Author Archives: Nicky13

Search for Identity in Cristina Gracía’s “Dreaming in Cuban”: Pilar’s Internal and External Conflicts

Leave a reply

The Cuban revolution is a turning point in Dreaming in Cuban as well as in its author’s life; Cristina García had to go into exile as the main character of her novel, Pilar. Their families were torn because of politics and the situation implied many conflicts. In the passage of pages 25 and 26[1], the author reveals Pilar’s internal and external conflicts through contrasts created by the tense changes, a paradox, and an antithesis. It draws thus attention to one of the consequences of exile: hybridity. According to Joseph Raab hybridity is a word that has become a most useful metaphor for conceptualizing cultural contact (Raab 2008). Indeed, Pilar is influenced by both Cuba and the USA and the repercussion of this cultural contact is that she is searching for her identity. To find it, she wants to go back to Cuba.

Pilar expresses the certainty of her decision to leave by using assertions in the present. However, the reason of her decision contrasts with her certainty, which constructs a paradox. “That’s it. My mind’s made up. I’m going back to Cuba.” (García, 25) is a parataxis. García uses three short sentences getting more precise in each of them. In the last sentence, the reader finds out about Pilar’s decision. Through these assertions in the present, she demonstrates that she is sure about her decision. The present continuous of the last sentence even shows that this is a plan that will be realized in a close future. Then comes the explanation of why Pilar wants to leave: “I’m fed up with everything around here” (25). “[F]ed up” is an expression of informal and familiar register. “[E]verything” is a hyperbole. Pilar exaggerates the reason of her decision; she generalizes the situation (she has just seen her father with another woman). Thus, this sentence points out that this is a teenager’s spontaneous decision, who wants to run away from a situation that she generalizes. Consequently, this is a spontaneous but a radical decision, which constructs a paradox. “I take all my money out of the bank, $120” (25) is a part of the paradox because the small amount of money that the girl possesses contrasts with the greatness of her project. Therefore, Pilar’s certainty about her decision is contradicted by the paradox that it involves.

Indeed, as it is a spontaneous decision, uncertainty is raised when Pilar talks of the future. It creates thus a contrast with her initial certainty. “I figure if I can just get there” (25) is an assumption followed by the future: “I’ll be able to make my way to Cuba, maybe rent a boat or get a fisherman” (26). In the first quote, the verb “figure” shows that she supposes what will happen in the future, she is not sure anymore. “[I]f” is a subordinate conjunction which signals hypothesis, thus raising doubt. Then the modal verb “can” involves the idea that it is possible that she fails. Furthermore, the doubt is strengthened by the adverb “maybe”. This uncertainty challenges all the assertions that Pilar made before, thus revealing an antithesis between assertions and assumptions. She continues assuming when she “imagine[s]” (26) her reunion with her grandmother. This verb is also followed by the future: “[s]he’ll be sitting”, “she’ll smell”, “[t]here’ll be gulls”, “[s]he’ll stroke” (26). It depicts the scene that Pilar visualizes precisely but these are only expectations. The girl knows that she wants to leave, but she did not think of how to get to Cuba. This brings uncertainty in her decision that is too spontaneous and not elaborated enough. As a result, she can only imagine the future. The consequence of the antithesis between assertions and assumptions is that a contrast between certainty and uncertainty is raised. This contrast shows Pilar’s instability due to an inner conflict.

Pilar does not only live an internal conflict; she also has a flashback evoking her family’s external conflict in which she feels powerless. Indeed, she evokes the breaking of the family that happened because of Lourdes’ decision to leave Cuba when Pilar “was only two years old” (26). The girl talks in the past, which is the tense of finished actions. These actions are trapped in the past forever like Pilar was jammed in her very young age at this time. Consequently, she could manifest her refusal only by “scream[ing] at the top of [her] lungs” (26). This is a metaphor evoking that her scream came not from her throat, but from even deeper. Thus, she strongly manifested her disagreement to be separated from her grandmother. As Lourdes’s decision of leaving Cuba is rejected by Pilar, the consequence is that young girl is torn between the USA and Cuba. This tearing appears in the text through the antithesis between “here” (25) and there, which represents “Cuba” (25,26). Pilar lives in the USA against her will, and here she has to “slav[e] away at [her] mother’s bakery” (25). This powerful expression denotes Pilar’s opinion on her relationship with Lourdes and indicates that she considers herself as her mother’s slave. The consequence is that Pilar is not free and she had to follow her mother “here” (25), where she is “fed up with everything” (25). During the argument that happened years ago, Jorge exposed his point of view on their relationship by claiming: “[Pilar] belongs with Lourdes” (26). This implies that Pilar’s home is where Lourdes is thus demonstrating why the girl had to follow her mother in the USA. Nevertheless, Pilar challenges her belonging by her will to go back to Cuba without her mother. This questioning of belonging is the result of the external conflict that she lived years ago and has provoked her actual inner conflict.

Therefore, Pilar’s unsolved external conflict of the past brings her into an inner conflict years later. Indeed, paradoxical certainty which contrasts with her uncertainty about the future demonstrates that she is not constant and stable in her mind. Pilar is torn between two places: she was born in Cuba but has lived nearly her whole life in the USA. She lives thus with the culture of America but with the nostalgia of Cuba. We understand later in the book why she wants to go back to Cuba: “If I could see Abuela Celia again, I’d know where I belonged” (58). This is thus the story of a lost teenager who is searching for her identity, and who lives in hybridity.

 

Works Cited Section:

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

Raab, Joseph. “Introduction: Cultural Hybridity in the Americas” (with Martin Butler). Hybrid           Americas: Contacts, Contrasts, and Confluences in the New World Literatures and Culture,     2008.

