [her] imagination where [their] history should be” (García, 138). The absence of oral communication between Celia and Pilar makes their personal history disappear. The fact that Pilar refers to Celia as her “grandmother” is significant in this context. It emphasises even more that her Cuban culture is disappearing. As orality’s presence keeps history and culture alive, its absence makes them fade away.

The difficulty occurs when one has to write down stories that are drawn from oral cultures. “The circular communication of the oral process that occurs between teller and listener(s) is, when written down, transformed into a linear narrative structure” (Edwards, 43). Edwards explains that oral communication is not organised in the same way as written communication. Therefore, it is difficult to bring out orality in written pieces. However, García’s novel has a particular structure that demonstrate the presence of orality. The plot is not written in a linear way. Back and forth in time are part of this non-linear writing that recall an oral transmission. The chapters are not chronologically ordered and the addition of Celia’s letters in the middle shows a particular organisation of time. In this perspective, it is a “literature that mixes oral and written forms of communication” (Edwards, 47).  Edwards also points out another characteristic of orality: “Oral cultures […] do not order thoughts in this [linear] ways because their natives and cultural belief systems rely on […] the ′stitching together′ stories” (Edwards, 46). This idea of “′stitching together′ stories” is interesting in the context of Dreaming in Cuban. In this novel, there are different narrative voices. In every chapter, there are various characters expressing themselves to make the plot move forward. They tell stories which differ from the ones that the previous character told. The novel is constructed as stories stitched together and this points out the orality in García’s style of writing.

         Dreaming in Cuban is a postcolonial novel in many ways. Therefore, in the whole novel, there are different manifestations of orality, which is a central theme in postcolonial literature. The presence of Spanish words in an English text is one of the manifestation of orality in the novel. Those words point out the Cuban culture in the novel. The preservation of history is another central theme linked to orality. The novel points out how history is preserved differently when recorded in an oral or in a written way. It also points out how the absence of orality makes history disappear. Finally, the structure of Dreaming in Cuban is in itself a manifestation of the oral culture.

References:

 

 

The Dualism in Luz Villaverde’s View of Her Family in Cristina García’s Dreaming in Cuban

Leave a reply

The Dualism in Luz Villaverde’s View of Her Family in Cristina García’s Dreaming in Cuban

In Cristina Gracía’s novel Dreaming in Cuban, the theme of family relationships has an important place. This theme is treated in different ways according to which character the narration is focusing on. This essay focuses on the passage that begins on page 120 from “After Mamá set him on fire |…|” and ends on page 121 till “|…|wants to hear”. It deals with Luz Villaverde’s point of view. She uses a language to describe her family that shows how her point of view is tainted with dualism. Dualism is a central term to understand Luz’s view of her family. In the Oxford English Dictionary, dualism is defined as “the doctrine that there are two independent principles, one good and the other evil”. According to this definition, there are two different sides in life: the good and the evil. This concept can be applied on Luz’s view of her family. Luz sees only the good in her father and the bad in her mother. Those views oppose themselves to each other and show the contrast from Luz’s point of view.

            Luz’s view of her family is separated in two parts: the good and the bad. Each part is linked to some family members. The language she uses when describing her family shows that her sister belongs to the good part. She uses a metaphor to describe the strong link she has with her sister: “We’re a double helix, tight and impervious” (120, García). The double helix is a scientific term that is used to describe the shape of the DNA (Oxford English Dictionary). Luz’s use of this expression has a double meaning. In fact, there is the aspect of DNA because her sister and her are twins. There is also the image of the DNA being two sides tight close together as Luz and Milagro are. They are “tight and impervious” because, like the DNA, they cannot be separated from each other. After that Luz says that their mother “can’t penetrate [them]” (120). This metaphor expresses the fact that the two sisters are so close to each other that nothing, not even their mother, can tear them apart. For Luz, Milagro is linked to the good part of her family. In the passage, there are no terms that describe Milagro being in any way a bad person. How Luz describes her sister shows the dualism in her view of her family.

