Como Agua Para Chocolate

This novel was, by far, my favorite of the readings we have done so far in the class. I assume it is because I am biased to the Mexican culture (because that is the culture I am most knowledgeable of outside the United States), and because I agree with Esquivel's critiques of the American culture.  The three critiques that I found most applicable were the critiques of passion, tradition, and food.  All three share connections to one another in the Mexican culture, but in the American culture they sometimes don't exist or connect.

The first critique, passion, is the most obvious. Tita and Pedro shared this deep passion for each other, unlike most.  Esquivel uses magical realism to show just how deep their passions were from one another.  She describes it as, 'they are both explosions waiting to happen'.  Inside they share this fire for one another and if a match is lit, the explosion will happen.  She makes the connection, also, that they are 'como agua para chocolate' because their passion for each other is like the process of making chocolate.  They keep boiling and boiling, but they get pulled off the stove before they boil over (Mama Elena pulling them away from each other).  Esquivel is critiquing that it is important to feel this type of passion, and that one is not living their life unless they allow themselves to 'boil over'. In the American culture, much like the Spanish culture, we are often times refined.  Especially in the time when this novel took place, American's would have found this type of behavior outrageous and unacceptable.  Still today, we don't allow ourselves to be extremely passionate for other people for various reasons such as distractions, self-image, or unawareness due to an outside source.

Which brings me to the critique of tradition.  In the United States, every family follows different traditions because we are a country founded on different ethnicity's and religions. Again, during this time period though, the majority of the North American belief system, stemmed from the Puritans.  The puritans did believe in following traditions because they followed traditions themselves.  Yet, somehow as American's, when we watch Tita be abused by Mama Elena over an over again, we want her to revolt! I read this and asked, why doesn't she just leave? We see the character Gertrudis revolt, and we as American's, like it! Esquivel wants her audience to know that it is an option to revolt, but that is not what the Mexican culture and tradition is really about.  The tradition has been passed on for years, it is something that many of the family member's felt it was necessary because they respect their ancestors and want to continue doing the work of those ancestors.

Esquivel's critique of food is my last and final interest to the novel.  Each chapter begins with a recipe to wrap in the emotions that go into the preparation of the food and the meaning behind the recipe.  Each entree takes hours of preparation and ties into the plot of that chapter.  My favorite chapter was the rose petal quail dish.  The rose petals came from Pedro, for Tita, because it was the only safe way he could share his appreciation of her.  Tita makes the dish having more feelings and thoughts for Pedro. When the dish is eaten, it causes Gerturdis to have a fiery reaction because of the emotions added to the dish. I found this as a critique now in the twenty-first century America, because there are never thoughts or passions in preparation to the food we eat.  The food we eat today is usually prepared as fast as possible because of our busy schedules.  I found this most interesting because until I read this I never thought twice about how often I ate something because it fit with my schedule.  There is hardly ever meaning or thought into the dishes we eat, which may be why there are so many health issues and obesity in the United States.

In the Mexican culture, passions, traditions, and food all tie together as well.  There is a 'passion' put into the 'food' and prepared due to 'traditions'.  It makes me wonder when these three things ever tied together to me or any United States citizen I know. I have a greater respect for my Mexican friends because I now understand their heritage and individual make up.  I have a friend who I worked with at Carrabba's Italian Grill, he was a cook.  I remember walking into work and him having prepared his famous corn chowder. He would sit, make me finish the last bite, and tell me he prepared it all day just for me! I would always laugh and tell him he didn't. But, after reading the novel and learning more about the culture, I believe he was true, and really put all his passion and traditions into his corn chowder!

