The Shrouded Woman (Week 4)

From the beginning, I was absolutely sucked in by this novel. I found the descriptions to be so poetic and mysterious and the words flowed in a way that kept me very engaged. I actually found the way this book was written to be very relaxing and calming. Since the last couple of weeks we’ve been speaking so extensively about how we relate to the main characters or not, I would say that I related to Ana Maria a lot throughout this novel. Recently, my grandmother has been sick, which has made me ponder how people are often venturing in and out of our lives in a way where there is constant movement without fully stopping to appreciate them as people and the effect they’ve had on us. Additionally, this novel resonated with me as the feeling of being stuck while people move around you is very relatable. To me, this was represented initially by her watching her body at the funeral while people moved around her and then with the initial plot of Ricardo leaving for Europe. This also brings me to the other theme that stuck out in this novel and that is gender roles in Latin America. 

As a woman who is in a relationship with a man from Latin America, I identified a lot with Ana Maria’s experience on this. While I don’t know if this pertains to only Latin American culture, I find entwining romance in your life as a woman is often very complicated. For me, there is a desire to be attached, as represented by her relationship with Ricardo, and despite loving the man, he ultimately has the freedom to leave and chase his own success without social judgment. Additionally, there is an expectation on Ana Maria to settle for a man who would give her a life of responsibility and children. However, the argument can also be made that there is also this expectation put on men with the mention of Rodolfo being "coerced" (204) into marrying Anita, despite the fact that he does not love her. It is interesting how Ana Maria feels sadness for Anita in this scenario although she is arguably in the same position with Antonio. It is also striking how Ana Maria mentions how "she was not strong enough to cast [Fernando] out" (206). I think this speaks a lot to how women were (and sometimes still are) not given the luxury of choosing love over practicality in relationships and are not given control over such major things in our lives. We often have to negotiate and compromise on these things instead of choosing what makes us truly happy. 

Question for the class: How do you think gender roles and expectations are presented in this novel? Do you think Ricardo affected Ana Maria's view on love throughout her life and if so, how? 

Mad Toy (Week 3)

While it had its moments, I had a difficult time getting drawn into Mad Toy. However, while I didn't enjoy the book last week because of the writing, I really enjoyed Arlt's writing style this week. My main issue with the book was that I just couldn't sympathize or enjoy the main character, Silvio. However, my lack of enjoyment for the book as a whole due to the main character did get me thinking about what makes a main character likeable, whether or not they need to be likeable to enjoy a book, and what the role of a main character is in a novel in general. 

From the beginning, I didn't really know what to expect from Silvio. His life in poverty made me want to sympathize with him, however, his perspective and opinions made it hard for me to do so. Silvio rode an interesting line for me where he didn't go into an extreme villainous role which would have made him interesting, but he also didn't really challenge his environment positively in a way that was very engaging to me as the reader. Particularly, I had difficulty concerning his laziness and just general disrespect/annoyance to those around him. For example, at the beginning of chapter 2, he is painted as a very lazy person who doesn't want to seek out work to help his mother. This to me is a very trivial/boring character arch that gave me difficulty sympathizing with Silvio's situation. While he did change for the better as the novel went on, he still just didn't read to me as very likeable. At the beginning of the novel when he said that "joy widens our souls when we break the law and enter smiling into sin" (40), I was getting ready for a dark, psychologically challenging main character, but as the novel went on I found myself disappointed in how he developed. 

By the time I got to chapter 3, my opinion of Silvio changed a bit for the better as he placed more importance on his intelligence and seemed to grow more as a person, I became a little more invested. However, considering this was nearly at the end of the novel, it brings me to question the role that main characters play in literature either in enhancing the novel or inhibiting it. Do main characters need to be super engaging and/or likeable in order for the novel to be good? I don't necessarily think so, but for me to enjoy the novel I need to at least be made to care about what they are doing. I didn't really feel much of a connection to Silvio, hence I had a hard time getting into this book. 

Question to the class: What did you think of Silvio as the main character? Do you think you would change your perspective about him if he didn't come from a background of poverty?