            As with Milagro, Luz sees her father in a good way. The dualism can also be seen in the descriptions of her father. She considers him as the person who would save her and her sister from their mother: “I fantasized about how he’d come back to take Milagro and me away from Mamá and her coconuts” (120). She also “imagined riding on the backs of those cranes, flying to wherever he was” (120), a trope that shows how much she wants to be with him rather than with Felicia. She finds excuses for her father even if what he did was flawed: “It didn’t matter that we were too young to wear [the scarves], only that he thought we could” (120). Hugo is not close enough to them to know what they can wear or not, but, because of her positive view of her father, she does not notice this. She idealises her father because she does not know all the bad things he did to her mother. She has a biased point of view.

           The only thing that the twin sisters know is that their mother “set [their father] on fire” (120) and they resent her for this. This action is the point for Luz’s biased perception of her mother. Everything that their mother says to them are “pretty words” and “meaningless words that didn’t nourish us, that didn’t comfort us, that kept us prisoners in her alphabet world” (121). She uses the metaphor “prisoners” to express the sentiment of being stuck with her mother. This metaphor is also hyperbolic because Luz and her sister are not in a prison neither are they treated as prisoners. The sentiment of being prisoners emphasises the desire of wanting to fly “to wherever [her father] is” (120). The metaphor of the “alphabet world” emphasises the idea of “meaningless words” that her mother uses. She is stuck in a world that is made only of words that do not have a meaning for her. The word “alphabet” emphasises it because the alphabet only contains the letters and therefore the primary meaning of words. The letters alone do not have a broader meaning. When letters are put together to form a word, then this word may have multiple meanings. If one reads the word and understand it only for its primary meaning, then the broader meaning is lost. Luz does not understand her mother because Luz understands only this primary meaning of the words. Felicia is using figurative language that her daughter does not understand.

          The language Luz uses to describe her mother is so mean that she and her sister created a metaphor to name their mother: “not-Mamá” (121). This metaphor translates her resentment against her mother. Luz does not consider her mother as being a “mamá”. “Mother” is linked to the biological aspect which is giving birth whereas as “mamá” is linked to the emotional aspect. “Mamà” is the Spanish word for “mom” which is more affective. This emphasises the wickedness of the term “not-Mamá” because, by calling her mother this way, Luz shows Felicia that she is not acting like a mom should act.

         In the passage, through the oral language of Luz Villaverde, the dualism is present and opposes her family members. On the one hand, there is the good embodied by her sister and her father. On the other hand, there is the bad embodied by her mother. She has a fourteen-year-old point of view and hers shows dualism. It is also biased and does not represent the whole picture of the actual situation in her family. The reader knows that the father made mistakes as well as the mother because of the different characters’ point of views. But if the story was written in a unique point of view, the reader would not have this knowledge about the real situation. The dualism in Luz’s point of view is only noticeable because of the structure of the novel. 

References:

 

 

Lourdes’ anti-hybridity character as a means to cope with Western Lifestyle.

Leave a reply

Hybridity is a key concept in post-colonial literature. As Edwards explains in his paper, hybridity can be considered “a challenge to essentialism and problematic ideas about purity and authenticity” (EDWARDS, 140). Thus, hybridity is the antithesis of purity. Hybridity is a central theme in Cristina Garcia’s Dreaming in Cuban; the novel explores the consequences of the Cuban Revolution through the lens of different women. One character that stands out concerning hybridity is Lourdes, as she is what one can call a ‘non-hybrid’ character. Lourdes’ non-hybridity is explored through her binary and mimetic behaviour and confronts the reader to a different way of coping with post-revolution lifestyle.

