Are we supposed to talk about Cisneros' writing style?
I think that her use of Spanglish is very interesting...
My favourite part about the way she writes is her subtle way of hinting that a something is meant to be in Spanish, although it is written in English. For example, she directly translates Spanish phrases into English: "I gave light" (93), "My sky, my life, my eyes" (113)...expressions that are not the same in English. But then she also uses some funny Chicano Spanish words, for example "Wachelos" (123). Chicano Spanish has always intrigued me, both English and Spanish at the same time, but also neither.
My favourite stories in this second half of the book were Eyes of Zapata and Bien Pretty. Bien Pretty was written in such a way that pointed out the differences between the narrator, as an educated Chicana (supposedly born in the U.S.) woman and Flavio, a Mexican man living in the U.S. The narrator points out her dual identity, to bring it back to Gloria, her state of nepantla...
she says: "I wanted to be Mexican at that moment, but it was true. I was not Mexican" (152). It was also interesting when she pointed out that she had never "made love in Spanish before...not with anyone whose first language was Spanish" (153). This shows that she has lived a very hybridized Mexican-American life, not truly belonging to one culture or the other, one language or the other.
Their cultural differences are pointed out over dinner, she is talking about "Afro-Brazilian dance as a means of spiritual healing" (150) whereas he is talking about going to the gym every Thursday "with aims to build himself a body better than Mil Mascara's" (150). She is a University-educated Chicana from San Francisco...he is an exterminator from San Antonio...Cisneros is not subtle when she points out their cultural, social and class differences...while the narrator is interested in discussing culture, international cuisine and other more "intellectual" topics his choice of topics are far more superficial...what happens at work, his daily activities, his own superficial goal to have a better body than a lucha libre wrestler.
I totally loved this story.
I also totally loved Eyes of Zapata. Cisneros' ability to create this love story/affair of Emiliano Zapata and Ines was fantastic. I don't have much time to write about this one, but the one thing that I wanted to throw out there was this overall feeling that I got from Cisneros' writing about the Mexican revolution (I time when patriotism and loyalty were important things to define) to me the relationship between Ines and Zapata almost symbolizes Cisneros' relationship with Mexico and Mexican culture. A lifelong love affair, that is both strong and weak at the same time...but Ines says that despite how many other women Zapata is with he always comes back to her...to me this symbolized Cisneros' returns to Mexico throughout her life, never forgetting her love, her life of Mexico, proving her loyalty to Mexico despite her dual identity as a Mexican-American and the life she creates in the United States. Okay that's it for now...hasta manana.
domingo, 26 de octubre de 2008
sábado, 18 de octubre de 2008
las tres madres de mexico
I love this book, I knew that I would love it, I've been excited to read it for a while now.
My favourite stories so far have been "My Lucy Friend who Smells Like Corn" and "Mericans".
I especially liked the character of the awful grandmother in "Mericans".
I found this story to say a lot about chicanos born in the United States to Mexican parents, growing up speaking spanglish, without a firm grasp on Spanish i.e "the awfulgrandmother says it all in Spanish, which I understand when I'm paying attention" (19), it was also funny when the woman outside the church was surprised to learn that the children spoke English. To me this represents the unique border identity of chicanos and their ability to be both Mexican and American at the same time.
Cisneros writes about "las tres madres de mexico" (a concept that is common in writing by Chicana women and that Gloria often wrote about)...Guadalupe, the virgin mother whhas not abandoned her people, la Malinche/Malintzin, the raped mother and mother of mestizaje, and la Llorona, la madre que grita y llora para sus hijos perdidos.
My favourite was this line: "La Virgen de Guadalupe on the main altar because she's a big miracle, the crooked crucifix on a side altar because that's a little miracle" (18), this really shows how much la virgen is revered in Mexico and how Jesus is important to the religion of the country but his presence is not as widespread and is not as characteristic of mexican culture.
La virgen de guadalupe es la "reina de mexico" y era un milagro mexicano, pero jesucristo es importante para todos los cristianos, la virgen es para los mexicanos.
Those who know me know that I am fascinated by the virgen de guadalupe and the symbolism and culture surrounding her veneration. So, the fact that cisneros refers to la virgen in her writing just makes me love her a little bit more.
She also talks about la Llorona in "Woman Hollering Creek"..."Perhaps la Llorona is the one they named the creek after, she thinks, remembering all the stories she learned as a child" (51). La Llorona, the wailing woman, is a very important figure in this story and in mexican folklore.
