Twenty Love Poems and a Song of Despair by Pablo Neruda (Week 4)

Despite Neruda's questionable past, I actually really enjoyed his poems. As someone who is not an avid reader of poetry, I appreciated the transparency and straightforwardness of his writing, while also leaving room for metaphor and interpretation. 

The first theme I noticed throughout Neruda's poetry is nature and landscape. There are constant references to the wind, the beaches, the seasons, trees/branches/plants/leaves, and water. I find this combination between everyday landscapes and love interesting because it makes the kind of romantic, ideal, love that Neruda writes about as normal and mundane as his observations in nature. Poetry can often seem really metaphorical and difficult to grasp the meaning of to me, however, Neruda's straight forward and understandable prose made reading poetry similar to reading a fictitious novel. I'd be curious to know how different the translation is to the original (it's times like these where I wish I spoke better Spanish), because I wonder how exact the translation is. Is Neruda as direct in his original compositions?

Another common theme throughout his poetry was the inclusion of the seasons. He at some point mentions each season in comparison to his love or lust. To me, this adds a really cool sense of imagery and time throughout the book and makes it appear almost chronologically. I feel as if I'm reading his experience as time changes and following along with him through his writings within a span of a year. It also establishes a certain tone or imagery to his poems that I would usually attach with certain seasons. For example in his phrasing of "I will bring you happy flowers from the mountains, bluebells, dark hazels, and rustic baskets of kisses. I want to do with you what spring does with cherry trees" (12), I picture the crisp spring air and bright new sunlight of spring in relation to his prose, as well as the feeling of leaving the darkness of winter behind to the promise of a bright summer. I know that One Hundred Years of Solitude also plays with time in a creative way, so I'm looking forward to reading that to compare. Ever since the discussion of time in Latin American literature from a couple of weeks ago, I have been noticing how it is a common thread and something that really adds a lot of depth to these stories. I love it when authors play with time because it creates such an engaging sense of movement in their writing. 

I'm looking forward to discussing this book with you all further in class. Particularly because I bought the Kindle version and the translation wasn't exactly as quoted in the lecture. There wasn't an abusive connotation as heavily in my version of the poetry so I'm wondering if that was intentional or an accident. Regardless, I'm looking forward to discussing it with you all. 

Question for the class: Do you attach nature with any particular emotions? Do you think it adds or takes away from the emotion in Neruda's writing?

The Underdogs by Mariano Azuela (Week 3)

I really enjoyed reading The Underdogs by Mariano Azuela. Having read many and written a few papers on the Mexican revolution from a historical perspective, it was really enjoyable to put on a creative hat and read about such a significant time in history through an imaginary lens. I thought Azuela did a really good job of combining the historical reality of the Revolution by referencing Diaz and Madero through the admiration or disdain of the characters, while also bringing in fictional storytelling elements through the romance (or lack thereof) of Camilla and Luis. Even that relationship could be viewed as symbolic or metaphorical to the historical narratives of the Revolution. Young and innocent Camilla desires an older, arguably more practical man in Luis who uses her attention to get ahead while only caring about how he is perceived by those within his social class. To me, this presented parallels between the young generations of Mexico (often similarly described as rural and social separate by some historical researchers I have previously read) asking for favour from the more "urban" and educated man in Luis who politicizes her attention to get ahead amongst his group. Having just read the female focused narrative of Mama Blanca's Memoirs, I found it interesting how differently the female characters in Underdogs are represented. 

Firstly, when I open a book on the Mexican Revolution, I am not expecting it to include a female perspective. I don't know if Azuela includes a feminine perspective exactly, but he definitely includes a perspective on how women are viewed in his written society. Considering that most stories surrounding the Mexican revolution are often centred around men, I found myself wondering the motive behind the inclusion of Camilla. The descriptive language between how female and male characters are described also makes me wonder if it is a statement on the differences in how gender is/was perceived. For example, Luis describes his new wife as having "skin as fresh and soft as a rose petal" (50), whereas the features of men are often described in brutal, bloody, and grotesque detail in reference to the violence of the Revolution. Demetrio further establishes that women have no place in the fight by not believing women capable of owning weapons where a female responds "weapons? what weapons do you expect lone, decent women to have?" (56). To me the naivety and objectification of women in this society is a very stark difference from the place that women held in De la Parra's writings. While I acknowledge the differences in time and gender of the authors, it really shows the diversity of gender perception in Latin American literature.  

Question for the class: Do you think the objectification of the women in this novel adds to the narrative or plot of this story or does it just serve as an example of how women's role in society has changed (or not?) since the Revolution?