Lourdes is a binary character. In fact, she “abhors ambiguity” (GARCIA, 65) to such a point that she either lives in one extreme or another. It is either all or nothing. This can be seen for example with her eating habits. She does not balance her diet; her need for food is either enormous or non-existent. At the beginning of the novel, Lourdes is described by Pilar as being “as fat as Macy’s Thanksgiving Day float from all the pecan sticky buns she eats” (27). But later in the plot, Lourdes is no longer craving for food; she wants absolute purity inside her stomach (167). In fact, “the smell of food repels her” (169). When Lourdes looks at food she is disgusted as the insectile lexical field suggests: “wormy curves of the buttery croissants, the gluey honey buns with fat pecans trapped like roaches in the cinnamon curves” (169). Here, the food is compared metaphorically to insects and connotes the repugnance that Lourdes is experiencing when looking at food. When at the beginning of the plot she could eat many “sticky buns” (27) as Lourdes describes, here she sees “roaches in the cinnamon curves” (169). The metaphorical terms used to describe the food indicates her strong distaste towards the food she sees. Because of this diet “Lourdes [lost] 118 pounds” and is now completely “[metamorphosed]” (172). Now that this diet is complete she can begin to eat ‘normally’ again, but as her behaviour is binary, she cannot help herself but to eat frantically and a complete opposite behaviour can be seen on page 173: “her mouth is moving feverishly, like a terrible furnace.” She stokes it with more hunks of turkey and whole candied yams. Lourdes helps herself to a mound of creamed spinach, dabbing it with a quickly diminishing loaf of sourdough. […] Lourdes devours every last morsel”. She is craving food, when three pages earlier in the novel she could not even look at it. The variety of the lexical field to describe the food she eats highlights the fact that, in a short period of time, she frantically grabs and eats whatever comes close to her hand, may that be “turkey”, “creamed spinach” or “leek-and-mustard pie” (173).

Furthermore, her binary behaviour can also be seen with the way she thinks about society. She does not care for people “between black and white”, “for the dreamers” (128). Her vision of the world is binary. On one side the communists, on the other side the ‘good people’. Just as she describes it on page 171; Lourdes and Jorge “denounce the Communist threat to America”. For them, “the Democrats are to blame, the Democrats and those lying, two timing Kennedys. What America need […] is another Joe McCarthy to set things right again” (171). In this passage, she clearly opposes two sides: the “leftist”, the “Democrats” and the “Communist” with their lies and propaganda to the “malleable” youth, and the people who could only “set things right again” (171). Her binary behaviour is highlighted here by, her strong beliefs and views on how American politics.

As seen before, hybridity can be seen “as a challenge to essentialism and problematic ideas about purity and authenticity” (EDWARDS, 140); Lourdes’ mimetic behaviour does exactly the opposite. She embraces American culture and adapts to Western beliefs and culture to such a point that Pilar thinks she has a “distorting lens” (GARCIA, 176). Lourdes mimics American culture to such an extent that she “[embellishes]” (176) the reality around her as Lourdes describes. The mimicry of Lourdes can be seen with the way she manages her bakery. Her father wanted her to put up a sign with her name “so they know what we Cubans are up to, that we’re not all Puerto Ricans” (170). Jorge insists on the fact that Puerto Ricans are viewed as ‘bad people’ and that Cubans should not be assimilated to them. He wants to be apart from the segregated group, but as a Cuban. However, Lourdes does not indicate in her signs that she is Cuban. In fact, her signs are in the colours of the United States: “Red, white and blue” (170). She is no longer associated with the segregated culture and people; she “[feels] a spiritual link to American moguls” (170). The term ‘moguls’ refers to an “important, influential, or dominant person; an autocrat.”[1] and thus she identifies herself with the dominant culture. Furthermore, as she identifies with Western culture, she wants an individualistic expansion and “[envisions] a chain of […] bakeries stretching across America […] in suburban shopping malls” (171). This is emphasized by the repetitions of the words ‘she’ and ‘her’ which highlights that it is only her name, her bakery and her legacy that will live throughout the ages. Her business becomes part of the Western culture and therefore, as her identity is associated with the bakery, she herself becomes part of Western culture. It is a mimetic behaviour to blend herself in society and to not compromise her hypothetic place as dominant figure.

