I did not know what to think while reading, ‘The Society of Reluctant Dreamers’, by José Eduardo Agualusa. It is certainly a book that I found exists more in the realm of the unknown than the known. The story relies on speculation much of the time…
Posted in Blogs | Tagged with Angola, confusion, Dreams, society
I did not know what to think while reading, ‘The Society of Reluctant Dreamers’, by José Eduardo Agualusa. It is certainly a book that I found exists more in the realm of the unknown than the known. The story relies on speculation much of the time…
Posted in Blogs | Tagged with Angola, confusion, Dreams, society
The W or Memory of Childhood is a book with two stories, the first being W, and the second being The Memory of Childhood. W was a fantastic story of a man who was on the search for a boy but came across a mysterious island (W) and quickly emerged into their society. W is not the pretty island we think, however. Their morals and sins are based on a game like the “Olympics,” and people must survive, but only the fittest do. This shocked me, and the details in the story made the island come to life. The second story is a memoir of Perec’s past childhood. He is confused because he has many gaps in his memory and cannot remember his childhood clearly. This fogginess is something that I believe definitely is from PTSD from the war and violence when he was a child. I learned in my psychology class that the brain would adapt and forget specific memories if they are too painful and cause a blockage in your memory. This is apparent in Perec’s story as he continuously mentions how he forgets and doesn’t remember his childhood exactly. He believes he has a vague idea of his childhood but cannot put the pieces together. It’s like looking through foggy glasses, and most things are blurry, but no matter what you do, they never clear up. I tried to figure out how the two stories were connected while reading, and it was so confusing. Until I came across this quote, “when I was thirteen I made up a story … [It] was called W and it was, in a way, if not the story of my childhood, then at least a story of my childhood.” After that, I realized that the story of W is not complete but like a symbolic story of his childhood. These ideals were what he had to do as a child to survive and be the fittest. This W voyage is a story of his childhood, and his brain is using what he can to remember his childhood by creating the memories into “fictional” stories that aren’t really fiction at all. The way it jumped back from story to story made it harder to follow along, but it made them feel more connected. If we simply just read the W story and then his memoir, I feel that the effect of the two stories forming and creating each other would not be as apparent. My question for this text is, do you think the author decided to include alternating chapters to connect the stories more in the text? And How do you think this helped shape the story’s themes/similarities to be more connected?
Posted in Blogs | Tagged with childhood, confusion, fiction, memory loss, ptsd, war
The W or Memory of Childhood is a book with two stories, the first being W, and the second being The Memory of Childhood. W was a fantastic story of a man who was on the search for a boy but came across a mysterious island (W) and quickly emerged into their society. W is not the pretty island we think, however. Their morals and sins are based on a game like the “Olympics,” and people must survive, but only the fittest do. This shocked me, and the details in the story made the island come to life. The second story is a memoir of Perec’s past childhood. He is confused because he has many gaps in his memory and cannot remember his childhood clearly. This fogginess is something that I believe definitely is from PTSD from the war and violence when he was a child. I learned in my psychology class that the brain would adapt and forget specific memories if they are too painful and cause a blockage in your memory. This is apparent in Perec’s story as he continuously mentions how he forgets and doesn’t remember his childhood exactly. He believes he has a vague idea of his childhood but cannot put the pieces together. It’s like looking through foggy glasses, and most things are blurry, but no matter what you do, they never clear up. I tried to figure out how the two stories were connected while reading, and it was so confusing. Until I came across this quote, “when I was thirteen I made up a story … [It] was called W and it was, in a way, if not the story of my childhood, then at least a story of my childhood.” After that, I realized that the story of W is not complete but like a symbolic story of his childhood. These ideals were what he had to do as a child to survive and be the fittest. This W voyage is a story of his childhood, and his brain is using what he can to remember his childhood by creating the memories into “fictional” stories that aren’t really fiction at all. The way it jumped back from story to story made it harder to follow along, but it made them feel more connected. If we simply just read the W story and then his memoir, I feel that the effect of the two stories forming and creating each other would not be as apparent. My question for this text is, do you think the author decided to include alternating chapters to connect the stories more in the text? And How do you think this helped shape the story’s themes/similarities to be more connected?
Posted in Blogs | Tagged with childhood, confusion, fiction, memory loss, ptsd, war
There are many things I liked about this book and I will attempt to mention them all. Firstly, I enjoyed that I was reading two stories simultaneously, guided by the different font I found my mind to almost switch to the story I’m about to get into and what I’m visualizing instantly changed. One moment I was reading fragmented memories of a childhood torn apart by confusion and fear and another moment I was transported into a horrible place where no one has control over their fate, people leading lives that are also guided by confusion and fear.
