The dynamic of Lourdes and Pilar’s relationship

Leave a reply

The dynamic of Lourdes and Pilar’s relationship  

Exploring the significance of Pilar and Lourdes relationship through Pilar’s inner monologue in Cristina Garcia’s “Dreaming in Cuban”

 

Cristina Garcia’s 1992 “Dreaming in Cuban” deals with the consequences of the 1979 Cuban Revolution, such as the separation of Cuban families. Even if the Puente family is not physically separated, Lourdes and Pilar do have some disagreements because of their ideologies about Cuba. This passage is rooted at the beginning of the story, as Pilar arrives to her cousin’s house, Blanquito. Pilar is on the run for Cuba and she imagines her mother’s reaction (on page 63). This passage focuses on Pilar’s determination to go back to Cuba, despites her mother’s opinion. The process of narrating in Pilar’s monologue effectively sheds a light on Pilar’s desire as well as the dynamic of Pilar’s relationship with her mother. The use of antithesis, double-meaning and associations portrays Pilar confronting her mother’s ambiguous personality. Thus, Pilar’s monologue reveals that Cuba appears as the missing part to affirm Pilar’s own identity and the remedy for her relationship with Lourdes.

By depicting Lourdes through the use of animalistic similes, Pilar’s inner monologue intensifies her mother’s ambiguous reactions. After discreetly sitting on Blanquito’s lounge chair and imagining her mother’s reprimands, Pilar juxtaposes two metaphoric images of her mother. On the one hand, her mother’s physical appearance parallels an authoritarian figure with evil connotations, as “she can look like the gods guarding hell” (63). On the other hand, Pilar underlines Lourdes’ inoffensive and powerless personality, as “[Lourdes] sounds more like a terrier or a Chihuahua” (63). By using animals from opposite tempers, Pilar ironizes Lourdes’s overreactions. This opposition thereby appears more as an antithesis, because it visualizes Pilar’s own perception of Lourdes’s personality. In other words, by mocking her mother’s reaction through an antithesis statement, Pilar implicitly spells out her own doubts or inability to understand her mother’s ambiguous personality. Thus, this derision of Lourdes’ behaviour suggests that the dynamic of their relationship is fed by a lack of communication on behalf of Lourdes and Pilar.

While Pilar’s inner monologue implicitly sheds a light on her own thoughts concerning her mother’s ambiguous personality through the use of animalistic antithesis, the ignorance of double meaning echoes Pilar’s rejection of her mother’s principles. As Pilar still imagines her mother’s reaction, Pilar recreates Lourdes’s discourse: “You [Pilar] can’t compare yourself to me [Lourdes] |…] I work fourteen hours a day so you [Pilar] can be educated “(63). This comparison implicitly suggest that Lourdes works the more she can in order to pay school for Pilar. Lourdes then appears as a devoted mother. Nonetheless, as Pilar asks the following rhetorical question “so who’s comparing?” (63), Pilar choses to reject her mother’s help. By ignoring the idea that Lourdes is involved on her education, Pilar indirectly refuses her mother’s work ethic principles. It is also suggested that Pilar refuses to be confined by her mother; Pilar needs her own independence, as she is looking for her own identity. thus, Pilar’s rejection of her mother’s morals shapes their relationship, as the serpent biting its own tail; the more her mother will try to instil morals or principles to Pilar, the more Pilar will move away from her mother.

