Student Blogs

I found The Trenchcoat by Norman Manea to be a bit difficult. I felt lost at times and I was unsure of what was happening in the book at moments. The plot begins with a dinner party in which the guest feel awkward and obligated to be there. Perhaps because Ioana’s husband Ali is co-workers … read full post >>

    

      I am very glad I watched part of the lecture video *before* reading this novel. Having a little bit of context about what was happening in Romania made things make a lot more sense than they would have had I been reading blind. Even still, this novella was pretty confusing, not because I couldn't understand the writing it seemed by design, I can reread a page and still be left feeling confused even while understanding context and what had occurred plot wise. I get the sense it was intentional, a reflection of the time the book was set in and it seemed obvious that most of the characters didn't fully understand what was occurring either. There was a overarching feeling of fearful uncertainty thinly veiled by social niceties like those that were seen at the dinner. 

    Initially, I was pretty confused by the first section of the novella, a conversation occurring sometime in the future that had absolutely no context at the time. As soon as the trench coat Dina found was mentioned, I formed a little theory that these two were connected. I was very pleased to find that I was correct and it was in fact carelessly (or possibly not carelessly?) left by one of these confidential agents. To me, this makes the trench coat a symbol of mistrust. Something left behind as a symbol of the governments mistrust in its people, to go to such lengths as using other peoples homes for meetings/interviews without permission and also the mistrust the people had for their government that was not supporting them how it should and went behind their back to report about *them*. 

    When it comes to the ending, I found it to real fit together with the title of the collection of these novels 'Compulsory Happiness.' Laughter, usually a pretty obvious sign of joy, but in a context where it was once again a thin veil to cover the grim reality the characters were living in. Laughing at the situation, or maybe laughing to try to ignore it and pretend everything was fine.

Overall, I enjoyed this novella it was really interesting and I also never hear much about Romania in general so it was cool to read something from there. I am very interested to see what Manea has to say on Thursday, about the book but also about his experiences and anything else. I don't think I have ever had the chance to hear an author talk about their life/writing live before so it'll be cool. I have a somewhat unrelated question for Manea: How did moving to the U.S. affect your writing? I can imagine that there was some culture shock and I wonder how that may have changed how you viewed things.

read full post >>

    

      I am very glad I watched part of the lecture video *before* reading this novel. Having a little bit of context about what was happening in Romania made things make a lot more sense than they would have had I been reading blind. Even still, this novella was pretty confusing, not because I couldn't understand the writing it seemed by design, I can reread a page and still be left feeling confused even while understanding context and what had occurred plot wise. I get the sense it was intentional, a reflection of the time the book was set in and it seemed obvious that most of the characters didn't fully understand what was occurring either. There was a overarching feeling of fearful uncertainty thinly veiled by social niceties like those that were seen at the dinner. 

    Initially, I was pretty confused by the first section of the novella, a conversation occurring sometime in the future that had absolutely no context at the time. As soon as the trench coat Dina found was mentioned, I formed a little theory that these two were connected. I was very pleased to find that I was correct and it was in fact carelessly (or possibly not carelessly?) left by one of these confidential agents. To me, this makes the trench coat a symbol of mistrust. Something left behind as a symbol of the governments mistrust in its people, to go to such lengths as using other peoples homes for meetings/interviews without permission and also the mistrust the people had for their government that was not supporting them how it should and went behind their back to report about *them*. 

    When it comes to the ending, I found it to real fit together with the title of the collection of these novels 'Compulsory Happiness.' Laughter, usually a pretty obvious sign of joy, but in a context where it was once again a thin veil to cover the grim reality the characters were living in. Laughing at the situation, or maybe laughing to try to ignore it and pretend everything was fine.

Overall, I enjoyed this novella it was really interesting and I also never hear much about Romania in general so it was cool to read something from there. I am very interested to see what Manea has to say on Thursday, about the book but also about his experiences and anything else. I don't think I have ever had the chance to hear an author talk about their life/writing live before so it'll be cool. I have a somewhat unrelated question for Manea: How did moving to the U.S. affect your writing? I can imagine that there was some culture shock and I wonder how that may have changed how you viewed things.

read full post >>

As much as I liked the actual story that Carlos Fuente writes about in his historical novel The Old Gringo, I can’t say I enjoyed this novel as much as other texts we have read thus far. I found the … Continue reading → read full post >>

