So I’m going to be honest – this blog entry is four days late and I have yet to finish the book. But, I AM determined to finish it.
Disclaimer: This blog will be all over the place. Like the book.
As I was reading, I was continually searching for some topic to discuss on my blog. I would find something but then as I read on, forget about it. In addition to what we discussed in class today regarding the correlation between length and difficulty of a book, I myself find it not so much a matter of length, but instead the extent of small details. There are so many smaller stories within the big story of this book, such as the stone village, the pen obssession, etc., that I think it makes the novel hard to read. I say this because I found One Hundred Years of Solitude difficult to read as well, and it was just 18 pages less than this book; but it was the large number of characters and their personal events and stories that I think made it hard to follow. And I think that the power in actually within the reader and the novel is up to the reader’s interpretation because I think we all remember specific parts of the book more clearly. While I will discussing the book witih Carla, she talked about a cat story, and I had absolutely no recollection of it, but it was something that she remembered very well.
I’m also still EXTREMELY confused about the relationship between the compiler and Roa Bastos. Perhaps this is addressed at the end of the book which I haven’t got to yet, but after reading the “Final Compiler’s Note” today in class, my head was spinning. I can’t tell throughout the entire book, whether it is the compiler or the author writing. And perhaps Roa Bastos is the writer and is using the title of the compiler to create anonymity and power in writing. But essentially, if the book is simply a compilation as is said in the “Final Compiler’s Note”, then what did Roa Bastos write?
Unlike most novels in which the mystery of problem is solved as the story progresses, thus far, I feel even more confused than I was at the beginning. They don’t seem to have come much closer to determining the writer of the note; and not only that, they have added a lot more mysteries. The stone village! I want to know what happened there! But from the looks of it, I don’t think that will be talked about anymore. I predict I will be still searching for answers at the end of the book. Page 199, why did Patiño have The Supreme’s pen, and how did Loco-Solo “inherit” it? Sounds fishy.
Oh, page 256. The compiler’s note about El Supremo’s prediction in the Appendix – why does he have to add that? Why couldn’t he just let it be a surprise? Why in the middle and not at the bottom of the page like usual? I was so tempted to skip the rest of the book and flip straight to the Appendix. It’s like the compiler is intentionally trying to distract and divert the reader’s attention.
But, I am going to end this on a positive note. I really do see the intricacies of the book and how complex it can be. I still am more intrigued by the way in which the book is written instead of by the content, but I’m not sure if I would enjoy the content more if I knew more about the historical stories and “facts” that The Supreme writes about. I would like to understand more about the way the book is written and a bit about the orange tree, because I found that was one thing that was mentioned quite frequently. It's likee a bittersweet, love-hate relationship. So long and difficult, but at the same time, it draws you in.
So I guess I did have a lot to say about this novel. And maybe one day when I want to challenge my literary sense I will even re-read it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
totally! I definitely felt constantly distracted. I couldn't focus on any one thing! That's why I think this book would need multiple reads before it would fully make sense.
"I can’t tell throughout the entire book, whether it is the compiler or the author writing."
Heh. Well, the book plays on this confusion. Of course, the compiler is Roa Bastos in some senses, but he is also another character... just as what the Supreme writes is "actually" written also by the author, Roa Bastos. It's just that normally we try to separate out characters from authors.
Roa Bastos has complicated things by adding another figure, the compiler, who is as it were "between" the author and the character. Though the secretary Patiño is also in some sense "between" the compiler and the Supreme. Remember the little diagram I put up on the board? Supreme -> Patiño -> compiler -> reader. And as (I think) Sebastian pointed out, it's hard to know where to put the author, Roa Bastos. He's both everywhere and nowhere. And I think that's part of the point.
NB it's the compiler who has the Supreme's pen in the important episode of pp. 197-199.
I definitely understand where you're coming from with the confusion of who is writing. Did The Supreme write a circular? Did the compiler change it? Did he simply imagine it? Did he exist? I'm also heartened to read that im not the only person to have not quite finished the book. Well, in a sense... IT isn't finished but I'M finished.
yea i agree, because of all of the small stories, i seem to concentrate too much on them because i think the author must be trying to tell me something important in those stories, and then i get distracted making the book harder to read.
I think Sarmiento's claim of his sources throughout the book, Facundo, is more convincing than the compiler's claim at the end of the book. However, I like how both of them acknowledge that there could be the possibility of wrong info.
In any case, it's hard for one to not agree with the power of writing and interpretation after reading "i, the Supreme". i the Supreme is more philosophical and creative while Facundo is more like a documentary.
Post a Comment