In addition to the mother-daughter relationship dynamic partly based on rejections and objections depicted by the ignorance of double-meaning, the use of associations illustrated in Pilar’s inner monologue constantly depicts her thoughts about Cuba and her mother. Effectively, by spontaneously “guess[ing] [she is] one of those things [her mother] can’t change” (63), Pilar’s inner monologue leads two opposite meanings. For example, this association does not picture Pilar as the victim concerning the dynamic of her relationship with her mother, rather Pilar considers herself as the culprit. Pilar indirectly acknowledges that she may be one of the reasons why her mother is frustrated. In this sense, she indirectly confesses questioning herself as being one of the constant sources of her mother’s torments. Nonetheless, the association of Pilar to “those things” gives an idea of certainty as well. This association of Pilar to “those things” then puts forward Pilar’s self confidence; she refuses to submit to her mother concerning her decision to go back to Cuba. Both possibilities indirectly spell out that the problem of their relationship is not rooted in Pilar herself. The problem between them is rather rooted on Lourdes’ fear of confronting her past, as Pilar will inevitably dig it up by returning to Cuba. Besides, by comparing Lourdes’ reputation in both Cuba and the US, Pilar underlines Lourdes’ blindness concerning Lourdes’ self-awareness: “Back in Cuba, everybody used to treat Mom with respect. […] These days, all the neighbourhood merchants hate her” (63). This comparison points out how Lourdes is despised in a place, where she idealises the American dream. It also underlines Lourdes’ unhappiness, as she has to leave Cuba because of the revolution. This comparison then reinforces Pilar’s disapproval of staying in the US, because on the one hand her mother refuses to deal with her inner struggles. On the other hand, this comparison motivates Pilar to return to Cuba in order to find herself as well as to bring peace to her mother. Thereby, it is suggested that the dynamic of their relationship is more tormented by the geographical place, than Pilar and Lourdes themselves. Cuba appears as the key to save their relationship as well as the Pilar’s affirmation of herself.

According to the antithesis, which echoes Pilar’ uncertain perception of Lourdes, the ignorance of double-meaning in Lourdes’s discourse, as well as the associations articulated around Pilar and Lourdes, the layout of Pilar’s inner monologue appears as a portrayal of her determination to go back to Cuba. The use of implicit language also articulates Pilar’s possible doubts and Pilar’s determination. In other words, it is suggested that Pilar and Lourdes both embodies ambiguities. This monologue reveals that the source of the remedy is also the source of their torments; both of them will go back to Cuba. Pilar will affirm herself and Lourdes will free herself. Pilar’s monologue reveals the importance of nation, or the feeling of belonging to construct one’s self.

Traditional Memory –or a military strategy

Leave a reply

Traditional Memory –or a military strategy

Exploring the Link between Memory and the way of Writing about Colonial History in Cristina Garcia’s Dreaming in Cuban.

In Cristina Garcia’s 1992 Dreaming in Cuban, the memories of Colonization are recounted through unconventional points of view. To put it differently, Pilar and Herminia’s views of colonial history do not correspond to the traditional view of colonial history. The ‘traditional history’ of Colonization, as pointed out in the chapter ‘Memory’ of Justin D. Edwards’ in Post Colonial Literature, symbolizes “the imperial power” (Edwards 2008: 131). This metaphor expresses the fact that the traditional way of writing about colonial history is first and foremost through the colonizer’s point of view, that is to say European countries such as Spain. This traditional way of writing history consequently implies that there are traditional memories as well. In other words, these memories are Eurocentric. Throughout the use of a rhetorical question and a metaphor, Pilar and Herminia, who remember what their fathers told them about historical events, both expose the idea that these traditional memories of colonization are in fact selective memories. Choosing what should be recount and what must be occluded in term of historical events in fact reveals a military strategy of the “imperial power” (131).

Throughout the use of a rhetorical question, Pilar implies that memory interferes in the way of writing history. Traditional history then appears as a partial memory. Pilar’s father recounts her how, after “Columbus came” (García 1992: 28) in Cuba, “Spaniards wiped out more Indians with smallpox than with muskets” (28). Specifying that the infectious diseases brought by Spaniards killed more Indians than enslavement shows that Pilar’s father knowledge about the arrival of the Columbus in the unknown territory does not rely on the traditional accounts. After hearing this different account about the ‘1942 Discovery of the New World’, Pilar wonders “why [we don’t] read about this in history book” (28). By using the verb “read” (28) in her rhetorical question, Pilar challenges in fact the way to write history. Then, the term ‘history book’ referring to traditional history also questions who has the legitimacy to write about historical records. This rhetorical question thus denounces that the persons who represent traditional history, are persons who have the power. To put it differently, the legitimacy of writing history belongs to the “imperial power” (Edwards 2008: 131). By taking into account Rufino’s version, the ‘Columbus’ Arrival’ consequently appears as a ‘partial’ memory because those who have the power select what they want to remember of the world history and delete what is preferable to be forgotten. This process of erasure, as pointed out by Edward in Kincaid’s My brother, “is a way of controlling and manipulating stories about the past –stories that might challenge the legitimacy of the [imperial power]” (131). Indeed, the use of verbs such as ‘controlling and manipulating’ exposes the idea that memory influences the way to write about history. Traditional memory consequently appears as a medium which allows the colonizers to maintain power over the colonized. By asking “why [we don’t] read about this in history books” (Cristina 1992: 28), Pilar in fact dismantles this hierarchical order. In this sense, her question puts forward the idea that the term ‘1942 Discovery of the New World’ depends on which point of view is taken. Pilar’s view then refers to this date as a symbol of Colonization. Thus, traditional memory does not only appears as being subjective; it rather appears as a medium which guarantees hierarchical power.

