Bessie's page

Last post....

2008-04-12T01:11:00.000-07:00

I can't believe this term's over! I really liked this course, except the part where I had to write a blog entry every week, had to read so fast that I did not have the chance to really enjoy the books and not to mention the wikipedia project. The reason why I liked this course mainly is because I am a bookworm! I love reading all different kinds of books, from Harry Potter to autobiographies. Before taking this course, I have never read anything that fits in the dictator novel genre. I am not a big fan of war, military, dictatorship that kind of stuff. However, I found the dictator novels that were introduced in this class quite interesting, especially The President. Although the novel itself is entirely fictional, it was said to be based on the period of time when Guatemala was ruled by a dictator. From this novel, I could easily picture that people at that time must have constantly lived in fear and suppressed by the government. They were forced to betray people who were close to them and were often not allowed to express their opinions about the government truthfully. For instance, in The President, Camila's uncle and aunt chose to ignore their niece in order to save their own lives since Camila's father was accused of committing murder. In The Feast of The Goat, Urania's father chose to sacrifice her daughter's virginity to remain close to the dictator.
Besides having an idea of how it was like under a dictator's rule, I also learned more about Latin American history through reading these books, especially from Facundo. Facundo is the only non-fiction that we read and the content of the book is mainly based on facts. The author devoted the first few chapters of the book to introduce history and geography of Argentina and explained the reason why Argentina came under a dictator's rule. The Feast of The Goat also mentioned about history of Dominican Republic when Urania (a fictional character from modern times) went back to Dominican Republic to visit her father and had flashbacks of the past.

The Feast of The Goat (2)

2008-03-31T23:29:00.000-07:00

As mentioned in our last lecture, this novel is a thriller. I can't agree with that more. I noticed that the chapters are always concluded with an ending and this leaves traces as to what is going to happen after. This made me want to read faster so I would get to know what is going to happen in the story next. I think this is the best method of writing to grasp the readers' attention and to arouse their interests towards the story. Besides, there are 3 storylines which made the novel even more interesting to read.
Out of the 3 storylines, Urania's story fascinates me the most. Urania's story took place in recent times but with lots of recalls from the time when Trujillo was the dictator of Dominican Republic and Santo Domingo was Ciudad Trujillo. Her recalls provided me with the historical information during Trujillo's reign of tyranny and I was also eager to find out why she left her father alone and why she came back to this country which haunted her throughout her life. In my opinion, she was always trying to suppress her emotions and feelings. She was telling Senor Cabral that during all those years she spent in the states, she never took a vacation and all she ever did on the weekends was to read about Dominican history. She would get so tired at the end of the day and so she would fall asleep right away. I think this is a way for her to avoid thinking about her days in Dominican Republic.
One thing that strikes me is the characters of Trujillo and his son Ramfis. In Urania's storyline, they both abuse their power to do things that they are not supposed to do. For example, Trujillo used his power to sleep with women that he wanted to sleep with, even wives of his generals. His son Ramfis committed rapes of young women and used financial aid from other country to purchase luxurious gifts to the women that he liked. At the same time, Trujillo would cover up this story and pretended nothing happened. Similar to Facundo and The President, this novel has shown the negative sides of dictators.

The Feast of Goat (1)

2008-03-24T21:34:00.000-07:00

Switching from reading "The General and His Labyrinth" to "The Feast of Goat", the first thing that I noticed was the font size is smaller. It did seem a bit intimidating at first, but I found the story as I continued reading. Similar to the previous novels that we read, this book is lack of an introduction which I always believe is the best source of the background information to the story. But I guess the little passage on the back cover of the book gave me a brief yet clear plot summary to begin with.
Similar to Asturia's "The President", this novel is clearly divided into chapters and I think it helps to make the novel appear more organized. Also, the writing style of Asturia and Llosa are similar as they are both written in third person narrative and it is very descriptive about the ways the characters died and the tortures that they received. I think the explicit descriptions could give the readers a better understanding of the tyranny of the Goat.
Unlike other novels that we looked at, this novel contains three plots: one is about Urania Cabral, the second one is about the dictator whom other people called him "The Goat", and the third one is about the assassination of the Goat. The three plots happen in the same place - Santo Domingo (or Ciudad Trujillo which was the name of the capital city of Dominican Republic in 1961) but at different times. The first plot took place in the present day (in Santo Domingo) but with lots of Urania's flashbacks of the past (in Ciudad Trujillo). The second and third plots occurred in 1961 when The Goat was still the dictator. I think this is a very unique and intriguing writing style of a novel because it allows the readers to look at the Goat's dictatorship in three different perspectives. However, since there are three different plots in this novel, sometimes the names of the characters confuse me.