All in all, Lourdes can be seen as a binary character that does not want any ambiguity inside her. She mimics the Western lifestyle and adopts its culture. The strong resentment that Lourdes feels towards ambiguity can be interpreted as way of coping with the post-revolutionary lifestyle. As it is a strong transformation in the way one lives his life, the behaviour can be affected in many ways. To cope with this new lifestyle, Lourdes adopts a mimetic and anti-hybrid behaviour. She does not want to think about the past, but is rather focused on the future. It is an adaptation and a way to survive in the Western world.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bibliography

GARCIA, Cristina. Dreaming in Cuban. New York: Ballantine Books, 1993.

EDWARDS D., Justin. Postcolonial Literature. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008.

 

[1] Oxford English Dictionary Online. http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/120726?rskey=vP5DAS&result=1&isAdvanced=false#eid

Cristina Garcia’s Dreaming in Cuban: Between America and Cuba, Pilar’s resentment.

Leave a reply

Identity issues, broken families, generational gap and political conflicts are at the centre of Garcia’s novel Dreaming in Cuban. In this novel, Cristina Garcia explores the consequences of the Cuban Revolution that took place between 1953 and 1959. The aftermath of the revolution is explored through many characters and Pilar Puente is one of these. This passage (GARCIA 25, 26; ‘I’m trying on […] sing quietly in my ear’) is the first time the reader encounters Pilar and already, Pilar’s ambivalence towards her surrounding is set. In fact, her need to escape her lifestyle in the U.S.A. in hope to find a better life in Cuba is emphasized in the passage. By means of contrasted narrative tone and contrasted lexical fields, this passage confronts the reader to the resent Pilar feels towards her life in America and the comfort she hopes to find in Cuba. It sets Pilar as an ambivalent character.

Pilar is an ambivalent character and this ambivalence is reflected with the depiction of her situation. This passage is narrated from her point of view. The narrative tone is critical and ironic and allows the reader to sympathize with her point of view. As soon as she sees her father with another woman, she criticizes their behaviour and attitude: ‘like a 1950s beauty queen gone to seed’; ‘[They are] pretending to window-shop […] [in] outdated stores with merchandise that’s been there since the Bay of Pigs’ (25). Pilar’s critique towards the relationship of her father with the woman highlights the fact that she hates the situation. Furthermore, Pilar is also critical of her current situation in America. Describing the work at the ‘bakery’ as slavery (25). Not only critical, her tone is also ironic. Describing the situation in an ironic tone allows the reader to sympathize with her point of view. “The beauty queen leans into him outside a stereo place that’s blasting, incredibly, “Stop in the Name of Love.” (25) Pilar wants the situation to stop and, ironically, a music named Stop in the Name of Love is ‘blasting’. Also, when talking about the woman, Pilar uses a lot of figurative language. Comparing the woman to a ‘beauty queen gone to seed’, ‘as if she’s been walking in those heels since birth’ (25). The ironic tone used to describe the situation has a humorous effect and helps the reader sympathize with the Pilar’s position. Pilar’s tone reflects her point of view on her situation in America. She is critical and takes distance from the situation, allowing her to be ironic at times.

On the other hand, when talking about Cuba and how she envisions it, Pilar’s tone shifts; thus emphasizing the contrast between her point of view of America and Cuba. She is imagining how her life would be: ‘I imagine Abuela Celia’s surprise’; ‘she’ll smell of salt and violet water’; ‘She’ll stroke my cheek with her cool hands, sing quietly in my ear’ (26). The tone here is calm and peaceful. It highlights the vision Pilar has of Cuba, a tranquil place where her grandmother can comfort her. Her resent towards her American life is conveyed critically and with irony. And when imagining her life in Cuba, the tone shifts to more peaceful one. The contrast between the two narrative tones emphasizes Pilar’s ambivalence.

