The Time of the Doves by Mercè Rodoreda is a captivating story with a unique protagonist. Initially, I wasn’t quite sure how I felt about Natalia, the narrator. My emotions swung from sympathy to shock to frustration while reading about her. However, as the book progressed, her character developed as she learned to adapt to her circumstances. Oddly enough, this made me enjoy the book even more. It was interesting to see how she navigated life in a begrudging marriage and during a war.
I found the dynamic that Rodoreda created between Natalia and Quimet symbolic of the traditional ‘submissive woman/dominating man’ dynamic. Quimet was a controlling man who more or less declared that Natalia would be his wife after one encounter in the town square. Additionally, he finds ways to measure up the pain that she has felt with himself to prove that she cannot outdo him in any way. This was evident when he compared having a tapeworm to childbirth, claiming that they had been through a similar level of pain now.
What is noteworthy during their interaction is his nickname for her, Colometa, which means dove. Throughout the book, we see Quimet’s obsession with doves through collecting and breeding them in their house. I find this to be symbolic of how he views his relationship with Natalia as well, his so-called dove. He views her as his property, something he can collect and control.
Thus, Natalia’s hatred for the doves is a powerful indication of her rebellion against him and his behavior. When she receives news of Quimet’s death, the last dove also dies, marking the end of their relationship too.
Additionally, it is also important to note how the author has described the effects of war on an average civilian. Natalia never goes too in-depth about the war and who is fighting; this could indicate how she does not care for the politics of the war. All she focused on was her children and keeping them alive. It was devastating to read about her consideration of killing her and her children so that they would die of their own will and not because of the effects of the war.
Overall, I found this book to be a fascinating read, despite the certain level of predictability it possessed. My question for everyone else would be: what do you think of Natalia’s relationship with her children? Do you think she was a good parent?
Posted in Blogs, Rodoreda | Tagged with family, narration, relationships, women
The Time of the Doves by Mercè Rodoreda is a captivating story with a unique protagonist. Initially, I wasn’t quite sure how I felt about Natalia, the narrator. My emotions swung from sympathy to shock to frustration while reading about her. However, as the book progressed, her character developed as she learned to adapt to her circumstances. Oddly enough, this made me enjoy the book even more. It was interesting to see how she navigated life in a begrudging marriage and during a war.
I found the dynamic that Rodoreda created between Natalia and Quimet symbolic of the traditional ‘submissive woman/dominating man’ dynamic. Quimet was a controlling man who more or less declared that Natalia would be his wife after one encounter in the town square. Additionally, he finds ways to measure up the pain that she has felt with himself to prove that she cannot outdo him in any way. This was evident when he compared having a tapeworm to childbirth, claiming that they had been through a similar level of pain now.
What is noteworthy during their interaction is his nickname for her, Colometa, which means dove. Throughout the book, we see Quimet’s obsession with doves through collecting and breeding them in their house. I find this to be symbolic of how he views his relationship with Natalia as well, his so-called dove. He views her as his property, something he can collect and control.
Thus, Natalia’s hatred for the doves is a powerful indication of her rebellion against him and his behavior. When she receives news of Quimet’s death, the last dove also dies, marking the end of their relationship too.
Additionally, it is also important to note how the author has described the effects of war on an average civilian. Natalia never goes too in-depth about the war and who is fighting; this could indicate how she does not care for the politics of the war. All she focused on was her children and keeping them alive. It was devastating to read about her consideration of killing her and her children so that they would die of their own will and not because of the effects of the war.
Overall, I found this book to be a fascinating read, despite the certain level of predictability it possessed. My question for everyone else would be: what do you think of Natalia’s relationship with her children? Do you think she was a good parent?
Posted in Blogs, Rodoreda | Tagged with family, narration, relationships, women
Sagan’s Bonjour Tristesse was an interesting read. I enjoyed reading about the privileged Cécile and her problems, more so because her issues seemed both superficial and deep simultaneously. While reading this text, I couldn’t help but make parallels to Moravia’s Agostino because of how the genders have reversed in Sagan’s text. Cécile is more mature about her feelings for her father as opposed to Agostino, a boy at the verge of puberty. I found the bond between Cécile and her father quite interesting because of the possessiveness she has over her father and how she views him more as a friend than a father in most situations.
I was quite perplexed about what to feel for Anne, as our narrator herself kept swaying between love and hate for her. Initially, she was excited at the prospect of her joining them, but over time she grew more impatient with her because of Anne’s need to ‘fix’ her. Moreover, it was hard to tell who was being ‘dramatic’ and who wasn’t solely from Cécile’s perspective because she switched from emotion to emotion herself. I found her awareness of her privilege and her spoilt lifestyle quite funny because of how openly she expressed her joy for the frivolous parties she attended. Her father supported this and even found joy in the fact that she thought this way. His character was also a weird one, and I found Cécile’s description of him as a ‘big baby’ to be quite accurate.