I really liked this book. It’s definitely one of my favourites of the ones we’ve covered. We’ve read a few books that are based on memory, and we’ve discussed how fickle memory can be and what kind of story is created when it is strung together by a collection of memories. However, The Old Gringo […] read full post >>

blog#9 – the Object of Anxiety — I’ll admit that I am not very good at remembering character’s names when reading, especially during the part I have to read in dialogue. But in this book, many characters have a kind of tic or catchphrase that they say which I thought was really interesting. Whatever their […] read full post >>

For this weeks book, I read The Old Gringo, by Carlos Fuentes. To be honest with you, I found this book to be a little bit confusing, but for a few different reasons.  At the beginning of my reading, I found the old gringo’s motivation to be a bit strange; he has come to Mexico […] read full post >>

It was starting the bat with this week’s reading, the trench coat. I found it exciting but quite challenging to... read full post >>

Manea’s The Trenchcoat was a really fascinating read; I enjoyed diving into the slightly unsettling atmosphere of stagnation, censorship and being forced to say “correct” things that pervaded the dinner party and the initial drive there. It seemed like social convention had an extremely strong influence over the attendees’ actions.  For example, before the party, it […] read full post >>

Initially when reading this novel I found the words and names to all mix together. The start of the book felt like a bag of random facts and information which made it hard for me to follow along and get invested to. But who knows maybe I was just reading “The Old Gringo” on an […] read full post >>

 I found Fuentes’ fictional tale of Bierce’s demise interesting, but after looking into the background of the novel, I understand why he chose to write about Bierce. The idea of entering Mexico to fight in the revolution in hopes of death seems to me, despite the fact that no writing exists from this time, to be a very “gonzo”-esque idea (getting shot by a Mexican firing squad actually wouldn’t be that out of place in the weird world of Hunter S. Thompson). I guess in a way, the fact that what was probably a very colourful story in reality undertaken by Bierce was a catalyst for Fuentes to record his own imagination of the events which took place, guided by what little information he found. 

What’s interesting in this format, however, is that it is not from Bierce’s point of view. While the title “The Old Gringo” may not seem patronizing, the first portion of the novel’s opening chapter will soon set that straight. And in this sense, the tragedy unfolds—the gringo goes where shouldn’t have been and ends up paying the price for it. In a way, there are some interesting politics at play here that echo throughout modern journalism and geopolitical lines now. Is it a journalists right to be there? Is there a sense of falsehood, or intrusion? 

Ultimately, it’s interesting that it is a Mexican author who gets to famously fictionalize Bierce’s demise and rebellious end of days—in a sense, once he passed the border and joined the civil war, he lost ownership of his life and fate (as he may or may not have intended to) and perhaps in doing so, lost control of his ultimate story. 

One last thing I found interesting was the difference in contrasting the American and his Mexican counterparts, especially Arroyo. There is a level of visceral will to the “Mexican” side of the story, especially in the actions Arroyo takes, but in the end, we see that it is Arroyo who is also shot, out of fear of America. So on one hand, there is the derogatory nature towards the gringo and what he represents, but ultimately, the Mexicans greatly fear (or respect) the Americans, and they use this fear to kill Arroyo. 

Questions:

What did you think of the contrast between the two nations?

Why do you think Fuentes chose to fictionalize this story, and how true do you think it is?

read full post >>

 I found Fuentes’ fictional tale of Bierce’s demise interesting, but after looking into the background of the novel, I understand why he chose to write about Bierce. The idea of entering Mexico to fight in the revolution in hopes of death seems to me, despite the fact that no writing exists from this time, to be a very “gonzo”-esque idea (getting shot by a Mexican firing squad actually wouldn’t be that out of place in the weird world of Hunter S. Thompson). I guess in a way, the fact that what was probably a very colourful story in reality undertaken by Bierce was a catalyst for Fuentes to record his own imagination of the events which took place, guided by what little information he found. 

What’s interesting in this format, however, is that it is not from Bierce’s point of view. While the title “The Old Gringo” may not seem patronizing, the first portion of the novel’s opening chapter will soon set that straight. And in this sense, the tragedy unfolds—the gringo goes where shouldn’t have been and ends up paying the price for it. In a way, there are some interesting politics at play here that echo throughout modern journalism and geopolitical lines now. Is it a journalists right to be there? Is there a sense of falsehood, or intrusion? 

Ultimately, it’s interesting that it is a Mexican author who gets to famously fictionalize Bierce’s demise and rebellious end of days—in a sense, once he passed the border and joined the civil war, he lost ownership of his life and fate (as he may or may not have intended to) and perhaps in doing so, lost control of his ultimate story. 