Also...does anyone know where the name Mad Toy comes from in this book? Hahaha

Combray (Week 2)

 I must say, from the beginning, I didn't particularly enjoy reading this novel. Proust's run-on sentences with extreme descriptions left me in a bit of a dreary state with my attention drifting in and out of the words. However, considering how the first part was primarily centred around a dreamlike state, I think from an artistic standpoint this can be quite effective. It just wasn't easy to digest and jump in for me from the beginning. Tying in with the theme of modernism as mentioned in the lecture, I found the relationship between my "real" and the representation within the book to be blurred because of the difficulty grasping the run-on, descriptive sentences. As per the lecture, when I think about what I look for in a novel, I look for a novel that grabs my attention from the beginning while also having some artistic merit. While this book didn't grab my attention, I can admire the artistic, dreamlike, effect produced by the writing style. I'm not going to lie, the first part was a bit of a struggle to get through. However, the second part was more enjoyable. 

One thing that stuck out to me in this novel was the use of time. Perhaps this was what made it so confusing, but the references back to the past in the dreamlike state during the first part created the impression of a lack of fixed temporal space, which was what ultimately made it difficult to follow. Not only were we at a fixed point in time with Marcel remembering/dreaming about his childhood, but within those memories was an additional time jump in describing the pasts of those in his dreams/memories, his Aunt for example. Because of this, it made it hard for me to filter what was necessary information that would eventually be integral to the plot and what was just added for artistic effect. 

Moving onto the second part of the novel, I found it interesting how time changed to be described and represented through the architecture. For example, the descriptions of tapestries and glass built to entertain specific kings grounded the novel in a more present sense of time, while also referencing a past, but in a more "real" way. Shifting the descriptions from memories to architecture grounds the novel in a way that represents reality in a much easier format, instead of the dreamlike state of the first section. 

Questions/thoughts for the class: How do you think the use of time in this novel is used as a tool towards a greater message? Do you like when authors spend a lot of time in the past? How do you think Proust uses the memories of the first section to influence the reality of the second section? Do you think the placement of time is an integral part of Combray?

Introductions! (Week 1)

Hello everyone! My name is Julia and I am a fourth year dual degree student majoring in sociology and business with a minor in Latin American studies. I was born and raised in Canada, but I love reading and studying about other countries. I'm looking forward to learning about society from a literary perspective as throughout my degree, I haven't really had many opportunities to examine how fiction can speak to the truth of current and historical events. I took SPAN 312 with Jon last year and I loved how this course felt like a fun weekly book club where I got to learn so much from other students and experience such a wide range of literature. Excited to discuss with you all througout this semester!

As for the lecture, I must admit, I've never really thought much about Romance Studies and what it entails. I find the point about where it fits within university coursework to be interesting as so many aspects of what I would consider to be part of Romance Studies would also be part of other degrees. While I don't have the answer to where it sits within a faculty, the generality of it makes me excited for this class as it allows for multiple different perspectives to inform different opinions. As a sociology major, maybe I would have a different perspective as someone who is in psychology or history. The generality of Romance Studies sounds like it creates the potential for creativity and discussion. I believe this also fits well with the idea of commonality between works of literature as they can be constructed in any way that is inspiring to you.  

What surprised me about the lecture was the connection to linguistic studies. I must admit, in my limited familiarity with Romance Studies I didn't really think about it from a linguistic perspective. Instead, I thought about it more from a cultural one. Language obviously impacts culture, however I am excited to see how books written in different languages amongst different cultures share commonalities and fit within the field of Romance Studies. However, the point about what is lost in translation will also be interesting to unpack. While Romance Studies may not have a specific geographic location (another wrong assumption I had about this field of study) as someone who is Portuguese and Italian, I'm still excited to read and learn more about my own culture through this course. 

Excited to read with you all! Also, as a side note, Inca Kola is one of my favourite drinks I have a bottle in my fridge at all times :D 

My question to you this week: What were your ideas of Romance Studies before starting this course? What did you think it studied?