The fragmented memories of childhood were sometimes hard to follow, but Perec repeatedly reminded us that the stories he was telling were a mix of truth and imagination. This is an important lesson to learn, our memories are more often than not, flawed and incomplete. There’s a lot of power in realizing that. Of course, reading this book I was compelled to think back about my own childhood. All these things that I “remembered”, how much of it is real? Those photographs that I look at and make up stories about their backgrounds, did any of it happen the way I think? Probably not.
I was more intrigued by reading about the horrible place Perec called W. The more I read about it, the scarier it became and the more I wanted to continue reading. The worst thing a person can go through is a life of uncertainty, where laws are unclear, fear predominates and there is nothing they can do to dictate their fate. It was difficult reading the fate of children who are taught nothing about ‘the world’ or even their world. It was difficult reading about the fate of women and how they were either killed at birth or used for conception, rape was a part of their existance. The adolescents who were thrown into this world essentially getting tortured without reason. And eventually the ‘athletes’ and their miserable lives and deaths. The writing was impactful and I don’t believe the images I’ve conjured up in my head of W would be going anywhere.
Although a very emotional book, I found it easy to read. Part because the writing was clear and easy to follow and part because it was two stories at once. I’m wondering if other people thought the fact that there were two stories a positive or a negative thing? Did you look forward to one of them more than the other?
Posted in Blogs, Perec | Tagged with confusion, dystopia, fear, ww2
There are many things I liked about this book and I will attempt to mention them all. Firstly, I enjoyed that I was reading two stories simultaneously, guided by the different font I found my mind to almost switch to the story I’m about to get into and what I’m visualizing instantly changed. One moment I was reading fragmented memories of a childhood torn apart by confusion and fear and another moment I was transported into a horrible place where no one has control over their fate, people leading lives that are also guided by confusion and fear.
The fragmented memories of childhood were sometimes hard to follow, but Perec repeatedly reminded us that the stories he was telling were a mix of truth and imagination. This is an important lesson to learn, our memories are more often than not, flawed and incomplete. There’s a lot of power in realizing that. Of course, reading this book I was compelled to think back about my own childhood. All these things that I “remembered”, how much of it is real? Those photographs that I look at and make up stories about their backgrounds, did any of it happen the way I think? Probably not.
I was more intrigued by reading about the horrible place Perec called W. The more I read about it, the scarier it became and the more I wanted to continue reading. The worst thing a person can go through is a life of uncertainty, where laws are unclear, fear predominates and there is nothing they can do to dictate their fate. It was difficult reading the fate of children who are taught nothing about ‘the world’ or even their world. It was difficult reading about the fate of women and how they were either killed at birth or used for conception, rape was a part of their existance. The adolescents who were thrown into this world essentially getting tortured without reason. And eventually the ‘athletes’ and their miserable lives and deaths. The writing was impactful and I don’t believe the images I’ve conjured up in my head of W would be going anywhere.
Although a very emotional book, I found it easy to read. Part because the writing was clear and easy to follow and part because it was two stories at once. I’m wondering if other people thought the fact that there were two stories a positive or a negative thing? Did you look forward to one of them more than the other?
Posted in Blogs, Perec | Tagged with confusion, dystopia, fear, ww2
Agostino is a kid who never really grows up. In the beginning, I thought that Agostino was around the ages of 10-11 years old. I could picture this from how he envisioned his mother, so blessed by her presence and in awe of her beauty. He loved her like a child. He also was treated like a young child by his mother too, and the way he complained about her attention towards him and his jealousy made me think he was much younger than he actually was. Later in the book, we learn that he is 13 years old when he tells the man and his son on the boat ride. This book shows how much others’ influence has on you. In the beginning, Agostino was a young, innocent, well-behaved boy who enjoyed his mother’s company. After encountering the young boatman who “stole” his mother away from him, feelings of hatred, disgust, and jealousy arose within him. He could not fathom the idea of having to share his mother, especially let this man enjoy and indulge in her beauty that was only admired by him before in his mind. The young boys he met at a further down beach on his vacation changed his thoughts about women forever and himself. Agostino had no idea of his mother’s relations, he saw her as a pure angel, and these boys crushed this image he looked up to instantly. Although his age or older, the boys knew more about women, power, and lustfulness. Agostino was still in his innocent age. He had not heard or even ever explored the ideas of these topics, which made his mind start to spin. These feelings confused with the image he had of his mother beforehand. He now saw her as a pleasure and a woman, not his mother. This shows us how Agostino has not grown up or matured even after learning about these “maturing” subjects. He cannot differentiate between the two and lets his feelings take over his actions he would have once considered inappropriate or looked down upon. The text shows us how unaccountable he is when he gives all his money away to his friend and is cheated by him. He put his trust into a boy he still barely knew and just accepted his words for truth without questioning anything. This once again proves that Agostino is still young and, although not as innocent, he is immature.
My question I have after reading this text is…
Do you think if Agostino never met the boy in the cabin who brought him into the gang, that he would still have this innocence and see his mother for her motherhood and not a lustful woman?
Posted in Blogs | Tagged with confusion, influence, innocence, lust