The General in his labyrinth (2)

2008-03-18T11:16:00.000-07:00

A very late post and at last I finished reading this very good novel. I think Garcia Marquez truly is a great novelist. I like the plot of this novel very much and I think it is quite unusual to look at a once powerful figure in history in the weakest state of his life. At the end of this novel, General Simon Bolivar finally succumbed to his illness which he had endured for so long and he did not set off to Europe due to his illness despite having travelled all the way from Santa Fe de Bogota to the north to Cartagena with his entourage. I felt very sad after I read this ending since he is depicted as weak and sick at the very beginning of the novel. Also, he is constantly thinking about the past, about the days when he was healthy and had high respect from his people. His nostalgia made me unhappy when I was reading the novel because it implies that the General knew he is going to die soon.
I was a little confused and angry as well. Simon Bolivar made such huge contributions to many South American countries such as Colombia (New Granada), Venezuela, and Bolivia at that time by liberating them from Spanish rule. He also says "because everything I've done has been for the sole purpose of making this continent into a single, independent country, and as far as that's concerned I've never contradicted myself or had a single doubt."(203) His intentions for the countries were good but how come his people come to hate him when he decided to resign and set off to Europe? I felt sorry for the General as it seemed like he was never rewarded for his kindness towards people. Besides not being loved by his people, he was betrayed by Santander, a friend that he trusted. Also, Mosquera, who became president after Bolivar resigned, had been a friend of Bolivar but he did not pay him a visit when he was ill. The General "recalled everything he had done for Mosquera, how much he had helped him become who he was..."(218)

The General in His Labyrinth (1)

2008-03-15T22:58:00.000-07:00

Before started reading this novel, I've always wanted to read Gabriel Garcia Marquez's books. Why? Because he is such a well-known writer of Latin American literature and he is also a nobel prize winner. After reading the first half of this novel, I'm getting more and more fascinated by the story and the General - Simon Bolivar. Garcia Marquez's writing style makes this story flow and this makes the story very easy to read.
This novel is written in third person narrative and it is about the Colombia General Simon Bolivar who is sick and is leaving Santa Fe de Bogota in Colombia for Europe. I think Bolivar is portrayed very differently from the dictators in the previous novels that we read. He is not portrayed as powerful like Dr. Francia in "I, the Supreme" or the president in "The President". Rather he is depicted as weak and unhealthy since he is ill and he's constantly having a high fever. He even has troubles walking on his trip to Europe: "...and he climbed, leaning on Captain Ibarra's arm, staggering at each step and struggling to hold himself upright"(104). Also, his departure implies a loss of power because he establishes his power in South America.
Furthermore, unlike other dictators that we looked at, Simon Bolivar seems to be a character that is not as distant and cold. He allows his servant to see him naked when he is most vulnerable and he seems to be a "womanizer" to me. He has a lot of lovers and affairs in the past and he is "madly in love" with Manuela Saenz. He seems to have more feelings than the other dictators and more like a normal person.
The one thing that I don't like about this novel is I always found it confusing to keep track of the places Simon Bolivar has been in the past. He was the person who helped to gain independence in South American countries such as Colombia, Venezuela, and Ecuador from the Spanish. He liberated "eighteen provinces from Spanish domination. He had created the Republic of Colombia out of the former territories of the Viceregency of New Granada, the Captaincy General of Venezuela"(49). He was a once president of Quito, Ecuador. I hope I got this right...

I, The Supreme Part 2

2008-03-12T17:36:00.000-07:00

"I, the Supreme" is such a long novel and I find it quite intimidating. After reading it and having attended all the classes, I am still very confused about the Supreme. He is a very complex character and I don't understand what is going on in the story most of the time.
As I continue reading this novel, the plot appears to be clearer to me now. The Supreme, Dr. Francia, is dying and is trying to write everything down about himself and his dictatorship before he dies. In the end Francia did not get to finish what he wanted to write down and the "Compiler" continued Francia's story. This novel mainly consists of The Supreme and his secretary Patino's conversations where the Supreme dictated to Patino. The novel also features Francia's "private notebook" and the "Perpetual Circular". The private notebook is handwritten by the Supreme himself and sometimes includes different sets of texts that elaborated on things that the Supreme wrote. For example, on page 114, the separated text gives the story about Juan Rengger and Marcelino Longchamp when the Supreme mentioned them in his private notebook. These texts appear in perpetual circular as well and sometimes they contradict what Francia wrote.
In class, we discussed "The Final Compiler's Note" on page435 and I think this section is very interesting. The Compiler explains to the readers how this novel is compiled: "The compilation has been culled-it would be more honest to say coaxed-from some twenty thousand dossiers, published and unpublished; from an equal number of other volumes, pamphlets, periodicals, correspondences..." (435). Although "I, the Supreme" is a novel, a fiction, the Compiler attempts to make the readers view this book more of a documentary of Francia's dictatorship.