Furthermore, Pilar’s ambivalence is emphasized again with a contrast in lexical fields. When describing the relationship between her father and the woman, everything they do lead to disgust. The queen is ‘gone to seed’, she has a ‘flicking, disgusting […] flycatcher tongue’ and it makes Pilar ‘sick to her stomach’ (25). The use of this lexical field allows the reader to visualize the resentment Pilar is feeling. The lexical field of disgust also comes to highlight the negativity of the situation. Moreover, Pilar describes her father and the woman with their physical attributes which reinforces the negative point of view of Pilar. This lexical field of appearances can particularly be seen when Pilar is describing the woman: ‘[She] is huge and blond […] has a cloud of bleached hair and high-muscled calves’; ‘They walk down Fulton Street arm in arm, pretending to […]’; ‘my father holds her waxy, bloated face’ (25). But also when describing her father: ‘[He] looks like a kid, laughing and animated’ (25). Pilar does not like what she sees and the combination of the two lexical fields highlights this fact. It is the reason she is ‘fed up with everything around here’ (25) and is a real turning point in her relation with her father as it will be seen later in the novel (138).

By contrast, the lexical fields used when imagining her life in Cuba is not as negative as the latter one. The lexical field of movement, which can be interpreted as a metaphor for freedom, gives a more positive point of view: ‘one-way bus ticket to Miami’; ‘if I can just get there, I’ll be able to make my way to Cuba’; ‘rent a boat or get a fisherman to take me’; ‘as I sneak up […]’ (25-26). Even the act of sitting is not idle: ‘She’ll be sitting in her wicker swing’ (26). Furthermore, the lexical field of the five senses is associated with Cuba: ‘overlooking’; ‘she’ll smell of salt and violet water’; ‘She’ll stroke my cheek with her cool hands, sing quietly in my ear’ (26). The combination of the two lexical fields emphasize the positive point of view Pilar has of Cuba. A place where her sense can be free.

All in all, this passage creates a clear contrast between the different point of view Pilar has of America and Cuba. Each geographical region is associated with different lexical fields and narrative tones. This contrast highlights Pilar as an ambivalent character and, as it will be seen later in the novel, this passage is a clear turning point in her life (138).

Cristina Garcia’s Dreaming in Cuban: Between America and Cuba, Pilar’s struggle.

Leave a reply

Every day, we see refugees on the news, people fleeing revolutions, finding themselves with no ‘home’ and constantly reconstructing their lives. Cristina García, with her novel Dreaming in Cuban, explores the consequences of the Cuban Revolution that took place in 1953. Identity issues, broken families, generational gap and political conflicts are at the centre of García’s work. Pilar Puente is one of the many characters of this novel to go through the struggles that followed the revolution. In fact, Pilar’s need to escape America to find salvation in Cuba is emphasized in this passage (GARCÌA 25, 26). By means of an extended metaphor, lexical field and a contrast between two verb tenses, this passage confronts the reader to the misery she is going through in America and the comfort she hopes to find in Cuba.

Firstly, the passage opens with an extended metaphor of superficiality and consumerism which can be interpreted as the occidental lifestyle. Superficiality and consumerism are characterized by the relationship between Pilar’s father and the ‘beauty queen’ (GARCÌA 25). The superficiality is highlighted with the description of the woman. Only described physically, the beauty she radiates is truly fake. Her hair is ‘blond and puffy’ (25) but it is only ‘bleached hair’; She is a canon of beauty (‘1950s beauty queen’) but she ‘[has] gone to seed’ and her face is ‘waxy [and] bloated’ (25). As can be seen, her beauty is based on fake ornaments. She characterizes the superficiality of the occidental culture. Moreover, the occidental consumerism is emphasized with their actions. Consumerism is ‘the belief that it is good for a society or an individual person to buy and use a large quantity of goods and services’[1]. Consumerism is the action of buying a great number of consumables because it is seen as “good”. For example, the first thing the reader learns about Pilar is that she ‘[is] trying on French-style garters and push-up brassieres’ in a shop (25). Right after that, she is ‘hiding behind racks of hats and on-sale sweaters’ (25). There is such a large number of goods that she is able to hide behind them. Thus representing the ridiculousness of consumerism. It is further seen that consumerism is used as an excuse for the couple to see each other: ‘They walk down Fulton Street arm in arm, pretending to window-shop.’ (25) To sum up, consumerism and superficiality are characterized in this passage by Pilar and the couple.