Lastly, Cisneros creates an image of la Malinche/Malintzin in the stoy "Never Marry a Mexican" in which the narrator takes on the role of la malinche, with Drew as Cortez.
La Malinche was given the nickname "la Chingada", because as gloria says, she was the raped mother of mexico, an indigenous woman who gave birth to the first mestizo.
When I read this: "I was there first, always. I've always been there, in the mirror, under his skin, in the blood, before you were born" (76) it immediately made me think that the narrator, as la Malinche was talking about mexico, that her people had always been there, before the Spaniards and before the mestizos. That this story of a man cheating on his wife with her (la malinche/la chingada/la puta, the opposite of the pure virgen de guadalupe) to me symbolizes how mexico was taken advantage of and violated by the Spaniards. Maybe I'm way off, maybe you don't agree...maybe I've read too much gloria anzaldua and see the virgen/puta dichotomy in everything...but that's how I saw it when I read it.
Okay that's it for now, can't wait to read more of this book.
My favourite stories so far have been "My Lucy Friend who Smells Like Corn" and "Mericans".
I especially liked the character of the awful grandmother in "Mericans".
I found this story to say a lot about chicanos born in the United States to Mexican parents, growing up speaking spanglish, without a firm grasp on Spanish i.e "the awfulgrandmother says it all in Spanish, which I understand when I'm paying attention" (19), it was also funny when the woman outside the church was surprised to learn that the children spoke English. To me this represents the unique border identity of chicanos and their ability to be both Mexican and American at the same time.
Cisneros writes about "las tres madres de mexico" (a concept that is common in writing by Chicana women and that Gloria often wrote about)...Guadalupe, the virgin mother whhas not abandoned her people, la Malinche/Malintzin, the raped mother and mother of mestizaje, and la Llorona, la madre que grita y llora para sus hijos perdidos.
My favourite was this line: "La Virgen de Guadalupe on the main altar because she's a big miracle, the crooked crucifix on a side altar because that's a little miracle" (18), this really shows how much la virgen is revered in Mexico and how Jesus is important to the religion of the country but his presence is not as widespread and is not as characteristic of mexican culture.
La virgen de guadalupe es la "reina de mexico" y era un milagro mexicano, pero jesucristo es importante para todos los cristianos, la virgen es para los mexicanos.
Those who know me know that I am fascinated by the virgen de guadalupe and the symbolism and culture surrounding her veneration. So, the fact that cisneros refers to la virgen in her writing just makes me love her a little bit more.
She also talks about la Llorona in "Woman Hollering Creek"..."Perhaps la Llorona is the one they named the creek after, she thinks, remembering all the stories she learned as a child" (51). La Llorona, the wailing woman, is a very important figure in this story and in mexican folklore.
Lastly, Cisneros creates an image of la Malinche/Malintzin in the stoy "Never Marry a Mexican" in which the narrator takes on the role of la malinche, with Drew as Cortez.
La Malinche was given the nickname "la Chingada", because as gloria says, she was the raped mother of mexico, an indigenous woman who gave birth to the first mestizo.
When I read this: "I was there first, always. I've always been there, in the mirror, under his skin, in the blood, before you were born" (76) it immediately made me think that the narrator, as la Malinche was talking about mexico, that her people had always been there, before the Spaniards and before the mestizos. That this story of a man cheating on his wife with her (la malinche/la chingada/la puta, the opposite of the pure virgen de guadalupe) to me symbolizes how mexico was taken advantage of and violated by the Spaniards. Maybe I'm way off, maybe you don't agree...maybe I've read too much gloria anzaldua and see the virgen/puta dichotomy in everything...but that's how I saw it when I read it.
Okay that's it for now, can't wait to read more of this book.
domingo, 12 de octubre de 2008
chicana/o or latina/o?
Since some of the authors in our reading list are not Mexican-American but are Dominican-American or descendant from parents born in other Latin American countries, they are not all Chicanos...but are they all Latinos?
Se puede decir que cada mexicano-estadounidense es un "chicano"? Creo que no...me parece que "Chicano/a" es una identidad que uno/a elige para si mismo. Del mismo sentido, se puede decir que todos los Chicanos tambien son Latinos? Que es la diferencia entre Chicano y Latino? Me acuerda de una clase de geografia aqui en ubc donde aprendimos que "chicano/a" es una identidad que tiene mas sentido politico que "latina/o" Tambien Chicano refiere solamente a gente que han nacido en los EEUU, no a los mexicanos que nacieron en mexico y viven/han vividos en los EEUU.