[1] From “That’s it” to “last time I saw her”.

Traumatic Past in Cristina García’s Dreaming in Cuban: Lourdes’ Unbearable Memories

Leave a reply

Cristina García’s Dreaming in Cuban reflects different points of view of the history of Cuba. For instance, Lourdes has an adverse opinion of Cuba after the Revolution. At the beginning of the novel, she is an enigmatic character, but the reader understands her perspective when s/he finds out what happened to her in the past. Justin D. Edwards, in his chapter on memory in Postcolonial Literature, states that the “postcolonial writing often deals with the recollection of traumatic events” (132). Indeed, Cristina García illustrates this situation in Dreaming in Cuban through Lourdes’ callback of her unborn baby’s death and her rape. Hence, the author shows the repercussions of a traumatic event by calling back Lourdes’ memory, thus reflecting one of the perceptions on the introduction of a revolutionary government in Cuba and its consequences.

The articulation of Lourdes’ memories in the narration suggests a logical connection between the events of the past, which helps to understand the character’s motives and reactions. The plot is a disrupted narrative structured like memory. Each event is a piece of memory articulated with another one in a non-linear way. However, it seems like events of Lourdes’ memory are linked together in a logical way. In chapter 5, the reader finds out about a traumatic event that Lourdes lived through: soldiers of the revolutionary government catalyzed her miscarriage and she has been raped by one of them (García, 70-71). The reminiscence of this episode of violence appears just after the mention of the day Lourdes left Cuba (García, 69). This succession in the narration connects the two memories; as Lourdes’ aggression happened before her exile, it suggests that this traumatic event has been a motive of her exile. Moreover, just after the mention of Lourdes’ trauma, the narrator asserts that immigration is a good point in her life because it “has redefined her” (García, 73). S/he further reveals that “[s]he wants no part of Cuba, no part of its wretched carnival floats creaking with lies, no part of Cuba at all” (García, 73). The repetition of “no part” highlights Lourdes’ rejection of Cuba. This association of memories in the narration reveals that Lourdes’ rejection of her homeland is one possible consequence of her trauma.

A further consequence of Lourdes’ trauma is her impossibility to talk about this violent incident. Judith Lewis Herman argues that “a trauma is outside of language and, as a result, is unspeakable and unrepresentable” (Herman 1992 cited in: Edwards 2008: 136). Lourdes’ reaction when Jorge asks her to go to Cuba illustrates this point. She refuses her father’s proposition but she does not say why; her body reminds her of her trauma and speaks for her: “I can’t go back. It’s impossible. […] You don’t understand, Lourdes 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” (García, 196). Indeed, her trauma is expressed through feelings; she “cries” which shows her pain. She also has difficulty to breathe because she “searches the breeze above her”, which means that she feels oppressed only by thinking to go back to the place of her trauma. Furthermore, Lourdes’ aggression left her with physical sequelae. She “feels” sensations related to suffering (“scraping blade”, “web of scars”), which demonstrates that, unconsciously, she associates the place of her aggression with pain. It is besides what Judith Lewis Herman claims: “a trauma is often that which is suppressed within individual’s consciousness, so traumatic material is often difficult, if not impossible to depict” (Herman 1992 cited in Edwards 2008: 136). Thus, García devised a master stroke by letting Lourdes’ body express itself against the idea of going back to Cuba.

The repercussion of Lourdes’ impossibility to talk of her trauma is that she fears that her suffering becomes forgotten. However, instead of staying passive, she reacts on a political level. When she is finally in Cuba, she goes back to the place of her aggression: “She lost her second child in this place. […] What she fears most is this: that her rape, her baby’s death were absorbed quietly by the earth” (227). Through the metaphor “absorbed quietly by the earth”, the reader finds out that Lourdes is afraid that her suffering is forgotten and meaningless. It leads the reader to believe that Lourdes has engaged in politics to give a sense to her aggression. Indeed, she has become an anti-communist: “[s]he is convinced that she can fight Communism from behind her bakery counter” (García, 136). After all, it is because of the introduction of a communist government that Lourdes’ aggression occurred. It confirms that, as Kali Tal suggests, “the memories of traumatic events often involve cultural-political movements” (Tal 1996 cited in Edwards 2008: 133). Tal further argues that the “traumatic experience becomes a weapon in another battle, the struggle for political power” (Tal 1996 cited in Edwards 2008: 133). It is interesting to note the word field of war in both Tal’s second statement (“weapon”, “battle”, “power”) and Lourdes’ conviction towards Communism (“fight”). It means that Lourdes’ political fight can be interpreted as a revenge on her past: she lost a battle but not the war.

Therefore, through the narrative structure that helps making links between the events of the past, the expression of Lourdes’ unconscious feelings through her body, and her reaction after the traumatic event, the reader finds out Lourdes’ version of history. Her recollection of traumatic events enables the reader to understand the different positions that follow episodes of history such as the introduction of a revolutionary government in Cuba. Justin D. Edwards claims that “the postcolonial writer who captures memories often does so as a way of bearing witness to the traumatic histories of the past” (138). Indeed, García, by recalling not only individual memories –for instance through Lourdes’ story– but also a collective memory –through the history of black people– gives a voice to the people who suffered and thus the historical truth is revealed.

Bibliography

Primary Text:

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

Secondary Text:

Edwards, Justin D. “Chapter Twelve: Memory.” Postcolonial Literature. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008.

Works Cited:

Herman, Judith. Trauma and Recovery. New York: Basic Books, 1992.

Tal, Kali. Worlds of Hurt: Reading the Literatures of Trauma. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.