In addition to Pilar’s rhetorical question which is against the idea that the legitimacy of writing history belongs to the colonizers, Pilar’s metaphor also emphasizes the oppressive function of traditional memory over the colonized. While Pilar denounces about the dictatorial system in Cuba, she asserts that “the politicians and the generals […] force events on [Cubans] that structure [their] lives, [and] that dictate the memories” (Cristina 1992: 138). By saying so, Pilar reveals how much Cubans’ lives were controlled by the political system. On the one hand, the metaphor “dictate the memories” (138) highlights the authoritarian power of dictatorships. On the other hand, this metaphor depicts how this political system maintained its power; by controlling the way Cuban perceived history. However, this metaphor implies that “the politicians and the generals” (138) not only controlled people’s perception of history throughout “history books” (28), but they also imposed the Eurocentric view of colonial history in Cubans’ minds. In other words, they force people to remember certain events and forget others. Even if the following example does not correspond to the same political event, the oppressive function of traditional memory is still illustrated throughout Herminia’s opinion about the way politicians dealt with “the Little War of 1912” (185). Herminia, who is Afrocuban, claims claims that “for many years in Cuba, nobody spoke of the problem between blacks and whites[, because] it was considered too disagreeable to discuss” (184-185). The exaggeration “too disagreeable” (138) intensifies the fact that it was probably forbidden to talk publicly of this racial war after it happened. This exaggeration also echoes Herminia’s anger and dissatisfaction because this war “is only a footnote in our history books” (138). Thus, as in Pilar’s case, Herminia “condemns” (Edwards 2008: 131) those who have the “imperial power” (131) because they occlude parts of history. Herminia’s opinion parallels the one of Kincaid, as both argue “that this act of forgetting has a purpose, for it erases abuse and illegitimate power and negates responsibility” (131). As Edwards puts it, the reasons why the imperial country silences past events are essentially political and moral. On the one hand, by silencing its own act of atrocity, the imperial country guarantees the legitimacy of “imperial power” (131) as already suggested. On the other hand, they do not need to take responsibility, so that “there can be no apology, reparation or forgiveness” (131). In other words, selecting memories allows the imperial country to expand its conquest. Traditional memory in Dreaming in Cuban then denounces more than its political power; it is also reveals that this imperial uses memory as a military strategy. By speaking for the marginalized, Pilar and Herminia expose the imperial country’s inhumanity and savageness and refuse to conform to the “imperial power” (131).

By taking into account the different choice of verbs and the figures of speech, Pilar and Herminia on the one hand question the Eurocentric vision of the world regarding to the way of writing and understanding history. On the one hand, they denounce that this traditional way of writing history is in fact biased by political, moral and military strategies. As emphasised throughout Edwards’ analysis of Kincaid’s My Brother, traditional memory is consequently not a reliable source of information, because of its a selection of memories. Thus, the significance of collective memory in Dreaming in Cuban is revolutionary because remembering unconventional memories decentralizes the “imperial power” (131) and consequently calls for political equality.