Mama Blanca's Memoirs by Teresa De la Parra (Week 2)

There are several themes that stuck out to me while reading Teresa de la Parra’s Mama Blanca's Memoirs. Throughout the novel, de la Parra plays with the themes of gender, class, modernity, and idealism through the eyes of a child on a sugar plantation. The first thing that I found interesting is the time that the novel is set. I was expecting to read about the role of slavery in society through gruelling plantation work, however, Mama Blanca’s Memoirs gives a perspective of progress and change in Latin American that I wasn’t expecting by taking place shortly after the abolition of slavery in Venezuela. Building on this, the way that the class system is presented negotiates and mystifies the day-to-day affects of the class system in a way that I haven’t read before. De la Parra does this by invoking the image of wealth through objects like “crystal pitchers” (25) and “champagne glasses” (25) and observation of her mother’s “vanity” (26), while also providing few specifics on the place that Mama Blanca’s family ranks in the social hierarchy of Venezuelan society. 

The lack of detail placed on the family’s social class in comparison to others through a child’s eyes makes an interesting statement that social class is something that is heavily conditioned and encouraged subconsciously into adulthood. Or perhaps, Mama Blanca didn’t find herself needing to repeatedly note their social position because her family’s position in society was all she was aware of. The narrator’s idyllic and childlike view of the plantation exemplifies the naivety instilled in upper class youth about their history and impact on society. De la Parra also expands on the perspective of social class by having the narrator’s main struggles be through her curly hair in a time where many were not given the luxury to worry about their beauty. It makes an interesting statement that in a time of progress, the future of the upper class (symbolized through the childhood narrator) still sees little change in their daily routine, struggles and quality of life. 

Building on the example of the curls, this example combines the themes of gender, idealism, and progress in a very interesting way to me. The pressure to conform to the European beauty standards of straight hair speaks to the continued attempt to minimize Indigenous features even after abolition and therefore further cementing the social hierarchy. Carmen Maria’s concern for her daughter’s hair also speaks to the expectations placed on women, while also showing their role in society. Strive of European standards is again emphasized by Cousin Jauncho’s “admiration for Europe” (53). The daily and repetitive act of having her hair fixed shows that there is little effort to break from tradition amongst the upper classes. However, it could also be argued that Mama Blanca’s aversion to the daily traditional task that her mother forces on her symbolizes the transition from old to new ideals that is around the corner. However, for the time being, Mama Blanca continues to contribute aesthetic features to success in society by her statement that “Cousin Juancho wore his noble, well-brushed poverty with quiet dignity” (55) while also “carefully conceal[ing]” (55) it. 

Having studied a bit of Latin American history before, I’ve never really thought about the role that vanity and aesthetics played in change for social progress. I’m torn on whether the importance of traditional appearances from the older characters in this novel speaks to how tradition stays the same or if it changes through the age of social progress. Therefore, do you believe that aesthetic appearance hindered the road to social change in Venezuela? Or maybe aesthetic ideals just suppressed those of a certain gender (as illustrated by Carmen Maria’s concern for Mama Blanca’s hair)? Mama Blanca herself takes note of her mother’s “vanity” (26), maybe this was a criticism for the social norms and expectations of the times, or maybe it just illustrated the appeal to authority that children are often forced to assimilate to.

Questions for the class: Do you think aesthetic appearance gives people power in society? And if so how? Does it hinder or advance female influence/power?

Introduction and Hello! (Week 1)

Hello everyone! My name is Julia and I am a third 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 am really looking forward to learning more from the literary perspectives of Latin America as it has not often been discussed throughout by degree so far. One of the things I love about studying Latin America is learning about the diversity and cultural change that Latin American has undergone throughout history. Most of my degree has been centred around Latin America before the 20th century, so I'm excited to learn from more modern perspectives. Even though every other Latin American studies course I have taken has approached the topic from a historical view, I agree with the lecture that there is a seperation between literature and life. Therefore, I'm looking forward to reading from perspectives not often attached to what I have been previously told as fact about history. I think this will be a really eye opening and engaging experience. 

I'm also looking forward to examining how these perspectives have changed over time during the readings. Particularly how the roles and narratives of women have shifted. Having already read The Underdogs by Mariano Azuela, I am looking forward to discussing the role that female characters play throughout the novel and how it differs from the female centred narrative of Mama Blanca's Memoirs by Teresa de la Parra. 

To respond to the question in the lecture, my idea of Latin American literature is that it is full of creativity, colour, conflict, and lightheartedness. My partner is Mexican so I am often exposed to traditional Mexican stories and find that they are often very meaningful and insightful, while also maintaining a sense of playfulness and fun. 

My expectations for this course is that it would encourage and engage in diverse discussion. I'm really excited about the blog format as I get to read how different people have interpreted things differently from myself. I hope that this course encourages original and creative thought and harbours a place for great debates and discussions. I'm also looking forward to discussing the texts with you all considering we all come from different backgrounds, countries, and majors. I believe this is going to create the chance for a lot of fantastic learning opportunities! 

My question to you: How do you think reading Latin American literature is going to differ from reading literature from other countries?