Even though Pilar almost embraced this style of living at the beginning by trying on goods and ornaments but she later realizes that she resents this lifestyle. Through a lexical field of disgust, this passage shows her repugnance towards this lifestyle. The moment she sees this woman with her father is clearly a turning point. As said earlier, she was living this lifestyle, but, as she ‘[sees] them’, she panics: ‘Shit! I can’t believe this!’ Indeed, in this passage, the physical attributes of the lady are often linked with elements of disgust: ‘like a 1950s beauty queen gone to seed’; ‘flicking, disgusting tongue’; ‘It makes me sick’; ‘that flycatcher tongue of hers’ (25). Pilar cannot stand this superficiality and realizes that the consumerism based lifestyle is a nonsense as she sees them ‘walking down’. Indeed, she realizes that the shops are ‘just a run-down stretch of outdated stores with merchandise that’s been there since the Bay of Pigs’ (25). It is through the lexical field of disgust that the reader can understand the Pilar’s misery. Pilar slowly realizes that she is living a lifestyle based on consumption and appearances and it disgusts her.

Following her disgust, is her will to go back to Cuba. Her decision to return there is accentuated in this passage by the opposition of two verb tenses: present and future. These two verb tenses are geographically attached: present for the United States and future for Cuba. As said before, when Pilar is talking about her life in America, it is associated with disgust. Furthermore, it is narrated in the present tense: ‘I think I hear’; ‘I stick my head’; ‘She has’; ‘They walk’; etc. This present tense is associated to her present life and is therefore synonym of disgust. She is not satisfied with her present life… Which leads her envision a different future. This future is linked to Cuba, as when she thinks about it, there is a shift of verb tense that occurs: ‘I’m going back to Cuba’; ‘I’ll be able to’; ‘She’ll be sitting’; ‘She’ll smell’; ‘There’ll be’ (26). The opposition between these two tenses emphasizes the struggle she is going through and the political ambivalence of the character. Not only this, but the opposition between her present and her future are opposed in terms of lexical field too. The future she envisions is a future full of hope, a future where all of her senses are pleased: ‘overlooking the sea’; ‘she’ll smell of salt and violet water’; ‘She’ll stroke my cheek with her cool hands, sing quietly in my ear’ (26). The lexical field of the five senses highlights the opposition between present and future. Pilar’s present lifestyle is full of disgust whereas her future is a collection of physical bliss. On the whole, there is a clear opposition between America and Cuba. Both geographical regions are associated with a lexical field and verb tenses that are diametrically opposed: disgust and the present tense for America and the five senses and the future tense for Cuba.

All in all, this passage shows Pilar’s necessity to go back to Cuba and to leave the repugnance of America. Through an extended metaphor of superficiality and consumerism characterized by the couple and a lexical field of disgust the passage highlights her disgust toward this lifestyle. Thus leading to her hope to find bliss in Cuba emphasized by an opposition between present and future tense both geographically attached to Cuba and America. This passage is a clear turning point in the life of Pilar as we will see later in the book where she is self-reflecting on this precise moment (p.138).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bibliography

GARCÌA, Cristina. Dreaming in Cuban. New York: Ballantine Books, 1993.

[1] http://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/consumerism

Sense of orality in Pilar’s Excerpts

Leave a reply

Narrative Techniques and Language in Pilar’s Excerpt:
How They Create a Sense of Oral Tradition

Cristina’s Garcia’s novel Dreaming in Cuban portrays the stories of a Cuban family members and the relationships between each other. Family is one of the main themes of the novel and getting to know a story from different perspectives has a significant role in Garcia’s book. The plot focuses on the three generations and uses drifting narration throughout the chapters, which are divided in parts describing a certain character. The stories of the older characters are portrayed in the third person narration , where the youngsters’ excerpts are written in first (the only exception is the one section narrated by Herminia – a non family member and an adult). Pilar Puente is the oldest of the grandchildren and her excerpts are the most prominent from the young generation. The use of first-person narration, present tense and uncomplicated colloquial language in Pilar’s segments create a sense of orality. Through the use of these elements, the text addresses directly to the reader, as if the young character was telling her story and thoughts to a friend. I will focus on analysing a passage from the chapter Going South in which Pilar is in a bus on her runaway to Cuba, staring through the window and reflecting about her parents.