One last thing I found interesting was the difference in contrasting the American and his Mexican counterparts, especially Arroyo. There is a level of visceral will to the “Mexican” side of the story, especially in the actions Arroyo takes, but in the end, we see that it is Arroyo who is also shot, out of fear of America. So on one hand, there is the derogatory nature towards the gringo and what he represents, but ultimately, the Mexicans greatly fear (or respect) the Americans, and they use this fear to kill Arroyo. 

Questions:

What did you think of the contrast between the two nations?

Why do you think Fuentes chose to fictionalize this story, and how true do you think it is?

read full post >>

Norman Manea's "The Trenchcoat" was a very interesting read. I did feel a bit lost while reading it, until I realized it was not about the details of the story that mattered. Once I adjusted the way I was reading it, the story became much more enjoyable. It felt very distant and impersonal for quite a bit of the text. It focused quite a bit on interpersonal relationships, with the use of symbolism to describe life at that time in Communist Romania. A lot of the story involves reading between the lines of the text to be able to understand the underlying messages. 

While not explicitly mentioned within the book, the novel describes life under Communist Romanian President Nicolae Ceaușescu. Ceaușescu was famously executed along with his wife on Christmas Day, ending communism in Romania. Manea is able to paint the scenes of the story through symbolism. Much of what he writes throughout the story has double meanings and plays into a larger picture. He was unable to explicitly mention specific people or parties to ensure his safety and that of his family. I did not realize that so much of the story would depend on understanding some of Romania's history. Luckily, going into the novel I had the past knowledge necessary to understand the timing of the story. 

I think that a lot of the importance of this story is how it can impact people. Sadly, there are many countries with improper rulers and unfair laws. There is a universality to the text that can still be utilized and compared to the world today. Bad governance has been prevalent all throughout history and modern times. 

Throughout the dinner party, I kept asking myself: what am I missing? It felt very mundane and uncomfortable and I was unable to see the significance of it. I am open to hearing anyone's interpretations of that scene as I would like to know how other people understood it. 

I really enjoyed Manea's writing style. I've began wondering if his other novels are similar to this one. Do they all convey political undertones? How have they impacted the lives of those who have read it? Furthermore, how does it represent Romanian beliefs and social circumstances during that time? 

My question to the class is: What do you think the purpose of the dinner was? Were there secret messages or was it to set the scene of the mysterious trench coat?

read full post >>

Norman Manea's "The Trenchcoat" was a very interesting read. I did feel a bit lost while reading it, until I realized it was not about the details of the story that mattered. Once I adjusted the way I was reading it, the story became much more enjoyable. It felt very distant and impersonal for quite a bit of the text. It focused quite a bit on interpersonal relationships, with the use of symbolism to describe life at that time in Communist Romania. A lot of the story involves reading between the lines of the text to be able to understand the underlying messages. 

While not explicitly mentioned within the book, the novel describes life under Communist Romanian President Nicolae Ceaușescu. Ceaușescu was famously executed along with his wife on Christmas Day, ending communism in Romania. Manea is able to paint the scenes of the story through symbolism. Much of what he writes throughout the story has double meanings and plays into a larger picture. He was unable to explicitly mention specific people or parties to ensure his safety and that of his family. I did not realize that so much of the story would depend on understanding some of Romania's history. Luckily, going into the novel I had the past knowledge necessary to understand the timing of the story. 

I think that a lot of the importance of this story is how it can impact people. Sadly, there are many countries with improper rulers and unfair laws. There is a universality to the text that can still be utilized and compared to the world today. Bad governance has been prevalent all throughout history and modern times. 

Throughout the dinner party, I kept asking myself: what am I missing? It felt very mundane and uncomfortable and I was unable to see the significance of it. I am open to hearing anyone's interpretations of that scene as I would like to know how other people understood it. 

I really enjoyed Manea's writing style. I've began wondering if his other novels are similar to this one. Do they all convey political undertones? How have they impacted the lives of those who have read it? Furthermore, how does it represent Romanian beliefs and social circumstances during that time? 

My question to the class is: What do you think the purpose of the dinner was? Were there secret messages or was it to set the scene of the mysterious trench coat?

read full post >>

I initially started reading this text before watching the lecture – a mistake on my part. Prior to watching the lecture, the text didn’t make much sense to me, it was vague and ambiguous and I felt as though I was missing context. After watching the lecture and learning that Manea had written this text […] read full post >>