Often, it felt as if Cécile played the role of the parent instead of her father. This was an intriguing dynamic to read because both made careless, impulsive decisions, often without considering others. Overall, I found this portrayal of frivolity to be humorous to read.
Additionally, I agree with the idea proposed in the lecture that certain words and phrases cannot be translated as their meaning is only conveyed in the intended language. I find how Cécile welcomes this feeling of melancholy funny, purely because she adds her twist to it with the sarcastic tone she seems to say it with.
All in all, I enjoyed this text thoroughly. My question to the class would be: what did you think about Cécile’s privilege? How do you think it impacted the decisions that she made and the way she views people?
Posted in Blogs, Sagan | Tagged with family, narration, relationships
Sagan’s Bonjour Tristesse was an interesting read. I enjoyed reading about the privileged Cécile and her problems, more so because her issues seemed both superficial and deep simultaneously. While reading this text, I couldn’t help but make parallels to Moravia’s Agostino because of how the genders have reversed in Sagan’s text. Cécile is more mature about her feelings for her father as opposed to Agostino, a boy at the verge of puberty. I found the bond between Cécile and her father quite interesting because of the possessiveness she has over her father and how she views him more as a friend than a father in most situations.
I was quite perplexed about what to feel for Anne, as our narrator herself kept swaying between love and hate for her. Initially, she was excited at the prospect of her joining them, but over time she grew more impatient with her because of Anne’s need to ‘fix’ her. Moreover, it was hard to tell who was being ‘dramatic’ and who wasn’t solely from Cécile’s perspective because she switched from emotion to emotion herself. I found her awareness of her privilege and her spoilt lifestyle quite funny because of how openly she expressed her joy for the frivolous parties she attended. Her father supported this and even found joy in the fact that she thought this way. His character was also a weird one, and I found Cécile’s description of him as a ‘big baby’ to be quite accurate.
Often, it felt as if Cécile played the role of the parent instead of her father. This was an intriguing dynamic to read because both made careless, impulsive decisions, often without considering others. Overall, I found this portrayal of frivolity to be humorous to read.
Additionally, I agree with the idea proposed in the lecture that certain words and phrases cannot be translated as their meaning is only conveyed in the intended language. I find how Cécile welcomes this feeling of melancholy funny, purely because she adds her twist to it with the sarcastic tone she seems to say it with.
All in all, I enjoyed this text thoroughly. My question to the class would be: what did you think about Cécile’s privilege? How do you think it impacted the decisions that she made and the way she views people?
Posted in Blogs, Sagan | Tagged with family, narration, relationships
I dived into Proust’s Combray completely unaware of what to expect. The first thing that caught my attention was the language. It was very descriptive, thus allowing me to envision every room and meal as the narrator experienced it. Secondly, I noticed the stream of consciousness that the narrator seemed to be traveling along while narrating. What started in a room with an insight into the intricacies of sleep and wakefulness turned into a formative childhood memory. This form of writing intrigued me immensely because of how naturally it flowed. I almost did not notice the transition until I read about the narrator’s next idea!
I must confess that I did get a little bit confused when the narrator switched to talking about his childhood experience from his ideologies as an adult. However, once I picked up on the difference I was able to enjoy the innocence with which the child craved to be with his mother. As seen in the scene below, Proust’s description of the raw emotion of longing from a child’s perspective makes the scene more impactful and its sentiment that much deeper.
“But I implored her again: ‘Come say goodnight to me,’ terrified as I saw the light from my father’s candle already creeping up the wall, but also making use of his approach as a means of blackmail, in the hope that my mother, not wishing to find me here, as find me he must if she continued to refuse me, would give in and say: ‘Go back to your room. I will come.'”
I found this particularly significant because of how palpable and tangible the emotions were in this extract.
Additionally, the lecture touched upon many points that I did not consider while reading but added to the importance of the text upon considering them. One of these points is regarding the multiple perspectives we experience in the chapter, but only through the narrator’s eyes. We learn about M. Swann, the narrator’s great-aunt and grandmother, and how they all share a great number of opinions on varying societal issues. But once again, all of these thoughts are shrouded by the narrator’s perspective which as a child was solely focused on gaining his mother’s attention. Proust therefore sheds light on an important question worth considering: how do we perceive each character’s perspective differently when the narration is only through one person’s point of view?
Hence, as stated in the lecture, we only get to see a portion of what happened because of the gap which exists in relaying information. This drives us to make assumptions to fill in the spaces and to keep reading to see if what we thought was true. I feel like this text has prepared me for the other literature in this course because of its unique writing style and the type of reading it demands.
I look forward to reading more and discussing this text in class with everyone!