Zorro

This was my first experience reading a graphic novel, and my first time working with Zorro.  After reading the graphic novel, I was very impressed.  I found it very interesting because the images were extremely descriptive so there wasn't a greater need for more text.  Wagner was able to take a few words and make them go along way because of the vivid images. I have to admit that I never imagined time could be controlled through magical realism in a graphic novel.  I like how the story goes back and forth from Diego's childhood to Zorro, until the end when it's only present time Zorro defending California.  I like that this version of Zorro, starts with a young Diego who experiences horrific events which forever change his life.  As he grows, his skills with sword fighting grow, and his morals and reasoning change.  The images that Francavilla creates are powerful.  I personally was moved with the scene of Amalia's death. When Diego is hiding under the bed and his mother is being murdered.  The images are snap shots of Diego's fear, his mothers legs, and the bad guys boot.  As the mother's leg moves forward, with the bad guys boot, Francavilla zooms in on the fear in Diego's eyes. It gave me, the reader, a strong reaction of sorrow for the characters.  And finally I liked the importance of history in the graphic novel.  The author's make sure to make a point of a political standpoint. Of the colonization of the Spaniards in the early 1900th century and the feelings they have towards mixed blooded people.  It's important because it was a huge turning point in world history. I imagine it as a story inside an even bigger story.  To me I feel that Zorro is a small story of a hero, inside an even bigger story of the Spaniards taking over the new world and treating the local people like animals.  For this story to take place in an important event, makes Zorro an even greater hero.

Jorge Borges

Jorge Luis Borges, writer of the three creative stories, "The garden of forking paths", "The gospel according to Mark", and "Emma Zunz".  Like other students in the class, I must admit that I found the first story, "The garden of forking paths" to be the most confusing.  It was very frustrating in a way because it was a longer story and I had to read it multiple times.  The other two stories were great.  I felt I understood Borges themes, and found the overall message to be clear and concise.

The two main themes that connected all three stories were, the nature of time, and ignorance vs. intellectual. In the story, "The garden of forking paths" you have the idea of a parallel universe. The author is working with time in a sense that you can change outcomes by making choices.  Each choice takes you down a different path.  In the story, we find that the man thinks he has figured everything out, but really he is killed.  This was Borges way of critiquing, know matter how intellectual one may be, ignorance is more powerful. I often relate with the idea of "The garden of forking paths" because I'm constantly analyzing whether or not I made the right choice, and if the choice I make will lead me to the future I want.  Could a simple path such as going to the grocery store one day before another effect my life five years from now?  I wonder if I've missed people or opportunities by one simple choice.

"The Gospel according to Mark" works with the nature of time through Baltasar Espinosa, a medical student, raised as a freethinker, who spends his summer at his cousins ranch.  After a flood comes and there is nothing to do, Espinosa decides to read the Gospel of Mark, from the old testament, to the Gutres family.  This family knew a lot about country things, but not much of anything else. Espinosa began reading to the Gutres from the Gospel of Mark.  From the Gutres perspective, Espinosa looked a lot like Jesus.  The Gutres became fascinated with the story and had Espinosa read it over and over again.  Borges brings in time in the end of the novel when the Gutres reenact the terrible crucifixion and kill Espinosa.  They knew they would be forgiven like Roman Soldiers, therefore their ignorance led them to be murderers. The didn't understand that it was just a historical story, not for reenactment, yet their ignorance powered the intellectual man.

"Emma Zunz" was a very interesting story which took a very intellectual girl, to create a believably true story, only that the time was not true.  She is hurt over her fathers suicide over an embezzlement accusation. She knows the truth of the story, that it was not her father, but Lowenthal who actually created the crime.  Emma wants Lowenthal to pay, so after a long thought out process, she seeks revenge.  First, she gets a test to show that she is a virgin.  Then, she finds a man who is an ugly visitor, that doesn't speak spanish, to have his way with her.  She doesn't want it, so in her mind it is rape.  Then, she goes to Lowenthal's, shoots him with his own revolver, and sets up a rape scene.  Emma Zunz was able to toy with time and make everything true.  "True was Emma Zunz' tone, true was her shame, true was her hate. True also was the outrage she had suffered: only the circumstances were false, the time, and one or two proper names"

Emma Zunz was by far the most incredible.  Her intellectual may have gotten her the prize (killing the man she wanted dead), everything that she did ruined her self worth.  I feel that this cause ignorance to power her intelligence because she destroyed her innocence.  But the way in which Borges worked with time, made it the most compelling. It was more magical to me than in "The Continuity of Parks" because the twist, was that the main character twisted time herself.  She made everything look like it happened all at once, and made it scarily believable.  Her self determination and creativity, caused the events to actually come together. I find Borges writings to be like movies.  As I read them, I could image the events very clearly. The struggles of the characters, the events right before the murders.