So, Jose Marti is not a Chicano, right? By the definitions that are commonly accepted (and according to wikipedia) Marti would not be Chicano because he was born in Cuba to Spanish parents. However, would he be considered Latino? More likely, I think. But, since he did spend some time living in Mexico and in the U.S. could he identify himself as a Chicano if he believed in the politics? Quien sabe?
Y Maria Amparo Ruiz de Burton? Was she a Chicana? Maybe because of the political and feminist nature of her writings. But, if you were to base the decision solely on geography and not of politics or philosophy she would not be, since technically she was born in Mexico and moved to the U.S. ... but she moved to a part of the U.S. that used to be Mexico...so now this is confusing, one of those instances where the border moved, not el pueblo.
But since Chicano/a identity is both very political and personal, ultimately it is up to the individual to define their own identity. Either way, all of the authors that we are reading in this class have a similar experience in that they have Latin American ancestry (or were born in a Latin American country) and have lived in the U.S., both of these aspects of their individual identities have a definite influence over their writing.
Okay, now I'm rambling. I have enjoyed these books...Rivera has been my favourite so far, and I look forward to reading the books to come.
Se puede decir que cada mexicano-estadounidense es un "chicano"? Creo que no...me parece que "Chicano/a" es una identidad que uno/a elige para si mismo. Del mismo sentido, se puede decir que todos los Chicanos tambien son Latinos? Que es la diferencia entre Chicano y Latino? Me acuerda de una clase de geografia aqui en ubc donde aprendimos que "chicano/a" es una identidad que tiene mas sentido politico que "latina/o" Tambien Chicano refiere solamente a gente que han nacido en los EEUU, no a los mexicanos que nacieron en mexico y viven/han vividos en los EEUU.
So, Jose Marti is not a Chicano, right? By the definitions that are commonly accepted (and according to wikipedia) Marti would not be Chicano because he was born in Cuba to Spanish parents. However, would he be considered Latino? More likely, I think. But, since he did spend some time living in Mexico and in the U.S. could he identify himself as a Chicano if he believed in the politics? Quien sabe?
Y Maria Amparo Ruiz de Burton? Was she a Chicana? Maybe because of the political and feminist nature of her writings. But, if you were to base the decision solely on geography and not of politics or philosophy she would not be, since technically she was born in Mexico and moved to the U.S. ... but she moved to a part of the U.S. that used to be Mexico...so now this is confusing, one of those instances where the border moved, not el pueblo.
But since Chicano/a identity is both very political and personal, ultimately it is up to the individual to define their own identity. Either way, all of the authors that we are reading in this class have a similar experience in that they have Latin American ancestry (or were born in a Latin American country) and have lived in the U.S., both of these aspects of their individual identities have a definite influence over their writing.
Okay, now I'm rambling. I have enjoyed these books...Rivera has been my favourite so far, and I look forward to reading the books to come.
sábado, 4 de octubre de 2008
...cuando lleguen
Después de leer el blog que Katie ha escrito ya veo que no entendí mucho de la novela. De todos modos me gustó el libro. Creo que mi parte favorito era al final cuando todos los trabajadores estaban el la "troca" en camino hasta Iowa. Aunque casi nunca hay nombres el lector sabe que los comentarios vienen de gente diferente, de edades y posiciones sociales diferentes.
Para mi el capítulo "Cuando Lleguemos" era lo mejor de todo el libro. Me parece que en ese capítulo el lector puede ver la situación de los personajes de verdad. Y podemos entender un poquito sobre como era la vida de un trabajador migrante de esos años. Y eso me hace pensar de como ha cambiado la situación de los trabajadores migrantes en eses 50 años...si ha cambiado aún...
Me gustan todos los puntos de vista diferentes de la gente en la troca. Uno/a quien es bien molestado/a y enojado/a...que solamente dice maldiciones, otro que está pensando en una vida mejor con su coche propia, otro/a que tiene fe y esperanza que pide a "Diosito" para que habría trabajo, otro que está "cansado de llegar" (104). Con eses monólogos está claro que a nadie le gusta ese viaje, pero que es la única opción para ganarse un poco de dinero y sobrevivir.