I, The Supreme Part 1

2008-02-29T22:44:00.000-08:00

After having read the beginning of this novel, it does not seem to have a very clear plot to me. I am very confused and I find it really difficult to get through. I believe it would be much more interesting to read if I know more about the history of Paraguayan history and background information of the characters in this book. It is especially hard to get used to the author' complex writing styles. The conversations between the Supreme and Patiño are not presented clearly and they are just crammed together in a paragraph. It was hard to distinguish whether the Supreme or Patiño was talking. Moreover, a separate text could always be found at the bottom of the pages and the text usually provides more information on things that needed to be elaborated on in the original text.
Unlike Asturia's "The President", the main character of this novel is the dictator himself and this novel is written in first person narration. Since the main character is the Supreme himself, this book seems to be more focused on his personal thoughts and actions. In "The President", the focus was not on the dictator. Moreover, in comparison to "Facundo", Roa Bastos did not provide a detailed and descriptive background information on "I The Supreme".

The most interesting thing that I found in this novel is the conversations between the Supreme and Patiño. I found them quite amusing sometimes and comparing to other dictators that we read about, the Supreme seems to be more humorous. I also think the Supreme is crazy: "I fished about for the button in my pockets; all I found was an old clipped silver coin worth half a real" (52). The Supreme had an encounter with La Andaluza and he placed her button in his pocket during the encounter. However, he could not find the button when he looked for it again. This implies that the encounter may have been his own hallucination.

"The President" (con't)

2008-02-04T22:32:00.000-08:00

It was truly a pleasure to read this nobel prize winning novel. I like how the author uses all these figurative language in the book and I think Asturias’ extensive uses of figurative language makes “The President” very interesting. The figurative language such as similes, metaphors, and personification helps create very vivid images. With these vivid images in mind, I could easily picture the images of the city that Asturias creates and the feelings/thoughts of different characters. The feelings and thoughts of the characters especially since this book is written in third person narration, it does not really help the readers to better understand the feelings and thoughts. However, I found out that with the aid of the figurative language, it in fact enables me to understand more of the feelings and thoughts. I recall in chapter XXI and chapter XXVI, Asturias uses a lot of figurative language to describe the dreams that Angel Face had. I think these chapters are good examples of how Asturias managed to use figure of speech to allow the readers to have a better understanding of feelings and thoughts of the characters. I believe the reason of the heavily uses of figurative language in these chapters is because Asturias wants to create the image of Angel Face having a dream and thus the images seem to be “all over the place” but they are in fact connected. Also, the reason why images do not seem to be connected at first glance is because this represents the confused state of mind of Angel Face.

Some of my classmates mentioned that the title of the book is “The President” but the main character is more like Angel Face, so why the author would name his book ‘The President I found this point quite interesting as well. In my opinion, one of the reasons why Asturias chose this as a title is because the lives of the characters revolve around the President. President has the power to control them and the president “forms” the characters while Angel Face does not.

One thing that I found most intriguing is in chapter XXIX where a hearing was held for the charges pressed upon Carvajal. We all know the president is the dictator of the country, why is there a hearing given to a convicted criminal under his rule?

"The President" by Miguel Angel Asturias...