Gabriel García Márquez

This week we are presented with two stories by Gabriel García Márquez that connect the same theme of perception. A theme which is eye opening because today in the 21st century we have all been victims of a superficiality.  Márquez criticizes the stubbornness of people and how they limit themselves to only seeing what they want to perceive. It's exhilarating how Márquez takes two pieces of literature on opposite ends of the spectrum, and connects them with the same underlying theme.

Story number one: "A very old man with enormous wings"

The story starts with a young child who is very ill.  An angel has fallen into the courtyard of the family. It is questioned whether or not he is an angel because he doesn't look or act the part of what an angel is 'supposed to be like'.  The angel had "very few teeth in his mouth" and "huge buzzard wings, dirty and half plucked". Everyone in the town comes to the see the angel. He is judged, tormented, and even branded.  In the end, he really is an angel who heals the child, and brings the family wealth.  The family was never thankful of his miracles and the wife even claims that "he was no longer an annoyance in her life but an imaginary dot on the horizon of the sea" once he has left. 

Story number two: "The handsomest drowned man in the world"

A dead man floats ashore from sea.  The women of the small village clean up after the dead stranger and notice that he is "the tallest, strongest, most virtue, and best built man they had ever seen".  These woman become obsessed with this dead man because he is so good looking. They name him, claim him as their own, make special clothes for his large body, feel sorry for him, and throw him a very meaningful wake.  In the end, they hold onto his memory by changing their homes in honor of him, and planting flowers.

So, in story number one, we have people who have too many limits and standards on what and angel is supposed to look like. And in story number two, we have people who don't have any limitations, so boundless that in fact, they do more for an attractive dead man, than they would do for their own husbands. Both of which prove how ignorant we can be when we don't see things the way they really are, instead of what our mind tells us we want to see.  It's comical how our thoughts can be deceiving and mask us from reality.


I feel that today people are less superficial than they were ten or twenty years ago, and perhaps stories like these have helped opened people's minds to resolve these issues.  For example, when one is buying a car. Ten years ago when the economy was good and people were sharing the wealth, one may have purchased an expensive SUV. They saw it as a good-looking car, with a nice stereo system.  Really that car burned fossil fuels, and probably gave that person bad credit after they lost their job. Today, people aren't necessarily learning from the mistakes but rather looking at the pros and cons. In other words, seeing the car for what it really is: a terrible idea. Today, after doing research they may decide on going for the hybrid toyota because its cheaper, and environmentally friendly. Yeah the car might look a little goofy but it's solar roof may save enough energy to keep us on this earth a little longer. Now, I'm not saying Márquez has changed the world, because obviously many factors contribute to this kind of reasoning, but I do feel that he's reaching out and trying to wake people up from their terrible nightmares.  Márquez is saying, "HELLO! Are you an idiot? There's meaning behind everything you see! If you just open your eyes a little wider you might see what I'm seeing!" 


Perception is a gift.  Everyone may use it as they please. It's important to look beyond the surface and see things for what they really are.

Cortázar's Reader Response

Julio Cortázar is the first of many Latin American authors that I have read. Therefore, it was a new challenge to try to relate to the readings and have an understanding.  His readings were difficult because he doesn't write in 'black and white', but also interesting because 'black and white' doesn't always please me.  I love to analyze readings, and he is definitely an artist that forces readers to think critical, analyze, and use their imagination.