 

Fictional History and True Memory

Leave a reply

Here is my second essay, discussing the theme of “memory” in Cristina Garcìa’s Dreaming in Cuban, it is entitled Fictional History and True Memory. Here it is:

Fictional History and True Memory

Between 1952 and 1959, Cuba was subject to the dictator Fulgencio Batista who supported U.S. business and economy to develop his own profit. All the industry was in their hands and therefore, Cuban people had no power against Batista and the U.S. In this context, the Cuban revolted against the dictator to regain, not only their freedom, but as well their collective identity. Nowadays, Cuba got rid of dictatorship and, “memory becomes an important way of uniting the past with the present” (Justin D. Edwards, 2008 p.130). In her novel Dreaming in Cuban, Cristina Garcìa presents a Cuban family who has partly emigrated to the U.S. after the Cuban revolution. In this novel, memory is a central theme conveyed through the story’s structure, historical facts opposed to that memory and Celia’s letters.

The plot line of the story is not chronological, thus showing that this book is written as if it came from memory. In fact, the story timeline and the plot line are not the same throughout the book. The plot line starts in 1972 and finishes in 1959 (“Celia’s letter” p.249), but passes by 1935 (“Celia’s letters” p.49) or 1980 during the novel. The chapters are therefore not linear because of “Celia’s letters” coming in-between them. “Celia’s letters” are the written proves of Celia’s memory. However, inside the chapters, the plot is not linear as well. For example, in the first chapter “Ocean Blue” happening in 1972, other dates such as 1952 or 1967 referring to historical events are mentioned. This is due to the memory; in order to remember something about our past, we have to do links with what happened during that time, politically, historically, socially, … Memory is not linear and so is not this novel. “The structure … is non-linear and, as such, it follows the flow of … memory” (Edwards 2008, p.131). In addition, this story is told from different points of view, such as Pilar, Celia or Lourdes. It gives an importance to individual memory, whereas the historical elements accentuate collective memory. Mixing different points of view and historical elements, this novel deals with individual and collective memory.

Historical elements are supposed to be facts and therefore non-arguable, however this novel presents an history made by the ones in power and offers a quest for truth. This novel, as Naomi Nakane’s narrative in Joy Kogawa’s novel does, “interweaves two stories, one of the past and another of the present, mixing experience and recollection, history and memory throughout” (Edwards 2008, p.134). A good example of that is on page 28, when Pilar says: “If it were up to me… in Bombay”. It continues with two rhetorical questions: “Why don’t I know anything about them? Who chooses what we should know or what’s important?” She knows the answer; it is the ones in power. It is supported by rhetorical questions in Edwards’ article as well: “What has been erased from the history of colonization? Whose memories are privileged in historical narratives? And whose perspective or point of view is foregrounded in stories about the past?” (Edwards 2008, p.136). Edwards underlines that memory can be used “to explore the complexities of truth” (Edwards 2008, p.137). It contradicts what Pilar says about her mother, with a metaphor replacing her eyes by a “distorting lens” (176). For her, this “lens” prevent her from seeing “what’s really there” (176), the truth. However, Felicia tells his son that “Imagination, like memory, can transform lies to truths” (88). With this sentence, we can understand that it is not what really happened in the past that matters, but rather how we choose to bring together the memories. The sentence “the war that killed … thousands of other blacks is only a footnote in our history book” (185) shows once again that history is written by the ones in power and the only way to know what really happened is memory.

Memory being linked with history; it can be a source of trauma for those under the power during the colonization. According to Cathy Caruth, a trauma must “be spoken in a language that is always somehow literary: a language that defies, even as it claims, our understanding” (Edwards 2008, p.136). It is interesting in Dreaming in Cuban because of Celia’s letters. In fact, the chapters of that book are intertwined with letters that Celia wrote to Gustavo from 1935 to 1959. Reading them afterwards could make them see as memories. However, on page 47 and 48, we can see that for Celia “Memory cannot be confined” (47). She thinks as well that “capturing images [is] an act of cruelty” and that “it [is] an atrocity to sell cameras at El Encanto department store [and] to imprison emotions on squares of glossy paper” (48). This is a personification of images and emotions. So, for her, we cannot fix memories, however, she can relieve them when she encounters a place that was important to her. For example, on page 43: “She imagines him swinging … and shattering her past”. Moreover, for Celia, memories can live through objects, like her pearl earrings. It is a recurrent object in the novel, but it is only on page 38 that we understand its importance: “Celia has removed her drop pearl earrings only nine times, to clean them. No one ever remembers her without them” (38). In this sentence, the pearl earrings are a marker of Celia’s identity. Through the character of Celia, we have a different approach on memory; it is strong, cannot be fixed but can be relieve through objects and places.