2008-01-28T16:03:00.000-08:00

As I flipped through the first few pages of "The President", I was surprised to find that there is no Introduction nor a page in which the authors/translators would write down whom this book is dedicated to where I would usually find in books nor a table of content which could be found in "Facundo". So the major difference of this novel from "Facundo" is, of course, that there is no introductory paragraphs would provide readers background information to this novel. Also, unlike "Facundo", I think "The President" could be classified into a specific genre - a dictator novel. This could be illustrated by the first half of the book. The settings of the book is at a place where it is governed by a person named The President of the Republic and people did not have the freedom to do what they think is right under his rule. "Whether you're guilty or innocent is irrelevant, General; what matters is whether you're in favour or not with the President..."(63) This implies The President's dictatorship as only The President himself could determine who is guilty or who is innocent because it does not matter what the truth is.
Without an introduction, this novel first gave me the impression that the author did not organize the contents in the book before getting it published. Also, although unlike "Facundo", Asturias did not provide a background information to this story but the story is not hard to understand and follow at all. It is divided into different Parts and it is further subdivided into different chapters. One of the reasons why I think this book is easy to follow is because each chapter is quite short and I could keep track of what I read as I keep reading since each chapter has its own title and I think the titles are the themes to the chapters. The second reason is I think that the book has caught my attention
I like this novel in general but I was always confused trying to remember each character's name. There are usually two names associated with the same person. For instance, the idiot could be referred to Zany, the Swine could be referred to the Doctor Barreño, and the favourite is another name referring to Angel Face. ( I hope I did not mix them up..)

Facundo Part II

2008-01-21T23:44:00.000-08:00

I found the second part of Facundo more interesting and more easy to get through comparing to the first half since the author no longer wrote about the history or geography of Argentina and Latin America as much. After the reading, I still felt a bit confused about some of the things in the book. Although the names of the places and of the characters Sarmiento mentioned appeared quite frequently in the book, I still found it quite difficult to get familiar with them. I think that is mainly because I do not have a good background knowledge of the histories of neither Latin America nor Europe. I believe it would be very helpful to understand Facundo if I knew more about them... I think Facundo is in fact a very interesting book. I consider reading as one of my favourite pastimes. I like reading all sorts of books such as science fictions,autobiographical novels,romance novels,etc... But never have I read a book like Facundo which I cannot really categorize it into a specific book genre. It is a historical and autobiographical novel while it sends messages to people telling people how ugly dictatorship is at the same time . Moreover, the author's style of writing changed as the topics that he wrote about changed. For instance, when he talked about the history of Argentina, he used a very descriptive style of writing. However, when he wrote about the childhood life of Facundo, he used more like a story-telling kind of tone.

What strikes me the most while I was reading the second half of this novel is the ways how Facundo, a dictator, treated other people. He never treated others with respect and liked to humiliate others when he was in the mood. People, especially civilized ones like the priests, were being treated like prisoners under his tyranny. Facundo used them to entertain himself and they all had to follow his wishes. This was shown in one of the chapters in which Sarmiento mentioned Facundo loved gambling. Whenever he gambled, other people who gambled with him at the same time could not take money from him even if he lost. Furthermore, they had to act extra carefully as he could give lashes or even kill someone if he thought they acted inappropriately. In my opinion, Facundo was portrayed as a bully but a bully who was powerful (whether politically or physically) and very violent.

Facundo Part I

2008-01-14T22:05:00.000-08:00

When I was reading the introduction of Facundo, I was very confused as I am not very familiar with neither Argentinian history nor its culture...but as I kept reading till the end of first half of this novel, I became less confused and more interested in this book. According to the translator of the book Kathleen Ross, Facundo: Civilization and Barbarism is "today recognized as one of the foundational works of Spanish American literary history..." Before started reading this book, I did not know much about Latin American history. I learned more about it after I read the first half of this "foundation work" as it is mostly focused on introducing the history and geography of Argentina in the eighteenth century to the readers. Also, I think the author wrote in a very descriptive way and talked about the geographical condition of Argentina in great details. I find this descriptive style of writing very helpful as I could easily visualize how Argentina used to be like.

Also, I find it very interesting that instead of writing about how he was being treated under the barbarism in Argentina before he was exiled to Chile, he dedicated most of the first half of his book talking about how barbarism developed in Argentina and the reason why there was lack of civilization. I think it is mostly because he wanted his readers to understand the causes of the barbarism.

Moreover, I think Sarmiento’s uses of French quotations in his book are very fascinating. As we discussed in class, Sarmiento used French because France was associated with liberty and enlightenment. Liberty and enlightenment were what Sarmiento was most appreciated but could not have when he was in Argentina. Although he was not an expert in French as he misquoted the phrase “On ne tue pas de coups de fusil aux idees” (30), this usage of French expressed that he took side with civilization.

First post (test post)

2008-01-11T00:01:00.001-08:00

Hello everyone! I signed up this blog for my span312 class and so I don't really know how to use this blog. Hopefully I will get familiar with it soon!