Creo que el mejor ejemplo de como se sentían eses personajes es que son "cansado de llegar". Eso es un comentario de la vida en que la gente siempre quiere algo más, pero nunca lo alcanzan. O si lo alcanzan siempre hay un deseo para algo más y algo más. Pero también para algunos todavía existe la fe y la esperanza para seguir viviendo. La religión era, y creo que todavía es, muy importante para esa gente quien está trabajando en situaciones como así en ese libro.
En ese ejemplo de las diferentes voces de la gente en la troca algunos todavía tienen su fe, están pidiendo a Dios o están pensando en una vida mejor. Pero otros ya han perdidos su fe y esperanza y ya no se importa de intentar de mejorar su situación y solo son de mal humor.
Como discutíamos el otro día, la religión es un tema muy importante en ese libro y yo creo que con ese capítulo Rivera muestra como la religión, la fe y la esperanza afectan la perspectiva de los trabajadores migrantes del libro.
Para mi el capítulo "Cuando Lleguemos" era lo mejor de todo el libro. Me parece que en ese capítulo el lector puede ver la situación de los personajes de verdad. Y podemos entender un poquito sobre como era la vida de un trabajador migrante de esos años. Y eso me hace pensar de como ha cambiado la situación de los trabajadores migrantes en eses 50 años...si ha cambiado aún...
Me gustan todos los puntos de vista diferentes de la gente en la troca. Uno/a quien es bien molestado/a y enojado/a...que solamente dice maldiciones, otro que está pensando en una vida mejor con su coche propia, otro/a que tiene fe y esperanza que pide a "Diosito" para que habría trabajo, otro que está "cansado de llegar" (104). Con eses monólogos está claro que a nadie le gusta ese viaje, pero que es la única opción para ganarse un poco de dinero y sobrevivir.
Creo que el mejor ejemplo de como se sentían eses personajes es que son "cansado de llegar". Eso es un comentario de la vida en que la gente siempre quiere algo más, pero nunca lo alcanzan. O si lo alcanzan siempre hay un deseo para algo más y algo más. Pero también para algunos todavía existe la fe y la esperanza para seguir viviendo. La religión era, y creo que todavía es, muy importante para esa gente quien está trabajando en situaciones como así en ese libro.
En ese ejemplo de las diferentes voces de la gente en la troca algunos todavía tienen su fe, están pidiendo a Dios o están pensando en una vida mejor. Pero otros ya han perdidos su fe y esperanza y ya no se importa de intentar de mejorar su situación y solo son de mal humor.
Como discutíamos el otro día, la religión es un tema muy importante en ese libro y yo creo que con ese capítulo Rivera muestra como la religión, la fe y la esperanza afectan la perspectiva de los trabajadores migrantes del libro.
domingo, 28 de septiembre de 2008
...y no se lo trago la tierra
Ya he leido la primera mitad de ... y no se lo trago la tierra de Tomas Rivera y pienso que me gusta el libro. Su manera de escribir es muy informal, y como han dicho unos otros en la clase, el libro parece que estuviera una novela para jovenes. Hay unos elementos, por ejemplo el diseno de la portada, la talla de las palabras, que parece que el narrador es un chavo joven, y la manera de que esta escrito, que nos dice que es un libro para jovenes, pero creo que las temas de que se trata son mas profundas.
Yo tambien estaba un poco confundida de unas cosas como de quien estaba hablando y de que edad tiene el narrador y del orden de los cuentitos que no parece cronologico. Pero de todos modos me gusta los cuentos y no me importa mucho si no tienen nada de orden ni si me confunden un poquito.
Lo que me gusta mas de ese libro es su manera informal de escribir en espanol. Ese texto es mil veces mas facil de leer que el de Marti que era lo mas dificil que yo he leido en mucho tiempo. Rivera usa muchas palabras coloquiales de Mexico y America latina, por ejemplo todos los personajes siempre dicen “n’ombre” o “m’ijo”. Eso para mi es interesante porque nunca he visto esas palabras en un libro. Tambien me gusta la manera de que Rivera uso expresiones como “por favorcito” y “Diosito” porque eses dichos diminutivas tambien son bien mexicanos. Yo tambien tome nota de que Rivera siempre escribe luego…luego y que tambien siempre habla de la verguenza y del orgullo y el coraje. Todavia no se porque el escribio asi, pero tal vez hablamos de eso el lunes en clase.