Having a non-linear plot line, and opposing history and memory, Dreaming in Cuban offers a mix between individual and collective memory, and presents as well a truth-seeking. It would be interesting to link memory with orality, since “oral information is ephemeral and relies on memory for its durability” (Edwards 2008, p.41). However, we need to be cautious with this theme because “memory is not always perfect; it can distort or change information” (Edwards 2008, p.41).

Bibliography

  • Edwards, Justin. “Orality.” Postcolonial Literature. Hampshire: PALGRAVE MACMILLAN, 2008. Pp.40-50.
  • Edwards, Justin. “Memory.” Postcolonial Literature. Hampshire: PALGRAVE MACMILLAN, 2008. Pp.129-138.

Web Reference

Dawn of Madness

Leave a reply

Dawn of Madness

Close reading of page 75 and the 1st paragraph of page 76 of Christina Garcia’s Dreaming in Cuban

 

In Christina Garcia’s Dreaming in Cuban, the reader discovers Felicia Del Pino as a crazy character by plunging in her thoughts. Throughout the passage, the third-person narrator does a character focalization on Felicia by setting out the situation she endures. Her hallucinations allow her to observe and listen things very distinctly. Despite her craziness, she demonstrates a clarity in her words regarding what she sees, hears and thinks. The essay will focus on page 75 from “Felicia del Pino doesn’t know” to “It is worse when she closes her eyes” in page 76. It will enable to discover her overdeveloped senses and her tangle of thoughts. Throughout the narrative voice’s expressions, figures of speech and lexical fields, the depiction of Felicia allows the readers to make an image of this woman’s deep imagination. In the description of Felicia in the beginning of the passage, the sudden increase of her sensorial abilities, as well as her thoughts makes the reader feeling small next to Felicia’s competence.

The intensification of sounds within Felicia’s head influences her sensitiveness to noises and damages her mind. Felicia does not know what happened to her, she “doesn’t know what brings on her delusions” (75). Her confusing situation gives to the “delusions” (75) a negative connotation. Theses hallucinations prompted an apparition of sounds that have a harmful effect to Felicia’s health. The multiplication of sounds is driving her crazy as perceived by the narrative voice saying that “they call to her all at once, grasping for parts of her” (75). Here again, the verb “grasp” (75) has also a negative connotation because it has a weigh on her brain. Each time the third-person narrator specifies that she hears another sound, it emphasizes the din and reinforces the mess in her head. When the narrator underlines that Felicia “can hear everything in this world and others, every sneeze and creak and breath in the heavens or the harbour or the gardenia tree down the block” (75) she mentions several noises from different places. The adverb “everything” (75) exaggerates the turn of this declaration and outlines this sentence as a hyperbole. Besides, small noises like a “sneeze” (75), a “creak” (75) and a “breath” (75) join the same lexical field of sounds and expose the extent of her craziness. Seeing that she hears them in “heavens” (75) and in the “harbour” (75) confirms that she is insane. The term “heavens” (75) symbolizes her mental state because she constantly seems to be in her own world.  Felicia gives the sensation that she is feeling oppressed by all the information coming to her mind.

Felicia’s sight is another sense that makes her feel both lucid and crazy. Her perception of the colours creates a poetic turn to the narrator’s declaration. The assonance “even the greens, her favourite shades of greens, flee the trees and assault her with luminosity” (75) seeks to make poetic this form of sentence. On the other hand, within this assonance, the metaphor “flee the trees” (75) displays the kind of images that are built in her head. It is meant to plunge Felicia in a madness by creating a character who sees weird things. Thereby, Felicia’s own representation of the colours has both a poetic and a crazy aspect in the extended metaphor from “the colours, too, escape their objects” (75) to “assault her with luminosity” (75). Another element that makes her an insane character is her objectification of the human being. Indeed, when Felicia looks outside “the people are paintings, outlined in black, their faced crushed and squarish” (75). She dehumanizes people because something is real only if she can touch it that is why the narrator says that “nothing is solid until she touches it” (75). This metaphor is used to say that Felicia only believes what is real, what she can touch.