While sitting in the bus, Pilar notices the neon signs outside the road have missing letters which gives them a completely different and more humoristic meaning: “hell”(!!) instead of Shell and “cock—s”(!!) instead of cocktails. That takes her, against her struggle not to, to speak about the image of her dad cheating: “No matter how hard I try, though, I keep seeing the bloated face of that aging beauty queen bouncing off the lights into my father’s outstretched hands”(31). Disapprovingly describing her dad’s lover as an old lady along with giving her “beauty queen” epithet implies that Pilar is very upset and annoyed by witnessing the love affair. Pilar seems to have an internal conflict, she bears a grudge against her father, does not want to talk nor think about him but at the same time tries to defend him by saying her parents barely see each other and that he appears troubled. What is interesting, to express this concern, the female narrator uses a grammatically incorrect phrase. Instead of stating he looks really worried, she says the man “looks real worried”(31) – uses the noun in place where should an adverb. This expression is unusual for writing it down but is commonly used in everyday spoken language. Other words that appear and are considered colloquial “weird”(31), “damn”(31),  “down-to-outs”(31) contribute to making the text seem more passed orally, as they are more common to say than to being written down. Later Pilar proceeds talking about how Lourdes, the mother, taking care of her bakery by using more humoristic language. The teenager criticizes her mother for employing non-English speaking people to just “get them cheap”(32) and then for inspecting their personal belongings to ensure they have not stole anything. Pilar does not believe her mother having anything valuable, so asks rhetorical questions with funny suggestions what could have they taken: “Like what they are going to steal? A butter cookie? A French bread?”(32). As much as these questions are to entertain the reader it easily can be to friend who is listening to Pilar telling a story. She finishes her dismissal by suggesting her mother is not a good person to receive the chance of the American dream from and suggests the foreign employees to look for it elsewhere: “Hell, if she’s the welcome wagon, they’d better hitch a ride with someone else”(32). The interjection “hell” at the opening of this quote emphasizes the character’s irritation and also together with other interjections Pilar uses such as “though” and “too”, it resembles oral tradition.

Pilar is the first-person narrator: the text is written from her point of view (“I’m too tired…”(31)). She also states personal expressions, such as, “I swear it”(31), “I guess”(31), which are more familiar to be used in conversation to support what is told than to be written down. These phrases together with the first-person narration give the impression that Pilar is addressing her thoughts to someone. Furthermore, indirect speech is barely used to illustrate conversations. For instance, when an incident at the bakery is recalled, instead of inserting dialogue with direct quotes, the narrator describes the talk in just one sentence: “She told me to check someone’s purse once and I said no fucking way”(32). Pilar, as the narrator, does not mention the name of the employee or exactly in what words did her mom ask her to check the personal belongings, which is natural. This makes the passage seem to be delivered verbally by using her own words rather than to be a text. Another interesting fact about the narration is that it is mostly written in the present tense – the sentence quoted above is one of the few, which are distinguished from this observation  throughout the whole Pilar’s subsection. Therefore, past tense is only occasionally applied for the reminded events that happened before. The technique to use mostly present tense creates an impression that Pilar describes right at the moment like in conversation telling story and what is on her mind.

To conclude, the usage of everyday language through rhetorical questions, injections, colloquial phrases and first-person narration along with indirect speech, being written in present tense gives the text sense of orality. While reading, the rhetorical questions and personal expressions make the passage seem directly addressed to the reader and the character’s thoughts told like to recipient of the book. Narration being first-person along with indirect speech and almost the whole text being written in present tense make the impression of the passage being told by Pilar at the exact moment as a story to the reader.