Creo que ese texto es muy interesante y es una manera facil de aprender sobre la situacion social y economico de la gente chicana en los anos 1950.
Yo tambien estaba un poco confundida de unas cosas como de quien estaba hablando y de que edad tiene el narrador y del orden de los cuentitos que no parece cronologico. Pero de todos modos me gusta los cuentos y no me importa mucho si no tienen nada de orden ni si me confunden un poquito.
Lo que me gusta mas de ese libro es su manera informal de escribir en espanol. Ese texto es mil veces mas facil de leer que el de Marti que era lo mas dificil que yo he leido en mucho tiempo. Rivera usa muchas palabras coloquiales de Mexico y America latina, por ejemplo todos los personajes siempre dicen “n’ombre” o “m’ijo”. Eso para mi es interesante porque nunca he visto esas palabras en un libro. Tambien me gusta la manera de que Rivera uso expresiones como “por favorcito” y “Diosito” porque eses dichos diminutivas tambien son bien mexicanos. Yo tambien tome nota de que Rivera siempre escribe luego…luego y que tambien siempre habla de la verguenza y del orgullo y el coraje. Todavia no se porque el escribio asi, pero tal vez hablamos de eso el lunes en clase.
Creo que ese texto es muy interesante y es una manera facil de aprender sobre la situacion social y economico de la gente chicana en los anos 1950.
lunes, 22 de septiembre de 2008
jose marti
Yo estaba leyendo esa lectura en camino hasta Penticton. Tenia mi mini-diccionario de espanol conmigo y tambien yo estaba con una amiga ecuadorana en la coche pero de todos modos tenia problemas con el lenguaje de ese texto. Al principio no queria leerlo porque tuve que buscar muchas palabras en el diccionario. Al fin yo decidi que no valia la pena busar todas porque muchas de las que no conoci no estan en el diccionario, y mi amiga ecuadorana tampoco las conoce. Decidi que seria mejor leer el texto y intentar de entender el sentido de la lectura. Jose Marti escribio eses cuentos con un estilo muy poetica y por eso creo que no es necesario conocer todas las palabras sino hay que sentir el sentido que el queria expresar.
Parece que a Marti le gusto escribir frases bien largas con mucha descripcion porque hay muchas frases asi en sus obras. Normalmente yo no soy muy interesada en la poesia, tampoco me da mucho gusto leer algo con tanta descripcion. Pero, despues de leer algunos de estes cuentos, me parece que no cuesta tanta trabajo que yo pensaba que iba a cuestar.
Ese parafo del cuento Fiestas de la Estatua de la Libertad es muy interesante:
"Vedlos: todos revelan una alegria de resucitados! No es este pueblo, a pesar de su rudeza, la casa hospitalaria de los oprimidos? De adentro vienen, fuera de la voluntad, las voces que impelen y aconsejan. Reflejos de bandera hay en los rostros: un dulce amor conmueve leas entranas: un superior sentido de soberania saca la paz, y aun belleza, a las facciones; y todos estos infelices, irlandeses, polacos, italianos, bohemios, alemanes, redimidos de la opresion o la miseria, celebran el monumento de la libertad porque en el les parece que se levantan y recobran a sus propios." (183)
Ese parafo explica, como otros que ha escrito Marti, el sueno que tenia la gente a llegar a los Estados Unidos. Aqui tambien Marti habla de los diferentes nacionalidades de la gente y con todas sus experiencias variadas que todos habian llegados a nueva york para empezar una nueva vida. Tambien habla de la estatua de libertad como un simbolo de esperanza y fe, que ese monumento permite que la gente pueden dejar sus experiencias de opresion y miseria en el pasado, en Europa, y que pueden empezar una vida mejor en los Estados Unidos.
La busca para la libertad todavia pasa hoy, que la gente quieren mudarse a los EEUU o a Canada para una vida mejor. Entonces ya me di cuenta que ese texto de Marti es importante para la vida de hoy y entonces voy a dejar de quejar y seguir leyendo.
Parece que a Marti le gusto escribir frases bien largas con mucha descripcion porque hay muchas frases asi en sus obras. Normalmente yo no soy muy interesada en la poesia, tampoco me da mucho gusto leer algo con tanta descripcion. Pero, despues de leer algunos de estes cuentos, me parece que no cuesta tanta trabajo que yo pensaba que iba a cuestar.