Felicia’s thoughts are, at the same time, fragmented by her reason and her hallucinations. A metaphor is used to depict what is happening within Felicia’s head by saying that her “mind floods with thoughts” (76). Thereby, it creates an imagery to explain with water how full is her mind. She is in some way drowning herself in her thoughts, they are too numerous, especially because they are from “the past” (76), “the future” (76) and from “other people” (76). Besides, telling that Felicia’s mind is full of thoughts “from the past, from the future, other people’s thoughts” (76) is perceived as a hyperbole because it is exaggerated to say that she reached to know other people thoughts. She does not have any power to do that and in this example, her delusions took over her reason. Moreover, there is a second hyperbole in the same paragraph to describe Felicia’s tangle of thoughts since the narrative voice declares that “every idea seems to her connected to thousands of others” (76). Felicia overestimates her cognitive competence saying that “thousands” (76) of ideas seem connected to hers. The third-person narrator mentions a comparison that symbolizes her mental state, by saying “she jumps from one to another like a nervous circus horse” (76) speaking about her ideas. The adjective “nervous” (76) is used to compare Felicia’s state to a “nervous circus horse” (76). Therefore, this adjective takes a negative connotation which illustrates the damage that causes her hallucinations. However, some thoughts are real and the narrator did not forget to mention that. When it is related that “Things come back as symbol, bits of conversation, a snatch of an old church hymn” (76) it is an allusion to the time when Felicia used to go to church with her sister and her father. Besides, in the next paragraph Felicia mentions these memories, so it shows that there is still a part of lucidity in her thoughts that makes her struggle against her delusions.

Through a variety of figures of speech, this passage presents Felicia, a character who is flooded by her delusions but also lucid in her description of thoughts. The strong presence of technical features in this passage makes fascinating the reading of this book. The narrator’s monologue provides a distinct way to understand and imagine how messy are Felicia’s thoughts. Indeed, the reader discovers someone who is trapped by her two senses, that is the sight, the hearing as well as her thoughts.

The importance of form in the development of a character

Leave a reply

In any literary text, the form is a central element and is usually linked to the content. For Cristina García’s Dreaming in Cuban, it is definitely the case. In this book, form is a tool used to give each character a specific way to express him- or herself, therefore making them unique and more realistic. In the passage chosen for this essay, pages 120-121 (“Luckily, Milagro and I […] it’s okay with me”), Luz Villaverde has her own voice and it helps define who she is, using both figures of speech such as metaphors, allusions and similes, and narrative elements. Here I will analyze these different elements and show how closely form is linked to meaning.

This passage is told from the point of view of Luz Villaverde, a young teenager. She speaks using a lot of imagery (particularly metaphors), which accentuates her youth – whereas an adult, might use more logical, objective terms and be more rational in his description. Luz is a very imaginative girl and her thoughts are filled with images; the visual elements are an important part of the way she thinks.In this passage, Luz uses multiple metaphors, for example to describe herself and her siblings: “[Milagro and I] are a double helix, tight and impervious” (p.120); “[Ivanito] is her gullible rag doll” (p.121). In the first quote, she describes the bond she shares with her twin sister, and the metaphor helps create a vivid image in the reader’s mind. In the second quote, Luz refers to Ivanito’s relationship to Felicia, clearly criticizing her little brother even though he is very young – this emphasizes the fact that she is a child herself and thinks her brother is to blame for obeying their mother, showing a biased narration.The allusion in this passage (“the summer of coconuts”, p.121) shows again that Luz is very young and uses a lot of imagery when expressing herself. It is told casually, as if it were a normal way to refer to a period of their lives. The reader knows what she is referring to as the allusion has been used before in the book, but Luz feels no need to explain it. This is a characteristic of children’s speech; they use their own terms and do not think that they may not be clear to other people.

Another example of Luz’s imagination is the simile on page 121: “[…] she looks right past us as if she could see another pair of girls just behind us.” The young girl gets into her mother’s head and tries to imagine what she sees, showing again her imaginative personality.

