When you need to hit the word count of an essay, but its kind of genius - Death with Interruptions (Week 11)

I did not expect to love this novel as much as I did. I was so hooked from the beginning. Given that I criticized Piglia heavily last week on how dense the text was with such a lack of dialogue I thought I would be saying the same for Saramago, but this density worked for me! My first impression of this novel was a little like when you need to hit the word count of an essay and tend to ramble on a bit, but after I got into the structure of the writing, I got so lost in it. It was almost meditative. It was also really cool to read a Portuguese novel! I'm actually Portuguese and I've never been able to read a book from Portugal before, so I felt a nice connection with the work from the beginning in that sense.

What I loved about this book is that it looks at death from macro and micro perspectives. So many stories about death are very singular and this story bended the rules with that. Another thing that I enjoyed about this novel was how it looked at death (or lack thereof) as a shift in power. It is interesting how power was given and at the same time taken away from the government once nobody was able to die. Also interesting how the government (aka maphia) still found a way to almost control death itself by removing those who became old. Even when power and control were taken away from the organization and natural flow of society in the way that it was, the government still found a way to instill control in how society "needed" to be conducted. 

The removal of the older population from the country was also a fascinating sociological addition to the novel. Now in this globalized society, those in the first world have the freedom of migration and mobility, while for others outside of privileged communities, their position is often dictated by the state. I thought this read as a great metaphor for how governments pick and choose their citizens based on their desired criteria. It also really made a statement about who is viewed as more valued by society. I thought in a society where death was taken away, the elderly and sick would be given more power, but they were still considered unwanted in the community, despite them now being on the same level as everyone else. Naming the government the maPHia was also so cheeky and genius I loved it.  

Question for the class: why do you think Saramago chose to focus so much on the government when examining the topic of death? There was mention of religion, but the government took the main focus. Why do you think that is? 

The Lover (Week 9)

I'm at a bit of a loss on what to write about this week. I didn't particularly enjoy this novel very much, if I'm being honest it's probably one of my least favourite reads of the term so far. I found it a bit confusing, I didn't really get the point behind jumping from first to third person, and the overall theme of it bothered me a little. I think some things can have nuance in them, but underage child sexual exploitation should always be read as the exploitation that it is. In the lecture, there was a bit of back and forth about how her lover was almost the vulnerable, childlike one where it was to the point of who was using who, but at the end of the day, I still think she is a child and he is an adult. In addition, the social and racial components within the novel made it even more uncomfortable for me. Don't get me wrong, I think it's important to write about issues of exploitation as these things do actually happen, however, I think they should be written about from the perspective that it is wrong. Around halfway through the book when "the lover" and her family meet I also had issues as she doesn't speak a word to him in her family's presence, and then he essentially ignores her. While this part is written in the first person, I didn't see the point in including her family's complacency in this love affair in the presence of her lover. Nevertheless, it is interesting how her mother is silent when in the presence of her lover, but yells, hits, and shames her over it in the privacy of their home.

I think this just speaks to another level of exploitation shown through poverty and class. What Jon mentioned in the lecture about how this book has changed over time with the original character of the lover being white is also a fascinating point expanding on this. It made me think about the factor that race plays in this dynamic of whether or not the exploitation was perceived as wrong (again, I still think it is, but for the sake of this class, I'll entertain the argument). At the end of the day, race does definitely play a factor, but this novel was more nuanced as ultimately the lover was still in a financial position of power and she was not, not to mention the role that age plays in this as well. In the lecture, Jon says that both have power over each other, but again I'd have to disagree. At the end of the day, she is still a lot younger and poorer than he is. She was in a more vulnerable position and he abused that. 

Question for the class: How would your opinion of this novel have changed if her lover had remained white as in a former version of the text? Do you think if her lover was a different race the power dynamic would have come across differently?