Ese parafo del cuento Fiestas de la Estatua de la Libertad es muy interesante:
"Vedlos: todos revelan una alegria de resucitados! No es este pueblo, a pesar de su rudeza, la casa hospitalaria de los oprimidos? De adentro vienen, fuera de la voluntad, las voces que impelen y aconsejan. Reflejos de bandera hay en los rostros: un dulce amor conmueve leas entranas: un superior sentido de soberania saca la paz, y aun belleza, a las facciones; y todos estos infelices, irlandeses, polacos, italianos, bohemios, alemanes, redimidos de la opresion o la miseria, celebran el monumento de la libertad porque en el les parece que se levantan y recobran a sus propios." (183)
Ese parafo explica, como otros que ha escrito Marti, el sueno que tenia la gente a llegar a los Estados Unidos. Aqui tambien Marti habla de los diferentes nacionalidades de la gente y con todas sus experiencias variadas que todos habian llegados a nueva york para empezar una nueva vida. Tambien habla de la estatua de libertad como un simbolo de esperanza y fe, que ese monumento permite que la gente pueden dejar sus experiencias de opresion y miseria en el pasado, en Europa, y que pueden empezar una vida mejor en los Estados Unidos.
La busca para la libertad todavia pasa hoy, que la gente quieren mudarse a los EEUU o a Canada para una vida mejor. Entonces ya me di cuenta que ese texto de Marti es importante para la vida de hoy y entonces voy a dejar de quejar y seguir leyendo.
domingo, 14 de septiembre de 2008
the drama continues
I'd say that what has most astonished me from this novel has been Hackwell's ability to manipulate most of the female characters. Hackwell is a very interesting character, he really did become the villain of the novel and quite a player as well. He has wooed Lavinia, Mrs. Hackwell (who dies) and Mrs. Norval however this does not suffice him and he attempts to win Lola. I really do feel sorry for Lola for she is taken advantage of, manipulated and lied to many times throughout the story. I just wish that she and Julian could be together, that's probably the most annoying part of the story. Her relationship with Julian is so difficult to maintain.
It also makes me think about the means of communication that were available in that day. All of the telegraphing, letter writing and traveling is quite comical, it seems that all the characters are constantly writing to one another and taking trains to maintain in contact. Ruiz de Burton does not make much of a fuss of how long these processes take or how they happen, it is simply stated, for example that Isaac goes to Mexico and that he returns. Ruiz de Burton does not romanticize the journeys or the waiting between letters or telegraphs nor does she hint at how long it would take for Isaac to travel to and from Mexico.
Speaking of Isaac, I'm confused about him. When he found the manuscript how did he not figure out that it was about Lola? It's really too bad that he didn't figure it out because it made everything more difficult. But, at the same time Ruiz de Burton did that on purpose to make more of a story I guess.
I enjoyed this novel way more than I would have expected. I thought Ruiz de Burton's use of the narrator that sometimes addressed the reader was clever, it made me feel more involved. While this novel had its share of drama and could be considered to be a little telenovela-like, the ending did not match the rest of the novel's drama. I too was lost by all the political ramblings in the conclusion and would have preferred a happily-ever-after story about Lola and Julian. But I guess the romantic plots of this book were secondary to the political plot that runs throughout the novel.
It also makes me think about the means of communication that were available in that day. All of the telegraphing, letter writing and traveling is quite comical, it seems that all the characters are constantly writing to one another and taking trains to maintain in contact. Ruiz de Burton does not make much of a fuss of how long these processes take or how they happen, it is simply stated, for example that Isaac goes to Mexico and that he returns. Ruiz de Burton does not romanticize the journeys or the waiting between letters or telegraphs nor does she hint at how long it would take for Isaac to travel to and from Mexico.
Speaking of Isaac, I'm confused about him. When he found the manuscript how did he not figure out that it was about Lola? It's really too bad that he didn't figure it out because it made everything more difficult. But, at the same time Ruiz de Burton did that on purpose to make more of a story I guess.
I enjoyed this novel way more than I would have expected. I thought Ruiz de Burton's use of the narrator that sometimes addressed the reader was clever, it made me feel more involved. While this novel had its share of drama and could be considered to be a little telenovela-like, the ending did not match the rest of the novel's drama. I too was lost by all the political ramblings in the conclusion and would have preferred a happily-ever-after story about Lola and Julian. But I guess the romantic plots of this book were secondary to the political plot that runs throughout the novel.
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)