Many elements of the narration also contribute to building the Luz’s character. She talks and expresses her feelings very dramatically, meaning that she almost exaggerates the gravity of what she is talking about in order to have more effect on her interlocutor. To create this effect, she uses mostly parallelism; for example, “Pretty words. Meaningless words […]” (p.121); “he never saw what we saw, he never heard what we heard” (p.121); “[…] Milagro and I have a pact to ignore Mamá, to stay as far away from her as possible” (p.121). These constructions are more likely to affect the reader’s emotions about Luz’s story, making it seem more serious than it might have been (however, we cannot make this affirmation with certainty as we are dealing with a biased narrator). Similarly, Luz uses repetitions, such as: “We try to protect him but he doesn’t want to be protected” (p.121), and “They got married and had children while they were still children themselves” (p.121). These repetitions are surprising coming from a young girl; they make her sound very mature for her age (we will come back on this later). In the last example, the emphasis put on the word children is even greater with the word themselves adding on to it.

Two more narrative elements contribute to building Luz’s character for the reader. The first one is the fact that she and Milagro call their mother not-Mamá (p.121). This shows a very strong character for such a young girl – usually when children are mad at one of their parents it lasts only a short moment, and they do not go as far as Luz and Milagro do. It shows that she is a strong, intransigent person, almost unforgiving – although the reader does not blame her for it as Felicia’s inconstant behavior as a mother has already been shown multiple times, and we can imagine the impact this can have on her children. The second element is the way she expresses herself in the last paragraph of the passage. This paragraph shows Luz’s intelligence and her maturity. She says that she realizes how lucky she is to be offered an education:

“We’re studying hard so when we grow up we can get good jobs and go wherever we please. Abuela Celia tells us that before the revolution smart girls like us usually didn’t go to college. They got married and had children while they were still children themselves. I’m glad we don’t have to worry about that.” (p.121)

This shows real maturity and intelligence coming from a young girl, as well as political consciousness – she knows that it is easier for her than it used to be for other girls and she wants to take advantage of it and enjoy this chance.

The last paragraph also shows Luz’s – and, indirectly, Milagro’s – intelligence through her choice of words. In a few occurrences, she uses an entire word instead of using the common abbreviation for it – veterinarian and not vet; rhinoceroses and hippopotamuses and not rhinos and hippos. She also states that her twin sister plans to be a “mycologist specializing in tropical funghi” (p.121), a very unusual dream for a child.

These figures of speech and narrative elements allow the reader to learn a lot more about Luz than he or she might initially think. Luz used to be just a child, a part of Felicia’s life and background, and she is starting to step forward as an important character in the novel. She is a very surprising character because of her imagination and her intelligence. Her personality is getting more complex to the reader’s eyes, making her seem like an important part of the story just like Celia, Lourdes and Pilar have been since the beginning of the novel. Luz’s character is now evolving from secondary to primary and, simultaneously, from flat to round.

Bounded Suffering

Leave a reply

Here is my first essay about a close reading of a passage situated on pages 21 and 22 of Cristina Garcia’s Dreaming in Cuban, it is entitled Bounded Suffering. Here it is:

Bounded Suffering

In 1959, Fidel Castro and the 26th of July Mouvement revolted against the dictator Fulgencio Batista whose government was supported by the US. Born during the Cuban revolution, Cristina Garcìa, a Cuban-born American, wrote Dreaming in Cuban in 1992, telling the story of a Cuban family after the revolution, that still has, nowadays, consequences. This family is composed by Celia and Jorge who have three children: Lourdes, Felicia and Javier. In the second chapter, from the first paragraph on page 21 to the beginning of page 22, Garcìa presents a portray of Jorge and the consequences for Lourdes, his daughter and Rufino, her husband. Through hyperboles and similes, the reader can understand the suffering this three characters feel and the different links between them.