In his first reading, "The Continuity of Parks", Cortázar uses magical realism, by making realistic fiction believable.  He took a simple story of a man reading a book, and twisted it into the man being a victim in the novel he was reading.  Of course, like everyone else who has ever read this story, I had to read this story three times in order to wrap my brain around it. In the end, I found the story as a whole, very interesting.  But after reading and understanding, I found the story even more interesting when I read Julia Palmers analysis of "The Continuity of Parks" in her writing, "Verbs, Voyeurism, and the Stalker Narrative". I found it most interesting because, at this time in my life I am extremely passionate about becoming bilingual and learning the Spanish language.  So when she argued the preterite and imperfect tense Cortázar used in order to twist the story from novel to reality, I was hooked.  I tried reading and translating the spanish version.  Of course, I didn't get very far, but I definitely understood the message she was trying to convey about the purposeful grammatical choices, and found her point to be accurate and interesting.

Cortázar's next reading was "Our Demeanor At Wakes", which was much different than the first reading.   This story is about hypocrisy and a family acting fake in order to be accepted by their neighbors and family.  In the beginning, they are questioned on whether or not they go to the wake, because they don't want to, but they fear that people may not think they are sincere.  When they decide to go, they are completely ridiculous, by crying, hijacking cars to be with the body, and competing with others, in order to prove sincerity. When I first read this I thought, 'There has to be a reason why these people are acting this way', and I thought 'These people are acting too suspicious. What is up?'.  I laugh now because in the end, they end up leaving the funeral and go home.  It's funny how this story can relate to the reader's experience. Almost everyone has been a hypocrite or has known a hypocrite, and like the innocent people in the story, often times it's right in front of us and we don't even know. For me, it drew a red flag immediately.  I wasn't sure why, but I didn't trust them from the beginning.  For me, I couldn't put my finger on why they were faking their sincerity, but I didn't trust it. I had to take a step back and remind myself that it was just a short story and not reality.

The last story, "Axolotls" was my least favorite. I didn't relate to this story as much as I did the other two.  The story portrays isolation through the salamander, who wants to talk but is trapped with no voice.  I give Cortázar credit, because he did a great job using creativity in order to portray his personal emotional struggles. After Benander, told us about his personal exile form Argentina to France, and never being able to return home, I found the writing more meaningful.  But, I didn't have empathy for the Axolotls in the story, like Cortázar wanted. I had empathy for Cortázar, for being vulnerable enough to share this experience.  The story itself was odd.  Maybe it was the mood I was in when I was reading it, but I just wasn't impressed with a man who claimed he was an "Axolotl" because he saw one, researched one, and sympathized with one.  I found it unrealistic, and thought 'If this is the case, this man needs to seek medical attention immediately'.

Overall, I found my first experience of Latin America Literature to be interesting.  It was challenging at times, but it was interesting.  I found Cortázar twisted his stories in ways that twisted my thoughts. His writings were all realistic in a way, where they made the reader personally relate.  Most novels or short stories that I have read are pretty clear on what the reader is supposed to gain.  Cortázar's approach was much different because he wants readers to be confused, he wants to question their beliefs, and he wants to make them use their imagination.

Reader Response to Popol Vuh Chapter 3-5

I found the reading to Popol Vuh chapters 3-5 to be very interesting because of the way in which the text relates to other religions around the world.  I grew up studying the christian belief in my family. The Popol Vuh is very similar to the old testament of the book of Genesis. The creator and maker destroyed the wooden people in the story because they were bad.  The wooden people treated the animals, the plates, the pots, and the grinding stones terribly.  Therefore, because of this treatment, the animals and objects got to return the abusive behavior.  The character Vucub-Caquix was too proud of a man, he taught his family to act in the same way.  They were evil to the earth and therefore the Gods destroyed he and his family.  This story was very easy to relate to The Great Flood.  In The Holy Bible, God did not like how the people were acting, therefore he created this great flood to destroy the earth and the people only leaving the animals and Noah to survive because they were the only ones worthy enough.  The Popul-Vuh is important to world history and religiously educational.  It is a story that I will never forget and I am glad to have read because it gave me a view of the latin world and how it was created.  I am a Latin America Studies major, therefore I may be biased, but I will further have more of an eye for the culture and the background of why the culture follows certain beliefs.