Analyzing the passage from “Lourdes’ agility” to “she wasn’t sure what”, we can admit that Rufino suffers and his agony contrasts with the well-being of Lourdes, his wife. In these two paragraphs, Lourdes is described entirely with figures of speech. The simile “her legs looped and rotated like an acrobat’s” (21) displays her flexibility and her good physical shape. It is emphasized by two hyperboles functioning as well as metaphors comparing her to a machine: “her neck swiveled with extra ball bearings” (21) and “Lourdes’s mouth and tongue were like the mouths and tongues of a dozen experienced women” (21). However, this second paragraph contrasts sharply with the one that follows. Unlike Lourdes’s good physical shape, her husband, Rufino, suffers physically and psychologically. The words “ached” (21), “exertions” (21), “arthritic” (21) and “begged” (21) are all linked to the theme of the suffering. Moreover, the simile “his joints swelled like an arthritic’s” (21) reinforced the pain in Rufino’s body. The meaning of this last quotation contrasts with the meaning of the simile “her legs looped and rotated like an acrobat’s”. However, there is, as well, a parallelism in the structure of these two sentences. Rufino’s suffering contrasts with Lourdes’s well-being, and they are therefore linked.

Lourdes hides herself behind her fake well-being: deep down, she suffers in a way his family cannot imagine. In fact, for her, moving to the United States of America did not only meant leaving Cuba, but as well leaving the loss of a child and a brutal rape behind her. Earlier in the story, we learned that “her appetite for sex and baked goods increased dramatically” (20). Moreover, “the more she took her father…, and for Rufino” (20), and she certainly had to take him a lot to the hospital because he had cancer. These two sentences reveal that her desire for sex and her eating obsessions are linked to her father’s suffering and to the exile in the US. In the first paragraph, we learn through the simile “she submitted to them like a somnambulist to a dream” (21) that she has no “control” (21) of “her cravings” (21). However, she has control of her husband because she has a “bell” (21) to ring him. She always wants him to have sex with her, she “led him by the wrist to their bedroom” (21) and that makes him suffer. Lourdes’s cravings have control of her, and she has control of Rufino. Therefore, Lourdes’s cravings have directly control of Rufino, and Lourdes, despite appearing healthy and having a strong character, is submitted and suffers as well. Her rape, her insatiable sexual desires and her eating disorders are all indicators of her suffering.

Jorge, despite his whole existence taking care of himself, has suffered during his life and especially at the end of it. The last paragraph of page 21 from the beginning to “microbios” (21) helps up identifying what kind of man he is. Jorge was “a fastidious man, impeccable, close-shaven, with razor-sharp” (21) and this description shows that he took good care of himself and perhaps too much. He certainly suffers from mysophobia because he never walks “barefoot” in order to avoid “microbios”. Moreover, for him, “they are the enemy!” (21). However, it is a hyperbole because “microbios” are certainly not more dangerous than the revolution. Even the word, “microbios”, put in italics because borrowed from Spanish means microbes and is probably written in Spanish in order to underline that Jorge used to say it all the time. In the text, this word is followed by a dead metaphor: “the very word lit a fire in his eyes” (21) which emphasizes his hatred towards “microbios”. The hyperbole “culprits of tropical squalor” (22) accentuates it once again, because they are not the only responsible for the filth Jorge and his family live in. However, despite avoiding the “microbios” his entire life, he died from cancer. More importantly, the passage from “Lourdes lifts her dead father’s gnarled hands” (21) to the end of the paragraph shows that cancer made him suffer a lot. The simile “his fingers are […] stiffened haphazardly like branches” (21) presents him not as human anymore, but part of nature, of a dead nature. The hyperbole “his skin is so transparent that even the most delicate veins are visible” (21) makes it seem as if he were a ghost. This is reinforced by the oxymoron: “The vast white bed obscures him” (21). The color white cannot obscure anything or anyone. It demonstrates that he is even more white or “transparent” (21) than the white itself and therefore it emphasizes his sickness and his pain. Consequently, we can see that Jorge, despite being really careful about his health during his life, has suffered a lot and is now dead.

Through a variety of figures of speech, this passage presents us the suffering of three characters of that novel and their relationship. Even if their sufferings are different, we can say that they are bounded because one helps to understand another. It would be interesting to analyze how Lourdes’s suffering evolves once she gets back to Cuba, her roots, reminder of her rape and lost child.

Vincent Konzelmann